English: Thank you for arranging this debate today, and I'd like to thank all the team supporting the committee as well, because I think this was a really important piece of work. And, to put on the record, I think what I found most valuable was talking to people at the various locations that we visited - homeless people who could give us their everyday life experience of living on the streets. There's nothing more valuable to me than hearing how people are struggling to survive, and how we as politicians can change that, if we have the will to do so. I think their eloquence in taking part in this particular inquiry was phenomenal, and I'd like to thank them wholeheartedly for that. There were differing views on whether or not rough-sleepers were given priority need, as has been exemplified, with some councils stating they would classify those sleeping rough in priority need and other organisations, such as Shelter, stating that, in practice, this wasn't always the case. Related to this is obviously the Pereira test, which is problematic as the meaning of 'vulnerable' isn't being interpreted in the same way or applied consistently. For the record as well, I was deeply disappointed to see that Janet Finch-Saunders did not support this recommendation. I personally would have believed that the Conservatives would have supported the concept that those living on the streets should be a priority to be given a roof over their heads. We tried to accommodate Members in the report, and I can quote paragraph 64, saying, 'we believe that a phased approach to abolition provides the most pragmatic way forward. For example, by introducing new categories of priority need, such as rough sleepers'. So, if she cares as much as she says she does, then I would have thought that a phased approach would have sufficed in that regard. We're not suggesting that it could be done overnight. We know that there would be financial implications, but I think that's as much as we would deserve to do for those people who are currently being defined as not a priority - mostly young men - when they should be just as important as other homeless people. You would expect me to talk about recommendation 10 - devolution of welfare administration - and I was pleased that we got cross-party support, to an extent, on this. We've been crystal clear on this: it's all well and good for politicians to criticise welfare changes as one of the root causes of poverty in society, but when there is no willingness to even attempt to gain control over some of those welfare powers, then it undermines the credibility of the argument entirely. Do we want to complain about welfare changes or do we want to influence and change them? Let's not have empty words about solidarity across the UK in terms of our welfare system either - Scotland and Northern Ireland already have powers over the administration of welfare. The desire to see a unified, UK-wide welfare system is an argument that has already passed. It's a semantic view that does nothing to help people in Wales, living on the streets or in any other difficulty. So, I hope that we can progress this argument and that we can look at this further as a committee. The committee seems to be working positively; I just wish the Welsh Government were listening to that voice as intently as we'd hoped they would. In relation to housing first, I think it's really, really good that we've set our stall in saying how important housing first is. But, I've had a Twitter conversation this week with Peter Black, a former Assembly Member, who runs the homelessness working group on Swansea council, and he's been asking Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board for months to go in to speak to him to talk about housing first and how they can work together on this. And only because, I believe, we had this Twitter conversation, suddenly ABMU said they would come to the meeting to discuss housing first. It shouldn't have to take two politicians having a live debate on social media for ABMU to suddenly realise that housing first is part of their problem, or not a problem, but part of the solution to homelessness here in Wales. I think that housing first is a wonderful concept, but we have to get buy-in, not only from the housing sector, but from health, social services and education, so that we can make housing first work. I would urge the Minister to make sure that if this is going to be the future of housing and homelessness prevention here in Wales, we have to be serious, therefore, in getting people around the table. Just to finish quickly in relation to some of the comments. The Big Issue has noted in evidence that a large proportion of its vendors were European economic area citizens with no recourse to public funds, and this is something that, again, is not currently devolved, but the consequences of this policy and the hostile environment efforts from the UK Government are something that we all should be concerned about. We need to be solving some of the current issues surrounding the preparedness of social and private rented sector landlords to offer places to homeless and rough-sleepers. Evidence in the report showed that many social landlords did not feel equipped to help rough-sleepers or those with some of the problems that often arise as a result of being on the streets. I could probably talk all day on this issue, but I won't - my time is up - but I think it's really important that we put forward these recommendations and that we make sure that homelessness can come to an end here in Wales, and I think that this committee report has gone a long way to putting this on the political map.
Welsh: Diolch i chi am drefnu'r ddadl hon heddiw, a hoffwn ddiolch i bawb o'r tîm sy'n cefnogi'r pwyllgor yn ogystal, oherwydd credaf fod hwn yn waith pwysig iawn. A hoffwn gofnodi mai'r hyn a oedd fwyaf gwerthfawr yn fy marn i oedd siarad â phobl mewn amryw o leoliadau yr ymwelwyd â hwy - pobl ddigartref a allai roi eu profiad o fywyd bob dydd ar y strydoedd i ni. Nid oes unrhyw beth yn fwy gwerthfawr i mi na chlywed sut y mae pobl yn brwydro i oroesi, a sut y gallwn ni fel gwleidyddion newid hynny, os oes gennym ewyllys i wneud hynny. Credaf fod eu huodledd wrth gymryd rhan yn yr ymchwiliad hwn yn aruthrol, a hoffwn ddiolch o galon iddynt am hynny. Cafwyd gwahanol safbwyntiau ynglŷn â rhoi angen blaenoriaethol i rai a gysgai ar y stryd ai peidio, fel y gwelwyd, gyda rhai cynghorau'n nodi y byddent yn categoreiddio'r rhai sy'n cysgu ar y stryd fel rhai ag angen blaenoriaethol a sefydliadau eraill, megis Shelter, yn dweud, yn ymarferol, nad oedd hyn bob amser yn wir. Roedd y prawf Pereira'n gysylltiedig â hyn wrth gwrs, prawf sy'n achosi problemau gan nad yw ystyr 'agored i niwed' yn cael ei ddehongli yn yr un ffordd neu'n cael ei gymhwyso'n gyson. Hoffwn gofnodi hefyd fy mod yn siomedig i weld nad oedd Janet Finch-Saunders yn cefnogi'r argymhelliad hwn. Yn bersonol buaswn wedi credu y byddai'r Ceidwadwyr wedi cefnogi'r cysyniad y dylai'r rhai sy'n byw ar y stryd fod yn flaenoriaeth ar gyfer cael to dros eu pennau. Rydym wedi ceisio bodloni Aelodau yn yr adroddiad, a gallaf ddyfynnu paragraff 64, sy'n dweud, 'credwn mai dull fesul cam i ddiddymu yw'r ffordd fwyaf pragmatig ymlaen. Er enghraifft, drwy gyflwyno categorïau newydd o angen blaenoriaethol, fel pobl sy'n cysgu ar y stryd' Felly, os yw hi'n poeni cymaint ag y mae'n dweud ei bod, buaswn wedi meddwl y byddai dull fesul cam yn ddigon yn hynny o beth. Nid ydym yn awgrymu y gellid ei wneud dros nos. Gwyddom y byddai goblygiadau ariannol, ond credaf fod angen ei wneud ar gyfer pobl sydd ar hyn o bryd yn cael eu diffinio fel rhai nad ydynt yn flaenoriaeth - dynion ifanc yn bennaf - pan ddylent fod yr un mor bwysig â phobl eraill sy'n ddigartref. Byddech yn disgwyl imi sôn am argymhelliad 10 - datganoli gweinyddu lles - ac roeddwn yn falch ein bod wedi cael cefnogaeth drawsbleidiol, i raddau, ar hyn. Rydym wedi bod yn gwbl glir ar hyn: mae'n ddigon hawdd i wleidyddion feirniadu newidiadau lles fel un o achosion sylfaenol tlodi yn y gymdeithas, ond pan nad oes unrhyw barodrwydd i hyd yn oed geisio ennill rheolaeth dros rai o'r pwerau lles hynny, mae'n tanseilio hygrededd y ddadl yn gyfan gwbl. A ydym eisiau cwyno am newidiadau lles neu a ydym eisiau dylanwadu arnynt a'u newid? Gadewch inni beidio â chael geiriau gwag am undod ar draws y DU mewn perthynas â'n system les ychwaith - mae gan yr Alban a Gogledd Iwerddon bwerau eisoes dros weinyddu lles. Mae'r awydd i weld system les unedig, ledled y DU yn ddadl sydd eisoes wedi mynd heibio. Barn semantig ydyw nad yw'n gwneud dim i helpu pobl yng Nghymru sy'n byw ar y stryd neu mewn unrhyw anhawster arall. Felly, rwy'n gobeithio y gallwn symud ymlaen â'r ddadl hon ac y gallwn edrych ar hyn ymhellach fel pwyllgor. Ymddengys bod y pwyllgor yn gweithio mewn modd cadarnhaol; o na bai Llywodraeth Cymru yn gwrando ar y llais hwnnw mor astud ag y gobeithiem y byddai'n ei wneud. Mewn perthynas â thai yn gyntaf, credaf ei bod hi'n dda iawn ein bod wedi gosod ein stondin drwy ddweud pa mor bwysig yw tai yn gyntaf. Ond cefais sgwrs Twitter yr wythnos hon gyda Peter Black, cyn Aelod Cynulliad, sy'n arwain y gweithgor digartrefedd ar gyngor Abertawe, ac mae ef wedi bod yn gofyn i Fwrdd Iechyd Lleol Abertawe Bro Morgannwg ers misoedd i fynd i mewn i siarad ag ef ynglŷn â thai yn gyntaf a sut y gallant weithio gyda'i gilydd ar hyn. Ac oherwydd ein bod wedi cael y sgwrs hon ar Twitter, rwy'n credu, yn sydyn fe ddywedodd Prifysgol Abertawe Bro Morgannwg y byddent yn dod i'r cyfarfod i drafod tai yn gyntaf. Ni ddylai gymryd dau wleidydd yn cael dadl fyw ar y cyfryngau cymdeithasol i Abertawe Bro Morgannwg sylweddoli'n sydyn fod tai yn gyntaf yn rhan o'u problem, neu nid problem, ond yn rhan o'r ateb i ddigartrefedd yma yng Nghymru. Credaf fod tai yn gyntaf yn gysyniad gwych, ond rhaid inni gael cefnogaeth, nid yn unig gan y sector tai, ond o'r maes iechyd, gwasanaethau cymdeithasol ac addysg, fel y gallwn wneud i dai yn gyntaf weithio. Os yw hyn yn mynd i fod yn rhan o'r dyfodol ym maes tai ac atal digartrefedd yma yng Nghymru, buaswn yn annog y Gweinidog i wneud yn siŵr ein bod o ddifrif, felly, ynglŷn â chael pobl o amgylch y bwrdd. I orffen yn gyflym mewn perthynas â rhai o'r sylwadau. Mae The Big Issue wedi nodi mewn tystiolaeth fod cyfran fawr o'u gwerthwyr yn ddinasyddion yr ardal economaidd Ewropeaidd heb allu i ofyn am arian cyhoeddus, ac unwaith eto, dyma rywbeth nad yw wedi'i ddatganoli ar hyn o bryd, ond mae canlyniadau'r polisi hwn a'r awyrgylch gelyniaethus o du Llywodraeth y DU yn rhywbeth y dylai pob un ohonom bryderu yn ei gylch. Mae angen inni ddatrys rhai o'r problemau cyfredol sy'n ymwneud â pharodrwydd landlordiaid y sector rhentu cymdeithasol a phreifat i gynnig lleoedd i bobl ddigartref a phobl sy'n cysgu ar y stryd. Roedd tystiolaeth yn yr adroddiad yn dangos nad oedd llawer o landlordiaid cymdeithasol yn teimlo eu bod wedi'u paratoi ar gyfer helpu pobl sy'n cysgu ar y stryd neu rai sydd â rhai o'r problemau sy'n codi yn aml o ganlyniad i fod ar y strydoedd. Mae'n fwy na thebyg y gallwn siarad drwy'r dydd ar y mater hwn, ond ni wnaf hynny - mae fy amser ar ben - ond mae'n bwysig iawn ein bod yn cyflwyno'r argymhellion hyn a'n bod yn sicrhau y gall digartrefedd ddod i ben yma yng Nghymru, a chredaf fod yr adroddiad pwyllgor hwn wedi gwneud llawer iawn i roi hyn ar y map gwleidyddol.