English: Thank you, and I'm very grateful indeed to Members for bringing forward this cross-party debate today. As Mick Antoniw set out at the very start of the debate, leaseholders have a long history, but I think our debate today has really highlighted how, in recent years, an unscrupulous minority of developers and freeholders have sought to profit from questionable practices. I think that the issues that have been discussed fall into three broad themes: the inappropriate sale of new homes as leasehold; the plight of people who have been sold homes on leasehold and are victims of poor practice; and the underlying question as to whether or not leasehold is actually still fit for purpose in the modern housing market. This particular motion focuses on the first of these themes. Not all leasehold transactions are inappropriate, of course. Leasehold is a valid tenure for flats and apartments, for example, when it's operated fairly. It can ensure that communal areas and maintenance are dealt with on behalf of all the residents. And in the absence of a current suitable alternative, leasehold does have its place in our housing market, particularly given the increasing number of new homes that are flats and apartments. This is why point three of the motion is difficult for us, although I do obviously agree with the spirit of the motion. Contributions today have again highlighted that there are those out there who will neither use leasehold appropriately or operate it fairly, and the concerns, really, are many, complex and varied, and we've heard so many examples of them today. All too often, I think that they do relate to leaseholders feeling that they've been misled or that they face excessive or escalating charges, and we also hear of difficulties when seeking to buy those freeholds, extend leases, and we hear of leaseholders feeling that they are receiving poor value for money or a poor service. So, I want to put on record today my commitment to exploring what can be done to address these issues, recognising the complexity and the technical nature of the issues. But, turning to today's motion, we are all aware of the recent high-profile cases of new-build houses being offered on a leasehold rather than a freehold basis without any clear justification. The data shows that the proportion of new houses sold as leasehold has increased in recent years and I want to put an end to the inappropriate use of leasehold for new-build houses in Wales. There are a small number of sound reasons for houses to be sold on a leasehold basis, and these include the sale of new-build developments on land owned by certain bodies that have a long-term interest in land, such as university bodies or the National Trust, and that, specifically, is what we're talking about when we're talking about the phrase 'absolutely necessary'. But, beyond this, I see little reason for houses not to be offered for sale on a freehold basis. I do recognise the need to act with urgency, and since coming into post I've identified a number of key improvements, which are to be taken forward immediately. I've already opened up discussions with developers in Wales through our house builders engagement programme and I've made it clear that it is my desire to limit the number of new properties that are sold as leasehold and that my preference is for leasehold to be limited to premises such as flats where the structure of the building and the need to ensure there is maintenance of common areas does necessitate it. I want all house builders operating in Wales to publicly pledge not to sell new-build houses as leasehold in Wales, except in those exceptional circumstances that have been mentioned, and Jane Hutt kindly named some of those developers who have already made that commitment. I'll be using the tools currently at my disposal -
Welsh: Diolch i chi, ac rwy'n ddiolchgar iawn i'r Aelodau am gyflwyno'r ddadl drawsbleidiol hon heddiw. Fel y nododd Mick Antoniw ar ddechrau'r ddadl, mae gan lesddeiliaid hanes hir, ond credaf heddiw fod ein dadl wedi tynnu sylw go iawn at sut, yn ystod y blynyddoedd diweddar, y mae lleiafrif diegwyddor o ddatblygwyr a rhydd-ddeiliaid wedi ceisio gwneud elw o arferion amheus. Rwy'n credu bod y materion a drafodwyd yn perthyn i dair prif thema: gwerthu cartrefi newydd fel lesddaliadau'n amhriodol; trafferthion pobl y gwerthwyd cartrefi lesddaliadol iddynt ac sy'n dioddef yn sgil arferion gwael; a'r cwestiwn sylfaenol ynglŷn ag a yw lesddaliadau'n dal i fod yn addas at y diben yn y farchnad dai fodern mewn gwirionedd. Mae'r cynnig penodol hwn yn canolbwyntio ar y cyntaf o'r themâu hyn. Nid yw pob lesddaliad yn amhriodol, wrth gwrs. Mae lesddaliad yn ddeiliadaeth ddilys ar gyfer fflatiau a rhandai, er enghraifft, pan gaiff ei gweithredu'n deg. Mae'n gallu sicrhau bod mannau cymunedol a chynnal a chadw yn cael sylw ar ran yr holl drigolion. Ac os na cheir opsiwn arall addas ar hyn o bryd, mae lle i lesddaliadau yn ein marchnad dai, yn enwedig o ystyried y nifer gynyddol o gartrefi newydd sy'n fflatiau ac yn rhandai. Dyma pam y mae pwynt tri y cynnig yn anodd i ni, er fy mod yn cytuno ag ysbryd y cynnig wrth gwrs. Mae'r cyfraniadau heddiw unwaith eto wedi tanlinellu bod yna rai allan yno na fydd yn defnyddio lesddaliad yn briodol nac yn ei weithredu'n deg, ac mae'r pryderon, mewn gwirionedd, yn niferus, yn gymhleth ac yn amrywiol, ac rydym wedi clywed cymaint o enghreifftiau ohonynt heddiw. Yn rhy aml, credaf eu bod yn ymwneud â lesddeiliaid yn teimlo eu bod wedi cael eu camarwain neu eu bod yn wynebu taliadau gormodol neu gynyddol, a chlywn hefyd am anawsterau wrth geisio prynu'r rhydd-ddaliadau, neu ymestyn lesoedd, a chlywn hefyd am lesddeiliaid yn teimlo nad ydynt yn cael gwerth am arian neu eu bod yn cael gwasanaeth gwael. Felly, rwyf am gofnodi heddiw fy ymrwymiad i archwilio beth y gellir ei wneud i fynd i'r afael â'r materion hyn, gan gydnabod eu cymhlethdod a'u natur dechnegol. Ond gan droi at y cynnig heddiw, rydym oll yn ymwybodol o achosion proffil uchel yn ddiweddar o dai a adeiladir o'r newydd yn cael eu cynnig ar lesddaliad yn hytrach nag ar sail rydd-ddaliadol heb unrhyw gyfiawnhad clir. Mae'r data'n dangos bod y gyfran o dai newydd a werthir fel lesddaliadau wedi cynyddu yn y blynyddoedd diwethaf ac rwyf am roi terfyn ar y defnydd amhriodol o lesddaliadau ar gyfer tai a adeiladir o'r newydd yng Nghymru. Ceir nifer fach o resymau cadarn dros werthu tai ar sail lesddaliadol, ac mae'r rhain yn cynnwys gwerthu datblygiadau a adeiladir o'r newydd ar dir sy'n eiddo i gyrff penodol sydd â diddordeb hirdymor yn y tir, megis cyrff prifysgol neu'r Ymddiriedolaeth Genedlaethol, a dyna, yn benodol, rydym yn sôn amdano pan fyddwn yn defnyddio'r ymadrodd 'cwbl angenrheidiol'. Ond y tu hwnt i hyn, ni welaf fawr o reswm dros beidio â chynnig tai i'w gwerthu ar sail rydd-ddaliadol. Ac rwy'n cydnabod yr angen i weithredu ar fyrder, ac ers dod i'r swydd rwyf wedi nodi nifer o welliannau allweddol sydd i gael sylw ar unwaith. Rwyf eisoes wedi dechrau trafodaethau gyda datblygwyr yng Nghymru drwy ein rhaglen ymgysylltu adeiladwyr tai ac wedi nodi'n glir mai fy awydd yw cyfyngu ar nifer yr eiddo newydd sy'n cael eu gwerthu fel lesddaliadau ac mai'r hyn a fyddai orau gennyf fyddai gweld lesddaliadau'n gyfyngedig i safleoedd fel fflatiau lle mae strwythur yr adeilad a'r angen i sicrhau bod gwaith cynnal a chadw'n digwydd mewn mannau cyffredinol yn golygu bod angen gweithredu trefn lesddaliadol. Rwyf am i'r holl adeiladwyr tai sy'n gweithredu yng Nghymru wneud addewid cyhoeddus i beidio â gwerthu tai a adeiladir o'r newydd ar sail lesddaliadol yng Nghymru, ac eithrio yn yr amgylchiadau eithriadol a grybwyllwyd, a nododd Jane Hutt yn garedig rai o'r datblygwyr sydd eisoes wedi gwneud yr ymrwymiad hwnnw. Byddaf yn defnyddio'r offer sydd ar gael i mi ar hyn o bryd -