English: While I agree with much of the Minister's approach, I do think it's time to move more quickly, though I do welcome the fact that we're having regular statements on this very important issue. For instance, I note that you will publish a White Paper on building safety. I think that's appropriate. But I think what we also need to know is whether you intend to legislate before the Assembly elections in 2021, because, if you don't, any Government that's elected then at that election will have to bring in a legislative programme, that probably won't be until the autumn of 2021, and it could be 2022 or 2023 before we are seeing any legislation. So, I really think that we need to do the legislation in this Assembly, if at all possible. I have a couple of specific questions as well. I note what you said about compartmentation, which is not easy to say, being critical to the design of high-rise buildings, and that any safety inspection has to look at that, and then any future remediation has to look at that, and communal areas. Even each person's front door - if that isn't of the required fire safety then it doesn't matter how robust the flat is, obviously you've got a problem. But I do want to know where we are with 'stay put' advice as well. I notice in England - sorry, in London - they are expressly reviewing that. There's still a lot of confusion about what residents should do. And then the registration of managing agents - whilst I could see, in terms of a voluntary scheme, that you can get going quicker on that, I would like to know whether we have the power to legislate or whether that doesn't lie within our powers. And, if it doesn't, what discussions are we having with the UK Government to ensure - ? I think it should be a mandatory system, and if we could move forward on that as quickly as possible - . Finally, can I say that I was a bit disappointed about what we're doing in the private residential sector, where there have been more and more revelations of sub-standard buildings, some of them not very old? The Celestia complex in Cardiff Bay has been discussed, and I think it's a very troubling example: developed by Redrow, now found to have very poor or non-existent fire barriers between flats - there is an enforcement order issued by the fire authority - very poor or non-existent compartmentation measures; design features not in place to stop fire spreading internally; missing or defective external fire cavity barriers; and some of the timber cladding and insulation does not meet required standards. Now, just reading that out, you can imagine what the residents feel, but it now appears that they're going to bear all the risk and the cost of putting things right, unless pressure is brought to bear. I think the developers have and the builders have a moral responsibility, but we need to go a bit further than that and see if the regulations that were in force at the time were properly observed, and, if not, and there's systematic failure, so even if the materials were correct the way they were installed was not, then it seems to me that, at the very least, we need a partnership approach between the private sector, state sector and, perhaps, residents as well. But I do not think the residents should be bearing the brunt of the cost - nothing like it. Now, the UK Government, to get moving on this, has announced that about £200 million would be made available to remove and replace unsafe cladding from high-rise private residential buildings. This will enable remediation work to take place and it will have to be done for the benefit of the leaseholders, and presumably it will help to reduce the costs they face. I genuinely don't know if that's a UK scheme. If it is, what can we expect to get and how will you administer it? If it isn't, is there any Barnett consequential and will you be developing a scheme as well? But, it's not enough, I think, and I would say this of the UK Government as well - I'm not singling you out - to talk about moral responsibility that the builders and developers have. We need to get everyone around the table and find a solution, and not just send off bills for £40,000, potentially, to someone who owns a modest two-bedroomed flat in one of these developments. People are really, really concerned - I'm sure many of them are watching this session. I would co-operate with you fully, because we are where we are through a series of problems and errors that have been committed by various administrations, no doubt, but we do need to help these people who are in real need at the moment, and, in many ways, in a worse position than those in social housing.
Welsh: Er fy mod i'n cytuno â llawer o ddull gweithredu'r Gweinidog, rwy'n credu ei bod yn bryd symud yn gynt, ond rwy'n croesawu'r ffaith ein bod yn cael datganiadau rheolaidd ar y mater pwysig iawn hwn. Er enghraifft, rwy'n sylwi y byddwch yn cyhoeddi Papur Gwyn ar ddiogelwch adeiladau. Rwy'n credu bod hynny'n briodol. Ond rwy'n credu mai'r hyn y mae angen inni ei wybod hefyd yw a ydych chi'n bwriadu deddfu cyn etholiadau'r Cynulliad yn 2021, oherwydd, os na fyddwch yn gwneud hynny, bydd yn rhaid i unrhyw Lywodraeth a etholir yn yr etholiad hwnnw yn gorfod cyflwyno rhaglen ddeddfwriaethol, ac mae'n debyg na fydd hynny tan hydref 2021, a gallai fod yn 2022 neu 2023 cyn i ni weld unrhyw ddeddfwriaeth. Felly, rwy'n credu o ddifrif bod angen i ni wneud y ddeddfwriaeth yn y Cynulliad hwn, os yw hynny'n bosibl. Mae gennyf i gwpl o gwestiynau penodol hefyd. Rwy'n nodi'r hyn y gwnaethoch chi ei ddweud am gompartmentau, ac nid yw'n hawdd dweud hynny, gan eu bod yn hanfodol i ddyluniad adeiladau uchel, a bod yn rhaid i unrhyw archwiliad diogelwch ystyried hynny, ac yna mae'n gorfod ystyried unrhyw waith adfer yn y dyfodol, a mannau cymunedol. Hyd yn oed drws ffrynt pob person - os nad yw hynny'n unol â'r diogelwch tân gofynnol, yna does dim ots pa mor gadarn yw'r fflat, yn amlwg mae gennych chi broblem. Ond rwy'n awyddus i wybod lle'r ydym ni arni gyda'r cyngor i aros lle'r ydych chi hefyd. Rwy'n sylwi yn Lloegr - mae'n ddrwg gen i, yn Llundain - maen nhw'n adolygu hynny'n benodol. Mae llawer o ddryswch o hyd ynglŷn â'r hyn y dylai preswylwyr ei wneud. Ac yna cofrestru asiantau rheoli - er y gallwn i weld, o ran cynllun gwirfoddol, y gallwch chi fynd yn gyflymach ar hynny, hoffwn i wybod a oes gennym ni y pŵer i ddeddfu neu a yw hynny y tu hwnt i'n pwerau? Ac, os nad ydyw o fewn ein pwerau, pa drafodaethau yr ydym ni'n eu cael gyda Llywodraeth y DU i sicrhau - ? Rwy'n credu y dylai fod yn system orfodol, ac os byddai modd i ni symud ymlaen ar hynny cyn gynted ag sy'n bosibl - . Yn olaf, a gaf i ddweud fy mod ychydig yn siomedig am yr hyn yr ydym ni'n ei wneud yn y sector preswyl preifat, lle y bu fwyfwy o ddatgelu adeiladau is-safonol, rhai ohonyn nhw nad ydynt yn hen iawn? Mae adeilad Celestia ym Mae Caerdydd wedi cael ei drafod, ac rwy'n credu ei fod yn enghraifft drafferthus: wedi'i ddatblygu gan Redrow, rydym yn gwybod erbyn hyn fod ganddyn nhw rwystrau tân rhwng fflatiau sydd naill ai'n wael iawn, neu nad ydyn nhw'n bodoli - mae gorchymyn gorfodi wedi cael ei gyhoeddi gan yr awdurdod tân - yn wael iawn neu fesurau compartmentau nad ydyn nhw'n bodoli; nodweddion dylunio nad ydyn nhw'n weithredol i atal tân rhag lledaenu'n fewnol; rhwystrau ceudod tân allanol ar goll neu'n ddiffygiol; ac nid yw peth o'r cladin coed ac inswleiddio yn cyrraedd y safonau gofynnol. Nawr, dim ond wrth ddarllen hynny allan, gallwch chi ddychmygu'r hyn y mae'r preswylwyr yn ei deimlo, ond mae'n ymddangos yn awr eu bod yn mynd i ysgwyddo'r holl risg a'r gost o unioni pethau, oni bai fod pwysau'n cael ei ddefnyddio. Rwy'n credu bod gan y datblygwyr a'r adeiladwyr gyfrifoldeb moesol, ond mae angen inni fynd ychydig ymhellach na hynny a gweld a oedd y rheoliadau a oedd mewn grym ar y pryd wedi cael eu dilyn yn gywir, ac, os nad oeddent, a bod methiant systematig, felly hyd yn oed os oedd y deunyddiau yn gywir, nid oedd y ffordd y cawsant eu gosod yn gywir, yna mae'n ymddangos i mi fod angen dull partneriaeth, o leiaf, rhwng y sector preifat, y sector gwladol ac, efallai, preswylwyr hefyd. Ond nid wyf yn credu y dylai'r preswylwyr fod yn ysgwyddo baich y gost - dim byd tebyg iddi. Mae Llywodraeth y DU, er mwyn symud ymlaen, wedi cyhoeddi y byddai tua £200 miliwn ar gael i symud a disodli cladin anniogel o adeiladau preswyl preifat uchel. Bydd hyn yn galluogi gwaith adfer i ddigwydd a bydd yn rhaid ei wneud er budd y prydleswyr, ac mae'n debyg y bydd yn helpu i leihau'r costau y maen nhw'n eu hwynebu. Wn i ddim os ydy hynny'n gynllun y DU. Os ydyw, beth y gallwn ni ddisgwyl ei gael a sut y byddwch chi'n ei weinyddu? Os nad ydyw, a oes unrhyw swm canlyniadol dan fformiwla Barnett ac a fyddwch chi'n datblygu cynllun hefyd? Ond, nid yw'n ddigon, yn fy marn i, a byddwn i'n dweud hyn am Lywodraeth y DU hefyd - nid wyf yn sôn amdanoch chi yn unig - i siarad ynghylch cyfrifoldeb moesol yr adeiladwyr a'r datblygwyr. Mae angen inni gael pawb o amgylch y bwrdd a dod o hyd i ateb, ac nid dim ond anfon biliau am £40,000, o bosibl, at rywun sy'n berchen ar fflat dwy lofft gymedrol yn un o'r datblygiadau hyn. Mae pobl yn wirioneddol bryderus - rwy'n siŵr bod llawer ohonyn nhw yn gwylio'r sesiwn hon. Byddwn i'n cydweithio â chi'n llawn, oherwydd rydym ni yn y fan lle'r ydym ni drwy gyfres o broblemau a chamgymeriadau a gyflawnwyd gan wahanol weinyddiaethau, mae'n siŵr, ond mae angen inni helpu'r bobl hyn sydd mewn angen gwirioneddol ar hyn o bryd, ac mewn sawl ffordd, sydd mewn sefyllfa waeth na'r rhai mewn tai cymdeithasol.