English: Thank you, and thank you to Hefin for bringing this, and for your passion; I feel it loud and clear, and I'm glad that you have brought this here today. In recent weeks, we've been exploring some of the problems with leasehold contracts and unadopted roads, so it's logical that we're now moving on to the problems created by so-called 'fleecehold' arrangements, as you mentioned, service charges and the problems that come with them. These issues are of course linked with wider problems of market abuse in new developments that have happened more frequently since the financial crash. We are seeing increasing reports of poorer standards for new builds, and inadequate redress for some home owners. For example, it costs £120 just to log a complaint with the consumer code for home builders, which is widely viewed as being on the side of the home builders. Home owners and flat owners are facing estate service charges that are often completely unjustifiable, arbitrary and can cause great financial difficulty. It's a system particularly widespread and expensive in the apartment sector, as I think David Rees mentioned. It's shocking to see that an estate management company can gain possession of a property for unpaid rent over such a short period of time. With the economic state that we find ourselves in, with increasing costs for everyone, and flatlining pay, people need and expect an element of flexibility, and, in fact, it is often available from other utility companies and mortgage companies - that they give you that holiday or that break. In 2018, people rely on this to overcome a difficulty, even short term. So, the fact that someone can lose their home over some unpaid estate management fee is appalling, and people must have protection against losing their home for minor missed payments. Now, I know the Government has announced some good measures designed to protect these houses purchased under Help to Buy, but as I said last week, this is a very small part of the overall market. The bigger picture here is the fundamental fairness of this model, whether it is leasehold, freehold or anything else. I believe in principle that it is wrong to expect people to pay extra charges, which are often high, for maintenance of a wider estate, and then also expect people to pay council tax. It's an extra financial burden people can't afford. And at some point, I think people are going to revolt over this issue, not just with new housing estates, but also with the tens of thousands of people who pay management fees and also council tax in apartment buildings. It simply isn't right to ask people to pay twice. This model is not the way we build an equitable housing sector, or how we improve affordable home ownership, and it's another cost in a society that is now so filled with costs, it is crushing working people. I think this motion is a good one, and it's important that we are discussing it, but I do have to say again, as I did last week during topical questions on leasehold reform, that the Welsh Government could actually use their powers further beyond restrictions surrounding Help to Buy. I understand that they have agreements to not build leasehold under some circumstances, for example from certain home builders, but will those arrangements hold forever and how do they apply here? So, we do support this proposal for a Bill but I think we should be looking at the whole wider rip-offs that we are becoming aware of and strengthening the protection for consumers across the board in this sector. Diolch.
Welsh: Diolch i chi, a diolch i Hefin am gyflwyno hyn, ac am eich angerdd; rwy'n ei deimlo'n bendant iawn, ac rwy'n falch eich bod wedi cyflwyno hyn yma heddiw. Yn ystod yr wythnosau diwethaf, rydym wedi bod yn archwilio rhai o'r problemau gyda chontractau lesddaliadol a ffyrdd nad ydynt wedi cael eu mabwysiadu, felly mae'n rhesymegol ein bod bellach yn symud ymlaen at y problemau a grëwyd gan yr hyn a elwir yn drefniadau 'fleecehold', fel y sonioch chi, taliadau gwasanaeth a'r problemau sy'n dod gyda hwy. Mae'r materion hyn, wrth gwrs, yn gysylltiedig â'r problemau ehangach gyda chamddefnyddio'r farchnad mewn datblygiadau newydd, sydd wedi digwydd yn amlach ers y cwymp ariannol. Rydym yn gweld adroddiadau cynyddol am safonau salach ar adeiladau newydd, a chamau unioni annigonol ar gyfer rhai perchnogion cartrefi. Er enghraifft, mae'n costio £120 i gofnodi cwyn gyda'r cod defnyddwyr ar gyfer adeiladwyr cartrefi, ac mae llawer yn credu bod hwnnw ar ochr yr adeiladwyr. Mae perchnogion cartrefi a pherchnogion fflatiau yn wynebu taliadau gwasanaeth ystadau sy'n aml yn daliadau mympwyol na ellir eu cyfiawnhau o gwbl, ac maent yn gallu achosi anhawster ariannol mawr. Mae'n system sy'n arbennig o gyffredin a chostus yn y sector fflatiau, fel y soniodd David Rees rwy'n credu. Mae'n syfrdanol gweld y gall cwmni rheoli ystadau gael meddiant ar eiddo os nad yw'r rhent yn cael ei dalu am gyfnod mor fyr o amser. Gyda'r sefyllfa economaidd rydym ynddi, gyda chostau'n cynyddu i bawb, a chyflogau'n aros yn yr unfan, mae pobl angen ac yn disgwyl elfen o hyblygrwydd, ac yn wir, mae cwmnïau cyfleustodau a chwmnïau morgais eraill yn cynnig yr elfen honno'n aml - lle maent yn rhoi'r gwyliau neu'r egwyl hwnnw i chi. Yn 2018, mae pobl yn dibynnu ar hyn i oresgyn anhawster, hyd yn oed yn y tymor byr. Felly, mae'r ffaith y gall rhywun golli eu cartref am fethu talu ffi rheoli ystadau'n warthus, ac mae'n rhaid i bobl gael amddiffyniad rhag colli eu cartref am fethu talu mân daliadau. Nawr, gwn fod y Llywodraeth wedi cyhoeddi rhai mesurau da a luniwyd i ddiogelu'r tai hyn a brynwyd o dan Cymorth i Brynu, ond fel y dywedais yr wythnos diwethaf, rhan fach iawn o'r farchnad yn ei chyfanrwydd yw hon. Y darlun ehangach yma yw tegwch sylfaenol y model hwn, pa un a yw'n lesddaliad, yn rhydd-ddaliad neu'n unrhyw beth arall. Mewn egwyddor, credaf ei bod yn anghywir disgwyl i bobl dalu ffioedd ychwanegol, sy'n aml yn uchel, am waith cynnal a chadw ar yr ystâd ehangach, ac yna disgwyl i bobl dalu'r dreth gyngor hefyd. Mae'n faich ariannol ychwanegol na all pobl ei fforddio. Ac ar ryw adeg, credaf y bydd pobl yn gwrthryfela ynglŷn â'r mater hwn, nid y rheini sy'n byw ar ystadau tai newydd yn unig, ond hefyd y degau o filoedd o bobl sy'n talu ffioedd rheoli yn ogystal â'r dreth gyngor mewn fflatiau. Yn syml, nid yw'n iawn i ofyn i bobl dalu ddwywaith. Nid dyma'r model ar gyfer adeiladu sector tai teg, na'r modd i wella perchentyaeth fforddiadwy, ac mae'n gost arall mewn cymdeithas sydd bellach yn llawn o gostau, mae'n rhoi pwysau ar bobl sy'n gweithio. Credaf fod y cynnig hwn yn un da, ac mae'n bwysig ein bod yn ei drafod, ond mae'n rhaid i mi ddweud eto, fel y gwneuthum yr wythnos diwethaf yn ystod y cwestiynau amserol ar ddiwygio lesddeiliadaeth, y gallai Llywodraeth Cymru ddefnyddio'i phwerau ymhellach, y tu hwnt i gyfyngiadau'n ymwneud â Cymorth i Brynu. Rwy'n deall bod ganddynt gytundebau i beidio ag adeiladu lesddaliadau o dan rai amgylchiadau, er enghraifft gan adeiladwyr cartrefi penodol, ond a fydd y trefniadau hynny'n para am byth a sut y maent yn berthnasol yma? Felly, rydym yn cefnogi'r cynnig hwn ar gyfer Bil, ond credaf y dylem edrych ar yr arferion diegwyddor ehangach rydym yn dod yn ymwybodol ohonynt yn ogystal â chryfhau amddiffyniad i ddefnyddwyr yn gyffredinol yn y sector hwn. Diolch.