English: Can I welcome this UKIP debate and also commend the opening speech by Gareth Bennett, which analysed very effectively and thoroughly the current situation and, I thought, made a very persuasive case? So, we do give a general welcome to this policy shift. I think it's very important to reflect the change in society. We now have generation rent. It will take us a long time to build the quantity of houses we need to really have an effect on supply and therefore reduce the average cost of housing, which would definitely be in the public interest, however that is achieved - through private or social, or a combination of both types of housebuilding. So, I very much welcome the fact the Chancellor identified this subject as worthy of attention and has suggested a ban on letting agency fees. I'm not sure it's been mentioned so far, but in the last 10 or 15 years, there has been a general increase in the charges that have been made by letting agents. There's also very little consistency in their approach, and a couple of Members have mentioned this. They seem sometimes to be just a random attempt to get an extra charge, at a time when a potential tenant has little power, really, to object. In any case, for the operation of the market, it would better if these costs were met by the landlord - or landlady, indeed - who can seek the most efficient type of service and is in a position to bargain effectively. We've heard that there is already experience of how the reform might operate in Scotland, where they have banned the fees. And whilst there's been a general increase in rentals in the last - well, even since the financial crash, rents have gone up, but I don't think there is evidence that Scottish rents have gone up more than the UK average. So, that would suggest to me that banning the letting agency fees has not been borne directly by tenants. It seems to have been largely absorbed. Can I just say that we will abstain on the actual motion just to trigger the amendments? We'll support all of the amendments apart from the final amendment, because I'm not quite sure where we are in terms of the privilege that Governments have for legal advice, and they do need legal advice sometimes. That would be the case for the UK Government as well as the Government here, so we will probably abstain on amendment 4, but then we will support the motion, however it is amended. We do this because I think the Welsh Government is right to seek to consult with the various stakeholders about the way forward. But I think the general presumption now has to be that these fees should be abolished. Thank you.
Welsh: A gaf fi groesawu'r ddadl hon gan UKIP a chymeradwyo'r araith agoriadol gan Gareth Bennett hefyd, a oedd yn dadansoddi'r sefyllfa bresennol yn effeithiol ac yn drylwyr iawn, ac roeddwn yn meddwl ei fod yn cyflwyno achos argyhoeddiadol iawn? Felly, rydym yn croesawu'r newid polisi hwn yn gyffredinol. Credaf ei bod yn bwysig adlewyrchu'r newid yn y gymdeithas. Erbyn hyn mae gennym genhedlaeth rent. Bydd yn cymryd amser hir i adeiladu'r nifer o dai sydd eu hangen arnom i ni effeithio ar gyflenwad a lleihau cost tai ar gyfartaledd, a fyddai'n sicr o fudd i'r cyhoedd sut bynnag y cyflawnir hynny - drwy adeiladu tai preifat neu gymdeithasol, neu gyfuniad o'r ddau fath o adeiladu. Felly, rwy'n croesawu'n fawr y ffaith fod y Canghellor wedi nodi'r pwnc hwn fel un sy'n deilwng o sylw ac wedi awgrymu gwaharddiad ar ffioedd asiantaethau gosod tai. Nid wyf yn siŵr ei fod wedi cael ei grybwyll hyd yn hyn, ond yn y 10 neu 15 mlynedd diwethaf, bu cynnydd cyffredinol yn y taliadau a godir gan asiantaethau gosod tai. Hefyd, ychydig iawn o gysondeb a geir rhwng eu dulliau o weithredu, a soniodd un neu ddau o'r Aelodau am hyn. Mae'n ymddangos weithiau nad ydynt ond yn ymgais ar hap i gael tâl ychwanegol, ar adeg pan nad oes gan denant posibl fawr o bŵer, mewn gwirionedd, i wrthwynebu. Beth bynnag, o ran gweithrediad y farchnad, byddai'n well pe bai'r costau hyn yn cael eu talu gan y landlord, a all ofyn am y math mwyaf effeithiol o wasanaeth ac sydd mewn sefyllfa i fargeinio'n effeithiol. Rydym wedi clywed bod yna eisoes brofiad o sut y gallai'r diwygiad weithredu yn yr Alban, lle y maent wedi gwahardd y ffioedd. Ac er bod cynnydd cyffredinol wedi bod yn y rhenti yn - wel, hyd yn oed ers y cwymp ariannol, mae rhenti wedi codi, ond nid wyf yn credu bod tystiolaeth fod rhenti'r Alban wedi codi mwy na chyfartaledd y DU. Felly, byddai hynny'n awgrymu nad yw tenantiaid wedi gorfod ysgwyddo'r baich yn uniongyrchol yn sgil gwahardd ffioedd yr asiantaethau gosod tai. Mae'n ymddangos eu bod wedi cael eu hamsugno i raddau helaeth. A gaf fi ddweud y byddwn yn ymatal ar y cynnig ei hun, a hynny'n unig er mwyn sbarduno'r newidiadau? Byddwn yn cefnogi'r holl welliannau heblaw am y gwelliant olaf, oherwydd nid wyf yn hollol siŵr lle rydym o ran y fraint sydd gan Lywodraethau mewn perthynas â chyngor cyfreithiol, ac maent angen cyngor cyfreithiol weithiau. Byddai hynny'n wir ar gyfer Llywodraeth y DU yn ogystal â'r Llywodraeth yma, felly byddwn yn ôl pob tebyg yn ymatal ar welliant 4, ond wedyn byddwn yn cefnogi'r cynnig, sut bynnag y caiff ei ddiwygio. Rydym yn gwneud hyn oherwydd credaf fod Llywodraeth Cymru yn iawn i geisio ymgynghori â'r rhanddeiliaid amrywiol ynglŷn â'r ffordd ymlaen. Ond rwy'n credu erbyn hyn fod yn rhaid i'r rhagdybiaeth gyffredinol fod o blaid diddymu'r ffioedd hyn. Diolch.