English: As a Plaid Cymru group, we are minded to support at the moment, but, as with the caveats proposed by David Melding, I think it's important that we see what happens at committee stage and to - [Interruption.] Everybody's phone is going off today. Gosh. I just wanted to say that we'd have to look at what happens in committee in relation to the amendments potentially that will be put forward. I'd want to probe further on whether you are content that there are still sufficient controls in place for Welsh Government under these proposed changes. You mention the regulatory framework for housing associations registered in Wales document, but, for example, performance indicator 2 in relation to tenants is quite - . Well, it's just one tiny paragraph, and it doesn't say how you'd demonstrate tenants are effectively engaged. It doesn't go into detail about what appropriate ways there are for tenants to be engaged, so I'm wondering how you're proposing to enhance the role of tenants if that is the vehicle for doing so and if it's not through this particular piece of legislation. Picking up on the point with regard to councillors, I believe that's because the councillors who'll be on any given board won't have the deciding vote on that particular board. I was wondering whether you could look into the possibility of whether tenants groups or tenants could have that particular role, so then, potentially, you wouldn't have to reduce it because tenants wouldn't be deemed to be political. The reason why I think you have to decrease the amount of councillors is because it is deemed as Government control or political control. If you had tenants performing that higher level role on housing association boards, could you do it that way? Could it be a different way of looking at things? I'm not sure whether you've done that research. I'm getting my way through the explanatory memorandum, but, obviously, we had it yesterday and we've got 134 pages to read, so I haven't got through it all yet. So, perhaps we can discuss that further. As we know, the issue with regard to it being in the public domain at the moment would be the borrowing issue. So, this is a wider point about whether you've discussed with the UK Government increasing or altering the cap on local authorities' borrowing, considering the fact that, if it did remain in the public domain, you'd be borrowing off the public purse, and you've already got plans in train. So, would you be able to appeal to the UK Government to change their long-standing opposition in this regard? And, if you can, then I will congratulate you. Can you comment on the removal of disposal consents? In what ways do you plan to make sure that the Tenant Participation Advisory Service will be fully involved in consultation on that particular issue? When this goes to committee, can we ask the ONS to comment on any potential recommendations so that any potential amendments either by the Government or by individual Members are considered in relation to what the ONS deems to be acceptable? I.e. at the moment, the ONS have said that, as the Bill stands, it would be acceptable, but, in politics, people have different ideas; amendments will probably come forward. How are we going to know throughout that process that the ONS are happy with that, because, of course, you've presented a Bill, but you've only had a reaction to it as it stands? When we've discussed this before on the education committee in the previous Assembly, where we had reclassification of further education and higher education, we did have a private briefing from the ONS, but we didn't have something on the record. But really, I think, we need to be as open and accountable as possible - so whether the ONS could give the committee dealing with this that type of flexibility and that openness to discuss whether possible amendments would be futile or whether they would be able to consider them appropriately. At the end of the day, we want to be able to build more social housing, and if changing this means that that happens, then, of course, we think we will be able to support it. But I think it's about the detail of what is proposed and how we ensure that tenants' rights are at the heart of all of this.
Welsh: Fel grŵp Plaid Cymru, ein tuedd yw cefnogi ar hyn o bryd, ond, yn debyg i'r cafeatau a gynigiwyd gan David Melding, credaf ei bod yn bwysig i ni weld beth fydd yn digwydd yn ystod y pwyllgor ac i - [Torri ar draws.] Mae ffôn pawb yn canu heddiw. Jiw, jiw. Yr hyn yr oeddwn i eisiau ei ddweud oedd y byddai'n rhaid inni edrych ar yr hyn sy'n digwydd yn y pwyllgor o ran y gwelliannau posib y gellid eu cyflwyno. Hoffwn holi ymhellach ynglŷn â pha un a ydych chi'n fodlon bod yna ddigon o reolaethau ar waith i Lywodraeth Cymru o hyd o dan y newidiadau arfaethedig hyn. Rydych chi'n sôn am y ddogfen fframwaith rheoleiddio ar gyfer cymdeithasau tai sydd wedi'u cofrestru yng Nghymru, ond, er enghraifft, mae dangosydd perfformiad 2 o ran tenantiaid yn eithaf - . Wel, dim ond un paragraff bach ydyw, ac nid yw'n dweud sut y byddech chi'n dangos ymgysylltiad effeithiol â thenantiaid. Nid yw'n rhoi manylion ynghylch pa ffyrdd priodol sydd ar gael i ymgysylltu â thenantiaid, felly hoffwn wybod sut ydych chi'n bwriadu gwella swyddogaeth tenantiaid os mai dyna'r cyfrwng ar gyfer gwneud hynny ac os nad yw hynny trwy'r ddeddfwriaeth benodol hon. Gan gyfeirio at y pwynt o ran cynghorwyr, rwy'n credu bod hynny oherwydd na fydd gan y cynghorwyr a fydd ar unrhyw fwrdd penodol, y bleidlais benderfynol ar y bwrdd penodol hwnnw. Roeddwn i'n meddwl tybed a allech chi ymchwilio i weld a fyddai'n bosibl i grwpiau tenantiaid neu denantiaid gael y swyddogaeth benodol honno, ac felly, efallai na fyddai'n rhaid i chi ei leihau oherwydd na fyddai tenantiaid yn cael eu hystyried yn wleidyddol. Y rheswm pam yr wyf yn credu bod yn rhaid i chi leihau nifer y cynghorwyr yw ei fod yn cael ei ystyried fel rheolaeth y Llywodraeth neu reolaeth wleidyddol. Pe byddai tenantiaid yn cyflawni'r swyddogaeth lefel uwch honno ar fyrddau cymdeithasau tai, a allech chi ei wneud yn y modd hwnnw? A allai hon fod yn ffordd wahanol o ystyried pethau? Nid wyf yn siŵr os ydych chi wedi gwneud yr ymchwil hwnnw. Rwyf ar hanner y memorandwm esboniadol, ond, yn amlwg, ddoe cawsom ni'r memorandwm ac mae gennym ni 134 o dudalennau i'w darllen, felly nid wyf wedi darllen y cyfan eto. Felly, efallai y gallwn ni drafod hynny ymhellach. Fel y gwyddom, y broblem o ran i hyn fod yn gyhoeddus ar hyn o bryd, yw'r broblem benthyca. Felly, mae hwn yn bwynt ehangach ynghylch pa un a ydych chi wedi trafod gyda Llywodraeth y DU ynglŷn â chynyddu neu newid y cap ar fenthyca gan awdurdodau lleol, o ystyried y ffaith, pe byddai'n parhau yn gyhoeddus, y byddech chi'n benthyca o bwrs y wlad, ac mae gennych chi eisoes gynlluniau ar waith. Felly, a fyddech chi'n gallu apelio i Lywodraeth y DU i newid ei gwrthwynebiad hirsefydlog yn hyn o beth? Ac, os gallwch chi, yna byddaf yn eich llongyfarch. A allwch chi roi sylw ar y cynnig i ddileu caniatâd gwaredu? Ym mha ffyrdd yr ydych chi'n bwriadu sicrhau y bydd y Gwasanaeth Ymgynghorol Cyfranogiad Tenantiaid yn cymryd rhan lawn yn yr ymgynghoriad ar y mater penodol hwnnw? Pan fydd hyn yn mynd gerbron y pwyllgor, a gawn ni ofyn i'r SYG roi sylw ar unrhyw argymhellion posibl er mwyn ystyried unrhyw welliannau posibl naill ai gan y Llywodraeth neu gan Aelodau unigol o ran yr hyn y mae'r SYG yn ei ystyried sy'n dderbyniol? Hynny yw, ar hyn o bryd, mae'r SYG wedi dweud, y byddent yn fodlon â'r Bil presennol, ond, mewn gwleidyddiaeth, mae gan bobl syniadau gwahanol; mae'n debyg y bydd gwelliannau yn cael eu cyflwyno. Sut y byddwn ni'n gwybod yn ystod y broses honno bod y SYG yn hapus â hynny, oherwydd, wrth gwrs, rydych chi wedi cyflwyno Bil, ond dim ond wedi cael ymateb iddo fel y mae ar hyn o bryd? Pan ein bod wedi trafod hyn o'r blaen yn y pwyllgor addysg yn y Cynulliad blaenorol, pan wnaethom ailddosbarthu addysg bellach ac addysg uwch, fe gawsom gyfarfod briffio preifat gyda'r SYG, ond ni roddwyd unrhyw beth ar gofnod. Ond, mewn gwirionedd, rwy'n credu, mae'n rhaid inni fod mor agored ac atebol â phosibl - felly a all y SYG roi i'r pwyllgor sy'n ymdrin â'r mater y math hwnnw o hyblygrwydd a bod yn agored i drafod pa un a fyddai gwelliannau posibl yn ddibwrpas neu a fyddai modd iddyn nhw eu hystyried yn briodol. Yn y pen draw, rydym ni'n awyddus i adeiladu mwy o dai cymdeithasol, ac os yw newid hyn yn golygu bod hynny'n digwydd, yna, wrth gwrs, rydym ni'n credu y byddwn yn gallu ei gefnogi. Ond rwy'n credu ei fod yn ymwneud â manylion yr hyn a gynigir a sut yr ydym yn sicrhau bod hawliau tenantiaid wrth wraidd hyn i gyd.