English: Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, for calling me to speak in this very important debate. And thanks very much to Plaid Cymru for raising these important issues, because I do believe that there is a lot of cross-party consensus on these particular issues. I'm very pleased to support the amendment in the name of Julie James, which does call on the Welsh Government to consider abolishing priority need, and also to move towards a comprehensive approach to ending homelessness, which includes a housing first policy. So, I think there is a great deal of consensus, really, about the way that we should actually be going. I think we should commend the Welsh Government on its efforts to tackle homelessness in the Housing (Wales) Act 2014, because I think it has made a difference. We've obviously got the audit report now to look at in detail to see what the actual effects are, but I think, in some local authorities, there have been real concrete results in being able to get in there early and work to prevent homelessness. I also welcome the fact that the Government has protected the Supporting People grant, because as we all know and as we have referred to in this debate, people who are homeless do have complex needs, which cover much more than just having a roof over their heads, but you have to start off with a roof, which is why we would want to support the housing first policy. I also welcome the extra £2.6 million, which will help to tackle rough-sleeping, youth homelessness and mental health and homelessness, as well as increasing capital funding for emergency night provision capacity for Cardiff, Newport, Wrexham and Swansea. However, I think it is very important that we do debate what is appropriate emergency provision, and Leanne covered this in her speech. Certainly in Cardiff, there appears to have been a big increase in street homelessness. But Lynda Thorne, the cabinet member for housing in Cardiff council, on 29 December, sent out a message that 60 places were available for rough-sleepers on one particular night and only six were taken. So, I think what this does illustrate are the reasons why many people who are sleeping rough do feel unable to take up places in shelters and in emergency accommodation, because of fears of substance misuse, I think. Leanne mentioned the issue about animals and, if you're with a partner, what sort of accommodation is offered. I think there are a huge number of reasons why people sometimes feel unable to take up the opportunity of a shelter. So, I really think that we do need a debate on how we provide appropriate accommodation for all those people who are on the street. To move on to the priority list and those people who are classed as being a priority need, obviously this includes people who have dependent children, pregnant women, older people, disabled people, 16 and 17-year-olds, 18 to 21-year-old care leavers and many others. I also want to mention the issue of prisoners, which John Griffiths mentioned in his speech, because ex-prisoners with a local connection to the area and who are vulnerable as a result of being an ex-prisoner are the criteria for ex-prisoners. Of course, during the last Assembly term, we did actually change this and I think it is really a matter of great concern that there appears to have been a bad outcome for prisoners as a result of not being automatically a priority need. I'm sure many of us saw the Estyn report into Swansea prison, which was published a couple of weeks ago, which found that half of the prisoners being released are not being sent to sustainable accommodation. The report says that, in their judgment, the outcomes for prisoners in the area of resettlement have sunk to 'poor', which is the lowest possible, and it did say that the Welsh Assembly's policy of not giving priority on housing lists to prisoners on release may have contributed to this result. So, I think it's really important that we do look again at the issue of prisoners. I don't know if the Government has got any research that it has done itself that shows that efforts to rehouse prisoners, although they're not a priority in the way they were, have resulted in some success, but certainly the evidence appears to be that this has not been a successful change in policy. So, I would ask the Government if it would look at that again, and I think that we should move to a situation where we are looking for housing first and that we should not have priority categories any more.
Welsh: Diolch yn fawr iawn, Ddirprwy Lywydd, am alw arnaf i siarad yn y ddadl bwysig hon. A diolch yn fawr iawn i Blaid Cymru am godi'r materion pwysig hyn, oherwydd rwy'n credu bod llawer o gonsensws trawsbleidiol ar y materion penodol hyn. Rwy'n falch iawn o gefnogi'r gwelliant yn enw Julie James, sy'n galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i ystyried diddymu angen blaenoriaethol, a hefyd i symud tuag at ddull cynhwysfawr o ddod â digartrefedd i ben sy'n cynnwys polisi tai yn gyntaf. Felly, credaf fod llawer iawn o gonsensws, mewn gwirionedd, ynglŷn â'r ffordd y dylem fynd. Credaf y dylem ganmol Llywodraeth Cymru am ei hymdrechion i fynd i'r afael â digartrefedd yn Neddf Tai (Cymru) 2014, oherwydd credaf ei bod wedi gwneud gwahaniaeth. Yn amlwg mae gennym yr adroddiad archwilio yn awr i edrych yn fanwl arno er mwyn gweld beth fydd yr effeithiau gwirioneddol, ond mewn rhai awdurdodau lleol, credaf fod canlyniadau cadarn i'w gweld o ran gallu bwrw iddi'n gynnar a gweithio i atal digartrefedd. Rwyf hefyd yn croesawu'r ffaith bod y Llywodraeth wedi diogelu'r grant Cefnogi Pobl, oherwydd fel y gwyddom, ac fel rydym wedi dweud yn y ddadl hon, mae gan bobl ddigartref anghenion cymhleth, sy'n llawer mwy na chael to uwch eu pennau'n unig, ond rhaid i chi ddechrau gyda tho, a dyna pam y byddem yn awyddus i gefnogi'r polisi tai yn gyntaf. Hefyd, rwy'n croesawu'r £2.6 miliwn ychwanegol, a fydd yn helpu i fynd i'r afael â chysgu ar y stryd, digartrefedd ymhlith pobl ifanc ac iechyd meddwl a digartrefedd, yn ogystal â chyllid cyfalaf cynyddol ar gyfer capasiti darpariaeth frys yn y nos ar gyfer Caerdydd, Casnewydd, Wrecsam ac Abertawe. Fodd bynnag, credaf ei bod yn bwysig iawn ein bod yn trafod beth yw'r ddarpariaeth frys briodol, a soniodd Leanne am hyn yn ei haraith. Yn sicr yng Nghaerdydd, ymddengys bod cynnydd mawr wedi bod mewn digartrefedd ar y stryd. Ond anfonodd Lynda Thorne, yr aelod cabinet dros dai yng nghyngor Caerdydd, neges allan ar 29 Rhagfyr fod 60 o leoedd ar gael ar gyfer pobl sy'n cysgu ar y stryd ar un noson benodol a chwech lle yn unig a gymerwyd. Felly, rwy'n credu mai'r hyn y mae'n ei ddangos yw'r rhesymau pam y mae llawer o bobl sy'n cysgu ar y stryd yn teimlo na allant fanteisio ar leoedd mewn llochesi a llety brys, oherwydd ofnau'n ymwneud â chamddefnyddio sylweddau, rwy'n credu. Soniodd Leanne am y mater ynghylch anifeiliaid ac os oes gennych bartner, pa fath o lety a gynigir. Credaf fod nifer fawr o resymau pam fod pobl weithiau'n teimlo na allant fanteisio ar y cyfle i gael lloches. Felly, credaf o ddifrif fod angen dadl ar sut y gallwn ddarparu llety priodol ar gyfer yr holl bobl sydd ar y stryd. I symud ymlaen at y rhestr flaenoriaethol a'r bobl a gategoreiddir fel rhai ag angen blaenoriaethol, yn amlwg mae hyn yn cynnwys pobl sydd â phlant dibynnol, menywod beichiog, pobl hŷn, pobl anabl, rhai 16 a 17 mlwydd oed, rhai 18 - 21 sy'n gadael gofal a llawer o rai eraill. Rwyf am sôn hefyd am garcharorion, y soniodd John Griffiths amdanynt yn ei araith, oherwydd mai cyn-garcharorion gyda chysylltiad lleol â'r ardal ac sy'n agored i niwed o ganlyniad i fod yn gyn-garcharor yw'r meini prawf ar gyfer cyn-garcharorion. Wrth gwrs, yn ystod tymor diwethaf y Cynulliad, fe newidiwyd hyn gennym mewn gwirionedd a chredaf ei fod yn fater o bryder mawr ei bod hi'n ymddangos bod peidio â bod yn angen blaenoriaethol yn awtomatig wedi esgor ar ganlyniadau gwael i garcharorion. Rwy'n siŵr fod llawer ohonom wedi gweld adroddiad Estyn ar garchar Abertawe a gyhoeddwyd ychydig wythnosau'n ôl, ac a ganfu nad yw hanner y carcharorion sy'n cael eu rhyddhau yn cael eu hanfon i lety cynaliadwy. Mae'r adroddiad yn dweud yn eu barn hwy fod y canlyniadau i garcharorion ym maes ailsefydlu wedi suddo i 'gwael', sef y categori isaf posibl, ac roedd yn dweud y gallai polisi Llywodraeth y Cynulliad o beidio â rhoi blaenoriaeth ar restrau tai i garcharorion a ryddhawyd fod wedi cyfrannu at y canlyniad hwn. Felly rwy'n credu ei bod hi'n bwysig iawn i ni edrych eto ar garcharorion. Nid wyf yn gwybod a oes gan y Llywodraeth unrhyw ymchwil y mae wedi ei wneud ei hun sy'n dangos bod ymdrechion i ailgartrefu carcharorion, er nad ydynt yn flaenoriaeth yn y ffordd yr oeddent, wedi arwain at rywfaint o lwyddiant, ond yn sicr mae'r dystiolaeth i'w gweld yn dynodi nad oedd hwn yn newid polisi llwyddiannus. Felly, buaswn yn gofyn i'r Llywodraeth edrych ar hynny eto, a chredaf y dylem symud at sefyllfa lle rydym yn chwilio am dai yn gyntaf ac na ddylem gael categorïau blaenoriaethol mwyach.