English: Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm grateful to the many Members who have supported this debate today. The level of cross-party engagement reflects the growing public and media spotlight on an issue that affects every one of the estimated 200,000 leasehold property owners in every part of Wales. Our debate here today, the action already taken in Scotland, and the proposals recently floated by the UK Government suggest to me that this is a serious debate and that a first principles review of leasehold contracts is well overdue - around 10 centuries overdue, in fact. Leasehold is a relic from the eleventh century, a time when land meant power, and unfortunately it still does. For today's landowner, leasehold means maximising income and retaining control of the land they own. But for the leaseholder it means the exact opposite: uncontrollable costs and a lack of control over what they can do to the property they own. When the Scottish Government legislated to abolish feudal tenure, they got the tone exactly right. Like many Members, I've received representations from constituents where the root cause is the inherent unfairness, complexity and outdated nature of leasehold contracts. Complaints about spiralling ground rents, people feeling trapped in their own home, and property values that plummet year on year as the remaining lease reduces are commonplace. Over the last few days, I ran a Facebook survey and I found that these headline issues are just the tip of an enormous and complex iceberg. One constituent told me that his lease was sold twice within a 12-month period, resulting in two separate demands for ground rent. He had to go to court to resolve the matter. Another told me that, after the lease company went bust, the new company increased the ground rent overnight by 100 per cent. A third said that when she tried to purchase her freehold, her landlord valued her lease at three times the value of her home. Others told of house sales lost as a result of leasehold complications, the need to get permission to undertake the most basic repairs, and incurring charges for maintenance despite none being undertaken. A number complained about the lack of information about leasehold at the point of sale, with one left feeling that he'd been mis-sold. In recent years, there's been an avalanche of press reports across the spectrum of leasehold-related horror stories. There have, of course, been a number of leasehold reforms over the years, from restrictions on the rights of landlords to evict tenants in the 1920s, through to the 1960s and 1990s, which did bring new rights for tenants to extend leases. Leasehold reform groups and organisations working with the sector, such as the Conveyancing Association, have criticised the weakness of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 for failing to offer leasehold home owners protection from unreasonable fees and delays in buying, selling or even improving their home. Legislation to date has not addressed the problem and it is remarkable how the issues that are so prevalent today existed 20, 40, 60 years ago. As one Welsh MP told Parliament: 'When leaseholders seek either to renew their lease, or to buy the freehold of their home, they are held to ransome. Leaseholders are completely defenceless before the ground landlord.' 'Because of the profitability of the leasehold system, finance corporations have bought out a great many ground landlords.' That was a speech made to Parliament in 1961. Now, new problems are emerging. Some lenders are reported as refusing mortgages on leasehold properties, effectively making the houses worthless. House values are eroded because of increasing ground rents, tribunal costs and ground rents being sold as commodities on the financial markets. One constituent of mine was charged £140 as an assessment fee when he sought to buy out his lease. He was completely astounded to be told that his freehold would cost him a staggering £13,000. He employed a solicitor, at a further cost of £420, who then negotiated the fee down to £8,000. So, it is sensible then that the UK Government have committed to work with the Law Commission to support legal reform. The complexity of leasehold contracts with elements of contract and property law intertwined also puts a home owner at an immediate disadvantage in respect of ground rent disputes. Speaking in the House of Commons in November last year, one MP put it like this: 'Present-day "onerous ground rents" are, more likely than not, the resultant of unconscionable conduct carried out by one sector of society who have superior informationat the expense of an unsuspectingpart of society.' In April last year, the all-party parliamentary group on leasehold reform called for leasehold houses to be banned and for an end to onerous ground rents. Then, in a written statement in December 2017, the Secretary of State, Sajid Javid, announced a package of measures to crack down on unfair leasehold practices in England, including legislation banning new leaseholds. He said: 'It's clear that far too many new houses are being built and sold as leaseholds, exploiting homebuyers with unfair agreements and spiralling ground rents. Enough is enough. These practices are unjust, unnecessary and need to stop.' So, these too are encouraging words, but, so far, there is no sign of any UK Government legislation. A private Member's Bill due for its second reading in Westminster next month, however, will propose further regulatory reform. In Wales, Welsh Labour's 2017 manifesto made our intentions clear and signalled that Labour is ready to introduce protection for existing leaseholders, saying: 'We will back those who own their homes, includingleaseholderswho are currently unprotected from rises in ground rents A Labour Government will give leaseholders security from rip-off ground rents and end the routine use of leasehold houses in new developments.' So, I welcome the Welsh Government's 2012 'Homes for Wales' White Paper, which commits to working with the Leasehold Advisory Service to gather evidence on the scale, volume and nature of leasehold problems to inform further action. I'd be grateful if the Minister could outline what action is proposed as a result, and what further action might be considered as a result of this debate. A ban on new-build leasehold houses is an obvious and necessary first step. In 2016, leasehold transactions accounted for 22 per cent of all transactions of new-build properties in Wales, and I do recognise the distinction between new-build homes and issues relating to apartments and flats, which is a far more complex issue, but one where there are still significant issues with regard to commonhold and leasehold. Responding to a Westminster Hall debate in December 2017, the then Minister for housing, Alok Sharma MP, noted that 'whether Wales abolishes leasehold is a devolved matter'. So, unlike in the eleventh century, our society values home ownership - it has been positively encouraged by Governments of all colours. We all understand that this is something that most people aspire to. So, the existence, re-emergence and growth of leasehold tenure is, in my view, a scourge on society. It is an embarrassment that this feudal landowner exploitation of home owners continues to exist, and it has to be brought to an end. So, I call for three things: urgent temporary steps to restrict new leasehold builds within Wales, I call for the Welsh Government to introduce urgent legislation to permanently ban any further house building based on leasehold tenure, and I call for an inquiry into all types of existing leasehold tenures, with a view to legal reform to enable this complex and iniquitous system to be brought to a just end. Thank you.
Welsh: Diolch i chi, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Rwy'n ddiolchgar i'r nifer o Aelodau sydd wedi cefnogi'r ddadl hon heddiw. Adlewyrcha'r lefel o ymgysylltiad trawsbleidiol y sylw cynyddol gan y cyhoedd a'r cyfryngau i fater sy'n effeithio ar bob un o'r 200,000 amcangyfrifedig o berchnogion eiddo lesddaliad ym mhob rhan o Gymru. Mae ein dadl yma heddiw, y camau a gymerwyd eisoes yn yr Alban, a'r cynigion a gyflwynwyd yn ddiweddar gan Lywodraeth y DU yn awgrymu i mi fod hon yn ddadl ddifrifol a'i bod yn hen bryd cael adolygiad egwyddorion cyntaf o gontractau lesddaliad - mae ar ei hôl hi o oddeutu 10 canrif mewn gwirionedd. Mae lesddaliad yn grair o'r unfed ganrif ar ddeg ar adeg pan oedd tir yn golygu pŵer, ac yn anffodus mae hynny'n dal i fod yn wir. I dirfeddiannwr heddiw, mae lesddaliad yn golygu sicrhau'r incwm mwyaf posibl a chadw rheolaeth dros y tir y maent yn berchen arno. Ond i'r lesddeiliad mae'n golygu'r gwrthwyneb yn llwyr: costau direolaeth a diffyg rheolaeth ar yr hyn y gallant ei wneud i'r eiddo y maent yn berchen arno. Pan ddeddfodd Llywodraeth yr Alban i ddileu deiliadaeth ffiwdal, roeddent yn llygad eu lle o ran cywair y ddeddfwriaeth. Fel llawer o Aelodau, rwyf wedi cael sylwadau gan etholwyr sy'n dweud mai'r achos sylfaenol yw annhegwch cynhenid, cymhlethdod a natur hen ffasiwn contractau lesddaliad. Mae cwynion am renti tir cynyddol, pobl yn teimlo'n gaeth yn eu cartrefi eu hunain, a gwerthoedd eiddo sy'n gostwng fwyfwy flwyddyn ar ôl blwyddyn wrth i'r brydles sy'n weddill leihau yn gyffredin. Dros yr ychydig ddyddiau diwethaf, cynhaliais arolwg Facebook a gwelais nad oedd y materion hyn yn ddim ond cyfran fach iawn o broblem enfawr a chymhleth. Dywedodd un etholwr wrthyf fod ei brydles wedi'i gwerthu ddwywaith o fewn cyfnod o 12 mis, gan arwain at ddau hawliad ar wahân am rent tir. Bu'n rhaid iddo fynd i'r llys i ddatrys y mater. Dywedodd un arall wrthyf, ar ôl i'r cwmni prydlesu fynd i'r wal, fod y cwmni newydd wedi cynyddu rhent tir 100 y cant dros nos. Dywedodd un arall fod ei landlord wedi prisio ei phrydles ar dair gwaith gwerth ei chartref pan geisiodd brynu ei rhydd-ddaliad. Soniodd eraill am werthiannau tai a gollwyd o ganlyniad i gymhlethdodau gyda'r lesddaliad, yr angen i gael caniatâd i wneud yr atgyweiriadau mwyaf sylfaenol, a chodi tâl am waith cynnal a chadw er na wnaed unrhyw waith. Roedd nifer yn cwyno am ddiffyg gwybodaeth ynghylch lesddaliad yn y man gwerthu, gydag un yn teimlo ei fod wedi'i dwyllo wrth wneud pryniant. Yn y blynyddoedd diwethaf, bu llu o adroddiadau yn y wasg ar draws y sbectrwm am straeon arswyd yn ymwneud â lesddeiliadaeth. Wrth gwrs, cafwyd nifer o ddiwygiadau i lesddeiliadaeth dros y blynyddoedd, o'r cyfyngiadau ar hawliau landlordiaid i droi tenantiaid allan yn y 1920au, hyd at yr 1960au a'r 1990au, a welodd hawliau newydd i denantiaid i ymestyn lesoedd. Mae grwpiau a sefydliadau diwygio lesddeiliadaeth sy'n gweithio gyda'r sector, megis y Gymdeithas Drawsgludo, wedi beirniadu gwendid Deddf Cyfunddaliad a Diwygio Cyfraith Lesddaliad 2002 am fethu rhoi amddiffyniad i berchnogion cartrefi lesddaliad rhag ffioedd afresymol ac oedi wrth brynu, gwerthu neu hyd yn oed wella eu cartref. Nid yw'r ddeddfwriaeth hyd yn hyn wedi datrys y broblem ac mae'n rhyfeddol sut roedd y materion sydd mor gyffredin heddiw yn bodoli 20, 40, 60 mlynedd yn ôl. Fel y dywedodd un Aelod Seneddol Cymreig wrth y Senedd: Pan fo lesddeiliaid yn ceisio naill ai adnewyddu eu prydles, neu brynu rhydd-ddaliad eu cartref, cânt eu dal am bridwerth. Mae lesddeiliaid yn hollol ddiamddiffyn gerbron landlord y tir. Oherwydd proffidioldeb y system lesddaliadol, mae corfforaethau cyllid wedi prynu cyfran llawer o landlordiaid tir mawr. Araith oedd honno a wnaed i'r Senedd yn 1961. Nawr, mae problemau newydd yn dod i'r amlwg. Dywedir bod rhai benthycwyr yn gwrthod morgeisi ar eiddo lesddaliadol, gan wneud y tai yn ddiwerth i bob pwrpas. Mae gwerthoedd tai wedi erydu oherwydd rhenti tir cynyddol, costau tribiwnlys a rhenti tir yn cael eu gwerthu fel nwyddau ar y marchnadoedd arian. Codwyd £140 ar un o fy etholwyr fel ffi asesu pan geisiodd brynu ei lesddaliad. Fe'i syfrdanwyd wrth glywed y byddai ei rydd-ddaliad yn costio £13,000 iddo. Cyflogodd gyfreithiwr, ar gost bellach o £420, a lwyddodd wedyn i negodi'r ffi i lawr i £8,000. Felly, mae'n gwneud synnwyr fod Llywodraeth y DU wedi ymrwymo i weithio gyda Chomisiwn y Gyfraith i gefnogi diwygio cyfreithiol. Hefyd, mae cymhlethdod contractau lesddaliad gydag elfennau o gyfraith contract a chyfraith eiddo yn cydblethu yn rhoi perchennog cartref dan anfantais ar unwaith mewn anghydfodau ynghylch rhenti tir. Wrth siarad yn Nhŷ'r Cyffredin ym mis Tachwedd y llynedd, cafodd ei ddisgrifio gan un Aelod Seneddol fel hyn: Mae 'rhenti tir beichus' y dyddiau hyn yn deillio yn ôl pob tebyg o ymddygiad afresymol un sector o gymdeithas sydd â gwell gwybodaeth ar draul rhan o gymdeithas nad ydynt yn gwybod beth sy'n digwydd. Ym mis Ebrill y llynedd, galwodd y grŵp seneddol hollbleidiol ar ddiwygio lesddeiliadaeth am wahardd tai lesddaliadol a rhoi diwedd ar renti tir beichus. Yna, mewn datganiad ysgrifenedig ym mis Rhagfyr 2017, cyhoeddodd yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol, Sajid Javid, becyn o fesurau i leihau arferion lesddaliadol yn Lloegr, gan gynnwys deddfwriaeth i wahardd lesddaliadau newydd. Dywedodd: Mae'n glir fod llawer gormod o dai newydd yn cael eu hadeiladu a'u gwerthu fel lesddaliadau, gan gamfanteisio ar brynwyr tai gyda chytundebau annheg a rhenti tir sy'n codi fwyfwy. Digon yw digon. Mae'r arferion hyn yn anghyfiawn, yn ddiangen ac mae angen rhoi diwedd arnynt. Felly, mae'r rhain hefyd yn eiriau calonogol, ond hyd yma, nid oes unrhyw arwydd o unrhyw ddeddfwriaeth gan Lywodraeth y DU. Fodd bynnag, bydd Bil Aelod preifat sy'n aros am ei ail ddarlleniad yn San Steffan y mis nesaf yn argymell diwygio rheoleiddiol pellach. Yng Nghymru, roedd maniffesto Llafur Cymru ar gyfer 2017 yn gwneud ein bwriadau'n glir ac yn dynodi bod Llafur yn barod i gyflwyno amddiffyniad i lesddeiliaid presennol, gan ddweud: 'Byddwn yn cefnogi'r rheiny sy'n berchen ar eu cartrefi, gan gynnwys lesddeiliaid ac nad ydynt wedi'u gwarchod ar hyn o bryd rhag cynnydd mewn rhenti tir Bydd Llywodraeth Lafur yn rhoi sicrwydd i lesddeiliaid rhag rhenti tir twyllodrus ac yn rhoi terfyn ar y defnydd arferol o dai lesddaliadol mewn datblygiadau newydd.' Felly, rwy'n croesawu Papur Gwyn Llywodraeth Cymru 2012, 'Cartrefi i Gymru', sy'n ymrwymo i weithio gyda'r Gwasanaeth Cynghori ar Lesddaliadau i gasglu tystiolaeth ar raddfa, maint a natur problemau lesddaliadol i lywio camau gweithredu pellach. Buaswn yn ddiolchgar pe gallai'r Gweinidog amlinellu pa gamau a argymhellir o ganlyniad, a pha gamau pellach y gellid eu hystyried o ganlyniad i'r ddadl hon. Mae gwaharddiad ar dai lesddaliadol a adeiladir o'r newydd yn gam cyntaf amlwg ac angenrheidiol. Yn 2016, roedd 22 y cant o holl drafodion eiddo adeiladau newydd yng Nghymru yn drafodion lesddaliadol, ac rwy'n cydnabod y gwahaniaeth rhwng cartrefi a adeiladir o'r newydd a materion yn ymwneud â fflatiau a rhandai, sy'n fater llawer mwy cymhleth, ond un lle y ceir problemau sylweddol o hyd o ran cyfunddaliadau a lesddaliadau. Wrth ymateb i ddadl yn Neuadd Westminster ym mis Rhagfyr 2017, dywedodd y Gweinidog tai ar y pryd, Sharma Alok AS Mae pa un a yw Cymru'n diddymu lesddeiliadaeth yn fater wedi'i ddatganoli. Felly, yn wahanol i'r unfed ganrif ar bymtheg, mae ein cymdeithas yn rhoi gwerth ar berchentyaeth - mae wedi cael ei annog yn gadarnhaol gan lywodraethau o bob lliw. Rydym i gyd yn deall bod hyn yn rhywbeth y mae'r rhan fwyaf o bobl yn dyheu amdano. Felly, mae bodolaeth, ailymddangosiad a thwf lesddeiliadaeth yn bla ar gymdeithas yn fy marn i. Mae'n destun cywilydd fod y modd hwn o gamfanteisio ar berchnogion cartrefi gan dirfeddianwyr ffiwdal yn parhau i fodoli, ac mae'n rhaid rhoi diwedd arno. Felly, galwaf am dri pheth: camau brys dros dro i gyfyngu ar adeiladau lesddaliadol newydd yng Nghymru, rwy'n galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i gyflwyno deddfwriaeth frys i wahardd unrhyw adeiladu tai pellach sy'n seiliedig ar lesddeiliadaeth, ac rwy'n galw am ymchwiliad i bob math o lesddeiliadaeth sy'n bodoli eisoes, gyda golwg ar ddiwygio'r gyfraith i'w gwneud hi'n bosibl rhoi diwedd ar y system gymhleth ac anghyfiawn hon. Diolch i chi.