Y Cyfarfod Llawn
Plenary
02/04/2025Cynnwys
Contents
Yn y fersiwn ddwyieithog, mae’r golofn chwith yn cynnwys yr iaith a lefarwyd yn y cyfarfod. Mae’r golofn dde yn cynnwys cyfieithiad o’r areithiau hynny.
In the bilingual version, the left-hand column includes the language used during the meeting. The right-hand column includes a translation of those speeches.
Cyfarfu'r Senedd yn y Siambr a thrwy gynhadledd fideo am 13:30 gyda'r Llywydd (Elin Jones) yn y Gadair.
The Senedd met in the Chamber and by video-conference at 13:30 with the Llywydd (Elin Jones) in the Chair.
Prynhawn da a chroeso, bawb, i'r Cyfarfod Llawn. Cwestiynau i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyllid a’r Gymraeg fydd gyntaf y prynhawn yma, ac mae'r cwestiwn cyntaf gan Alun Davies.
Good afternoon and welcome to this afternoon's Plenary meeting. The first item on the agenda is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language, and the first question is from Alun Davies.
1. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet roi diweddariad ar waith Llywodraeth Cymru i adolygu fformiwla Barnett? OQ62557
1. Will the Cabinet Secretary provide an update on the Welsh Government's work to review the Barnett formula? OQ62557
Llywydd, our current priority in the near term is to ensure that the present funding formula works as well as it can do for Wales. More fundamental reform will require the agreement of all four nations of the United Kingdom to a new fiscal framework and an independent oversight body.
Lywydd, ein blaenoriaeth ar hyn o bryd yn y tymor agos yw sicrhau bod y fformiwla gyllido bresennol yn gweithio cystal ag y gall weithio i Gymru. Bydd diwygio mwy sylfaenol yn ei gwneud yn ofynnol i bedair gwlad y Deyrnas Unedig gytuno i fframwaith cyllidol newydd a chorff goruchwylio annibynnol.
I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for that. I'm sure he agrees with me that the Barnett formula is no longer fit for purpose, and it also ensures that Wales does not get a fair crack of the whip when it comes to the distribution of funding across the United Kingdom. But, this afternoon, could the Cabinet Secretary confirm that the UK Government has decided to use Barnett consequentials as a means of distributing funds to compensate the Welsh Government for the employers' national insurance rise? Will he also confirm that this breaks the agreement between Governments in the United Kingdom that where one Government takes a decision that has a negative financial impact on another Government, they should provide the costs in full? And will he further confirm that this change to the established process could cost Wales £65 million?
Rwy’n ddiolchgar i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Rwy’n siŵr ei fod yn cytuno â mi nad yw fformiwla Barnett yn addas i’r diben mwyach, ac mae hefyd yn sicrhau nad yw Cymru’n cael chwarae teg o ran dosbarthiad cyllid ar draws y Deyrnas Unedig. Ond y prynhawn yma, a wnaiff Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet gadarnhau bod Llywodraeth y DU wedi penderfynu defnyddio cyllid canlyniadol Barnett fel modd o ddosbarthu arian i ddigolledu Llywodraeth Cymru am y cynnydd i gyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol cyflogwyr? A wnaiff gadarnhau hefyd fod hyn yn torri’r cytundeb rhwng Llywodraethau yn y Deyrnas Unedig, lle mae un Llywodraeth yn gwneud penderfyniad sy’n cael effaith ariannol negyddol ar Lywodraeth arall, y dylent ddarparu’r costau’n llawn? Ac a wnaiff gadarnhau ymhellach y gallai’r newid hwn i’r broses sefydledig gostio £65 miliwn i Gymru?
Llywydd, thank you to Alun Davies for those further questions. In agreeing with him that the Barnett formula is not fit for purpose, of course, we are both agreeing with Joel Barnett, who, many, many times, said that the formula that he had devised in particular circumstances in the 1970s was no longer fit to discharge the heavy burden that it has borne since then.
Turning to the specific questions that the Member has raised, I can confirm that the UK Government has decided to distribute the assistance that will go to Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales in fulfilment of the Chancellor's promise that public sector employees would have the costs of national insurance increases met, and that the Chancellor has decided to use the Barnett formula for that purpose. I think that she is wrong to do that, and I have said so in direct terms to the Chief Secretary of the Treasury when he was here for the Finance: Interministerial Standing Committee at the end of February, as did the finance Ministers for Scotland and for Northern Ireland.
I've taken the precaution, Llywydd, wondering if this issue might come up today, of bringing with me the statement of funding policy—all 92 pages of it. And paragraph 10 on page 13 says, I think, very clearly that when decisions are taken by any of the administrations that lead to additional costs for any of the other administrations, the body whose decision leads to the additional cost will meet that cost. Well, that suggests to me that, when the UK Government made its decision, it should reimburse Welsh public services for the actual costs of the increase in national insurance contributions, not a Barnett share of the costs in England. The result is, as the Member says, that we are now—and it could be as much as—£65 million short of what we estimate that public services in Wales, within the Chancellor's own definition, will have to pay. We continue to be in discussions, of course, with the Treasury on this matter, and those figures will not be confirmed until later in the spring. But the basic issue that Alun Davies has raised is one that I agree with. We should have been compensated for the actual costs, not the Barnett share of the costs in England.
Lywydd, diolch i Alun Davies am ei gwestiynau pellach. Wrth gytuno ag ef nad yw fformiwla Barnett yn addas i’r diben, rydym ein dau'n cytuno â Joel Barnett, a ddywedodd sawl tro nad oedd y fformiwla a ddyfeisiodd mewn amgylchiadau penodol yn y 1970au bellach yn addas i gyflawni’r baich trwm y mae wedi’i ysgwyddo ers hynny.
Gan droi at y cwestiynau penodol y mae’r Aelod wedi’u codi, gallaf gadarnhau bod Llywodraeth y DU wedi penderfynu dosbarthu’r cymorth a fydd yn mynd i’r Alban, Gogledd Iwerddon a Chymru i gyflawni addewid y Canghellor y byddai gweithwyr y sector cyhoeddus yn gweld costau'r cynnydd i gyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol yn cael eu talu, a bod y Canghellor wedi penderfynu defnyddio fformiwla Barnett at y diben hwnnw. Credaf ei bod yn anghywir i wneud hynny, ac rwyf wedi dweud hynny'n glir wrth Brif Ysgrifennydd y Trysorlys pan oedd yma ar gyfer y Pwyllgor Sefydlog Rhyngweinidogol ar Gyllid ddiwedd mis Chwefror, fel y gwnaeth Gweinidogion cyllid yr Alban a Gogledd Iwerddon.
Gan ragweld y byddai'r mater hwn yn codi heddiw, Lywydd, rwyf wedi dod â’r datganiad o bolisi cyllido gyda mi—92 tudalen ohono. Ac mae paragraff 10 ar dudalen 13 yn dweud yn glir iawn pan fydd unrhyw un o’r gweinyddiaethau yn gwneud penderfyniadau sy'n arwain at gostau ychwanegol i unrhyw un o'r gweinyddiaethau eraill, y bydd y corff a wnaeth y penderfyniad a arweiniodd at y gost ychwanegol yn talu'r costau. Wel, mae hynny’n awgrymu i mi, pan wnaeth Llywodraeth y DU ei phenderfyniad, y dylai ad-dalu gwasanaethau cyhoeddus Cymru am gostau gwirioneddol y cynnydd i gyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol, nid cyfran Barnett o’r costau yn Lloegr. Y canlyniad, fel y dywed yr Aelod, yw ein bod bellach—a gallai fod cymaint â—£65 miliwn yn brin o'r hyn yr amcangyfrifwn y bydd yn rhaid i wasanaethau cyhoeddus yng Nghymru, yn ôl diffiniad y Canghellor ei hun, ei dalu. Rydym yn parhau i gael trafodaethau gyda'r Trysorlys ynglŷn â'r mater hwn, ac ni fydd y ffigurau hynny'n cael eu cadarnhau tan yn nes ymlaen yn y gwanwyn. Ond mae’r mater sylfaenol y mae Alun Davies wedi’i godi yn un rwy'n cytuno ag ef. Dylem fod wedi cael ein digolledu am y costau gwirioneddol, nid cyfran Barnett o’r costau yn Lloegr.
There has been, for quite some time here, cross-party consensus in the Senedd around the need to reform the Welsh funding model. Despite the independent auditor general highlighting that, through the Barnett formula, £1.20 is allocated to Wales for every £1 spent on public services in England, the Holtham Commission found that, under current arrangements, Wales could be underfunded by some £300 million per year. So, the message is clear that Wales should be funded according to need and not based on population. An interesting point about the national insurance contributions also is the fact that, yet again, whilst there are moves to protect those in the public sector, the private sector—those running care homes—now will not receive any such support. So, could I ask the Cabinet Secretary how he intends to equalise and show equal parity, where you've got some care homes run by local authorities that will receive the national insurance amount, albeit coming from the UK Government? And what discussions have taken place with HM Treasury and the Secretary of State for Wales about the Holtham proposals, and do they agree that there now needs to be reform? Diolch.
Cafwyd consensws trawsbleidiol ers tro yma yn y Senedd ynghylch yr angen i ddiwygio model cyllido Cymru. Er i’r archwilydd cyffredinol annibynnol dynnu sylw at y ffaith bod £1.20 yn cael ei ddyrannu i Gymru drwy fformiwla Barnett am bob £1 a werir ar wasanaethau cyhoeddus yn Lloegr, canfu Comisiwn Holtham, o dan y trefniadau presennol, y gallai Cymru fod yn cael ei thanariannu oddeutu £300 miliwn y flwyddyn. Felly, mae’r neges yn glir y dylai Cymru gael ei hariannu yn ôl angen ac nid ar sail poblogaeth. Pwynt diddorol am y cyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol yw'r ffaith, unwaith eto, er bod camau'n cael eu cymryd i amddiffyn y rheini yn y sector cyhoeddus, na fydd y sector preifat—y rheini sy’n rhedeg cartrefi gofal—bellach yn cael unrhyw gymorth o’r fath. Felly, a gaf i ofyn i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet sut y mae'n bwriadu cydraddoli a dangos cydraddoldeb, lle mae gennych rai cartrefi gofal sy'n cael eu rhedeg gan awdurdodau lleol a fydd yn cael y cyllid yswiriant gwladol, er mai gan Lywodraeth y DU y daw? A pha drafodaethau a gafwyd gyda Thrysorlys EF ac Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru am gynigion Holtham, ac a ydynt yn cytuno bod angen diwygio nawr? Diolch.
Thank you very much to Janet Finch-Saunders for those additional questions, and thanks to her for expressing the support of her party for reform of the Barnett formula. When we hear Treasury voices say that Wales gets £1.20 for every £1 spent in England, what they tend not to tell you is that that includes all expenditure, not just expenditure that comes through this Senedd. It includes all the expenditure—on defence matters, on pensions, on the social security system. It, I think, tells you part of the picture but not the whole picture. Because, of course, the point of the Barnett formula, imperfect as it is, is to make sure that spending power is broadly equivalent over the United Kingdom, and that a broadly consistent level and quality of public goods can be achieved in all parts of the UK. We will continue to make that case I've made it at the FISC here. The real issue is the one I pointed to in my answer to Alun Davies—that you can only reform the Barnett formula if every part of the United Kingdom agrees. I think that's very hard to bring off, because some parts of the United Kingdom do rather well out of the Barnett formula, and the pressure on them to seek reform is not the same as it might be felt in this Chamber.
As to the point that the Member made about those parts of the Welsh economy that fall outside the Chancellor's definition—the definition she chose to adopt—I'm not in a position to use Welsh Government money to make up for the costs that those organisations will incur. The only way to do that would be to divert money away from the things for which we are responsible to things for which we are not responsible, and, I'm afraid, difficult though some of those choices are, I don't think that's a principle that we can easily override.
Diolch i Janet Finch-Saunders am ei chwestiynau ychwanegol, a diolch iddi am fynegi cefnogaeth ei phlaid i ddiwygio fformiwla Barnett. Pan glywn leisiau’r Trysorlys yn dweud bod Cymru’n cael £1.20 am bob £1 a werir yn Lloegr, yr hyn nad ydynt yn tueddu i’w ddweud wrthych yw bod hynny’n cynnwys yr holl wariant, nid gwariant a ddaw drwy’r Senedd hon yn unig. Mae'n cynnwys yr holl wariant—ar faterion amddiffyn, ar bensiynau, ar y system nawdd cymdeithasol. Rwy'n credu ei fod yn cyfleu rhan o’r darlun i chi, ond nid y darlun cyfan. Oherwydd, wrth gwrs, pwynt fformiwla Barnett, er nad yw'n berffaith, yw sicrhau bod pŵer gwario yn weddol gyfartal dros y Deyrnas Unedig, ac y gellir cyflawni lefel ac ansawdd sy’n weddol gyson o ran nwyddau cyhoeddus ym mhob rhan o’r DU. Byddwn yn parhau i ddadlau'r achos y bûm yn ei ddadlau yn y Pwyllgor Sefydlog Rhyngweinidogol ar Gyllid yma. Y mater go iawn yw’r un y cyfeiriais ato yn fy ateb i Alun Davies—na allwch ond diwygio fformiwla Barnett os bydd pob rhan o’r Deyrnas Unedig yn cytuno. Credaf ei bod yn anodd iawn cyflawni hynny, gan fod rhai rhannau o’r Deyrnas Unedig yn gwneud yn dda iawn allan o fformiwla Barnett, ac nid yw’r pwysau arnynt i geisio diwygio yr un fath ag y gallai fod yn cael ei deimlo yn y Siambr hon.
O ran y pwynt a wnaeth yr Aelod am y rhannau hynny o economi Cymru sydd y tu allan i ddiffiniad y Canghellor—y diffiniad y dewisodd ei fabwysiadu—nid wyf mewn sefyllfa i ddefnyddio arian Llywodraeth Cymru i wneud iawn am y costau y bydd y sefydliadau hynny’n eu hwynebu. Yr unig ffordd o wneud hynny fyddai dargyfeirio arian oddi wrth y pethau yr ydym yn gyfrifol amdanynt i bethau nad ydym yn gyfrifol amdanynt, ac er bod rhai o’r dewisiadau hynny'n anodd, mae arnaf ofn nad wyf yn credu bod honno’n egwyddor y gallwn ei diystyru'n hawdd.
The fairly shocking revelation that we've just heard is one more example, isn't it, Cabinet Secretary, of the fact that the Barnett formula is not just clearly unfair, but it's also inconsistently applied and it lacks transparency. To give one example of that, I think I'm right in saying that the block grant transparency report hasn't been published since July 2023, and yet, that report, as the name suggests, is pretty essential to be able to work out, for example, how close we are to the needs-based funding floor in Wales and a similar mechanism that exists in Northern Ireland. So, it's not working at any level. Now, I understand what he says about the need for a four-nation approach overall. But I heard, in the brief interregnum that he was on the backbenches, he did suggest that we could make some progress, potentially, by invoking the clause in the fiscal agreement that would allow us in Wales unilaterally to ask for a review of that agreement. Has that time now come?
Mae’r datguddiad gweddol syfrdanol yr ydym newydd ei glywed yn un enghraifft arall, onid yw, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, o’r ffaith bod fformiwla Barnett nid yn unig yn amlwg yn annheg, ond ei bod hefyd yn cael ei rhoi ar waith yn anghyson a’i bod yn ddiffygiol o ran tryloywder. I roi un enghraifft o hynny, rwy'n credu fy mod yn iawn i ddweud nad yw adroddiad tryloywder y grant bloc wedi’i gyhoeddi ers mis Gorffennaf 2023, ac eto, mae’r adroddiad hwnnw, fel y mae’r enw’n awgrymu, yn eithaf hanfodol i allu canfod, er enghraifft, pa mor agos ydym ni at y cyllid gwaelodol sy'n seiliedig ar anghenion yng Nghymru a mecanwaith tebyg sy’n bodoli yng Ngogledd Iwerddon. Felly, nid yw'n gweithio ar unrhyw lefel. Nawr, rwy’n deall yr hyn a ddywed ynglŷn â'r angen am ddull pedair gwlad yn gyffredinol. Ond yn y cyfnod byr y bu ar y meinciau cefn, clywais ei fod wedi awgrymu y gallem wneud rhywfaint o gynnydd o bosibl drwy ddefnyddio'r cymal yn y cytundeb cyllidol a fyddai’n caniatáu i ni yng Nghymru ofyn yn unochrog am adolygiad o’r cytundeb hwnnw. A yw'r adeg honno bellach wedi dod?
Thank you to Adam Price for a number of important points there. The proposals that we put forward in 'Reforming our Union' would not only have created a new rules-based system, with the transparency that that would bring, but also would have created a new independent oversight body, because we cannot, I believe, go on indefinitely having the Treasury the judge, the jury and, occasionally, the executioner, when it comes to the Barnett formula. We saw that in the £1 billion bung, as it was called, that went in order to secure the support of the DUP to the minority administration led by Theresa May. Neither England, Scotland nor Wales had anything the equivalent, as the Barnett formula itself would have otherwise required. So, we do need something that is a good deal more transparent, rules based and independent than we have now.
I’m told by our colleagues in the Treasury that they do hope to publish a block grant transparency report before too long. And I should say that, in the FISC meeting, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury did offer to codify some of the improvements that we’ve seen in the way that the Treasury has behaved in relation to the devolved Governments since July of last year. We’ve had earlier information, we’ve had better information, and the Chief Secretary has offered to make that a permanent part of the way that he conducts his office. So, I’m pleased about that.
As far as invoking the disputes mechanism is concerned, it has been invoked by the Northern Ireland Executive, not on this matter, but on another matter. And, just at the moment, I am watching how that dispute is being taken through the disputes mechanism, and I’ll watch that carefully to see whether that provides a route that we might wish to follow in those places where we think Wales has not been properly served by current arrangements. But I’m not at that point just yet.
Diolch i Adam Price am nifer o bwyntiau pwysig yno. Byddai’r cynigion a gyflwynwyd gennym yn 'Diwygio ein Hundeb’ nid yn unig wedi creu system newydd sy'n seiliedig ar reolau, gyda’r tryloywder a ddaw yn sgil hynny, ond byddent hefyd wedi creu corff goruchwylio annibynnol newydd, gan na allwn, yn fy marn i, barhau i gael y Trysorlys yn farnwr, yn rheithgor, ac yn achlysurol, yn ddienyddiwr, mewn perthynas â fformiwla Barnett. Gwelsom hynny yn y cildwrn o £1 biliwn, fel y’i gelwid, a roddwyd i sicrhau cefnogaeth y DUP i weinyddiaeth leiafrifol Theresa May. Ni chafodd Cymru, Lloegr na’r Alban unrhyw beth cyfatebol, fel y byddai fformiwla Barnett ei hun wedi’i wneud yn ofynnol fel arall. Felly, mae arnom angen rhywbeth sy'n llawer mwy tryloyw, yn fwy seiliedig ar reolau ac sy'n fwy annibynnol na'r hyn sydd gennym ar hyn o bryd.
Dywed ein cymheiriaid yn y Trysorlys wrthyf eu bod yn gobeithio cyhoeddi adroddiad tryloywder y grant bloc cyn bo hir. A dylwn ddweud, yng nghyfarfod y Pwyllgor Sefydlog Rhyngweinidogol ar Gyllid, fod Prif Ysgrifennydd y Trysorlys wedi cynnig codeiddio rhai o’r gwelliannau a welsom yn y ffordd y mae’r Trysorlys wedi ymddwyn mewn perthynas â’r Llywodraethau datganoledig ers mis Gorffennaf y llynedd. Rydym wedi cael gwybodaeth yn gynharach, rydym wedi cael gwell gwybodaeth, ac mae'r Prif Ysgrifennydd wedi cynnig gwneud hynny'n rhan barhaol o'r ffordd y mae'n rhedeg ei adran. Felly, rwy'n falch o hynny.
O ran defnyddio’r mecanwaith anghydfodau, mae Gweithrediaeth Gogledd Iwerddon wedi’i ddefnyddio, nid ar y mater hwn, ond ar fater arall. Ac ar hyn o bryd, rwy'n gwylio sut y mae'r anghydfod hwnnw'n cael ei drin gyda'r mecanwaith anghydfodau, a byddaf yn gwylio hynny'n ofalus i weld a yw'n darparu llwybr y gallem ei ddilyn yn y mannau lle credwn nad yw Cymru wedi'i gwasanaethu'n briodol gan y trefniadau presennol. Ond nid wyf wedi cyrraedd y pwynt hwnnw eto.
2. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet ddatganiad ar asesiad Llywodraeth Cymru o effaith datganiad gwanwyn y DU ar Gymru? OQ62579
2. Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on the Welsh Government's assessment of the impact of the UK spring statement on Wales? OQ62579
Presiding Officer, I understand that you've given your permission for questions 2 and 8 to be grouped.
Lywydd, deallaf eich bod wedi caniatáu i gwestiynau 2 ac 8 gael eu grwpio.
I had given that permission, but I'm going to need to revise that position, if that's okay with the Cabinet Secretary, unusually, due to circumstances involving question 8 and James Evans. [Interruption.]
I'm about to revise the revision that I've just made and allow this question to be grouped, and carry on as if I'd never opened my mouth in the first place. [Laughter.]
Roeddwn wedi rhoi’r caniatâd hwnnw, ond bydd angen imi adolygu’r safbwynt hwnnw, os yw hynny’n iawn gydag Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, yn anarferol, oherwydd amgylchiadau'n ymwneud â chwestiwn 8 a James Evans. [Torri ar draws.]
Rwyf ar fin adolygu'r adolygiad rwyf newydd ei wneud a chaniatáu i'r cwestiwn hwn gael ei grwpio, felly parhewch fel pe na bawn erioed wedi agor fy ngheg yn y lle cyntaf. [Chwerthin.]
8. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet ddatganiad ar sut y mae datganiad gwanwyn Llywodraeth y DU wedi effeithio ar gyllideb Llywodraeth Cymru? OQ62561
8. Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on how the UK Government's spring statement has impacted the Welsh Government's budget? OQ62561
Llywydd, diolch yn fawr, a diolch i Joyce Watson am y cwestiwn, wrth gwrs.
Thank you, Llywydd, and thank you to Joyce Watson for the question.
The spring statement provides an additional £16 million for Wales in 2025-26. This builds on the significant rise in capital and revenue resources set out in the UK autumn budget. Together, these increases will support our efforts to cut waiting times, support schools, and restore our public services.
Mae datganiad y gwanwyn yn darparu £16 miliwn ychwanegol i Gymru yn 2025-26. Mae hyn yn adeiladu ar y cynnydd sylweddol mewn adnoddau cyfalaf a refeniw a nodir yng nghyllideb yr hydref y DU. Gyda’i gilydd, bydd y codiadau hyn yn cefnogi ein hymdrechion i dorri amseroedd aros, cefnogi ysgolion, ac adfer ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus.
Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. Like many in the Chamber, I’ve received e-mails from constituents who are concerned about how the proposed welfare changes are going to impact upon them, and I do share those concerns. The Chancellor said in her statement that the UK Government will be investing £1.4 billion into a programme that will help people back into work. So, Cabinet Secretary, what assessment have you made regarding that additional funding from the UK Government to help people back into work in Wales?
Diolch am eich ateb, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Fel llawer yn y Siambr, rwyf wedi cael e-byst gan etholwyr sy’n pryderu ynglŷn â sut y mae’r newidiadau lles arfaethedig yn mynd i effeithio arnynt, ac rwy’n rhannu’r pryderon hynny. Dywedodd y Canghellor yn ei datganiad y bydd Llywodraeth y DU yn buddsoddi £1.4 biliwn mewn rhaglen a fydd yn helpu pobl yn ôl i waith. Felly, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, pa asesiad a wnaethoch chi o'r cyllid ychwanegol hwnnw gan Lywodraeth y DU i helpu pobl yn ôl i waith yng Nghymru?
Well, Llywydd, thanks to Joyce Watson for that. The first thing to say is that we don’t yet have a figure of the share of that investment that the Chancellor has announced—the share that will be spent in Wales. Of course, I do support any actions that can be taken to make the social security system more helpful to people who do wish to return to work. We know that one of the huge problems of the benefit system is that it traps people into that dependency when they would themselves far rather be in work. But if you have a universal credit system, for example, where you have to wait five weeks before you get any help at all, then taking the risk of leaving benefits and going into a job, where you don’t know whether that job will suit you, you don’t always know whether that job will last, that is to heap all the risks on the shoulder of the individual and none of the risks into the system. And I believe very firmly that those risks should be shared, and that we need, as Gordon Brown used to say, to create a social security system that is a springboard for those people who wish to overcome a temporary difficulty and find themselves back in work again.
When the Chancellor comes to look at the detail of what she intends to do, then I hope very much that she will look to Wales. The First Minister yesterday referred to the success of the young person’s guarantee here in Wales. If you look at what has happened to the year ending September of last year, youth unemployment in Wales was 6.5 per cent, down 3.6 percentage points compared to the previous year. At the same time, youth unemployment across the whole of the United Kingdom was 11.4 per cent, and rose over that previous year. There are things we are doing in Wales already that demonstrate that, when you use the system to stand alongside people and offer them the help they need, those people can make that journey from being out of work to being in work, and that’s the sort of system we would like to see in Wales.
Wel, Lywydd, diolch i Joyce Watson am hynny. Y peth cyntaf i’w ddweud yw nad oes gennym ffigur eto o ran y gyfran o’r buddsoddiad y mae’r Canghellor wedi’i gyhoeddi—y gyfran a gaiff ei gwario yng Nghymru. Wrth gwrs, rwy'n cefnogi unrhyw gamau y gellir eu cymryd i wneud y system nawdd cymdeithasol yn fwy defnyddiol i bobl sy'n dymuno dychwelyd i'r gwaith. Gwyddom mai un o broblemau enfawr y system fudd-daliadau yw ei bod yn caethiwo pobl yn y ddibyniaeth honno pan fyddai’n llawer gwell ganddynt hwy eu hunain fod mewn gwaith. Ond os oes gennych system gredyd cynhwysol, er enghraifft, lle mae’n rhaid ichi aros pum wythnos i gael unrhyw help o gwbl, yna cymryd y risg o adael budd-daliadau a dechrau mewn swydd, lle nad ydych yn gwybod a fydd y swydd honno’n addas i chi, nid ydych chi bob amser yn gwybod a fydd y swydd honno’n para, mae hynny'n rhoi'r holl risgiau ar ysgwyddau'r unigolyn yn hytrach nag ar y system. Ac rwy'n credu'n gryf iawn y dylid rhannu’r risgiau hynny, a bod angen inni greu, fel yr arferai Gordon Brown ei ddweud, system nawdd cymdeithasol sy’n sbardun i’r bobl sy’n dymuno goresgyn anhawster dros dro a dychwelyd i waith eto.
Pan ddaw’r Canghellor i edrych ar fanylion yr hyn y mae’n bwriadu ei wneud, rwy'n gobeithio'n fawr y bydd yn edrych ar Gymru. Ddoe, cyfeiriodd y Prif Weinidog at lwyddiant y warant i bobl ifanc yma yng Nghymru. Os edrychwch ar yr hyn sydd wedi digwydd hyd at y flwyddyn a ddaeth i ben ym mis Medi'r llynedd, roedd diweithdra ymhlith pobl ifanc yng Nghymru yn 6.5 y cant, i lawr 3.6 pwynt canran o gymharu â’r flwyddyn flaenorol. Ar yr un pryd, roedd diweithdra ymhlith pobl ifanc ar draws y Deyrnas Unedig gyfan yn 11.4 y cant, a chynyddodd dros y flwyddyn flaenorol honno. Mae pethau rydym yn eu gwneud yng Nghymru eisoes yn dangos, pan fyddwch yn defnyddio’r system i sefyll ochr yn ochr â phobl a chynnig yr help sydd ei angen arnynt, y gall y bobl hynny wneud y daith honno o fod yn ddi-waith i fod mewn gwaith, a dyna’r math o system yr hoffem ei gweld yng Nghymru.
James Evans.
James Evans.
Diolch, Llywydd, and apologies for being late to the Chamber. Cabinet Secretary, you’re well aware of the issues facing many third sector organisations across Wales and our general practitioners and pharmacies regarding the national insurance rise. Many people were expecting the spring budget to hear something about NI, but nothing came forward around that. So, I’m just interested in what work the Welsh Government is doing to make sure that those third sector organisations, our GPs, our pharmacy practices, and all those health professions across Wales who aren’t exempt from this, can get the support they need. Because what we don’t want to see is those charities and those organisations having to lose staff because of this unintentional NI rise that was imposed by the UK Government.
Diolch, Lywydd, ac ymddiheuriadau am fod yn hwyr i'r Siambr. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, rydych yn ymwybodol iawn o’r problemau sy’n wynebu llawer o sefydliadau'r trydydd sector ledled Cymru a’n meddygon teulu a’n fferyllfeydd o ran y cynnydd i yswiriant gwladol. Roedd llawer o bobl yn disgwyl clywed rhywbeth am yswiriant gwladol yng nghyllideb y gwanwyn, ond ni ddigwyddodd hynny. Felly, mae gennyf ddiddordeb yn y gwaith y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei wneud i sicrhau bod sefydliadau'r trydydd sector, ein meddygon teulu, ein practisau fferyllol, a’r holl broffesiynau iechyd ledled Cymru nad ydynt wedi’u heithrio o hyn, yn gallu cael y cymorth sydd ei angen arnynt. Oherwydd nid ydym am weld yr elusennau a’r sefydliadau hynny'n gorfod colli staff oherwydd y cynnydd anfwriadol hwn i yswiriant gwladol a osodwyd gan Lywodraeth y DU.
Well, Llywydd, I rehearsed some of these arguments a little earlier this afternoon. The Welsh Government has been able to provide additional support to the third sector in Wales through a significant rise in the budget available to the sector in the coming financial year. That is not specifically to deal with national insurance costs, it’s for all the different demands that the sector faces. My colleague Jeremy Miles was able to reach a settlement with general practitioners in Wales as well only a few weeks ago, with a very significant £27 million additional investment in GP services in Wales. The Government is in a position, because of the UK budget, to make those additional investments. What we can’t do is to divert money that is intended for public services in Wales to meet costs that were imposed completely outside our devolved responsibilities.
Wel, Lywydd, fe wneuthum rai o'r dadleuon hyn yn gynharach y prynhawn yma. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi gallu darparu cymorth ychwanegol i’r trydydd sector yng Nghymru drwy gynnydd sylweddol yn y gyllideb sydd ar gael i’r sector yn y flwyddyn ariannol i ddod. Nid yw hynny'n benodol er mwyn talu costau yswiriant gwladol, mae ar gyfer yr holl ofynion gwahanol y mae’r sector yn eu hwynebu. Ychydig wythnosau yn ôl yn unig, llwyddodd fy nghyd-Aelod Jeremy Miles i gyrraedd setliad gyda meddygon teulu yng Nghymru hefyd, gyda buddsoddiad ychwanegol sylweddol iawn o £27 miliwn i wasanaethau meddygon teulu yng Nghymru. Mae’r Llywodraeth mewn sefyllfa, oherwydd cyllideb y DU, i wneud y buddsoddiadau ychwanegol hynny. Yr hyn na allwn ei wneud yw dargyfeirio arian a fwriedir ar gyfer gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yng Nghymru i dalu costau a osodwyd y tu allan i’n cyfrifoldebau datganoledig yn llwyr.
We know that the spring statement, don’t we, was anything but a spring statement. In fact, it was an emergency budget by a Chancellor completely out of her depth, a Chancellor that had taken the risk on higher taxes and more borrowing and spectacularly failed. And we know where that ends, we know from when Labour last left Government in the United Kingdom with that note being left behind saying that there is no money left. That’s exactly the path that we are on today.
The inheritance that this Chancellor received from the last Conservative Government was the fastest growing economy in the G7, inflation down to the target of 2 per cent, and falling unemployment. Just nine months on, we have taxes on the rise, an economy stagnating, and household bills, as of yesterday, increasing again.
So, how is the Welsh Government helping people with those increasing household bills as a result of decisions taken in Westminster by a UK Labour Government, and then pressure added on by increased taxes from this Welsh Labour Government in things like our tourism sector, which has been severely punished by a Welsh Labour Government? Why is it that every problem that this Labour Party sees on both ends of the M4 ends up with higher taxes?
Gwyddom fod datganiad y gwanwyn, oni wyddom, yn unrhyw beth ond datganiad y gwanwyn. Yn wir, roedd yn gyllideb frys gan Ganghellor sydd allan o'i dyfnder yn llwyr, Canghellor a gymerodd risg ar drethi uwch a mwy o fenthyca ac a fethodd yn llwyr. A gwyddom sut y daw hynny i ben, gwyddom o'r adeg y gadawodd Llafur y tro diwethaf fel Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig gyda’r nodyn a adawyd ar ôl yn dweud nad oes arian ar ôl. Dyna’r union lwybr yr ydym arno heddiw.
Yr hyn a etifeddodd y Canghellor hwn gan y Llywodraeth Geidwadol ddiwethaf oedd yr economi a oedd yn tyfu gyflymaf yn y G7, chwyddiant i lawr i’r targed o 2 y cant, a lefelau diweithdra’n gostwng. Gwta naw mis yn ddiweddarach, mae gennym drethi ar gynnydd, economi farwaidd, a biliau’r cartref, ers ddoe, yn codi unwaith eto.
Felly, sut y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn helpu pobl gyda'r cynnydd ym miliau'r cartref o ganlyniad i benderfyniadau a wnaed yn San Steffan gan Lywodraeth Lafur y DU, ac phwysau ychwanegol yn sgil cynnydd mewn trethi gan Lywodraeth Lafur Cymru mewn pethau fel ein sector twristiaeth, sydd wedi’i gosbi’n llym gan Lywodraeth Lafur Cymru? Pam fod pob problem y mae’r Blaid Lafur yn ei gweld ar ddau ben yr M4 yn arwain at drethi uwch?
Well, Llywydd, had there been a shred of credibility in what the Member has said, then he’d be asking himself how his party failed so spectacularly to convince people in Wales of that case when they went to the ballot box in July of this year. If everything was so wonderful in the economic garden, if everything that he said were true, how is it that not a single constituency in Wales was convinced by the case that he made? The reason why people weren’t convinced, of course, is because his case has no credibility. It rings hollow in the Chamber, and it rang very hollow indeed in the ears of people here in Wales. He’s wrong about what the Office for Budget Responsibility said in its report on the spring statement. The OBR revised growth in the UK economy down this year and then revised its growth forecasts up in every other year of its forecast. The UK economy, according to the OBR, will be larger in its forecast in the spring of this year than it was forecasting in the autumn of last year. The UK economy is on a path to growth. It is having to recover from—[Laughter.] Well, that's what the OBR says. You're very happy to laugh, of course; all I am telling you is what the OBR said. It believes, in March of this year, that the economy will be larger at the end of this period than it believed back in October. That's the path that the UK economy needs to be on; it's in recovery from 14 years of being bled dry by his party, and I look forward to the success of the policies rather than the evidence-free and bleak vision that he's offered us this afternoon.
Wel, Lywydd, pe bai unrhyw hygrededd i'r hyn y mae’r Aelod wedi’i ddweud, byddai’n gofyn i'w hun sut y methodd ei blaid argyhoeddi pobl Cymru o’r achos hwnnw pan aethant i’r blwch pleidleisio ym mis Gorffennaf eleni. Os oedd popeth mor wych yn yr ardd economaidd, os oedd popeth a ddywedodd yn wir, sut na chafodd un etholaeth yng Nghymru ei hargyhoeddi gan ei achos? Y rheswm pam na chafodd pobl eu hargyhoeddi, wrth gwrs, yw am nad oes unrhyw hygrededd i'w achos. Nid yw'n argyhoeddi yn y Siambr, ac nid yw'n argyhoeddi pobl yma yng Nghymru. Mae'n anghywir am yr hyn a ddywedodd y Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol yn ei hadroddiad ar ddatganiad y gwanwyn. Fe wnaeth y Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol ddiwygio twf yn economi’r DU i lawr eleni, a diwygio ei rhagolygon twf i fyny ym mhob blwyddyn arall o’i rhagolwg. Bydd economi’r DU, yn ôl y Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol, yn fwy yn ei rhagolwg yng ngwanwyn eleni nag a ragwelai yn yr hydref y llynedd. Mae economi’r DU ar lwybr tuag at dwf. Mae’n gorfod gwella ar ôl—[Chwerthin.] Wel, dyna mae’r Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol yn ei ddweud. Rydych chi'n hapus iawn i chwerthin, wrth gwrs; y cyfan rwy'n ei ddweud wrthych yw'r hyn a ddywedodd y Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol. Mae’n credu, ym mis Mawrth eleni, y bydd yr economi’n fwy ar ddiwedd y cyfnod hwn nag y credai ym mis Hydref. Dyna’r llwybr y mae angen i economi’r DU fod arno; mae'n adfer ar ôl 14 mlynedd o gael ei gwaedu'n sych gan ei blaid ef, ac edrychaf ymlaen at lwyddiant y polisïau yn hytrach na'r weledigaeth ddi-dystiolaeth a llwm y mae wedi'i chynnig i ni y prynhawn yma.
Cwestiynau nawr gan lefarwyr y pleidiau. Llefarydd y Ceidwadwyr, Samuel Kurtz.
Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Samuel Kurtz.
Diolch, Llywydd. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ym mis Ionawr, cyhoeddodd eich cydweithiwr Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Addysg ddatganiad ar y cynllun strategol ar gyfer y gweithlu addysg. Nid oedd unrhyw sôn am y Gymraeg a'i rôl wrth gynllunio'r gweithlu—hepgoriad sy'n arbennig o bryderus o ystyried cynnydd presennol Bil y Gymraeg ac Addysg (Cymru).
Yn ystod Cyfnod 2 ystyriaeth y pwyllgor o'r Bil, codais y mater hwn a mynegais fy siom bod addysg cyfrwng Cymraeg yn cael ei hanwybyddu yn y datganiad. Ydych chi'n rhannu fy mhryder na chyfeiriwyd at y Gymraeg, a sut ydych chi'n gweithio gyda'ch cydweithwyr i sicrhau bod recriwtio athrawon cyfrwng Cymraeg wedi'i ymgorffori'n llawn yn y cynllun ar gyfer y gweithlu?
Thank you, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, in January, your colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Education issued a statement on the strategic education workforce plan. There was no mention of the Welsh language and its role in workforce planning—an omission that is particularly concerning given the current progress of the Welsh Language and Education (Wales) Bill.
During Stage 2 of the committee's consideration of the Bill, I raised this issue and expressed my disappointment that Welsh-medium education was overlooked in the statement. Do you share my concern that the Welsh language was not referenced, and how are you working with your colleagues to ensure that the recruitment of Welsh-medium teachers is fully embedded in the workforce plan?
Wel, diolch yn fawr i Sam Kurtz am y cwestiwn, Llywydd. Dwi'n cytuno am bwysigrwydd y gweithlu, wrth gwrs. Mae uchelgais gennym ni i gyd yn y Siambr hon i godi nifer y bobl sy'n siarad Cymraeg a dyblu'r defnydd o'r Gymraeg, a'r ffordd i'n helpu ni i wneud hynny yw trwy ysgolion a thrwy'r Bil sydd o flaen y Senedd ar hyn o bryd. Ac mae nifer fawr o bethau yn y Bil sy'n mynd i'n helpu ni i gynyddu'r gweithlu ac i baratoi pobl am y gwaith rŷn ni eisiau iddyn nhw ei wneud.
Ges i'r cyfle i gydweithio ag Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Addysg cyn iddi hi gyhoeddi'r datganiad. Roedd hi'n sôn nid jest am y gweithlu o bobl sy'n mynd i addysgu trwy gyfrwng yr iaith Gymraeg, ond y gweithlu ehangach, a dyna pam nad oedd hi'n tynnu sylw at jest un peth—roedd hi'n siarad am y darlun i gyd. Ac, wrth gwrs, dwi'n mynd i gydweithio â hi yn y dyfodol—cydweithio gyda'n gilydd i greu'r gweithlu sy'n bwysig i ni am beth rŷn ni eisiau ei wneud yn y maes Cymraeg.
Well, thank you very much to Sam Kurtz for that question, Llywydd. I agree on the importance of the workforce, of course. We have a shared ambition in this Chamber to increase the numbers of Welsh speakers and to double the use of the Welsh language, and the way to help us do that is through our schools and through the Bill that is currently before the Senedd. And there are a number of things in the Bill that will help us to increase the workforce and to prepare people for the work that we want them to do.
I had the opportunity to work with the Cabinet Secretary for Education before she published her statement. She was talking not just about the workforce who would be teaching through the medium of Welsh, but the broader workforce, and that's why she didn't highlight just one single aspect—she was covering the bigger picture. And, of course, I will be working with her in the future. We will work together in order to create the workforce that is so important for us in terms of our ambitions in terms of the Welsh language.
Diolch i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ond dwi'n siomi nad oedd unrhyw sylw wedi cael ei dynnu yn y datganiad at yr iaith Cymraeg, gan fod polisi 'Cymraeg 2050' gennym ni yma yn y Senedd. Ond hoffwn ddiolch i chi hefyd am eich ymagwedd gydweithredol at Fil y Gymraeg ac addysg—cam pwysig i gadw'r iaith uwchlaw gwleidyddiaeth pleidiau. Diolch i ti am hynny.
Yn ystod Cyfnod 2, cynigiais welliant i sicrhau bod ansawdd addysgu pynciau drwy'r Gymraeg yn cyd-fynd ag ansawdd sgiliau iaith yr athro. Rhannais enghreifftiau o fy addysg fy hun, lle'r oedd athrawon yn cael pynciau y tu allan i'w harbenigedd dim ond oherwydd eu bod nhw'n siarad Cymraeg. Ers hynny, rwyf wedi clywed enghreifftiau pellach gan etholwyr. Er bod fy ngwelliant yn aflwyddiannus, sut mae Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn bwriadu atal yr arfer hon ar ôl cwblhau'r Bil, a sicrhau'r safonau addysgu uchaf ar draws pob pwnc?
Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, but I am disappointed that no attention was drawn in the statement to the Welsh language, given that we have the 'Cymraeg 2050' here in the Senedd. But I'd like to thank you today for your collaborative approach to the Welsh language and education Bill—an important step in keeping the language above party politics. I thank you for that.
During Stage 2, I proposed an amendment to ensure that the quality of subject teaching through the medium of Welsh matches the quality of the teacher's language skills. I shared examples from my own schooling, where teachers were assigned subjects outside their expertise simply because they spoke Welsh. Since then, I have heard further examples from constituents. Although my amendment was unsuccessful, how does the Cabinet Secretary plan to prevent this practice after the Bill's completion, and ensure the highest teaching standards across all subjects?
Wel, diolch yn fawr i Sam Kurtz, Llywydd, am beth ddywedodd e am sut rydyn ni wedi mynd ati gyda'n gilydd yng Nghyfnod 2 o'r Bil i gydweithio. Roedd Cyfnod 2 yn gyfle inni glywed gan bobl eraill ac i ddysgu oddi wrth rai o'r pethau roedden nhw'n codi ac yn awgrymu yn ystod y ddadl. Dwi'n edrych ymlaen at gydweithio gyda Cefin Campbell a gyda Sam Kurtz pan fydd y Bil yn dod nôl i lawr y Senedd ar gyfer Cyfnod 3.
Gyda'r enghreifftiau roedd yr Aelod yn cyfeirio atynt, dwi wedi cael cyfle i siarad unwaith eto gyda'n swyddogion ni. Rŷn ni'n cydnabod y ffaith bod rhai pynciau ble mae'n heriol i ffeindio pobl gyda'r sgiliau ymhob cwr o Gymru. Dydy hwnna ddim yn wir am bob lle yng Nghymru, ond mewn rhai ardaloedd mae'n heriol i ffeindio pobl gyda'r sgiliau yn barod, yn enwedig mewn rhai pynciau. Rŷn ni'n canolbwyntio, gyda'r arian sydd gyda ni—ac mae mwy o arian yn y cynllun yn y flwyddyn ariannol nesaf—i helpu pobl sydd â rhai sgiliau yn barod, ond ble maen nhw eisiau gwella'r sgiliau, y sgiliau ieithyddol, i'n helpu ni i lenwi'r bylchau lle mae bylchau'n codi.
Well, thank you very much to Sam Kurtz for his remarks on our joint approach to Stage 2 of the Bill. Stage 2 was an opportunity for us to hear from others and to learn from some of the things that they raised and suggested during the debate. I look forward to working with Cefin Campbell and Sam Kurtz when the Bill comes back to the Senedd for Stage 3 proceedings.
In terms of the examples that the Member referred to, I have had an opportunity to speak once again to our officials. We recognise the fact that there are certain subjects where it is challenging to find people with skills in every part of Wales. That's not true of every area, but in certain areas it can be challenging to find people who already have those skills, particularly in certain subjects. We're focusing, with the money that we've got—and there is more money in the plan for the next financial year—on helping people who have some skills already but who want to enhance those linguistic skills in order to fill those gaps where those gaps do arise.
Diolch i ti am yr ateb. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae cynnal y Gymraeg mewn cymunedau hanesyddol Cymraeg eu hiaith yn dibynnu ar alluogi siaradwyr Cymraeg lleol i aros yn eu hardaloedd. Mae hyn yn gofyn am dai fforddiadwy a swyddi diogel sy'n talu'n dda. Enghraifft ddiweddar yw'r sefyllfa o amgylch Wylfa ac Ynys Môn. Mae Sam Dumitriu, pennaeth polisi yn Britan Remade, wedi rhybuddio mai—
Thank you for that response. Cabinet Secretary, sustaining the Welsh language in historically Welsh-speaking communities depends on enabling local Welsh speakers to remain in their areas, and this requires affordable housing and jobs that are secure and well paid. A recent example is a situation around Wylfa and Ynys Môn. Sam Dumitriu, head of policy at Britain Remade, has warned—
'The real threat to the Welsh language in Ynys Môn...is a lack of well-paying jobs for locals',
'Y gwir fygythiad i'r Gymraeg ar Ynys Môn… yw diffyg swyddi sy'n talu'n dda i bobl leol.'
yn enwedig yn y sector niwclear. Gyda Chymru'n wynebu heriau economaidd parhaus, cyflogau isel a diffyg swyddi yn ardaloedd gwledig Cymru sy'n Gymraeg eu hiaith, pa drafodaethau ydych chi'n eu cael gyda chydweithwyr yn y Cabinet i fynd i'r afael â'r materion strwythurol hyn, a sut mae'r Llywodraeth yn bwriadu alinio twf economaidd ag ymdrechion i gynnal cymunedau Cymraeg?
particularly in the nuclear sector. With Wales facing persistent economic challenges, low wages and limited job prospects in rural Welsh-speaking areas, what discussions are you having with your Cabinet colleagues to address these structural issues, and how does the Government plan to align economic growth with efforts to sustain Welsh-speaking communities?
Wel, Llywydd, dwi'n edrych ymlaen at fynd at y Cabinet gydag ymateb y Llywodraeth, ac at yr adroddiad gyda Simon Brooks ar y pwyllgor oedd yn ei helpu e, sydd wedi dod ymlaen â nifer fawr o argymhellion ar sut i gryfhau'r iaith Gymraeg mewn ardaloedd ble mae'r Gymraeg yn cael ei defnyddio bob dydd.
Mae lot o bethau rŷn ni wedi'u gwneud yn barod—lot o bethau oedd wedi codi oddi wrth y cytundeb rhwng y Blaid Lafur a Phlaid Cymru'n gynharach yn y tymor hwn. Arfor, er enghraifft: beth rŷn ni wedi'i wneud trwy Arfor yw trio defnyddio'r iaith Gymraeg fel rhywbeth sy'n gallu ein helpu ni i dyfu'r economi mewn ardaloedd ble mae Cymraeg yn cael ei defnyddio bob dydd. Mae'n gallu bod yn gymhleth, onid yw e? Dwi'n cofio pan oeddem ni'n trafod pethau ar Ynys Môn gydag ynni niwclear—y pryderon oedd y byddai nifer fawr o bobl yn dod i mewn i'r ynys pan fyddai'r adeiladu'n mynd ymlaen, heb y Gymraeg, ac y byddai hwnna'n cael effaith ar yr iaith ar yr ynys.
So, dwi eisiau gweld y Gymraeg yn rhan o'r ymdrech rŷn ni'n gwneud i dyfu'r economi, i greu swyddi, ac i helpu pobl i aros yn lleol, a dwi'n gwneud hynny, wrth gwrs, gydag aelodau eraill y Cabinet.
Well, Llywydd, I look forward to going to Cabinet with the Government's response, and to Simon Brooks's report and the commission that helped him, which has brought forward a number of recommendations in terms of how we can strengthen the Welsh language in areas where the Welsh language is used on a daily basis.
There are many things that we've already done—many things that arose from the co-operation agreement between the Labour Party and Plaid Cymru earlier in this term. Arfor, for example: what we've done through Arfor is to try to use the Welsh language as a tool to help us grow the economy in areas where Welsh is used on a daily basis. It can be complex, can't it? I recall when we were discussing issues around nuclear on Anglesey—the concerns were that a large number of people would move onto the island when the construction work was ongoing and they wouldn't have the Welsh language, and that that would have an impact on the language on the island.
So, I want to see the Welsh language as part of our effort to grow the economy, to create jobs and to help people to remain in their communities, and I do that, of course, with other Cabinet members.
Llefarydd Plaid Cymru, Heledd Fychan.
Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Heledd Fychan.
Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, I'd just like to pick up on the national insurance responses that you gave to Alun Davies earlier. I'm glad that there was no ambiguity in terms of the Government's position; you've been very clear in terms of thinking that it's a fundamental unfairness, and again today saying that they were wrong to do so. What I'd like to know is what is the position around that shortfall now, that £65 million—or up to—you've identified? That's only for public sector, as we've heard; there will be implications for the third sector and so on. You mentioned the additional funding, but that's not specifically towards the national insurance contributions. So, what do you foresee happening, for instance, for local government? Are you expecting them to find the shortfall? Are you going to have to adjust the budget? And, if I may, why do you think your UK counterparts have failed to listen? Are there any other avenues that we can explore to ensure that they change their minds?
Diolch, Lywydd. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, hoffwn gyfeirio at yr ymatebion a roesoch i Alun Davies ar yswiriant gwladol yn gynharach. Rwy’n falch nad oedd unrhyw amwysedd o ran safbwynt y Llywodraeth; rydych chi wedi bod yn glir iawn eich barn ei fod yn annhegwch sylfaenol, ac wedi dweud unwaith eto heddiw eu bod yn anghywir i wneud hynny. Yr hyn yr hoffwn ei wybod yw beth yw'r safbwynt ynghylch y diffyg hwnnw nawr, yr £65 miliwn—neu hyd at hynny—a nodwyd gennych? Mae'n hynny i'r sector cyhoeddus yn unig, fel clywsom; bydd goblygiadau i’r trydydd sector ac yn y blaen. Fe sonioch chi am y cyllid ychwanegol, ond nid yw hynny’n benodol tuag at y cyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol. Felly, beth y rhagwelwch y bydd yn digwydd, er enghraifft, i lywodraeth leol? A ydych chi'n disgwyl iddynt ddod o hyd i'r arian hwnnw? A fydd yn rhaid ichi addasu’r gyllideb? Ac os caf, pam yn eich barn chi y mae eich swyddogion cyfatebol ar lefel y DU wedi methu gwrando? A oes unrhyw lwybrau eraill y gallwn eu harchwilio i sicrhau eu bod yn newid eu meddyliau?
Well, Llywydd, Treasury Ministers had a choice to make. They could choose to take money through the Barnett formula or they could have chosen to fund the actual effect of their decision in the devolved Governments. I believe they made the wrong choice. Their view is that Barnett would be the normal way for this to happen, and they've just followed the normal path. I think that is disputable, and we will go on disputing it with them, and we won't be on our own as well. You may have seen that this has been extensively rehearsed in Scotland already, and they are, in many ways, more adversely affected than we are.
I'm not in a position this afternoon, Llywydd, to provide answers to the question that the Member raises, because we are still having to think those things through. The confirmation we had from the Treasury is very recent. I will want to look at how the Barnett formula has been applied, what strands in English decision making have led to the global sum we now believe will come to Wales, and then I will look to see whether there is anything further that we can do to support those public services. I'm not in a position this afternoon to say that there will be anything that I can do, but I will, with my officials, be exploring what choices now fall to us to make. And, of course, when we make them, then we will report them to the Senedd.
Wel, Lywydd, roedd gan Weinidogion y Trysorlys ddewis i’w wneud. Gallent ddewis mynd ag arian drwy fformiwla Barnett neu gallent fod wedi dewis ariannu effaith wirioneddol eu penderfyniad yn y Llywodraethau datganoledig. Rwy'n credu eu bod wedi gwneud y dewis anghywir. Eu barn hwy yw mai fformiwla Barnett fyddai’r ffordd arferol i hyn ddigwydd, ac maent wedi dilyn y llwybr arferol. Rwy'n credu bod hynny'n ddadleuol, a byddwn yn parhau i ddadlau ynghylch hynny gyda hwy, ac ni fyddwn ar ein pen ein hunain ychwaith. Efallai eich bod wedi gweld hyn wedi cael ei drafod yn helaeth yn yr Alban yn barod, ac mewn sawl ffordd, cânt eu niweidio'n fwy na ni.
Nid wyf mewn sefyllfa y prynhawn yma, Lywydd, i roi atebion i’r cwestiwn y mae’r Aelod yn ei godi, gan ein bod yn dal i orfod meddwl yn ofalus am y pethau hynny. Mae’r cadarnhad a gawsom gan y Trysorlys yn ddiweddar iawn. Byddaf yn awyddus i edrych ar sut y mae fformiwla Barnett wedi’i gymhwyso, pa elfennau o'r broses o wneud penderfyniadau yn Lloegr sydd wedi arwain at y cyfanswm y credwn y bydd yn dod i Gymru nawr, ac yna byddaf yn edrych i weld a oes unrhyw beth pellach y gallwn ei wneud i gefnogi'r gwasanaethau cyhoeddus hynny. Nid wyf mewn sefyllfa y prynhawn yma i ddweud y bydd unrhyw beth y gallaf ei wneud, ond gyda fy swyddogion, byddaf yn archwilio pa ddewisiadau sydd gennym i'w gwneud nawr. Ac wrth gwrs, pan fyddwn yn eu gwneud, byddwn yn rhoi gwybod amdanynt i'r Senedd.
I'm grateful for that response. I'm sure you can see from the level of interest there's been on national insurance that every Member here has received so much correspondence, as has the Welsh Government, and there is real concern. You've also been, in the past, unambiguous when you denounced previous Conservative Government cuts to the welfare budget, describing them in November 2021 as
'the deliberate decisions of a Government that knows what it is doing, knows that there will be thousands more children in poverty in Wales because of their cuts...but simply don't care.'
Do you agree with me that the actions of the current UK Government deserve the same level of condemnation?
Diolch am yr ymateb. Rwy'n siŵr y gallwch weld o'r lefel o ddiddordeb sydd wedi bod ynghylch yswiriant gwladol fod pob Aelod yma wedi derbyn cymaint o ohebiaeth, fel y mae Llywodraeth Cymru, ac mae pryder gwirioneddol. Rydych chi hefyd wedi bod yn ddiamwys yn y gorffennol wrth gondemnio toriadau blaenorol y Llywodraeth Geidwadol i'r gyllideb les, gan eu disgrifio ym mis Tachwedd 2021 fel
'[p]enderfyniadau bwriadol gan Lywodraeth sy'n gwybod beth mae'n ei wneud, yn gwybod y bydd miloedd yn fwy o blant mewn tlodi yng Nghymru oherwydd eu toriadau... ond nid oes ots ganddyn nhw.'
A ydych chi'n cytuno â mi bod gweithredoedd Llywodraeth bresennol y DU yn haeddu'r un lefel o gondemniad?
Well, the Member attempts to dig a pit in front of me and invites me to jump into it, and I'm afraid I'm a bit too old to follow her in that. No child chooses to be born in poverty, and the impact of poverty on the life of that child is profound. And Llywydd, I can remember every Labour Government since 1964, and I don't think any one of them did not have an ambition to lower rates of child poverty in the United Kingdom, and I expect this Labour Government at Westminster to have that same ambition. It may not be possible to make the progress we would like to see in the earliest stages of that UK term, but I would certainly look to a UK Labour Government to share the ambition of all previous Labour Governments, and certainly the ambition of this Labour Government, to see rates of child poverty reduce over the whole of its five-year term.
Wel, mae'r Aelod yn ceisio cloddio pwll o'm blaen ac yn fy ngwahodd i neidio i mewn iddo, ac rwy'n ofni fy mod ychydig yn rhy hen i wneud hynny. Nid oes unrhyw blentyn yn dewis cael ei eni mewn tlodi, ac mae effaith tlodi ar fywyd y plentyn hwnnw'n ddwys. A Lywydd, gallaf gofio pob Llywodraeth Lafur ers 1964, ac nid wyf yn credu bod unrhyw un ohonynt heb uchelgais i ostwng cyfraddau tlodi plant yn y Deyrnas Unedig, ac rwy'n disgwyl y bydd yr un uchelgais gan y Llywodraeth Lafur hon yn San Steffan. Efallai na fydd yn bosibl gwneud y cynnydd yr hoffem ei weld yng nghyfnodau cynnar y tymor yn y DU, ond byddwn yn sicr yn disgwyl i Lywodraeth Lafur y DU rannu uchelgais yr holl Lywodraethau Llafur blaenorol, ac yn sicr uchelgais y Llywodraeth Lafur hon, i weld cyfraddau tlodi plant yn gostwng dros ei thymor cyfan o bum mlynedd.
But their actions indicate differently, knowingly pushing 250,000 more people, including 50,000 children, into poverty, and, as always, Wales inevitably bearing the disproportionately heavier brunt of the fallout. I'd just like to understand, because, obviously, during the years of austerity, the Welsh Government had to find additional funding to ensure that we were supporting those most vulnerable. So, can I ask, in terms of that proportion of the £4.8 billion of cuts announced by the Chancellor, do you know what the impact will be on Wales? And are you also having to make any adjustments to the Welsh budget for this financial year to mitigate the policies of your UK counterparts that are going to impact so many people here in Wales, and actually cost us more in terms of the NHS and so on? If more people are in poverty, it also puts a greater strain on other services. So, I'd like to know your response in terms of the impacts on the budget specifically.
Ond mae eu gweithredoedd yn dangos yn wahanol, gan wthio 250,000 yn fwy o bobl, gan gynnwys 50,000 o blant, i mewn i dlodi, ac fel erioed, mae Cymru'n anochel yn ysgwyddo pwysau anghymesur o drwm yn sgil hynny. Hoffwn ddeall, oherwydd, yn amlwg, yn ystod blynyddoedd cyni, roedd yn rhaid i Lywodraeth Cymru ddod o hyd i gyllid ychwanegol i sicrhau ein bod yn cefnogi'r rhai mwyaf agored i niwed. Felly, a gaf i ofyn, o ran y gyfran honno o'r £4.8 biliwn o doriadau a gyhoeddwyd gan y Canghellor, a ydych chi'n gwybod beth fydd yr effaith ar Gymru? Ac a ydych chi hefyd yn gorfod gwneud unrhyw addasiadau i gyllideb Cymru ar gyfer y flwyddyn ariannol hon i liniaru polisïau eich cymheiriaid yn y DU sy'n mynd i effeithio ar gymaint o bobl yma yng Nghymru, ac sy'n mynd i gostio mwy i ni o ran y GIG ac yn y blaen? Os oes mwy o bobl yn byw mewn tlodi, mae'n rhoi mwy o straen ar wasanaethau eraill hefyd. Felly, hoffwn glywed eich ymateb ynghylch yr effeithiau ar y gyllideb yn benodol.
Well, Llywydd, the First Minister has asked Westminster Ministers to provide an impact assessment for Wales. We don't have that as yet. We have some preliminary, but I don't think hard to understand, analysis, for example, from the Wales Governance Centre, that points out that, whereas 7 per cent of the English population are recipients of personal independence payments, 11 per cent of the Welsh population are in that position. So, we have to expect that there will be an additionally adverse impact on Wales from some of those decisions. What we have done, using the responsibilities that are devolved to us, is to put in place a series of programmes, which are not available elsewhere in the United Kingdom, in order to mitigate the impact of some of those difficulties and to improve the lives of Welsh people. So, I could rehearse them all for you this afternoon. I won't, because you'll know them, but I'll just mention two or three of them, and these are things that aren't available across our border: the discretionary assistance fund, which has £38.5 million, the largest amount of money we've ever put in it; the council tax benefit scheme, which doesn't exist elsewhere, £244 million; £93 million for universal free school meals. These are all actions, and significant actions in terms of the Welsh Government's budget, that put money into the pockets of people who otherwise are struggling to be able to meet their ordinary expenses. Will we need to revisit some of that? Well, I was very pleased to secure agreement with the First Minister on the day of the spring statement; we got £16 million we weren't anticipating, and we've already allocated £1.4 million of that for a 10 per cent increase in our single advice fund services. We know that, as a minimum, every £1 we invest in that scheme brings £3 out of the UK Treasury into Wales and into the pockets of people who need it. And I will continue to review with all my colleagues as to whether or not there are further opportunities where we can use our powers and our budgets to have that positive impact on the budgets of people who need our help the most.
Wel, Lywydd, mae Prif Weinidog Cymru wedi gofyn i Weinidogion San Steffan ddarparu asesiad effaith i Gymru. Nid yw hwnnw gennym eto. Mae gennym waith rhagarweiniol, ond heb fod yn anodd ei ddeall, er enghraifft, gan Ganolfan Llywodraethiant Cymru, sy'n nodi bod 7 y cant o boblogaeth Lloegr yn dderbynwyr taliadau annibyniaeth personol, a bod 11 y cant o boblogaeth Cymru yn y sefyllfa honno. Felly, mae'n rhaid inni ddisgwyl y bydd rhai o'r penderfyniadau hynny'n cael effaith niweidiol ychwanegol ar Gymru. Yr hyn a wnaethom, gan ddefnyddio'r cyfrifoldebau sydd wedi'u datganoli i ni, yw rhoi cyfres o raglenni ar waith, nad ydynt ar gael mewn mannau eraill yn y Deyrnas Unedig, er mwyn lliniaru effaith rhai o'r anawsterau hynny a gwella bywydau pobl Cymru. Felly, gallwn eu rhestru i gyd i chi y prynhawn yma. Ni wnaf, oherwydd fe wyddoch amdanynt, ond fe soniaf am ddwy neu dair, ac mae'r rhain yn bethau nad ydynt i'w cael dros y ffin: y gronfa cymorth dewisol, sy'n cael £38.5 miliwn, y swm mwyaf o arian a roesom i mewn erioed; cynllun budd-dal y dreth gyngor, nad yw'n bodoli mewn mannau eraill, £244 miliwn; £93 miliwn ar gyfer prydau ysgol am ddim i bawb. Mae'r rhain i gyd yn gamau gweithredu, a chamau sylweddol mewn perthynas â chyllideb Llywodraeth Cymru, sydd wedi rhoi arian ym mhocedi pobl a fyddai fel arall yn cael trafferth talu eu treuliau cyffredin. A fydd angen inni ailedrych ar rywfaint o hynny? Wel, roeddwn yn falch iawn o sicrhau cytundeb gyda'r Prif Weinidog ar ddiwrnod datganiad y gwanwyn; cawsom £16 miliwn nad oeddem yn ei ddisgwyl, ac rydym eisoes wedi dyrannu £1.4 miliwn o hwnnw ar gyfer cynnydd o 10 y cant i wasanaethau ein cronfa gynghori sengl. Gwyddom, fan lleiaf, fod pob £1 a fuddsoddwn yn y cynllun hwnnw'n denu £3 allan o Drysorlys y DU i Gymru ac i bocedi pobl sydd ei angen. A byddaf yn parhau i adolygu gyda fy holl gyd-aelodau o'r Cabinet a oes cyfleoedd pellach lle gallwn ddefnyddio ein pwerau a'n cyllidebau i gael effaith gadarnhaol ar gyllidebau'r bobl sydd fwyaf o angen ein help.
3. Sut mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn cynorthwyo cynghorau tref a chymunedol gyda'r gost o gyfieithu Cymraeg i Saesneg? OQ62544
3. How is the Welsh Government supporting town and community councils with the cost of Welsh-to-English translation? OQ62544
Diolch yn fawr i Janet Finch-Saunders am y cwestiwn, a llongyfarchiadau am ddefnyddio'r iaith Gymraeg am y cwestiwn. Mae cynghorau tref a chymuned yn gyrff democrataidd sy'n codi praesept i gyflawni eu dyletswyddau statudol ac ymrwymiadau'r cynlluniau iaith, lle'n berthnasol. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi darparu cyllid i helpu'r sector i adeiladu capasiti i weithredu'n ddwyieithog. Mae hyn yn cynnwys canllawiau ar offer cyfieithu digidol, a rhannu capasiti â'r prif gynghorau.
I thank Janet Finch-Saunders very much for the question, and congratulations on asking the question in Welsh. Town and community councils are democratic bodies that raise a precept to fulfil their statutory duties and language scheme commitments, where relevant. The Welsh Government has provided funding to help the sector to build its bilingual capacity. This includes guidance on digital translation tools and sharing capacity with the principal councils.
Diolch yn fawr. Dwi'n gwybod am gynghorau tref a chymuned sydd ddim yn gallu fforddio cyfieithu ar y pryd, felly yn gorfod cynnal eu cyfarfodydd yn Saesneg. Pa gymorth sydd ar gael i helpu cynghorau tref a chymuned gyda chostau cyfieithu ar y pryd?
Thank you very much. I know of town and community councils that cannot afford interpretation services, and so have to hold their meetings in English. What support is available to help town and community councils with the costs of interpretation?
Diolch yn fawr am y cwestiwn ychwanegol. Dwi'n meddwl mai hyn yw un o'r meysydd ble mae pethau wedi newid yn sylweddol dros y cyfnod o ddatganoli. Nawr, mae ffyrdd o gyfieithu yn defnyddio ffyrdd technolegol doedd ddim ar gael pan oedd y Cynulliad yn dechrau nôl yn 1999. So, rŷn ni wedi buddsoddi gyda One Voice Wales. Roedd cynllun gyda nhw. Roedden nhw wedi cyhoeddi'r cynllun nôl yn 2023, i helpu gyda'r pethau digidol yn y maes cynghorau lleol a thref. Rŷn ni wedi buddsoddi £300,000 gyda'r sector i'w helpu nhw gyda'r cynllun yna. Dwi'n meddwl, drwy ddefnyddio'r ffyrdd newydd o gyfieithu, bydd hwn yn gallu bod yn haws i'r cynghorau yn y dyfodol, a diolch yn fawr i Janet Finch-Saunders am dynnu sylw at y pwnc pwysig.
Thank you very much for that supplementary question. I think that this is one of the areas where things have changed significantly over the period of devolution. Now, there are technological approaches to translation that weren't available when the Assembly was established back in 1999. So, we have invested with One Voice Wales. They had a plan in place. That was published back in 2023, to help with those digital solutions in relation to town and community councils. We have invested £300,000 with the sector to help them with that programme. And I think that, through using these new translation methods, this will make it easier for councils in the future, and I thank Janet Finch-Saunders for highlighting this important issue.
4. Pa drafodaethau y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn eu cael gyda chydweithwyr Llywodraeth Cymru a Phrifysgol Caerdydd i sicrhau parhad cyfleoedd ymchwil nyrsio yn Gymraeg? OQ62555
4. What discussions is the Cabinet Secretary having with Welsh Government colleagues and with Cardiff University to ensure the continuity of Welsh language nursing research opportunities? OQ62555
Diolch yn fawr i Rhys ab Owen am y cwestiwn. Llywydd, mae'r Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol wedi ysgrifennu at holl brifysgolion Cymru yn gofyn iddynt amlinellu effaith toriadau arfaethedig ar ddarpariaeth cyfrwng Cymraeg. Ar hyn o bryd, nid oes unrhyw ymchwil cyfrwng Cymraeg yn cael ei gynnal ar lefel ôl-raddedig ym maes nyrsio ym Mhrifysgol Caerdydd.
I thank Rhys ab Owen for the question. Llywydd, the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol has written to all Welsh universities asking them to outline the impact of proposed cuts on Welsh-medium provision. At present, no Welsh-medium research is undertaken at a postgraduate level in the nursing field at Cardiff University.
Diolch yn fawr am yr ateb. Fis diwethaf, gwnaeth fy swyddfa fynychu cyfarfod a gafodd ei drefnu—ei noddi—gan Jenny Rathbone a Julie Morgan â'r Coleg Nyrsio Brenhinol. Roedd nifer o negeseuon pwysig yn y cyfarfod hwnnw, nifer ohonyn nhw tu hwnt i'ch portffolio chi, ond un oedd yn bwysig o fewn eich portffolio chi oedd y gallu i astudio ac ymchwilio trwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg i nyrsys. Yn ôl y cyfarfod, mae natur ymarferol llawer o waith ymchwil nyrsys yn golygu bod canlyniadau cleifion yn cael eu heffeithio yn uniongyrchol gan yr ymchwil hwnnw, a gyda llai o gyfleoedd i ymchwilio, felly, trwy'r Gymraeg, bydd hynny'n debygol o effeithio ar gleifion a chymunedau Cymraeg yn andwyol.
Dwi hefyd yn deall bod sicrhau goruchwylwyr PhD ac arholwyr yn y maes yma sy'n gallu siarad Cymraeg ac sydd â'r arbenigedd yn nyrsio yn anodd iawn yn barod. Gyda llai, felly, o gyfleoedd ymchwil, mae hynny'n mynd i olygu bod hynny'n mynd i ddod yn hyd yn oed yn fwy anodd. Mae Prifysgol Caerdydd mor bwysig—prifysgol sy'n arbenigo mewn ymchwil ac yn cynnig y pwnc trwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg. Pa sgyrsiau ydych chi'n eu cael, neu'n bwriadu eu cael, i sicrhau parhad ymchwil nyrsio trwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg yng Nghaerdydd? Diolch yn fawr.
Thank you for that answer. Last month, my office attended a meeting that was sponsored by Julie Morgan and Jenny Rathbone with the Royal College of Nursing. There were a number of powerful messages in that meeting, many of them outwith your portfolio, but one of them within your portfolio was the ability for nurses to study and research through the medium of Welsh. According to the meeting, the practical nature of much nursing research means that patient outcomes are often directly affected by that research, and, with fewer opportunities for research through the medium of Welsh, it's likely that that will have a detrimental impact on Welsh-speaking patients and communities.
I also understand that securing PhD supervisors and examiners in this area who can speak Welsh and who have expertise in nursing is very difficult already. With fewer research opportunities, that means that it's going to make things even more difficult. Cardiff University is so important, because it specialises in research and offers the subject through the medium of Welsh. So, what conversations have you had, or are you planning to have, to ensure the continuation of Welsh-medium nursing research in Cardiff? Thank you.
Diolch yn fawr am y cwestiwn ychwanegol. Wrth gwrs, dwi wedi cael trafodaethau ac, fel un o Aelodau'r Senedd lleol, dwi wedi bod yn rhan o'r trafodaethau roedd Rhys yn sôn amdanynt, a dwi wedi bod yn siarad â'r Gweinidog Addysg Bellach ac Uwch hefyd. Dydy hi ddim yn hollol glir i mi faint o gyfleon sydd yng Nghaerdydd yn barod i bobl sydd eisiau ymchwilio trwy gyfrwng yr iaith Gymraeg yn y maes nyrsio. Yn y wybodaeth dwi wedi ei gweld oddi wrth y Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol, mae yna gyfleon nid jest yng Nghaerdydd, ond yn Abertawe, yn Aberystwyth ac yn enwedig ym Mangor. Bangor yw'r lle ble rydym ni wedi cael pobl yn gwneud PhDs trwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg yn y maes nyrsio yn barod. Dwi eisiau gweld mwy o gyfleon, wrth gwrs, a dwi eisiau gweld cyfleon yng Nghaerdydd hefyd. Ond mae cyfleon eraill tu fas i'r brifddinas, a dyna ble, ar hyn o bryd, rydym ni wedi gweld mwy o waith yn mynd ymlaen.
Well, thank you very much for the supplementary question. Of course, I have had discussions and, as a local Senedd Member, I've been involved in the discussions that Rhys mentioned, and I have been speaking to the Minister for Further and Higher Education too. It's not entirely clear to me how many opportunities exist in Cardiff at the moment for those who want to conduct research in nursing through the medium of Welsh. From the information that I have seen from the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol, there are opportunities not just in Cardiff, but in Swansea, Aberystwyth and particularly in Bangor. Bangor is the university where we have had people studying PhDs through the medium of Welsh in the field of nursing already. I want to see more opportunities, of course, and I want to see opportunities in Cardiff too. But there are other opportunities outside of the capital city and that, at the moment, is where we have seen more work happening.
Rhys mentioned the meeting with the RCN that he, Jenny Rathbone and I had—his staff, Jenny Rathbone and I had—last week, and the importance of Welsh in nursing generally was certainly stressed in that meeting, but also the opportunities for Welsh research were mentioned. And obviously, I think we all know the importance of Welsh in nursing in terms of being able to communicate, and particularly with older people and people with dementia it's absolutely crucial that they're able to use their first language. But, as I understood it from the RCN, more advanced nursing roles have research as part of the core work, and it's one of the pillars of advanced practice. And obviously, if there is no longer a nursing school in Cardiff University, there will be fewer opportunities for that to be developed, and developed through the medium of Welsh. So, would the Cabinet Secretary agree that it is very important that we do keep nursing education and the research that may be there as part of the advanced nursing roles in Cardiff University?
Soniodd Rhys am y cyfarfod gyda'r Coleg Nyrsio Brenhinol a gafodd ef, Jenny Rathbone a minnau—ei staff, Jenny Rathbone a minnau—yr wythnos diwethaf, ac yn sicr pwysleisiwyd pwysigrwydd y Gymraeg mewn nyrsio yn gyffredinol yn y cyfarfod hwnnw, ond soniwyd hefyd am y cyfleoedd ar gyfer ymchwil Gymraeg. Ac yn amlwg, rwy'n credu ein bod i gyd yn gwybod am bwysigrwydd y Gymraeg mewn nyrsio o ran gallu cyfathrebu, ac yn enwedig gyda phobl hŷn a phobl â dementia mae'n hollol hanfodol eu bod yn gallu defnyddio eu hiaith gyntaf. Ond fel y'i deallais gan y Coleg Nyrsio Brenhinol, mae gan rolau nyrsio uwch ymchwil yn rhan o'r gwaith craidd, ac mae'n un o bileri ymarfer uwch. Ac yn amlwg, os nad oes ysgol nyrsio ym Mhrifysgol Caerdydd mwyach, bydd llai o gyfleoedd i hynny gael ei ddatblygu, a'i ddatblygu drwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg. Felly, a fyddai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn cytuno ei bod yn bwysig iawn ein bod yn cadw addysg nyrsio a'r ymchwil a allai fod yno yn rhan o'r rolau nyrsio uwch ym Mhrifysgol Caerdydd?
Well, Llywydd, I think Vikki Howells has already explained to the Senedd that the Welsh Government was not engaged by the university in the proposal that it published for consultation and that we were somewhat surprised not to have been drawn into that conversation, given the amount of investment that is made via the Welsh Government in training nurses in Cardiff. I'm hopeful from all the discussions that have gone on during the consultation period—and I myself have met with individuals who teach at the university in the field of nursing who have alternative proposals that they wish to put to the university authorities—that there is further thinking going on that may lead to revised proposals at the end of the consultation period. From my portfolio responsibilities, of course I would wish to see opportunities in the nursing field for people who study partly through the medium of Welsh, because the ability to speak Welsh when people are unwell and would rather use their language of choice, that's absolutely consistent with 'Mwy na geiriau', our own policy in this field, and where there are opportunities for research, and that research can also be conducted either through the medium of Welsh or into policies and issues that are relevant to Welsh speaking services, I will be very disappointed if those opportunities no longer existed in Cardiff.
Wel, Lywydd, rwy'n credu bod Vikki Howells eisoes wedi esbonio i'r Senedd na wnaeth y brifysgol ymgysylltu â Llywodraeth Cymru ynglŷn â'r cynnig a gyhoeddodd ar gyfer ymgynghori a'n bod wedi synnu braidd na chawsom ein cynnwys yn y sgwrs honno, o ystyried faint o fuddsoddiad a wneir drwy Lywodraeth Cymru i hyfforddi nyrsys yng Nghaerdydd. Rwy'n gobeithio o'r holl drafodaethau a fu yn ystod y cyfnod ymgynghori—ac rwyf i fy hun wedi cyfarfod ag unigolion sy'n addysgu yn y brifysgol ym maes nyrsio sydd â chynigion amgen y maent yn dymuno eu cyflwyno i awdurdodau'r brifysgol—fod yna feddwl pellach yn digwydd a allai arwain at gynigion diwygiedig ar ddiwedd y cyfnod ymgynghori. O fy nghyfrifoldebau portffolio, hoffwn weld cyfleoedd yn y maes nyrsio i bobl sy'n astudio'n rhannol drwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg wrth gwrs, oherwydd mae'r gallu i siarad Cymraeg pan fydd pobl yn sâl ac yn well ganddynt ddefnyddio eu dewis iaith, yn gwbl gyson â 'Mwy na geiriau', ein polisi ein hunain yn y maes hwn, a lle mae cyfleoedd ar gyfer ymchwil, a bod modd cyflawni ymchwil naill ai drwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg neu i bolisïau a materion sy'n berthnasol i wasanaethau Cymraeg, byddaf yn siomedig iawn os na fydd y cyfleoedd hynny'n bodoli yng Nghaerdydd mwyach.
5. Pa gamau y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn eu cymryd i sicrhau gwerth am arian i drethdalwyr Cymru o grantiau a ddarperir gan Lywodraeth Cymru i'r trydydd sector? OQ62552
5. What action is the Cabinet Secretary taking to ensure value for money to Welsh taxpayers from grants provided by the Welsh Government to the third sector? OQ62552
Thank you to the Member for that question. Llywydd, the third sector makes a significant contribution to the long-term well-being of Welsh communities. The Welsh Government provides dedicated support and guidance to enhance the effectiveness and value for money of grant management across the wider Welsh public sector.
Diolch i'r Aelod am y cwestiwn hwnnw. Lywydd, mae'r trydydd sector yn gwneud cyfraniad sylweddol i les hirdymor cymunedau Cymru. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn darparu cymorth ac arweiniad pwrpasol i wella effeithiolrwydd a gwerth am arian rheoli grantiau ar draws y sector cyhoeddus yn ehangach yng Nghymru.
Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. This question relates to town and community councils that the Auditor General for Wales highlighted recently, which I appreciate isn't directly in your portfolio, but he highlighted that nearly 70 councils do not file accounts with him to be signed off, and that situation is deteriorating rapidly. A lot of those town and community councils are partners to third sector organisations to apply for grants to improve the quality of life for many people in those particular areas across Wales. You, obviously being the source of finance out of the Welsh Government, would have an interest in making sure that those accounts are filed, are audited, and ultimately, the money can be proved value for money and spent wisely in those communities. What action are you taking, along with the local government Minister, to work with the auditor general, to make sure that town and community councils do improve their accounting procedures, so that when third sector organisations partner with them, they can have confidence that they have a fair crack of the whip in getting their share of the money to improve lives across Wales?
Diolch am yr ateb hwnnw, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Mae'r cwestiwn hwn yn ymwneud â chynghorau tref a chymuned y tynnodd Archwilydd Cyffredinol Cymru sylw atynt yn ddiweddar, ac rwy'n deall nad yw'n rhan uniongyrchol o'ch portffolio, ond nododd nad yw bron i 70 o gynghorau yn cyflwyno cyfrifon iddo ef i'w cymeradwyo, ac mae'r sefyllfa honno'n gwaethygu'n gyflym. Mae llawer o'r cynghorau tref a chymuned hynny'n bartneriaid i sefydliadau'r trydydd sector wneud cais am grantiau i wella ansawdd bywyd llawer o bobl yn yr ardaloedd penodol hynny ledled Cymru. Gan mai chi yw ffynhonnell y cyllid sy'n mynd allan o Lywodraeth Cymru, fe fyddech am sicrhau bod y cyfrifon hynny'n cael eu cyflwyno a'u harchwilio, ac yn y pen draw, yn profi'n werth yr arian ac yn cael ei wario'n ddoeth yn y cymunedau hynny. Pa gamau rydych chi'n eu cymryd, gyda'r Gweinidog llywodraeth leol, i weithio gyda'r archwilydd cyffredinol, i sicrhau bod cynghorau tref a chymuned yn gwella eu gweithdrefnau cyfrifyddu, fel y gallant fod yn hyderus, pan fydd sefydliadau'r trydydd sector yn partneru â hwy, eu bod yn cael pob cyfle teg i gael eu cyfran o'r arian i wella bywydau ledled Cymru?
Llywydd, can I thank Andrew R.T. Davies for that important question and for shining a light on that auditor general's report? This is a long-standing problem in the sector. I have been a local government Minister, relatively briefly in the Welsh Government, and I was very well aware of it then in my discussions with One Voice Wales. The point the Member makes is, I think, a very real one. We know, in the work of community councils, the relatively small amounts of grant that they are sometimes able to make local organisations make a real difference on the ground and to the quality of services in those local areas.
So, I'm a strong supporter of community councils, when they are effective and well-run and well-managed. The dilemma we are faced with in Wales is while there are many community councils that operate at that end of the spectrum, there is a tail of community councils that lack ambition, lack capacity, and as you've seen in the auditor general's report, that translates into not being able properly to account for the money they spend and the way that they conduct their business. I will certainly be working with my colleague Jayne Bryant on those aspects of the report that fall directly in that finance field. What we want to see is a performance of all community councils being the performance of the best, because then they really do do good work and they work powerfully with third sector organisations at that local level.
Lywydd, a gaf i ddiolch i Andrew R.T. Davies am y cwestiwn pwysig hwnnw ac am daflu goleuni ar adroddiad yr archwilydd cyffredinol? Mae hon yn broblem hirsefydlog yn y sector. Bûm yn Weinidog llywodraeth leol am gyfnod cymharol fyr yn Llywodraeth Cymru, ac roeddwn yn ymwybodol iawn ohono bryd hynny yn fy nhrafodaethau gydag Un Llais Cymru. Mae'r pwynt y mae'r Aelod yn ei wneud yn un real iawn. Yng ngwaith cynghorau cymuned, fe wyddom fod y symiau cymharol fach o grantiau y maent weithiau'n gallu eu rhoi i sefydliadau lleol yn gwneud gwahaniaeth gwirioneddol ar lawr gwlad ac i ansawdd y gwasanaethau yn yr ardaloedd lleol hynny.
Felly, rwy'n cefnogi cynghorau cymuned yn fawr pan fyddant yn effeithiol ac yn cael eu rhedeg yn dda ac yn cael eu rheoli'n dda. Er bod llawer o gynghorau cymuned yn gweithredu ar y pen hwnnw i'r sbectrwm, y dilema a wynebwn yng Nghymru yw bod cynffon o gynghorau cymuned sydd heb uchelgais, heb allu, ac fel y gwelsoch yn adroddiad yr archwilydd cyffredinol, mae hynny'n trosi'n fethiant i roi cyfrif priodol o'r arian a wariant a'r ffordd y cyflawnant eu busnes. Byddaf yn sicr yn gweithio gyda fy nghyd-Aelod Jayne Bryant ar yr agweddau ar yr adroddiad sy'n disgyn yn uniongyrchol yn y maes cyllid hwnnw. Yr hyn y dymunwn ei weld yw perfformiad pob cyngor cymuned yn cymharu â pherfformiad y goreuon, oherwydd maent hwy'n gwneud gwaith da ac maent yn gweithio'n bwerus gyda sefydliadau'r trydydd sector ar y lefel leol honno.
6. Pa asesiad y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet wedi’i wneud o’r cyllid canlyniadol y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei dderbyn o ganlyniad i ymrwymiadau gwariant addysg a wnaed gan Lywodraeth y DU ers mis Hydref 2024? OQ62563
6. What assessment has the Cabinet Secretary made of the consequential funding that the Welsh Government will receive as a result of UK Government education spending commitments made since October 2024? OQ62563
Diolch am y cwestiwn, Llywydd. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi derbyn cyllid canlyniadol ychwanegol o £4.6 miliwn, wedi ei rannu rhwng refeniw a chyfalaf yn 2025-26 yn natganiad y gwanwyn, o ganlyniad i newidiadau i gyllideb yr Adran Addysg yn San Steffan.
Thank you for the question. The Welsh Government has received additional consequential funding of £4.6 million, split between revenue and capital in 2025-26 in the spring statement, as a result of changes to the budget of the Department for Education in Westminster.
Thank you for that response. In October 2024, the Chancellor announced a £2.3 billion increase in core funding for schools, including a £1 billion allocation for special needs education. I understand that consequential funding is not ring fenced, obviously, but unions were asked, I understand, by the Welsh Government to lobby the UK Government for additional education funding, and they're keen to understand how this money will be spent. Can I ask, therefore, are you able to share with us how much of the consequential funding was directed towards education?
Diolch am yr ymateb hwnnw. Ym mis Hydref 2024, cyhoeddodd y Canghellor gynnydd o £2.3 biliwn mewn cyllid craidd ar gyfer ysgolion, gan gynnwys dyraniad o £1 biliwn ar gyfer addysg anghenion arbennig. Rwy'n deall nad yw cyllid canlyniadol yn cael ei neilltuo, yn amlwg, ond yn ôl yr hyn a ddeallaf, gofynnodd Llywodraeth Cymru i'r undebau lobïo Llywodraeth y DU am gyllid addysg ychwanegol, ac maent yn awyddus i ddeall sut y bydd yr arian hwn yn cael ei wario. A gaf i ofyn, felly, a allwch chi rannu gyda ni faint o'r cyllid canlyniadol a gyfeiriwyd tuag at addysg?
Well, Llywydd, I think I've already provided that information to the Finance Committee. The Finance Committee asked for further information about consequentials, where they came from, how they translated into money for Wales, and I've provided that information to the Finance Committee. Of course, here in Wales, the education sector is benefiting from £262.5 million additional funding in the financial year just ending, and a further—. Sorry, it's £151 million of that £262.5 million in the financial year just ending, and a further £111.5 million of extra funding in the financial year just beginning.
In Wales, we have a very different system of funding education, with money going to local authorities who then fund schools. The comparison with England is very hard to bring about, but the latest figures published by the UK Government—I think they were published under the previous regime—continue to show that since the pandemic, 2019-20, spend per person on education in Wales has increased by 24 per cent, larger than the increase in England, and 10 percentage points higher than the increase in Scotland.
Wel, Lywydd, rwy'n credu fy mod eisoes wedi darparu'r wybodaeth honno i'r Pwyllgor Cyllid. Gofynnodd y Pwyllgor Cyllid am ragor o wybodaeth am symiau canlyniadol, o ble y doent, sut y byddent yn trosi'n arian i Gymru, ac rwyf wedi darparu'r wybodaeth honno i'r Pwyllgor Cyllid. Wrth gwrs, yma yng Nghymru, mae'r sector addysg yn elwa o £262.5 miliwn o gyllid ychwanegol yn y flwyddyn ariannol sy'n dod i ben, a—. Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, mae'n £151 miliwn o'r £262.5 miliwn yn y flwyddyn ariannol sy'n dod i ben, a £111.5 miliwn arall o gyllid ychwanegol yn y flwyddyn ariannol sy'n dechrau.
Yng Nghymru, mae gennym system wahanol iawn o ariannu addysg, gydag arian yn mynd i awdurdodau lleol sydd wedyn yn ariannu ysgolion. Mae'r gymhariaeth â Lloegr yn anodd iawn i'w gwneud, ond mae'r ffigurau diweddaraf a gyhoeddwyd gan Lywodraeth y DU—rwy'n credu eu bod wedi'u cyhoeddi o dan y drefn flaenorol—yn parhau i ddangos bod gwariant y pen ar addysg yng Nghymru wedi cynyddu 24 y cant ers y pandemig, 2019-20, yn fwy na'r cynnydd yn Lloegr, a 10 pwynt canran yn uwch na'r cynnydd yn yr Alban.
7. Sut y mae polisi caffael Llywodraeth Cymru yn sicrhau gwerth cymdeithasol? OQ62565
7. How does the Welsh Government's procurement policy ensure social value? OQ62565
Thank you to the Member. The Welsh Government recognises public procurement as a key driver for social, economic, environmental and cultural outcomes. We have developed progressive and forward-thinking legislation that puts social value, fair work and community well-being at the heart of our policies.
Diolch i'r Aelod. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn cydnabod bod caffael cyhoeddus yn sbardun allweddol i ganlyniadau cymdeithasol, economaidd, amgylcheddol a diwylliannol. Rydym wedi datblygu deddfwriaeth flaengar sy'n rhoi lle canolog i werth cymdeithasol, gwaith teg a lles cymunedol yn ein polisïau.
Diolch am eich ymateb, Ysgrifennydd Cabinet.
Thank you for your response, Cabinet Secretary.
And, Llywydd, at the outset of my supplementary, I want to make clear that I am a member of two trade unions.
The Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act 2023 that both of us will be somewhat familiar with, Cabinet Secretary, will shift the dial on how procurement has traditionally been viewed through a lens of bureaucracy and the financial bottom line to procurement as a means to bring about broader benefits for our people and places. The power of the public purse to effect the change we want to see is one of the key levers at our devolved disposal here in Wales. With that in mind, it's my view that public money should not go to companies who do not align their own principles with the Welsh Government's position on fair work. I understand that the social partnership council is currently carrying out a piece of work looking at how the economic contract could potentially be strengthened in this respect. However, I believe that we should once again lead the way in Wales, and that a condition of receiving public funds should be that a business or organisation should simply allow access to trade unions. Cabinet Secretary, is this something that the Welsh Government will consider?
Lywydd, ar ddechrau fy nghwestiwn atodol, rwyf am wneud yn glir fy mod yn aelod o ddau undeb llafur.
Bydd Deddf Partneriaeth Gymdeithasol a Chaffael Cyhoeddus (Cymru) 2023 y bydd y ddau ohonom yn gyfarwydd â hi, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, yn newid y ffordd y mae caffael wedi cael ei ystyried yn draddodiadol trwy lens biwrocratiaeth a'r llinell waelod ariannol i gaffael fel modd o ddod â manteision ehangach i'n pobl a'n lleoedd. Mae pŵer y pwrs cyhoeddus i gyflawni'r newid yr ydym am ei weld yn un o'r ysgogiadau allweddol sydd ar gael i ni yma yng Nghymru. Gyda hynny mewn golwg, fy marn i yw na ddylai arian cyhoeddus fynd i gwmnïau nad yw eu hegwyddorion yn cyd-fynd â safbwynt Llywodraeth Cymru ar waith teg. Rwy'n deall bod y cyngor partneriaeth gymdeithasol ar hyn o bryd yn gwneud gwaith yn edrych ar sut y gellid cryfhau'r contract economaidd yn hyn o beth. Fodd bynnag, credaf y dylem arwain y ffordd yng Nghymru unwaith eto, ac y dylai fod yn amod wrth dderbyn arian cyhoeddus y dylai busnes neu sefydliad ganiatáu mynediad at undebau llafur. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a yw hyn yn rhywbeth y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei ystyried?
Well, Llywydd, can I thank Hannah Blythyn, not simply for the question, but for all the work that she invested in her time as Minister for Social Partnership, not simply on the social partnership and social procurement Bill, which she led on, but also the wider work on fair work? Trade union membership in Wales is something that we absolutely value. We have well-being goals under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and one of those goals tells us that an increase in trade union membership in Wales is to be regarded as a positive indicator of a fairer society. I firmly believe that fair work includes employers allowing access to trade unions.
I welcome the work that the Member referred to going on in Flintshire, but she will be aware, I know, that the social partnership council has established a sub-group on fair work and business grants. That will allow an opportunity to explore the issue that she has raised, and trade union access will certainly be part of the considerations of that working group. I'm sure that our colleague Jack Sargeant will be watching carefully the way that it navigates an answer to the question the Member has raised.
Wel, Lywydd, a gaf i ddiolch i Hannah Blythyn, nid yn unig am y cwestiwn, ond am yr holl waith a wnaeth yn ei hamser fel Gweinidog Partneriaeth Gymdeithasol, nid yn unig ar y Bil partneriaeth gymdeithasol a chaffael cymdeithasol, yr arweiniodd arno, ond hefyd am y gwaith ehangach ar waith teg? Mae aelodaeth o undeb llafur yng Nghymru yn rhywbeth yr ydym yn ei werthfawrogi'n fawr. Mae gennym nodau llesiant o dan Ddeddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol (Cymru) 2015, ac mae un o'r nodau hynny'n dweud wrthym fod cynnydd yn aelodaeth undebau llafur yng Nghymru i'w ystyried yn ddangosydd cadarnhaol o gymdeithas decach. Rwy'n credu'n gryf fod gwaith teg yn cynnwys cyflogwyr i ganiatáu mynediad at undebau llafur.
Rwy'n croesawu'r gwaith y cyfeiriodd yr Aelod ato yn sir y Fflint, ond fe fydd hi'n ymwybodol, rwy'n gwybod, fod y cyngor partneriaeth gymdeithasol wedi sefydlu is-grŵp ar waith teg a grantiau busnes. Bydd hynny'n rhoi cyfle i archwilio'r mater y mae hi wedi'i godi, a bydd mynediad at undebau llafur yn sicr yn rhan o ystyriaethau'r gweithgor hwnnw. Rwy'n siŵr y bydd ein cyd-Aelod Jack Sargeant yn gwylio'n ofalus y ffordd y mae'n llywio ateb i'r cwestiwn y mae'r Aelod wedi'i godi.
Cwestiwn 9 yn olaf. Mick Antoniw.
Finally, question 9. Mick Antoniw.
9. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet roi datganiad ar y cynnydd a wnaed o ran rhoi dyraniadau canlyniadol ar sail gyfansoddiadol? OQ62551
9. Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on the progress made to put consequential allocations onto a constitutional basis? OQ62551
Thank you to the Member, Llywydd. The operational basis of the Barnett formula is set out in the UK statement of funding policy. The case for strengthening the constitutional basis of this and wider inter-governmental arrangements is persuasively set out in the Gordon Brown report on the United Kingdom's future.
Diolch i'r Aelod, Lywydd. Mae sail weithredol fformiwla Barnett wedi'i nodi yn natganiad polisi cyllido'r DU. Mae'r achos dros gryfhau sylfaen gyfansoddiadol hyn a threfniadau rhynglywodraethol ehangach wedi'i nodi'n argyhoeddiadol yn adroddiad Gordon Brown ar ddyfodol y Deyrnas Unedig.
Thank you for those comments, and also the comments that were made earlier, I think, in response to question 1, when you commented on issues, what I would call the abuses of the current system, for example, the way in which Northern Ireland funding was allocated, the so-called 'bung', and the issues that are now under way with regard to transport funding, HS2 and so on. Do you agree with me that the biggest issue with regard to the funding formula is the actual lack of a binding and constitutionally based structure? We may have an arrangement, but it seems to me that much of the arrangement is often subject to the whim of the Treasury. I wonder if you could expand a bit further on the way in which you would see a more solidly structured arrangement for ensuring that the funding that this place gets is based on a proper formula and one that has a constitutional structure to it.
Diolch am y sylwadau hynny, a hefyd y sylwadau a wnaed yn gynharach mewn ymateb i gwestiwn 1, pan wnaethoch chi sylwadau ar faterion, yr hyn y byddwn i'n eu galw'n gamdriniaeth o'r system bresennol, er enghraifft y ffordd y dyrannwyd cyllid Gogledd Iwerddon, y 'bung' fel y'i gelwir, a'r materion sydd bellach ar y gweill mewn perthynas â chyllid trafnidiaeth, HS2 ac yn y blaen. A ydych chi'n cytuno â mi mai'r broblem fwyaf o ran y fformiwla ariannu yw diffyg strwythur rhwymol wedi'i seilio ar y cyfansoddiad? Efallai fod gennym drefniant, ond mae'n ymddangos i mi fod llawer o'r trefniant yn aml yn ddarostyngedig i chwiw'r Trysorlys. Tybed a allech chi ehangu ychydig ymhellach ar y ffordd y byddech chi'n gweld trefniant strwythuredig mwy cadarn ar gyfer sicrhau bod y cyllid y mae'r lle hwn yn ei gael yn seiliedig ar fformiwla briodol ac un sydd â strwythur cyfansoddiadol iddo.
I thank Mick Antoniw very much for that and echoing some of the points that Adam Price made earlier. I think the Gordon Brown report has a three-stranded answer to the Member's question. It does refer to the need for a fair funding formula, and we've rehearsed that extensively this afternoon, but beyond the formula itself, you need to have that formula entrenched in two ways. First of all, it needs parliamentary oversight, both at the UK Parliament but in the other Parliaments of the United Kingdom. And then, it needs a way of being justiciable. The problem with a formula and a convention is that when attempts were made to go to the Supreme Court to have the Sewel convention looked at, the courts concluded that there was nothing that the courts could do, because this was merely a convention despite the fact that it had been honoured for 20 years. So, what Gordon Brown says in his report is: reform of the formula, proper parliamentary oversight of it and a legally binding part of it, which means that if you believe that things have not been done properly, you have recourse to independent redress, rather than it simply being in the hands of the people who made the decision in the first place.
Diolch i Mick Antoniw am hynny, gan adleisio rhai o'r pwyntiau a wnaeth Adam Price yn gynharach. Rwy'n credu bod gan adroddiad Gordon Brown ateb ag iddo dair elfen i gwestiwn yr Aelod. Mae'n cyfeirio at yr angen am fformiwla ariannu teg, ac rydym wedi trafod hynny'n helaeth y prynhawn yma, ond y tu hwnt i'r fformiwla ei hun, mae angen ichi gael y fformiwla honno wedi'i gwreiddio mewn dwy ffordd. Yn gyntaf oll, mae angen goruchwyliaeth seneddol, yn Senedd y DU ond yn Seneddau eraill y Deyrnas Unedig. Ac yna, mae angen ffordd iddo fod yn draddodadwy. Pan wnaethpwyd ymdrechion i fynd i'r Goruchaf Lys i edrych ar gonfensiwn Sewel, y broblem gyda fformiwla a chonfensiwn yw bod y llysoedd wedi dod i'r casgliad nad oedd unrhyw beth y gallai'r llysoedd ei wneud, am mai confensiwn yn unig oedd hwn er ei fod wedi'i anrhydeddu ers 20 mlynedd. Felly, yr hyn y mae Gordon Brown yn ei ddweud yn ei adroddiad yw: diwygio'r fformiwla, goruchwyliaeth seneddol briodol arni a rhan gyfreithiol rwymol iddi, sy'n golygu os ydych chi'n credu nad yw pethau wedi'u gwneud yn iawn, y bydd modd i chi geisio iawn yn annibynnol, yn hytrach na'i fod yn nwylo'r bobl a wnaeth y penderfyniad yn y lle cyntaf.
Diolch i'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet.
I thank the Cabinet Secretary.
Yr eitem nesaf, felly, fydd y cwestiynau i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Addysg. Y cwestiwn cyntaf, Mabon ap Gwynfor.
The next item will be questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Education. The first question is from Mabon ap Gwynfor.
1. Pa arweiniad mae'r Llywodraeth yn ei ddarparu i ysgolion a cholegau er mwyn mynd i'r afael ag effeithiau y diwylliant incel? OQ62575
1. What guidance is the Government providing to schools and colleges to address the effects of incel culture? OQ62575
The Welsh Government is committed to ensuring that all learners feel safe and supported in school. The mandatory relationships and sexuality education, RSE, code and our peer-on-peer sexual harassment in education settings action plan are two examples of active measures that enable schools and colleges to address this.
Mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi ymrwymo i sicrhau bod pob dysgwr yn teimlo'n ddiogel ac yn cael eu cefnogi yn yr ysgol. Mae'r cod addysg cydberthynas a rhywioldeb orfodol, a'n cynllun gweithredu aflonyddu rhywiol rhwng cyfoedion mewn lleoliadau addysg yn ddwy enghraifft o fesurau gweithredol sy'n galluogi ysgolion a cholegau i fynd i'r afael â hyn.
Diolch yn fawr iawn i'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet am yr ymateb, ac mae'r camau yna i'w croesawu cyn belled ag yr ydw i yn y cwestiwn. Wrth gwrs, mae yna lot o sôn wedi bod yn ddiweddar am incel yn dilyn y rhaglen Adolescence ar Netflix, a phryderon am y ffordd y mae plant a phobl ifanc yn medru cyfathrebu â'i gilydd yn yr ysgol drwy ffonau symudol, a sut mae'r negeseuon yma'n cael eu cyfleu drwy ffonau symudol. Rŵan, fel rhan o'r drafodaeth gyhoeddus o amgylch hyn, mae yna bobl wedi sôn am atal ffonau symudol mewn ysgolion a cholegau. Dwi'n meddwl bod y dystiolaeth ddiweddaraf yn dangos nad ydy hynny'n effeithiol, ond mae yna gwestiwn, wedyn, o ran mynediad plant a phobl ifanc at ffonau yn yr ysgolion. Felly, pa ystyriaeth ydych chi wedi'i rhoi i gryfhau'r canllawiau, neu i roi canllawiau cenedlaethol cliriach o ran mynediad at ffonau symudol yn ein hysgolion ni?
I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that response, and those steps are to be welcomed from my perspective, certainly. There has been a lot of talk recently of incel following Adolescence on Netflix, and concerns about the way children and young people can communicate with each other at school through mobile phones, and how those messages are passed around on mobiles. Now, as part of the public discourse around all of this, people have mentioned banning the use of mobile phones in schools and colleges. I think the latest evidence shows that that isn't effective, but there is then a question in terms of children and young people's access to phones at school. So, what consideration have you given to strengthening the guidance, or to providing clearer national guidance in terms of access to mobile phones in our schools?
Can I thank Mabon for the supplementary question? Like many of us, I watched Adolescence and it was a deeply worrying experience watching it, and I really welcome the debate that it's provoked. You raised the issue of mobile phones, and young people are growing up in a very different world to the one that we all grew up in. I think our RSE curriculum has a really important role to play in that, but what I'm worried about is how we keep pace as adults with a world that is so very different from our own. So, we are doing some work to strengthen our RSE provision.
The issue of mobile phones is really complex, because, as you've highlighted here, there's been a lot of research and some of the research suggests that what happens outside school is the huge problem with mobile phones. You’ll also be aware of the inquiry that Carolyn Thomas led in the Petitions Committee. We are actively discussing mobile phones with our schools. Schools have already got the power to ban mobile phone use during the school day. You’ll be aware that we’re having a behaviour summit in May, and one of the pieces of work that we’re doing in the run-up to that is to look specifically at the issue of mobile phones. It is a complex issue and there are reasons why some children do need access to a mobile phone, but that’s why we’re doing this work in a thorough way with a view to really considering what we do. You’ll be aware that the Petitions Committee didn’t call for a complete ban—they called for national guidance.
The other thing for me is I think we’ve got to do more to ensure that young people can use technology safely, being mindful of the fact that I don’t think we really understand what they’re dealing with. One of the things that I’ve asked, since watching Adolescence and the focus on this, is to meet—. We've got a group of learners who help us with our keeping safe online work, and I’ve asked to meet with them, as well as with the team that leads on that, so that we can really make sure that the resources that we’re providing via Hwb to children, parents and teachers are fully up to date and take account of the kind of things that are emerging now in society.
A gaf i ddiolch i Mabon am y cwestiwn atodol? Fel llawer ohonom, gwyliais Adolescence ac roedd yn brofiad hynod bryderus, ac rwy'n croesawu'r ddadl y mae'n ei hysgogi. Fe wnaethoch chi godi mater ffonau symudol, ac mae pobl ifanc yn tyfu i fyny mewn byd gwahanol iawn i'r un y gwnaethom ni i gyd dyfu i fyny ynddo. Rwy'n credu bod gan ein cwricwlwm addysg cydberthynas a rhywioldeb rôl bwysig iawn i'w chwarae yn hynny, ond yr hyn rwy'n poeni amdano yw sut y gallwn ni fel oedolion gadw i fyny â byd sydd mor wahanol i'n byd ni ein hunain. Felly, rydym yn gwneud gwaith i gryfhau ein darpariaeth addysg cydberthynas a rhywioldeb.
Mae mater ffonau symudol yn gymhleth iawn, oherwydd, fel rydych chi wedi'i nodi yma, mae llawer o ymchwil wedi bod ac mae peth o'r ymchwil yn awgrymu mai'r hyn sy'n digwydd y tu allan i'r ysgol yw'r broblem enfawr gyda ffonau symudol. Fe fyddwch yn ymwybodol hefyd o'r ymchwiliad a arweiniodd Carolyn Thomas yn y Pwyllgor Deisebau. Rydym yn trafod ffonau symudol gyda'n hysgolion. Mae ysgolion eisoes wedi cael pŵer i wahardd defnyddio ffôn symudol yn ystod y diwrnod ysgol. Fe fyddwch yn ymwybodol ein bod ni'n cynnal uwchgynhadledd ymddygiad ym mis Mai, ac un o'r darnau o waith yr ydym yn eu gwneud cyn hynny yw edrych yn benodol ar fater ffonau symudol. Mae'n fater cymhleth ac mae yna resymau pam y mae rhai plant angen defnyddio ffôn symudol, ond dyna pam y gwnawn y gwaith hwn mewn ffordd drylwyr gyda'r bwriad o roi ystyriaeth wirioneddol i'r hyn a wnawn. Fe fyddwch yn ymwybodol nad oedd y Pwyllgor Deisebau yn galw am waharddiad llwyr—fe wnaethant alw am ganllawiau cenedlaethol.
Y peth arall yw fy mod yn credu bod rhaid inni wneud mwy i sicrhau bod pobl ifanc yn gallu defnyddio technoleg yn ddiogel, gan gofio nad wyf yn credu ein bod yn deall yr hyn y maent yn ymdrin ag ef. Un o'r pethau y gofynnais amdanynt, ers gwylio Adolescence a'r ffocws ar hyn, yw cyfarfod—. Mae gennym grŵp o ddysgwyr sy'n ein helpu gyda'n gwaith ar gadw'n ddiogel ar-lein, ac rwyf wedi gofyn am gael eu cyfarfod, yn ogystal â'r tîm sy'n arwain ar hynny, fel y gallwn wneud yn siŵr fod yr adnoddau a ddarparwn drwy Hwb i blant, rhieni ac athrawon yn gwbl gyfredol ac yn ystyried y math o bethau sy'n dod i'r amlwg nawr mewn cymdeithas.
As the parent and grandparent of both girls and boys, I find incel culture extremely concerning. Until I watched the Adolescence series, I'd never heard of the term 'incel culture', but now I know that it's shorthand for 'involuntary celibate', and that, although the term was originally developed by an older woman as a positive thing, it now applies to online forums in which men discuss feeling angry and resentful towards women because they believe that women don't find them attractive. I'm sure you'll join me in seeing the irony in this, where these adolescent and adult men make themselves unattractive to women by doing this.
What action will you take to work, for example, with Hafan Cymru to capture incel culture within the Spectrum healthy relationships programme sessions delivered in schools, which I've attended in the past, and to broaden that programme's reach? And what action can and will you take to provide information and support to families for their early intervention in the home?
Fel rhiant a thaid i ferched a bechgyn, mae diwylliant 'incel' yn peri cryn bryder i mi. Tan imi wylio’r gyfres Adolescence, nid oeddwn erioed wedi clywed am y term 'diwylliant incel’, ond bellach, gwn ei fod yn fyr am 'involuntary celibate', ac er i’r term gael ei ddatblygu’n wreiddiol gan fenyw hŷn fel peth cadarnhaol, mae bellach yn cael ei ddefnyddio i gyfeirio at fforymau ar-lein lle mae dynion yn trafod teimlo dicter a chwerwder tuag at fenywod am eu bod yn credu nad yw menywod yn eu gweld yn ddeniadol. Rwy’n siŵr y gwnewch chi ymuno â mi wrth weld yr eironi yn hyn, lle mae dynion yn eu harddegau a dynion sy'n oedolion yn gwneud eu hunain yn anneniadol i fenywod drwy wneud hyn.
Pa gamau y byddwch chi'n eu cymryd i weithio, er enghraifft, gyda Hafan Cymru i drafod diwylliant 'incel' yn sesiynau rhaglen perthnasoedd iach Sbectrwm a ddarperir mewn ysgolion, yr wyf wedi eu mynychu yn y gorffennol, ac i ehangu cyrhaeddiad y rhaglen honno? A pha gamau y gallwch ac y byddwch chi'n eu cymryd i ddarparu gwybodaeth a chymorth i deuluoedd ar gyfer ymyrraeth gynnar yn y cartref?
Thank you very much, Mark, for your question. As I said in response to Mabon, we’ve got our RSE provision, and Spectrum play an important role in that. We fund the Spectrum project and that supports schools across Wales with lessons on healthy relationships, violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence. But I am looking at what more we can do around RSE in Wales. I’m currently considering our Curriculum for Wales grant support programme, so I’m looking through that at what more we can do to really beef up the support for schools in this area. We’ve also got our new professional learning body coming online in the autumn and clearly there’s a key role for that.
But I mentioned as well that we have got good resources online that we provide as a Government on keeping safe online. I’ve looked at them as a parent, but young people can use them as well. But what we need to make sure, I think, is that they are keeping pace with what are some really quite scary developments that were highlighted by the programme. But I am really concerned about it; I’m concerned about it as a parent as well. It was a shocking programme, and we do need to make sure that we are doing absolutely everything that we can.
Diolch am eich cwestiwn, Mark. Fel y dywedais mewn ymateb i Mabon, mae gennym ein darpariaeth addysg cydberthynas a rhywioldeb, ac mae Sbectrwm yn chwarae rhan bwysig yn hynny. Ni sy'n ariannu prosiect Sbectrwm ac mae'n cefnogi ysgolion ledled Cymru gyda gwersi ar berthnasoedd iach, trais yn erbyn menywod, cam-drin domestig a thrais rhywiol. Ond rwy’n edrych ar beth arall y gallwn ei wneud o ran addysg cydberthynas a rhywioldeb yng Nghymru. Rwy'n ystyried ein rhaglen cymorth grant Cwricwlwm i Gymru ar hyn o bryd, felly rwy'n edrych drwy hynny i weld beth arall y gallwn ei wneud i wella'r cymorth i ysgolion yn y maes hwn. Mae gennym hefyd ein corff dysgu proffesiynol newydd yn dod yn weithredol yn yr hydref, ac yn amlwg, mae rôl allweddol i hwnnw.
Ond soniais hefyd fod gennym adnoddau da ar-lein yr ydym yn eu darparu fel Llywodraeth ar gadw’n ddiogel ar-lein. Rwyf wedi edrych arnynt fel rhiant, ond gall pobl ifanc eu defnyddio hefyd. Ond credaf mai'r hyn y mae angen i ni ei sicrhau yw eu bod yn cadw i fyny â’r datblygiadau brawychus hyn a amlygwyd gan y rhaglen. Ond rwy'n bryderus iawn ynglŷn â hyn; rwy'n poeni amdano fel rhiant hefyd. Roedd yn rhaglen ysgytwol, ac mae angen inni sicrhau ein bod yn gwneud popeth yn ein gallu.
2. Sut y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn cefnogi bechgyn niwroamrywiol mewn ysgolion gwladol? OQ62578
2. How is the Welsh Government supporting neurodiverse boys in state schools? OQ62578
Through our reform of the education system, we are supporting neurodiverse boys to engage, learn and thrive. Our new curriculum, additional learning needs system and whole-school approach to mental health and well-being are creating a change to the school environment that supports all learners to reach their full potential.
Drwy ddiwygio’r system addysg, rydym yn cefnogi bechgyn niwroamrywiol i ymgysylltu, dysgu a ffynnu. Mae ein cwricwlwm newydd, ein system anghenion dysgu ychwanegol a’n dull ysgol gyfan o weithredu ar iechyd meddwl a llesiant yn creu newid i amgylchedd yr ysgol sy’n cefnogi pob dysgwr i gyflawni eu potensial llawn.
Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I am disappointed about the treatment of Kian Mills, whose parents have been forced to remove him from St Joseph's Catholic School in Port Talbot. We know boys have higher rates of diagnosis of ADHD—four times higher than girls, according to ADHD UK. We also know they face significant stigma, with behaviours often characterised as disruptive, and that such people are punished unfairly, with detentions, isolation, and even exclusion. At the same time, Wales's NHS executive estimates that autism or ADHD assessment backlogs could triple over the next three years. We therefore are unaware of the true scale of the problem. How many more Kians are suffering in our schools? Cabinet Secretary, what will you do to ensure all neurodiverse pupils are sufficiently supported?
Diolch, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Rwy'n siomedig ynghylch y driniaeth a gafodd Kian Mills, y mae ei rieni wedi’u gorfodi i’w symud o Ysgol Gatholig Sant Joseff ym Mhort Talbot. Gwyddom fod gan fechgyn gyfraddau uwch o ddiagnosis o ADHD—bedair gwaith yn uwch na merched, yn ôl ADHD UK. Gwyddom hefyd eu bod yn wynebu stigma sylweddol, gydag ymddygiadau'n aml yn cael eu disgrifio fel rhai aflonyddgar, a bod pobl o’r fath yn cael eu cosbi’n annheg, gyda chyfnodau o orfod aros ar ôl ysgol, ynysu, a hyd yn oed gwaharddiadau. Ar yr un pryd, mae gweithrediaeth GIG Cymru yn amcangyfrif y gallai ôl-groniadau o asesiadau awtistiaeth neu ADHD dreblu dros y tair blynedd nesaf. Nid ydym, felly, yn ymwybodol o wir faint y broblem. Sawl Kian arall sy'n dioddef yn ein hysgolion? Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, beth a wnewch i sicrhau bod pob disgybl niwroamrywiol yn cael eu cefnogi'n ddigonol?
Thank you very much, Altaf. I'm sure you wouldn't expect me to go into an individual case in the Chamber today, but I will try and deal with the general issues that you've raised. Obviously, it's really important that we support all our learners, and I think we are very well equipped to do that, with the new curriculum and with our ALN reforms in Wales. I do think there's more work to do in terms of equipping schools with the knowledge to support neurodiverse learners. You've highlighted some of the things that can happen when that doesn't happen, because they don't understand the behaviour, and that's when you see inappropriate punishments, exclusions, et cetera.
One of the things that we're doing at the moment is working with Education Support to develop a new professional learning programme for schools that's focused on developing education practitioners' understanding of neurodivergence, child development, and our whole-school approach to mental health. Initial teacher education partnerships are doing good work around ALN, but I want to make sure that we've got a consistent approach to upskilling our new teachers to learn about how to support learners who are neurodiverse or who have other additional learning needs.
In terms of the issues you've raised about waiting times, I think it's important to emphasise again that children do not need a diagnosis to get support in a school. That is something that's been made very clear. Schools should be responding to the needs of individual children. But I completely understand why families want that diagnosis. As you've highlighted, there is a very significant backlog, and that has been made worse, unfortunately, by the pandemic. My colleague Sarah Murphy has announced—. There's been £12 million invested in the neurodivergence improvement programme. That was added to by a further £3 million for waiting times initiatives in relation to neurodivergence, before Christmas. So, there is a plan to drive down those waiting times.
The neurodivergence improvement team are also working with schools. There's a community of practice, to try and improve the understanding. And also, as a Government, we've been leading inclusive practice events, sharing good practice across Wales, to try and make sure that all schools are coming up to the level of the best in terms of supporting neurodiverse children and young people.
Diolch, Altaf. Rwy’n siŵr na fyddech yn disgwyl imi drafod manylion achos unigol yn y Siambr heddiw, ond rwyf am geisio ymdrin â’r materion cyffredinol a godwyd gennych. Yn amlwg, mae'n bwysig iawn ein bod yn cefnogi ein holl ddysgwyr, ac rwy'n credu ein bod wedi ein harfogi'n dda iawn i wneud hynny, gyda'r cwricwlwm newydd a chyda'n diwygiadau ADY yng Nghymru. Credaf fod mwy o waith i'w wneud o ran arfogi ysgolion â'r wybodaeth i gefnogi dysgwyr niwroamrywiol. Rydych wedi tynnu sylw at rai o'r pethau a all ddigwydd pan na fydd hynny'n digwydd, am nad ydynt yn deall yr ymddygiad, a dyna pryd y gwelwch gosbau amhriodol, gwaharddiadau, ac ati.
Un o'r pethau yr ydym yn eu gwneud ar hyn o bryd yw gweithio gydag Education Support i ddatblygu rhaglen ddysgu broffesiynol newydd ar gyfer ysgolion sy'n canolbwyntio ar ddatblygu dealltwriaeth addysgwyr o niwrowahaniaeth, datblygiad plant, a'n dull ysgol gyfan o weithredu ar iechyd meddwl. Mae partneriaethau addysg gychwynnol i athrawon yn gwneud gwaith da mewn perthynas ag ADY, ond hoffwn sicrhau bod gennym ddull cyson o uwchsgilio ein hathrawon newydd i ddysgu sut i gefnogi dysgwyr niwroamrywiol neu sydd ag anghenion dysgu ychwanegol eraill.
Ar y materion a godwyd gennych ynghylch amseroedd aros, rwy'n credu ei bod yn bwysig pwysleisio eto nad oes angen diagnosis ar blant i gael cymorth mewn ysgol. Mae hynny’n rhywbeth sydd wedi’i wneud yn glir iawn. Dylai ysgolion ymateb i anghenion plant unigol. Ond rwy’n deall yn llwyr pam y mae teuluoedd eisiau diagnosis. Fel rydych chi wedi'i nodi, mae ôl-groniad sylweddol iawn, ac mae hynny wedi’i waethygu, yn anffodus, gan y pandemig. Mae fy nghyd-Aelod Sarah Murphy wedi cyhoeddi—. Mae £12 miliwn wedi'i fuddsoddi yn y rhaglen gwella gwasanaethau niwrowahaniaeth. Cyn y Nadolig, ychwanegwyd £3 miliwn arall at hynny ar gyfer cynlluniau'n ymwneud ag amseroedd aros mewn perthynas â niwrowahaniaeth. Felly, mae cynllun ar waith i leihau'r amseroedd aros hynny.
Mae'r tîm gwella gwasanaethau niwrowahaniaeth hefyd yn gweithio gydag ysgolion. Ceir cymuned o ymarfer, i geisio gwella dealltwriaeth. A hefyd, fel Llywodraeth, rydym wedi bod yn arwain digwyddiadau ymarfer cynhwysol, gan rannu arferion da ledled Cymru, i geisio sicrhau bod pob ysgol yn cyrraedd lefel y goreuon o ran cefnogi plant a phobl ifanc niwroamrywiol.
Cwestiynau nawr gan lefarwyr y pleidiau. Llefarydd y Ceidwadwyr, Natasha Asghar.
Questions now from the party spokespeople. Conservatives spokesperson, Natasha Asghar.
Thank you so much, Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, private and independent schools play an incredibly important role in our education system. There seems to be a common misconception, and, sadly, it's prevalent amongst the Labour benches, that these schools are only for the rich. In reality, this couldn't be further from the truth. Having visited many private schools since taking up my role, including Kings Monkton School in Cardiff, as well as Monmouth Haberdashers', many families actually scrimp and save to send their children to private school, making many and countless sacrifices along the way.
When we discussed independent schools in the Chamber a few weeks ago, the disdain radiated from the former First Minister, now Cabinet Secretary for finance—he deliberately misconstrued my points and proceeded on a rant about privilege. So, Cabinet Secretary, do you share your colleague’s contempt for private and independent schools, or do you recognise that they have an important role to play? And I’d urge you to think very carefully about your answer, given that both the First Minister, Baroness Eluned Morgan, and the Labour Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, have received this type of schooling.
Diolch, Lywydd. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae ysgolion preifat ac annibynnol yn chwarae rhan hynod bwysig yn ein system addysg. Ymddengys bod camsyniad cyffredin, ac yn anffodus, mae’n gyffredin ymhlith y meinciau Llafur, mai dim ond ar gyfer y cyfoethog y mae’r ysgolion hyn. Mewn gwirionedd, ni allai hyn fod ymhellach o'r gwir. Ar ôl ymweld â llawer o ysgolion preifat ers dechrau yn fy rôl, gan gynnwys Ysgol Kings Monkton yng Nghaerdydd, yn ogystal ag ysgol Haberdashers' yn Nhrefynwy, mae llawer o deuluoedd yn crafu a chynilo i anfon eu plant i ysgol breifat, gan aberthu llawer iawn i wneud hynny.
Pan fuom yn trafod ysgolion annibynnol yn y Siambr ychydig wythnosau’n ôl, roedd y dirmyg yn amlwg gan y cyn-Brif Weinidog, sydd bellach yn Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid—fe gamddehonglodd fy mhwyntiau yn fwriadol, a bu'n rhefru am fraint. Felly, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a ydych chi'n rhannu dirmyg eich cyd-Aelod tuag at ysgolion preifat ac annibynnol, neu a ydych chi'n cydnabod bod ganddynt ran bwysig i'w chwarae? Ac rwy'n eich annog i feddwl yn ofalus iawn am eich ateb, o ystyried bod y Prif Weinidog, y Farwnes Eluned Morgan, a Phrif Weinidog Llafur y DU, Keir Starmer, wedi cael addysg o'r fath.
Thank you, Natasha. I can assure you that I always think really carefully about the answers that I give here. I didn’t hear the exchange with my colleague Mark Drakeford, but what I can tell you is that I know my colleague Mark Drakeford is as intent as I am on maximising the resources available for our state schools in Wales. The measures that we have supported as a Government have been about making sure that the schools most of our families use are well funded.
Diolch, Natasha. Gallaf roi sicrwydd i chi fy mod bob amser yn meddwl yn ofalus iawn am yr atebion a roddaf yma. Ni chlywais y ddadl gyda fy nghyd-Aelod Mark Drakeford, ond yr hyn y gallaf ei ddweud wrthych yw fy mod yn gwybod bod fy nghyd-Aelod Mark Drakeford mor benderfynol â minnau i ddarparu cymaint o adnoddau â phosibl ar gyfer ein hysgolion gwladol yng Nghymru. Mae’r mesurau a gefnogwyd gennym fel Llywodraeth wedi ymwneud â sicrhau bod yr ysgolion y mae’r rhan fwyaf o’n teuluoedd yn eu defnyddio yn cael eu hariannu’n dda.
Cabinet Secretary, it is evident that Labour politicians both here and at the other end of the M4 seem hell-bent on attacking our private and independent schools. There has been a triple-whammy of higher taxes for them, with the national insurance hike, removing rate relief for charity-run schools, and, of course, adding VAT on to school fees.
The decision to impose VAT alone has had a major impact on the sector, with parents pulling students out of school, applications for the upcoming year dropping, teaching staff being axed, and subjects being slashed. Labour’s Treasury Minister, Torsten Bell, has admitted that around 100 private schools will be forced to close because of this tax rate, although the Independent Schools Bursars Association believes that the true number is actually set to be around 300.
Let’s go with the Swansea MP’s prediction of 100 schools closing. That would mean around 40,000 students being displaced, and 11,000 jobs lost, according to this analysis. Many of these students will transition to our already overstretched state schools, which I don’t have any problem with. But I’d like to know what assessment has the Welsh Government made of the impact Labour’s VAT hike will have on our already under pressure and underfunded Welsh state schools.
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae'n amlwg fod gwleidyddion Llafur yma ac ar ben arall yr M4 i'w gweld yn benderfynol o ymosod ar ein hysgolion preifat ac annibynnol. Maent wedi gorfod wynebu trethi uwch ar dri chyfrif, gyda’r cynnydd i yswiriant gwladol, diddymu rhyddhad ardrethi ar gyfer ysgolion sy’n cael eu rhedeg gan elusennau, ac ychwanegu TAW at ffioedd ysgolion wrth gwrs.
Mae’r penderfyniad i osod TAW wedi cael effaith fawr ar y sector, gyda rhieni’n tynnu myfyrwyr allan o’r ysgol, llai o geisiadau ar gyfer y flwyddyn i ddod, staff addysgu’n cael eu diswyddo, a phynciau’n cael eu torri. Mae Gweinidog Llafur y Trysorlys, Torsten Bell, wedi cyfaddef y bydd oddeutu 100 o ysgolion preifat yn cael eu gorfodi i gau oherwydd y gyfradd dreth hon, er bod Cymdeithas Bwrsariaid Ysgolion Annibynnol yn credu y bydd y gwir nifer oddeutu 300.
Dewch inni fynd gyda rhagfynegiad AS Abertawe y bydd 100 o ysgolion yn cau. Byddai hynny’n golygu oddeutu 40,000 o fyfyrwyr yn cael eu dadleoli, a 11,000 o swyddi’n cael eu colli yn ôl y dadansoddiad hwn. Bydd llawer o'r myfyrwyr hyn yn symud i'n hysgolion gwladol sydd eisoes dan bwysau, ac nid oes gennyf unrhyw broblem ynglŷn â hynny. Ond hoffwn wybod pa asesiad y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i wneud o'r effaith y bydd codiad TAW Llafur yn ei chael ar ein hysgolion gwladol yng Nghymru sydd eisoes dan bwysau ac nad ydynt yn cael digon o arian.
Thank you, Natasha. Obviously, we’ve discussed this quite a few times in the Chamber. I’m sure that you recognise that the intent of the UK Labour Government in asking private schools to pay VAT was so that there is an appropriate contribution for our state schools, which we know are under huge pressure financially. I very much welcome that, and, indeed, the commitment to use that money to get more teachers in front of our children.
In terms of the analysis, I can assure you that my officials monitor carefully the demand on the school system. As I’ve highlighted before in the Chamber, we actually have a surplus of places in Wales in our schools, so there is plenty of room to accommodate any other children who want to move to our state schools.
Diolch, Natasha. Yn amlwg, rydym wedi trafod hyn gryn dipyn o weithiau yn y Siambr. Rwy’n siŵr eich bod yn cydnabod mai bwriad Llywodraeth Lafur y DU wrth ofyn i ysgolion preifat dalu TAW oedd sicrhau y ceir cyfraniad priodol i’n hysgolion gwladol, y gwyddom eu bod o dan bwysau ariannol aruthrol. Rwy'n croesawu hynny’n fawr, ac yn wir, yr ymrwymiad i ddefnyddio’r arian hwnnw i roi mwy o athrawon o flaen ein plant.
O ran y dadansoddiad, gallaf roi sicrwydd i chi fod fy swyddogion yn monitro’r galw ar y system ysgolion yn ofalus. Fel y nodais yn y Siambr o’r blaen, mae gennym leoedd gwag yn ein hysgolion yng Nghymru, felly mae digon o le i ddarparu ar gyfer unrhyw blant eraill sydd am symud i’n hysgolion gwladol.
Cabinet Secretary, I’m glad you mentioned choice, but I’d like to talk a bit about figures. One particular private school in Wales supports 86 pupils with additional learning needs. I know you’re very passionate about ALN, so let’s talk about this. Just for the record, their places are funded privately by their families. Let’s say those 86 students are forced to leave private schools due to spiralling costs, and transition into state school. Based on the average cost per pupil, that would cost the state nearly £628,360 extra per year. There have been estimates that anywhere between 90,000 and 135,000 students across the UK could leave the independent sector.
So, let’s go with this. Ninety thousand pupils leaving would cost the taxpayer £648 million, and if we saw 135,000 leaving, that would cost a staggering £972 million. Despite what Labour politicians say, this isn’t about boosting education. In my view, it’s a vindictive and ideologically driven attack on the private school sector. This isn’t about fairness; it’s about resentment, as I can hear from your backbencher there, who’s more than welcome to make a contribution in his own time rather than hindering mine. It’s an attack on aspiration, and an attack on parental choice.
Wales’s First Minister, and also the UK’s Prime Minister, were able to thrive in the education that they were afforded. If it was good enough for a humble toolmaker’s son, and a daughter of a vicar, why is Labour determined to stifle aspiration and remove choice, instead of focusing on improving standards in our state sector?
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, rwy'n falch ichi grybwyll dewis, ond hoffwn sôn ychydig am ffigurau. Mae un ysgol breifat benodol yng Nghymru yn cefnogi 86 o ddisgyblion ag anghenion dysgu ychwanegol. Gwn eich bod yn angerddol iawn am ADY, felly gadewch inni siarad am hyn. Ar gyfer y cofnod, mae eu lleoedd yn cael eu hariannu'n breifat gan eu teuluoedd. Gadewch inni ddweud bod yr 86 o fyfyrwyr hynny'n cael eu gorfodi i adael ysgolion preifat oherwydd costau cynyddol, a symud i ysgol wladol. Ar sail ar y gost gyfartalog fesul disgybl, byddai hynny'n costio bron i £628,360 y flwyddyn yn ychwanegol i'r wladwriaeth. Mae amcangyfrifon y gallai rhwng 90,000 a 135,000 o fyfyrwyr ledled y DU adael y sector annibynnol.
Felly, gadewch inni ystyried hyn. Byddai 90,000 o ddisgyblion yn gadael yn costio £648 miliwn i’r trethdalwr, a phe gwelem 135,000 yn gadael, byddai hynny’n costio swm syfrdanol o £972 miliwn. Er gwaethaf yr hyn y mae gwleidyddion Llafur yn ei ddweud, nid yw hyn yn ymwneud â hybu addysg. Yn fy marn i, mae'n ymosodiad dialgar ac ideolegol ar y sector ysgolion preifat. Nid yw'n ymwneud â thegwch; mae a wnelo â dicter, fel y gallaf ei glywed gan yr Aelod ar eich meinciau cefn, y mae can croeso iddo wneud cyfraniad yn ei amser ei hun yn hytrach na rhwystro fy un i. Mae'n ymosodiad ar ddyhead, ac yn ymosodiad ar ddewis rhieni.
Llwyddodd Prif Weinidog Cymru, a Phrif Weinidog y DU hefyd, i ffynnu yn yr addysg a roddwyd iddynt. Os oedd yn ddigon da i fab gwneuthurwr offer, ac i ferch ficer, pam fod Llafur yn benderfynol o fygu dyhead a dileu dewis, yn hytrach na chanolbwyntio ar wella safonau yn ein sector ysgolion gwladol?
There’s no question of removing choice. People can still send their children to private school if they choose to. The choice we have made as a Government is that we want to prioritise our investment in our state publicly funded schools, and that’s exactly the choice that has been made by the UK Government.
As you’re aware, I believe, Natasha, we do place some young people with very complex needs in independent schools, and that is funded by the public purse. There are arrangements under this new legislation to make sure that the VAT can be recouped for that, so that there is no loss of income.
I appreciate that it’s challenging for families who are self-funding children with ALN in private schools, but what I would advise to them is to have that discussion about their child’s needs. We’ve got a new system in Wales that is geared to meeting the needs of all children. If they’re entitled to an IDP, they should get one, and they’re entitled to information, they’re entitled to advocacy. So, those options are there for them.
Nid oes unrhyw gwestiwn o ddileu dewis. Gall pobl barhau i anfon eu plant i ysgol breifat os ydynt yn dewis gwneud hynny. Y dewis a wnaethom ni fel Llywodraeth yw ein bod am flaenoriaethu ein buddsoddiad yn ein hysgolion gwladol a ariennir yn gyhoeddus, a dyna’r union ddewis a wnaed gan Lywodraeth y DU.
Fel y gwyddoch, rwy'n credu, Natasha, rydym yn gosod rhai pobl ifanc ag anghenion cymhleth iawn mewn ysgolion annibynnol, a chaiff hynny ei ariannu o bwrs y wlad. Mae trefniadau o dan y ddeddfwriaeth newydd hon i sicrhau y gellir adennill y TAW ar gyfer hynny, fel nad oes unrhyw incwm yn cael ei golli.
Rwy'n sylweddoli ei bod yn heriol i deuluoedd sy’n ariannu plant ag ADY eu hunain mewn ysgolion preifat, ond yr hyn y byddwn yn eu cynghori i'w wneud yw cael y drafodaeth honno ynglŷn ag anghenion eu plentyn. Mae gennym system newydd yng Nghymru sydd wedi'i hanelu at ddiwallu anghenion pob plentyn. Os oes ganddynt hawl i gynllun datblygu unigol, dylent gael un, ac mae ganddynt hawl i wybodaeth, mae ganddynt hawl i eiriolaeth. Felly, mae'r opsiynau hynny yno ar eu cyfer.
Llefarydd Plaid Cymru, Cefin Campbell.
The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Cefin Campbell.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. It's a question to the Minister. Minister, in a written statement published last month, you said that you would be, and I’m quoting,
‘working with UK Government on their plans for higher education reform.’
Why then, in response to Plaid Cymru’s written questions both here in the Senedd and in Westminster, neither you nor the UK Government could confirm that Wales would have an official role as part of the UK Government’s plans to reform the sector? Would you like to respond to that?
Diolch, Lywydd. Mae’n gwestiwn i’r Gweinidog. Weinidog, mewn datganiad ysgrifenedig a gyhoeddwyd fis diwethaf, fe ddywedoch chi y byddech yn
'gweithio gyda Llywodraeth y DU ar eu cynlluniau nhw ar gyfer diwygio addysg uwch.'
Pam felly, mewn ymateb i gwestiynau ysgrifenedig Plaid Cymru yma yn y Senedd ac yn San Steffan, na allech chi na Llywodraeth y DU gadarnhau y byddai gan Gymru rôl swyddogol yn rhan o gynlluniau Llywodraeth y DU i ddiwygio’r sector? A hoffech chi ymateb i hynny?
Yes. Thank you, Cefin Campbell, for that opening question and I’m very happy to respond to that. What the UK Government has announced is that it’s developing a plan for higher education reform, which is due to be published this summer. So, it’s a plan for reform. What it’s not is a formal review of higher education. So, without it being classed as a formal review, then we can’t say that we have a formal role in it. But, given the interconnected challenges facing the HE sector across the UK, I think it’s very important that I and my officials play a key role within that piece of work, and that’s exactly what we are doing.
Iawn. Diolch, Cefin Campbell, am eich cwestiwn agoriadol ac rwy’n fwy na pharod i ymateb i hynny. Yr hyn y mae Llywodraeth y DU wedi’i gyhoeddi yw ei bod yn datblygu cynllun ar gyfer diwygio addysg uwch, sydd i’w gyhoeddi yn yr haf. Felly, mae’n gynllun ar gyfer diwygio. Nid yw'n adolygiad ffurfiol o addysg uwch. Felly, os nad yw wedi'i gategoreiddio'n adolygiad ffurfiol, ni allwn ddweud bod gennym rôl ffurfiol ynddo. Ond o ystyried yr heriau rhyng-gysylltiedig sy’n wynebu’r sector addysg uwch ledled y DU, credaf ei bod yn bwysig iawn fy mod i a fy swyddogion yn chwarae rhan allweddol yn y gwaith hwnnw, a dyna’n union rydym yn ei wneud.
I find it incredible that you have no formal role, because you’ve made great play on how you would partake in that review. Whilst it may seem to be an issue of semantics, it actually touches on a crucial principle, because Wales was promised a partnership in power—that is, two Labour Governments working together each side of the M4. Just as we’ve seen this week with the cruel cuts to welfare benefits, the Welsh Government may well be talking to the UK Government, but it’s clear to me they’re not listening.
In that same written statement, you also said you’d be seeking clarity from UK Government on, and I’m quoting again,
‘fees policy…the details of HM Treasury’s rules on our student loans budget…the future of shared prosperity and research funding’,
and also
‘the future of the graduate visa.’
Can I just ask simply, have you succeeded in getting clarity on those issues?
Mae'n anghredadwy nad oes gennych unrhyw rôl ffurfiol, gan eich bod wedi rhoi llawer o bwyslais ar sut y byddech chi'n cymryd rhan yn yr adolygiad hwnnw. Er ei fod yn ymddangos yn fater o semanteg, mae’n cyffwrdd ag egwyddor hollbwysig mewn gwirionedd, gan yr addawyd partneriaeth mewn grym i Gymru—hynny yw, dwy Lywodraeth Lafur yn cydweithio ar bob pen i’r M4. Yn union fel y gwelsom yr wythnos hon gyda’r toriadau creulon i fudd-daliadau lles, efallai’n wir fod Llywodraeth Cymru yn siarad â Llywodraeth y DU, ond mae’n amlwg i mi nad ydynt yn gwrando.
Yn yr un datganiad ysgrifenedig hwnnw, fe ddywedoch chi hefyd y byddech yn ceisio eglurder gan Lywodraeth y DU
'ar bolisi ffioedd… manylion rheolau Trysorlys EF ar ein cyllideb ar gyfer benthyciadau myfyrwyr… dyfodol y cyllid ffyniant cyffredin ac ymchwil’,
a hefyd
'dyfodol y fisa i raddedigion.'
A gaf i ofyn, yn syml, a ydych chi wedi llwyddo i gael eglurder ar y materion hynny?
Thank you very much, Cefin. I was going to use the word 'semantics' but you used it yourself. If the UK Government are calling it a plan, then a plan is not something that you can have a formal role in. So, it is semantics. It doesn’t undermine the key role that we are playing just because I can’t reply to you formally in a letter and say, 'Yes, we can class that as a formal role.' So, what I and my officials are working closely with the UK Government on is the future of the UK international education strategy, the future of structural investment and research funding across the UK, the future oversight of student finance and funding, and a UK-wide review of governance and leadership in universities.
The fees policy is very important. In the round-table that I held with the First Minister and all the vice-chancellors of universities in Wales, it was the No.1 ask from those VCs. They really want certainty about fees policy for the rest of this parliamentary term—that’s the UK Government’s parliamentary term—because that enables them to forward plan for their finances. So, I’m committed to ensuring that that is the case. That’s my No.1 ask of the UK Government.
With student loans as well, it’s really important that we work closely with the UK Government on that because our student loan envelope is tied to the spending and the envelope within England as well. Under HM Treasury rules, we’re not permitted to spend more than the English system. So, it is really important that I engage on that, because that's a key part of the way in which we support our students and the way in which our universities are funded.
You mentioned SPF funding as well. Yes, absolutely, it's really important that we feed into that. That was another thing that vice-chancellors asked of me and the First Minister, to try and get, again, a longer term funding stream and some certainty there. And the graduate visa issue is a really important one, because the household income threshold for that, we believe, needs to be lower in Wales to reflect the fact of our average graduate incomes here.
Diolch, Cefin. Roeddwn yn mynd i ddefnyddio'r gair 'semanteg' ond fe'i defnyddiwyd gennych chi. Os yw Llywodraeth y DU yn ei alw'n gynllun, nid yw cynllun yn rhywbeth y gallwch gael rôl ffurfiol ynddo. Felly, semanteg ydyw. Nid yw'n tanseilio'r rôl allweddol yr ydym yn ei chwarae am na allaf ateb yn ffurfiol i chi mewn llythyr a dweud, 'Gallwn ei gategoreiddio'n rôl ffurfiol.' Felly, yr hyn rwyf i a fy swyddogion yn gweithio’n agos arno gyda Llywodraeth y DU yw dyfodol strategaeth addysg ryngwladol y DU, dyfodol buddsoddiad strwythurol a chyllid ymchwil ledled y DU, trosolwg o gyllid a chyllid myfyrwyr yn y dyfodol, ac adolygiad DU gyfan o lywodraethiant ac arweinyddiaeth mewn prifysgolion.
Mae'r polisi ffioedd yn bwysig iawn. Yn y cyfarfod bord gron a gynhaliais gyda'r Prif Weinidog a holl is-gangellorion prifysgolion Cymru, dyna oedd y prif beth y gofynnwyd i'r is-gangellorion yn ei gylch. Maent yn awyddus iawn i gael sicrwydd ynghylch polisi ffioedd am weddill tymor y Senedd hon—tymor Senedd y DU—gan fod hynny'n eu galluogi i flaengynllunio ar gyfer eu cyllid. Felly, rwyf wedi ymrwymo i sicrhau bod hynny'n digwydd. Dyna fy mhrif gais i Lywodraeth y DU.
Gyda benthyciadau myfyrwyr hefyd, mae'n bwysig iawn ein bod yn gweithio'n agos gyda Llywodraeth y DU ar hynny gan fod ein hamlen fenthyciadau myfyrwyr yn gysylltiedig â'r gwariant a'r amlen yn Lloegr hefyd. O dan reolau Trysorlys EF, ni chaniateir inni wario mwy na system Lloegr. Felly, mae'n bwysig iawn fy mod yn trafod hynny, gan ei fod yn rhan allweddol o'r ffordd y cefnogwn ein myfyrwyr a'r ffordd y caiff ein prifysgolion eu hariannu.
Fe sonioch chi am gyllid y gronfa ffyniant gyffredin hefyd. Ydy, yn sicr, mae'n bwysig iawn ein bod yn bwydo i mewn i hynny. Dyna beth arall y gofynnodd is-gangellorion i mi a’r Prif Weinidog yn ei gylch, i geisio cael, unwaith eto, ffrwd gyllido fwy hirdymor a rhywfaint o sicrwydd yno. Ac mae mater y fisa i raddedigion yn un gwirioneddol bwysig, gan ein bod o'r farn fod angen i drothwy incwm y cartref ar gyfer hynny fod yn is yng Nghymru i adlewyrchu incwm cyfartalog ein graddedigion yma.
So, let's be clear then, because it's called a 'plan' you can't play a formal role in that, although you previously have suggested that you would play a part in any review led by the UK Government. So, that's not the kind of clarity that our university institutions are looking for. And it's probably emphasising the importance, more than ever, that we need to find a Welsh way forward when it comes to protecting Welsh universities.
The written statement also outlined other actions you are taking to try and support the sector, but as Professor Dylan Jones Evans has said recently, and I quote,
'most of these actions are a short term political response...rather than a coherent strategy for the sustainable future of the higher education sector.'
So, why, therefore, can’t you respond constructively to my call, and Plaid Cymru’s call, for a cross-party, independent, wholesale review into our higher education sector to resolve these issues and place our institutions on a more sustainable financial footing, not just for now, but for years to come? Or do you honestly believe that Labour knows best?
Felly, gadewch inni fod yn glir, oherwydd ei fod wedi'i alw'n 'gynllun', ni allwch chwarae rhan ffurfiol ynddo, er eich bod wedi awgrymu o'r blaen y byddech yn chwarae rhan mewn unrhyw adolygiad a arweinir gan Lywodraeth y DU. Felly, nid dyna'r math o eglurder y mae ein sefydliadau prifysgol yn chwilio amdano. Ac mae’n debyg fod hynny'n pwysleisio, yn fwy nag erioed, pa mor bwysig yw hi ein bod yn dod o hyd i ffordd Gymreig ymlaen pan ddaw’n fater o ddiogelu prifysgolion Cymru.
Roedd y datganiad ysgrifenedig hefyd yn amlinellu camau eraill rydych chi'n eu cymryd i geisio cefnogi’r sector, ond fel y dywedodd yr Athro Dylan Jones Evans yn ddiweddar,
'ymateb gwleidyddol tymor byr yw'r rhan fwyaf o'r camau hyn... yn hytrach na strategaeth gydlynol ar gyfer dyfodol cynaliadwy i'r sector addysg uwch.'
Pam, felly, na allwch ymateb yn adeiladol i fy ngalwad, a galwad Plaid Cymru, am adolygiad trawsbleidiol, annibynnol, eang o'n sector addysg uwch i ddatrys y materion hyn a gosod ein sefydliadau ar sylfaen ariannol fwy cynaliadwy, nid yn unig am y tro, ond am flynyddoedd i ddod? Neu a ydych chi wir yn credu mai Llafur sy'n gwybod orau?
You've mentioned the word 'formal' again for the third time, and so I'll reply to you again, for the third time, we have an intrinsic role in this work that is being brought forward by the UK Government. You might want to come here every time you question me and say that the most important thing to you is whether we can use the word 'formal' or not; the most important thing to me when I come here every week is what we're able to get out of that work with the UK Government to deliver for our universities, to deliver for the students and to deliver for the staff within those universities as well.
We are doing a tremendous amount of work here in Wales on the issues that we are able to control. And I would say to you that the most important one of those is the evaluation of the Diamond student support package. That is a very comprehensive piece of work, with initial findings due in the autumn. I've also asked Medr, as you're aware, to begin an overview of subject demand, provision and distribution in HE in Wales, and that will provide a really important evidence base for me in order to consider where interventions might be required to ensure the continuation of strategically important subject areas in Wales that are vital to the success of public services. Within that, as well, we're also looking at the spread of Welsh language provision in HE. I believe that is a very important commitment for us to hold to. And, of course, as well, I have been able to secure an additional £28.5 million-worth of funding for the sector during this financial year.
Rydych wedi crybwyll y gair 'ffurfiol' eto am y trydydd tro, ac felly fe'ch atebaf eto, am y trydydd tro, fod gennym rôl hanfodol yn y gwaith hwn sy'n cael ei wneud gan Lywodraeth y DU. Efallai eich bod am ddod yma bob tro y byddwch yn fy holi a dweud mai’r peth pwysicaf i chi yw pa un a allwn ddefnyddio’r gair ‘ffurfiol’ ai peidio; y peth pwysicaf i mi pan fyddaf yn dod yma bob wythnos yw'r hyn y gallwn ei gael allan o'r gwaith hwnnw gyda Llywodraeth y DU i allu cyflawni ar ran ein prifysgolion, i allu cyflawni ar ran y myfyrwyr ac i allu cyflawni ar ran y staff yn y prifysgolion hynny hefyd.
Rydym yn gwneud llawer iawn o waith yma yng Nghymru ar y materion y gallwn eu rheoli. Ac rwy'n dweud wrthych chi mai'r mater pwysicaf o'r rheini yw'r gwerthusiad o becyn cymorth i fyfyrwyr Diamond. Mae hwnnw’n waith cynhwysfawr iawn, a disgwylir y canfyddiadau cychwynnol yn yr hydref. Fel y gwyddoch, rwyf hefyd wedi gofyn i Medr ddechrau trosolwg o’r galw am bynciau, a darpariaeth a dosbarthiad pynciau mewn addysg uwch yng Nghymru, a bydd hynny’n darparu sylfaen dystiolaeth wirioneddol bwysig i mi allu ystyried lle gallai fod angen ymyriadau i sicrhau parhad meysydd pwnc strategol bwysig yng Nghymru sy’n hanfodol i lwyddiant gwasanaethau cyhoeddus. O fewn hynny, hefyd, rydym yn edrych ar ledaeniad y ddarpariaeth Gymraeg mewn addysg uwch. Credaf fod hwnnw’n ymrwymiad pwysig iawn i ni ei wneud. Ac wrth gwrs, rwyf hefyd wedi gallu sicrhau gwerth £28.5 miliwn ychwanegol o gyllid ar gyfer y sector yn ystod y flwyddyn ariannol hon.
3. Sut y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn bwriadu cynnal ei hadolygiad blynyddol o'r lwfans cynhaliaeth addysg? OQ62559
3. How does the Welsh Government intend to undertake its annual review of the education maintenance allowance? OQ62559
We will review the early impact of the threshold increase I announced in January, as EMA applications start to be submitted for academic year 2025-26, and consider any further changes to policy and scheme rules alongside our budget and participation discussions for academic year 2026-27.
Byddwn yn adolygu effaith gynnar y cynnydd yn y trothwy a gyhoeddais ym mis Ionawr, wrth i geisiadau'r lwfans cynhaliaeth addysg ddechrau cael eu cyflwyno ar gyfer blwyddyn academaidd 2025-26, ac yn ystyried unrhyw newidiadau pellach i reolau'r cynllun a pholisi ochr yn ochr â’n trafodaethau ynghylch y gyllideb a chyfranogiad ar gyfer blwyddyn academaidd 2026-27.
Thank you for that answer. Of course, when you made that announcement back in January, I was incredibly proud of the campaign that had been, ultimately, led by students to get to this point, and it was a very welcome announcement, but now what we are looking for is simply clarification. So, could you clarify whether the review process will be purely desk based, or if there will be consultation with colleges, students and other stakeholders to gather their feedback on the effectiveness of the current system? In addition, clarification around whether the review will be extended to the administration of the allowance would also be very helpful. As I mentioned back in January, over the years, the application process has become increasingly complicated and there have been significant delays in the payment of allowances. These delays have, ultimately, left many students struggling to attend college or school, therefore creating a cycle of financial strain.
Diolch am eich ateb. Wrth gwrs, pan wnaethoch y cyhoeddiad hwnnw yn ôl ym mis Ionawr, roeddwn yn hynod falch o’r ymgyrch a oedd, yn y pen draw, wedi’i harwain gan fyfyrwyr i gyrraedd y pwynt hwn, ac roedd y cyhoeddiad i’w groesawu’n fawr, ond bellach, yr hyn yr edrychwn amdano yw eglurhad. Felly, a allech chi egluro a fydd yn adolygiad desg, neu a fydd yn ymgynghori â cholegau, myfyrwyr a rhanddeiliaid eraill i gasglu eu hadborth ar effeithiolrwydd y system bresennol? Yn ogystal, byddai eglurhad ynglŷn ag a fydd yr adolygiad yn cael ei ymestyn i gynnwys gweinyddu'r lwfans hefyd yn ddefnyddiol iawn. Fel y soniais yn ôl ym mis Ionawr, dros y blynyddoedd, mae’r broses ymgeisio wedi mynd yn fwyfwy cymhleth a bu oedi sylweddol cyn talu lwfansau. Mae'r oedi hwn, yn y pen draw, wedi golygu bod llawer o fyfyrwyr wedi'i chael hi'n anodd mynychu coleg neu ysgol, gan greu cylch o straen ariannol.
Thank you, Luke, for those follow-up questions. To me, it's very important that this review is as all-encompassing as possible. For officials who crunch the numbers, those desk-based analyses are very important, but I think it's important also to get that human side—that human feedback—so I fully intend to take account of the views of learners, colleges and other stakeholders as well. NUS Cymru are a very important voice within that, but there are also many others as well, and I do agree with you that it is vital for us to also look at the administration of EMA to ensure that it is always paid accurately and in a timely manner as well.
Diolch am y cwestiynau atodol, Luke. I mi, mae'n bwysig iawn fod yr adolygiad hwn mor hollgynhwysol â phosibl. I swyddogion sy'n ymdrin â'r ffigurau, mae'r dadansoddiadau desg hynny'n bwysig iawn, ond credaf ei bod yn bwysig cael yr ochr ddynol hefyd—yr adborth dynol—felly rwy'n llwyr fwriadu ystyried safbwyntiau dysgwyr, colegau a rhanddeiliaid eraill yn ogystal. Mae Undeb Cenedlaethol Myfyrwyr Cymru yn llais pwysig iawn yn hynny, ond mae llawer o rai eraill hefyd, ac rwy'n cytuno â chi ei bod yn hanfodol ein bod yn edrych hefyd ar weinyddu'r lwfans cynhaliaeth addysg er mwyn sicrhau ei fod bob amser yn cael ei dalu’n gywir ac yn amserol.
4. Pa gamau y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn eu cymryd i liniaru effaith costau ynni ar gyllidebau ysgolion? OQ62543
4. What steps is the Welsh Government taking to mitigate the impact of energy costs on school budgets? OQ62543
Rising energy costs will have an impact on all public services, including our schools. Decisions on the level of funding available to schools are made by each local authority as part of their overall budget setting. To mitigate the impact, we are increasing the local government settlement by 4.5 per cent in 2025-26.
Bydd costau ynni cynyddol yn cael effaith ar bob gwasanaeth cyhoeddus, gan gynnwys ein hysgolion. Gwneir penderfyniadau ar lefel y cyllid sydd ar gael i ysgolion gan bob awdurdod lleol fel rhan o’u cyllideb gyffredinol. I liniaru’r effaith, rydym yn cynyddu’r setliad llywodraeth leol 4.5 y cant yn 2025-26.
Thank you. Exchange Utility have highlighted that the average annual energy cost per school in the UK is £27,000—some, actually, can be over £80,000. Now, at a time when a lot of schools are struggling to balance their budgets, with some having to file a deficit budget, more needs to be done to reduce the strain of these energy costs. In 2024, five schools in Powys were fitted with solar panels, batteries, LED lighting and loft insulation in a bid to make them more sustainable. I've been asked by headteachers at primary school and secondary school level—. You know, they really find their energy bills quite daunting, yet they say, 'Look, we would love solar panels on our school roofs, but we've raised it with the education department and nobody ever gets back to us.' What guidance can you give to education authorities and schools themselves, where we can actually see buildings that can be used to bring reducing energy costs, but also new technologies—renewable technologies—so that you're working across Government on addressing climate change issues? Thanks.
Diolch. Mae Exchange Utility wedi nodi mai £27,000 yw’r gost ynni flynyddol gyfartalog i ysgolion yn y DU—gall rhai fod dros £80,000 mewn gwirionedd. Nawr, ar adeg pan fo llawer o ysgolion yn ei chael hi'n anodd mantoli eu cyllidebau, gyda rhai yn gorfod ffeilio cyllideb ddiffyg, mae angen gwneud mwy i leihau straen y costau ynni hyn. Yn 2024, gosodwyd paneli solar, batris, goleuadau LED a deunydd insiwleiddio mewn pum ysgol ym Mhowys er mwyn eu gwneud yn fwy cynaliadwy. Mae penaethiaid ysgolion cynradd ac ysgolion uwchradd wedi gofyn i mi—. Wyddoch chi, mae eu biliau ynni'n eithaf brawychus, ac eto, maent yn dweud, 'Edrychwch, byddem wrth ein boddau â phaneli solar ar doeau ein hysgolion, ond rydym wedi codi hynny gyda'r adran addysg ac nid ydynt byth yn dod yn ôl atom.' Pa ganllawiau y gallwch eu rhoi i awdurdodau addysg ac i ysgolion eu hunain, lle gallwn weld adeiladau y gellir eu defnyddio i leihau costau ynni, a thechnolegau newydd hefyd—technolegau ynni adnewyddadwy—fel eich bod yn gweithio ar draws y Llywodraeth ar fynd i'r afael â materion newid hinsawdd? Diolch.
Thank you very much, Janet. Obviously, I recognise the pressures school budgets are under and what a worry the increased energy costs can be. That's why we did make such a significant increase in funding to the local government settlement, and why we've also provided an additional £402 million through the local authority education grant this year. So, we've done our very best to try and make sure that we get as much money into schools as we possibly can.
In terms of the point you raise, we are committed to net-zero schools. As part of our Sustainable Communities for Learning programme, there is investment available for net-zero schools. In terms of the point you've made specifically about solar panels et cetera, I would advise that that's probably a matter that should be discussed with the local authority, because we provide the funding to the local authority. But I will pick up the point you've raised about that particular local authority with officials.
Diolch, Janet. Yn amlwg, rwy’n cydnabod y pwysau sydd ar gyllidebau ysgolion a chymaint o bryder y gall y costau ynni cynyddol ei achosi. Dyna pam y gwnaethom sicrhau cynnydd mor sylweddol i gyllid y setliad llywodraeth leol, a pham ein bod hefyd wedi darparu £402 miliwn ychwanegol drwy'r grant addysg i awdurdodau lleol eleni. Felly, rydym wedi gwneud ein gorau glas i geisio sicrhau ein bod yn cael cymaint o arian ag y gallwn i mewn i ysgolion.
Ar y pwynt a godwch, rydym wedi ymrwymo i ysgolion sero net. Fel rhan o'n rhaglen Cymunedau Dysgu Cynaliadwy, mae buddsoddiad ar gael ar gyfer ysgolion sero net. Ar y pwynt a wnaethoch yn benodol am baneli solar ac ati, byddwn yn cynghori ei bod yn debygol fod hwnnw’n fater y dylid ei drafod gyda’r awdurdod lleol, gan ein bod yn darparu’r cyllid i’r awdurdod lleol. Ond fe af ar drywydd y pwynt a godwyd gennych am yr awdurdod lleol penodol hwnnw gyda swyddogion.
5. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet roi diweddariad ar gyfranogiad gan ysgolion yn y cynllun cyn-fyfyrwyr Gyrfa Cymru? OQ62572
5. Will the Cabinet Secretary provide an update on participation by schools in the Careers Wales alumni scheme? OQ62572
Careers Wales are supporting 72 schools across all 22 local authorities to generate alumni networks. In total, Careers Wales have 1,859 individual alumni recorded against 137 schools on their Careers Wales education business exchange database, which schools can access.
Mae Gyrfa Cymru yn cefnogi 72 o ysgolion ar draws pob un o’r 22 awdurdod lleol i greu rhwydweithiau cyn-fyfyrwyr. Mae gan Gyrfa Cymru gyfanswm o 1,859 o gyn-fyfyrwyr unigol wedi’u cofnodi yn erbyn 137 o ysgolion yng nghronfa ddata cyfnewidfa addysg busnes Gyrfa Cymru, y gall ysgolion gael mynediad ati.
Thank you. There's a reason why most elite schools and universities have an alumni scheme: to draw upon the resources, the connections and the ideas of their former pupils, and far too few of our comprehensive schools follow suit. That is why the Valleys taskforce piloted a project in 10 schools and produced, as a result of that, a toolkit that Careers Wales now are meant to be promoting, though it's quite hard to find it on their website. Encouraged by those figures the Cabinet Secretary mentioned, clearly there's potential to do far more than that. Would she please work with other Ministers to encourage the uptake of this scheme and to remind schools of this resource and the potential it has to provide them and their pupils with practical help?
Diolch. Mae yna reswm pam y mae gan y rhan fwyaf o ysgolion a phrifysgolion elitaidd gynllun cyn-fyfyrwyr: i fanteisio ar adnoddau, cysylltiadau a syniadau eu cyn-ddisgyblion, ac nid oes agos digon o'n hysgolion cyfun yn gwneud yr un peth. Dyna pam y gwnaeth tasglu’r Cymoedd dreialu prosiect mewn 10 ysgol a chynhyrchu pecyn cymorth o ganlyniad i hynny y mae Gyrfa Cymru bellach i fod i’w hyrwyddo, er ei bod yn eithaf anodd dod o hyd iddo ar eu gwefan. Rwyf wedi fy nghalonogi gan y ffigurau y soniodd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet amdanynt, ac yn amlwg mae potensial i wneud llawer mwy na hynny. A fyddai hi cystal â gweithio gyda Gweinidogion eraill i annog pobl i gymryd rhan yn y cynllun hwn ac i atgoffa ysgolion o’r adnodd a’r potensial sydd ganddo i roi cymorth ymarferol iddynt hwy a’u disgyblion?
Thank you, Lee. I'm very happy to give you that commitment. Careers Wales sits with Jack Sargeant, but the issue here is also about how effectively schools are engaging with Careers Wales. I think it's a great idea, it also seems like an idea that doesn't cost a lot of money, which is always really welcome, and I also take on board the point you've made about alumni and connections, and we need to make sure that our children are able to access those. I've looked at the figures. There's clearly more that we can do. I don't think it should be a burdensome thing for schools, if we've got families and parents that are happy to come and give that service, so I will have that discussion with Jack Sargeant.
Diolch, Lee. Rwy'n hapus iawn i roi'r ymrwymiad hwnnw i chi. Mae Gyrfa Cymru yn rhan o gyfrifoldebau Jack Sargeant, ond mae'r mater yma hefyd yn ymwneud â pha mor effeithiol y mae ysgolion yn ymgysylltu â Gyrfa Cymru. Rwy'n credu ei fod yn syniad gwych, mae hefyd i'w weld yn syniad nad yw'n costio llawer o arian, sydd bob amser yn cael ei groesawu'n fawr, ac rwyf hefyd yn derbyn y pwynt a wnaethoch am gyn-fyfyrwyr a chysylltiadau, ac mae angen inni wneud yn siŵr fod ein plant yn gallu cael mynediad at y rheini. Rwyf wedi edrych ar y ffigurau. Mae'n amlwg fod mwy y gallwn ei wneud. Nid wyf yn credu y dylai fod yn beth beichus i ysgolion, os oes gennym ni deuluoedd a rhieni sy'n hapus i ddod i roi'r gwasanaeth hwnnw, felly fe gaf y drafodaeth honno gyda Jack Sargeant.
6. Pa asesiad y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet wedi'i wneud o effaith adroddiad blynyddol 2023-24 Estyn ar addysg yn Nwyrain De Cymru? OQ62548
6. What assessment has the Cabinet Secretary made of the impact of Estyn's annual report 2023-24 on education in South Wales East? OQ62548
Estyn’s annual report provides a valuable, independent account of how the education system is performing across Wales. Within South Wales East, there are significant strengths but also aspects to improve. I am committed to addressing the challenges we still face.
Mae adroddiad blynyddol Estyn yn rhoi cyfrif gwerthfawr, annibynnol o sut y mae'r system addysg yn perfformio ledled Cymru. Yn Nwyrain De Cymru, mae cryfderau sylweddol ond hefyd agweddau i'w gwella. Rwy'n ymrwymedig i fynd i'r afael â'r heriau yr ydym yn dal i'w hwynebu.
Diolch, Cabinet Secretary. Estyn's annual report really wasn't anything to be proud of, was it? This Government really needs to take heed of it and do a lot better.
One of the problems we're facing, which is having an impact on outcomes in our schools, and children's outcomes, is absenteeism. Recently I attended the Council of Europe in Strasbourg and it became very apparent to me that absenteeism is a growing problem across Europe since COVID. What conversations have you had as a Government and as a Cabinet Secretary with other countries about this escalating issue? And have any new ideas stemmed from those conversations? Diolch.
Diolch, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Nid oedd adroddiad blynyddol Estyn yn rhywbeth i fod yn falch ohono. Mae angen i'r Llywodraeth hon gymryd sylw ohono a gwneud yn llawer gwell.
Un o'r problemau a wynebwn, sy'n cael effaith ar ganlyniadau yn ein hysgolion, a chanlyniadau plant, yw absenoldeb. Yn ddiweddar mynychais Gyngor Ewrop yn Strasbwrg a daeth yn amlwg iawn i mi fod absenoldeb yn broblem gynyddol ledled Ewrop ers COVID. Pa sgyrsiau a gawsoch chi fel Llywodraeth ac fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet gyda gwledydd eraill am y broblem gynyddol hon? Ac a oes unrhyw syniadau newydd wedi deillio o'r sgyrsiau hynny? Diolch.
Thank you very much. Can I start by expressing my gratitude to all our leaders and teachers within south-east Wales and throughout Wales? I'd also like to congratulate those schools from South Wales East who've been showcased within the annual report, so that's Langstone Primary School in Newport, Cyfarthfa Park Primary School in Merthyr Tydfil, and Undy Primary School in Monmouthshire. Can I say to the Member that I am very proud of those schools? I think it is about celebrating the things that we do well but never being complacent about what we need to improve.
Attendance was a key issue raised in the Estyn report. That wasn't a surprise to us as a Government, because obviously we've identified improving attendance rates as a top priority. If children aren't in school then we are not going to raise standards. That's why as a Government we have announced over this year and last year £8.8 million to support attendance, and the aim is to recover our position to the position it was in before the pandemic.
Now, you asked a question about international comparisons. I met with Andreas Schleicher, who leads the education team in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, a few months ago, and one of the issues we discussed was absenteeism, attendance and what we can do. Last week I attended the international summit for the teaching profession in Iceland, which was jointly hosted by the OECD and Education International, and attendance was a key theme at that. Later on in the summer we are very committed to learning from good practice elsewhere, and we are hosting an OECD peer learning event in Wales, and we will be discussing attendance at that.
Diolch. A gaf i ddechrau trwy ddiolch i'n holl arweinwyr ac athrawon yn ne-ddwyrain Cymru a ledled Cymru? Hefyd, hoffwn longyfarch yr ysgolion o Ddwyrain De Cymru sydd wedi cael eu harddangos yn yr adroddiad blynyddol, felly Ysgol Gynradd Langstone yng Nghasnewydd, Ysgol Gynradd Parc Cyfarthfa ym Merthyr Tudful, ac Ysgol Gynradd Gwndy yn sir Fynwy. A gaf i ddweud wrth yr Aelod fy mod yn falch iawn o'r ysgolion hynny? Rwy'n credu ei fod yn ymwneud â dathlu'r pethau a wnawn yn dda a pheidio â bod yn hunanfodlon am yr hyn y mae angen inni ei wella.
Roedd presenoldeb yn fater allweddol a godwyd yn adroddiad Estyn. Nid oedd hynny'n syndod i ni fel Llywodraeth, oherwydd yn amlwg rydym wedi nodi gwella cyfraddau presenoldeb fel prif flaenoriaeth. Os nad yw plant yn yr ysgol, nid ydym yn mynd i godi safonau. Dyna pam rydym wedi cyhoeddi £8.8 miliwn fel Llywodraeth dros eleni a'r llynedd i gefnogi presenoldeb, a'r nod yw adfer ein sefyllfa i'r sefyllfa yr oeddem ynddi cyn y pandemig.
Nawr, fe wnaethoch chi ofyn cwestiwn am gymariaethau rhyngwladol. Cyfarfûm ag Andreas Schleicher, sy'n arwain y tîm addysg yn y Sefydliad ar gyfer Cydweithrediad a Datblygiad Economaidd, ychydig fisoedd yn ôl, ac un o'r materion a drafodwyd gennym oedd absenoldeb, presenoldeb a'r hyn y gallwn ei wneud. Yr wythnos diwethaf mynychais yr uwchgynhadledd ryngwladol ar gyfer y proffesiwn addysgu yng Ngwlad yr Iâ, a gynhaliwyd ar y cyd gan y Sefydliad ar gyfer Cydweithrediad a Datblygiad Economaidd ac Education International, ac roedd presenoldeb yn thema allweddol yno. Yn ddiweddarach yn yr haf rydym wedi ymrwymo i ddysgu o arferion da mewn mannau eraill, ac rydym yn cynnal digwyddiad dysgu rhwng cymheiriaid y Sefydliad ar gyfer Cydweithrediad a Datblygiad Economaidd yng Nghymru, a byddwn yn trafod presenoldeb yn y digwyddiad hwnnw.
7. Pa asesiad y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i wneud o safon bwyd mewn ysgolion ledled Cymru? OQ62569
7. What assessment has the Welsh Government made of the standard of food in schools across Wales? OQ62569
Local authorities and governing bodies asses the standard of food in schools and are required to adhere to the healthy eating in schools regulations and guidance. These set out the standards for food and drink provided in maintained schools in Wales. These regulations are currently being reviewed and updated.
Mae awdurdodau lleol a chyrff llywodraethu yn asesu safon bwyd mewn ysgolion ac mae'n ofynnol iddynt gadw at reoliadau a chanllawiau bwyta'n iach mewn ysgolion. Mae'r rhain yn nodi'r safonau ar gyfer bwyd a diod a ddarperir mewn ysgolion a gynhelir yng Nghymru. Mae'r rheoliadau hyn yn cael eu hadolygu a'u diweddaru ar hyn o bryd.
Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that response. Providing free school meals to pupils across Wales may be lauded as a positive step. However, if we are not giving our children healthy unprocessed or nutritious food, we are actually not helping them at all to become healthy. Free school meals should not just be about feeding our young people; the policy should be used as a vehicle to improve their health and well-being, which, in turn, will translate into improved life chances for them. As Professor Kevin Morgan from Cardiff University said, there is no good in universalising poor-quality food. Sadly, there is far too much inconsistency across local authorities as to the standard of food that our children are receiving, and I also know too often the meals are too small for growing kids. Your Government said that you are working closely with local authorities to offer the best possible food in schools. So, with that in mind, Cabinet Secretary, when can Welsh primary schoolchildren expect to see the improvements they deserve?
Diolch am yr ymateb, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Efallai y bydd darparu prydau ysgol am ddim i ddisgyblion ledled Cymru yn cael ei ganmol fel cam cadarnhaol. Fodd bynnag, os nad ydym yn rhoi bwyd iach heb ei brosesu neu faethlon i'n plant, nid ydym yn eu helpu o gwbl i ddod yn iach. Dylai prydau ysgol am ddim ymwneud â mwy na dim ond bwydo ein pobl ifanc yn unig; dylid defnyddio'r polisi fel cyfrwng i wella eu hiechyd a'u lles, a fydd, yn ei dro, yn arwain at well cyfleoedd iddynt mewn bywyd. Fel y dywedodd yr Athro Kevin Morgan o Brifysgol Caerdydd, nid oes unrhyw dda mewn cynnig prydau bwyd o ansawdd gwael i bawb. Yn anffodus, mae llawer gormod o anghysondeb ar draws awdurdodau lleol o ran safon y bwyd y mae ein plant yn ei gael, ac rwy'n gwybod hefyd yn rhy aml fod y prydau'n rhy fach i blant sy'n tyfu. Dywedodd eich Llywodraeth eich bod yn gweithio'n agos gydag awdurdodau lleol i gynnig y bwyd gorau posibl mewn ysgolion. Felly, gyda hynny mewn golwg, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, pryd y gall plant ysgolion cynradd Cymru ddisgwyl gweld y gwelliannau y maent yn eu haeddu?
Thank you very much, Peter, and I'm aware of your long-standing interest in this issue, and I do think our universal primary free-school-meal offer is really important. We don't want hungry children—they won't learn—but it is vital that we provide them with a healthy meal, and I think there is really good work going on in Wales to provide a healthy offer to children and young people. But as I said when I come to the cross-party group on food, we have got more work to do. That's why we're reviewing the healthy eating in schools regulations and statutory guidance, and we've worked closely with local government on that. We'll be going out to consult on the new regulations in the not-too-distant future. We'll also be looking at the guidance that focuses on the role of the governing body, Estyn, and the local authority in relation to their requirements to promote healthy eating and drinking. And I've already given an assurance that the issue of portion sizes will be looked at as part of that work.
Diolch, Peter, ac rwy'n ymwybodol o'ch diddordeb hirsefydlog yn y mater hwn, ac rwy'n credu bod ein cynnig o brydau ysgol am ddim i bawb yn yr ysgol gynradd yn bwysig iawn. Nid ydym eisiau plant llwglyd—ni fyddant yn dysgu—ond mae'n hanfodol ein bod ni'n darparu pryd iach iddynt, ac rwy'n credu bod gwaith da iawn yn digwydd yng Nghymru i ddarparu cynnig iach i blant a phobl ifanc. Ond fel y dywedaf pan fyddaf yn dod i'r grŵp trawsbleidiol ar fwyd, mae gennym fwy o waith i'w wneud. Dyna pam rydym yn adolygu'r rheoliadau bwyta'n iach mewn ysgolion a chanllawiau statudol, ac rydym wedi gweithio'n agos gyda llywodraeth leol ar hynny. Byddwn yn dechrau ymgynghori ar y rheoliadau newydd heb fod yn hir. Byddwn hefyd yn edrych ar y canllawiau sy'n canolbwyntio ar rôl y corff llywodraethu, Estyn, a'r awdurdod lleol mewn perthynas â'u gofynion i hyrwyddo bwyta ac yfed iach. Ac rwyf eisoes wedi rhoi sicrwydd y bydd mater maint prydau yn cael ei ystyried yn rhan o'r gwaith hwnnw.
Yn olaf, cwestiwn 8, Buffy Williams.
Finally, question 8, Buffy Williams.
8. Sut y mae cyllideb Llywodraeth Cymru yn cefnogi'r rhaglen Cymunedau Dysgu Cynaliadwy? OQ62558
8. How does the Welsh Government's budget support the Sustainable Communities for Learning programme? OQ62558
The sustainable communities for learning capital programme has seen an investment of over £3.7 billion since 2014. I've also approved plans for a further 316 projects, equating to £5.4 billion, as part of the programme’s nine-year rolling programme.
Mae'r rhaglen gyfalaf cymunedau dysgu cynaliadwy wedi gweld buddsoddiad o dros £3.7 biliwn ers 2014. Rwyf hefyd wedi cymeradwyo cynlluniau ar gyfer 316 o brosiectau pellach, sy'n cyfateb i £5.4 biliwn, yn rhan o raglen dreigl naw mlynedd y rhaglen.
Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Our young people deserve the best opportunities to learn. High-quality facilities play a crucial role. Over Christmas, thanks to the sustainable communities for learning programme, pupils and staff at Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Llyn y Forwyn moved from their old site to a brand-new facility in Maerdy. The learning and play facilities are exceptional and the school community already feels at home. Looking ahead, we will soon see new school buildings for Ysgol Gyfun Cwm Rhondda and Penrhys Primary School, both of which have waited far too long for the facilities they deserve. I'm proud to have played a small part in securing these improvements for staff and pupils. I know I'm not the only one looking forward to seeing the plans. Can the Cabinet Secretary provide an update on the progress for the new buildings at Ysgol Gyfun Cwm Rhondda and Penrhys Primary School, and does she agree with me that the sustainable communities for learning programme is essential to improving standards across education in Wales?
Diolch, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Mae ein pobl ifanc yn haeddu'r cyfleoedd gorau i ddysgu. Mae cyfleusterau o ansawdd uchel yn chwarae rhan hanfodol. Dros y Nadolig, diolch i'r rhaglen cymunedau dysgu cynaliadwy, symudodd disgyblion a staff Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Llyn y Forwyn o'u hen safle i gyfleuster newydd sbon yn y Maerdy. Mae'r cyfleusterau dysgu a chwarae yn eithriadol ac mae cymuned yr ysgol eisoes yn teimlo'n gartrefol. Wrth edrych ymlaen, byddwn yn gweld adeiladau ysgol newydd ar gyfer Ysgol Gyfun Cwm Rhondda ac Ysgol Gynradd Penrhys, y ddwy ohonynt wedi aros yn llawer rhy hir am y cyfleusterau y maent yn eu haeddu. Rwy'n falch o fod wedi chwarae rhan fach yn y gwaith o sicrhau'r gwelliannau hyn i staff a disgyblion. Rwy'n gwybod nad fi yw'r unig un sy'n edrych ymlaen at weld y cynlluniau. A wnaiff Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet roi'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf am gynnydd ar yr adeiladau newydd yn Ysgol Gyfun Cwm Rhondda ac Ysgol Gynradd Penrhys, ac a yw'n cytuno â mi fod y rhaglen cymunedau dysgu cynaliadwy yn hanfodol i wella safonau ar draws addysg yng Nghymru?
Can I thank Buffy Williams for her question and for highlighting the new school and the excellent experience that children are having in it? I think it does make a huge difference to the education of children, but also I think it says something to those children about their worth to us as a society that we are valuing the buildings that they are operating in. She'll be aware that there is a process that is undertaken when we invest in funding our schools. It follows an outline business case, full business case et cetera, and there is an investment board. So, I will write to her with an update on the specific project that she mentioned, but just to assure her that we work really closely with local authorities—it's a joint programme. We've increased our intervention rates as a Government, and I regard it as a huge success.
A gaf i ddiolch i Buffy Williams am ei chwestiwn ac am dynnu sylw at yr ysgol newydd a'r profiad ardderchog y mae plant yn ei gael ynddi? Rwy'n credu ei fod yn gwneud gwahaniaeth enfawr i addysg plant, ond hefyd rwy'n credu ei fod yn dweud rhywbeth wrth y plant hynny am eu gwerth i ni fel cymdeithas ein bod yn gweld gwerth yr adeiladau y maent yn gweithredu ynddynt. Fe fydd hi'n ymwybodol fod yna broses i'w chyflawni pan fyddwn yn buddsoddi arian yn ein hysgolion. Mae'n dilyn achos busnes amlinellol, achos busnes llawn ac ati, ac mae yna fwrdd buddsoddi. Felly, byddaf yn ysgrifennu ati gyda diweddariad ar y prosiect penodol y soniodd amdano, ond os caf ei sicrhau ein bod yn gweithio'n agos iawn gydag awdurdodau lleol—mae'n rhaglen ar y cyd. Rydym wedi cynyddu ein cyfraddau ymyrraeth fel Llywodraeth, ac rwy'n ystyried y rhaglen yn llwyddiant ysgubol.
Diolch i'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet.
Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.
Eitem 3 sydd nesaf, cwestiynau amserol—dau gwestiwn heddiw. Llyr Gruffydd sy'n gofyn y cwestiwn cyntaf ac mae'r cwestiwn yma i'w ateb gan y Cwnsler Cyffredinol a'r Gweinidog Cyflawni. Llyr Gruffydd.
Item 3 is next, the topical questions. There are two questions today. Llyr Gruffydd will ask the first question and this question will be answered by the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery. Llyr Gruffydd.
1. Pa gamau y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn eu cymryd i fynd i'r afael â'r pryderon a godwyd gan y sector ffermio yn dilyn yr adolygiad statudol o'r Rheoliadau Rheoli Llygredd Amaethyddol? TQ1326
1. What steps will the Welsh Government take to address the concerns raised by the farming sector following the statutory review of the Control of Agricultural Pollution Regulations? TQ1326
The steps that will be taken were outlined in the written statement of 31 March. We intend to take forward the recommendations in full and at pace.
Amlinellwyd y camau a gymerir yn y datganiad ysgrifenedig ar 31 Mawrth. Rydym yn bwriadu bwrw ymlaen â'r argymhellion yn llawn ac yn gyflym.
Well, thank you for your response. This was clearly an opportunity for the Government to listen to the genuine concerns of farmers and to introduce much-needed changes, yet the response from the farming sector, of course, to the review, has been one of deep frustration and disappointment. Now, farmers were promised that it would provide a meaningful assessment of the impact of these regulations and lead to proportionate, evidence-based improvements. But instead, what we saw in the Cabinet Secretary's statement was a response that failed to recognise the urgency of their situation. The regulations remain unchanged, of course, despite mounting evidence that they impose an unworkable, costly and bureaucratic burden on farm businesses, businesses that are already struggling with financial pressures, market instability and a host of other challenges.
The National Farmers Union Cymru's survey of over 400 farmers paints a stark picture. It confirms that the worst fears of the sector have materialised in relation to huge compliance costs, an unmanageable regulatory framework, and, of course, an impact on the mental health and well-being of farming families, many of whom feel that these regulations threaten the viability of their livelihoods. Now, farmers are being told that they may have to wait up to three more years for potential adjustments, following this review, and that simply isn't good enough. The Government shouldn't be looking to add further layers of regulations, when the existing framework is already seen as disproportionate and impractical; it should be listening to the sector and taking immediate steps to make sure that regulation is better targeted, evidence led and fair. I heard you say that you will take this on at pace. That certainly wasn't reflected in the statement on 31 March.
So, will you now commit to urgent changes to these regulations, to reduce their complexity and their impracticality, particularly given that the review concludes that the burden of regulation should be lower for farms that present the lowest risk of pollution? Secondly, do you accept that the farming-by-calendar approach now has to come to an end? Because, as the review says, it's not compatible with the principle of the right nutrient application at the right time. And finally, do you acknowledge that failing to act swiftly on these recommendations will seriously add to the worry and desperation of those out there who really are grappling with these regulations? As I say, waiting up to three years for the implementation of some of these recommendations will have serious impacts on the mental health and well-being of many of those who are already struggling to cope.
Wel, diolch am eich ymateb. Roedd hwn yn amlwg yn gyfle i'r Llywodraeth wrando ar bryderon dilys ffermwyr ac i gyflwyno newidiadau mawr eu hangen, ond mae ymateb y sector ffermio i'r adolygiad wedi bod yn un o rwystredigaeth a siom dwfn. Nawr, addawyd i ffermwyr y byddai'n darparu asesiad ystyrlon o effaith y rheoliadau hyn ac yn arwain at welliannau cymesur, yn seiliedig ar dystiolaeth. Ond yn hytrach, yr hyn a welsom yn natganiad Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet oedd ymateb a fethodd gydnabod difrifoldeb eu sefyllfa. Mae'r rheoliadau'n parhau i fod yn ddigyfnewid er gwaethaf tystiolaeth gynyddol eu bod yn gosod baich anymarferol, costus a biwrocrataidd ar fusnesau fferm, busnesau sydd eisoes yn cael trafferth gyda phwysau ariannol, ansefydlogrwydd y farchnad a llu o heriau eraill.
Mae arolwg Undeb Cenedlaethol Amaethwyr Cymru o dros 400 o ffermwyr yn cynnig darlun llwm. Mae'n cadarnhau bod ofnau gwaethaf y sector wedi'u gwireddu mewn perthynas â chostau cydymffurfio enfawr, fframwaith rheoleiddio na ellir ei reoli, ac effaith ar iechyd meddwl a lles teuluoedd ffermio, y mae llawer ohonynt yn teimlo bod y rheoliadau hyn yn bygwth hyfywedd eu bywoliaeth. Nawr, mae ffermwyr yn clywed y gallai fod yn rhaid iddynt aros hyd at dair blynedd arall am addasiadau posibl, yn dilyn yr adolygiad hwn, ac nid yw hynny'n ddigon da. Ni ddylai'r Llywodraeth ychwanegu haenau pellach o reoliadau, pan fo'r fframwaith presennol eisoes yn cael ei ystyried yn anghymesur ac yn anymarferol; dylai fod yn gwrando ar y sector a chymryd camau ar unwaith i sicrhau bod rheoleiddio'n cael ei dargedu'n well, yn cael ei arwain gan dystiolaeth ac yn deg. Fe'ch clywais yn dweud y byddwch chi'n mynd i'r afael â hyn yn gyflym. Yn sicr, nid oedd hynny'n cael ei adlewyrchu yn y datganiad ar 31 Mawrth.
Felly, a wnewch chi ymrwymo nawr i newidiadau brys i'r rheoliadau hyn, er mwyn lleihau eu cymhlethdod a'u hanymarferoldeb, yn enwedig o ystyried bod yr adolygiad yn dod i'r casgliad y dylai baich rheoleiddio fod yn is i ffermydd sy'n peri'r risg leiaf o lygredd? Yn ail, a ydych chi'n derbyn bod yn rhaid i'r dull ffermio yn ôl y calendr ddod i ben? Oherwydd, fel y dywed yr adolygiad, nid yw'n gydnaws â'r egwyddor o osod y lefelau iawn o faethynnau ar yr adeg iawn. Ac yn olaf, a ydych chi'n cydnabod y bydd methu gweithredu'n gyflym ar yr argymhellion hyn yn ychwanegu'n ddifrifol at bryder ac anobaith y bobl sy'n ymrafael â'r rheoliadau hyn? Fel y dywedaf, bydd aros hyd at dair blynedd cyn gweithredu rhai o'r argymhellion hyn yn cael effaith ddifrifol ar iechyd meddwl a lles llawer o'r rhai sydd eisoes yn cael trafferth ymdopi.
Well, thank you, Llyr. Look, I think we've got to start from the point of view that the health of the water bodies across Wales are critical for every person in Wales. From access to water for drinking, for recreation, for food production, for healthy, thriving ecosystems, the well-being of current and future generations is heavily dependent on clean water, and that is no different for farming families or businesses than for anyone else at all. Water quality in Wales is still detrimentally impacted, and we've got to make improvements to that. We talk all the time in this Chamber about the need to protect our watercourses, and in particular our special areas of conservation rivers, which are very heavily impacted as well, and we absolutely acknowledge, and have done for some considerable time, that the causes of pollutions are not limited to any one sector, and agriculture remains as one of the main contributors.
Llyr, I know you're familiar with the summit process that took place under the previous First Minister, which I was very much a part of. The written statement sets out that we will continue to do that, and very much central to the action plan that came out of that process was an acknowledgement from each sector contributing to water quality, and to improved water quality as well as to water detriment, that they would look to see what their own particular industry could do to improve practice. That's the same for the farming industry as it is for the water companies, as it is for the house builders, as it is for everybody else who took part in that summit, and an action plan was agreed.
In the meantime, one of the things that we also did was we decided to have an independently chaired review of these regulations, and we did that because we wanted to be sure that they were—well, we wanted to see what their impact was, and we wanted to make sure that they fit within a new summit process and the action plan and so on. The review has come back for us, and it's highlighted that there is significant scope to improve the regulations, and for those regulations to be improved for the benefit of both the farming industry and, more broadly, of course, for the environment and, indeed, specifically for water quality.
We are going to recommend—. We have accepted all the recommendations. We will implement them in full and at pace. The recommendations, as I'm you know, are split up, very usefully, into short, medium and long-term actions that we can do. They reflect that some of the changes should be relatively quick and easy to make, but also that some of the recommendations require consideration of very complex interlocking issues. I think you probably have read through it. So, one of the things it recommends very specifically is that we should address imminently the issue about making the regulations more accessible to farmers. So, they're hard to understand; we need to make sure that people understand what's required of them on a farming business and that they're able to comply with what that is. They do want to look at the closed period, and also at the storage issues, but they are quite complicated, as you know. And what we all want to see is that a farmer spreading nutrients on the land is doing so in accordance with the needs of the crop that they are about to produce and is not doing so in a way that, you know, frankly, it just tips into the local river.
I'll just say a personal reflection, for example. I was actually on a trip to the Cleddau, and I watched a contractor spread on a field in between two very heavy rain showers because they'd been contracted to spread on the field. And the fact that that—. I mean, it went straight into the river. I watched it; I actually took a photograph of it. We have to get to a point where—. You know, a lot of the spreading is done by contractors. We have to get to a point where the regulations are clear-cut for farmers. We know what can be done; we know that something as, frankly, idiotic as doing it in between two clearly forecasted rain showers is not something we should do. You know—[Interruption.] Absolutely. Absolutely, most farmers don't want to do that; I'm just pointing out that I watched it. But I also was part of a summit where a number of farmers came and showed us a whole series of small improvements they had made to their farms about this. Just a slightly different spreading practice on a particular field prevented the run-off, made sure the nutrients stayed in the soil and made sure the soil stayed on the field. It was a delightful thing to watch and I was very impressed by the farmer who had come to show us and the community of practice.
And I'm telling you those two anecdotes because I think we have got to make sure that the regulations are effective, that they drive the right kinds of practice, but that they don't drive insecurity and any kind of isolation, that people feel that they understand what those regulations are asking of them, that they buy in, frankly, to the outcome of the regulations, which is better watercourses for everyone—. And who needs that more than farmers? Of course, they need it.
So, we will implement the recommendations, we will take forward those short-term—. It's worth going through—. The Llywydd will not want me to read them out, because they're very long, but the short-term ones do address many of the issues around understanding and access to the regulations, but there's no getting away from the fact that some of them are more complicated, and the report is very clear about why they're more complicated, and it's clear about the fact that they impact particular types of intensive animal farming in a way that is more impactful than for other farmers. It says a lot of interesting things about upland grazing and lowland arable, for example, that I thought was most interesting.
So, the answer is: we will implement them, we will take account of the short, medium and long-term recommendations as well, we will look to make sure that we have the right people in the room. So, it doesn't actually make any provisions for specific changes to the regulations; it says that we need to get a group of people together and make sure that we do that properly. And for those longer term ones, it will be pivotal to make sure that the right people are in the room to make sure that those regulations stay fit for purpose. But we are going to leave the regulations in place while that process occurs; we will, though, take forward the short-term ones immediately.
So, I think, in hitting the difficult but correct balance between ensuring that a very pivotal part of our economy—farming—is able to thrive and making sure that our watercourses are absolutely fit for purpose, we need to just hit that sweet spot in the middle.
Wel, diolch, Llyr. Edrychwch, rwy'n credu bod yn rhaid inni ddechrau o'r safbwynt fod iechyd y cyrff dŵr ledled Cymru yn hanfodol i bob person yng Nghymru. O fynediad at ddŵr i'w yfed, ar gyfer hamdden, ar gyfer cynhyrchu bwyd, ar gyfer ecosystemau iach, ffyniannus, mae lles cenedlaethau'r presennol a'r dyfodol yn dibynnu'n fawr ar ddŵr glân, ac nid yw hynny'n wahanol i deuluoedd neu fusnesau ffermio nag i unrhyw un arall o gwbl. Mae ansawdd dŵr yng Nghymru yn dal i gael ei niweidio, ac mae'n rhaid inni wneud gwelliannau i hynny. Rydym yn siarad drwy'r amser yn y Siambr hon am yr angen i ddiogelu ein cyrsiau dŵr, ac yn enwedig afonydd ein hardaloedd cadwraeth arbennig, yr effeithir arnynt yn drwm iawn hefyd, ac rydym yn cydnabod yn llwyr, ac wedi gwneud ers cryn amser, nad yw achosion llygredd wedi'u cyfyngu i unrhyw un sector, ac mae amaethyddiaeth yn parhau i fod yn un o'r prif gyfranwyr.
Llyr, rwy'n gwybod eich bod chi'n gyfarwydd â'r broses uwchgynhadledd a gynhaliwyd o dan y Prif Weinidog blaenorol, proses yr oeddwn yn rhan fawr ohoni. Mae'r datganiad ysgrifenedig yn nodi y byddwn yn parhau i wneud hynny, ac yn ganolog iawn i'r cynllun gweithredu a ddeilliodd o'r broses honno roedd cydnabyddiaeth gan bob sector sy'n cyfrannu at ansawdd dŵr, ac at wella ansawdd dŵr yn ogystal â niwed i ddŵr, y byddent yn edrych i weld beth y gallai eu diwydiant penodol eu hunain ei wneud i wella ymarfer. Mae hynny yr un peth ar gyfer y diwydiant ffermio ag y mae ar gyfer y cwmnïau dŵr, fel y mae ar gyfer adeiladwyr tai, fel y mae i bawb arall a gymerodd ran yn yr uwchgynhadledd honno, ac fe gytunwyd ar gynllun gweithredu.
Yn y cyfamser, un o'r pethau a wnaethom hefyd oedd penderfynu cael adolygiad wedi'i gadeirio'n annibynnol o'r rheoliadau hyn, ac fe wnaethom hynny oherwydd ein bod am fod yn siŵr eu bod—wel, roeddem eisiau gweld beth oedd eu heffaith, ac roeddem eisiau gwneud yn siŵr eu bod yn cymryd eu lle yn y broses uwchgynhadledd newydd a'r cynllun gweithredu ac yn y blaen. Mae'r adolygiad wedi dod yn ôl, ac mae'n tynnu sylw at y ffaith bod llawer o le i wella'r rheoliadau, ac i wella'r rheoliadau hynny er budd y diwydiant ffermio, ac yn ehangach ar gyfer yr amgylchedd, wrth gwrs, ac ar gyfer ansawdd dŵr yn arbennig.
Rydym yn mynd i argymell—. Rydym wedi derbyn yr holl argymhellion. Byddwn yn eu gweithredu'n llawn ac yn gyflym. Mae'r argymhellion, fel y gwyddoch, wedi'u rhannu, yn ddefnyddiol iawn, yn gamau gweithredu tymor byr, canolig a hir y gallwn eu gwneud. Maent yn nodi y dylai rhai o'r newidiadau fod yn gymharol gyflym ac yn hawdd i'w gwneud, ond hefyd fod rhai o'r argymhellion yn galw am ystyried materion cydgysylltiedig cymhleth iawn. Rwy'n credu eich bod wedi darllen drwyddo. Felly, un o'r pethau y mae'n ei argymell yn benodol iawn yw y dylem fynd i'r afael ar fyrder â'r mater ynghylch gwneud y rheoliadau'n fwy hygyrch i ffermwyr. Felly, maent yn anodd eu deall; mae angen inni wneud yn siŵr fod pobl yn deall beth sy'n ofynnol ganddynt mewn busnes ffermio a'u bod yn gallu cydymffurfio â'r hyn ydyw. Maent eisiau edrych ar y cyfnod gwaharddedig, a hefyd ar y problemau storio, ond maent yn eithaf cymhleth, fel y gwyddoch. A'r hyn rydym i gyd eisiau ei weld yw bod ffermwr sy'n gwasgaru maethynnau ar y tir yn gwneud hynny'n unol ag anghenion y cnwd y maent ar fin ei gynhyrchu ac nad yw'n gwneud hynny mewn ffordd sydd ond yn ei ollwng i mewn i'r afon leol.
Fe soniaf am un profiad personol, fel enghraifft. Roeddwn wedi mynd ar daith at afon Cleddau, ac roeddwn i'n gwylio contractwr yn gwasgaru ar gae rhwng dwy gawod drom iawn o law oherwydd eu bod wedi cael eu contractio i wasgaru ar y cae. A'r ffaith bod hynny—. Hynny yw, fe aeth yn syth i'r afon. Fe'i gwyliais; tynnais lun ohono mewn gwirionedd. Mae'n rhaid inni gyrraedd pwynt lle—. Wyddoch chi, mae llawer o'r gwasgaru'n cael ei wneud gan gontractwyr. Mae'n rhaid inni gyrraedd pwynt lle mae'r rheoliadau'n glir i ffermwyr. Fe wyddom beth y gellir ei wneud; fe wyddom na ddylem wneud rhywbeth mor hurt â'i wasgaru rhwng dwy gawod o law a gafodd eu rhagweld yn glir. Wyddoch chi—[Torri ar draws.] Yn hollol. Yn hollol, nid yw'r rhan fwyaf o ffermwyr eisiau gwneud hynny; rwyf ond yn nodi fy mod wedi ei wylio. Ond roeddwn hefyd yn rhan o uwchgynhadledd lle daeth nifer o ffermwyr ynghyd a dangos cyfres gyfan o welliannau bach yr oeddent wedi'u gwneud i'w ffermydd mewn perthynas â hyn. Roedd arfer gwasgaru ychydig bach yn wahanol ar gae penodol yn gallu atal y dŵr ffo, gan wneud yn siŵr fod y maethynnau'n aros yn y pridd a sicrhau bod y pridd yn aros ar y cae. Roedd yn beth hyfryd i'w wylio ac fe wnaeth y ffermwr a ddaeth i ddangos i ni a'r gymuned ymarfer argraff fawr arnaf.
Ac rwy'n sôn am y ddau hanesyn hynny am fy mod yn credu bod yn rhaid inni wneud yn siŵr fod y rheoliadau'n effeithiol, eu bod yn gyrru'r mathau cywir o ymarfer, ond nad ydynt yn ysgogi ansicrwydd nac unrhyw fath o ynysigrwydd, fod pobl yn teimlo eu bod yn deall beth y mae'r rheoliadau hynny'n gofyn iddynt ei wneud, eu bod yn cefnogi canlyniadau'r rheoliadau, sef gwell cyrsiau dŵr i bawb—. A phwy sydd angen hynny'n fwy na ffermwyr? Wrth gwrs eu bod ei angen.
Felly, byddwn yn gweithredu'r argymhellion, byddwn yn bwrw ymlaen â'r—. Mae'n werth mynd trwyddo—. Ni fydd y Llywydd eisiau i mi eu darllen, oherwydd maent yn hir iawn, ond mae'r rhai tymor byr yn mynd i'r afael â llawer o'r materion sy'n ymwneud â dealltwriaeth a mynediad at y rheoliadau, ond nid oes dianc rhag y ffaith bod rhai ohonynt yn fwy cymhleth, ac mae'r adroddiad yn glir iawn ynglŷn â pham eu bod yn fwy cymhleth, ac mae'n glir am y ffaith eu bod yn effeithio ar fathau penodol o ffermio anifeiliaid dwys mewn ffordd sy'n creu mwy o effaith nag yn achos ffermwyr eraill. Mae'n dweud llawer o bethau diddorol am bori ar yr ucheldir ac iseldir âr, er enghraifft, ac roeddwn i'n meddwl bod hynny'n ddiddorol iawn.
Felly, yr ateb yw: byddwn yn eu gweithredu, byddwn yn ystyried yr argymhellion tymor byr, canolig a hir hefyd, byddwn yn ceisio sicrhau bod gennym y bobl iawn yn yr ystafell. Felly, nid yw'n gwneud unrhyw ddarpariaethau ar gyfer newidiadau penodol i'r rheoliadau; mae'n dweud bod angen inni gael grŵp o bobl at ei gilydd a gwneud yn siŵr ein bod ni'n gwneud hynny'n iawn. Ac ar gyfer y rhai mwy hirdymor, fe fydd yn hollbwysig gwneud yn siŵr fod y bobl iawn yn yr ystafell i wneud yn siŵr fod y rheoliadau hynny'n parhau'n addas i'r diben. Ond rydym yn mynd i adael y rheoliadau yn eu lle tra bod y broses honno'n digwydd; byddwn yn bwrw ymlaen â'r rhai tymor byr ar unwaith.
Felly, wrth daro'r cydbwysedd anodd ond cywir rhwng sicrhau bod rhan allweddol iawn o'n heconomi—ffermio—yn gallu ffynnu a gwneud yn siŵr fod ein cyrsiau dŵr yn gwbl addas i'r diben, mae angen inni daro'r man prydferth hwnnw yn y canol.
I'd better declare an interest as a farmer for the record. I thank Llyr for bringing the topical question forward, and, Cabinet Secretary, you will have answered some of my points, but I think they're so important that we need to reiterate some of them. Dr Susannah Bolton's review provides some hope of change in some areas, but also additional concerns for the farming community in others. I welcome the tone of the review, and it has at least listened to stakeholders to understand better their concerns and the impacts that the regulations will have, or have had, on farmers' well-being, and some of the recommendations acknowledge this. However, farmers will be frustrated that many things are likely to stay just the same for the foreseeable future.
Cabinet Secretary, you've said that all 23 recommendations will be implemented. Recommendations require a lot of work before they can be implemented, but our farmers need to see the progress on that as soon as possible, and I think you've given us some reassurance that things are going to happen quickly. I welcome the fact that the review recognises the bureaucratic nature of the regs and the lack of clarity to farmers—a key issue if we do want them to positively engage. Anything we can do around that needs to be enacted very quickly.
The more targeted approach of the regs is also welcome, but the detail of what this could mean will be keenly anticipated. I welcome the consideration of the closed periods and of the 170 kg nitrogen limits, as well as what seems to be more of a pragmatic and targeted approach, as farming by calendar remains a real issue as it fails to reflect the reality of farming life and practice, and anybody who doesn't get that needs to come out on a farm and experience it.
I welcome the recommendations to look at innovative ways to manage manure, also the exemptions for farms that are under TB restrictions. That will be very welcomed by some of those farmers. However, whilst some of the recommendations give a modicum of hope, there are things that will raise anxieties even more. For instance, in the long term, all slurry stores will have to be covered over. Well, that's a huge capital cost that could fall on farmers. Also the anxiety of older stores for both silage and slurry to be inspected. What this could lead to is possibly huge replacement costs, which—again, how will that be funded? And of course, this new focus on air quality adds a new dimension of anxiety to the industry if those recommendations are brought in.
So, Cabinet Secretary, there is a huge amount to digest from this review, and clarity on the Government's next steps will be crucial. I'm conscious you've given us some of that. But can you give further indication of what farmers can expect now? Will you immediately apply any pragmatic approach to some of the recommendations that can be delivered in the short term—I think you've said you can—because farmers continue to have so much to contend with, and these water regulations have driven huge anxiety and concern, and we need to be able to move forward? Thank you.
Byddai'n well imi ddatgan buddiant fel ffermwr ar gyfer y cofnod. Diolch i Llyr am ofyn y cwestiwn amserol, ac Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, fe fyddwch wedi ateb rhai o fy mhwyntiau, ond rwy'n credu eu bod mor bwysig fel bod angen inni ailadrodd rhai ohonynt. Mae adolygiad Dr Susannah Bolton yn rhoi rhywfaint o obaith o newid mewn rhai meysydd, ond pryderon ychwanegol i'r gymuned ffermio mewn meysydd eraill. Rwy'n croesawu cywair yr adolygiad, ac mae o leiaf wedi gwrando ar randdeiliaid i ddeall eu pryderon yn well a'r effeithiau y bydd y rheoliadau'n eu cael, neu wedi'u cael, ar les ffermwyr, ac mae rhai o'r argymhellion yn cydnabod hyn. Fodd bynnag, bydd ffermwyr yn rhwystredig fod llawer o bethau'n debygol o aros yr un fath am y dyfodol rhagweladwy.
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, rydych chi wedi dweud y bydd pob un o'r 23 argymhelliad yn cael eu gweithredu. Mae argymhellion yn galw am lawer o waith cyn y gellir eu gweithredu, ond mae angen i'n ffermwyr weld y cynnydd ar hynny cyn gynted â phosibl, ac rwy'n credu eich bod wedi rhoi rhywfaint o sicrwydd i ni fod pethau'n mynd i ddigwydd yn gyflym. Rwy'n croesawu'r ffaith bod yr adolygiad yn cydnabod natur fiwrocrataidd y rheoliadau a'r diffyg eglurder i ffermwyr—mater allweddol os ydym am iddynt ymgysylltu'n gadarnhaol. Mae angen gweithredu unrhyw beth y gallwn ei wneud ynghylch hynny yn gyflym iawn.
Croesewir dull mwy targededig y rheoliadau hefyd, ac edrychir ymlaen yn eiddgar i weld manylion yr hyn y gallai hynny ei olygu. Rwy'n croesawu'r ystyriaeth o'r cyfnodau gwaharddedig a'r terfynau nitrogen 170 kg, yn ogystal â'r hyn sydd i'w weld yn ddull mwy pragmatig a thargededig, gan fod ffermio yn ôl y calendr yn parhau i fod yn broblem go iawn am ei fod yn methu adlewyrchu realiti bywyd ac ymarfer ffermio, ac mae angen i unrhyw un nad yw'n deall hynny ddod i fferm i'w brofi.
Rwy'n croesawu'r argymhellion i edrych ar ffyrdd arloesol o reoli tail, a'r eithriadau ar gyfer ffermydd o dan gyfyngiadau TB. Bydd hynny'n cael ei groesawu'n fawr gan rai o'r ffermwyr hynny. Fodd bynnag, er bod rhai o'r argymhellion yn cynnig ychydig bach o obaith, mae yna bethau a fydd yn creu mwy o bryder. Er enghraifft, yn y tymor hir, bydd yn rhaid i bob storfa slyri gael ei gorchuddio. Wel, mae honno'n gost gyfalaf enfawr a allai ddisgyn ar ffermwyr. Hefyd y pryder yn sgil archwilio storfeydd silwair a slyri hŷn. Gallai hyn arwain at gostau enfawr i adeiladu cyfleusterau newydd, sydd—unwaith eto, sut y byddai hynny'n cael ei ariannu? Ac wrth gwrs, mae'r ffocws newydd ar ansawdd aer yn ychwanegu dimensiwn newydd o bryder i'r diwydiant os yw'r argymhellion hynny'n cael eu cyflwyno.
Felly, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae llawer i'w dreulio yn yr adolygiad hwn, a bydd eglurder ar gamau nesaf y Llywodraeth yn hollbwysig. Rwy'n ymwybodol eich bod wedi rhoi rhywfaint o hynny i ni. Ond a allwch chi roi arwydd pellach o'r hyn y gall ffermwyr ei ddisgwyl nawr? A wnewch chi fabwysiadu ymagwedd bragmatig ar unwaith ynghylch rhai o'r argymhellion y gellir eu cyflawni yn y tymor byr—rwy'n credu eich bod wedi dweud y gallwch—oherwydd mae gan ffermwyr gymaint i ymdopi ag ef o hyd, ac mae'r rheoliadau dŵr wedi arwain at bryder a gofid enfawr, ac mae angen inni allu symud ymlaen? Diolch.
Thank you, Peter. So, in response, I would say that the FUW, for example, in responding to the review, highlighted the need to take forward the recommendations in collaboration, and I think that's really what you're saying as well. So, obviously we will do that. We will absolutely make sure we do it in collaboration. As I said, the whole point of the summit process was that we did it in collaboration with every industry that had a footprint in our watercourses. It is absolute axiomatic, and I know it's impossible to argue otherwise, that clean watercourses are as important, if not more important, for most farm businesses, than they are for the general population. So, it's in farmers' interests to make sure that we have a set of regulations in place that, obviously, enables them to farm, but also enables them to make sure that they're not polluting our waterways, and I know that most farmers want to do that.
So, we will absolutely follow the proper process of consulting and developing a regulatory impact assessment and making sure that there's a cost-benefit analysis for that and making sure that it's targeted in the right way. So, I already mentioned a couple of the targeting points that the review highlights, and we will make sure—. So, what we want to make sure that we have is a set of regulations that regulate appropriately, in the right place, that, obviously, allow people to understand what the burden of complying with the regulations looks like and to plan that out over a period of time, but primarily what we want is to make sure that we have a fit-for-purpose sector that is able to produce valuable food and valuable exports—because, of course, a lot of it is exported—and to do that, actually, on that point alone, we also need to make sure that we're compliant with EU regulations, because most of our food is exported into the EU. So, actually making sure that we have a robust set of circumstances in place that farmers absolutely understand how to access, they absolutely understand the asks on them, but also that reassures our export markets that we're doing it properly, is paramount.
So, I can't emphasise enough that we want to do this in collaboration. We're really grateful to the stakeholders who took part in the review. It's been a long, arduous process for them. I'm very grateful for that, but the review is very straightforward. It sets out what we need to do in the short, medium and long term. We've accepted all the recommendations, and we will be implementing them.
Diolch, Peter. Felly, mewn ymateb, hoffwn ddweud bod yr FUW, er enghraifft, wrth ymateb i'r adolygiad, wedi tynnu sylw at yr angen i fwrw ymlaen â'r argymhellion mewn cydweithrediad, ac rwy'n credu mai dyna rydych chi'n ei ddweud hefyd. Felly, yn amlwg fe fyddwn yn gwneud hynny. Byddwn yn gwneud yn siŵr ein bod ni'n ei wneud mewn cydweithrediad. Fel y dywedais, holl bwynt y broses uwchgynhadledd oedd ein bod ni'n ei wneud mewn cydweithrediad â phob diwydiant a oedd ag ôl troed yn ein cyrsiau dŵr. Mae'n gwbl wirebol, ac rwy'n gwybod ei bod yn amhosibl dadlau fel arall, fod cyrsiau dŵr glân yr un mor bwysig, os nad yn bwysicach, i'r rhan fwyaf o fusnesau fferm, ag y maent i'r boblogaeth yn gyffredinol. Felly, mae o fudd i ffermwyr wneud yn siŵr fod gennym set o reoliadau ar waith sydd, yn amlwg, yn eu galluogi i ffermio, ond hefyd yn eu galluogi i wneud yn siŵr nad ydynt yn llygru ein cyrsiau dŵr, ac rwy'n gwybod bod y rhan fwyaf o ffermwyr eisiau gwneud hynny.
Felly, byddwn yn dilyn y broses briodol o ymgynghori a datblygu asesiad effaith rheoleiddiol a gwneud yn siŵr fod dadansoddiad cost a budd ar gyfer hynny a gwneud yn siŵr ei fod wedi'i dargedu yn y ffordd gywir. Felly, rwyf eisoes wedi sôn am un neu ddau o'r pwyntiau targedu y mae'r adolygiad yn tynnu sylw atynt, a byddwn yn gwneud yn siŵr—. Felly, rydym am wneud yn siŵr fod gennym set o reoliadau sy'n rheoleiddio'n briodol, yn y lle iawn, ac sydd, yn amlwg, yn caniatáu i bobl ddeall sut beth yw'r baich o gydymffurfio â'r rheoliadau ac i gynllunio hynny dros gyfnod o amser, ond yn bennaf rydym eisiau gwneud yn siŵr fod gennym sector addas i'r diben sy'n gallu cynhyrchu bwyd gwerthfawr ac allforion gwerthfawr—oherwydd mae llawer ohono'n cael ei allforio—ac i wneud hynny, ar y pwynt hwnnw'n unig, mae angen inni hefyd wneud yn siŵr ein bod yn cydymffurfio â rheoliadau'r UE, oherwydd mae'r rhan fwyaf o'n bwyd yn cael ei allforio i'r UE. Felly, mae'n hollbwysig gwneud yn siŵr fod gennym set gadarn o amgylchiadau ar waith y mae ffermwyr yn deall yn iawn sut i gael mynediad atynt, a'u bod yn deall y gofynion yn llwyr, ond hefyd mae hynny'n rhoi sicrwydd i'n marchnadoedd allforio ein bod yn ei wneud yn iawn.
Felly, ni allaf bwysleisio digon ein bod am wneud hyn mewn cydweithrediad. Rydym yn ddiolchgar iawn i'r rhanddeiliaid a gymerodd ran yn yr adolygiad. Mae wedi bod yn broses hir ac anodd iddynt. Rwy'n ddiolchgar iawn am hynny, ond mae'r adolygiad yn syml iawn. Mae'n nodi'r hyn y mae angen inni ei wneud yn y tymor byr, canolig a hir. Rydym wedi derbyn yr holl argymhellion, a byddwn yn eu gweithredu.
I want to welcome the report, and also the commitment by the Welsh Government to accept the recommendations, and the further commitment to work with farmers and landowners in realising the aims of the report.
So, Dr Susannah Bolton has stressed, rightly, that the ultimate review is about reducing and preventing water pollution from agriculture. I'm not going to rehearse everything. There are some short-term wins, medium term, and longer term, and I think that the actions as identified will produce those. You're right—you've reiterated it, but this is something I will reiterate—that our environment and our river status is critical to everything that we see about us. And whilst you're right that most farmers don't pollute, there have been cases where that isn't, actually, the reality, and there have been significant pollutions along the rivers in my area, and there was evidence that it was being built into their business plan. Now, I stress that I'm not laying that at every farmer, because I'm not, and that is recognised in this report, that, those who are farming with really good examples of looking after their environment, the asks will be, of course, much smaller. And there is, within this report, the suggestion that finance will go towards realising some of those aims. So, I do welcome it. I think, with climate change happening, we've got very, very heavy downpours of rain unexpectedly now, and, on the other hand, drought. It is critical that action for our waterways happens and it happens now. So, I do welcome the report, I do welcome the engagement, and I'm sure that the Chair of the environment committee will be as committed to looking after the environment as he is to protecting those businesses.
Rwyf am groesawu'r adroddiad, a hefyd ymrwymiad Llywodraeth Cymru i dderbyn yr argymhellion, a'r ymrwymiad pellach i weithio gyda ffermwyr a thirfeddianwyr i wireddu nodau'r adroddiad.
Felly, mae Dr Susannah Bolton wedi pwysleisio, yn gywir ddigon, fod yr adolygiad yn ymwneud yn y pen draw â lleihau ac atal llygredd dŵr o amaethyddiaeth. Nid wyf yn mynd i ailadrodd popeth. Mae rhai buddugoliaethau tymor byr, tymor canolig, a mwy hirdymor, ac rwy'n credu y bydd y camau gweithredu fel y'u nodwyd yn cynhyrchu'r rheini. Rydych chi'n gywir—rydych chi wedi ailadrodd hynny, ond mae hyn yn rhywbeth rwyf am ei ailadrodd—fod ein hamgylchedd a'n statws afonydd yn allweddol i bopeth a welwn o'n cwmpas. Ac er eich bod chi'n iawn nad yw'r rhan fwyaf o ffermwyr yn llygru, gwelwyd achosion lle nad yw hynny'n wir, ac mae llygredd sylweddol wedi bod ar hyd yr afonydd yn fy ardal i, ac roedd tystiolaeth ei fod yn cael ei adeiladu i mewn i'w cynllun busnes. Nawr, rwy'n pwysleisio nad wyf yn beio pob ffermwr, oherwydd nid yw hynny'n wir, ac mae hynny'n cael ei gydnabod yn yr adroddiad hwn, y bydd y gofynion i'r rhai sy'n ffermio gydag enghreifftiau da iawn o edrych ar ôl eu hamgylchedd yn llawer llai wrth gwrs. Ac yn yr adroddiad hwn, mae awgrym y bydd cyllid yn mynd tuag at wireddu rhai o'r nodau hynny. Felly, rwy'n ei groesawu. Gyda newid hinsawdd yn digwydd, rydym yn cael glawiadau trwm iawn yn digwydd yn annisgwyl nawr, ac ar y llaw arall, sychder. Mae'n hanfodol fod gweithredu'n digwydd ar gyfer ein cyrsiau dŵr a'i fod yn digwydd nawr. Felly, rwy'n croesawu'r adroddiad, rwy'n croesawu'r ymgysylltiad, ac rwy'n siŵr y bydd Cadeirydd pwyllgor yr amgylchedd yr un mor ymrwymedig i ofalu am yr amgylchedd ag y mae i ddiogelu'r busnesau hynny.
Thank you very much, Joyce. I think you're absolutely right, and I'm very delighted that we're still doing the 'source to sea' review of the Teifi in your area. The Teifi was chosen by the summit process. We're literally looking at every single inch of it, from source to sea, and we're working with all the landowners, right along the length of the Teifi, to develop a bespoke service to make sure that that river gets into absolutely tip-tip environmental condition, with a view to understanding the lessons from that, to be spread out across the other special areas of conservation rivers in Wales.
It's worth reiterating, Llywydd, that we chose the Teifi because it's the only river in Wales that doesn't have agricultural pollution as the top polluter, and we did that because we wanted the farmers to engage in it without feeling that their industry was being highlighted. That was very deliberate, and it's part of the collaborative process that we've been using. But the end result is a clean waterway, because a clean waterway helps everyone. So, this is about targeting. Llyr, you said it—I think Peter said it as well; Joyce probably said it too—each farm is different. So, what we've got to do is we've got to help farmers understand what is necessary on their farm for their best practice, and we need to assist them to do that by understanding the regulatory regime, making sure it's fit for purpose, but also making sure, because I know they don't want to, that they are not contributing to the water pollution that we know—. It's the highest polluter right across the rest.
So, the general approach we've taken has been endorsed by the review. We aren't revoking the regulations as we review them. Agricultural pollution remains one of the main causes of water pollution in Wales. So, we're not looking to increase levels of pollution, obviously, we're looking to reduce those, but we absolutely want to do that in collaboration with our farmers and with all our other landowners and all our other land users, and I mentioned a couple of the other sectors as well, and there was a general consensus that this is the way forward.
Diolch, Joyce. Rwy'n meddwl eich bod chi'n hollol iawn, ac rwy'n falch iawn ein bod ni'n dal i wneud yr adolygiad o'r afon Teifi yn eich ardal chi o'i tharddiad i'r môr. Dewiswyd afon Teifi gan broses yr uwchgynhadledd . Rydym yn llythrennol yn edrych ar bob modfedd ohoni o'i tharddiad i'r môr, ac rydym yn gweithio gyda'r holl dirfeddianwyr, ar hyd afon Teifi, i ddatblygu gwasanaeth pwrpasol i wneud yn siŵr fod yr afon honno'n cyrraedd cyflwr amgylcheddol cwbl wych, gyda'r bwriad o ddeall y gwersi o hynny, i'w lledaenu ar draws afonydd yr ardaloedd cadwraeth arbennig eraill yng Nghymru.
Mae'n werth ailadrodd, Lywydd, ein bod wedi dewis afon Teifi oherwydd mai dyma'r unig afon yng Nghymru lle nad yw amaethyddiaeth yn brif lygrydd, ac fe wnaethom hynny oherwydd ein bod am i'r ffermwyr gymryd rhan yn yr adolygiad heb deimlo ein bod yn tynnu sylw at eu diwydiant hwy. Roedd hynny'n fwriadol iawn, ac mae'n rhan o'r broses gydweithredol y buom yn ei defnyddio. Ond y canlyniad terfynol yw cwrs dŵr glân, oherwydd mae cwrs dŵr glân yn helpu pawb. Felly, mae hyn yn ymwneud â thargedu. Llyr, fe ddywedoch chi—rwy'n credu bod Peter wedi'i ddweud hefyd; ac mae'n siŵr fod Joyce wedi ei ddweud—fod pob fferm yn wahanol. Felly, yr hyn sy'n rhaid inni ei wneud yw helpu ffermwyr i ddeall beth sy'n angenrheidiol ar eu fferm ar gyfer eu harferion gorau, ac mae angen inni eu helpu i wneud hynny trwy ddeall y drefn reoleiddio, gan wneud yn siŵr ei bod yn addas i'r diben, ond hefyd gwneud yn siŵr, oherwydd rwy'n gwybod nad ydynt eisiau gwneud hynny, nad ydynt yn cyfrannu at y llygredd dŵr y gwyddom—. Dyma'r llygrydd mwyaf ar draws y gweddill.
Felly, mae'r dull cyffredinol a roddwyd ar waith gennym wedi'i gymeradwyo gan yr adolygiad. Nid ydym yn dirymu'r rheoliadau wrth inni eu hadolygu. Mae llygredd amaethyddol yn parhau i fod yn un o brif achosion llygredd dŵr yng Nghymru. Felly, nid ydym am gynyddu lefelau llygredd, yn amlwg, rydym am eu gostwng, ond rydym yn bendant eisiau gwneud hynny mewn cydweithrediad â'n ffermwyr a chyda'n holl dirfeddianwyr eraill a'n holl ddefnyddwyr tir eraill, a soniais am un neu ddau o'r sectorau eraill hefyd, ac roedd consensws cyffredinol mai dyma'r ffordd ymlaen.
Whilst I agree that it's really good that you're prepared to work with farmers and look at these recommendations, I know of just one farmer in Aberconwy who's had to spend £50,000 on extending his lagoon—sounds lavish that, doesn't it? And despite there being a pre-1991 exemption on his silage pit, he's now been told, following a recent NRW inspection, that he's no longer exempt and he has to spend another £70,000 on a new silage pit. They'll also have to switch from silage pit to round bales, because who's going to spend £120,000 of capital investment with zero returns? It is causing immense mental health problems to a lot of farmers.
But today, I had a presentation, Cabinet Secretary, on the fact that there are 1,300 mines, particularly metal mines, across the length and breadth of Wales and they themselves are leaching—leaching—so much toxic pollution into our waters. Now, when we've all blamed the water companies, and you've blame the farmers, I wasn't aware that we had—. And you've taken the responsibility, I believe, today to actually—I can't think of the word—remediate—
Er fy mod yn cytuno ei bod yn dda iawn eich bod yn barod i weithio gyda ffermwyr ac edrych ar yr argymhellion hyn, gwn am un ffermwr yn Aberconwy sydd wedi gorfod gwario £50,000 ar ymestyn ei lagŵn—mae hynny'n swnio'n llawer, onid yw? Ac er bod eithriad cyn-1991 ar ei bwll silwair, mae bellach wedi cael gwybod, yn dilyn archwiliad diweddar gan CNC, nad yw bellach wedi'i eithrio a bod yn rhaid iddo wario £70,000 arall ar bwll silwair newydd. Bydd yn rhaid iddynt hefyd newid o bwll silwair i fyrnau crwn, oherwydd pwy sy'n mynd i wario £120,000 o fuddsoddiad cyfalaf heb unrhyw enillion? Mae’n achosi problemau iechyd meddwl aruthrol i lawer o ffermwyr.
Ond heddiw, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, cefais gyflwyniad ar y ffaith bod 1,300 o fwyngloddiau, yn enwedig mwyngloddiau metel, ledled Cymru ac maent hwy eu hunain yn trwytholchi—yn trwytholchi—cymaint o lygredd gwenwynig i'n dyfroedd. Nawr, pan ydym oll wedi bod yn rhoi'r bai ar y cwmnïau dŵr, ac rydych chi wedi bod yn beio'r ffermwyr, nid oeddwn yn ymwybodol ein bod wedi—. A chredaf eich bod wedi cymryd y cyfrifoldeb heddiw, mewn gwirionedd, i—ni allaf feddwl am y gair—unioni—
Well, can I just remind you that this is a topical question on agricultural pollution? So, if you could address your question to agricultural pollution, because we're out of time.
Wel, a gaf i eich atgoffa mai cwestiwn amserol ar lygredd amaethyddol yw hwn? Felly, os gallwch sôn am lygredd amaethyddol yn eich cwestiwn, gan fod ein hamser ar ben.
Yes, so I think at some stage in your contributions, as for pollution, maybe less blame for the farmers and more blame for these mines that you've assumed some responsibility for. Thanks.
Ie, felly ar ryw adeg yn eich cyfraniadau, o ran llygredd, efallai llai o feio'r ffermwyr a mwy o fai ar y mwyngloddiau yr ydych chi wedi cymryd peth cyfrifoldeb amdanynt. Diolch.
Well, you know, Janet, once again, you leave me just almost speechless. [Interruption.] So, I have gone out of my way in my contribution, which you clearly did not listen to, but I have gone out of my way in my contribution to say that each sector needs to look to what it needs to do—[Interruption.]—to clear up its—
Wel, wyddoch chi, Janet, unwaith eto, rydych yn fy ngadael bron yn fud. [Torri ar draws.] Felly, rwyf wedi mynd allan o fy ffordd yn fy nghyfraniad, y mae'n amlwg na wrandawoch chi arno, ond rwyf wedi mynd allan o fy ffordd yn fy nghyfraniad i ddweud bod angen i bob sector edrych ar yr hyn y mae angen iddo ei wneud—[Torri ar draws.]—i fynd i'r afael â'i—
Allow the Minister to carry on and stop repeating your question. Allow the Minister to answer, please, Janet Finch-Saunders.
Gadewch i’r Gweinidog barhau a rhowch y gorau i ailadrodd eich cwestiwn. Gadewch i’r Gweinidog ateb, os gwelwch yn dda, Janet Finch-Saunders.
I didn't list every single sector—you're quite right, Janet—but I made it more than plain that the purpose of the whole summit process has been for each sector that contributes to pollution in Wales to look to its own particular purpose and to clean up its own act. That absolutely goes for mines; it absolutely goes for every other polluter. But the absolute bottom line is that, for all the rivers in Wales except the Teifi—all the special areas of conservation rivers in Wales, except the Teifi— agricultural pollution is the top polluter. We have to do something about that, and I know that farmers want to do that. We will do that in collaboration with our farmers; we will do that so that their farm businesses are viable, but we will clean up the waters.
Ni restrais bob un sector—rydych chi'n llygad eich lle, Janet—ond fe’i gwneuthum yn glir iawn mai diben proses yr uwchgynhadledd oedd i bob sector sy’n cyfrannu at lygredd yng Nghymru edrych at ei ddiben penodol ei hun a chael trefn ar ei weithgarwch ei hun. Mae hynny'n wir am fwyngloddiau; mae'n wir am bob llygrwr arall. Ond y gwir amdani yw, ar gyfer holl afonydd Cymru ac eithrio’r Teifi—holl afonydd ardaloedd cadwraeth arbennig Cymru, ac eithrio’r Teifi—llygredd amaethyddol yw’r prif lygrwr. Mae’n rhaid inni wneud rhywbeth am hynny, a gwn fod ffermwyr am wneud hynny. Byddwn yn gwneud hynny mewn cydweithrediad â’n ffermwyr; byddwn yn gwneud hynny fel bod eu busnesau fferm yn hyfyw, ond byddwn yn glanhau’r dyfroedd.
I will be brief, Llywydd. I recently met with campaigners from the Save our Rivers campaign, Cabinet Secretary, and they were talking to me primarily about the River Usk and the River Wye. They carry out citizen science, they work with academics. They're absolutely appalled at the levels of pollution in the rivers. Some of them are wild swimmers, some of them are campaigners that connect local communities to nature through wild camping. They're all concerned with the depletion of nature, biodiversity and the quality of our environment, and they want to see speedy and effective progress in cleaning up our rivers right across Wales, and for me, locally, primarily, the Usk and the Wye.
And they are clear, as you have said, that it is predominantly agriculture that is the main polluter of those rivers—the rivers Wye and Usk. They want to be more involved in this process and have taken a very close interest in the review and now the report on the review. They want to be involved, they want to get local communities involved, but most of all, they want to see that pollution—and for them, mainly agricultural pollution—dealt with effectively in as timely a way as possible.
Fe fyddaf yn gryno, Lywydd. Cyfarfûm yn ddiweddar ag ymgyrchwyr o ymgyrch Save our Rivers, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ac roeddent yn siarad â mi yn bennaf am afon Wysg ac afon Gwy. Maent yn ymgymryd â gwyddoniaeth dinasyddion, maent yn gweithio gydag academyddion. Mae'r lefelau llygredd yn yr afonydd wedi eu brawychu. Mae rhai ohonynt yn nofwyr gwyllt, mae rhai ohonynt yn ymgyrchwyr sy'n cysylltu cymunedau lleol â natur drwy wersylla gwyllt. Mae pob un ohonynt yn bryderus ynghylch dihysbyddiad natur, bioamrywiaeth ac ansawdd ein hamgylchedd, ac maent am weld cynnydd cyflym ac effeithiol ar lanhau ein hafonydd ledled Cymru, ac i mi, yn lleol, yn bennaf, afon Wysg ac afon Gwy.
Ac maent yn glir, fel y dywedoch chi, mai amaethyddiaeth yn bennaf yw prif lygrwr yr afonydd hynny—afon Gwy ac afon Wysg. Maent am gymryd mwy o ran yn y broses hon ac maent wedi dangos cryn ddiddordeb yn yr adolygiad a bellach yn yr adroddiad ar yr adolygiad. Maent am gymryd rhan, maent am annog cymunedau lleol i gymryd rhan, ond yn bennaf, maent am weld y llygredd hwnnw—ac iddynt hwy, llygredd amaethyddol yn bennaf—yn cael ei drin yn effeithiol mewn ffordd mor amserol â phosibl.
Yes, thank you, John. I should at this point, I suppose, declare an interest, as I always point out that I am also very keen on wild swimming and very keen on the regulations that make sure that bathing waters are clean and accessible. It's also a major part of our tourism offer, of course, so it's very important indeed.
And you're absolutely right: we need to harness the strength of citizen science. We are absolutely doing that. We have worked with NRW for years, making sure that NRW are able to harness citizen science. It's not amateur at all; it's perfectly good science. People spend hours and hours and hours and hours and many, many thousands of pounds of their own money on doing it, and of course we should harness that. And I'm very familiar with the group that you're talking about, and I know Huw is as well. So, in our consultation, and in our stakeholder groups, we will absolutely make sure that the particular group that you mention is included and has their views reflected.
And then just, Llywydd, to reiterate, in the overall discussion, what these regulations are there to do is to make sure that they are a proportionate response to what we know is a problem. In doing the review, we will make sure that we review it so that it remains proportionate and fit for purpose. But the review also addressed the fact that there are regulatory gaps. So, I don't want Members to come away with the idea that this is somehow just about one particular type of pollution. So, for example, they address the regulatory gap in relation to phosphorus. So, we will need to explore alternative measures in respect of polluting substances being put on our land. And as I've already said, one of the reasons we're doing the Teifi source to sea review is to make sure that we understand the impact of that on every landowner and every land use all the way along the length of the river. Mark Drakeford, when he was First Minister, put that process in place; I'm very pleased that the Government is still taking it forward. I just mention it because it goes hand in hand with the review of these regulations, and that Senedd Members should be aware that this is obviously not the only thing we're doing in this space.
Ie, diolch, John. Ar y pwynt hwn, mae’n debyg y dylwn ddatgan buddiant, gan fy mod bob amser yn nodi fy mod innau hefyd yn hoff iawn o nofio gwyllt ac yn hoff iawn o'r rheoliadau sy’n sicrhau bod dyfroedd ymdrochi yn lân ac yn hygyrch. Mae hefyd yn rhan fawr o'n harlwy twristiaeth, wrth gwrs, felly mae'n bwysig dros ben.
Ac rydych chi'n llygad eich lle: mae angen inni harneisio cryfder gwyddoniaeth dinasyddion. Rydym yn sicr yn gwneud hynny. Rydym wedi gweithio gyda CNC ers blynyddoedd, gan sicrhau bod CNC yn gallu harneisio gwyddoniaeth dinasyddion. Nid yw'n amaturaidd o gwbl; mae'n wyddoniaeth berffaith ddilys. Mae pobl yn treulio oriau ac oriau a miloedd o bunnoedd o’u harian eu hunain ar wneud hynny, ac wrth gwrs y dylem harneisio hynny. Ac rwy'n gyfarwydd iawn â'r grŵp y soniwch amdano, a gwn fod Huw hefyd. Felly, yn ein hymgynghoriad, ac yn ein grwpiau rhanddeiliaid, byddwn yn sicrhau bod y grŵp penodol y soniwch amdano yn cael ei gynnwys a bod eu safbwyntiau'n cael eu hadlewyrchu.
Ac i ailadrodd, Lywydd, yn y drafodaeth gyffredinol, yr hyn y mae'r rheoliadau hyn yno i'w wneud yw sicrhau eu bod yn ymateb cymesur i'r hyn y gwyddom ei bod yn broblem. Wrth gynnal yr adolygiad, byddwn yn sicrhau ein bod yn ei adolygu fel ei fod yn parhau i fod yn gymesur ac yn addas i'r diben. Ond roedd yr adolygiad hefyd yn mynd i'r afael â'r ffaith bod bylchau yn y rheoliadau. Felly, nid wyf am i’r Aelodau fod o dan yr argraff fod hyn rywsut yn ymwneud ag un math penodol o lygredd yn unig. Felly, er enghraifft, maent yn mynd i’r afael â’r bwlch rheoleiddiol mewn perthynas â ffosfforws. Felly, bydd angen inni archwilio mesurau eraill mewn perthynas â rhoi sylweddau sy'n llygru ar ein tir. Ac fel y dywedais eisoes, un o'r rhesymau pam ein bod yn cynnal adolygiad o'r tarddiad i'r môr o afon Teifi yw er mwyn sicrhau ein bod yn deall effaith hynny ar bob perchennog tir a'r holl ddefnydd tir yr holl ffordd ar hyd yr afon. Pan oedd yn Brif Weinidog, rhoddodd Mark Drakeford y broses honno ar waith; rwy’n falch iawn fod y Llywodraeth yn dal i fwrw ymlaen â hi. Rwy'n sôn amdani am ei bod yn mynd law yn llaw â'r adolygiad o'r rheoliadau hyn, a dylai Aelodau'r Senedd fod yn ymwybodol nad dyma'r unig beth a wnawn yn y maes hwn, yn amlwg.
Yn olaf, Samuel Kurtz.
Finally, Samuel Kurtz.
Diolch, Llywydd. Thank you, Counsel General, for leading on this topical in the absence of the Deputy First Minister, who isn't here. But what I would quite like, with the Trefnydd in her place, is a statement from the Deputy First Minister when we return from recess on this, given that he's the portfolio lead. I think that would be fair that we get the opportunity to question him directly.
I note from your responses there the repetition of the word 'collaboration', and I greatly welcome that. The farming unions have always wanted to be involved in the discussion around improving water qualities in Wales. But there is a level of frustration following this announcement yesterday, because a lot of the issues that they raised as potential problems down the line have been highlighted now in this report. So, they feel that they weren't listened to initially when they brought forward some of their concerns, for example, around the closed period. And we can just look to Ireland and the Irish Environmental Protection Agency, where closed periods around NVZ showed that peak nitrates happen once the closed period becomes an open period, showing that evidence that this system doesn't work. So, the frustration lies now that we've come this far down the channel to be told what we knew four, five years ago with regards to this policy.
So, I really welcome the collaborative messaging that you're putting forward on this, but what guarantees can you give to the farming unions, and the farming industry, that they will be listened to on this policy, going forward? Because they feel like they haven't been listened to previously.
Diolch, Lywydd. Diolch, Gwnsler Cyffredinol, am arwain ar y pwnc hwn yn absenoldeb y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog, nad yw yma. Ond yr hyn yr hoffwn, gyda'r Trefnydd yn ei lle, yw datganiad gan y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog ar hyn pan fyddwn yn dychwelyd o'r toriad, o ystyried mai ef yw arweinydd y portffolio. Rwy'n credu y byddai'n deg inni gael cyfle i’w holi’n uniongyrchol.
Nodaf o’ch ymatebion yno fod y gair 'cydweithrediad’ wedi'i ailadrodd, ac rwy'n croesawu hynny’n fawr. Mae undebau'r ffermwyr bob amser wedi bod yn awyddus i fod yn rhan o’r drafodaeth ynghylch gwella ansawdd dŵr yng Nghymru. Ond mae lefel o rwystredigaeth yn dilyn y cyhoeddiad hwn ddoe, gan fod llawer o'r materion a godwyd ganddynt fel problemau posibl yn y dyfodol wedi eu hamlygu nawr yn yr adroddiad hwn. Felly, maent yn teimlo na wrandawyd arnynt i ddechrau pan wnaethant nodi rhai o'u pryderon, er enghraifft, ynghylch y cyfnod gwaharddedig. A gallwn edrych tuag at Iwerddon ac Asiantaeth Diogelu'r Amgylchedd Iwerddon, lle dangosodd cyfnod gwaharddedig o amgylch parthau perygl nitradau fod y lefelau uchaf o nitradau yn ymddangos pan ddaw'r cyfnod gwaharddedig yn gyfnod agored, gan ddangos tystiolaeth nad yw'r system hon yn gweithio. Felly, y rhwystredigaeth yw ein bod wedi dod mor bell â hyn i lawr y ffordd i gael clywed yr hyn a wyddem bedair, bum mlynedd yn ôl ynglŷn â'r polisi hwn.
Felly, rwy'n croesawu'n fawr eich negeseuon ynghylch cydweithrediad mewn perthynas â hyn, ond pa warantau y gallwch eu rhoi i undebau'r ffermwyr, a'r diwydiant ffermio, y byddant yn cael eu clywed mewn perthynas â'r polisi hwn, wrth symud ymlaen? Oherwydd maent yn teimlo nad ydynt wedi cael eu clywed cyn hyn.
Well, just on the point of the statement, that's obviously a matter for the Trefnydd, but I would refer you to the fact that the Government put out a written statement on this only yesterday, so there's plenty of evidence for you to have a look at there. And, obviously, there are many opportunities to question the Deputy First Minister, but that's a matter for the Trefnydd, not me. Not quite sure what that implied, actually, but feel free to ask me any question that you have on the subject.
Just in terms of listening, not really quite sure what you're trying to get at there. Because, obviously, the whole point of the review was in response to the fact that we had listened to people's concerns and we had a review done as a result of having listened to their concerns. So, I'm genuinely not quite sure what you're saying. So, we listened, we've done a review, I've just said we're going to implement the review in collaboration, so I'm not quite sure what further listening you had in mind.
But just to reiterate, this is an iterative, collaborative process, and the stakeholders are very much engaged. Anyone who wants to be engaged in the process should absolutely put their hand up via the unions, or indeed directly to the Deputy First Minister, or indeed to me, or to the First Minister, to say they want to be involved in that review. We will be taking it forward. The panel has come forward with a set of recommendations that are very helpfully set out in short, medium and longer term sets. We absolutely accept the recommendations, we've been very clear about that. All of that information is in the written statement.
Wel, ar bwynt y datganiad, mae hynny'n amlwg yn fater i'r Trefnydd, ond rwyf am eich cyfeirio at y ffaith bod y Llywodraeth wedi cyhoeddi datganiad ysgrifenedig ar hyn ddoe ddiwethaf, felly mae digon o dystiolaeth ichi gael golwg arni. Ac yn amlwg, mae llawer o gyfleoedd i gwestiynu’r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog, ond mater i’r Trefnydd yw hynny, nid fi. Nid wyf yn siŵr beth oeddech chi'n ei awgrymu wrth hynny, mewn gwirionedd, ond mae croeso ichi ofyn unrhyw gwestiwn sydd gennych ar y pwnc i mi.
O ran gwrando, nid wyf yn siŵr beth y ceisiwch ei ddweud. Oherwydd yn amlwg, holl bwynt yr adolygiad oedd ymateb i’r ffaith ein bod wedi gwrando ar bryderon pobl a bod adolygiad wedi’i gynnal gennym o ganlyniad i fod wedi gwrando ar eu pryderon. Felly, nid wyf yn siŵr iawn beth rydych chi'n ei ddweud. Felly, fe wnaethom wrando, fe wnaethom adolygiad, rwyf newydd ddweud ein bod yn mynd i roi'r adolygiad ar waith mewn cydweithrediad, felly nid wyf yn siŵr pa wrando pellach a oedd gennych mewn golwg.
Ond i ailadrodd, mae hon yn broses iteraidd, gydweithredol, ac mae'r rhanddeiliaid yn rhan fawr ohoni. Dylai unrhyw un sydd am gymryd rhan yn y broses godi eu llaw drwy’r undebau, neu’n wir, yn uniongyrchol i’r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog, neu’n wir, i mi neu’r Prif Weinidog, i ddweud eu bod am gymryd rhan yn yr adolygiad hwnnw. Byddwn yn bwrw ymlaen ag ef. Mae'r panel wedi cyflwyno set o argymhellion sydd wedi'u nodi'n ddefnyddiol iawn mewn setiau tymor byr, canolig a hwy. Rydym yn derbyn yr argymhellion yn llwyr, rydym wedi dweud hynny'n glir iawn. Mae’r holl wybodaeth honno yn y datganiad ysgrifenedig.
Diolch i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet.
Mae'r cwestiwn nesaf i'w ateb gan Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Iechyd a Gofal Cymdeithasol, ac i'w ofyn gan Julie Morgan.
I thank the Cabinet Secretary.
The next question is to be answered by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, and to be asked by Julie Morgan.
2. Pa bwysau y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei roi ar Lywodraeth y DU i gyflymu'r broses o sicrhau taliadau iawndal i bobl sydd wedi'u heintio gan waed halogedig, ac y mae'r sgandal gwaed halogedig wedi effeithio arnynt? TQ1325
2. What pressure is the Welsh Government putting on the UK Government to speed up the delivery of compensation payments to people infected and affected by the contaminated blood scandal? TQ1325
There is a pattern of four nations ministerial meetings to discuss infected blood, and my officials continue to press for progress between meetings. On 3 March, I met with the Minister for the Cabinet Office, Nick Thomas-Symonds, and Ministers from Scotland and Northern Ireland, to discuss the arrangements to support people infected and affected by the scandal, including the need for timely delivery of compensation claims from the Infected Blood Compensation Authority.
Ceir patrwm o gyfarfodydd gweinidogol pedair gwlad i drafod gwaed heintiedig, ac mae fy swyddogion yn parhau i bwyso am gynnydd rhwng cyfarfodydd. Ar 3 Mawrth, cyfarfûm â Gweinidog Swyddfa'r Cabinet, Nick Thomas-Symonds, a Gweinidogion o’r Alban a Gogledd Iwerddon, i drafod y trefniadau i gefnogi pobl a gafodd eu heintio ac sydd wedi dioddef yn sgil y sgandal, gan gynnwys yr angen i gyflwyno hawliadau iawndal yn brydlon gan yr Awdurdod Iawndal Gwaed Heintiedig.
Daeth y Dirprwy Lywydd (David Rees) i’r Gadair.
The Deputy Presiding Officer (David Rees) took the Chair.
Diolch am yr ateb.
Thank you for that response.
It’s now two years since Sir Brian Langstaff published his second interim report on compensation, and he published this report early, as he recognised that a delay to compensation would cause further harm to those infected and affected. On 20 May, it will be one year since Sir Brian Langstaff published his final inquiry report, in which he highlighted his damning findings. And we are now expecting him to report again, outlining his concerns about the completely unacceptable delay in setting up the Infected Blood Compensation Authority, and issuing compensation to victims. This should not be happening.
For more than 40 years, the infected and affected have been campaigning for justice. And I’ve been in this campaign for coming up to 30 years. And this is a cross-party campaign, because we have Rhun ap Iorwerth here, who’s the chair of the cross-party group on infected blood. We have other campaigners here—Mick and Hefin, and others—who have campaigned for years on this issue.
And last year, we were so pleased to welcome the news that £11.8 billion had been set aside for compensation. But I can’t support the way in which the setting up of the compensation framework, and the Infected Blood Compensation Authority, has caused significant delays, and the delays in registering for the affected. And I’m very pleased that we have got people here in the gallery today from Haemophilia Wales, and these are the people who are suffering because of these delays.
We heard on the weekend that two people are dying every week while they wait for compensation. Twenty-five infected or affected people that were known to Haemophilia Wales have died since the inquiry began. And I’ve been told that the compensation tariffs are so complex that it’s extremely difficult to gauge who will be eligible. However, Haemophilia Wales estimate that there’ll be around 300 infected and affected entitled to compensation in Wales. And, in Wales, at the moment, there are 213 infected and bereaved partners registered with the Wales infected blood support scheme for ex gratia payments. This cohort should have been paid compensation, as they are known to the Government, have already received an interim compensation payment, and they’ve already satisfied the necessary criteria for the interim compensation payment to be made.
I understand that there are a further 30 previously unrecognised deaths in Wales that are known to Haemophilia Wales, where no interim compensation payment has been made. These consist of affected parents, children who lost parents and siblings, and details of these people were passed on to the UK Government, Welsh Government and WIBSS in May last year. Thirteen have now received interim compensation, but 17 have not.
I’ve also heard that there have been rejections of transfusion estate applications, due to the destruction of medical records held at the University Hospital of Wales. And campaign groups, and, I think, Senedd Members, are very frustrated by this, Cabinet Secretary, because it does cause—. The delays do have practical impacts. If an infected person dies during this period, the compensation can be claimed through their estate, but if an affected person, like a widow or a widower dies, the claim to compensation dies with them.
In Wales, we’ve always been firm here in our position that we are on the side of the infected and the affected. We stand by them. We want justice to be served, and for victims to get their compensation. Would the Cabinet Secretary therefore push the UK Government in the strongest possible terms to speed up this process? Because I absolutely accept that the process has got to be done fairly, and it’s got to be a good process, but everything I’ve heard and seen makes me feel that there are unnecessary delays, unnecessary bureaucracy, and I think it’s up to us in this Senedd to do all we possibly can to urge the UK Government, and say, 'Look, just get on with it, it’s just been far too long.' This has been going on for years and years, and, as I’ve already said, people are dying.
I really feel that this extremely vulnerable group have been failed for more than 40 years, and I think we’re all proud that they’ve come here to the Senedd today. There was a considerable number of them outside on the Senedd steps, and some of them have come in to listen to the debate. They are looking to us to do what we can in order to urge the UK Government to move forward. Diolch.
Mae dwy flynedd bellach ers i Syr Brian Langstaff gyhoeddi ei ail adroddiad interim ar iawndal, a chyhoeddodd yr adroddiad hwn yn gynnar, gan ei fod yn cydnabod y byddai oedi cyn rhoi iawndal yn peri niwed pellach i’r rheini a gafodd eu heintio ac sydd wedi dioddef. Ar 20 Mai, bydd yn flwyddyn ers i Syr Brian Langstaff gyhoeddi ei adroddiad terfynol ar yr ymchwiliad, lle tynnodd sylw at ei ganfyddiadau damniol. A nawr rydym yn disgwyl iddo adrodd eto, gan amlinellu ei bryderon am yr oedi cwbl annerbyniol cyn sefydlu’r Awdurdod Iawndal Gwaed Heintiedig, a rhoi iawndal i ddioddefwyr. Ni ddylai hyn ddigwydd.
Am fwy na 40 mlynedd, mae'r rhai a gafodd eu heintio ac sydd wedi dioddef wedi bod yn ymgyrchu am gyfiawnder. Ac rwyf wedi bod yn rhan o'r ymgyrch hon ers bron i 30 mlynedd. Ac mae hon yn ymgyrch drawsbleidiol, gan fod gennym Rhun ap Iorwerth yma, sef cadeirydd y grŵp trawsbleidiol ar waed heintiedig. Mae gennym ymgyrchwyr eraill yma—Mick a Hefin, ac eraill—sydd wedi bod yn ymgyrchu ers blynyddoedd ar y mater hwn.
A’r llynedd, roeddem mor falch o groesawu’r newyddion fod £11.8 biliwn wedi’i neilltuo ar gyfer iawndal. Ond ni allaf gefnogi’r ffordd y mae'r gwaith o sefydlu’r fframwaith iawndal, a’r Awdurdod Iawndal Gwaed Heintiedig, wedi achosi oedi sylweddol, a’r oedi wrth gofrestru ar gyfer y rheini sydd wedi dioddef. Ac rwy'n falch iawn fod gennym bobl yma yn yr oriel heddiw o Hemoffilia Cymru, a dyma'r bobl sy'n dioddef oherwydd yr oedi hwn.
Clywsom ar y penwythnos fod dau o bobl yn marw bob wythnos wrth iddynt aros am iawndal. Mae 25 o bobl a gafodd eu heintio neu yr effeithiwyd arnynt yr oedd Hemoffilia Cymru yn gwybod amdanynt wedi marw ers i'r ymchwiliad ddechrau. A dywedwyd wrthyf fod y tariffau iawndal mor gymhleth fel ei bod yn anodd iawn mesur pwy fydd yn gymwys. Fodd bynnag, mae Hemoffilia Cymru yn amcangyfrif y bydd gan oddeutu 300 o bobl a gafodd eu heintio ac yr effeithiwyd arnynt hawl i iawndal yng Nghymru. Ac yng Nghymru, ar hyn o bryd, mae 213 o bobl a gafodd eu heintio a phartneriaid rhai a fu farw wedi'u cofrestru yng nghynllun cymorth gwaed heintiedig Cymru ar gyfer taliadau ex gratia. Dylai’r garfan hon fod wedi cael iawndal, gan fod y Llywodraeth yn gwybod amdanynt, maent eisoes wedi cael taliad iawndal interim, ac maent eisoes wedi bodloni’r meini prawf angenrheidiol ar gyfer derbyn y taliad iawndal interim.
Rwy'n deall bod Hemoffilia Cymru yn ymwybodol o 30 o farwolaethau pellach yng Nghymru nas cydnabuwyd o’r blaen, lle nad oes taliad iawndal interim wedi’i wneud. Mae’r rhain yn cynnwys rhieni yr effeithiwyd arnynt, plant a gollodd rieni a brodyr a chwiorydd, a throsglwyddwyd manylion y bobl hyn i Lywodraeth y DU, Llywodraeth Cymru a chynllun cymorth gwaed heintiedig Cymru ym mis Mai y llynedd. Mae 13 bellach wedi derbyn iawndal interim, ond mae 17 yn dal i fod heb ei gael.
Rwyf hefyd wedi clywed bod ceisiadau i ystadau pobl a gafodd drallwysiad wedi'u gwrthod, gan fod cofnodion meddygol a gedwid yn Ysbyty Athrofaol Cymru wedi'u dinistrio. Ac mae grwpiau ymgyrchu, ac Aelodau’r Senedd, rwy'n credu, yn rhwystredig iawn ynglŷn â hyn, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, gan ei fod yn achosi—. Mae'r oedi yn cael effaith ymarferol. Os bydd unigolyn heintiedig yn marw yn ystod y cyfnod hwn, gellir hawlio’r iawndal drwy eu hystad, ond os bydd unigolyn yr effeithir arnynt fel arall yn marw, fel gwraig neu ŵr gweddw, bydd yr hawliad am iawndal yn marw gyda hwy.
Yng Nghymru, rydym bob amser wedi arddel safbwynt cadarn yma ein bod ar ochr y rhai a gafodd eu heintio ac yr effeithiwyd arnynt. Rydym yn cydsefyll gyda hwy. Rydym am sicrhau cyfiawnder, ac rydym am i ddioddefwyr gael eu hiawndal. A wnaiff Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, felly, bwyso ar Lywodraeth y DU yn y modd cryfaf posibl i gyflymu’r broses hon? Oherwydd rwy'n derbyn yn llwyr fod yn rhaid i'r broses fod yn deg, ac mae'n rhaid iddi fod yn broses dda, ond mae popeth a glywais ac a welais yn gwneud imi deimlo bod oedi diangen a biwrocratiaeth ddiangen ynghlwm wrth hyn, a chredaf ei bod yn gyfrifoldeb arnom yn y Senedd hon i wneud popeth yn ein gallu i annog Llywodraeth y DU, a dweud, 'Edrychwch, gadewch inni fwrw ymlaen â hyn, mae wedi bod yn llawer rhy hir'. Mae hyn wedi bod yn llusgo ymlaen ers blynyddoedd lawer, ac fel y dywedais eisoes, mae pobl yn marw.
Rwy'n teimlo'n gryf fod y grŵp hynod agored i niwed hwn wedi cael cam ers mwy na 40 mlynedd, a chredaf fod pob un ohonom yn falch eu bod wedi dod yma i’r Senedd heddiw. Roedd nifer sylweddol ohonynt y tu allan ar risiau’r Senedd, ac mae rhai ohonynt wedi dod i mewn i wrando ar y ddadl. Maent yn dibynnu arnom i wneud yr hyn a allwn i annog Llywodraeth y DU i symud ymlaen. Diolch.
I thank Julie Morgan for her question. It’s a very important question, and the way in which she put it reminds us all of the very human impact of the arrangements that are being put in place and being discussed.
In my discussions with the UK Government, who obviously are responsible for the scheme, as she clearly is aware, I’m informed that the IBCA are still building and testing their compensation service, and they are working to start claims for estates, affected people and infected people who are not registered with the support scheme, with the aim of starting payments to some people in all of these groups by the end of this year. They won’t have finished paying people in these groups in that time frame, but they will have started.
Across all the infection groups, when they open, they will prioritise claims for those who are nearing the end of their life. This is for those who have been told by a medical professional that they might have 12 months or less to live. During April, I’m informed that they will write to everyone who’s registered with the support scheme to confirm that they have their correct details and to explain how to contact them if prioritising end-of-life claims applies to them. I’m also aware that the IBCA is recruiting hundreds of claims managers at the moment to help with compensation claims as soon as possible.
I want to identify myself with the comments that she made at the end of her statement about standing firm in support of infected and affected people and to see them having justice. I will press the case, as I have done, with the UK Government in my next meeting, and I shall make sure to be in touch with the Minister before that. I’m aware that Haemophilia Wales, who she referred to in her question, is I believe meeting with the Minister for the Cabinet Office later this week to discuss these very issues.
Diolch i Julie Morgan am ei chwestiwn. Mae'n gwestiwn pwysig iawn, ac mae'r ffordd y'i gofynnodd yn atgoffa pob un ohonom o effaith ddynol iawn y trefniadau sy'n cael eu rhoi ar waith ac sy'n cael eu trafod.
Yn fy nhrafodaethau gyda Llywodraeth y DU, sy’n amlwg yn gyfrifol am y cynllun, fel y mae hi’n gwybod wrth gwrs, dywedwyd wrthyf fod yr Awdurdod Iawndal Gwaed Heintiedig yn dal i adeiladu a phrofi eu gwasanaeth iawndal, a’u bod yn gweithio i ddechrau hawliadau am ystadau, pobl yr effeithiwyd arnynt a phobl a gafodd eu heintio nad ydynt wedi cofrestru gyda’r cynllun cymorth, gyda’r nod o ddechrau gwneud taliadau i rai pobl ym mhob un o’r grwpiau hyn erbyn diwedd y flwyddyn. Ni fyddant wedi gorffen talu pobl yn y grwpiau hyn o fewn yr amserlen honno, ond byddant wedi dechrau.
Ar draws yr holl grwpiau heintiedig, pan fyddant yn agor, byddant yn blaenoriaethu hawliadau i'r rheini sy'n agosáu at ddiwedd eu hoes. Mae hyn ar gyfer y rhai y mae gweithiwr meddygol proffesiynol wedi dweud wrthynt y gallai fod ganddynt 12 mis neu lai i fyw. Ym mis Ebrill, dywedir wrthyf y byddant yn ysgrifennu at bawb sydd wedi cofrestru gyda'r cynllun cymorth i gadarnhau bod ganddynt eu manylion cywir ac i egluro sut i gysylltu â hwy os yw blaenoriaethu hawliadau diwedd oes yn berthnasol iddynt hwy. Rwyf hefyd yn ymwybodol fod yr Awdurdod Iawndal Gwaed Heintiedig yn recriwtio cannoedd o reolwyr hawliadau ar hyn o bryd i helpu gyda hawliadau iawndal cyn gynted â phosibl.
Hoffwn gytuno â’r sylwadau a wnaeth ar ddiwedd ei datganiad ynglŷn â chydsefyll yn gadarn i gefnogi pobl a gafodd eu heintio ac yr effeithiwyd arnynt a sicrhau eu bod yn cael cyfiawnder. Byddaf yn pwysleisio'r achos, fel y bûm yn ei wneud, gyda Llywodraeth y DU yn fy nghyfarfod nesaf, a byddaf yn sicrhau fy mod yn cysylltu â’r Gweinidog cyn hynny. Rwy’n ymwybodol fod Hemoffilia Cymru, y cyfeiriodd atynt yn ei chwestiwn, yn cyfarfod â Gweinidog Swyddfa’r Cabinet yn nes ymlaen yr wythnos hon i drafod yr union faterion hyn.
I’d like to associate myself with all the comments made by Julie Morgan. This infected blood scandal is probably one of the biggest devastating impacts that’s ever been in our health service right the way across our country, and my thoughts and my group’s thoughts are with all those people who were affected or infected.
Cabinet Secretary, one thing I think I’d like to hear more of from you is actually the advocacy support and the mental health support that you are giving to those individuals. Some of these people, as Julie Morgan has said, have waited an awful long time, and there are now further delays in accessing the compensation that they can get. So, I’d just like to hear further from you what work you're doing in this space to make sure that those individuals and their families are supported through this process so nobody has to go through this alone. Most of them have gone through it alone for so many years before.
Hoffwn gytuno â’r holl sylwadau a wnaed gan Julie Morgan. Mae’n debyg mai’r sgandal gwaed heintiedig yw un o’r effeithiau dinistriol mwyaf a fu erioed yn ein gwasanaeth iechyd ledled ein gwlad, ac rwyf fi a fy ngrŵp yn cydymdeimlo â’r holl bobl a gafodd eu heintio ac yr effeithiwyd arnynt.
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, un peth y credaf yr hoffwn glywed mwy amdano gennych yw’r cymorth eiriolaeth a’r cymorth iechyd meddwl rydych chi'n ei roi i’r unigolion hynny. Mae rhai o’r bobl hyn, fel y dywedodd Julie Morgan, wedi bod yn aros ers amser maith, ac mae oedi pellach erbyn hyn cyn cael mynediad at yr iawndal y gallant ei gael. Felly, hoffwn glywed ymhellach gennych chi pa waith rydych chi'n ei wneud ar hyn i sicrhau bod yr unigolion hynny a'u teuluoedd yn cael eu cefnogi drwy'r broses hon fel nad oes rhaid i unrhyw un fynd drwy hyn ar eu pen ei hunain. Mae'r rhan fwyaf ohonynt wedi mynd drwy hyn ar eu pen ei hunain ers nifer o flynyddoedd yn barod.
I associate myself with the comments that James Evans made at the start in relation to the campaigning work that a number of Members have been pursuing, including, very markedly, Julie Morgan and others. He’s right to say that the support available to those affected in Wales is absolutely critical, and there is a range of support available, which I think is generally well received, but there is obviously more that we will always look to do to provide the support that people need. I hope that he found the answer I gave to Julie Morgan of some reassurance.
Rwy'n cytuno â’r sylwadau a wnaeth James Evans ar y dechrau mewn perthynas â’r gwaith ymgyrchu y mae nifer o Aelodau wedi bod yn ei wneud, gan gynnwys, yn amlwg iawn, Julie Morgan ac eraill. Mae'n llygad ei le i ddweud bod y cymorth sydd ar gael i'r rhai yr effeithiwyd yng Nghymru yn gwbl hanfodol, ac mae amrywiaeth o gymorth ar gael, sydd, yn fy marn i, wedi'i groesawu ar y cyfan, ond yn amlwg, mae mwy y byddwn bob amser yn ceisio'i wneud i ddarparu'r cymorth sydd ei angen ar bobl. Rwy'n gobeithio iddo gael rhywfaint o sicrwydd o'r ateb a roddais i Julie Morgan.
Diolch i Julie Morgan am y cwestiwn pwysig yma heddiw. Cyn yr etholiad yr haf diwethaf, fe glywsom ni bob mathau o addewidion i’r cleifion sydd wedi dioddef yn sgil y sgandal gwaed heintiedig. Ond, bron i flwyddyn yn ddiweddarach, mae’r cleifion a’u hanwyliaid yn dal i aros am daliadau ac am gyfiawnder. Yn wir, fel y clywsom ni gan Julie Morgan, mae yna ddau o’r cleifion yna’n marw bob wythnos, a phan mae eu hanwyliaid nhw yn marw yna mae’r hawl am iawndal yn marw gyda nhw. Felly, fe allwch chi ddeall pam fod rhai o’r teuluoedd sydd wedi bod mewn cyswllt efo fi yn credu bod y mater o lusgo traed yma yn fater bwriadol gan y Llywodraeth er mwyn trio osgoi talu yr iawndal.
Heddiw, ces i gyfarfod efo rhai o’r teuluoedd y tu allan i’r Senedd. Roedd Brian Williams yno. Mae Brian bellach yn dioddef o ganser yr iau yn sgil cael ei heintio, ond mae e’n dal i aros am daliadau ac yntau yn gwbl ddifai yn hyn i gyd. Nid yn unig bod cleifion yn aros, ond mae rhai yn gweld fod eu cofnodion meddygol nhw wedi cael eu colli—a dwi’n dweud ‘colli’, mewn dyfynodau, fan hyn. Fe soniodd Suzanne Morgan wrthyf i am sut y collodd yr ysbyty gofnodion iechyd ei mam, a hithau’n cael ei gwadu’r hawl i wneud cais am daliadau oherwydd nad oedd gwaith papur perthnasol gan yr ysbyty, er bod yna hen ddigon o gofnodion yn bodoli o’r clefyd. Felly, mae yna amryw o anghyfiawnderau yma sydd angen eu datrys.
Beth, felly, ydy dealltwriaeth yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet am beth sydd yn arafu'r broses i lawr? A pha gamau mae’r Llywodraeth yma wedi eu cymryd, gan ystyried fod yna bartneriaeth mewn grym yn bodoli, i fod, ar hyn o bryd, er mwyn dwyn pwysau ar Lywodraeth y Deyrnas Gyfunol i gyflymu’r broses? Fe wnaeth adroddiad Langstaff argymhellion oedd yn berthnasol i’r Llywodraeth yma yng Nghymru a’r byrddau iechyd hefyd. A gawn ni, felly, adroddiad cynnydd ar ble mae’r Llywodraeth arni wrth eu gweithredu nhw, ac a ydy’r byrddau iechyd wedi llwyddo i adnabod yr holl gleifion sydd wedi'u heffeithio yng Nghymru?
Yn olaf, dwi'n cydnabod mai sgandal a wnaeth ddatblygu cyn datganoli yw’r scandal yma, ac felly mai cyfrifoldeb Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Gyfunol ydy gweithredu, ond mae dyletswydd ar Lywodraeth Cymru i gynrychioli'r cleifion yma yng Nghymru. Roedd yn syndod i fi, felly, i ddeall nad ydych chi fel Ysgrifennydd Cabinet wedi cael cyfarfod gyda Hemoffilia Cymru i drafod y mater penodol yma. Felly, a wnewch chi ymrwymo heddiw i gael cyfarfod gyda Hemoffilia Cymru a'r cleifion maen nhw'n eu cynrychioli a'u teuluoedd er mwyn ffeindio ffordd ymlaen?
I thank Julie Morgan for this very important question today. Before the election last summer, we heard all kinds of promises made to the patients who have suffered as a result of the infected blood scandal. But, almost a year later, patients and their loved ones are still waiting for payments and for justice. In fact, as we heard from Julie Morgan, two patients related to the scandal die every week, and when their loved ones die then the right to compensation dies with them. So, you can understand why some patients’ families who have been in contact with me believe that the matter is being dragged out and that it’s intentional on the part of the Government in order to avoid paying out the compensation.
Today, I met some of the families outside the Senedd. Brian Williams was there. Brian now suffers from liver cancer as a result of being infected, but he is still waiting for payments while being completely blameless in all of this. Not only are patients waiting, but some have seen their medical records being lost—and I say 'lost', in quote marks. Suzanne Morgan told me how the hospital had lost her mother's health records, and she was denied the right to apply for payments because there was no relevant paperwork at the hospital, even though there were plenty of records of the disease. So, there are various injustices here that need to be resolved.
What is the Cabinet Secretary's understanding, therefore, of what is slowing this process down? And what action has this Government taken, given that it is part of a so-called partnership in power at the moment, in order to put pressure on the UK Government to speed up the process? The Langstaff report made recommendations that were relevant to this Government here in Wales and to the health boards as well. Could we, therefore, receive a progress report on where the Government is at in terms of implementing them, and have the health boards succeeded in identifying all of the patients affected in Wales?
Finally, I recognise that this is a scandal that developed before devolution, and it is, therefore, the UK Government's responsibility to act. Yet the Welsh Government has a duty to represent the patients here in Wales. I was surprised to hear, therefore, that the Cabinet Secretary has not had a meeting with Haemophilia Wales to discuss this specific issue. So, will you commit today to having a meeting with Haemophilia Wales and with the patients and the families that they represent in order to find a way forward?
Byddwn i, wrth gwrs, yn hapus i wneud hynny. Mae cryfder sylwadau Aelodau ar draws y Siambr yn glir, rwy'n credu, yn y drafodaeth heddiw, ac yn fater byddaf yn gallu dwyn i sylw yn y cyfarfod gyda'r Gweinidog yn San Steffan. Rwy'n gobeithio bod yr atebion gwnes i roi yn gynharach, o ran yr hyn sydd yn arafu'r broses, fel gwnaeth yr Aelod esbonio, yn rhoi y manylion addas iddo fe. Fel rwy'n dweud, mae gennym ni gyfres o gyfarfodydd gyda'r Gweinidog yn San Steffan i fynd drwy fanylion y pethau yma, ac mae swyddogion yn gwthio yn gyson am gynnydd rhwng y cyfarfodydd hyn.
Of course, I'd be happy to do that. The strength of comments made by Members across the Chamber is very clear in this discussion today, and is an issue that I will be able to highlight in my meeting with the Minister in Westminster. I do hope that the answers I gave earlier, in terms of what is slowing the process down, as the Member explained, has provided him with the details that he needed. As I say, we have a series of meetings with the Minister in Westminster to go through the details of this, and officials are pushing regularly for progress between those meetings.
I’d like to raise the case of a constituent of mine who has been ably supported as well by Julie Morgan. To follow on from her concerns about the IBCA, the new compensation scheme may unfairly discriminate against spouses and partners who become widowers and widows from here on in. For example, if my constituent had passed away before the end of March 2025—these are his words, by the way—his wife would have received 100 per cent of his support payments for the first year after his death, and then 75 per cent every year thereafter for the remainder of her life. However, from now on, as his wife is not currently signed up to the new scheme, she would be forced to take out a lump sum payment in return for the loss of her late husband’s earnings, which works out at a lot less over time than ongoing support payments. He and others who have been affected by the scandal were relieved last year when they were informed that support payments would continue for life. But they believe that this is a loophole, which potentially leaves families unsupported if something were to happen to loved ones. So, when the Cabinet Secretary has further meetings with UK counterparts, could he please raise that issue as well?
Hoffwn godi achos etholwr i mi sydd wedi cael cymorth gwerthfawr gan Julie Morgan. I ddilyn ymlaen o'i phryderon am yr Awdurdod Iawndal Gwaed Heintiedig, efallai y bydd y cynllun iawndal newydd yn gwahaniaethu'n annheg yn erbyn partneriaid a gwŷr a gwragedd sy'n dod yn wŷr a gwragedd gweddw o hyn ymlaen. Er enghraifft, pe bai fy etholwr wedi marw cyn diwedd mis Mawrth 2025—ei eiriau ef yw'r rhain, gyda llaw—byddai ei wraig wedi cael 100 y cant o'i daliadau cymorth am y flwyddyn gyntaf ar ôl ei farwolaeth, a 75 y cant bob blwyddyn ar ôl hynny am weddill ei hoes. Fodd bynnag, o hyn ymlaen, gan nad yw ei wraig wedi ymuno â'r cynllun newydd ar hyn o bryd, byddai’n cael ei gorfodi i gymryd cyfandaliad yn gyfnewid am golli enillion ei diweddar ŵr, sy’n cyfateb i lawer llai dros amser na thaliadau cymorth parhaus. Cafodd ef ac eraill yr effeithiwyd arnynt gan y sgandal ryddhad y llynedd pan gawsant wybod y byddai'r taliadau cymorth yn parhau am oes. Ond maent o'r farn mai bwlch yn y rheolau yw hwn, sydd o bosibl yn gadael teuluoedd heb gymorth pe bai rhywbeth yn digwydd i'w hanwyliaid. Felly, pan fydd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn cael cyfarfodydd pellach gyda swyddogion cyfatebol ar lefel y DU, a allai godi'r mater hwnnw hefyd, os gwelwch yn dda?
It is an issue that has been discussed at a four-nation level, recognising the concerns that the Member and others have outlined. All ex-gratia payments made through the support scheme after 1 April will be counted towards the compensation paid to an individual. This applies to a living or bereaved beneficiary, and they won't be disadvantaged. All compensation payments are calculated using a tariff model. In this case, the widow or a partner will have their compensation claim based, of course, on their particular circumstances and they can decide how they wish to receive their payment. They can choose to receive their compensation as either one single lump sum payment or a series of regular payments over five, 10 or 25 years, and those payments will increase each year with inflation. But I'd be very happy to look at the particular circumstances that the Member has raised in the Chamber today.
Mae’n fater sydd wedi’i drafod ar lefel y pedair gwlad, gan gydnabod y pryderon y mae’r Aelod ac eraill wedi’u hamlinellu. Bydd yr holl daliadau ex gratia a wneir drwy’r cynllun cymorth ar ôl 1 Ebrill yn cyfrif tuag at yr iawndal a delir i unigolyn. Mae hyn yn berthnasol i fuddiolwyr byw neu fuddiolwyr sydd mewn profedigaeth, ac ni fyddant dan anfantais. Cyfrifir pob taliad iawndal gan ddefnyddio model tariff. Yn yr achos hwn, bydd hawliad iawndal y gŵr, gwraig neu bartner gweddw yn seiliedig, wrth gwrs, ar eu hamgylchiadau penodol, a gallant benderfynu sut y maent yn dymuno derbyn eu taliad. Gallant ddewis derbyn eu hiawndal naill ai fel un cyfandaliad unigol neu gyfres o daliadau rheolaidd dros bum, 10 neu 25 mlynedd, a bydd y taliadau hynny’n cynyddu bob blwyddyn gyda chwyddiant. Ond rwy'n fwy na pharod i edrych ar yr amgylchiadau penodol y mae’r Aelod wedi’u codi yn y Siambr heddiw.
Cabinet Secretary, if I could add my name to all the comments that have been made, and particularly to thank Julie Morgan for not only the work she's done over many years, but also for raising this again today. Because it's clear, despite all the high hopes after Brian Langstaff's inquiry, that we still have these delays and it's obviously concerning. I would like to raise two particular points. There are 213 registered with the Welsh infected blood scheme. What I think we could be asking the UK Government to resolve is this: why can't the data that is on that scheme be transferred to the new scheme, so that people can be paid immediately? It's difficult to understand why that would not be possible, why it would not be the case.
The second point is that, for the remainder, which are the affected people, who are predominantly siblings, they've been told that they will be invited in 2029, that's in four years' time, to start their claim. But the question is how does UK Government know who to write to, who they are, when there was actually no register of those who are affected who may be invited in 2029. It seems to me that there's a need to fill some of these gaps in the processing of these. If those matters could be taken up and added to the list of all the other issues that have been raised, because these must be capable of prompt resolution. Obviously, the solution to all the compensation claims may take longer, but one does have concerns that this matter is not being expedited with the urgency that I think everyone here has been expressing.
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, hoffwn innau gytuno â'r holl sylwadau a wnaed, a hoffwn ddiolch yn enwedig i Julie Morgan nid yn unig am y gwaith y mae wedi’i wneud dros nifer o flynyddoedd, ond hefyd am godi hyn eto heddiw. Oherwydd mae'n amlwg, er gwaethaf yr holl obeithion mawr ar ôl ymchwiliad Brian Langstaff, fod yr oedi hwn gennym o hyd, ac mae hynny'n amlwg yn peri pryder. Hoffwn godi dau bwynt penodol. Mae 213 o bobl wedi cofrestru gyda chynllun cymorth gwaed heintiedig Cymru. Yr hyn y credaf y gallem fod yn gofyn i Lywodraeth y DU ei ddatrys yw hyn: pam na ellir trosglwyddo’r data ar y cynllun hwnnw i’r cynllun newydd, fel y gellir talu pobl ar unwaith? Mae'n anodd deall pam na fyddai hynny'n bosibl, pam na fyddai hynny'n digwydd.
Yr ail bwynt, o ran y gweddill, y bobl yr effeithiwyd arnynt, sef brodyr a chwiorydd yn bennaf, dywedwyd wrthynt y byddant yn cael eu gwahodd yn 2029, ymhen pedair blynedd, i ddechrau eu hawliad. Ond y cwestiwn yw sut y mae Llywodraeth y DU yn gwybod at bwy i ysgrifennu, pwy ydynt, pan nad oedd cofrestr o'r rheini yr effeithiwyd arnynt a allai gael eu gwahodd yn 2029. Ymddengys i mi fod angen llenwi rhai o'r bylchau hyn wrth brosesu'r rhain. Byddai'n dda pe gellid mynd i’r afael â’r materion hynny a’u hychwanegu at y rhestr o’r holl faterion eraill a godwyd, gan fod yn rhaid bod modd datrys y rhain yn brydlon. Yn amlwg, efallai y bydd yr ateb i’r holl hawliadau iawndal yn cymryd mwy o amser, ond mae rhywun yn pryderu nad yw’r mater hwn yn cael ei gyflymu gyda’r brys y credaf fod pob un ohonom yma wedi bod yn ei fynegi.
I'm grateful to Mick Antoniw for raising those two particular points. I'd be happy to make sure that my officials raise those directly with the UK Government.
Rwy’n ddiolchgar i Mick Antoniw am godi’r ddau bwynt penodol hynny. Rwy'n fwy na pharod i sicrhau bod fy swyddogion yn codi’r rheini’n uniongyrchol gyda Llywodraeth y DU.
Dwi eisiau cysylltu fy hun â'r sylwadau ar draws y pleidiau gwleidyddol heddiw, a diolch i Julie Morgan am y cwestiwn a'i gwaith hi yn ymgyrchu dros flynyddoedd lawer. Roeddwn i wedi methu bod yna i gyfarfod ymgyrchwyr heddiw, ond dwi'n diolch ac yn talu teyrnged iddyn nhw—Lynne Kelly o Haemophilia Wales a'r holl unigolion a theuluoedd hynny sydd wedi brwydro drwy boen personol rhyfeddol er mwyn ceisio cael cyfiawnder.
I want to echo the comments made across the political parties today, and I thank Julie Morgan for her question and her work in campaigning over many years. I couldn't be there to meet campaigners today, but I do thank them and pay tribute to them—Lynne Kelly, from Haemophilia Wales, and all the individuals and families who have battled through great personal pain in order to seek justice.
I'm going to read the words of a constituent of mine. I won't name them. They know who they are. But they've been very influential on me in relation to this issue. It's quite clear, they say, that 'the Government line is to meet its legal responsibilities as slowly as possible, in the hope that we will all die soon and stop bothering them. We feel that we are again being bullied by those in power, adding insult to severe injury. The situation cannot go on. The 4,000 or so infected victims must be compensated immediately so that they can put the past behind them and enjoy the time they have left in peace.' I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for agreeing to press the case again for rapid movement on compensation, but will he agree in pressing the case to express it in those terms of frustration and anger, and making it very clear that we in the Senedd believe there can be no further delay?
Rwy'n mynd i ddarllen geiriau un o fy etholwyr. Nid wyf am eu henwi. Maent yn gwybod pwy ydynt. Ond maent wedi dylanwadu'n fawr arnaf mewn perthynas â'r mater hwn. Mae'n eithaf amlwg, meddent, mai 'bwriad y Llywodraeth yw cyflawni ei chyfrifoldebau cyfreithiol mor araf â phosibl, yn y gobaith y bydd pob un ohonom yn marw cyn bo hir ac yn rhoi'r gorau i'w plagio. Rydym yn teimlo ein bod unwaith eto yn cael ein bwlio gan y rhai sydd mewn grym, gan roi halen ar friwiau difrifol. Ni all y sefyllfa hon barhau. Mae'n rhaid digolledu'r oddeutu 4,000 o ddioddefwyr heintiedig ar unwaith fel y gallant roi'r gorffennol y tu ôl iddynt a mwynhau'r amser sydd ganddynt ar ôl mewn heddwch.' Rwy’n ddiolchgar i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet am gytuno i bwysleisio’r achos eto dros symud yn gyflym ar iawndal, ond a wnaiff gytuno, wrth bwysleisio’r achos, i’w fynegi yn y termau hynny o rwystredigaeth a dicter, a dweud yn glir iawn ein bod ni yn y Senedd yn credu na ellir oedi ymhellach?
I think the strength of feeling in the Chamber is clear, and I think it's important to have a set of arrangements that can command confidence, so I'd be very happy to put the points to the UK Government in those terms.
Rwy'n credu bod cryfder y teimladau yn y Siambr yn glir, ac rwy'n credu ei bod yn bwysig cael set o drefniadau a all ennyn hyder, felly rwy'n fwy na pharod i wneud y pwyntiau i Lywodraeth y DU yn y termau hynny.
Ac yn olaf, John Griffiths.
And finally, John Griffiths.
Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. As with so many other Senedd Members, I have constituents who were and are affected by the infected blood scandal, and that word 'scandal' certainly applies to these matters, doesn't it? It really is a shocking scandal and absolutely heartbreaking for the families affected. It was informative to meet the campaigners here today, Cabinet Secretary, and lots of Senedd Members had very useful discussions with them in terms of the up-to-date situation.
Many of the matters I was going to raise have been raised by Senedd Members already, but I would very much like to join them in paying tribute to Julie Morgan and all of the campaigners outside of the Senedd in Wales for the strength of their commitment and the work that they do. I was going to ask if you would meet with Haemophilia Wales, but you've already answered that point from Mabon ap Gwynfor.
Could I just ask, in addition to that, Cabinet Secretary, could you ensure that the ongoing communication with Haemophilia Wales and affected families here in our country is everything it needs to be? Because it is sometimes quite a fast-changing situation. And as well as an initial meeting, I think having a system in place to allow for communication on an ongoing basis is absolutely crucial as well.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Fel gyda chymaint o Aelodau eraill o'r Senedd, mae gennyf etholwyr sydd wedi dioddef yn sgil y sgandal gwaed heintiedig, ac y mae’r gair ‘sgandal’ yn sicr yn berthnasol i’r materion hyn, onid yw? Mae wir yn sgandal ysgytwol a chwbl dorcalonnus i'r teuluoedd yr effeithir arnynt. Roedd yn addysgiadol cyfarfod â’r ymgyrchwyr yma heddiw, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a chafodd llawer o Aelodau’r Senedd drafodaethau defnyddiol iawn gyda hwy ynghylch y sefyllfa gyfredol.
Mae llawer o’r materion y bwriadwn eu codi wedi’u codi eisoes gan Aelodau o’r Senedd, ond hoffwn ymuno â hwy i dalu teyrnged i Julie Morgan a’r holl ymgyrchwyr y tu allan i Senedd Cymru am gryfder eu hymrwymiad a’r gwaith a wnânt. Roeddwn yn mynd i ofyn i chi gyfarfod â Hemoffilia Cymru, ond rydych chi eisoes wedi ateb y pwynt hwnnw gan Mabon ap Gwynfor.
Yn ogystal â hynny, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a gaf i ofyn i chi sicrhau bod y cyfathrebu parhaus â Hemoffilia Cymru a theuluoedd yr effeithir arnynt yma yn ein gwlad cystal ag y mae'n bosibl iddo fod? Oherwydd mae'n sefyllfa sy'n newid yn gyflym iawn weithiau. Ac yn ogystal â chyfarfod cychwynnol, rwy'n credu bod cael system ar waith i ganiatáu ar gyfer cyfathrebu ar sail barhaus yn gwbl hanfodol hefyd.
I thank John Griffiths for that, and I will certainly look to my officials to make sure that we have arrangements in place that make sure that, when we have information, that is shared in the way that he suggests.
May I also take the opportunity of echoing his thanks to Julie Morgan once again for bringing this important question to the Senedd today and to thank families and campaigners who are here to witness and share the debate with us today?
Diolch i John Griffiths am hynny, ac yn sicr, byddaf yn disgwyl i fy swyddogion sicrhau bod gennym drefniadau ar waith sy’n gwneud yn siŵr, pan fydd gennym wybodaeth, ei bod yn cael ei rhannu yn y ffordd yr awgryma.
A gaf i achub ar y cyfle hefyd i adleisio ei ddiolch i Julie Morgan unwaith eto am ddod â’r cwestiwn pwysig hwn i’r Senedd heddiw ac i ddiolch i deuluoedd ac ymgyrchwyr sydd yma i wylio'r ddadl a'i rhannu gyda ni heddiw?
Diolch i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet.
Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.
Eitem 4 yw'r datganiadau 90 eiliad. Dim ond un heddiw. Mark Isherwood.
Item 4 is the 90-second statements. There's only one today. Mark Isherwood.
Diolch. In 2008, the United Nations General Assembly designated 2 April each year as World Autism Awareness Day. Today is therefore World Autism Awareness Day 2025, with the theme of advancing neurodiversity and the UN sustainable development goals, which include reducing inequalities, good health and well-being and ensuring inclusive and equitable education for all. The day highlights the need for increased awareness and understanding of autism spectrum conditions, promoting acceptance, inclusion and support for autistic individuals. However, too many senior public officials in Wales still rely on tick-box autism awareness training and refuse to understand and meet the communication, sensory and processing needs of autistic individuals. This too often leads to bullying, blaming and punishing, pushing autistic people into crisis, rather than providing the care, health, education, housing and employment support needed.
At the last cross-party autism group, it was noted that many neurodiverse children are being educated at home, not by parental choice but due to inadequate support in mainstream school. A Gwynedd mum recently wrote stating that her autistic son's school is facing cuts, meaning that he is not receiving the support he needs. An autistic Anglesey constituent recently wrote, stating that autistic individuals are facing an increasingly hostile environment. And an autistic Flintshire mum wrote last Friday, describing discrimination and victimisation of the families who make complaints. Wales therefore needs action to turn professed autism awareness, understanding and acceptance from an unaccountable veneer into a living reality across our public and private sectors.
Diolch. Yn 2008, dynododd Cynulliad Cyffredinol y Cenhedloedd Unedig 2 Ebrill bob blwyddyn yn Ddiwrnod Ymwybyddiaeth Awtistiaeth y Byd. Mae heddiw felly'n Ddiwrnod Ymwybyddiaeth Awtistiaeth y Byd 2025, gyda’r thema o hyrwyddo niwroamrywiaeth a nodau datblygu cynaliadwy’r Cenhedloedd Unedig, sy’n cynnwys lleihau anghydraddoldebau, iechyd a llesiant da a sicrhau addysg gynhwysol a theg i bawb. Mae’r diwrnod yn amlygu’r angen am fwy o ymwybyddiaeth a dealltwriaeth o gyflyrau’r sbectrwm awtistiaeth, gan hyrwyddo derbyniad, cynhwysiant a chymorth i unigolion awtistig. Fodd bynnag, mae gormod o uwch swyddogion cyhoeddus yng Nghymru yn dal i ddibynnu ar hyfforddiant ymwybyddiaeth awtistiaeth sydd ond yn ticio blychau, ac yn gwrthod deall a diwallu anghenion cyfathrebu, synhwyraidd a phrosesu unigolion awtistig. Mae hyn yn rhy aml yn arwain at fwlio, beio a chosbi, gan wthio pobl awtistig i sefyllfa o argyfwng, yn hytrach na darparu’r gofal, yr iechyd, yr addysg, y tai a'r cymorth cyflogaeth sydd ei angen.
Yn y grŵp trawsbleidiol diwethaf ar awtistiaeth, nodwyd bod llawer o blant niwroamrywiol yn cael eu haddysgu gartref, nid drwy ddewis rhieni, ond oherwydd nad oes digon o gymorth mewn ysgolion prif ffrwd. Ysgrifennodd mam o Wynedd yn ddiweddar i nodi bod ysgol ei mab awtistig yn wynebu toriadau, sy'n golygu nad yw'n cael y cymorth sydd ei angen arno. Ysgrifennodd etholwr awtistig o Ynys Môn yn ddiweddar i nodi bod unigolion awtistig yn wynebu amgylchedd cynyddol elyniaethus. Ac ysgrifennodd mam awtistig o sir y Fflint ddydd Gwener diwethaf yn disgrifio'r gwahaniaethu a'r erledigaeth y mae teuluoedd sy'n gwneud cwynion yn ei brofi. Mae angen gweithredu ar Gymru, felly, i droi ymwybyddiaeth, dealltwriaeth a derbyniad o awtistiaeth o fod yn rhith arwynebol ac anatebol i fod yn realiti byw ar draws ein sectorau cyhoeddus a phreifat.
Diolch, Mark.
Thank you, Mark.
Eitem 5 heddiw yw'r ddadl frys: effaith diwygiadau lles diweddar y Canghellor. Galwaf ar Sioned Williams i agor y ddadl.
Item 5 today is an urgent debate: the impact of the Chancellor's recent welfare reforms. I call on Sioned Williams to open the debate.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. For any party claiming to represent the principles of equality, fairness and justice, eradicating the scourge of poverty should be their unshakeable lodestar, their unconditional purpose. And we were always led to believe that this was the case with the Labour Party. To quote the Cabinet Secretary for finance at the 2023 Labour Party conference, an incoming Starmer administration would be guided by a burning sense that
'this party’s mission is not to tinker at the edges, not to offer some mild amelioration, but to eradicate poverty'.
That's why the Welsh Government should have brought this debate to the floor of our Senedd today. It's extremely disappointing that it took a motion to call an urgent debate to force the Government to debate this issue, which will have, in the words of the Bevan Foundation, a huge and concerning impact on 275,000 people in Wales—to discuss the impact on Wales of the biggest cuts to disability benefits on record, which will push thousands into poverty.
We know that Labour isn't honouring long-held promises to Wales, as we've seen with their refusal to reform the outdated Barnett formula, devolving the Crown Estate and their failure to provide Wales with a single penny of HS2 consequentials. But we've now reached the stage where Labour is not only ignoring Welsh interests but actively working against them. How else to explain a decision to unleash welfare cuts that even George Osborne winces at, in the full knowledge that they will push hundreds of thousands of people into poverty, in the full knowledge that it will impact Wales harder. What's particularly shameful, as was reflected in the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions's letter to the First Minister, is that they haven't bothered with the pretence that the implications for Wales were even given a moment's thought. Instead, we have insulting blandishments about a broken benefits system, singularly failing to recognise that it is Labour's moral compass that is truly broken. An admission that no Wales-specific analysis has been undertaken. The sheer hollowness of the so-called partnership of power is plain for all to see. And to borrow the words of the Cabinet Secretary for finance once again, from a time when the Welsh Government was far more prepared to denounce the actions of Westminster, these are
'the deliberate decisions of a Government that knows what it is doing, knows that there will be thousands more children in poverty in Wales because of their cuts...but simply don't care.'
And while this was a decision taken in Westminster, because Wales has higher rates of disabled people of working age than the UK average and five of the UK's 10 local authorities with the highest rates of economic inactivity because of long-term illness, the impact of these unprecedented cuts to disability benefits on Wales will be devastating, and we need to know now what the Welsh Government's position is. After refusing to state what that position was in response to questions to the First Minister, to the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and to a topical question tabled by Plaid Cymru, the First Minister finally said that she was reserving her position when the Secretary of State for Wales suggested she had written to the UK Government in support of the welfare reforms. So, we need to hear clarity on a few issues this afternoon, don’t we?
Now that the First Minister has seen the response from the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, on which she said she would be basing her response, what is her position and that of her Government on these reforms? Does the Welsh Government agree with the loud and unified chorus of condemnation from inequality and poverty policy experts, social justice campaigners, disability rights campaigners, social policy researchers, disabled people’s organisations and, most importantly, disabled people themselves that these are short-sighted, immoral and unethical, and who say that these will have a chilling effect on engagement with support, leading not to increased employment, but to increased poverty? And what action is now being taken, therefore, by the Welsh Labour Government to address the impact of these cuts that the UK Labour Westminster Government didn’t even bother consulting with you on?
As no assessment has been provided to the Welsh Government, how will Ministers act to mitigate the impact of these reforms on the way it supports disabled people and people in poverty, and on the capacity and costs of the services it provides, the demand for welfare advice, the devolved grants and allowances, such as the discretionary assistance fund, for social and health services, for mental health support—the demand on which will all be disproportionately higher in Wales than in England? Additional resource will be needed for these services, so will the Welsh Government be asking for funding matched to this higher need, higher than the Barnettised uplift from the Chancellor? Will you be setting up a ministerial task and finish group on welfare reform, as you did in 2015 to consider the actions needed by Welsh Government in response to the consequences of Westminster cuts to welfare? That could also consider, of course, the continuing impact of the retention of the two-child cap, the scrapping of the winter fuel allowance for most pensioners, and the effect of the pension injustice suffered by 1950s-born women. I’d like answers, please, to those points in your response, as the Senedd and the people we all represent deserve answers. The time for spin is over and the time for opaqueness is over, because the impact of what the Government’s benefit cuts mean for ill and disabled people is even worse than first thought, according to the New Economics Foundation. While they say the widely reported numbers were concerning enough, that £4.8 billion-worth of cuts would lead to 250,000 people being pushed into poverty, including 50,000 children, they now say that the way these figures have been presented has concealed the fact that these cuts will hit ill and disabled people by almost £2 billion more than the reported figures, and could see around 100,000 additional people pushed into poverty.
So, we know now the UK Government has provided no assessment of the impact of these welfare reforms on Wales, no disaggregated data, so what work is now being done to conduct your own assessment, and when can we expect that to be published? How will the forthcoming disability rights plan and the child poverty strategy address these serious new challenges? I urge the Government to show leadership on this matter, which up to now has been conspicuous by its absence, evidenced by the fact that we had to force you to debate this issue, force you to reveal how you had engaged with the UK Government on this, force you ultimately to be answerable to the thousands of disabled people out there, many already facing financial and mental—[Interruption.] If you want to intervene, Hefin, intervene; otherwise, can you please be quiet?
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. I unrhyw blaid sy'n honni ei bod yn cynrychioli egwyddorion cydraddoldeb, tegwch a chyfiawnder, dylai dileu malltod tlodi fod yn egwyddor ddiysgog, yn ddiben diamod. Ac roeddem bob amser yn cael ein harwain i gredu bod hyn yn wir gyda'r Blaid Lafur. I ddyfynnu Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid yng nghynhadledd y Blaid Lafur yn 2023, byddai gweinyddiaeth Starmer yn cael ei harwain gan ymdeimlad angerddol
'nad cenhadaeth y blaid hon yw tincran at yr ymylon, na chynnig rhyw welliant bach, ond yn hytrach, dileu tlodi'.
Dyna pam y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru fod wedi dod â'r ddadl hon i lawr ein Senedd heddiw. Mae'n hynod siomedig ei bod wedi cymryd cynnig i alw dadl frys i orfodi'r Llywodraeth i drafod y mater hwn, a fydd, yng ngeiriau Sefydliad Bevan, yn cael effaith enfawr a phryderus ar 275,000 o bobl yng Nghymru—i drafod effaith y toriadau mwyaf erioed i fudd-daliadau anabledd ar Gymru, toriadau a fydd yn gwthio miloedd o bobl i fyw mewn tlodi.
Gwyddom nad yw Llafur yn anrhydeddu addewidion hirdymor i Gymru, fel y gwelsom gyda'u gwrthodiad i ddiwygio hen fformiwla Barnett, datganoli Ystad y Goron a'u methiant i ddarparu un geiniog o gyllid canlyniadol HS2 i Gymru. Ond rydym bellach wedi cyrraedd cam lle mae Llafur nid yn unig yn anwybyddu buddiannau Cymru ond yn gweithio'n weithredol yn eu herbyn. Sut arall y gellir esbonio penderfyniad i ryddhau toriadau lles sy'n gwneud i George Osborne hyd oed wingo, gan wybod yn iawn y byddant yn gwthio cannoedd o filoedd o bobl i fyw mewn tlodi, a chan wybod yn iawn y byddant yn effeithio'n waeth ar Gymru. Yr hyn sy'n arbennig o gywilyddus, fel yr adlewyrchwyd yn llythyr yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol dros Waith a Phensiynau at y Prif Weinidog, yw nad ydynt wedi trafferthu esgus bod y goblygiadau i Gymru wedi eu hystyried am eiliad. Yn hytrach, cawn weniaith sarhaus am system fudd-daliadau sydd wedi torri, gan fethu cydnabod mai cyfeiriad moesol Llafur sydd wedi torri mewn gwirionedd. Cyfaddefiad nad oes dadansoddiad penodol i Gymru wedi'i gynnal. Mae ffalster yr hyn a elwir yn bartneriaeth mewn grym yn amlwg i bawb ei weld. Ac i fenthyg geiriau Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid unwaith eto, o gyfnod pan oedd Llywodraeth Cymru yn llawer mwy parod i gondemnio gweithredoedd San Steffan, mae'r rhain
'yn benderfyniadau bwriadol gan Lywodraeth sy'n gwybod beth mae'n ei wneud, yn gwybod y bydd miloedd yn fwy o blant mewn tlodi yng Nghymru oherwydd eu toriadau...ond nid oes ots ganddyn nhw.'
Ac er bod hwn yn benderfyniad a wnaed yn San Steffan, oherwydd bod gan Gymru gyfraddau uwch o bobl anabl o oedran gweithio na chyfartaledd y DU a phump o'r 10 awdurdod lleol yn y DU gyda'r cyfraddau uchaf o anweithgarwch economaidd oherwydd salwch hirdymor, bydd effaith y toriadau digynsail hyn i fudd-daliadau anabledd ar Gymru yn ddinistriol, ac mae angen inni wybod nawr beth yw safbwynt Llywodraeth Cymru. Ar ôl gwrthod datgan beth oedd y safbwynt hwnnw mewn ymateb i gwestiynau i'r Prif Weinidog, i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol ac i gwestiwn amserol a gyflwynwyd gan Blaid Cymru, dywedodd y Prif Weinidog o'r diwedd ei bod yn ymatal rhag rhoi safbwynt pan awgrymodd Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru ei bod wedi ysgrifennu at Lywodraeth y DU i gefnogi'r diwygiadau lles. Felly, mae angen inni glywed eglurder ar ambell fater y prynhawn yma.
Gan fod y Prif Weinidog bellach wedi gweld yr ymateb gan yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol dros Waith a Phensiynau, y dywedodd y byddai'n seilio ei hymateb arno, beth yw ei safbwynt hi a safbwynt ei Llywodraeth ar y diwygiadau hyn? A yw Llywodraeth Cymru yn cytuno â'r corws uchel ac unedig o gondemniad gan arbenigwyr polisi anghydraddoldeb a thlodi, ymgyrchwyr cyfiawnder cymdeithasol, ymgyrchwyr hawliau pobl anabl, ymchwilwyr polisi cymdeithasol, sefydliadau pobl anabl, ac yn bwysicaf oll, pobl anabl eu hunain fod y rhain yn gibddall ac yn anfoesol, ac sy'n dweud y bydd y rhain yn cael effaith ofnadwy ar y nifer sy'n gofyn am gymorth, gan arwain nid at fwy o gyflogaeth, ond at fwy o dlodi? A pha gamau sy'n cael eu cymryd nawr, felly, gan Lywodraeth Lafur Cymru i fynd i'r afael ag effaith y toriadau hyn na wnaeth Llywodraeth Lafur y DU yn San Steffan drafferthu ymgynghori â chi yn eu cylch hyn yn oed?
Gan nad oes unrhyw asesiad wedi'i ddarparu i Lywodraeth Cymru, sut y bydd Gweinidogion yn gweithredu i liniaru effaith y diwygiadau hyn ar y ffordd y mae'n cefnogi pobl anabl a phobl sy'n byw mewn tlodi, ac ar gapasiti a chostau'r gwasanaethau y mae'n eu darparu, y galw am gyngor lles, y grantiau a'r lwfansau datganoledig, megis y gronfa cymorth dewisol, am wasanaethau cymdeithasol ac iechyd, am gymorth iechyd meddwl—y bydd y galw amdanynt i gyd yn anghymesur o uchel yng Nghymru o gymharu â Lloegr? Bydd angen adnoddau ychwanegol ar gyfer y gwasanaethau hyn, felly a fydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn gofyn am gyllid i gyd-fynd â'r cynnydd yn yr angen, sy'n uwch na'r codiad Barnett gan y Canghellor? A fyddwch chi'n sefydlu grŵp gorchwyl a gorffen gweinidogol ar ddiwygio lles, fel y gwnaethoch chi yn 2015 i ystyried y camau yr oedd eu hangen ar Lywodraeth Cymru mewn ymateb i ganlyniadau toriadau San Steffan i les? Gallai hynny ystyried effaith barhaus cadw'r cap dau blentyn, dileu lwfans tanwydd y gaeaf i'r mwyafrif o bensiynwyr, ac effaith yr anghyfiawnder pensiwn a ddioddefir gan fenywod a aned yn y 1950au. Hoffwn gael atebion i'r pwyntiau hynny yn eich ymateb, gan fod y Senedd a'r bobl a gynrychiolir gan bawb ohonom yn haeddu atebion. Mae'r amser ar gyfer sbin ar ben ac mae'r amser ar gyfer diffyg tryloywder ar ben, oherwydd mae effaith yr hyn y mae'r toriadau i fudd-daliadau'r Llywodraeth yn ei olygu i bobl sâl ac anabl hyd yn oed yn waeth nag a feddyliwyd yn wreiddiol, yn ôl y Sefydliad Economeg Newydd. Er eu bod yn dweud bod y niferoedd a gofnodwyd yn eang yn ddigon pryderus, y byddai toriadau gwerth £4.8 biliwn yn arwain at 250,000 o bobl yn cael eu gwthio i fyw mewn tlodi, gan gynnwys 50,000 o blant, maent bellach yn dweud bod y ffordd y cyflwynwyd y ffigurau hyn wedi cuddio'r ffaith y bydd y toriadau'n taro pobl sâl ac anabl bron i £2 biliwn yn fwy na'r ffigurau a gofnodwyd, a gallai olygu bod tua 100,000 o bobl ychwanegol yn cael eu gwthio i fyw mewn tlodi.
Felly, rydym yn gwybod bellach nad yw Llywodraeth y DU wedi darparu unrhyw asesiad o effaith y diwygiadau lles ar Gymru, dim data wedi'i ddadgyfuno, felly pa waith sy'n cael ei wneud nawr i gynnal eich asesiad eich hun, a phryd y gallwn ddisgwyl iddo gael ei gyhoeddi? Sut y bydd y cynllun hawliau pobl anabl sydd ar y ffordd a'r strategaeth tlodi plant yn mynd i'r afael â'r heriau newydd difrifol hyn? Rwy'n annog y Llywodraeth i ddangos arweinyddiaeth ar y mater hwn, sydd hyd yma wedi bod yn amlwg drwy ei absenoldeb, fel y tystia'r ffaith bod yn rhaid inni eich gorfodi i drafod y mater hwn, eich gorfodi i ddatgelu sut y gwnaethoch chi ymgysylltu â Llywodraeth y DU ar hyn, eich gorfodi yn y pen draw i fod yn atebol i'r miloedd o bobl anabl allan yno, a llawer ohonynt eisoes yn wynebu trallod ariannol a meddyliol—[Torri ar draws.] Os ydych chi eisiau ymyrryd, Hefin, gwnewch hynny; fel arall, a wnewch chi fod yn dawel os gwelwch yn dda?
The Government voted to have this debate, and I think—
Pleidleisiodd y Llywodraeth dros gael y ddadl hon, ac rwy'n credu—
Because I put forward a—
Oherwydd fy mod i wedi cyflwyno—
Can the Member put his intervention forward, please?
A wnaiff yr Aelod gyflwyno ei ymyriad, os gwelwch yn dda?
Go for it.
Ewch amdani.
This is a serious issue, and I think just trying to gain party political advantage without taking the issue seriously is very disappointing.
Mae hwn yn fater difrifol, ac rwy'n credu bod ceisio ennill mantais wleidyddol heb fod o ddifrif am y mater yn siomedig iawn.
Okay—[Interruption.]—I'll answer, I'll answer. We asked for this debate. We asked for it through Business Committee. We asked for it in business statement. We had to put forward topical questions. We only had a written statement in response to the spring statement. I had to table for an urgent debate to get this to happen. [Interruption.] You voted for it then because it was rather embarrassing, wasn't it? The Government should have put this forward. [Interruption.] I've answered you. There's your answer. [Interruption.]
O'r gorau—[Torri ar draws.]—fe atebaf, fe atebaf. Fe ofynnon ni am y ddadl hon. Fe wnaethom ofyn amdani drwy'r Pwyllgor Busnes. Fe wnaethom ofyn amdani mewn datganiad busnes. Roedd yn rhaid inni gyflwyno cwestiynau amserol. Dim ond datganiad ysgrifenedig a gawsom mewn ymateb i ddatganiad y gwanwyn. Roedd yn rhaid imi gyflwyno dadl frys i gael hyn i ddigwydd. [Torri ar draws.] Fe wnaethoch chi bleidleisio drosto wedyn am ei fod yn embaras braidd, onid oedd? Dylai'r Llywodraeth fod wedi cyflwyno hyn. [Torri ar draws.] Rwyf wedi eich ateb. Dyna eich ateb. [Torri ar draws.]
Can I—? [Interruption.] Alun—[Interruption.] Alun—
A gaf i—? [Torri ar draws.] Alun—[Torri ar draws.] Alun—
Well, perhaps you could tell your Government what to table, then, Alun Davies. Perhaps you should tell your business manager and Chief Whip. Perhaps you should tell your Cabinet Secretaries—
Wel, efallai y gallech ddweud wrth eich Llywodraeth beth i'w gyflwyno, felly, Alun Davies. Efallai y dylech ddweud wrth eich rheolwr busnes a'ch Prif Chwip. Efallai y dylech ddweud wrth eich Ysgrifenyddion Cabinet—
Wait a second. Let's not have the conversation across the Chamber from either side. An intervention was had, you responded, there should be no other conversations. Let's continue with the contribution.
Arhoswch eiliad. Gadewch inni beidio â chael y sgwrs ar draws y Siambr o'r naill ochr na'r llall. Cafwyd ymyriad, fe wnaethoch chi ymateb, ni ddylai fod unrhyw sgyrsiau eraill. Gadewch inni barhau gyda'r cyfraniad.
I will. I think you can see many of us have had e-mails from our constituents that have made us become very, very concerned and extremely disappointed by this, and that's what I'm trying to reflect in my contribution today. So, I'm going to continue.
I urge the Government to show leadership on this matter, which up to now has been conspicuous by its absence, evidenced by the fact that we had to force you to debate this issue, force you to reveal how you had engaged with the UK Government on this, forced you ultimately to be answerable to the thousands of disabled people out there, many already facing serious financial and mental health challenges, who are telling us and those who are supporting them that they are scared, that they don't know how they will cope physically, financially and mentally, that they feel under attack and stigmatised, with harmful and false narratives around disability and entitlement to social security being bolstered by these plans. So, please respond today to these real fears, these real concerns, with strong condemnation and real actions.
Fe wnaf. Rwy'n credu y gallwch weld bod llawer ohonom wedi cael negeseuon e-bost gan ein hetholwyr sydd wedi ein gwneud yn bryderus iawn ac yn hynod siomedig ynglŷn â hyn, a dyna beth rwy'n ceisio ei adlewyrchu yn fy nghyfraniad heddiw. Felly, rwy'n mynd i barhau.
Rwy'n annog y Llywodraeth i ddangos arweinyddiaeth ar y mater, sydd hyd yn hyn wedi bod yn amlwg drwy ei absenoldeb, fel y tystia'r ffaith ein bod wedi gorfod eich gorfodi i drafod y mater, eich gorfodi i ddatgelu sut y gwnaethoch chi ymgysylltu â Llywodraeth y DU ar hyn, eich gorfodi yn y pen draw i fod yn atebol i'r miloedd o bobl anabl allan yno, a llawer ohonynt eisoes yn wynebu heriau ariannol a heriau iechyd meddwl difrifol, sy'n dweud wrthym ni a'r rhai sy'n eu cefnogi eu bod yn ofnus, nad ydynt yn gwybod sut y gallant ymdopi yn gorfforol, yn ariannol ac yn feddyliol, eu bod yn teimlo dan ymosodiad ac wedi'u stigmateiddio, gyda naratifau niweidiol a ffug ynghylch anabledd a hawl i nawdd cymdeithasol yn cael eu hatgyfnerthu gan y cynlluniau hyn. Felly, ymatebwch heddiw i'r ofnau gwirioneddol hyn, y pryderon gwirioneddol hyn, gyda chondemniad cryf a gweithredoedd go iawn.
I thank Sioned for pushing for this debate today. However, I am of the opinion that whatever is said here today will have little to no impact on UK Government policy. This is not a UK Government known for listening to the Labour cliques in the Welsh Government. Why should they pay any attention to what we say here today?
The pathways to work Green Paper is causing real and deep concern amongst those in receipt of health-related benefits across the length and breadth of Wales. According to the First Minister, the UK Government cuts to welfare will fall more heavily in Wales. This is just adding to the concerns for our disabled constituents, which will not be addressed by this debate today. We need greater clarity, not more noise. Surely we would be better off calling the Secretary of State for Wales to come to this Chamber to address concerns and thoroughly outline the UK Government's plans. After all, this is not legislation, it is a Green Paper, the start of the process, not the end. The Senedd and the representatives of the people of Wales should be able to feed their views into the process, but this is a reserved matter. We have no direct role in these UK reforms.
We on this side of the Chamber believe that it should remain that way. Unlike Plaid and many in the Labour group, Welsh Conservatives don't support the devolution of welfare. If it was devolved, would you be doing anything different? I would like for Plaid and the Welsh Government to outline what steps they would take to ensure the long-term sustainability of the welfare system and to restore fairness. Doing nothing is not an option; the bill for health and related benefits for people of working age is set to rise to £71 billion a year by the end of the decade, far more than we spend on defending our nation. Something has to be done, and I congratulate the UK Government for finally realising this, but they are being disingenuous and hypocritical. Rachel Reeves has stated that designing a benefits system to save money is wrong. Liz Kendall has said that cutting disability support goes against the values of a decent society. According to Sir Keir Starmer, cutting disability benefits is unfair and unacceptable.
What we need is clear direction and, above all, assurances that disabled people will not be forced into poverty as a result of the UK Government's proposals. But these are questions that only the UK Government can address, so either the Welsh Government needs to be more forthcoming with their correspondence with the UK Ministers, or we need to be able to question the UK Government directly. Diolch yn fawr.
Diolch i Sioned am wthio am y ddadl hon heddiw. Fodd bynnag, nid wyf yn credu y caiff beth bynnag sy'n cael ei ddweud yma heddiw fawr ddim effaith ar bolisi Llywodraeth y DU. Nid yw hon yn Llywodraeth y DU sy'n enwog am wrando ar y cliciau Llafur yn Llywodraeth Cymru. Pam y dylent dalu unrhyw sylw i'r hyn a ddywedwn ni yma heddiw?
Mae'r Papur Gwyrdd llwybrau at waith yn achosi pryder gwirioneddol a dwfn ymhlith y rhai sy'n derbyn budd-daliadau sy'n gysylltiedig ag iechyd ar hyd a lled Cymru. Yn ôl Prif Weinidog Cymru, bydd toriadau Llywodraeth y DU i les yn cael mwy o effaith yng Nghymru. Mae hyn yn ychwanegol at y pryderon i'n hetholwyr anabl na chaiff sylw yn y ddadl hon heddiw. Mae angen mwy o eglurder arnom, nid mwy o sŵn. Yn sicr, byddai'n well inni alw ar Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru i ddod i'r Siambr i fynd i'r afael â phryderon ac amlinellu cynlluniau Llywodraeth y DU yn drylwyr. Wedi'r cyfan, nid deddfwriaeth yw hon, ond Papur Gwyrdd, dechrau proses, nid ei diwedd. Dylai'r Senedd a chynrychiolwyr pobl Cymru allu bwydo eu barn i mewn i'r broses, ond mae hwn yn fater a gadwyd yn ôl. Nid oes gennym unrhyw rôl uniongyrchol yn y diwygiadau hyn yn y DU.
Rydym ni ar yr ochr hon i'r Siambr yn credu y dylai aros felly. Yn wahanol i Blaid Cymru a llawer yn y grŵp Llafur, nid yw'r Ceidwadwyr Cymreig yn cefnogi datganoli lles. Pe bai'n cael ei ddatganoli, a fyddech chi'n gwneud unrhyw beth yn wahanol? Hoffwn i Blaid Cymru a Llywodraeth Cymru amlinellu pa gamau y byddent yn eu cymryd i sicrhau cynaliadwyedd hirdymor y system les ac i adfer tegwch. Nid yw gwneud dim yn opsiwn; mae'r bil ar gyfer budd-daliadau iechyd a budd-daliadau cysylltiedig i bobl o oedran gweithio yn mynd i godi i £71 biliwn y flwyddyn erbyn diwedd y degawd, sy'n llawer mwy nag a wariwn ar amddiffyn ein gwlad. Mae'n rhaid gwneud rhywbeth, ac rwy'n llongyfarch Llywodraeth y DU am sylweddoli hyn o'r diwedd, ond maent yn anniffuant ac yn rhagrithiol. Mae Rachel Reeves wedi dweud bod llunio system fudd-daliadau i arbed arian yn anghywir. Mae Liz Kendall wedi dweud bod torri cymorth i bobl anabl yn mynd yn groes i werthoedd cymdeithas weddus. Yn ôl Syr Keir Starmer, mae torri budd-daliadau i bobl anabl yn annheg ac yn annerbyniol.
Yr hyn sydd ei angen arnom yw cyfeiriad clir ac yn anad dim, sicrwydd na fydd pobl anabl yn cael eu gorfodi i fyw mewn tlodi o ganlyniad i gynigion Llywodraeth y DU. Ond mae'r rhain yn gwestiynau na all neb ond Llywodraeth y DU fynd i'r afael â hwy, felly naill ai mae angen i Lywodraeth Cymru fod yn fwy parod gyda'u gohebiaeth â Gweinidogion y DU, neu mae angen inni allu cwestiynu Llywodraeth y DU yn uniongyrchol. Diolch yn fawr.
I declare an interest in this debate as my daughter is in receipt of disability living allowance, and in seven years' time, when she's 16, she'll be moving on to personal independence payments. And the fact is that she's disabled—that is something that a parent with a child who is disabled comes to terms with over time—and the benefits system is there to support her. But after I'm no longer here to look after her she'll still be reliant on the benefits system, and what I don't want to do is get into a position where anything I say is frightening those people who are in a similar position to me. I'm connected to the autism community in Caerphilly and parents of disabled children, and I would reassure them that, where a child is disabled or with a disability that is getting worse, the benefits cuts will not have an impact on them and their children will continue to be supported.
The other thing I'd say about my daughter and children like her is that, one day, I want her to be able to work. At the moment, I don't know if she can. She's struggling to read and she's struggling to write, but she's very creative and I would hope that the system will find, one day, a job for her. And that is the role, I think, of the benefits system. At the moment, it is not achieving that; it is trapping people with autism, learning disabilities and other disabilities out of work and in poverty. The reform of the system requires individuals to be supported, and the First Minister said on Wales Online, and it was reported by the BBC, that she's concerned about those individuals who may be affected by these changes, and that's absolutely right. But we've seen where it can work.
A few weeks ago, at First Minister's questions, I made reference to Engage to Change, an organisation that was run through Cardiff University, which introduced job coaching and job carving for 1,300 autistic and/or learning disabled young people. And of those, 41 per cent of them found work. Across the UK, the average number of people finding work in those same situations is 4 per cent, and what that tells us is that our benefits system is working in the wrong direction and not enough of it is going to supporting people into work through things like job coaching. That can happen and that is the lesson and the legacy of Engage to Change. And I know that when my daughter and people like her reach that age when they will be looking for work, there's—
Rwy'n datgan buddiant yn y ddadl hon am fod fy merch yn cael lwfans byw i'r anabl, ac ymhen saith mlynedd, pan fydd hi'n 16, bydd hi'n symud ymlaen i daliadau annibyniaeth personol. A'r gwir yw ei bod hi'n anabl—mae hynny'n rhywbeth y mae rhiant sydd â phlentyn sy'n anabl yn dod i delerau ag ef dros amser—ac mae'r system fudd-daliadau yno i'w chefnogi. Ond pan na fyddaf i yma mwyach i ofalu amdani bydd hi'n dal i fod yn ddibynnol ar y system fudd-daliadau, a'r hyn nad wyf am ei wneud yw mynd i sefyllfa lle mae unrhyw beth rwy'n ei ddweud yn dychryn y bobl sydd mewn sefyllfa debyg i mi. Rwy'n gysylltiedig â'r gymuned awtistiaeth yng Nghaerffili a rhieni plant anabl, ac rwy'n eu sicrhau, pan fydd plentyn yn anabl neu ag anabledd sy'n gwaethygu, na fydd y toriadau i fudd-daliadau yn cael unrhyw effaith arnynt ac y bydd eu plant yn parhau i gael eu cefnogi.
Y peth arall yr hoffwn ei ddweud am fy merch a phlant tebyg iddi yw fy mod eisiau iddi allu gweithio rhyw ddydd. Ar hyn o bryd, nid wyf yn gwybod a fydd hi'n gallu. Mae hi'n cael trafferth darllen ac mae hi'n cael trafferth ysgrifennu, ond mae hi'n greadigol iawn ac rwy'n gobeithio y bydd y system yn dod o hyd i swydd iddi ryw ddydd. A dyna rôl y system fudd-daliadau. Ar hyn o bryd, nid yw'n cyflawni hynny; mae'n caethiwo pobl ag awtistiaeth, anableddau dysgu ac anableddau eraill allan o waith ac mewn tlodi. Mae diwygio'r system yn galw am gefnogaeth i unigolion, a dywedodd y Prif Weinidog ar Wales Online, a chafodd ei adrodd gan y BBC, ei bod hi'n pryderu am yr unigolion a allai gael eu heffeithio gan y newidiadau hyn, ac mae hynny'n hollol iawn. Ond rydym wedi gweld lle gall weithio.
Ychydig wythnosau yn ôl, mewn cwestiynau i'r Prif Weinidog, cyfeiriais at Engage to Change, sefydliad a oedd yn cael ei redeg drwy Brifysgol Caerdydd, a gyflwynai hyfforddiant swyddi a theilwra swyddi ar gyfer 1,300 o bobl ifanc awtistig a/neu bobl ifanc ag anableddau dysgu. Ac o'r rheini, daeth 41 y cant ohonynt o hyd i waith. Ar draws y DU, nifer cyfartalog y bobl sy'n dod o hyd i waith yn yr un sefyllfaoedd yw 4 y cant, a'r hyn y mae hynny'n ei ddweud wrthym yw bod ein system fudd-daliadau yn gweithio i'r cyfeiriad anghywir ac nad oes digon ohono'n mynd tuag at gefnogi pobl i weithio trwy bethau fel hyfforddiant swyddi. Gall hynny ddigwydd a dyna wers a gwaddol Engage to Change. Ac rwy'n gwybod pan fydd fy merch a phobl fel hi yn cyrraedd yr oedran pan fyddant yn chwilio am waith, fod yna—
Would you give way?
A wnewch chi ildio?
Just two seconds.
There's an opportunity for the benefits system to support them into that. Yes, Mark Isherwood, who I know is a long-standing campaigner on autism and learning support.
Dwy eiliad.
Mae cyfle i'r system fudd-daliadau eu cefnogi i mewn i hynny. Ie, Mark Isherwood, y gwn ei fod yn ymgyrchydd hirsefydlog ar awtistiaeth a chymorth dysgu.
Thank you. As you are a fellow member of the cross-party autism group, who also periodically attends the cross-party group on disability, will you confirm my statement that we've taken evidence in both those cross-party groups on disability and employment, and disabled and autistic people are telling us that they want to work, the problem is the barriers to employment and benefits accessibility that they encounter?
Diolch. Gan eich bod yn gyd-aelod o'r grŵp awtistiaeth trawsbleidiol, sydd hefyd yn mynychu'r grŵp trawsbleidiol ar anabledd o bryd i'w gilydd, a wnewch chi gadarnhau fy natganiad ein bod wedi cymryd tystiolaeth yn y ddau grŵp trawsbleidiol hynny ar anabledd a chyflogaeth, ac mae pobl anabl ac awtistig yn dweud wrthym eu bod eisiau gweithio, y broblem yw'r rhwystrau y maent yn eu hwynebu i gyflogaeth a hygyrchedd budd-daliadau?
That's absolutely the case and I've heard learning disabled and autistic people say that, and we've seen that through Engage to Change. I listened very carefully to your 90-second statement, which made that clear, in Autism Awareness Month as well.
I also have got concerns that I want to raise about people with mental health diagnoses, also in this case. We cannot stigmatise people with mental health conditions and I am concerned about some of the language in the Green Paper on those individuals with mental health conditions. Where someone has a mental health condition, there could be an underlying undiagnosed cause. So, people in their 30s, 40s, 50s and 60s could be undiagnosed autistic and therefore suffering from mental health conditions as a result of that. Now, if the level that they have to reach in order to qualify for a PIP is raised, yet they have an underlying condition, I would like the UK Government to consider that those PIPs cannot be removed, or any support be removed, until they've gone through the diagnostic process, however long that takes. That'll be part of what I'll be feeding back in my response to the Green Paper.
Chris Evans, MP for Caerphilly, and I will be issuing a joint response to the Green Paper. I've read through it. We are happy to take Liz Kendall at her word when she said in the letter to the First Minister that the Green Paper is the beginning of the conversation and not the end point. I'm willing to take that as an opportunity to recommend these changes to the Government's paper, both from my lived experience, but also from listening to those constituents who've contacted me and other stakeholders in my constituency and beyond who have these experiences and know what needs to change, both to help them and to mitigate the consequences of what's been announced.
Mae hynny'n bendant yn wir a chlywais bobl ag anabledd dysgu a phobl awtistig yn dweud hynny, ac rydym wedi gweld hynny drwy Engage to Change. Gwrandewais yn ofalus iawn ar eich datganiad 90 eiliad, a wnaeth hynny'n glir, ym mis Ymwybyddiaeth Awtistiaeth hefyd.
Mae gennyf bryderon hefyd yr wyf am eu codi am bobl sydd wedi cael diagnosis iechyd meddwl. Ni allwn stigmateiddio pobl â chyflyrau iechyd meddwl ac rwy'n pryderu am rywfaint o'r iaith yn y Papur Gwyrdd am unigolion â chyflyrau iechyd meddwl. Lle mae gan rywun gyflwr iechyd meddwl, gallai fod achos sylfaenol na wnaed diagnosis ohono. Felly, gallai pobl yn eu 30au, 40au, 50au a 60au fod heb gael diagnosis o awtistiaeth ac felly'n dioddef o gyflyrau iechyd meddwl o ganlyniad i hynny. Nawr, os yw'r lefel y mae'n rhaid iddynt ei chyrraedd er mwyn bod yn gymwys ar gyfer taliadau annibyniaeth personol yn cael ei chodi, ond bod ganddynt gyflwr isorweddol, hoffwn i Lywodraeth y DU ystyried na ellir cael gwared ar y taliadau annibyniaeth personol hynny, ac na ddylid dileu unrhyw gymorth, hyd nes eu bod wedi mynd drwy'r broses ddiagnostig, ni waeth pa mor hir y bydd hynny'n ei gymryd. Bydd hynny'n rhan o'r hyn y byddaf yn ei fwydo'n ôl yn fy ymateb i'r Papur Gwyrdd.
Bydd Chris Evans, AS Caerffili, a minnau'n cyhoeddi ymateb ar y cyd i'r Papur Gwyrdd. Rwyf wedi darllen drwyddo. Rydym yn hapus i gymryd gair Liz Kendall pan ddywedodd yn y llythyr at y Prif Weinidog mai'r Papur Gwyrdd yw dechrau'r sgwrs ac nid ei phen draw. Rwy'n barod i gymryd hynny fel cyfle i argymell y newidiadau hyn i bapur y Llywodraeth, o fy mhrofiad bywyd, ond hefyd o wrando ar yr etholwyr sydd wedi cysylltu â mi a rhanddeiliaid eraill yn fy etholaeth a thu hwnt sydd â'r profiadau hyn ac yn gwybod beth ddylai newid, i'w helpu ac i liniaru canlyniadau'r hyn sydd wedi'i gyhoeddi.
Would you take an intervention, Hefin?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad, Hefin?
Yes.
Gwnaf.
I recognise what you're saying, but the thing I think that we need to make clear also, though, is that there are 12 measures, changes, that are not being consulted on—they're not in the Green Paper—such as the requirement to score at least four points to get the daily living element of PIP; that 87 conditions, which include things like fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis, which can really impact you, are not now going to be included. So, they are not up for discussion.
Rwy'n cydnabod yr hyn rydych chi'n ei ddweud, ond y peth y mae angen inni ei wneud yn glir hefyd, fodd bynnag, yw bod yna 12 mesur, newidiadau, nad ymgynghorir arnynt—nid ydynt yn y Papur Gwyrdd—megis y gofyniad i sgorio o leiaf bedwar pwynt i gael elfen bywyd beunyddiol y taliadau annibyniaeth personol; nad yw 87 o gyflyrau, sy'n cynnwys pethau fel ffibromyalgia ac osteoarthritis, a all effeithio'n fawr arnoch, yn mynd i gael eu cynnwys mwyach. Felly, nid ydynt yn mynd i gael eu trafod.
Okay. So, they are up for discussion in the Green Paper, in that the four-points point is mentioned, because that's where I read it, in the Green Paper. But also one of the consultation questions asks us what would we like to see in place of PIP, what kind of support should be there in place where those four points have not been reached. So, there is an opportunity to make representations there.
I'm going to close my speech now because I'm out of time, but I would say that the responsible thing is that, collectively as a Senedd, we make our representations, that the Welsh Government makes a representation back, and that we work with our Members of Parliament in our communities to make sure the voices of those people who are concerned are heard by the Westminster Government.
Iawn. Felly, maent i'w trafod yn y Papur Gwyrdd, yn yr ystyr bod y pwynt pedwar pwynt yn cael ei grybwyll am mai dyna lle y'i darllenais, yn y Papur Gwyrdd. Ond hefyd mae un o gwestiynau'r ymgynghoriad yn gofyn i ni beth yr hoffem ei weld yn lle taliadau annibyniaeth personol, pa fath o gymorth a ddylai fod yno lle nad yw'r pedwar pwynt hynny wedi'u cyrraedd. Felly, mae cyfle i wneud sylwadau yno.
Rwy'n mynd i orffen fy araith nawr am fod fy amser ar ben, ond hoffwn ddweud mai'r peth cyfrifol yw ein bod ni, gyda'n gilydd fel Senedd, yn gwneud ein sylwadau, fod Llywodraeth Cymru yn gwneud sylwadau yn ôl, a'n bod yn gweithio gyda'n Haelodau Seneddol yn ein cymunedau i wneud yn siŵr fod lleisiau'r bobl sy'n pryderu yn cael eu clywed gan Lywodraeth San Steffan.
Mae'r pythefnos diwethaf wedi bod yn ddadlennol mewn sawl ystyr: Llywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan yn cyhoeddi diwygiadau i'r system les fydd yn cosbi'r mwyaf bregus, Llywodraeth Lafur yng Nghymru yn fud, mewn difrif, yn wyneb storm o feirniadaeth a'r partneriaid mewn grym honedig yma yn profi eu hunain i fod mor ofnadwy o aneffeithiol, a hynny'n cael ei adlewyrchu yn y ffaith does dim asesiad wedi cael ei wneud o effaith y toriadau lles ar Gymru. Mae'n rhyfeddol.
The last fortnight has been revealing in several respects: a Westminster Labour Government announcing welfare changes that will penalise the most vulnerable, a Labour Government in Wales silent in the face of a storm of protest and these supposed partners in power proving themselves to be so terribly ineffective, and that's reflected in the fact that no assessment has been made of the impact of the welfare cuts on Wales. It's astonishing.
Let me take Members back through the timeline of events to better understand the Welsh Government's position and approach to the Chancellor's reforms. On 11 March, the First Minister wrote to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, a letter that didn't raise one concern about the impacts of the reforms on the people of Wales—not one concern. Subsequently, on 18 March, the First Minister told me that she had raised concerns with No. 10—a yet unnamed official whom she spoke to—but there's no record of the conversation. What particular concerns did she raise on behalf of the Welsh Government then? We need an answer to that rather important question.
She said that she was:
'very pleased to see that many of those concerns have been taken on board and that the most vulnerable will continue to be protected',
yet eight days later the Chancellor went further and deeper with her welfare cuts than we had previously expected. So, what exactly did the First Minister influence?
Yesterday, a source close to the First Minister let it be known that she was displeased with the Secretary of State for Wales, Jo Stevens, for saying that she had supported the cuts. Why didn't the First Minister say so explicitly herself, rather than make some ambiguous comments about others speaking on her behalf? If she wasn't to show her displeasure—though we're still waiting for her condemnation, of course, rather than displeasure—how about saying unequivocally which elements of the UK Government's reforms she disagrees with and explain how the Welsh end of the so-called partnership in power will try to influence the Westminster end to change course?
Yesterday, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice committed to publishing a letter she wrote to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. As of 3 o'clock this afternoon, when I last checked, that hasn't happened, as far as I'm aware—nothing on the Welsh Government's website whatsoever. How are we to scrutinise? Then we have Liz Kendall's letter—a response to the First Minister's cursory note—that makes only a passing reference to working with Welsh Government on the impacts on Wales. It's nothing short of contemptuous.
What is the Welsh Government's understanding of when a Welsh-specific impact assessment will be made available? What consideration has Welsh Government given to undertaking their own assessment with the information available to them? I'll add here that, alongside complete ignorance of the impact in Wales of the welfare cuts, we've had it confirmed today that the national insurance changes, which come with full reimbursement for the public sector in England, only come with a Barnett consequential for Wales, leaving Wales, perhaps, we think, around £66 million short—another sign that this UK Labour Government cares not one bit about Wales. Dirprwy Lywydd, under Labour we have been taken back to a time reminiscent of Conservative rule at Westminster, unleashing austerity—because that's what this is—failing to consult with Welsh Government, and showing a carefree attitude to the impact of decisions on the people of Wales. This morning the First Minister said, and I quote again, ‘This is a UK Government decision, it's not my decision. This is absolutely the UK Government that's got to defend this position.’ It will not wash.
On 3 July last year, in Carmarthen—I was there on the same day—the First Minister said she was proud to stand alongside Keir Starmer. She can't distance herself from him now on this issue. And neither can she forget that she is the leader of the Labour Party in Wales, including its MPs. So, in her absence here this afternoon, I ask her: will she be instructing those MPs to vote against these cuts? If not, we know which side she's on.
Gadewch imi fynd â'r Aelodau yn ôl drwy'r llinell amser o ddigwyddiadau i ddeall yn well safbwynt ac agwedd Llywodraeth Cymru at ddiwygiadau'r Canghellor. Ar 11 Mawrth, ysgrifennodd y Prif Weinidog at yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol dros Waith a Phensiynau, llythyr na leisiodd unrhyw bryder am effeithiau'r diwygiadau ar bobl Cymru—dim unrhyw bryder. Yn dilyn hynny, ar 18 Mawrth, dywedodd y Prif Weinidog wrthyf ei bod wedi codi pryderon gyda Rhif 10—fe siaradodd â swyddog nas enwyd hyd yma—ond nid oes cofnod o'r sgwrs. Pa bryderon penodol a godwyd ganddi ar ran Llywodraeth Cymru bryd hynny? Mae angen ateb i'r cwestiwn go bwysig hwnnw.
Dywedodd ei bod:
'yn falch iawn o weld bod llawer o'r pryderon hynny wedi'u hystyried ac y bydd y rhai mwyaf agored i niwed yn parhau i gael eu diogelu',
ond wyth diwrnod yn ddiweddarach aeth y Canghellor ymhellach ac yn ddyfnach gyda'i thoriadau lles nag yr oeddem wedi'i ddisgwyl cyn hynny. Felly, beth yn union y gwnaeth y Prif Weinidog ddylanwadu arno?
Ddoe, dywedodd ffynhonnell sy'n agos at y Prif Weinidog ei bod yn anfodlon ag Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru, Jo Stevens, am ddweud ei bod wedi cefnogi'r toriadau. Pam na ddywedodd y Prif Weinidog hynny'n glir ei hun, yn hytrach na gwneud sylwadau amwys am eraill yn siarad ar ei rhan? Os nad oedd hi'n mynd i ddangos ei hanfodlonrwydd—er ein bod yn dal i aros am ei chondemniad, wrth gwrs, yn hytrach na'i hanfodlonrwydd—beth am ddweud yn ddiamwys pa elfennau o ddiwygiadau Llywodraeth y DU y mae hi'n anghytuno â hwy ac egluro sut y bydd pen Cymru o'r hyn a elwir yn bartneriaeth mewn grym yn ceisio dylanwadu ar ben San Steffan i newid trywydd?
Ddoe, ymrwymodd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol i gyhoeddi llythyr a ysgrifennodd at yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol dros Waith a Phensiynau. Am 3 o'r gloch y prynhawn yma, pan wneuthum edrych ddiwethaf, nid yw hynny wedi digwydd, hyd y gwn i—dim byd ar wefan Llywodraeth Cymru o gwbl. Sut y mae disgwyl i ni graffu? Yna mae gennym lythyr Liz Kendall—ymateb i nodyn brysiog y Prif Weinidog—sy'n cyfeirio wrth fynd heibio at weithio gyda Llywodraeth Cymru ar yr effeithiau ar Gymru. Nid yw'n ddim llai na dirmygus.
Beth yw dealltwriaeth Llywodraeth Cymru o ba bryd y bydd asesiad effaith penodol i Gymru ar gael? Pa ystyriaeth y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i rhoi i gynnal eu hasesiad eu hunain gyda'r wybodaeth sydd ar gael iddynt? Rwy'n ychwanegu yma, ochr yn ochr ag anwybodaeth lwyr o effaith y toriadau lles yng Nghymru, ein bod wedi gweld cadarnhad heddiw mai dim ond swm canlyniadol Barnett i Gymru a ddaw gyda'r newidiadau i yswiriant gwladol, sy'n cynnig ad-daliad llawn i'r sector cyhoeddus yn Lloegr, gan adael Cymru tua £66 miliwn yn fyr—arwydd arall nad yw Llywodraeth Lafur y DU yn poeni dim am Gymru. Ddirprwy Lywydd, o dan Lafur rydym wedi cael ein tywys yn ôl i gyfnod sy'n atgoffa o reolaeth y Ceidwadwyr yn San Steffan, yn rhyddhau cyni—oherwydd dyna beth yw hyn—methu ymgynghori â Llywodraeth Cymru, a dangos agwedd ddiofal at effaith penderfyniadau ar bobl Cymru. Y bore yma dywedodd Prif Weinidog Cymru, 'Penderfyniad gan Lywodraeth y DU yw hwn, nid fy mhenderfyniad i. Llywodraeth y DU a ddylai amddiffyn y safbwynt hwn.' Nid yw'n ddigon da.
Ar 3 Gorffennaf y llynedd, yng Nghaerfyrddin—roeddwn yno ar yr un diwrnod—dywedodd y Prif Weinidog ei bod yn falch o sefyll ochr yn ochr â Keir Starmer. Ni all ymbellhau oddi wrtho nawr ar y mater hwn. Ac ni all anghofio ychwaith mai hi yw arweinydd y Blaid Lafur yng Nghymru, gan gynnwys ei Haelodau Seneddol. Felly, yn ei habsenoldeb yma y prynhawn yma, rwy'n gofyn iddi: a fydd hi'n cyfarwyddo'r ASau hynny i bleidleisio yn erbyn y toriadau hyn? Os na, byddwn yn gwybod ar ba ochr y mae hi.
Before we move forward, can I remind Members that the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice is responding to the debate today? Alun Davies.
Cyn inni symud ymlaen, a gaf i atgoffa'r Aelodau mai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol sy'n ymateb i'r ddadl heddiw? Alun Davies.
I'm grateful to you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and grateful that this debate is taking place today. I think it is an important debate, and I think we should take seriously the impacts that are potentially going to be felt by some of the most vulnerable people in this country. I regret sometimes that the tone of some speeches can forget the people who are impacted by these decisions, and I very much welcome the contribution from Hefin David, which brought these debates into focus on the people that are affected, rather than political point-scoring.
Rwy'n ddiolchgar i chi, Ddirprwy Lywydd, ac yn ddiolchgar fod y ddadl hon yn digwydd heddiw. Rwy'n credu ei bod yn ddadl bwysig, ac rwy'n credu y dylem fod o ddifrif ynghylch yr effeithiau a allai gael eu teimlo gan rai o'r bobl fwyaf agored i niwed yn y wlad hon. Rwy'n gresynu weithiau y gall cywair rhai o'r areithiau anghofio'r bobl yr effeithir arnynt gan y penderfyniadau hyn, ac rwy'n croesawu'n fawr y cyfraniad gan Hefin David, a ddaeth â ffocws y dadleuon hyn ar y bobl yr effeithir arnynt, yn hytrach na sgorio pwyntiau gwleidyddol.
Will you take a very brief intervention? I'm glad that he welcomes the opportunity to have this debate. Does he not think that Government should have provided time to debate something that is so important to the constituents that we represent?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad byr iawn? Rwy'n falch ei fod yn croesawu'r cyfle i gael y ddadl hon. Onid yw'n meddwl y dylai'r Llywodraeth fod wedi rhoi amser i drafod rhywbeth sydd mor bwysig i'r etholwyr a gynrychiolir gennym?
The Government has ensured that this debate takes place, as far as I can see, and certainly there's never been any conversation that I've been a part of that the Government weren't going to be doing that. So, I think you can lose the focus on the people here.
But I think this is an important debate because of the impact on people, and some of the most vulnerable people, in the constituencies we all represent, but also because this speaks and goes to the heart of who we are as politicians and what is the purpose of government. And it is about our priorities, and it is about where we come from and what we want to achieve.
I would have preferred the UK Government to make a clear statement that its purpose is the eradication of poverty, that it seeks—actively seeks—a reduction in inequality across the whole of the United Kingdom. And my fear at the moment is that this current UK Government is in danger of repeating the same mistakes as the Liberal Democrats made in 2010, by accepting a Conservative economic analysis and then becoming the over-enthusiastic supporters of Tory austerity, with the damage that's been done to people, and the most vulnerable people and the most vulnerable communities, that we've all witnessed since then.
I prefer a different way, and this is a Labour way, because I remember the Governments of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, and I remember Rhodri Morgan here in this Chamber, and I remember a Welsh Government in the first years after it was established—after democratic self-government was established in this country, its first priority was to reduce inequality. And it worked with Tony Blair and Gordon Brown in order to reduce child poverty, and we saw child poverty reduced in my constituency as a consequence of that, because the Government took different decisions and made the eradication of poverty and inequality part of what it is, its purpose, its objectives, and, because you've done that, you then take different decisions. And it is those different decisions that I would like us to see.
We need to understand the impacts that this is going to have in different communities and on different people. I regret greatly that the UK Government did not seek to publish or carry out assessments of the impact this would have in Wales. Because this will have a significant impact on the work of the Welsh Government and the priorities of the Welsh Government. This will have an impact on some of the poorest communities in our country, and my constituency in Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney will be the test. If this constituency is not able to receive the help and support, and if people in this constituency are not able to receive the support they need as a consequence of these decisions, then they will be the wrong decisions. And it is right and proper that two Governments working together respect each other, and respect means more than resolutions and speeches: it means actions. It certainly means a reversal of the decision the finance Cabinet Secretary referred to earlier this afternoon in questions, but it also means conversations taking place before Green Papers are published, that Wales is protected and the most vulnerable people in Wales are protected from the damaging consequences of some of these decisions.
So, I hope that in debating these matters today this afternoon, what this Parliament can do is to speak as one to say that we will prioritise the most vulnerable people in our country and in our communities, and that we will seek a different way. We will seek a way that seeks to respect the most vulnerable people. We will not accept the Tory arguments on the economy. We know the Conservatives trashed the economy and have essentially eradicated growth. What we need to do is to eradicate poverty, and what I want to do is to work with a UK Government that is committed to the eradication of poverty and the eradication of inequality, because Labour Governments have done it before and it is time for a Labour Government to do it again.
Mae'r Llywodraeth wedi sicrhau bod y ddadl hon yn digwydd, cyn belled ag y gallaf weld, ac yn sicr ni fu erioed unrhyw sgwrs y bûm yn rhan ohoni nad oedd y Llywodraeth yn mynd i fod yn gwneud hynny. Felly, rwy'n credu y gallwch golli'r ffocws ar y bobl yma.
Ond rwy'n credu bod hon yn ddadl bwysig oherwydd yr effaith ar bobl, a rhai o'r bobl fwyaf agored i niwed, yn yr etholaethau y mae pawb ohonom yn eu cynrychioli, ond hefyd oherwydd bod hyn yn siarad am, ac yn mynd i galon pwy ydym ni fel gwleidyddion a beth yw pwrpas llywodraeth. Ac mae'n ymwneud â'n blaenoriaethau, ac mae'n ymwneud ag o ble y down ni a beth rydym eisiau ei gyflawni.
Byddai'n well gennyf pe bai Llywodraeth y DU wedi gwneud datganiad clir mai ei diben yw dileu tlodi, ei bod yn ceisio—yn mynd ati'n weithredol i geisio—lleihau anghydraddoldeb ar draws y Deyrnas Unedig gyfan. A fy ofn ar hyn o bryd yw bod Llywodraeth bresennol y DU mewn perygl o ailadrodd yr un camgymeriadau â'r Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol yn 2010, drwy dderbyn dadansoddiad economaidd Ceidwadol a dod yn gefnogwyr gorfrwdfrydig cyni Torïaidd, gyda'r niwed sydd wedi'i wneud i bobl, a'r bobl fwyaf agored i niwed a'r cymunedau mwyaf agored i niwed yr ydym i gyd wedi'u gweld ers hynny.
Mae'n well gennyf i ffordd wahanol, ac mae hon yn ffordd Lafur, oherwydd rwy'n cofio Llywodraethau Tony Blair a Gordon Brown, ac rwy'n cofio Rhodri Morgan yma yn y Siambr hon, ac rwy'n cofio Llywodraeth Cymru yn y blynyddoedd cyntaf ar ôl iddi gael ei sefydlu—ar ôl i hunanlywodraeth ddemocrataidd gael ei sefydlu yn y wlad hon, ei blaenoriaeth gyntaf oedd lleihau anghydraddoldeb. Ac fe weithiodd gyda Tony Blair a Gordon Brown i leihau tlodi plant, a gwelsom fod tlodi plant wedi lleihau yn fy etholaeth i o ganlyniad i hynny, oherwydd bod y Llywodraeth wedi gwneud penderfyniadau gwahanol a gwneud dileu tlodi ac anghydraddoldeb yn rhan o'r hyn ydyw, ei phwrpas, ei hamcanion, ac oherwydd eich bod wedi gwneud hynny, rydych chi wedyn yn gwneud penderfyniadau gwahanol. A hoffwn i ni weld y penderfyniadau gwahanol hynny.
Mae angen inni ddeall yr effeithiau y bydd hyn yn eu cael mewn gwahanol gymunedau ac ar wahanol bobl. Rwy'n gresynu'n fawr na wnaeth Llywodraeth y DU gyhoeddi na chynnal asesiadau o'r effaith y byddai hyn yn ei chael yng Nghymru. Oherwydd bydd hyn yn cael effaith sylweddol ar waith Llywodraeth Cymru a blaenoriaethau Llywodraeth Cymru. Bydd hyn yn cael effaith ar rai o gymunedau tlotaf ein gwlad, a fy etholaeth ym Mlaenau Gwent a Rhymni fydd y prawf. Os nad yw'r etholaeth hon yn gallu cael y cymorth a'r gefnogaeth, ac os nad yw pobl yn yr etholaeth hon yn gallu cael y gefnogaeth sydd ei hangen arnynt o ganlyniad i'r penderfyniadau hyn, byddant yn benderfyniadau anghywir. Ac mae'n iawn ac yn briodol fod dwy Lywodraeth sy'n gweithio gyda'i gilydd yn parchu ei gilydd, ac mae parch yn golygu mwy na phenderfyniadau ac areithiau: mae'n golygu gweithredoedd. Mae'n sicr yn golygu gwrthdroi'r penderfyniad y cyfeiriodd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid ato yn gynharach y prynhawn yma mewn cwestiynau, ond mae hefyd yn golygu bod sgyrsiau'n digwydd cyn i'r Papurau Gwyrdd gael eu cyhoeddi, fod Cymru'n cael ei diogelu a bod y bobl fwyaf agored i niwed yng Nghymru yn cael eu hamddiffyn rhag canlyniadau niweidiol rhai o'r penderfyniadau hyn.
Felly, wrth drafod y materion hyn heddiw y prynhawn yma, rwy'n gobeithio y gall y Senedd hon siarad fel un i ddweud y byddwn yn blaenoriaethu'r bobl fwyaf agored i niwed yn ein gwlad ac yn ein cymunedau, ac y byddwn yn edrych am ffordd wahanol. Byddwn yn chwilio am ffordd sy'n parchu'r bobl fwyaf agored i niwed. Ni fyddwn yn derbyn dadleuon y Torïaid ar yr economi. Rydym yn gwybod bod y Ceidwadwyr wedi chwalu'r economi ac wedi dileu twf i bob pwrpas. Yr hyn sydd angen i ni ei wneud yw dileu tlodi, a'r hyn rwyf i eisiau ei wneud yw gweithio gyda Llywodraeth y DU sy'n ymrwymedig i ddileu tlodi a dileu anghydraddoldeb, oherwydd mae Llywodraethau Llafur wedi gwneud hynny o'r blaen ac mae'n bryd i Lywodraeth Lafur wneud hynny eto.
For me, this debate is actually about dignity—dignity for those people who are disabled. If you are disabled, it costs more money to live on, more to heat your home, more to travel, more to find money for food. And yet we've heard—and perhaps there is cross-party agreement—that the Labour Government plan to cut the money that they actually rely on. Whether they're working or not, disabled people need more money in order just to survive. Cutting their benefits is a total false economy. Their medical needs will increase, more people will be pushed into poverty rather than being pushed into jobs, and homelessness will increase as well. Polly Neate, the chief executive of Shelter, has said that this benefit change is going to push more households into homelessness, and that cuts to benefits will increase homelessness among disabled people.
While disabled people are being asked to sacrifice, the richest in our country continue to see their wealth grow. Last year, UK billionaires saw their collective wealth increase by £35 million a day. Four new billionaires were created last year in the UK, taking the current total to 57. There's more than enough money here in the UK to make sure that we don't have to cut these benefits. Labour had the opportunity to tax the wealthiest, but they chose not to. I've mentioned in this Siambr before the organisation Patriotic Millionaires UK. This is their response to the spring 2025 budget announcement:
'As Patriotic Millionaires we have all benefited greatly from living in this country and understand that a strong economy depends on well-funded public services...Instead of asking those who have benefited most from our economy...the Government is choosing to further cut welfare—despite over a decade of austerity that has already eroded the social safety net for disabled people. This is a decision they do not have to make.'
So, there is a choice—there is a clear choice. We do not have to make disabled people poorer. We don't have to stress them out. We don't have to create the situation where, unfortunately, the Labour Government are picking once again on the little people. There's a long list now, I'm afraid, of those who are affected by this Labour Government's choices: WASPI women, as you've heard, not getting the compensation that they deserve; not scrapping the two-child benefit cap; taxing our farmers; increasing national insurance on our small businesses; cutting international aid to the poorest in the world; putting online videos showing the deportation of refugees and asylum seekers, therefore demonising them even further. It's a shameful situation, and we in Wales need to do better.
I'm pleased to hear from Alun and also from Altaf that there may be cross-party support to demonstrate that, here in Wales, we don't want to see this. We need to make sure that we stand up for the people of Wales. We need to make sure that we tackle, obviously, the situation where we want more people to get into work—of course we do—but where that's not possible, or where that has to be subsidised, and surely our disabled people have to be our priority.
So, I am going to finish, and I'm going to ask the Cabinet Secretary two questions here. The first is: will you agree to meet with Patriotic Millionaires, some of whom are here in Wales, and hear their view of how we can create a much fairer society? And that, I hope, will be something I'll hear about in your response. And then we do need to hear, as we've heard from some of the Labour backbenchers here, that you are concerned about the benefit cuts, that you want to represent Wales, and want to make sure that there is an impact assessment. Because we are here as the voice of the voiceless. We are here to make sure we represent our most vulnerable. They may not vote for us, they may not support us in any way in any elections, but that's not what we're here for; we are here to make sure we represent the most vulnerable in our society. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
I mi, mae'r ddadl hon yn ymwneud ag urddas—urddas i bobl sy'n anabl. Os ydych chi'n anabl, mae'n costio mwy o arian i fyw, mwy i wresogi eich cartref, mwy i deithio, mwy i ddod o hyd i arian ar gyfer bwyd. Ac eto rydym wedi clywed—ac efallai fod yna gytundeb trawsbleidiol—fod y Llywodraeth Lafur yn bwriadu torri'r arian y maent yn dibynnu arno mewn gwirionedd. Pa un a ydynt yn gweithio ai peidio, mae angen mwy o arian ar bobl anabl i allu goroesi. Mae torri eu budd-daliadau yn economi hollol ffug. Bydd eu hanghenion meddygol yn cynyddu, bydd mwy o bobl yn cael eu gwthio i fyw mewn tlodi yn hytrach na chael eu gwthio i mewn i swyddi, a bydd digartrefedd yn cynyddu hefyd. Mae Polly Neate, prif weithredwr Shelter, wedi dweud bod y newid i fudd-daliadau yn mynd i wthio mwy o aelwydydd i ddigartrefedd, a bydd toriadau i fudd-daliadau'n cynyddu digartrefedd ymhlith pobl anabl.
Tra bo gofyn i bobl anabl aberthu, mae'r cyfoethocaf yn ein gwlad yn parhau i weld eu cyfoeth yn tyfu. Y llynedd, gwelodd biliwnyddion y DU eu cyfoeth cyfunol yn cynyddu £35 miliwn y dydd. Cafodd pedwar biliwnydd newydd eu creu y llynedd yn y DU, gan godi'r cyfanswm presennol i 57. Mae mwy na digon o arian yma yn y DU i wneud yn siŵr nad oes rhaid inni dorri'r budd-daliadau hyn. Cafodd Llafur gyfle i drethu'r cyfoethocaf, ond fe wnaethant ddewis peidio â gwneud hynny. Rwyf wedi sôn yn y Siambr o'r blaen am sefydliad Patriotic Millionaires UK. Dyma eu hymateb i gyhoeddiad cyllideb y gwanwyn 2025:
'Fel miliwnyddion gwladgarol rydym i gyd wedi elwa'n fawr o fyw yn y wlad hon ac yn deall bod economi gref yn dibynnu ar wasanaethau cyhoeddus wedi'u hariannu'n dda... Yn hytrach na gofyn i'r rhai sydd wedi elwa fwyaf o'n heconomi... mae'r Llywodraeth yn dewis torri lles ymhellach—er gwaethaf dros ddegawd o gyni sydd eisoes wedi treulio'r rhwyd ddiogelwch gymdeithasol i bobl anabl. Mae hwn yn benderfyniad nad oes rhaid iddynt ei wneud.'
Felly, mae yna ddewis—mae yna ddewis clir. Nid oes rhaid inni wneud pobl anabl yn dlotach. Nid oes rhaid inni achosi straen iddynt. Nid oes rhaid inni greu'r sefyllfa lle mae'r Llywodraeth Lafur yn pigo unwaith eto ar y bobl fach. Mae arnaf ofn fod yna restr hir nawr o rai yr effeithir arnynt gan ddewisiadau'r Llywodraeth Lafur hon: menywod WASPI, fel y clywsoch, nad ydynt yn cael yr iawndal y maent yn ei haeddu; peidio â dileu'r cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau; trethu ein ffermwyr; cynyddu yswiriant gwladol i'n busnesau bach; torri cymorth rhyngwladol i'r tlotaf yn y byd; rhoi fideos ar-lein sy'n dangos ffoaduriaid a cheiswyr lloches yn cael eu hallgludo, gan eu diawleiddio hyd yn oed ymhellach. Mae'n sefyllfa gywilyddus, ac mae angen i ni yng Nghymru wneud yn well.
Rwy'n falch o glywed gan Alun a hefyd gan Altaf y gallai fod cefnogaeth drawsbleidiol i ddangos nad ydym am weld hyn yma yng Nghymru. Mae angen inni wneud yn siŵr ein bod yn sefyll dros bobl Cymru. Mae angen inni wneud yn siŵr ein bod yn mynd i'r afael â'r sefyllfa lle rydym eisiau i fwy o bobl gael gwaith—wrth gwrs ein bod—ond lle nad yw hynny'n bosibl, neu lle mae'n rhaid rhoi cymhorthdal tuag at hynny, ac yn sicr mae'n rhaid i'n pobl anabl fod yn flaenoriaeth i ni.
Felly, rwy'n mynd i orffen, ac rwy'n mynd i ofyn dau gwestiwn i'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yma. Y cyntaf yw: a wnewch chi gytuno i gyfarfod â Patriotic Millionaires, y mae rhai ohonynt yma yng Nghymru, a chlywed eu barn ynglŷn â sut y gallwn greu cymdeithas lawer tecach? Ac rwy'n gobeithio clywed am hynny yn eich ymateb. Ac yna mae angen inni glywed, fel y clywsom gan rai o'r meinciau cefn Llafur yma, eich bod chi'n pryderu am y toriadau i fudd-daliadau, eich bod am gynrychioli Cymru, ac eisiau gwneud yn siŵr fod yna asesiad effaith. Oherwydd rydym ni yma fel llais i'r di-lais. Rydym yma i wneud yn siŵr ein bod ni'n cynrychioli ein pobl fwyaf agored i niwed. Efallai na fyddant yn pleidleisio drosom, efallai na fyddant yn ein cefnogi mewn unrhyw ffordd mewn unrhyw etholiadau, ond nid dyna pam rydym ni yma; rydym yma i wneud yn siŵr ein bod yn cynrychioli'r rhai mwyaf agored i niwed yn ein cymdeithas. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
I note, whilst this debate has been taking place, that we've received a copy of the letter that the Cabinet Secretary sent to the UK Government. I'm not sure if there was another letter, because what we were told was that there was a comprehensive letter, with the Welsh Government's concerns outlined. I would like that clarity, perhaps, in the response today.
In terms of the debate today, it is an important one. It is one many constituents have contacted me about, and one of my constituents is actually here today, watching the debate, and she would like nothing more than to actually be able to speak for herself. She has shared some words with me that I'd like to share with everyone: 'Disability has cost me £14,000 just to be able to leave the house.' That's the cost of her wheelchair. 'That doesn't include the wheelchair accessible car, with costs starting at £30,000. Under the proposed new rules, as I can walk a few steps and sometimes wash my hair myself, I risk losing PIP and the limited capability for work employment and support allowance. How do they expect us to contribute to society when our access to the outside world is so expensive, with them also intending to cut our income? And, of course, the extra costs of things to help me eat, cook food, the medication that helps my symptoms that I can't get on the NHS, on my £28,000-a-year job, I couldn't afford those things. Expecting people not earning that to survive is absurd. You can reform the benefit system without chopping money off. And giving people a chance to work via trials and them not losing their benefits is great, but cutting the money we get won't help that; it's a separate issue.' Also, AJ says quite clearly, 'I want nothing more than to work, but my disability means I cannot any more. I didn't give up my career for fun; I gave it up because it was literally killing me to keep it going.'
So, we talk about getting people back into work, but this is the reality of what's happening, and the stress on constituents like AJ should not be happening. And the discourse is happening, talking about people, rather than with people, listening to those lived experiences. And that's why I've been so disappointed by the Welsh Government's response to date. And it's a shame that the First Minister's not here, because watching that scrutiny session on Friday—'reserving judgment'. Reserving judgment. Isn't she the First Minister that said she was listening to the people of Wales? Well, she hasn't been listening or actually reading about the impact on all those organisations that have outlined why we in Wales are especially vulnerable.
Now, I've been looking back at the Cofnod, when we've seen the austerity years, and the responses from the Welsh Government then were quite clear in terms of not wanting to see those most vulnerable impacted. They were very, very clear statements; why so silent now? And it is a shame that we have had to have an urgent debate. I would like to know where we go from here. How are we now going to see that clear position from Welsh Government?
There are some practical things that we'd like to know as well. So, previously, in response to the Welfare Reform Act 2012, the Welsh Government set up a ministerial task and finish group and commissioned research to understand the impact on household income in Wales, the wider economic and social impacts of welfare reform, and the potential impact on devolved public services in Wales. Are there any plans to do so this time? Because, obviously, we know the huge range of different things that the Welsh Government has had to put in place in order to counter austerity. Are we in a position where you're also going to have to extend that support in order to mitigate the impact on our already fragile public services?
When it comes to local authorities, we already know that they've been extremely concerned about the impact on some of their commissioned services or their work with agencies such as Citizens Advice because of the changes to national insurance. We know that Citizens Advice across Wales have had to actually undergo redundancies because of the proposed changes—because of the changes and the strain on budgets. Well, we are going to need these people now more than ever, aren't we? We've talked about maximising the amount of benefits that people claim and ensuring that people claim every pound they're entitled to. How are we going to do that without the expertise and those services if they're being reduced? So, can I ask, what assessment have you undertaken in terms of the impact on local authorities and other support agencies, and what assurances can you give that you will look to support local authorities and other support agencies?
These are the questions that we need clarity on and I would be grateful for those today.
Tra bo'r ddadl hon yn mynd rhagddi, rydym wedi cael copi o'r llythyr a anfonodd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet at Lywodraeth y DU. Nid wyf yn siŵr a oedd yna lythyr arall, oherwydd yr hyn a ddywedwyd wrthym oedd bod yna lythyr cynhwysfawr, gyda phryderon Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'u hamlinellu. Hoffwn eglurhad ar hynny, efallai, yn yr ymateb heddiw.
Mae'r ddadl heddiw'n un bwysig. Mae'n un y mae llawer o etholwyr wedi cysylltu â mi yn ei chylch, ac mae un o fy etholwyr yma heddiw, yn gwylio'r ddadl, a byddai wrth ei bodd yn gallu siarad drosti'i hun. Mae hi wedi rhannu rhai geiriau gyda mi yr hoffwn eu rhannu â phawb: 'Mae anabledd wedi costio £14,000 i mi, ddim ond i allu gadael y tŷ.' Dyna gost ei chadair olwyn. 'Nid yw hynny'n cynnwys y car sy'n hygyrch i gadeiriau olwyn, gyda chostau'n dechrau o £30,000. O dan y rheolau newydd arfaethedig, gan fy mod yn gallu cerdded ychydig gamau a golchi fy ngwallt fy hun weithiau, rwyf mewn perygl o golli taliadau annibyniaeth personol a'r lwfans cyflogaeth a chymorth gallu cyfyngedig i weithio. Sut y maent yn disgwyl inni gyfrannu at gymdeithas pan fo mynediad at y byd y tu allan mor ddrud, a'u bod hefyd yn bwriadu torri ein hincwm? Ac wrth gwrs, costau ychwanegol pethau i fy helpu i fwyta, coginio bwyd, y feddyginiaeth sy'n helpu fy symptomau na allaf ei chael ar y GIG, yn fy swydd £28,000 y flwyddyn, ni allwn fforddio'r pethau hynny. Mae disgwyl i bobl nad ydynt yn ennill hynny oroesi yn hurt. Gallwch ddiwygio'r system fudd-daliadau heb dorri arian. Ac mae rhoi cyfle i bobl weithio drwy dreialu a pheidio â cholli eu budd-daliadau yn wych, ond ni fydd torri'r arian a gawn yn helpu hynny; mae'n fater ar wahân.' Hefyd, mae AJ yn dweud yn eithaf clir, 'Nid wyf eisiau dim byd mwy na gweithio, ond mae fy anabledd yn golygu na allaf mwyach. Ni roddais y gorau i fy ngyrfa ar chwarae bach; rhoddais y gorau iddi oherwydd ei bod yn llythrennol yn fy lladd i ddal i fynd.'
Felly, rydym yn siarad am gael pobl yn ôl i waith, ond dyma realiti beth sy'n digwydd, ac ni ddylai fod straen ar etholwyr fel AJ. Ac mae'r sgwrs yn digwydd, siarad am bobl, yn hytrach na chyda phobl, a gwrando ar brofiadau bywyd. A dyna pam y cefais fy siomi cymaint gan ymateb Llywodraeth Cymru hyd yma. Ac mae'n drueni nad yw'r Prif Weinidog yma, oherwydd wrth wylio'r sesiwn graffu honno ddydd Gwener—'ymatal rhag rhoi barn'. Ymatal rhag rhoi barn. Onid hi yw'r Prif Weinidog a ddywedodd ei bod yn gwrando ar bobl Cymru? Wel, nid yw hi wedi bod yn gwrando nac yn darllen am yr effaith ar yr holl sefydliadau sydd wedi nodi pam ein bod ni yng Nghymru yn arbennig o agored i niwed.
Nawr, rwyf wedi bod yn edrych yn ôl ar y Cofnod, pan oedd gennym y blynyddoedd cyni, ac roedd yr ymatebion gan Lywodraeth Cymru bryd hynny yn eithaf clir nad oeddent am weld y rhai mwyaf agored i niwed yn cael eu heffeithio. Roeddent yn ddatganiadau clir iawn; pam eu bod mor dawel nawr? Ac mae'n drueni ein bod wedi gorfod cael dadl frys. Hoffwn wybod i ble'r awn oddi yma. Sut y gallwn weld y safbwynt clir hwnnw gan Lywodraeth Cymru nawr?
Mae yna rai pethau ymarferol yr hoffem wybod hefyd. Felly, yn flaenorol, mewn ymateb i Ddeddf Diwygio Lles 2012, sefydlodd Llywodraeth Cymru grŵp gorchwyl a gorffen gweinidogol a chomisiynodd ymchwil i ddeall yr effaith ar incwm aelwydydd yng Nghymru, effeithiau economaidd a chymdeithasol ehangach diwygio lles, a'r effaith bosibl ar wasanaethau cyhoeddus datganoledig yng Nghymru. A oes unrhyw gynlluniau i wneud hynny y tro hwn? Oherwydd, yn amlwg, fe wyddom am yr ystod enfawr o wahanol bethau y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi gorfod eu rhoi ar waith er mwyn gwrthsefyll cyni. A ydym ni mewn sefyllfa lle bydd yn rhaid ichi ymestyn y gefnogaeth honno er mwyn lliniaru'r effaith ar ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus sydd eisoes yn fregus?
O ran awdurdodau lleol, fe wyddom eisoes eu bod wedi bod yn bryderus iawn am yr effaith ar rai o'r gwasanaethau y maent yn eu comisiynu neu eu gwaith gydag asiantaethau fel Cyngor ar Bopeth oherwydd y newidiadau i yswiriant gwladol. Gwyddom fod Cyngor ar Bopeth ledled Cymru wedi gorfod diswyddo gweithwyr oherwydd y newidiadau arfaethedig—oherwydd y newidiadau a'r pwysau ar gyllidebau. Wel, rydym yn mynd i fod angen y bobl hyn nawr yn fwy nag erioed, onid ydym? Rydym wedi siarad am fanteisio i'r eithaf ar y budd-daliadau y mae pobl yn eu hawlio a sicrhau bod pobl yn hawlio pob punt y mae ganddynt hawl iddi. Sut y gwnawn hynny heb yr arbenigedd a'r gwasanaethau os cânt eu lleihau? Felly, a gaf i ofyn, pa asesiad a wnaethoch o'r effaith ar awdurdodau lleol ac asiantaethau cymorth eraill, a pha sicrwydd y gallwch ei roi y byddwch chi'n cefnogi awdurdodau lleol ac asiantaethau cymorth eraill?
Dyma'r cwestiynau y mae angen eglurder yn eu cylch, a hoffwn gael hynny heddiw.
I want to start by answering Altaf Hussain: what would the Welsh Government do differently if we had control over the administration of benefits? Well, I think one of the things we would do differently is what Hefin was talking about. Engage to Change is a really important initiative to enable people with disabilities—and particularly learning disabilities—to be able to work. And we want everybody who can work to have that dignity.
I think, secondly, we have the young person's guarantee. We—
Rwyf am ddechrau trwy ateb Altaf Hussain: beth fyddai Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei wneud yn wahanol pe bai gennym reolaeth dros weinyddu budd-daliadau? Wel, rwy'n credu mai un o'r pethau y byddem yn ei wneud yn wahanol yw'r hyn yr oedd Hefin yn siarad amdano. Mae Engage to Change yn fenter bwysig iawn i alluogi pobl ag anableddau—ac yn enwedig anableddau dysgu—i allu gweithio. Ac rydym eisiau i bawb sy'n gallu gweithio gael yr urddas honno.
Yn ail, mae gennym y warant i bobl ifanc. Rydym—
Would you take a very brief intervention? Thank you so much.
You mentioned Engage to Change; as we understand it, the funding has stopped to Engage to Change, and isn't going to continue. [Inaudible.] I'm sorry? [Inaudible.]
I wonder if you could just clarify: is there going to be continued funding, or maybe the Cabinet Secretary could clarify that? As we understand it, there are concerns that it won't continue. It's been a fabulous project, as we've all heard. Thank you.
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad byr iawn? Diolch.
Fe wnaethoch chi sôn am Engage to Change; yn ôl yr hyn a ddeallwn, mae'r cyllid wedi dod i ben i Engage to Change, ac nid yw'n mynd i barhau. [Anghlywadwy.] Mae'n ddrwg gennyf? [Anghlywadwy.]
Tybed a allech chi egluro: a fydd cyllid yn parhau, neu efallai y gallai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet egluro hynny? Yn ôl yr hyn a ddeallwn, mae pryderon na fydd yn parhau. Mae wedi bod yn brosiect gwych, fel y clywsom. Diolch.
Wrong person to ask, I'm afraid. I'm not in the Government.
The young person's guarantee supports people who are 16 to 24 to avoid being not in education, employment or training. So, the UK Government put a lot of emphasis on the fact that there's one in eight young people of that age not in work, not in training, not in education; that's absolutely shocking. Well, the initiative that the Welsh Government has, I want to have a really close look at it, to learn from it, because the First Minister, on more than one occasion, has said that we have half that rate in Wales, and if that is actually the case, we really do need to get the UK Government to learn from us.
This morning, I visited a charity that manages supported housing for people who have experienced homelessness. They have a great track record of working with people who have suffered adverse childhood experiences, addictions, gender-based violence, as well as the actual trauma of becoming homeless. Normally, they expect their tenants to live there for six months before moving into their own tenancy in the private rented sector, but the demand for affordable housing makes it almost impossible to become a social housing tenant with an affordable, secure tenancy. And even in the private rented sector in Cardiff, there's so little affordable housing, that those people typically remain in this supported housing for two to three years. Most PRS landlords refuse to take tenants in receipt of benefits, and insist on a UK home owner to be a guarantor of any tenancy. So, you can just see, illustrating this particular group of vulnerable people, all of whom, I imagine, are on benefits, just how difficult their lives are, and how much more difficult they're likely to be as a result of these benefit cuts.
Yes, there's going to be a £3-a-week increase in universal credit, and that's welcome, but it's overwhelmingly overshadowed by the £5 billion that the UK Government is wanting to cut from these benefits. I just can't overemphasise the importance of the need to have much more housing that people can afford so that everybody is appropriately housed. I just don't see that coming from the UK Government.
Last week, Rachel Reeves visited a construction site in Radyr to see what Wales is doing to tackle our housing crisis. I'm glad to hear that 30 per cent of the homes at Plasdŵr are social housing, and that's how it should be wherever housing is being built. But I'm given to understand that, of this 1.5 million houses that the UK Government is promising for England, a mere 1.2 per cent of them is social housing.
The UK Government has yet to get round to suspending the right to buy amongst council tenants. I mean, this is absolutely ridiculous. There's no use building housing at one end if you aren't dealing with the speculation on public housing at the other. It really pains me, in a way, to say that we are having this debate in the middle of what is an existential crisis.
Donald Trump is calling this day 'liberation day'. Well, I'm sure everybody in Argentina is having a big laugh on that because many of you may not realise that today is the anniversary of the invasion of the Falkland islands. The United States are no longer our friends. They didn't support the UK in the Falklands, and they won't take any notice of us under Trump if it gets in any way in the way of their conquest of precious resources in Ukraine, Greenland, Gaza, or anywhere else.
I'm not arguing against an increase in defence spending because of the way in which so much of the world is dominated by people who absolutely have no regard for the rule of law, but we have to ask what is this spending going to be put on—nuclear submarines that the US Government will never give us permission to use, and we frankly wouldn't want to use anyway because there is no winner in that. But we absolutely have to address these benefit cuts in the context of the recession—
Y person anghywir i ofyn iddi, mae arnaf ofn. Nid wyf yn y Llywodraeth.
Mae'r warant i bobl ifanc yn cefnogi pobl rhwng 16 a 24 oed i osgoi peidio â bod mewn addysg, cyflogaeth na hyfforddiant. Felly, mae Llywodraeth y DU yn rhoi llawer o bwyslais ar y ffaith bod un o bob wyth o bobl ifanc yr oedran hwnnw heb fod mewn gwaith, na hyfforddiant, nac addysg; mae hynny'n syfrdanol. Wel, rwyf am gael golwg fanwl iawn ar y fenter sydd gan Lywodraeth Cymru, i ddysgu ohoni, oherwydd mae'r Prif Weinidog, ar fwy nag un achlysur, wedi dweud mai hanner y gyfradd honno sydd gennym yng Nghymru, ac os yw hynny'n wir mewn gwirionedd, mae angen inni gael Llywodraeth y DU i ddysgu oddi wrthym.
Y bore yma, ymwelais ag elusen sy'n rheoli tai â chymorth i bobl sydd wedi cael profiad o ddigartrefedd. Mae ganddynt hanes gwych o weithio gyda phobl sydd wedi dioddef profiadau andwyol yn ystod plentyndod, dibyniaethau, trais ar sail rhywedd, yn ogystal â'r trawma o fod yn ddigartref. Fel arfer, maent yn disgwyl i'w tenantiaid fyw yno am chwe mis cyn symud i'w tenantiaeth eu hunain yn y sector rhentu preifat, ond mae'r galw am dai fforddiadwy yn ei gwneud bron yn amhosibl dod yn denant tai cymdeithasol gyda thenantiaeth fforddiadwy a diogel. A hyd yn oed yn y sector rhentu preifat yng Nghaerdydd, mae cyn lleied o dai fforddiadwy, fel bod y bobl hynny fel arfer yn aros yn y tai â chymorth am ddwy i dair blynedd. Mae'r rhan fwyaf o landlordiaid y sector rhentu preifat yn gwrthod cymryd tenantiaid sy'n cael budd-daliadau, ac yn mynnu bod perchennog cartref yn y DU yn warantwr ar gyfer unrhyw denantiaeth. Felly, fe allwch weld, o'r grŵp penodol hwn o bobl agored i niwed, a phob un ohonynt, rwy'n dychmygu, ar fudd-daliadau, pa mor anodd yw eu bywydau, a chymaint yn fwy anodd y maent yn debygol o fod o ganlyniad i'r toriadau hyn i fudd-daliadau.
Bydd yna gynnydd o £3 yr wythnos i gredyd cynhwysol, bydd, ac mae hynny i'w groesawu, ond caiff ei fwrw i'r cysgod gan y £5 biliwn y mae Llywodraeth y DU eisiau ei dorri oddi ar y budd-daliadau hyn. Ni allaf orbwysleisio pwysigrwydd yr angen i gael llawer mwy o dai y gall pobl eu fforddio fel bod pawb yn cael llety priodol. Nid wyf yn gweld hynny'n dod gan Lywodraeth y DU.
Yr wythnos diwethaf, ymwelodd Rachel Reeves â safle adeiladu yn Radur i weld beth y mae Cymru'n ei wneud i fynd i'r afael â'n hargyfwng tai. Rwy'n falch o glywed bod 30 y cant o'r cartrefi ym Mhlasdŵr yn dai cymdeithasol, a dyna sut y dylai fod lle bynnag y mae tai'n cael eu hadeiladu. Ond o'r 1.5 miliwn o dai y mae Llywodraeth y DU yn eu haddo i Loegr, rwy'n clywed mai dim ond 1.2 y cant ohonynt sy'n dai cymdeithasol.
Mae Llywodraeth y DU eto i ddod i ben ag atal yr hawl i brynu ymhlith tenantiaid cyngor. Mae'n hollol hurt. Nid oes unrhyw bwrpas adeiladu tai ar un pen os nad ydych chi'n delio â hapfasnachu tai cyhoeddus ar y llall. Mewn ffordd, mae'n boenus i mi ein bod yn cael y ddadl hon yng nghanol yr hyn sy'n argyfwng dirfodol.
Mae Donald Trump yn galw'r diwrnod hwn yn 'ddiwrnod rhyddid'. Wel, rwy'n siŵr fod pawb yn yr Ariannin yn chwerthin ynghylch hynny oherwydd efallai na fydd llawer ohonoch yn sylweddoli mai heddiw yw pen-blwydd goresgyniad ynysoedd y Falkland. Nid yw'r Unol Daleithiau yn ffrindiau i ni mwyach. Ni wnaethant gefnogi'r DU yn y Falklands, ac ni fyddant yn cymryd unrhyw sylw ohonom o dan Trump os yw mewn unrhyw fodd yn mynd yn ffordd eu cyrch ar adnoddau gwerthfawr yn Wcráin, yr Ynys Las, Gaza, neu unrhyw le arall.
Nid wyf yn dadlau yn erbyn cynyddu gwariant amddiffyn oherwydd y ffordd y mae cymaint o'r byd yn cael ei ddominyddu gan bobl nad oes unrhyw barch ganddynt at reolaeth y gyfraith, ond mae'n rhaid inni ofyn ar beth y bydd y gwariant hwn—llongau tanfor niwclear na fydd Llywodraeth yr Unol Daleithiau byth yn rhoi caniatâd i ni eu defnyddio, ac na fyddem eisiau eu defnyddio beth bynnag am nad oes neb yn ennill o wneud hynny. Ond mae'n rhaid inni fynd i'r afael â'r toriadau hyn i fudd-daliadau yng nghyd-destun y dirwasgiad—
You need to conclude now, please, Jenny.
Mae angen i chi orffen nawr, os gwelwch yn dda, Jenny.
—that must be likely to happen with the 20 per cent tariff on goods entering the United States. The upheavals are enormous, and I'm sad to say that I'm not sure that the UK Government is on top of this.
—sy'n debygol iawn o ddigwydd gyda'r tariff o 20 y cant ar nwyddau sy'n mynd i mewn i'r Unol Daleithiau. Mae'r aflonyddwch yn enfawr, ac mae'n ofid gennyf ddweud nad wyf yn siŵr fod gan Lywodraeth y DU afael ar hyn.
The Chancellor at Westminster, with her Cabinet colleagues, have collectively unveiled a plan so callous in its conception that it stands as nothing less than a betrayal of everything Labour once represented. Billions of pounds not taken from the coffers of privilege, not drawn from the vaults of excess, but torn from the threadbare pockets of those already struggling to survive.
We stand at a fairly stark crossroads, don't we? Down one path lies the continuation, as we've heard, of a cruel orthodoxy that measures a nation's success by the cold arithmetic of spreadsheets rather than the warmth of its compassion. Down the other, a recommitment to the principles that once made Labour the party of Bevan and Griffiths, Welsh architects of a welfare state born from the conviction that dignity is not a luxury to be afforded only to the fortunate few.
The economic folly of these cuts is matched only by their moral bankruptcy. Every £1 stripped from welfare is £1 removed from our local economies; it's £1 that would have been spent in our corner shops, our cafes, our small businesses. The Chancellor speaks of fiscal responsibility, while implementing policies, as we've heard, that will necessitate greater expenditure in the years to come, as children raised in deepening poverty require more intensive support, as communities hollowed out by desperation fall into crisis, as the social fabric that binds us together frays beyond repair.
We've witnessed this tragedy before. After 2008, successive Westminster Governments chose austerity over investment, punishment over compassion. The results speak for themselves—lost decade after lost decade, where child poverty surged, where foodbanks became more common than post offices, where the gap between the haves and have-nots has widened into an unbridgeable chasm. Andy Burnham in Manchester understands this and has condemned these proposals. So have the First Ministers in Edinburgh and Belfast.
The First Minister here and this Senedd possess a power that must not be squandered. Together with our counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland, we can forge an alliance of conscience that Westminster cannot ignore. Where we have no power, then we must use our voice. And where have power, we must our imagination.
If Labour in Westminster persist in this betrayal of its founding principles, then let us here chart a different course. Where they dismantle the welfare state, then let us begin to build a Welsh well-care state that rejects the false choice between economic growth and social justice, one that recognises that investment in human potential is the surest path to sustainable prosperity, one that understands that a nation’s greatness is measured not by the wealth of its richest citizens, but how it treats the most vulnerable.
This is not idealism alone—it's sound economics. It's the insight of Keynes a century ago, who understood that, in times of hardship, the state must step up, not step back. It's the insight of modern economists, who have demonstrated time and time again that societies with stronger safety nets recover faster from economic shocks and grow more sustainably in the long term.
The times that we're living in demand courage, not capitulation. They require vision, not the recycling of failed policies. While others abandon the principles that once guided them, let us uphold them. While others sacrifice the vulnerable on the altar of political expediency, let us defend them. And when the history of these troubled times is written, let it be said that, here in Wales, when darkness threatened to engulf the most needy among us, we did not merely light a candle—we ignited a beacon of hope.
Mae'r Canghellor yn San Steffan, gyda'i chyd-aelodau Cabinet, gyda'i gilydd wedi dadlennu cynllun mor greulon o ran ei gysyniad fel ei fod yn bradychu popeth a gynrychiolai Llafur ar un adeg. Biliynau o bunnoedd heb eu cymryd o goffrau'r breintiedig, heb eu tynnu o gladdgelloedd gormodedd, ond wedi'u rhwygo o bocedi brau y rhai sydd eisoes yn brwydro i oroesi.
Rydym yn sefyll ar groesffordd go ddigalon, onid ydym? Fel y clywsom, ar hyd un llwybr mae parhad yr uniongrededd creulon sy'n mesur llwyddiant cenedl trwy rifyddeg oer taenlenni yn hytrach na chynhesrwydd ei thosturi. Ar hyd y llall, ailymrwymiad i'r egwyddorion a wnaeth Llafur unwaith yn blaid Bevan a Griffiths, penseiri Cymreig gwladwriaeth les a aned o'r argyhoeddiad nad moethusrwydd i'r ychydig ffodus yn unig yw urddas.
Lawn cymaint â ffolineb economaidd y toriadau hyn y mae eu diffyg moesoldeb. Mae pob £1 sy'n cael ei dynnu o les yn £1 wedi'i thynnu o'n heconomïau lleol; mae'n £1 a fyddai wedi cael ei gwario yn ein siopau cornel, ein caffis, ein busnesau bach. Mae'r Canghellor yn sôn am gyfrifoldeb cyllidol, gan weithredu polisïau, fel y clywsom, a fydd yn galw am fwy o wariant yn y blynyddoedd i ddod, gan fod angen cymorth mwy dwys ar blant sy'n cael eu magu mewn tlodi sy'n dyfnhau, wrth i gymunedau wedi'u dryllio gan anobaith syrthio i argyfwng, wrth i'r gwead cymdeithasol sy'n ein clymu gyda'n gilydd dreulio gormod i'w drwsio.
Rydym wedi tystio i'r drasiedi hon o'r blaen. Ar ôl 2008, dewisodd Llywodraethau San Steffan olynol gyni dros fuddsoddiad, cosb dros dosturi. Mae'r canlyniadau'n siarad drostynt eu hunain—degawd coll ar ôl degawd coll, lle cynyddodd tlodi plant i'r entrychion, lle daeth banciau bwyd yn fwy cyffredin na swyddfeydd post, lle mae'r bwlch rhwng y cyfoethog a'r tlawd wedi lledu nes dod yn hafn na ellir ei phontio. Mae Andy Burnham ym Manceinion yn deall hyn ac wedi condemnio'r cynigion hyn. Felly hefyd y Prif Weinidogion yng Nghaeredin a Belfast.
Mae gan y Prif Weinidog yma a'r Senedd hon bŵer na ddylid ei wastraffu. Ynghyd â'n cymheiriaid yn yr Alban a Gogledd Iwerddon, gallwn greu cynghrair cydwybod na all San Steffan mo'i hanwybyddu. Lle nad oes gennym unrhyw bŵer, rhaid inni ddefnyddio ein llais. A lle mae gennym bŵer, rhaid inni ddefnyddio ein dychymyg.
Os yw Llafur yn San Steffan yn parhau i fradychu ei hegwyddorion sylfaenol, gadewch i ni yma gynllunio llwybr gwahanol. Os ydynt yn datgymalu'r wladwriaeth les, gadewch i ni ddechrau adeiladu gwladwriaeth les Gymreig sy'n gwrthod y dewis ffug rhwng twf economaidd a chyfiawnder cymdeithasol, un sy'n cydnabod mai buddsoddiad mewn potensial dynol yw'r llwybr mwyaf sicr i ffyniant cynaliadwy, un sy'n deall na chaiff mawredd cenedl mo'i fesur gan gyfoeth ei dinasyddion cyfoethocaf, ond gan y modd y mae'n trin y rhai mwyaf bregus.
Nid delfrydiaeth yw hyn yn unig—mae'n economeg gadarn. Dyma fewnwelediad Keynes ganrif yn ôl, a ddeallodd fod yn rhaid i'r wladwriaeth gamu i'r adwy ar adeg o galedi, nid camu'n ôl. Dyma fewnwelediad economegwyr modern, sydd wedi dangos dro ar ôl tro fod cymdeithasau sydd â rhwydweithiau diogelwch cryfach yn adfer yn gynt o siociau economaidd ac yn tyfu'n fwy cynaliadwy yn y tymor hir.
Mae'r cyfnod yr ydym yn byw ynddo'n galw am ddewrder, nid ildiad. Mae'n galw am weledigaeth, nid ailgylchu polisïau aflwyddiannus. Tra bod eraill yn cefnu ar yr egwyddorion a oedd unwaith yn eu tywys, gadewch i ni eu cynnal. Tra bod eraill yn aberthu'r bregus ar allor hwylustod gwleidyddol, gadewch i ni eu hamddiffyn. A phan ysgrifennir hanes y cyfnod cythryblus hwn, gadewch iddo ddweud, yma yng Nghymru, pan oedd tywyllwch yn bygwth amlyncu'r mwyaf anghenus yn ein plith, nid goleuo cannwyll yn unig a wnaethom, ond cynnau coelcerth o obaith.
Since the UK Government's announcement on welfare reform, Dirprwy Lywydd, I've had many conversations with constituents, as I'm sure other Members here have had as well. And I must say, I agree with the majority of my constituents that I've spoken to, in as much as what they believe is: that reform of welfare benefits should help people move from worklessness into work, because that's very good for those individuals, their families, and communities, and, of course, that in itself will reduce the benefits bill; that there must be a safety net for those unable to work, and we should not cut benefits for those in that position; we need to support the vulnerable; and they should not pay the price in terms of the challenge of balancing the UK Government's books.
There's a huge amount of worry and anxiety in our communities at the moment, which has been created by the communication around the announcement, which has worried so many people who are dependent on benefits. We do know, Dirprwy Lywydd, that there's a great deal of good work in Wales with devolved services working with the DWP and jobcentres to move people closer to the jobs market, as it's described, and get them into work. That's, sometimes, a long process, but it does bear fruit, and I do think we should take a longer term view on these matters, which, indeed, the well-being of future generations Act here in Wales directs us to do. There is much good work in Wales that we can build on, and further devolution in terms of what ability Wales has to help people move closer to the jobs market and into work would be very useful indeed. I believe discussions are very much under way in terms of that.
I have examples in Newport—and I'm sure there are examples right across Wales—of some very good work. Newport City Council, for example, runs job clubs at community centres for people over the age of 16 who are unemployed. It involves support for CV writing and writing job applications, developing interview skills, getting accredited qualifications, and it has free employment-related courses. Newport Mind, through their six-month Kickstart programme for young people, helps them to claim universal credit where they need to do that, but also supports them to improve their employability and, indeed, to get them into work and bridge the gap between those two things—being workless and eventually getting that paid employment.
And of course, Dirprwy Lywydd, several years ago now, when I chaired the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee, we did some work on the way that the UK benefits system works in Wales. We recommended, amongst other things, that the administration of that benefit system should be devolved to Wales. We believed very strongly—I still believe very strongly—that that would bring many advantages. We heard so often that it's dignity and respect that counts for a lot and needs to be embedded in the culture of the way the benefit system is administered, that there needs to be a different approach to assessments for disability and illness benefits, for example, and a different approach to the way that the sanctions regime operates—just a few examples of the way that I think we could be far more constructive and effective in the way that we operate here in Wales.
I think at the heart of this debate is recognising the particular impact that cuts to benefits would have here in Wales, and, as a result of that, the particular need for the UK Government to work very closely with the Welsh Government to get our people here in Wales in a position where they can move from worklessness into work, and in doing so, cut that UK benefits bill. I think that's the constructive approach, that's the best approach, and that's the approach we should see.
Ers cyhoeddiad Llywodraeth y DU ar ddiwygio lles, Ddirprwy Lywydd, rwyf wedi cael llawer o sgyrsiau gydag etholwyr, fel y bydd Aelodau eraill yma wedi'u cael hefyd, rwy'n siŵr. Ac mae'n rhaid imi ddweud, rwy'n cytuno â'r mwyafrif o'r etholwyr y siaradais â hwy, i'r graddau mai'r hyn a gredant yw: y dylai diwygio budd-daliadau lles helpu pobl i symud o ddiweithdra i waith, oherwydd mae hynny'n dda iawn i'r unigolion hynny, eu teuluoedd, a'u cymunedau, ac wrth gwrs, bydd hynny ynddo'i hun yn lleihau'r bil budd-daliadau; fod rhaid bod rhwyd ddiogelwch i'r rhai nad ydynt yn gallu gweithio, ac ni ddylem dorri budd-daliadau i bobl yn y sefyllfa honno; mae angen inni gefnogi'r bregus; ac ni ddylent hwy dalu pris yr her i Lywodraeth y DU o fantoli'r llyfrau.
Mae yna lawer iawn o bryder a gofid yn ein cymunedau ar hyn o bryd, wedi'i greu gan y cyfathrebiad ynghylch y cyhoeddiad, sydd wedi poeni cymaint o bobl sy'n ddibynnol ar fudd-daliadau. Ddirprwy Lywydd, fe wyddom fod llawer o waith da yng Nghymru gyda gwasanaethau datganoledig yn gweithio gyda'r Adran Gwaith a Phensiynau a chanolfannau gwaith i symud pobl yn agosach at y farchnad swyddi, fel y'i disgrifir, a'u cael i mewn i waith. Mae hynny, weithiau, yn broses hir, ond mae'n dwyn ffrwyth, ac rwy'n credu y dylem edrych yn fwy hirdymor ar y materion hyn, a dyna mae Deddf lles cenedlaethau'r dyfodol yma yng Nghymru yn ein cyfarwyddo i'w wneud. Mae llawer o waith da yng Nghymru y gallwn adeiladu arno, a byddai datganoli pellach o ran y gallu sydd gan Gymru i helpu pobl i symud yn agosach at y farchnad swyddi ac i mewn i waith yn ddefnyddiol iawn. Rwy'n credu bod trafodaethau ar y gweill ynglŷn â hynny.
Mae gennyf enghreifftiau yng Nghasnewydd—ac rwy'n siŵr fod enghreifftiau ledled Cymru—o waith da iawn. Mae Cyngor Dinas Casnewydd, er enghraifft, yn rhedeg clybiau gwaith mewn canolfannau cymunedol ar gyfer pobl dros 16 oed sy'n ddi-waith. Mae'n cynnwys cymorth i ysgrifennu CV ac ysgrifennu ceisiadau am swyddi, datblygu sgiliau cyfweliad, cael cymwysterau achrededig, ac mae ganddo gyrsiau am ddim yn gysylltiedig â chyflogaeth. Mae Mind Casnewydd, trwy eu rhaglen chwe mis Kickstart ar gyfer pobl ifanc, yn eu helpu i hawlio credyd cynhwysol lle mae angen iddynt wneud hynny, ond hefyd yn eu cefnogi i wella eu cyflogadwyedd ac yn wir, i'w cael i mewn i waith a phontio'r bwlch rhwng y ddau beth hynny—bod yn ddi-waith a chael gwaith â thâl yn y pen draw.
Ac wrth gwrs, Ddirprwy Lywydd, sawl blwyddyn yn ôl nawr, pan oeddwn i'n cadeirio'r Pwyllgor Cydraddoldeb, Llywodraeth Leol a Chymunedau, fe wnaethom waith ar y ffordd y mae system fudd-daliadau'r DU yn gweithio yng Nghymru. Fe wnaethom argymell, ymhlith pethau eraill, y dylid datganoli'r gwaith o weinyddu'r system fudd-daliadau honno i Gymru. Roeddem yn credu'n gryf iawn—rwy'n dal i gredu'n gryf iawn—y byddai hynny'n creu llawer o fanteision. Clywsom mor aml fod urddas a pharch mor bwysig a bod angen eu hymgorffori yn niwylliant y ffordd y mae'r system fudd-daliadau'n cael ei gweinyddu, fod angen dull gwahanol o weithredu asesiadau ar gyfer budd-daliadau anabledd a salwch er enghraifft, a dull gwahanol o weithredu'r gyfundrefn sancsiynau—dim ond rhai enghreifftiau o'r ffyrdd y credaf y gallem fod yn llawer mwy adeiladol ac effeithiol yn y ffordd y gweithredwn yma yng Nghymru.
Yn ganolog i'r ddadl hon, mae cydnabod yr effaith benodol y byddai toriadau i fudd-daliadau'n ei chael yma yng Nghymru, ac o ganlyniad i hynny, yr angen arbennig i Lywodraeth y DU weithio'n agos iawn gyda Llywodraeth Cymru i gael ein pobl yma yng Nghymru i sefyllfa lle gallant symud o ddiweithdra i waith, a thorri bil budd-daliadau'r DU trwy wneud hynny. Rwy'n credu mai dyna'r dull adeiladol, dyna'r dull gorau, a dyna'r dull y dylem ei weld.
Dwi'n galw ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol a'r Trefnydd—Jane Hutt.
I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and Trefnydd—Jane Hutt.
Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you for the opportunity to respond to this important debate, which I welcome. I welcome the opportunity to respond to it as Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, fully aware that when we discuss welfare reforms, we must remember that this is fundamentally about people across Wales who are concerned about what their futures may hold.
Our debate today is important, your voices across the Chamber are valued, and they will all help to contribute to the way in which we are engaging to present our response to the Green Paper. Of course, it is the UK Government's Green Paper, which includes a mix of reforms, which will require legislative changes to be approved by the UK Parliament. But I want to reassure people that the Welsh Government will make sure our voices and, most importantly, the voices of disabled people and their representatives are heard by the UK Government on all their proposed reforms.
Yes, I have shared the letter. It's actually the only letter that I've issued. To explain, in my letter to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, which was my initial response when we heard about the reforms, I did say in that letter, which I've shared now across the Chamber, and indeed it's out in public domain, that it would be beneficial if the Department for Work and Pensions organised face-to-face consultation events here in Wales to ensure those who are digitally excluded have the opportunity to share their views. And of course, we also have an opportunity on a four-nations basis, with a commitment to meet with the Department for Work and Pensions, and this clearly will be an opportunity to share this on a wider basis.
Our work establishing and working with the disability rights taskforce, which colleagues are very aware of, to develop the disabled people's rights plan, shortly to go out to consultation, reflects our commitment to listen to—not just listen to, but to collaborate and work with disabled people. And next week I'm meeting with the disability rights taskforce to discuss the Green Paper, and that will be followed by a meeting with the disability equality forum.
The views of people with lived experience—and I have to say that that includes all of the experiences that you fed back to me today from constituents and from your own observations and comments—will be at the heart of our cross-Government response to the welfare reforms. Every voice counts, all contributions matter. This is the start of our contribution to influence our response to the Green Paper on welfare reforms.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd, a diolch am y cyfle i ymateb i'r ddadl bwysig hon, dadl rwy'n ei chroesawu. Rwy'n croesawu'r cyfle i ymateb iddi fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol, yn gwbl ymwybodol fod yn rhaid inni gofio pan fyddwn yn trafod diwygiadau lles, ei fod yn ymwneud yn sylfaenol â phobl ledled Cymru sy'n poeni am yr hyn a allai fod gan y dyfodol i'w gynnig iddynt.
Mae ein dadl heddiw yn bwysig, mae eich lleisiau chi ar draws y Siambr yn cael eu gwerthfawrogi, a byddant i gyd yn helpu i gyfrannu at y ffordd yr ymgysylltwn i gyflwyno ein hymateb i'r Papur Gwyrdd. Wrth gwrs, Papur Gwyrdd Llywodraeth y DU ydyw, sy'n cynnwys cymysgedd o ddiwygiadau, a fydd yn galw am newidiadau deddfwriaethol i gael eu cymeradwyo gan Senedd y DU. Ond rwyf am roi sicrwydd i bobl y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn gwneud yn siŵr fod ein lleisiau ni, ac yn bwysicaf oll, lleisiau pobl anabl a'u cynrychiolwyr, yn cael eu clywed gan Lywodraeth y DU ynghylch eu holl ddiwygiadau arfaethedig.
Do, fe rennais y llythyr. Dyma'r unig lythyr a gyhoeddais. I egluro, yn fy llythyr at yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol dros Waith a Phensiynau, sef fy ymateb cychwynnol pan glywsom am y diwygiadau, dywedais yn y llythyr hwnnw, a rennais nawr ar draws y Siambr, ac mae yno i'r cyhoedd ei weld, y byddai'n fuddiol pe bai'r Adran Gwaith a Phensiynau yn trefnu digwyddiadau ymgynghori wyneb yn wyneb yma yng Nghymru i sicrhau bod y rhai sydd wedi'u hallgáu'n ddigidol yn cael cyfle i rannu eu barn. Ac wrth gwrs, mae gennym gyfle hefyd ar sail y pedair gwlad, gydag ymrwymiad i gyfarfod â'r Adran Gwaith a Phensiynau, a bydd hwn yn amlwg yn gyfle i rannu hyn ar sail ehangach.
Mae ein gwaith yn sefydlu a gweithio gyda'r tasglu hawliau pobl anabl, y mae'r cyd-Aelodau'n ymwybodol iawn ohono, i ddatblygu'r cynllun hawliau pobl anabl, sy'n mynd i fod yn destun ymgynghoriad yn fuan, yn adlewyrchu ein hymrwymiad i wrando ar—nid yn unig gwrando ar, ond i gydweithio a gweithio gyda phobl anabl. A'r wythnos nesaf rwy'n cyfarfod â'r tasglu hawliau pobl anabl i drafod y Papur Gwyrdd, a bydd hynny'n cael ei ddilyn gan gyfarfod gyda'r fforwm cydraddoldeb pobl anabl.
Bydd safbwyntiau pobl â phrofiad bywyd—a rhaid imi ddweud bod hynny'n cynnwys yr holl brofiadau y gwnaethoch chi eu bwydo'n ôl i mi heddiw gan etholwyr ac o'ch arsylwadau a'ch sylwadau eich hunain—yn ganolog i'n hymateb trawslywodraethol i'r diwygiadau lles. Mae pob llais yn cyfrif, mae pob cyfraniad yn bwysig. Dyma ddechrau ein cyfraniad i ddylanwadu ar ein hymateb i'r Papur Gwyrdd ar ddiwygiadau lles.
Will you take an intervention? I want to hear—. I think we've made it clear that on these benches we want to hear Welsh Government raise concerns. We have now a copy of your letter to Liz Kendall, which does not raise concerns about what we understood were going to be deep cuts to the welfare state. Did you not think it was in the interests of Wales, perhaps, for you to take that earliest opportunity to actually raise some concerns?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad? Hoffwn glywed—. Rwy'n credu ein bod wedi dweud yn glir ein bod ni ar y meinciau hyn am glywed Llywodraeth Cymru yn codi pryderon. Mae gennym gopi o’ch llythyr at Liz Kendall nawr, nad yw’n codi pryderon ynghylch yr hyn y deallem y byddent yn doriadau dwfn i’r wladwriaeth les. Onid oeddech chi'n credu y byddai o fudd i Gymru, efallai, i chi fanteisio ar y cyfle cynharaf hwnnw i godi pryderon?
You have received my letter, and, of course, it is, as I said, the start of my responses and my engagement with the UK Government in terms of the impact of the Green Paper on welfare reforms. And I think that it is important that that point I made, which was very much an initial point—that they must meet with and engage with disabled people. That was the point that I was making. And of course I will share all future correspondence, but the most important response will be our response to the Green Paper, and you are playing a part in this debate in influencing that.
And I think it's important that we recognise that the people of Wales should be served by a welfare system that provides meaningful support to help those who can work into sustainable employment, but also offers an effective financial safety net to people who are unable to work. And can I thank Hefin David for your contribution this afternoon, for sharing your concerns and based on experience? And as the First Minister has also recognised, it's looking also at opportunities that should lie in welfare benefit reforms. There have been many responses from disabled people's organisations saying, 'Yes, there needs to be change.' We need to seek now to influence the changes that are being proposed. And we recognise that, for many disabled people and people with long-term health conditions, the current benefits system doesn't always encourage or enable people to consider entering employment. Some people feel cautious about stepping out on their pathway to employment.
Rydych wedi cael fy llythyr, ac wrth gwrs, fel y dywedais, dyma ddechrau fy ymatebion a fy ymwneud â Llywodraeth y DU ynghylch effaith y Papur Gwyrdd ar ddiwygiadau lles. Ac rwy'n credu ei bod yn bwysig fod y pwynt hwnnw a wneuthum, a oedd yn bwynt cychwynnol i raddau helaeth—fod yn rhaid iddynt gyfarfod â phobl anabl ac ymgysylltu â hwy. Dyna oedd y pwynt a wneuthum. Ac wrth gwrs, byddaf yn rhannu pob gohebiaeth yn y dyfodol, ond yr ymateb pwysicaf fydd ein hymateb i'r Papur Gwyrdd, ac rydych chi'n chwarae rhan yn y ddadl hon i ddylanwadu ar hynny.
Ac rwy'n credu ei bod yn bwysig inni gydnabod y dylai pobl Cymru gael eu gwasanaethu gan system les sy’n darparu cymorth ystyrlon i helpu’r rheini sy’n gallu gweithio i gyflogaeth gynaliadwy, ond sydd hefyd yn cynnig rhwyd ddiogelwch ariannol effeithiol i bobl nad ydynt yn gallu gweithio. Ac a gaf i ddiolch i Hefin David am eich cyfraniad y prynhawn yma, am rannu eich pryderon ac ar sail profiad? Ac fel y mae'r Prif Weinidog hefyd wedi'i gydnabod, mae a wnelo hefyd ag edrych ar gyfleoedd a ddylai godi o ddiwygiadau i fudd-daliadau lles. Cafwyd llawer o ymatebion gan sefydliadau pobl anabl yn dweud, 'Oes, mae angen newid.' Nawr mae angen inni geisio dylanwadu ar y newidiadau a gynigir. Ac rydym yn cydnabod, i lawer o bobl anabl a phobl â chyflyrau iechyd hirdymor, nad yw'r system fudd-daliadau bresennol bob amser yn annog nac yn galluogi pobl i ystyried mynd i fyd gwaith. Mae rhai pobl yn teimlo'n betrus ynghylch camu allan ar eu llwybr at waith.
Thank you. I think we agree with that, but isn't the problem the feeling that the savings are motivated by a need to meet a notional cut in the Office for Budgetary Responsibility forecasts, not in a first-principles exercise about how to deliver an optimal welfare state system? And the Welsh Government should say loud and clear that that is the wrong starting point.
Diolch. Rwy'n credu ein bod yn cytuno â hynny, ond onid y broblem yw’r teimlad fod yr arbedion wedi’u hysgogi gan yr angen i gyflawni toriad tybiannol yn rhagolygon y Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol, nid ymarfer egwyddorion cyntaf ynglŷn â sut i ddarparu’r system wladwriaeth les orau? A dylai Llywodraeth Cymru ddweud yn uchel ac yn glir mai dyna'r man cychwyn anghywir.
Well, I think we have reserved judgment, haven't we, and the First Minister has made that very clear. What we do need to do is that we need to understand the evidence that is coming forward about the impacts of these proposals in the Green Paper. And as I say, just in terms of some of the prospects and the opportunities that should come from welfare reform, we just need to recognise what it means when you are making changes, where people may be fearful of immediately losing their disability benefits when they are seeking to progress onto a pathway to employment. And of course, at present, there's a very protracted and complicated assessment process. And we all know the positive impact that people gain from working in terms of greater income, improved mental health and physical health, as John Griffiths has said. But people do need reassurance, and that's what we've got to make sure in terms of our response, that we are clear.
And understanding the impact on people in Wales—preparing for starting work will not mean that they will end up in a worse financial situation. And these words are important from me as the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice; they are important words that are now in the public domain in terms of responding to these reforms. But we must recognise that the proposal from the UK Government to introduce legislation in 2026 that will guarantee that a person will not automatically face a reassessment of their benefit entitlements if they enter employment is to be welcomed.
Now, I think, Deputy Llywydd, I do want to have the opportunity to say that we have got to show where our powers and responsibilities are having a beneficial impact, wanting to make sure people in Wales who can work receive the support they need to find employment, so our employability programmes, supporting 15,000 people who are out of work, and the success of our young person’s guarantee is evident, with the youth unemployment rate in Wales, in the year ending September 2024, 6.5 per cent down, 3.6 percentage points, compared to the previous year. I just want to go onto the next point: our network of disabled people's employment champions working with employers to remove the barriers. These are things that we are doing, that we're responsible for in Wales, and they are working to help disabled people and employers to understand the barriers to finding work, and we will take part in the design of the trailblazer in Wales to tackle economic inactivity, and we'll get an additional £10 million funding from the UK Government for that as well. So, it is about reassuring people that we are engaging to look at what are the ways in which we have been helping disabled people to return to work, and also hopefully the UK Government can learn from that as well. But I particularly understand the specific impacts of these welfare reforms in Wales.
Wel, rwy'n credu ein bod wedi ymatal rhag rhoi barn, onid ydym, ac mae’r Prif Weinidog wedi gwneud hynny’n glir iawn. Yr hyn sydd angen i ni ei wneud yw deall y dystiolaeth sy’n cael ei chyflwyno am effeithiau’r cynigion hyn yn y Papur Gwyrdd. Ac fel y dywedaf, o ran rhai'n unig o'r rhagolygon a'r cyfleoedd a ddylai ddeillio o ddiwygio lles, nid oes ond angen inni gydnabod yr hyn y mae'n ei olygu pan fyddwch yn gwneud newidiadau, lle gallai fod pobl ofn colli eu budd-daliadau anabledd ar unwaith pan fyddant yn ceisio symud ymlaen i lwybr at gyflogaeth. Ac wrth gwrs, ar hyn o bryd, mae yna broses asesu hirfaith a chymhleth iawn. Ac fe ŵyr pob un ohonom am yr effaith gadarnhaol a gaiff gweithio ar bobl o ran mwy o incwm, gwell iechyd meddwl ac iechyd corfforol, fel y mae John Griffiths wedi’i ddweud. Ond mae angen sicrwydd ar bobl, a dyna y mae'n rhaid i ni ei sicrhau yn ein hymateb, ein bod yn glir.
Ac o ddeall yr effaith ar bobl yng Nghymru—ni fydd paratoi ar gyfer dechrau gweithio yn golygu y byddant mewn sefyllfa ariannol waeth yn y pen draw. Ac mae'r geiriau hyn yn bwysig gennyf i fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol; maent yn eiriau pwysig sydd bellach yn y parth cyhoeddus o ran ymateb i’r diwygiadau hyn. Ond mae’n rhaid inni gydnabod bod y cynnig gan Lywodraeth y DU i gyflwyno deddfwriaeth yn 2026 a fydd yn gwarantu na fydd unigolyn yn wynebu ailasesiad awtomatig o’u hawl i fudd-daliadau os byddant yn dechrau gweithio i’w groesawu.
Nawr, Ddirprwy Lywydd, rwyf am gael cyfle i ddweud bod rhaid inni ddangos lle mae ein pwerau a’n cyfrifoldebau yn cael effaith fuddiol, a'r awydd i sicrhau bod pobl yng Nghymru sy’n gallu gweithio yn cael y cymorth sydd ei angen arnynt i ddod o hyd i gyflogaeth, felly mae ein rhaglenni cyflogadwyedd, sy'n cefnogi 15,000 o bobl ddi-waith, a llwyddiant ein gwarant i bobl ifanc yn amlwg, gyda’r gyfradd ddiweithdra ymhlith bobl ifanc yng Nghymru, yn y flwyddyn hyd at fis Medi 2024, 6.5 y cant i lawr, 3.6 pwynt canran, o gymharu â'r flwyddyn flaenorol. Rwyf am fynd ymlaen at y pwynt nesaf: ein rhwydwaith o hyrwyddwyr cyflogaeth pobl anabl sy'n gweithio gyda chyflogwyr i gael gwared ar y rhwystrau. Mae'r rhain yn bethau yr ydym yn eu gwneud, yr ydym yn gyfrifol amdanynt yng Nghymru, ac maent yn gweithio i helpu pobl anabl a chyflogwyr i ddeall y rhwystrau i ddod o hyd i waith, a byddwn yn cymryd rhan yn y gwaith o gynllunio'r rhaglen arloesol yng Nghymru i fynd i'r afael ag anweithgarwch economaidd, a byddwn yn cael £10 miliwn o gyllid ychwanegol gan Lywodraeth y DU ar gyfer hynny hefyd. Felly, mae'n ymwneud â rhoi sicrwydd i bobl ein bod yn ymgysylltu i edrych ar y ffyrdd y buom yn helpu pobl anabl i ddychwelyd i'r gwaith, a gobeithio y gall Llywodraeth y DU ddysgu o hynny hefyd. Ond rwy’n bendant yn deall effeithiau penodol y diwygiadau lles hyn yng Nghymru.
You need to conclude now, Cabinet Secretary.
Mae angen ichi ddirwyn i ben, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet.
I will conclude now. I have to say that it is important in terms of concluding this debate today that I say again that Welsh Government will carefully consider the implications of the proposed welfare reforms. We'll respond to the consultation on the Green Paper, we'll ensure that the voices of disabled people in Wales are heard. I urge disabled people and their organisations that support them in Wales to ensure their voices are heard by responding to the consultation that closes on 30 June. I will meet Patriotic Millionaires, Jane, and I'm meeting disabled people and organisations, as I've said. We will continue to invest here in Wales.
Rwy'n dirwyn i ben. Mae'n rhaid imi ddweud ei bod yn bwysig, wrth gloi’r ddadl hon heddiw, fy mod yn dweud eto y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn ystyried goblygiadau’r diwygiadau lles arfaethedig yn ofalus. Byddwn yn ymateb i'r ymgynghoriad ar y Papur Gwyrdd, byddwn yn sicrhau bod lleisiau pobl anabl yng Nghymru yn cael eu clywed. Rwy’n annog pobl anabl a’r sefydliadau sy’n eu cefnogi yng Nghymru i sicrhau bod eu lleisiau’n cael eu clywed drwy ymateb i’r ymgynghoriad a fydd yn cau ar 30 Mehefin. Byddaf yn cyfarfod â Patriotic Millionaires, Jane, ac rwy'n cyfarfod â phobl anabl a sefydliadau, fel y dywedais. Byddwn yn parhau i fuddsoddi yma yng Nghymru.
Cabinet Secretary, I've been generous, but you need to conclude, please.
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, rwyf wedi bod yn hael, ond mae angen ichi ddirwyn i ben, os gwelwch yn dda.
And finally, Deputy Llywydd—I have taken a few interventions—
Ac yn olaf, Ddirprwy Lywydd—rwyf wedi derbyn ychydig o ymyriadau—
Yes, I've given you time.
Do, rwyf wedi rhoi amser i chi.
I want to finally say, in respect of the debate today, that we will draw contributions from this debate in our response to the Green Paper, and I do thank all who have contributed. Your voices have and will be heard. Diolch.
Hoffwn ddweud yn olaf, mewn perthynas â’r ddadl heddiw, y byddwn yn ystyried cyfraniadau o’r ddadl hon yn ein hymateb i’r Papur Gwyrdd, a diolch i bawb sydd wedi cyfrannu. Mae eich lleisiau wedi cael eu clywed a byddant yn parhau i gael eu clywed. Diolch.
Ac yn olaf, Sioned Williams i gau'r ddadl.
And finally I call on Sioned Williams to close the debate.
Diolch yn fawr. I must say, I'm very disappointed by that result. We are doing a lot of good things in Wales, and some of those you listed there, Cabinet Secretary, but we want to know what your view is, like we've heard what the view is from the First Minister of Scotland, like we've heard what the view is from the First Minister of Northern Ireland. In response to the UK budget of 2023, when the Conservatives were in power, the then Minister for finance, Rebecca Evans, said:
'While the Chancellor has announced further support to help people into work, we will not and cannot support any action which will make it difficult for people to access benefits or place conditions and sanction those currently receiving benefits.'
That's pretty unequivocal, isn't it? Why are we still not hearing that view? You can take an initial view, and you say you want to listen to the voices of disabled people; they've been made loud and clear. Yes, they do want to have more support into work, but they have been telling us, and they told us in the Equality and Social Justice Committee, that we need to have more focus on employers, and the attitudes of employers and the prejudice of employers, in order to that. The onus shouldn't be on the disabled people themselves. So, I'm extremely disappointed that you're still saying you're reserving judgment. You haven't got the courage of your convictions. You were there with us during those austerity years, when austerity was unleashed. As Adam Price rightly outlined, the terrible price, the terrible toll it took on Wales. You were all in Government. You've been in Government during all those times, Cabinet Secretary. You've known about those holes being torn in the fabric of society, as Adam outlined. And there are alternatives, aren't there? I agree with Alun Davies, the current UK Government is accepting the Conservative economic analysis, and that's shameful. And as Jane Dodds also outlined—. And I reject the fact that we don't have politics in these debates, Hefin David, because these are political decisions. These are political choices, as Jane Dodds outlined, so we have to have a political debate about them—[Interruption.] The fact that the Chancellor, as Lee Waters—. Opportunism, really? You must have a different inbox to me.
The fact that the Chancellor cut deeper, as Lee Waters rightly pointed out, when the OBR forecasts of her self-imposed fiscal rules proved that this was driven more by cutting costs than any altruistic reason. And now we've seen the letter—again, dropped into our inbox during the debate. No condemnation, it wasn't substantial. Yes, of course we want the UK Government to properly consult with disabled people, we want them also to hear the view of the Welsh Government. So, I'm glad that we've had this debate. I regret, as I said at the beginning, that we've had to use all the Senedd tools at our disposal in order to get the Senedd to be able to have a voice on this issue and properly debate this.
I just want to say as well that, yes, disabled people are right at the centre of this debate, and I want to put on record the utter condemnation of the fact that the UK Government not only paid no attention and no heed to the needs of the people of Wales, but paid no heed either to the needs of disabled people. They didn't put that Green Paper out in accessible formats, in easy read, in Braille. They weren't available. I mean, that's absolutely unforgivable. What happened to 'Nothing about us without us'?
I just want to say that I'm the chair of the cross-party group on learning disability; I know what the views of those people in that group were when I met with them this week. We will be writing unequivocally to the UK Government expressing our views and our utter dismay at and condemnation of these cuts. Again, as a representative of areas with above average Welsh levels of disability, I can assure you that I will put my constituents first, and on these benches, we will put our constituents first.
So, we need to hear stronger condemnation, we need to hear an advocacy for the different choices that Adam Price outlined, that these billions don't need to be taken from those who are most vulnerable in this way. We need to understand what—. We're standing at that stark crossroads as Adam Price outlined. In which direction does the Welsh Government want this UK Government to go, because it's Wales that'll suffer? As the pounds will be stripped from our local economies, our people will be pushed further into poverty, and it's the Welsh Government that will have to pick up the pieces yet again, and it's Wales that will suffer as a result.
So, I just want to say we have to remind, unfortunately, again, the Welsh Government what standing up for Wales really looks like. It means demanding a Welsh-specific assessment for these changes without delay, and I'd like to know a timeline on that, actually—if we could ask the UK Government when we're going to get that. And I would like to see an unambiguous condemning of this utter contempt of Westminster for failing to do so in the first place. Standing up for Wales means dispensing with the harmful rhetoric—that really harmful rhetoric—as we heard from Heledd Fychan, about a broken benefits system, and expressing firm solidarity with thousands of people across Wales who are terrified by this further weakening of an already frayed safety net. It means straining every sinew to mitigate the worst excesses of this devastating continuation of an austerity agenda, otherwise—
Diolch yn fawr. Rhaid imi ddweud fy mod yn siomedig iawn gyda'r canlyniad hwnnw. Rydym yn gwneud llawer o bethau da yng Nghymru, ac fe restroch chi rai o’r pethau hynny, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ond hoffem wybod beth yw eich barn chi, fel y clywsom farn Prif Weinidog yr Alban, fel y clywsom farn Prif Weinidog Gogledd Iwerddon. Mewn ymateb i gyllideb y DU yn 2023, pan oedd y Ceidwadwyr mewn grym, dywedodd y Gweinidog cyllid ar y pryd, Rebecca Evans:
'Er bod y Canghellor wedi cyhoeddi y bydd yn gwneud rhagor i helpu pobl i gael gwaith, wnawn ni ddim cefnogi unrhyw gamau a fydd yn ei gwneud hi’n anodd i bobl gael gafael ar fudd-daliadau neu a fydd yn gosod amodau a chosbau ar bobl sy'n cael budd-daliadau ar hyn o bryd.'
Mae hynny'n eithaf diamwys, onid yw? Pam nad ydym yn dal i glywed y farn honno? Gallwch ffurfio barn gychwynnol, ac rydych chi'n dweud eich bod am wrando ar leisiau pobl anabl; maent wedi codi llais yn glir. Maent am gael mwy o gymorth i gael gwaith, ydynt, ond maent wedi bod yn dweud wrthym, ac fe wnaethant ddweud wrthym yn y Pwyllgor Cydraddoldeb a Chyfiawnder Cymdeithasol, fod angen inni ganolbwyntio mwy ar gyflogwyr, ac agweddau cyflogwyr a rhagfarn cyflogwyr, er mwyn gwneud hynny. Ni ddylai'r cyfrifoldeb fod ar y bobl anabl eu hunain. Felly, rwy'n hynod siomedig eich bod yn dal i ddweud eich bod yn ymatal rhag rhoi barn. Nid ydych yn barod i sefyll dros eich egwyddorion. Roeddech yno gyda ni yn ystod blynyddoedd cyni, pan gyflwynwyd y mesurau cyni. Fel y nododd Adam Price yn gywir ddigon, y gost ofnadwy, yr effaith ofnadwy a gafodd ar Gymru. Roeddech i gyd yn Llywodraeth. Rydych chi wedi bod yn y Llywodraeth drwy gydol yr adegau hynny, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Rydych chi wedi gwybod am y tyllau a rwygwyd yng ngwead cymdeithas, fel y nododd Adam. Ac mae opsiynau eraill, onid oes? Rwy'n cytuno ag Alun Davies, mae Llywodraeth bresennol y DU yn derbyn dadansoddiad economaidd y Ceidwadwyr, ac mae hynny’n gywilyddus. Ac fel yr amlinellodd Jane Dodds hefyd—. Ac rwy’n gwrthod y syniad na ddylem gael gwleidyddiaeth yn y dadleuon hyn, Hefin David, gan mai penderfyniadau gwleidyddol yw’r rhain. Mae’r rhain yn ddewisiadau gwleidyddol, fel y nododd Jane Dodds, felly mae’n rhaid inni gael dadl wleidyddol amdanynt—[Torri ar draws.] Mae’r ffaith bod y Canghellor, fel y dywedodd Lee Waters—. Oportiwnistiaeth, o ddifrif? Mae'n rhaid bod gennych fewnflwch gwahanol i fy un i.
Nododd Lee Waters yn gywir ddigon y ffaith i’r Canghellor dorri’n ddyfnach pan brofodd rhagolygon y Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol o’i rheolau cyllidol hunanosodedig fod hyn wedi'i yrru fwy gan dorri costau nag unrhyw reswm anhunanol. A chan ein bod bellach wedi gweld y llythyr—unwaith eto, wedi'i ollwng i'n mewnflwch yn ystod y ddadl. Dim condemniad, nid oedd yn sylweddol. Wrth gwrs ein bod am i Lywodraeth y DU ymgynghori'n briodol â phobl anabl, rydym am iddynt glywed barn Llywodraeth Cymru hefyd. Felly, rwy’n falch ein bod wedi cael y ddadl hon. Mae'n drueni, fel y dywedais ar y dechrau, ein bod wedi gorfod defnyddio holl ddulliau'r Senedd sydd ar gael i ni i alluogi'r Senedd i gael llais ar y mater hwn a chael dadl briodol ar hyn.
Hoffwn ddweud hefyd fod pobl anabl yn hollol ganolog i'r ddadl hon, a hoffwn gofnodi fy nghondemniad llwyr o'r ffaith nid yn unig na thalodd Llywodraeth y DU unrhyw sylw i anghenion pobl Cymru, ond na thalodd unrhyw sylw ychwaith i anghenion pobl anabl. Ni wnaethant gyhoeddi'r Papur Gwyrdd hwnnw mewn fformatau hygyrch, hawdd eu darllen, mewn Braille. Nid oeddent ar gael. Hynny yw, mae hynny'n gwbl anfaddeuol. Beth ddigwyddodd i 'Dim byd amdanom ni hebom ni'?
Rwy'n gadeirydd y grŵp trawsbleidiol ar anabledd dysgu; gwn beth oedd barn y bobl yn y grŵp hwnnw pan gyfarfûm â hwy yr wythnos hon. Byddwn yn ysgrifennu’n ddiamwys at Lywodraeth y DU gan fynegi ein barn a’n siom a’n condemniad o’r toriadau hyn. Unwaith eto, fel cynrychiolydd ardaloedd sydd â lefelau uwch na’r cyfartaledd o bobl anabl yng Nghymru, gallaf roi sicrwydd i chi y byddaf i'n rhoi fy etholwyr yn gyntaf, ac ar y meinciau hyn, byddwn ni'n rhoi ein hetholwyr yn gyntaf.
Felly, mae angen inni glywed condemniad cryfach, mae angen inni glywed cefnogaeth i'r opsiynau gwahanol a amlinellodd Adam Price, nad oes angen mynd â'r biliynau oddi wrth y rheini sydd fwyaf agored i niwed yn y modd hwn. Mae angen inni ddeall beth—. Rydym yn sefyll ar y groesffordd ddigalon honno, fel y nododd Adam Price. I ba gyfeiriad y mae Llywodraeth Cymru am i Lywodraeth y DU fynd, gan mai Cymru sy'n mynd i ddioddef? Wrth i’r punnoedd ddiflannu o'n heconomïau lleol, bydd ein pobl yn cael eu gwthio ymhellach i mewn i dlodi, a Llywodraeth Cymru sy'n mynd i orfod codi’r darnau unwaith eto, a Chymru sy'n mynd i ddioddef o ganlyniad.
Felly, yn anffodus, mae'n rhaid inni atgoffa Llywodraeth Cymru unwaith eto beth y mae sefyll dros Gymru yn ei olygu mewn gwirionedd. Mae'n golygu mynnu asesiad sy'n benodol i Gymru ar gyfer y newidiadau hyn yn ddi-oed, a hoffwn gael amserlen ar gyfer hynny—os gallem ofyn i Lywodraeth y DU pryd y cawn hynny. A hoffwn weld condemniad diamwys o ddirmyg llwyr San Steffan yn methu gwneud hynny yn y lle cyntaf. Mae sefyll dros Gymru'n golygu rhoi’r gorau i’r rhethreg niweidiol—y rhethreg wirioneddol niweidiol honno—fel y clywsom gan Heledd Fychan, am system fudd-daliadau sydd wedi torri, a mynegi undod cadarn â miloedd o bobl ledled Cymru sy’n teimlo arswyd wrth weld rhwyd ddiogelwch sydd eisoes wedi treulio yn cael ei gwanhau ymhellach. Mae’n golygu gwneud pob ymdrech i liniaru effeithiau gwaethaf y parhad dinistriol hwn o agenda cyni, neu fel arall—
Sioned, you need to conclude now, please.
Sioned, mae angen ichi ddirwyn i ben, os gwelwch yn dda.
This is my final sentence, Dirprwy Lywydd. Otherwise, that burning sense of duty to the cause of fighting poverty will have been reduced to nothing more than a smouldering cinder, and that clear red water will have finally run dry.
Dyma fy mrawddeg olaf, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Fel arall, bydd yr ymdeimlad tanbaid o ddyletswydd i achos trechu tlodi wedi'i leihau'n ddim byd mwy na lludw mudlosg, a bydd y dŵr coch clir hwnnw wedi rhedeg yn sych unwaith ac am byth.
Daw hynny â'r ddadl frys i ben.
That concludes the urgent debate.
Mae eitem 6 wedi ei gohirio.
Item 6 has been postponed.
Felly, eitem 7 sydd nesaf, dadl ar adroddiad y Pwyllgor Safonau Ymddygiad— 'Atebolrwydd Aelodau Unigol: Dichell fwriadol'. Galwaf ar Gadeirydd y pwyllgor i wneud y cynnig. Hannah Blythyn.
So, we'll move to item 7, a debate on the Standards of Conduct Committee report—'Individual Member Accountability: Deliberate deception'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Hannah Blythyn.
Cynnig NDM8874 Hannah Blythyn
Cynnig bod y Senedd:
Yn nodi adroddiad y Pwyllgor Safonau Ymddygiad, ‘Atebolrwydd Aelodau Unigol: Dichell fwriadol’ a osodwyd yn y Swyddfa Gyflwyno ar 19 Chwefror 2025.
Motion NDM8874 Hannah Blythyn
To propose that the Senedd:
Notes the report of the Standards of Conduct Committee, ‘Individual Member Accountability: Deliberate deception’, which was laid in the Table Office on 19 February 2025.
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Mae'n bleser gennyf agor y ddadl heddiw ar ail adroddiad y pwyllgor ar ei ymchwiliad i 'Atebolrwydd Aelodau Unigol: Dichell fwriadol'.
Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm pleased to be opening today’s debate on the committee’s second report on its inquiry into 'Individual Member Accountability: Deliberate deception'.
The issue of trust in politics is not a new one. Honesty is enshrined in the Nolan principles, the ethical foundation expected of public office holders, and it is there for a reason. The public expect those who hold, and those who seek to hold, public office to act and speak truthfully. That’s why the statements we choose to make and the motivation for making them matters. Getting it wrong has far-reaching consequences for the trust that binds us as politicians to the people we serve, and those who do so deliberately for political gain need to be held to account. The exchanging of views and passionate, healthy debate is at the heart of democracy and should be protected. However, these debates should be rooted in fact. The committee recognises that changes in technology, social media, and their use to spread disinformation rapidly, are real and serious threats, bringing deliberate deception even further to the forefront.
Nid yw mater ymddiriedaeth mewn gwleidyddiaeth yn un newydd. Mae gonestrwydd wedi'i ymgorffori yn egwyddorion Nolan, y sylfaen foesegol a ddisgwylir gan ddeiliaid swyddi cyhoeddus, ac mae yno am reswm. Mae'r cyhoedd yn disgwyl i'r rheini mewn swyddi cyhoeddus, a'r rheini sy'n ymgeisio amdanynt, weithredu a siarad yn onest. Dyna pam fod y datganiadau y dewiswn eu gwneud a'r cymhelliad i'w gwneud yn bwysig. Mae eu cael yn anghywir yn arwain at ganlyniadau pellgyrhaeddol i’r ymddiriedaeth sy’n ein rhwymo fel gwleidyddion wrth y bobl a wasanaethwn, ac mae angen dwyn y rheini sy’n gwneud hynny’n fwriadol er budd gwleidyddol i gyfrif. Mae dadleuon a thrafodaethau angerddol ac iach yn hollbwysig i ddemocratiaeth, a dylid eu gwarchod. Fodd bynnag, dylid gwreiddio’r dadleuon hyn mewn ffaith. Mae’r pwyllgor yn cydnabod bod newidiadau mewn technoleg, y cyfryngau cymdeithasol, a’u defnydd i ledaenu twyllwybodaeth yn gyflym, yn fygythiadau gwirioneddol a difrifol, sy'n rhoi lle hyd yn oed yn fwy blaenllaw i ddichell fwriadol.
When we began this inquiry, it became apparent that the practical complexities of tackling deliberate deception, as well as respecting the overarching principles of the right to freedom of expression and the autonomy of Parliaments to self-regulate, was going to be a challenge. But the committee agreed that the difficulty of the task should not deter us from seeking pragmatic solutions. With that in mind, I would like to thank all of those who not only provided evidence and engaged with us throughout this inquiry, but who are doing important work behind the scenes to push for change and keep this issue firmly on the agenda. We are aware that we're entering new territory with this report and are grateful to all who shared their expertise and provided innovative ideas, all with a common goal of improving the status quo.
The terms of reference for the inquiry set out that it would gather evidence on the merits of introducing further mechanisms for the disqualification of Members and candidates found to have deliberately deceived the electorate, including through an independent judicial process. The compelling arguments for and against introducing a criminal or civil offence are set out in the report, as are our detailed committee views. However, we had significant concerns about the practical implications of such an offence—for example, the difficulties of proving false statements and the negative impact on court and police resources. We also considered the unintended consequences this may have on important democratic principles, such as the right to freedom of expression, parliamentary autonomy and the politicisation of the courts. On balance, the committee therefore concluded that it could not support such an offence. We did however, identify a number of changes that could be made across the existing standards regime and mechanisms that relate to candidates that would amount to a pioneering programme of reform.
We have made 11 recommendations aimed at confronting the issue head on with tools we already have. Taken together, they will make our rules clearer by embedding deliberate deception into the code of conduct, a code that, unlike other legislatures', applies to Members at all times. They will introduce more independence at every stage of the Senedd’s standards process and they will improve transparency when politicians do break the rules and broaden the sanctions available to hold those individuals to account. For the Senedd to enact some of these recommendations, the Welsh Government will need to make changes to existing legislation, which the committee believes will be achievable in time for the seventh Senedd. I am pleased that the Welsh Government have agreed to all of the recommendations directed to it, either in full or in principle.
Our first recommendation calls on the Welsh Government to provide a clear definition of deliberate deception in legislation relating to Senedd elections that is consistently applied by the Senedd in any associated Standing Orders and guidance. The conduct Order that governs Senedd elections already makes it an offence for candidates to make or publish a false statement of fact about the personal conduct or character of another candidate in order to affect the way a vote is cast in an election. As referred to in recommendations 3 and 4, broadening the scope of the existing offence to cover false statements of fact made by a candidate we believe would improve the accountability of those seeking to hold public office.
The Counsel General’s response suggests that broadening the existing scope is not possible and rather the introduction of a new offence would be required. While we are encouraged that this has been accepted in principle and that work will be done to develop a new offence in line with what the committee has recommended, understandably, Counsel General, Members are disappointed that it won't be included in the final conduct Order for the 2026 election, particularly as the Welsh Government had made a commitment to put time aside in its programme to legislate in this area.
The committee is unclear as to whether the proposed new offence would relate only to candidates, or also include Senedd Members, and we’d welcome further information on this from the Counsel General. However, we are pleased that the Counsel General intends to bring forward a definition of deliberate deception in this Senedd that will support the new offence for the conduct Order and how it's enshrined in the code of conduct and in Senedd procedures. We would encourage the Welsh Government to consider the evidence already gathered by the committee on related definitions within existing legislation, such as the Fraud Act 2006 and the Defamation Act 2013.
Recommendation 5, which requires candidates who have made or disseminated deliberately deceptive statements to correct the record clearly and at the earliest opportunity has been accepted in full. This should serve as a deterrent and improve accountability and transparency.
Recommendations 2 and 6 call on the Welsh Government to amend existing legislation to introduce more independence into the Senedd’s standards regime, including giving the commissioner for standards powers to initiate investigations and for the Senedd to appoint lay members to the Standards of Conduct Committee. This will bring more independence and expertise to the decision-making stage of the standards process and the committee’s broader policy work. We are pleased that these recommendations have been accepted in full.
Recommendations 7 through 10 are directed at the Senedd, and we intend to work with the Business Committee to bring these to fruition. We are proposing changing the code of conduct to expressly state that Members must not make deliberately misleading statements and to compel Members to correct factually incorrect statements at the earliest opportunity. This will give further weight to the fundamental requirement of Members to speak truthfully and put honesty at the heart of the respectful culture we are trying to nurture here.
Recommendation 8 proposes a formal two-stage procedure for correcting the record via Standing Orders—the first to address unintentional and minor inaccuracies, the second to allow for more formal correction notices to be issued by the commissioner for standards. Failure to comply with a correction notice would be considered a breach of the code of conduct and sanctioned as deceptive conduct by the Member. In both instances, Members would be required to publish corrections with equal prominence to the inaccurate statement at the earliest opportunity. For transparency, we are also proposing that such notices, as well as reports on breaches of the code of conduct, are published on Members of the Senedd’s webpages and, where applicable, to the Record of Proceedings.
Recommendation 10 relates to the proposed new recall procedure that the Welsh Government intends to bring forward, and for any guidelines containing deliberate deception as a trigger to specify that it is only recommended when the breach is severe in nature. We are also proposing that an appeals structure is established to provide additional safeguards for bringing in stronger sanctioning powers. Although it is for the Senedd to decide on the appropriate appeals process, to do so would require legislative change, and we are pleased that the Counsel General has agreed to explore options within the recall Bill to allow such a mechanism.
By making incremental changes to existing legislation in this way and strengthening the standards regime, we can make a real difference and position the Senedd at the forefront of the global effort to restore trust in politics. Our procedures must reflect our ambitions for a respectful and compassionate culture here in the Senedd. It is in all of our interests to keep on improving the integrity of our democratic institutions. We know that there is more to do, but this is a good place to start. Diolch.
Pan ddechreusom ar yr ymchwiliad hwn, daeth yn amlwg fod cymhlethdodau ymarferol mynd i’r afael â dichell fwriadol, yn ogystal â pharchu egwyddorion trosfwaol yr hawl i ryddid mynegiant ac ymreolaeth Seneddau i hunanreoleiddio, yn mynd i fod yn her. Ond cytunodd y pwyllgor na ddylai anhawster y dasg ein hatal rhag ceisio atebion pragmatig. Gyda hynny mewn golwg, hoffwn ddiolch i bawb sydd nid yn unig wedi darparu tystiolaeth ac wedi ymgysylltu â ni drwy gydol yr ymchwiliad hwn, ond sy’n gwneud gwaith pwysig y tu ôl i’r llenni i wthio am newid a chadw’r mater hwn ar yr agenda. Rydym yn ymwybodol ein bod yn torri tir newydd gyda'r adroddiad hwn ac rydym yn ddiolchgar i bawb a rannodd eu harbenigedd ac a ddarparodd syniadau arloesol, pob un â'r nod cyffredin o wella'r status quo.
Roedd cylch gorchwyl yr ymchwiliad yn nodi y byddai’n casglu tystiolaeth ar rinweddau cyflwyno rhagor o fecanweithiau ar gyfer diarddel Aelodau ac ymgeiswyr y cafwyd eu bod wedi twyllo’r etholwyr yn fwriadol, gan gynnwys drwy broses farnwrol annibynnol. Mae’r dadleuon cymhellol o blaid ac yn erbyn cyflwyno trosedd neu drosedd sifil wedi’u nodi yn yr adroddiad, yn ogystal â safbwyntiau manwl ein pwyllgor. Fodd bynnag, roedd gennym bryderon sylweddol ynghylch goblygiadau ymarferol trosedd o’r fath—er enghraifft, anawsterau profi datganiadau ffug a’r effaith negyddol ar adnoddau’r llysoedd a’r heddlu. Fe wnaethom hefyd ystyried y canlyniadau anfwriadol y gallai hyn eu cael ar egwyddorion democrataidd pwysig, megis yr hawl i ryddid mynegiant, ymreolaeth seneddol a gwleidyddoli’r llysoedd. Ar ôl pwyso a mesur, daeth y pwyllgor i’r casgliad felly na allai gefnogi trosedd o’r fath. Fodd bynnag, fe wnaethom nodi nifer o newidiadau y gellid eu gwneud ar draws y gyfundrefn safonau bresennol a mecanweithiau'n ymwneud ag ymgeiswyr a fyddai'n rhaglen ddiwygio arloesol.
Rydym wedi gwneud 11 o argymhellion gyda’r nod o fynd i’r afael â’r mater yn uniongyrchol gyda’r dulliau sydd gennym yn barod. Gyda’i gilydd, byddant yn gwneud ein rheolau’n gliriach drwy wreiddio dichell fwriadol yn y cod ymddygiad, cod sydd, yn wahanol i godau deddfwrfeydd eraill, yn berthnasol i Aelodau bob amser. Byddant yn cyflwyno mwy o annibyniaeth ar bob cam ym mhroses safonau’r Senedd a byddant yn gwella tryloywder pan fydd gwleidyddion yn torri’r rheolau ac yn ehangu’r sancsiynau sydd ar gael i ddwyn yr unigolion hynny i gyfrif. Er mwyn i’r Senedd weithredu rhai o’r argymhellion hyn, bydd angen i Lywodraeth Cymru wneud newidiadau i’r ddeddfwriaeth bresennol, ac mae’r pwyllgor yn credu y byddant yn gyflawnadwy mewn pryd ar gyfer y seithfed Senedd. Rwy’n falch fod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi cytuno i bob un o’r argymhellion a gyfeiriwyd ati, naill ai’n llawn neu mewn egwyddor.
Mae ein hargymhelliad cyntaf yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i ddarparu diffiniad clir o ddichell fwriadol mewn deddfwriaeth sy’n ymwneud ag etholiadau’r Senedd a ddefnyddir yn gyson gan y Senedd mewn unrhyw Reolau Sefydlog a chanllawiau cysylltiedig. Mae’r Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau sy’n llywodraethu etholiadau’r Senedd eisoes yn ei gwneud yn drosedd i ymgeiswyr wneud neu gyhoeddi datganiadau ffug am ymddygiad personol neu gymeriad ymgeisydd arall er mwyn effeithio ar y ffordd y caiff pleidlais ei bwrw mewn etholiad. Fel y nodir yn argymhellion 3 a 4, credwn y byddai ehangu cwmpas y drosedd bresennol i gynnwys datganiadau ffug a wneir gan ymgeisydd yn gwella atebolrwydd y rheini sy'n ymgeisio am swydd gyhoeddus.
Mae ymateb y Cwnsler Cyffredinol yn awgrymu nad yw’n bosibl ehangu’r cwmpas presennol, ac yn hytrach y byddai angen cyflwyno trosedd newydd. Er ein bod yn croesawu'r ffaith bod hyn wedi’i dderbyn mewn egwyddor ac y bydd gwaith yn mynd rhagddo i ddatblygu trosedd newydd yn unol â’r hyn y mae’r pwyllgor wedi’i argymell, yn ddealladwy, Gwnsler Cyffredinol, mae’r Aelodau’n siomedig na fydd yn cael ei gynnwys yn y Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau terfynol ar gyfer etholiad 2026, yn enwedig gan fod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi gwneud ymrwymiad i neilltuo amser yn ei rhaglen i ddeddfu yn y maes hwn.
Nid yw’n glir i'r pwyllgor a fyddai’r drosedd newydd arfaethedig yn berthnasol i ymgeiswyr yn unig, neu a fyddai'n cynnwys Aelodau’r Senedd hefyd, a byddem yn croesawu rhagor o wybodaeth am hyn gan y Cwnsler Cyffredinol. Fodd bynnag, rydym yn falch fod y Cwnsler Cyffredinol yn bwriadu cyflwyno diffiniad o ddichell fwriadol yn y Senedd hon a fydd yn cefnogi’r drosedd newydd ar gyfer y Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau a sut y'i hymgorfforir yn y cod ymddygiad ac yng ngweithdrefnau’r Senedd. Rydym yn annog Llywodraeth Cymru i ystyried y dystiolaeth a gasglwyd eisoes gan y pwyllgor ar ddiffiniadau cysylltiedig o fewn y ddeddfwriaeth bresennol, megis Deddf Twyll 2006 a Deddf Difenwi 2013.
Mae argymhelliad 5, sy'n ei gwneud yn ofynnol i ymgeiswyr sydd wedi gwneud neu ledaenu datganiadau sy’n camarwain drwy ddichell fwriadol gywiro'r cofnod yn glir a chyn gynted â phosibl, wedi'i dderbyn yn llawn. Dylai hyn atal dichell fwriadol a dylai wella atebolrwydd a thryloywder.
Mae argymhellion 2 a 6 yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i ddiwygio’r ddeddfwriaeth bresennol i gyflwyno mwy o annibyniaeth i gyfundrefn safonau’r Senedd, gan gynnwys rhoi pwerau i’r comisiynydd safonau gychwyn ymchwiliadau ac i’r Senedd benodi aelodau lleyg i eistedd ar y Pwyllgor Safonau Ymddygiad. Bydd hyn yn dod â mwy o annibyniaeth ac arbenigedd i gam gwneud penderfyniadau'r broses safonau a gwaith polisi ehangach y pwyllgor. Rydym yn falch fod yr argymhellion hyn wedi’u derbyn yn llawn.
Mae argymhellion 7 i 10 wedi’u cyfeirio at y Senedd, ac rydym yn bwriadu gweithio gyda’r Pwyllgor Busnes i'w gwireddu. Rydym yn cynnig newid y cod ymddygiad fel ei fod yn datgan yn benodol na ddylai Aelodau wneud datganiadau sy’n camarwain yn fwriadol ac i orfodi Aelodau i gywiro datganiadau ffeithiol anghywir cyn gynted â phosibl. Bydd hyn yn rhoi mwy o bwys ar y gofyniad sylfaenol i Aelodau siarad yn onest a sicrhau bod gonestrwydd yn ganolog i'r diwylliant parchus y ceisiwn ei feithrin yma.
Mae argymhelliad 8 yn cynnig gweithdrefn ffurfiol dau gam ar gyfer cywiro’r cofnod drwy Reolau Sefydlog—y cyntaf i fynd i’r afael â mân anghywirdebau ac anghywirdebau anfwriadol, a’r ail i ganiatáu i hysbysiadau cywiro mwy ffurfiol gael eu cyhoeddi gan y comisiynydd safonau. Byddai peidio â chydymffurfio â hysbysiad cywiro yn cael ei ystyried yn achos o dorri’r cod ymddygiad ac yn cael ei gosbi fel ymddygiad sy'n camarwain drwy ddichell gan yr Aelod. Yn y ddau achos, byddai'n ofynnol i Aelodau gyhoeddi cywiriadau cyn gynted â phosibl gan roi’r un amlygrwydd iddynt â’r datganiad anghywir. Er tryloywder, rydym hefyd yn cynnig bod hysbysiadau o’r fath, yn ogystal ag adroddiadau ar achosion o dorri’r cod ymddygiad, yn cael eu cyhoeddi ar dudalennau gwe Aelodau’r Senedd, a lle bo’n berthnasol, yng Nghofnod y Trafodion.
Mae argymhelliad 10 yn ymwneud â’r weithdrefn adalw newydd arfaethedig y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn bwriadu ei chyflwyno, ac i unrhyw ganllawiau sy’n cynnwys dichell fwriadol fel sail nodi mai dim ond pan geir achos difrifol o dorri’r cod y dylid ei sbarduno. Rydym hefyd yn cynnig sefydlu strwythur apelio i ddarparu mesurau diogelu ychwanegol ar gyfer cyflwyno pwerau cosbi cryfach. Er mai’r Senedd sydd i benderfynu ar y broses apelio briodol, byddai angen newid deddfwriaethol er mwyn gwneud hynny, ac rydym yn falch fod y Cwnsler Cyffredinol wedi cytuno i archwilio opsiynau o fewn y Bil adalw i ganiatáu mecanwaith o’r fath.
Drwy wneud newidiadau cynyddrannol i ddeddfwriaeth bresennol yn y modd hwn a chryfhau’r drefn safonau, gallwn wneud gwahaniaeth gwirioneddol a sicrhau bod y Senedd ar flaen y gad yn yr ymdrech fyd-eang i adfer ymddiriedaeth mewn gwleidyddiaeth. Mae'n rhaid i’n gweithdrefnau adlewyrchu ein huchelgais ar gyfer diwylliant parchus a thosturiol yma yn y Senedd. Mae o fudd i bob un ohonom barhau i wella uniondeb ein sefydliadau democrataidd. Gwyddom fod mwy i’w wneud, ond dyma le da i ddechrau. Diolch.
Can I thank the Chair of the committee, and the committee clerk and legal team, and all of those who have given evidence in this inquiry? As a Member of the standards committee, I welcome the chance to speak on this. Deception is a complicated and, in many ways, unique issue when we consider it in the context of our democratic processes. It raises valid concerns from all sides, and rightly so. The concept of deliberate deception is not merely about misinformation or misspeaking, but about the intentional misleading of voters. It strikes at the core of trust in our democracy, as the Chair rightly pointed out, yet defining and addressing it presents significant challenges. There are concerns, as was outlined, around freedom of speech and privilege, about political rhetoric and about the practicalities of enforcement. As a Senedd, we must tread carefully to ensure that we get the balance right.
I'll start by addressing one of the key distinctions that should be recognised, which is the fundamental difference between candidates and Members of the Senedd. These are two distinct entities, and, as such, they should require separate systems of accountability. A candidate aims to persuade voters, often making promises and claims that are subject to political scrutiny through debates, hustings, conversations with the public or through the media. A Member of the Senedd, however, has taken on the responsibility of representing their constituents, adhering to the Nolan principles of public service, as the Chair mentioned, and upholding the integrity of this institution. It is for this reason that I believe that we cannot simply apply the same rules to both.
Holding candidates accountable for deliberate deception poses significant legal and procedural challenges, particularly when considering the dynamic nature of political campaigns. Meanwhile, Members of the Senedd are bound by a clear set of ethical expectations, and the mechanisms for ensuring accountability must reflect that distinction. However, for both candidates and Members, political rhetoric is employed on a daily basis, and that should, rightly, be scrutinised.
A gaf i ddiolch i Gadeirydd y pwyllgor, a chlerc y pwyllgor a’r tîm cyfreithiol, a phawb sydd wedi rhoi tystiolaeth yn yr ymchwiliad hwn? Fel Aelod o’r pwyllgor safonau, rwy'n croesawu'r cyfle i siarad ynglŷn â hyn. Mae dichell yn fater cymhleth, ac mewn sawl ffordd, yn unigryw pan fyddwn yn ei ystyried yng nghyd-destun ein prosesau democrataidd. Mae’n codi pryderon dilys o bob ochr, ac yn gwbl briodol felly. Nid ymwneud â chamwybodaeth neu gamddweud yn unig y mae dichell fwriadol, ond yn hytrach â chamarwain pleidleiswyr yn fwriadol. Mae’n mynd at wraidd ymddiriedaeth yn ein democratiaeth, fel y nododd y Cadeirydd yn gywir ddigon, ond mae ei ddiffinio a mynd i’r afael ag ef yn creu heriau sylweddol. Mae pryderon, fel yr amlinellwyd, ynghylch y rhyddid i lefaru a braint, ynghylch rhethreg wleidyddol ac ymarferoldeb gorfodaeth. Fel Senedd, mae’n rhaid inni droedio’n ofalus i sicrhau ein bod yn cael y cydbwysedd yn iawn.
Fe ddechreuaf drwy fynd i’r afael ag un o’r gwahaniaethau allweddol y dylid eu cydnabod, sef y gwahaniaeth sylfaenol rhwng ymgeiswyr ac Aelodau’r Senedd. Mae’r rhain yn ddau endid gwahanol, ac fel y cyfryw, dylai fod angen systemau atebolrwydd ar wahân arnynt. Mae ymgeisydd yn ceisio perswadio pleidleiswyr, yn aml drwy wneud addewidion a honiadau sy'n destun craffu gwleidyddol drwy ddadleuon, hustyngau, sgyrsiau gyda'r cyhoedd neu drwy'r cyfryngau. Mae Aelodau’r Senedd, fodd bynnag, wedi derbyn y cyfrifoldeb o gynrychioli eu hetholwyr, gan gadw at egwyddorion gwasanaeth cyhoeddus Nolan, fel y soniodd y Cadeirydd, a chynnal uniondeb y sefydliad hwn. Am y rheswm hwn, ni chredaf y gallwn ddefnyddio'r un rheolau ar gyfer y ddau endid.
Mae dwyn ymgeiswyr i gyfrif am ddichell fwriadol yn creu heriau cyfreithiol a gweithdrefnol sylweddol, yn enwedig wrth ystyried natur ddeinamig ymgyrchoedd gwleidyddol. Yn y cyfamser, mae Aelodau’r Senedd wedi’u rhwymo gan gyfres glir o ddisgwyliadau moesegol, ac mae'n rhaid i’r mecanweithiau ar gyfer sicrhau atebolrwydd adlewyrchu’r gwahaniaeth hwnnw. Fodd bynnag, ar gyfer ymgeiswyr ac Aelodau, defnyddir rhethreg wleidyddol bob dydd, a dylid craffu ar hynny, a hynny’n gywir ddigon.
Would you give way?
A wnewch chi ildio?
Happily.
Wrth gwrs.
Thank you. Well, a statement is deceptive if it's false or misleading, untrue or untrue in a material particular. The World Economic Forum has stated that the soaring cost of food and energy is affecting people across the globe. Speaking here last July, the month of the UK general election, I noted that:
'33 European countries, the euro area and 17 G20 countries currently have higher inflation rates than the UK in consequence of the global cost-of-living crisis.'
However, Welsh Government Members keep stating here that the cost-of-living crisis was entirely precipitated by the former UK Government. Do you therefore agree that they should be careful what they wish for?
Diolch. Wel, mae datganiad yn ddichellgar os yw'n ffug neu'n gamarweiniol, yn anwir neu'n anwir mewn manylyn perthnasol. Mae Fforwm Economaidd y Byd wedi datgan bod cost gynyddol bwyd ac ynni yn effeithio ar bobl ledled y byd. Wrth siarad yma fis Gorffennaf diwethaf, yr un mis ag etholiad cyffredinol y DU, nodais:
'Ar hyn o bryd, mae gan 33 o wledydd Ewropeaidd, ardal yr ewro ac 17 o wledydd y G20 gyfraddau chwyddiant uwch na'r DU ar hyn o bryd yn sgil yr argyfwng costau byw byd-eang.'
Fodd bynnag, mae Aelodau Llywodraeth Cymru yn dal i ddweud yma fod yr argyfwng costau byw wedi’i achosi’n llwyr gan Lywodraeth flaenorol y DU. A ydych chi'n cytuno felly y dylent ofalu beth y dymunant ei gael?
I thank Mark Isherwood for making the political point there. As a representative of the committee, I will try to keep my views as a committee member on a cross-party basis, but Mark Isherwood has made his views on the Government's rhetoric very clear in his contribution.
But this debate also forms part of the broader process of strengthening the standards framework within the Senedd. The ongoing efforts to introduce a recall process and ensure a standards process fit for an expanded Senedd is vital in maintaining public confidence in our institution. A strong standards process is not just about punishment, it's about ensuring transparency, fairness and accountability. The work under way must continue to be refined to strike the right balance, ensuring that it is robust enough to deter misconduct, but also fair in its implementation. However, it is important to acknowledge that the process leading to these conclusions has been complex, and I do believe that additional time should have been allocated to fully consider the implications of these reforms. Hastening such an important process risks creating unintended consequences, and we must always be mindful of the need for thorough deliberation when making decisions that affect democratic accountability.
Finally, one particular aspect of the process that, for me, I believe warrants further examination is the role of the observer Members in the committee process. This is no judgment on the Members themselves, but I believe, in a committee context, having Members who are clearly with a defined pre-position on this makes it somewhat more difficult to gain some level of cross-party consensus on this. The Members were excellent contributors in this inquiry, and I thank them for that, but the system that was brought forward for this process I don't think was the best way of doing it. I would have preferred, with Adam Price's experience and past experience in this case, him being a witness to this committee, rather than an observer Member.
Diolch i Mark Isherwood am wneud y pwynt gwleidyddol yno. Fel cynrychiolydd y pwyllgor, fe geisiaf gadw fy marn fel aelod o'r pwyllgor ar sail drawsbleidiol, ond mae Mark Isherwood wedi gwneud ei safbwyntiau ar rethreg y Llywodraeth yn glir iawn yn ei gyfraniad.
Ond mae’r ddadl hon hefyd yn rhan o’r broses ehangach o gryfhau’r fframwaith safonau yn y Senedd. Mae’r ymdrechion parhaus i gyflwyno proses adalw a sicrhau proses safonau sy’n addas ar gyfer Senedd ehangach yn hanfodol i gynnal hyder y cyhoedd yn ein sefydliad. Mae proses safonau gref yn ymwneud â mwy na chosb yn unig, mae'n ymwneud â sicrhau tryloywder, tegwch ac atebolrwydd. Rhaid parhau i fireinio’r gwaith sy'n mynd rhagddo i sicrhau'r cydbwysedd cywir, gan wneud yn siŵr ei fod yn ddigon cadarn i atal camymddwyn, ond hefyd yn deg yn ei weithrediad. Fodd bynnag, mae’n bwysig cydnabod bod y broses sy’n arwain at y casgliadau hyn wedi bod yn gymhleth, a chredaf y dylid bod wedi neilltuo amser ychwanegol i ystyried goblygiadau’r diwygiadau hyn yn llawn. Mae rhuthro proses mor bwysig yn creu risg o ganlyniadau anfwriadol, ac mae’n rhaid inni fod yn ymwybodol bob amser o’r angen am ystyriaeth drylwyr wrth wneud penderfyniadau sy’n effeithio ar atebolrwydd democrataidd.
Yn olaf, un agwedd benodol ar y broses y credaf yn bersonol fod angen ei harchwilio ymhellach yw rôl yr Aelodau a oedd yn arsylwi ym mhroses y pwyllgor. Nid yw hyn yn feirniadaeth ar yr Aelodau eu hunain, ond yng nghyd-destun pwyllgor, rwy'n credu bod cael Aelodau sy’n amlwg â safbwynt rhagddiffiniedig ar hyn yn ei gwneud ychydig yn anos sicrhau rhyw lefel o gonsensws trawsbleidiol ar hyn. Roedd yr Aelodau’n gyfranwyr rhagorol yn yr ymchwiliad hwn, ac rwy'n ddiolchgar iddynt am hynny, ond ni chredaf mai’r system a gyflwynwyd ar gyfer y broses hon oedd y ffordd orau o'i wneud. Gyda phrofiad Adam Price a'i brofiad yn y gorffennol yn yr achos hwn, byddai wedi bod yn well gennyf pe bai wedi bod yn dyst i’r pwyllgor hwn, yn hytrach nag yn Aelod a oedd yn arsylwi.
Will you take an intervention?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad?
Happily.
Wrth gwrs.
I think what you're saying is totally invalid, because what you're saying is actually questioning the Chair of the committee and her position in relation to being able to distinguish between observer status and those of you who are on the committee. I don't think it's a fair position and I'd like you to consider the criticisms you're making of the Chair of the committee, in all seriousness.
Rwy'n credu bod yr hyn a ddywedwch yn gwbl annilys, gan fod yr hyn a ddywedwch yn cwestiynu Cadeirydd y pwyllgor a'i safbwynt mewn perthynas â gallu gwahaniaethu rhwng statws arsylwi a'r rhai ohonoch sydd ar y pwyllgor. Ni chredaf ei fod yn safbwynt teg, ac o ddifrif, hoffwn ichi ystyried eich beirniadaeth o Gadeirydd y pwyllgor.
I've considered this in great detail, Jane, and there's no criticism of the Chair and her chairing of this. Indeed, I've never been a member of the standards committee under any other chairmanship, and Hannah's chairmanship has been excellent. I just think if we are looking to do something like this in the future, with observer Members, which we do do in the Senedd in the context where other members of committees sit on other committees while looking at specific points, where they are then accountable to that committee to feed back, that is a premise that is already established and works well. Observer Members in this context I just don't think is the best way and format to move this forward. It's no feedback on the individuals themselves; it's the process more so that I think needs further consideration in the future. But it's no criticism of the chairmanship or indeed the Members, as I pointed out.
To close, Dirprwy Lywydd, as I'm conscious the clock has gone very red, concerns surrounding deception are valid and the need for accountability is clear. The way forward requires careful and considered policy making. We must continue to refine the mechanisms that uphold the integrity of the Senedd, ensuring that any reforms are both effective and fair. That means drawing clear distinctions between different roles in our democratic system, ensuring that scrutiny mechanisms are truly impartial, and allowing adequate time for meaningful deliberation.
This is an issue of trust: trust in our representatives, trust in our processes and trust in the standards that we uphold. It's important that we get it right. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.
Rwyf wedi ystyried hyn yn fanwl iawn, Jane, ac nid oes unrhyw feirniadaeth o'r Cadeirydd a'i chadeiryddiaeth. Yn wir, nid wyf erioed wedi bod yn aelod o’r pwyllgor safonau o dan unrhyw gadeiryddiaeth arall, ac mae cadeiryddiaeth Hannah wedi bod yn rhagorol. Os ydym yn ceisio gwneud rhywbeth fel hyn yn y dyfodol, gydag Aelodau sy'n arsylwi, sy'n rhywbeth a wnawn yn y Senedd mewn cyd-destun lle mae aelodau o bwyllgorau eraill yn eistedd ar bwyllgorau eraill wrth edrych ar bwyntiau penodol, lle maent wedyn yn atebol i'r pwyllgor hwnnw i roi adborth, rwy'n credu bod hwnnw'n gynsail sydd eisoes wedi'i sefydlu ac sy'n gweithio'n dda. Ni chredaf mai cael Aelodau sy'n arsylwi yn y cyd-destun hwn yw'r ffordd a'r fformat gorau i fwrw ymlaen â hyn. Nid yw'n adborth ar yr unigolion eu hunain; y broses, yn hytrach, sy'n galw am ystyriaeth bellach yn y dyfodol yn fy marn i. Ond nid yw’n feirniadaeth o’r gadeiryddiaeth nac yn wir o'r Aelodau, fel y nodais.
I gloi, Ddirprwy Lywydd, gan fy mod yn ymwybodol fod y cloc wedi troi'n goch iawn, mae pryderon ynghylch dichell yn ddilys, ac mae'r angen am atebolrwydd yn glir. Mae'r ffordd ymlaen yn galw am lunio polisïau gofalus ac ystyriol. Mae’n rhaid inni barhau i fireinio’r mecanweithiau sy’n cynnal uniondeb y Senedd, gan sicrhau bod unrhyw ddiwygiadau yn effeithiol ac yn deg. Mae hynny’n golygu gwahaniaethu’n glir rhwng gwahanol rolau yn ein system ddemocrataidd, gan sicrhau bod mecanweithiau craffu yn wirioneddol ddiduedd, a chaniatáu digon o amser ar gyfer ystyriaeth ystyrlon.
Mae'n fater o ymddiriedaeth: ymddiriedaeth yn ein cynrychiolwyr, ymddiriedaeth yn ein prosesau ac ymddiriedaeth yn y safonau yr ydym yn eu cynnal. Mae’n bwysig ein bod yn gwneud pethau’n iawn. Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd.
As we gather in this Chamber for the final time before its transformation, I'm struck by both history and possibility. These walls will soon give way to a new design, but, as we rebuild this physical space, I think we face a more fundamental question at the heart of our debate on this report: what values will we inscribe not in the shape of our Chamber, but at the heart of our democracy? I believe that chief among them must be an unwavering commitment to truth, the covenant, really, that binds democracy together.
We've witnessed elsewhere, haven't we, in the first 70 days of the second Trump presidency, the corrosive impact of systematic dishonesty. Each deception erodes the shared reality upon which democratic governance depends. Nobel laureate Maria Ressa puts it plainly: 'Without facts, you can’t have truth. Without truth, you can’t have trust, and without trust, we have no shared reality and democracy dies.' Let those words echo here today and resonate in our rebuilt Chamber tomorrow: without truth, democracy dies. This is not hyperbole, this is not partisan alarm; this is history's cold, hard lesson. When truth becomes optional, democracy becomes impossible.
Wales faces a choice. We can observe from a distance as other democracies struggle against waves of deliberate deception, or draw a line and say, 'Not here, not in our democracy, not while we stand watch.' Happy to give way.
Wrth inni ymgynnull yn y Siambr hon am y tro olaf cyn iddi gael ei thrawsnewid, rwy'n meddwl am hanes ac am bosibiliadau. Bydd y waliau hyn yn ildio i gynllun newydd cyn bo hir, ond wrth inni ailadeiladu’r gofod ffisegol hwn, rwy'n credu ein bod yn wynebu cwestiwn mwy sylfaenol wrth wraidd ein dadl ar yr adroddiad hwn: pa werthoedd y byddwn yn eu harysgrifennu nid yn siâp ein Siambr, ond yng nghalon ein democratiaeth? Credaf mai ymrwymiad diwyro i'r gwirionedd yw'r pwysicaf ohonynt, y cyfamod, mewn gwirionedd, sy'n clymu democratiaeth ynghyd.
Rydym wedi gweld mewn man arall, onid ydym, yn ystod 70 diwrnod cyntaf ail arlywyddiaeth Trump, effaith gyrydol anonestrwydd systematig. Mae pob dichell yn erydu'r realiti gyffredin y mae llywodraethiant democrataidd yn dibynnu arni. Mae Maria Ressa, enillydd gwobr Nobel, yn ei ddweud yn blaen: 'Heb ffeithiau, ni allwch gael gwirionedd. Heb wirionedd, ni allwch gael ymddiriedaeth, a heb ymddiriedaeth, nid oes gennym unrhyw realiti gyffredin ac mae democratiaeth yn marw.' Gadewch i’r geiriau hynny atseinio yma heddiw ac atseinio yn ein Siambr ar ei newydd wedd yfory: heb wirionedd, mae democratiaeth yn marw. Nid gormodiaith yw hyn, nid braw pleidiol mohono; dyma wers galed hanes. Pan ddaw'r gwirionedd yn opsiynol, daw democratiaeth yn amhosibl.
Mae Cymru'n wynebu dewis. Gallwn arsylwi o bell wrth i ddemocratiaethau eraill frwydro yn erbyn tonnau o ddichell fwriadol, neu dynnu llinell a dweud, 'Nid yma, nid yn ein democratiaeth ni, nid o dan ein gwyliadwriaeth ni.' Rwy'n fwy na pharod i ildio.
Thank you very much, Adam. I struggle because democracy means that we have rule of law, we have liberty, we have freedom of speech, but that's not enough. When we talk about democracy, there is some obligation on you. There is something that you have to give in return because you have made it. So, that return is that obedience, and that obedience becomes the rule of law, which you have accepted, and deception is eliminated that time because you joined the democratic set-up and you have that rule of law that you have to abide by. And you have to look into it, whether somebody has deceived you; how can he join that? So, I'm struggling, really, in this because I say the other name for democracy is obedience and deception has no role there because you are otherwise going against the law. Thank you.
Diolch, Adam. Rwy'n cael trafferth oherwydd mae democratiaeth yn golygu bod gennym reolaeth y gyfraith, mae gennym ryddid, mae gennym ryddid i lefaru, ond nid yw hynny'n ddigon. Pan siaradwn am ddemocratiaeth, mae peth rhwymedigaeth arnoch chi. Mae rhywbeth y mae'n rhaid i chi ei roi yn gyfnewid oherwydd eich bod chi wedi llwyddo. Felly, y peth hwnnw yw'r ufudd-dod hwnnw, ac mae'r ufudd-dod yn dod yn rheolaeth y gyfraith, yr ydych chi wedi ei dderbyn, a chaiff dichell ei ddileu y pryd hwnnw oherwydd eich bod wedi ymuno â'r drefn ddemocrataidd ac mae gennych reolaeth y gyfraith y mae'n rhaid i chi gydymffurfio â hi. Ac mae'n rhaid ichi edrych i mewn iddo, pa un a yw rhywun wedi eich camarwain; sut y gall ymuno â hynny? Felly, rwy'n cael trafferth gyda hyn oherwydd rwy'n dweud mai'r enw arall ar ddemocratiaeth yw ufudd-dod ac nid oes gan ddichell unrhyw rôl yno oherwydd fel arall, rydych chi'n mynd yn groes i'r gyfraith. Diolch.
You are making an intervention, not a speech.
Rydych chi'n gwneud ymyriad, nid araith.
I think that the fundamental imperative for us as democratic representatives is to tell the truth. That is the first principle, the foundation of our entire democracy. Last year, I remember, I think it was in a windowless room behind us, myself and Lee Waters witnessed the former Counsel General putting his name to three historic commitments on behalf of this Government that were then later repeated to the whole of the Senedd: first, the deliberate deception by anyone seeking or holding elected office would become a disqualifying offence; second, that the standard would be enforced through an independent judicial process; and third, that these protections would be in place by the end of this year, well before the next Senedd election. It wasn't a suggestion; it was an unambiguous pledge.
The committee's report and Government's response contain important elements of progress. For existing Members, the committee couldn't reach unanimous agreement regarding legislation and the Government's response is therefore silent on that, so I'd be grateful to the Counsel General if she could set out the Government's legislative proposals for Members, the Bill's timetable and how these plans align with the pledge.
For candidates, the committee recommended widening the existing criminal offence under the Representation of the People Act 1983 through the conduct Order for the coming Senedd election, and through amending the Government of Wales Act 2006 for future elections. Here, the Government's response, I have to say, is concerning. It has only accepted the committee's recommendation in principle, claiming changes cannot be delivered before the next election. I understand, based on legal assessments, that a new 12-week public consultation will be needed, that the Electoral Commission must be consulted, and these consultations extend beyond the six-month time limit before elections—the so-called Gould principle.
Can I ask the Counsel General if she herself accepts those legal assessments? I can't come across any specific duty to consult the Electoral Commission. We didn't do it over Senedd reform at any point; indeed, nor did we hold a public consultation in that regard. The Standards of Conduct Committee has already effectively run a public consultation for its inquiry, and the Gould principle is not statutory—as its name suggests, it's a convention. We didn't allow technical challenges to stop Senedd expansion. We didn't allow procedural complexity to prevent us from changing our voting system, and we must not now accept excuses for undermining the pledge given by the Government.
It seems to me the question before us is simple: will the Government deliver on its promise? I choose to trust that they will, because otherwise, they would confirm the cynical view out there, that politicians cannot be—
Rwy'n credu mai'r angen sylfaenol i ni fel cynrychiolwyr democrataidd yw dweud y gwir. Dyna'r egwyddor gyntaf, sylfaen ein democratiaeth gyfan. Y llynedd, rwy'n cofio, mewn ystafell ddi-ffenestr y tu ôl i ni, roedd Lee Waters a minnau'n dystion pan wnaeth y cyn-Gwnsler Cyffredinol dri ymrwymiad hanesyddol ar ran y Llywodraeth hon a ailadroddwyd wedyn yn ddiweddarach i'r Senedd gyfan: yn gyntaf, byddai dichell fwriadol gan unrhyw un sy'n ymgeisio am swydd etholedig neu sydd mewn swydd etholedig yn dod yn drosedd anghymhwyso; yn ail, y byddai'r safon yn cael ei gorfodi trwy broses farnwrol annibynnol; ac yn drydydd, y byddai'r amddiffyniadau hyn yn eu lle erbyn diwedd eleni, ymhell cyn etholiad nesaf y Senedd. Nid awgrym ydoedd; roedd yn addewid diamwys.
Mae adroddiad y pwyllgor ac ymateb y Llywodraeth yn cynnwys elfennau pwysig o gynnydd. Ar gyfer yr Aelodau presennol, ni allai'r pwyllgor ddod i gytundeb unfrydol ynglŷn â deddfwriaeth ac felly mae ymateb y Llywodraeth yn dawel ar hynny, felly byddwn yn ddiolchgar i'r Cwnsler Cyffredinol pe gallai nodi cynigion deddfwriaethol y Llywodraeth ar gyfer yr Aelodau, amserlen y Bil a sut y mae'r cynlluniau hyn yn cyd-fynd â'r addewid.
Ar gyfer ymgeiswyr, argymhellodd y pwyllgor y dylid ehangu'r drosedd bresennol o dan Ddeddf Cynrychiolaeth y Bobl 1983 drwy'r Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau ar gyfer etholiad y Senedd sydd i ddod, a thrwy ddiwygio Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru 2006 ar gyfer etholiadau yn y dyfodol. Yma, mae'n rhaid imi ddweud bod ymateb y Llywodraeth yn destun pryder. Dim ond mewn egwyddor y mae wedi derbyn argymhelliad y pwyllgor, gan honni na ellir cyflawni newidiadau cyn yr etholiad nesaf. Yn seiliedig ar asesiadau cyfreithiol, rwy'n deall y bydd angen ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus newydd 12 wythnos, fod rhaid ymgynghori â'r Comisiwn Etholiadol, a bod yr ymgynghoriadau hyn yn ymestyn y tu hwnt i'r terfyn amser o chwe mis cyn etholiadau—yr hyn a elwir yn egwyddor Gould.
A gaf i ofyn i'r Cwnsler Cyffredinol a yw hi ei hun yn derbyn yr asesiadau cyfreithiol hynny? Ni allaf ddod ar draws unrhyw ddyletswydd benodol i ymgynghori â'r Comisiwn Etholiadol. Ni wnaethom hynny dros ddiwygio'r Senedd ar unrhyw adeg; yn wir, ni chynhaliwyd ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus ar hynny. Mae'r Pwyllgor Safonau Ymddygiad eisoes wedi cynnal ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus i bob pwrpas ar gyfer ei ymchwiliad, ac nid yw egwyddor Gould yn statudol—fel y mae ei enw'n awgrymu, confensiwn ydyw. Ni wnaethom ganiatáu i heriau technegol atal ehangu'r Senedd. Ni wnaethom ganiatáu i gymhlethdod gweithdrefnol ein hatal rhag newid ein system bleidleisio, a rhaid inni beidio â derbyn esgusodion nawr dros danseilio'r addewid a roddwyd gan y Llywodraeth.
Mae'n ymddangos i mi fod y cwestiwn o'n blaenau yn syml: a fydd y Llywodraeth yn cyflawni ei haddewid? Rwy'n dewis bod â hyder y gwnânt, oherwydd fel arall, byddent yn cadarnhau'r farn sinigaidd allan yno, na all gwleidyddion—
Adam, you need to conclude now, please.
Adam, mae angen i chi orffen nawr, os gwelwch yn dda.
I took an intervention, and—
Derbyniais ymyriad, a—
You did, and I gave you the time for it. And I've given you the time for it.
Fe wnaethoch, a rhoddais amser i chi. Ac rwyf wedi rhoi amser i chi ar gyfer hynny.
Well, okay. We are discussing quite an important matter, and I did take a lengthy intervention, Chair, but—
Wel, iawn. Rydym yn trafod mater go bwysig, ac fe dderbyniais ymyriad hir, Gadeirydd, ond—
I appreciate that. And I've given you plenty of time.
Rwy'n derbyn hynny. Ac rwyf wedi rhoi digon o amser i chi.
Well, okay. I'll get to the nub of it: I think that it's absolutely essential that we take this step. Democracy must be defended by every generation, and that defence begins with truth, Deputy Presiding Officer. Truth in our words, truth in our actions, truth in our promise to the people of Wales, and it's that principle, as we expand the breadth and depth of this democracy, that should become the foundation of the democracy we're about to build.
Wel, iawn. Fe af i graidd y mater: rwy'n credu ei bod yn hollol hanfodol ein bod ni'n cymryd y cam hwn. Rhaid i bob cenhedlaeth amddiffyn democratiaeth, ac mae'r amddiffyniad hwnnw'n dechrau gyda gwirionedd, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Gwirionedd yn ein geiriau, gwirionedd yn ein gweithredoedd, gwirionedd yn ein haddewid i bobl Cymru, a dylai'r egwyddor honno, wrth inni ehangu hyd a lled y ddemocratiaeth hon, ddod yn sylfaen i'r ddemocratiaeth yr ydym ar fin ei hadeiladu.
Can I first of all just say that I think the Government has a challenge now in terms of converting the recommendations into legislation? But I think it is very much achievable, and I think there is a will within this Chamber that we do legislate, and we legislate for 2026. Can I also say that the recommendations, if they are implemented, will create what I think will be the most effective and most stringent standard of conduct of any of the Parliaments of the United Kingdom? So, the recommendations and the potential legislation for that will actually be groundbreaking and will set, probably, the highest standard of all the Parliaments of the United Kingdom.
Can I say, overall, I welcomed the report and I welcome very much the considerable amount of evidence that was brought into that? Evidence that was, in the earlier stages during the elections Bill, and other discussions, not available. And, of course, it was one of the concerns I remember raising at that time, that we needed to see that evidence and to hear it. Can I say the evidence that particularly influenced me was the evidence from the criminal bar, from the chief constables, from the Law Society and from the Crown Prosecution Service? That related very specifically to the issue of the creation of a criminal offence, and I think that the report deals very properly with that in terms of how deception could actually be dealt with, but does not support the idea of the creation of a very specific criminal offence, for all the reasons that came out within that particular evidence: it would not work, there would be all sorts of unforeseen consequences, and a potential to actually undermine the very foundation of parliamentary democracy, part of which is parliamentary privilege. The evidence was, I think, very impressive.
Can I just say, out of the report, the challenges that now come in converting this into legislation? First is the appropriateness and clarity of the definition that is used. Various options have been put forward, but it is something that needs considerable thought. Can I say also that the issue of lay members of the committee is an interesting idea? There is a power, if the recommendation is implemented, to achieve that. It needs to be thought about very, very carefully.
And can I say also, then, that one of the other challenges that comes out in the legislation is the ability to legislate in respect of candidates, as opposed to Members, once people are actually elected? Now, both are desirable, and the recommendation within the report with regard to strengthening section 106 of the Representation of the People Act, which of course goes beyond competence, would require support at the Westminster level as well for that, but also the potential changes to the conduct Order, whether that is feasible. Clearly, I think there is some thought that needs to go into that, because actually strengthening the legislation that would impact on candidates is clearly something that is desirable to do. Actually implementing it for candidates, the hundreds of candidates, the onus and the potential for difficulties that would arise in the pre-election period are obviously very, very challenging, and it may be that these things need to be taken in different parts in order to deal with them.
But dealing, certainly, with, in terms of Senedd Members, in terms of the strengthening of the code of conduct and the interaction that it will have with the previous report and the proposed legislation for recall, they go hand in hand. Because I certainly take the view that you get to a stage when deception where it hasn't been corrected, where it has been clearly established and is of such severity or a repetitive nature, should be such that it should trigger the ability for Members to be recalled for that. And I believe that goes further than any of the other Parliaments of the UK, and I think that is a very, very significant step forward.
Can I say, one of the areas that is obviously going to need careful consideration is the need for an appeals process? I believe if there is to be a recall of someone for a breach of conduct in respect of deception, then it is very necessary that there probably needs to be an appeal process. My desire would be that that would be within our own tribunal system or it would be by the empowerment of the committee within that, but that's a matter, obviously, Counsel General, for you to give further consideration to. Thank you.
A gaf i ddweud yn gyntaf fy mod yn credu mai'r her sy'n wynebu'r Llywodraeth nawr yw trosi'r argymhellion yn ddeddfwriaeth? Ond rwy'n credu ei fod yn gwbl gyflawnadwy, a bod ewyllys yn y Siambr hon i ddeddfu, a'n bod yn deddfu ar gyfer 2026. A gaf i ddweud hefyd y bydd yr argymhellion, os cânt eu gweithredu, yn creu'r safon ymddygiad fwyaf effeithiol a mwyaf llym yn unrhyw un o Seneddau'r Deyrnas Unedig? Felly, bydd yr argymhellion a'r ddeddfwriaeth bosibl ar gyfer hynny'n arloesol a byddant yn gosod, yn ôl pob tebyg, y safon uchaf o holl Seneddau'r Deyrnas Unedig.
A gaf i ddweud fy mod wedi croesawu'r adroddiad ar y cyfan, ac rwy'n croesawu'n fawr iawn y swm sylweddol o dystiolaeth a ddygwyd i mewn i hynny? Tystiolaeth nad oedd ar gael yn y camau cynharach yn ystod y Bil etholiadau, a thrafodaethau eraill. Ac wrth gwrs, roedd yn un o'r pryderon y cofiaf eu codi ar y pryd, fod angen inni weld y dystiolaeth honno a'i chlywed. A gaf i ddweud mai'r dystiolaeth a ddylanwadodd arnaf yn fwyaf arbennig oedd y dystiolaeth gan fargyfreithwyr troseddol, gan brif gwnstabliaid, o Gymdeithas y Gyfraith ac o Wasanaeth Erlyn y Goron? Roedd honno'n ymwneud yn benodol iawn â mater creu trosedd, ac rwy'n credu bod yr adroddiad yn ymdrin yn briodol â hynny o ran sut y gellid ymdrin â dichell mewn gwirionedd, ond nid yw'n cefnogi'r syniad o greu trosedd benodol iawn, am yr holl resymau a amlygwyd yn y dystiolaeth benodol honno: ni fyddai'n gweithio, byddai pob math o ganlyniadau annisgwyl, a pherygl o danseilio sylfaen democratiaeth seneddol, gyda braint seneddol yn rhan ohoni. Roedd y dystiolaeth yn drawiadol iawn.
O'r adroddiad, os caf sôn am yr heriau sy'n dod nawr wrth drosi hyn yn ddeddfwriaeth? Yn gyntaf, priodoldeb ac eglurder y diffiniad a ddefnyddir. Mae amryw o opsiynau wedi'u cyflwyno, ond mae'n rhywbeth sy'n galw am gryn dipyn o feddwl. A gaf i ddweud hefyd fod mater aelodau lleyg y pwyllgor yn syniad diddorol? Mae yna bŵer, os caiff yr argymhelliad ei weithredu, i gyflawni hynny. Mae angen meddwl amdano'n ofalus iawn.
Ac a gaf i ddweud hefyd, felly, mai un o'r heriau eraill a amlygir yn y ddeddfwriaeth yw'r gallu i ddeddfu mewn perthynas ag ymgeiswyr, yn hytrach nag Aelodau, pan gaiff pobl eu hethol? Nawr, mae'r ddau yn ddymunol, a byddai'r argymhelliad yn yr adroddiad mewn perthynas â chryfhau adran 106 o Ddeddf Cynrychiolaeth y Bobl, sydd wrth gwrs yn mynd y tu hwnt i gymhwysedd, yn galw am gefnogaeth ar lefel San Steffan hefyd ar gyfer hynny, ond hefyd y newidiadau posibl i'r Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau, a yw hynny'n ymarferol. Yn amlwg, rwy'n credu bod angen rhywfaint o feddwl am hynny, oherwydd mae cryfhau'r ddeddfwriaeth a fyddai'n effeithio ar ymgeiswyr yn amlwg yn rhywbeth sy'n ddymunol. Mae ei weithredu ar gyfer ymgeiswyr, y cannoedd o ymgeiswyr, y baich a'r perygl o anawsterau a fyddai'n codi yn y cyfnod cyn etholiad yn amlwg yn heriol iawn, ac efallai fod angen ymdrin â'r pethau hyn fesul rhannau gwahanol.
Ond wrth ymdrin ag Aelodau'r Senedd, yn sicr, o ran cryfhau'r cod ymddygiad a'r rhyngweithio rhyngddo a'r adroddiad blaenorol a'r ddeddfwriaeth arfaethedig ar gyfer adalw, maent yn mynd law yn llaw. Oherwydd rwy'n sicr o'r farn eich bod yn cyrraedd cam pan ddylai dichell lle nad yw wedi'i gywiro, lle mae wedi'i sefydlu'n glir ac o'r fath ddifrifoldeb neu o natur mor ailadroddus, fel y dylai sbarduno'r gallu i Aelodau gael eu hadalw am hynny. Ac rwy'n credu bod hynny'n mynd ymhellach nag unrhyw un o Seneddau eraill y DU, ac yn gam arwyddocaol iawn ymlaen.
Un o'r meysydd y bydd angen ei ystyried yn ofalus wrth gwrs yw'r angen am broses apelio? Os oes rhywun yn mynd i gael ei adalw am dorri cod ymddygiad mewn perthynas â dichell, mae'n sicr fod angen cael proses apêl. Fy nymuniad i fyddai i hynny fod o fewn ein system tribiwnlys ein hunain neu drwy rymuso'r pwyllgor o fewn hynny, ond mater i chi roi ystyriaeth bellach iddo yw hynny wrth gwrs, Gwnsler Cyffredinol. Diolch.
I'm grateful to the committee Chair and to the committee as well for the opportunity to be able to contribute to the committee. I found it very interesting, and I'm grateful to the Chair for including myself and others as well.
Where we're at is that there has been a global trustworthiness index survey and, last year, it found that people across the world did not trust politicians. Just 15 per cent of people globally trusted politicians, making them—making us—the least trusted profession in the whole of the world. So, clearly, what we've got in place, not just here in Wales, but in the UK and further afield, is not working. Trust in politics, as we know, is at an all-time low. We know that polls found that 45 per cent of the public believe that politicians are more likely to lie now than in the past.
So, the reason why we're here right now, today, debating this, and hopefully moving forward on this in a Bill, is because we want to restore that trust in us. That has to be a fundamental position that we take. And right now, globally, we can see exactly what is happening when untruths are told, and we have certain political parties already in this country starting to go unchallenged for some of their statements. When lies go unchallenged, democracy weakens, public faith erodes and accountability disappears.
If we look to the next generation, the Electoral Commission found that only 62 per cent of young people here in Wales feel they have a good understanding of democracy. We need to contribute to that and make sure that we're producing a next generation of politicians who not only understand that they need to be truthful, but that they want to partake in this democratic process.
I'm grateful to the standards committee for setting out a clear and practical step forward, and it is—. There were obviously clear differences that were acknowledged and reflected in the report. From my perspective, I believe that Members and candidates should be treated exactly the same; there should be no distinction. That makes it cleaner and very much clearer, and candidates have a responsibility from the point that they are selected.
Rwy'n ddiolchgar i Gadeirydd y pwyllgor ac i'r pwyllgor hefyd am y cyfle i allu cyfrannu at y pwyllgor. Roedd yn ddiddorol iawn, ac rwy'n ddiolchgar i'r Cadeirydd am fy nghynnwys i ac eraill hefyd.
Lle rydym arni yw bod arolwg mynegai ymddiriedaeth byd-eang wedi'i gynnal, a'r llynedd, canfu nad oedd pobl ledled y byd yn ymddiried mewn gwleidyddion. Dim ond 15 y cant o bobl yn fyd-eang a oedd yn ymddiried mewn gwleidyddion, gan olygu mai hwy—ni—yw'r proffesiwn y mae pobl yn ymddiried leiaf ynddo ledled y byd. Felly, yn amlwg, nid yw'r hyn sydd gennym, nid yn unig yma yng Nghymru, ond yn y DU a thu hwnt, yn gweithio. Mae ymddiriedaeth mewn gwleidyddiaeth, fel y gwyddom, ar ei isaf erioed. Gwyddom fod arolygon wedi canfod bod 45 y cant o'r cyhoedd yn credu bod gwleidyddion yn fwy tebygol o ddweud celwydd nawr nag yn y gorffennol.
Felly, y rheswm pam rydym ni yma nawr, heddiw, yn dadlau hyn, ac yn symud ymlaen ar hyn mewn Bil, gobeithio, yw oherwydd ein bod am adfer yr ymddiriedaeth honno ynom ni. Mae'n rhaid i hwnnw fod yn safbwynt sylfaenol i ni. Ac ar hyn o bryd, yn fyd-eang, gallwn weld yn union beth sy'n digwydd pan fydd anwireddau'n cael eu dweud, ac mae gennym rai pleidiau gwleidyddol eisoes yn y wlad hon yn dechrau mynd heb eu herio am rai o'u datganiadau. Pan fydd celwyddau'n mynd heb eu herio, mae democratiaeth yn gwanhau, mae ffydd y cyhoedd yn erydu ac atebolrwydd yn diflannu.
Os edrychwn ar y genhedlaeth nesaf, canfu'r Comisiwn Etholiadol mai dim ond 62 y cant o bobl ifanc yma yng Nghymru sy'n teimlo bod ganddynt ddealltwriaeth dda o ddemocratiaeth. Mae angen inni gyfrannu at hynny a gwneud yn siŵr ein bod ni'n cynhyrchu cenhedlaeth nesaf o wleidyddion sydd nid yn unig yn deall bod angen iddynt fod yn eirwir, ond sydd eisiau cymryd rhan yn y broses ddemocrataidd hon.
Rwy'n ddiolchgar i'r pwyllgor safonau am osod cam clir ac ymarferol ymlaen, ac mae—. Yn amlwg, roedd yna wahaniaethau clir a gafodd eu cydnabod a'u hadlewyrchu yn yr adroddiad. O'm safbwynt i, credaf y dylid trin Aelodau ac ymgeiswyr yn union yr un fath; ni ddylai fod unrhyw wahaniaeth. Mae hynny'n ei wneud yn lanach ac yn llawer cliriach, ac mae gan ymgeiswyr gyfrifoldeb o'r adeg y cânt eu dewis.
Will the Member give way?
A wnaiff yr Aelod ildio?
Of course.
Wrth gwrs.
Thank you very much; I'm grateful to you for giving way. The point is that candidates and Members don't exist at the same time. Once the dissolution of this place becomes apparent, we cease to be Members of the Senedd and we become candidates. So, that is the reason for a need for two separate courses of action should there be any deception from candidates and MSs—the fact that they don't co-exist.
Diolch; rwy'n ddiolchgar i chi am ildio. Y pwynt yw nad yw ymgeiswyr ac Aelodau yn bodoli ar yr un pryd. Pan gyhoeddir diddymiad y lle hwn, rydym yn peidio â bod yn Aelodau'r Senedd a down yn ymgeiswyr. Felly, dyna'r rheswm dros yr angen am ddwy ffordd wahanol o weithredu pe bai unrhyw ddichell gan ymgeiswyr ac Aelodau'r Senedd—y ffaith nad ydynt yn cyd-fodoli.
Thank you, Sam, and I know that there was some discussion on this. My understanding is that you become a candidate from the point that you're selected by your own political party. And, actually, there is a point at which we are all, as you say, in this pool, where we are not Members or candidates. So, actually, it creates an uneasy distinction if you say one set of rules applies to one set of Members—one set of people—and the others don't. But there are disagreements on this, and, obviously, as we go forward, we can debate that further.
My second issue—and I would welcome this being specifically responded to by the Counsel General—is a concern that the Government response to the report seemed to weaken in terms of the timescale and the timetable. I believe very clearly that this needs to be brought forward; this Bill and the legislation needs to be passed ready for 2026. In fact, there was a commitment, as you've heard, of it happening this year, that is, before the end of 2025. So, I would welcome the Counsel General's response to that particular issue, and having clarity on being able to achieve this, if possible by the end of 2025, but certainly by the end of the Senedd term in 2026. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Diolch, Sam, ac rwy'n gwybod bod rhywfaint o drafod wedi bod ynglŷn â hyn. Fy nealltwriaeth i yw eich bod chi'n dod yn ymgeisydd o'r adeg pan gewch eich dewis gan eich plaid wleidyddol eich hun. Ac mewn gwirionedd, mae yna adeg pan ydym i gyd yn y pwll hwnnw, fel y dywedwch, lle nad ydym yn Aelodau nac yn ymgeiswyr. Felly, mae'n creu gwahaniaeth anesmwyth os ydych chi'n dweud bod un set o reolau'n gymwys i un set o Aelodau—un set o bobl—a ddim i'r lleill. Ond mae yna anghytuno ynglŷn â hyn, ac yn amlwg, wrth inni symud ymlaen, gallwn drafod hynny ymhellach.
Fy ail fater—a byddwn yn croesawu ymateb penodol i hyn gan y Cwnsler Cyffredinol—yw pryder fod ymateb y Llywodraeth i'r adroddiad yn ymddangos fel pe bai'n gwanhau mewn perthynas â'r amserlen. Rwy'n credu'n glir iawn fod angen cyflwyno hyn yn gynt; mae angen pasio'r Bil hwn a'r ddeddfwriaeth yn barod ar gyfer 2026. Mewn gwirionedd, roedd ymrwymiad, fel y clywsoch, iddo ddigwydd eleni, hynny yw, cyn diwedd 2025. Felly, byddwn yn croesawu ymateb y Cwnsler Cyffredinol i'r mater penodol hwnnw, a chael eglurder ar y gallu i gyflawni hyn, os yn bosibl erbyn diwedd 2025, ond yn sicr erbyn diwedd tymor y Senedd yn 2026. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
What politicians say, how they say it and the impact it has matters, so says the standards report. I think the process that we've gone through has been a robust one, it has been a useful one, but it is one that has resulted in a compromise, and it's resulted in a compromise because there's no agreement, and I think that's fair enough. As Hannah Blythyn said, the recommendations represent incremental changes, and I think that's, in all honesty, where the committee's discussion ended.
The big question here is—and I think this is the difference—do we think that the deliberate act of deceiving, setting out to deceive on purpose, not accidentally, not a slip of the tongue, not a misunderstanding of the facts that then is corrected, or, as Mark Isherwood tried to interject into the debate earlier, a difference of interpretation of the politics or the evidence, but a deliberate act to say something that they know not to be true in order to mislead—. That's what this debate is about, and in the face of that, is that something that can be dealt with within the Parliament, within the standards process, or is it so externally threatening to the fabric of democracy that it needs to be dealt with through the legal process?
That's still the fundamental question, and that's one that's not really been resolved by the committee report. I think it's a fair enough reflection that a lot of the democratic world is in paralysis in the face of this threat that's coming at us. We don't know what is the best way to deal with Donald Trump and Elon Musk and the way that they are weaponising misinformation in order to deliberately destabilise our democratic cultures and societies. We look at the US Senate this week, where they are so confounded by it they've given into filibustering as a way of responding to it, which is an act of impotence. But it's another attempt to say, 'We don't know how to deal with this. What is the best way?'
I don't think we should beat ourselves about the head that we've failed to reach a consensus, and there are tortured arguments on both sides, and Members have made several practical points here about how it can be done. But these are second-order issues, I think, because what they don't deal with is the fundamental point.
Sam Kurtz's point about the role of observer Members, I think, is a perfectly valid observation, and I thought Mick Antoniw's interjection reinforced the point. For me, it wasn't really about that. The idea that people in the standards committee came to this neutrally without any thoughts beforehand is clearly not the case, and why should it be? We all have views. I think what was quite interesting is how conventional most of the responses to this debate were: this sense that it should be left to the institution; it should be democratic Members elected who are accountable to their voters who should deal with this in the normal way, that was most appropriate.
I don't decry that; I understand that. That is a perfectly conventional, orthodox, standard view of the way we deal with these things, and that was certainly reflected in a lot of the evidence we had and the advice we received from the committee service. And I think that is to be expected, but, having reflected on this and having come to this debate pretty neutral myself, I don't think it meets the order of the challenge of the threat that democracy is under. I don't think it meets the level of peril that our democratic fabric faces at the moment around the world, and Wales is no different from it. And in that sense, I think there's been a failure of imagination in the committee's response to deal with that level of assault.
However, I do recognise it does reflect a genuine level of disagreement, and also, I think, a failure on the part of Adam Price, Jane Dodds and myself to make the case to people that we need a leap of imagination here, we need a different approach. I don't think we have succeeded in getting the majority of people to agree with us on that. That's why we've ended up with this compromise report, and it's a compromise report that takes us further than we were before, and I think that's useful. The challenge now does fall to the Government, who, as Adam Price has reminded us, regardless of what the committee report says, have given a commitment to this Senedd. Adam read out what was signed last year—and it is now a challenge for the Government to know how to respond to honouring that—which said that, before 2026, there will be legislation
'for the disqualification of Members and candidates found guilty of deliberate deception, through an independent judicial process.'
I look forward to hearing how the Government intends to deal with that. Diolch.
Mae'r hyn y mae gwleidyddion yn ei ddweud, sut y maent yn ei ddweud a'r effaith y mae'n ei chael yn bwysig, dyna mae'r adroddiad safonau yn ei ddweud. Rwy'n credu bod y broses yr aethom drwyddi wedi bod yn un gadarn, mae wedi bod yn un ddefnyddiol, ond mae'n un sydd wedi arwain at gyfaddawd, ac mae wedi arwain at gyfaddawd am nad oes cytundeb, ac rwy'n credu bod hynny'n ddigon teg. Fel y dywedodd Hannah Blythyn, mae'r argymhellion yn cynrychioli newidiadau cynyddrannol, ac a bod yn onest, rwy'n credu mai dyna lle daeth trafodaeth y pwyllgor i ben.
Y cwestiwn mawr yma—ac rwy'n credu mai dyma'r gwahaniaeth—yw a ydym yn meddwl bod y weithred fwriadol o gamarwain drwy ddichell, mynd ati i gamarwain yn fwriadol, nid yn ddamweiniol, nid llithriad tafod, nid camddealltwriaeth o'r ffeithiau sy'n cael ei chywiro wedyn, neu fel y ceisiodd Mark Isherwood ei gyflwyno i'r ddadl yn gynharach, gwahaniaeth o ran dehongliad o'r wleidyddiaeth neu'r dystiolaeth, ond gweithred fwriadol i ddweud rhywbeth y maent yn gwybod nad yw'n wir er mwyn camarwain—. Dyna graidd y ddadl hon, ac yn wyneb hynny, a yw hynny'n rhywbeth y gellir ymdrin ag ef o fewn y Senedd, o fewn y broses safonau, neu a yw mor allanol fygythiol i wead democratiaeth fel bod angen ymdrin ag ef drwy'r broses gyfreithiol?
Dyna'r cwestiwn sylfaenol o hyd, ac mae'n un nad yw wedi'i ddatrys gan adroddiad y pwyllgor mewn gwirionedd. Rwy'n credu ei bod yn ystyriaeth ddigon teg fod llawer o'r byd democrataidd mewn parlys yn wyneb y bygythiad sy'n dod i'n cyfeiriad. Nid ydym yn gwybod beth yw'r ffordd orau o ymdrin â Donald Trump ac Elon Musk a'r ffordd y maent yn creu arf o gamwybodaeth er mwyn ansefydlogi ein diwylliannau a'n cymdeithasau democrataidd yn fwriadol. Rydym yn edrych ar Senedd yr Unol Daleithiau yr wythnos hon, lle maent mor ddryslyd o'i herwydd nes eu bod wedi ildio i ffilibystrad fel ffordd o ymateb iddo, sy'n weithred o ddiymadferthedd. Ond mae'n ymgais arall i ddweud, 'Nid ydym yn gwybod sut i ymdrin â hyn. Pa ffordd sydd orau?'
Nid wyf yn credu y dylem geryddu ein hunain am ein bod wedi methu sicrhau consensws, ac fe geir dadleuon dirdynnol ar y ddwy ochr, ac mae Aelodau wedi gwneud sawl pwynt ymarferol yma ynglŷn â sut y gellir ei wneud. Ond materion eilradd yw'r rhain yn fy marn i, am nad ydynt yn mynd i'r afael â'r pwynt sylfaenol.
Mae pwynt Sam Kurtz am rôl Aelodau sy'n arsylwi yn sylw hollol ddilys yn fy marn i, ac roeddwn i'n meddwl bod ymyriad Mick Antoniw yn atgyfnerthu'r pwynt. I mi, nid oedd yn ymwneud â hynny mewn gwirionedd. Mae'n amlwg nad yw'r syniad fod pobl yn y pwyllgor safonau wedi dod at hyn yn niwtral heb unrhyw feddyliau ymlaen llaw yn wir, a pham y dylai fod? Mae gan bob un ohonom safbwyntiau. Rwy'n credu ei bod yn eithaf diddorol pa mor gonfensiynol oedd y rhan fwyaf o'r ymatebion i'r ddadl hon: yr ymdeimlad y dylid ei adael i'r sefydliad; mai Aelodau a etholwyd yn ddemocrataidd sy'n atebol i'w pleidleiswyr yw'r rhai mwyaf priodol i ymdrin â hyn yn y ffordd arferol.
Nid wyf yn beirniadu hynny; rwy'n deall hynny. Mae honno'n farn berffaith gonfensiynol, uniongred, safonol o'r ffordd yr awn i'r afael â'r pethau hyn, ac roedd hynny'n sicr yn cael ei adlewyrchu yn llawer o'r dystiolaeth a gawsom a'r cyngor a gawsom gan wasanaeth y pwyllgor. Ac rwy'n credu bod hynny'n ddisgwyliedig, ond ar ôl myfyrio ar hyn a dod i'r ddadl hon yn eithaf niwtral fy hun, nid wyf yn credu ei fod yn ddigon i oresgyn her y bygythiad sy'n wynebu democratiaeth. Nid wyf yn credu ei fod yn ddigon i wrthsefyll lefel y perygl y mae ein gwead democrataidd yn ei wynebu ar hyn o bryd ledled y byd, ac nid yw Cymru'n wahanol. Ac yn yr ystyr honno, rwy'n credu bod methiant wedi bod o ran dychymyg yn ymateb y pwyllgor i ymdrin â'r lefel honno o ymosodiad.
Fodd bynnag, rwy'n cydnabod ei fod yn adlewyrchu lefel wirioneddol o anghytundeb, a methiant ar ran Adam Price, Jane Dodds a minnau i wneud yr achos i bobl fod angen dychymyg yma, mae angen dull gwahanol o weithredu arnom. Nid wyf yn credu ein bod wedi llwyddo i gael mwyafrif y bobl i gytuno â ni ar hynny. Dyna pam y cawsom yr adroddiad cyfaddawd hwn, ac mae'n adroddiad cyfaddawd sy'n mynd â ni ymhellach na lle'r oeddem o'r blaen, ac rwy'n credu bod hynny'n ddefnyddiol. Mae'n her i'r Llywodraeth nawr, sydd, beth bynnag y mae adroddiad y pwyllgor yn ei ddweud, wedi rhoi ymrwymiad i'r Senedd hon, fel y cawsom ein hatgoffa gan Adam Price. Darllenodd Adam yr hyn a lofnodwyd y llynedd—ac mae bellach yn her i'r Llywodraeth wybod sut i ymateb i anrhydeddu hynny—i ddweud y bydd deddfwriaeth cyn 2026
'ar gyfer datgymhwyso Aelodau ac ymgeiswyr a geir yn euog o ddichell fwriadol, a hynny drwy broses farnwrol annibynnol.'
Edrychaf ymlaen at glywed sut y mae'r Llywodraeth yn bwriadu mynd i'r afael â hynny. Diolch.
Thanks to everybody who took part in this inquiry and in bringing this report forward. I was a member of the committee, and the work is part of the individual Member accountability work that we've been carrying out as a committee, with recall already being report on, and other work carrying on on sexual harassment and bullying and other standards issues.
I've learnt an awful lot in the evidence that we've heard, things that I didn't really understand before, but I understand a bit better now. And that's thanks to the patience of committee clerks and the research team as well in explaining, patiently, how administrative models work and how civil and criminal offences work, and burdens of proof, and all these aspects that come into a complex but simple concept. 'Don't lie' is basically the simple concept, but when you start unpicking it and trying to come up with a definition of 'deception', and we've heard a number of different definitions—.
We've heard from Sam about the differences between a Member and a candidate, and I was one that came down on a different side of that argument. I thought that it could be done through an administrative model where it could be outsourced to an independent panel to do that. Maybe something like the Adjudication Panel for Wales could differentiate and come to a conclusion that could have been used. I was minded for that, and that's why there's a minority view within the report to try and put that case forward and to say that we did hear that case being made.
I'm slightly disappointed that the conduct Order changes that could have been brought in by 2026 seem to have been pushed out because of some of the aspects that came back in your response, Cabinet Secretary. Maybe you could go into a little bit more detail as to why that delay would happen and not maybe come in place by 2026, because I think it could have been a groundbreaking element that we could have put in place for the next election that would have made political deception an offence in a fairly straightforward way and within frameworks that are already available.
I've got to thank my fellow members and the observer members for making this a very interesting report to be part of. As a member of the committee, and I'm sure the other members, we’ll continue to do that incremental change and to do those changes to the code of conduct, to strengthen this democracy, and strengthen this place as we move into a new world of a larger Senedd in the future. I'd just like to finish with that and say thanks to everybody who was involved in this report. Diolch yn fawr.
Diolch i bawb a gymerodd ran yn yr ymchwiliad ac a gyflwynodd yr adroddiad hwn. Roeddwn i'n aelod o'r pwyllgor, ac mae'r gwaith yn rhan o'r gwaith ar atebolrwydd Aelodau unigol y buom yn ei wneud fel pwyllgor, gydag adroddiad ar adalw eisoes yn cael ei gyflawni, a gwaith arall yn digwydd ar aflonyddu rhywiol a bwlio a materion eraill yn ymwneud â safonau.
Dysgais lawer iawn yn y dystiolaeth a glywsom, pethau nad oeddwn i'n eu deall o'r blaen, ond rwy'n eu deall ychydig yn well nawr, diolch i amynedd clercod y pwyllgor a'r tîm ymchwil a fu'n esbonio, yn amyneddgar, sut y mae modelau gweinyddol yn gweithio a sut y mae troseddau sifil a throseddol yn gweithio, a baich prawf, a'r holl agweddau hyn sy'n rhan o gysyniad cymhleth ond syml. 'Peidiwch â dweud celwydd' yw'r cysyniad syml yn y bôn, ond pan fyddwch chi'n dechrau ei ddadansoddi a cheisio dod o hyd i ddiffiniad o 'ddichell', ac rydym wedi clywed nifer o wahanol ddiffiniadau—.
Clywsom gan Sam am y gwahaniaeth rhwng Aelod ac ymgeisydd, ac roeddwn i'n un a ddaeth i lawr ar ochr wahanol i'r ddadl honno. Roeddwn i'n meddwl y gellid ei wneud drwy fodel gweinyddol lle gellid ei allanoli i banel annibynnol wneud hynny. Efallai y gallai rhywbeth tebyg i Banel Dyfarnu Cymru wahaniaethu a dod i gasgliad y gellid bod wedi ei ddefnyddio. Roeddwn i'n meddwl hynny, a dyna pam y mae barn leiafrifol yn yr adroddiad i geisio cyflwyno'r achos hwnnw ac i ddweud ein bod wedi clywed yr achos hwnnw'n cael ei wneud.
Rwy'n siomedig braidd fod y newidiadau i'r Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau y gellid bod wedi'u cyflwyno erbyn 2026 i'w gweld fel pe baent wedi'u gwthio allan oherwydd rhai o'r agweddau a ddaeth yn ôl yn eich ymateb chi, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Efallai y gallech chi fanylu ychydig mwy pam y byddai'r oedi hwnnw'n digwydd a pham na fyddai'n dod i'w le erbyn 2026, oherwydd rwy'n credu y gallai fod wedi bod yn elfen arloesol y gallem fod wedi ei rhoi ar waith ar gyfer yr etholiad nesaf a fyddai wedi gwneud dichell wleidyddol yn drosedd mewn ffordd eithaf syml ac o fewn fframweithiau sydd eisoes ar gael.
Mae'n rhaid imi ddiolch i fy nghyd-aelodau a'r aelodau a oedd yn arsylwi am wneud hwn yn adroddiad diddorol iawn i fod yn rhan ohono. Fel aelod o'r pwyllgor, fel yr aelodau eraill rwy'n siŵr, byddwn yn parhau i wneud newid cynyddrannol a newidiadau i'r cod ymddygiad, i gryfhau'r ddemocratiaeth hon, a chryfhau'r lle hwn wrth inni symud i fyd newydd Senedd fwy yn y dyfodol. Hoffwn orffen gyda hynny a diolch i bawb a gyfrannodd at yr adroddiad hwn. Diolch yn fawr.
Galwaf ar y Cwnsler Cyffredinol a’r Gweinidog Cyflawni—Julie James.
I call on the Counsel General and the Minister for Delivery—Julie James.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I want to also start by thanking the Standards of Conduct Committee, and its chair in particular, for all of your hard work on this very important topic. There's no doubt that these are complex issues, and every option comes with risks and opportunities. I also want to thank the observer members for their input. Clearly, you all care very deeply about getting this right, and I think that's really shone through.
I was really pleased to see cross-party support in our recent debate on recall as well, and I think, Dirprwy Lywydd, that we need to build on that consensus as we move forward. As many Members today have said, every one of us in this Senedd has a duty to be honest with the people we represent. Their trust in us, in this institution, and in our democracy absolutely depends on it. The decisions we take here impact their daily lives, and while we may disagree on many things, I'm sure we all agree that public trust is fundamental—and that trust is under threat. We've all seen it, and we all need to act, and that does mean tackling deliberate deception in politics head-on.
The committee has taken a sensible approach, looking separately at standards for Members and candidates. I agree with their assessment that these are distinct roles subject to different rules, although I too agree that actually sometimes we have those roles simultaneously. I think it's very hard to argue in public that once you are selected by an approved political party to be its candidate, that you are not a candidate, even if you are currently elected. So, I think there's a right on both of those sides. You can hold both roles simultaneously. We need to make sure that people are held to the same standards of conduct.
For Members, though, the recommendation is to strengthen the existing standards regime while introducing a recall system. I've already committed to bringing forward a Bill before the 2026 election to make that happen. Dirprwy Lywydd, we need to all agree across this Chamber that that Bill is important, and that we need to agree a timetable for that Bill to come forward, because we are now right up against it. We are in the last year of this Senedd term, and we need to make sure that we expedite a Bill to make sure that this happens.
The Government is committing to making that system stronger by accepting recommendation 2, allowing lay members onto the standards committee. This brings independence, external perspective and expertise. We're also accepting recommendation 6, which lets the commissioner for standards start their own investigations. Both these changes will be included in the recall Bill.
For candidates, the committee, in recommendation 3, suggests the Welsh Government should create a new criminal offence of deliberate deception, broadening the existing offence in article 75 of the draft conduct Order, making false statements about a candidate's character, as it is at the moment. We do accept this in principle, but as I've outlined to the committee, we can't just tweak the existing offence. What's needed is something different, and that does require careful consideration.
Dirprwy Lywydd, I want to tell the Senedd today that I've asked my officials to develop a new offence reflecting the committee's intent. It isn't something we can rush. We do need a full assessment of the impact on the justice system and wider electoral law and a consultation. That means it probably won't be in place for next year's election, but I'm not saying definitely, and I am very happy, Dirprwy Lywydd, to offer to meet with Members, including the Chair of the committee, and any other Members who are interested, with my officials, to discuss what is possible, given the time constraints we are up against.
In terms of the conduct Order, Members always find it very hard to believe quite how long these things take in their gestation. But it is nearly drafted, and we will be laying it shortly, so we are right up against the time limits for this. [Interruption.] Sure.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Rwyf innau hefyd eisiau dechrau drwy ddiolch i'r Pwyllgor Safonau Ymddygiad, a'i gadeirydd yn arbennig, am eich holl waith caled ar y pwnc pwysig hwn. Nid oes amheuaeth fod y rhain yn faterion cymhleth, ac mae i bob opsiwn ei risgiau a'i gyfleoedd. Rwyf innau hefyd am ddiolch i'r aelodau a oedd yn arsylwi am eu mewnbwn. Yn amlwg, rydych i gyd yn hynod o awyddus i gael hyn yn iawn, ac rwy'n credu bod hynny wedi'i amlygu'n glir iawn.
Roeddwn yn falch iawn o weld cefnogaeth drawsbleidiol yn ein dadl ddiweddar ar adalw hefyd, ac rwy'n credu, Ddirprwy Lywydd, fod angen inni adeiladu ar y consensws hwnnw wrth inni symud ymlaen. Fel y mae llawer o'r Aelodau wedi dweud heddiw, mae gan bob un ohonom yn y Senedd ddyletswydd i fod yn onest gyda'r bobl a gynrychiolwn. Mae eu hymddiriedaeth ynom, yn y sefydliad hwn, ac yn ein democratiaeth yn dibynnu'n llwyr ar hynny. Mae'r penderfyniadau a wnawn yma yn effeithio ar eu bywydau bob dydd, ac er y gallwn anghytuno ar lawer o bethau, rwy'n siŵr ein bod i gyd yn cytuno bod ymddiriedaeth y cyhoedd yn sylfaenol—ac mae'r ymddiriedaeth honno dan fygythiad. Rydym i gyd wedi'i weld, ac mae angen i ni i gyd weithredu, ac mae hynny'n golygu mynd i'r afael â dichell fwriadol mewn gwleidyddiaeth yn uniongyrchol.
Mae'r pwyllgor wedi mabwysiadu ymagwedd synhwyrol, gan edrych ar wahân ar safonau i Aelodau ac ymgeiswyr. Rwy'n cytuno â'u hasesiad fod y rhain yn rolau gwahanol sy'n ddarostyngedig i wahanol reolau, er fy mod hefyd yn cytuno bod gennym y rolau hynny ar yr un pryd weithiau. Rwy'n credu ei bod hi'n anodd iawn dadlau yn gyhoeddus, pan gewch eich dewis gan blaid wleidyddol gymeradwy i fod yn ymgeisydd ar ei rhan, nad ydych chi'n ymgeisydd, hyd yn oed os ydych chi wedi cael eich ethol ar hyn o bryd. Felly, rwy'n credu bod y ddwy ochr yn iawn. Gallwch gael y ddwy rôl ar yr un pryd. Mae angen inni wneud yn siŵr fod pobl yn atebol i'r un safonau ymddygiad.
Ar gyfer yr Aelodau, fodd bynnag, yr argymhelliad yw cryfhau'r drefn safonau bresennol gan gyflwyno system adalw ar yr un pryd. Rwyf eisoes wedi ymrwymo i gyflwyno Bil cyn etholiad 2026 i wneud i hynny ddigwydd. Ddirprwy Lywydd, mae angen i ni i gyd gytuno ar draws y Siambr fod y Bil hwnnw'n bwysig, a bod angen i ni gytuno ar amserlen i'r Bil hwnnw gael ei gyflwyno, oherwydd mae amser yn brin iawn bellach. Rydym ym mlwyddyn olaf y tymor seneddol hwn, ac mae angen inni wneud yn siŵr ein bod yn cyflymu gwaith ar y Bil i wneud yn siŵr fod hyn yn digwydd.
Mae'r Llywodraeth yn ymrwymo i wneud y system honno'n gryfach trwy dderbyn argymhelliad 2, a chaniatáu aelodau lleyg i fod yn rhan o'r pwyllgor safonau. Daw hyn ag annibyniaeth, persbectif allanol ac arbenigedd yn ei sgil. Rydym hefyd yn derbyn argymhelliad 6, sy'n gadael i'r comisiynydd safonau gychwyn ymchwiliadau eu hunain. Bydd y ddau newid yn cael eu cynnwys yn y Bil adalw.
Ar gyfer ymgeiswyr, mae'r pwyllgor, yn argymhelliad 3, yn awgrymu y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru greu trosedd newydd o ddichell fwriadol, gan ehangu'r drosedd bresennol yn erthygl 75 o'r Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau drafft o wneud datganiadau ffug am gymeriad ymgeisydd, fel y mae ar hyn o bryd. Rydym yn derbyn hyn mewn egwyddor, ond fel y nodais wrth y pwyllgor, rhaid gwneud mwy na mân addasiadau i'r drosedd bresennol. Yr hyn sydd ei angen yw rhywbeth gwahanol, ac mae angen ystyried hynny'n ofalus.
Ddirprwy Lywydd, rwyf am ddweud wrth y Senedd heddiw fy mod wedi gofyn i fy swyddogion ddatblygu trosedd newydd sy'n adlewyrchu bwriad y pwyllgor. Nid yw'n rhywbeth y gallwn ei ruthro. Mae angen asesiad llawn o'r effaith ar y system gyfiawnder a chyfraith etholiadol ehangach ac ymgynghoriad. Mae hynny'n golygu na fydd yn debygol o fod yn ei le ar gyfer etholiad y flwyddyn nesaf, ond nid wyf yn dweud yn bendant, ac rwy'n hapus iawn, Ddirprwy Lywydd, i gynnig cyfarfod ag Aelodau, gan gynnwys Cadeirydd y pwyllgor, ac unrhyw Aelodau eraill sydd â diddordeb, gyda fy swyddogion, i drafod yr hyn sy'n bosibl, o ystyried y cyfyngiadau amser sydd arnom.
Ar y Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau, mae Aelodau bob amser yn ei chael hi'n anodd iawn credu pa mor hir y mae'r pethau hyn yn cymryd i ddatblygu. Ond mae bron wedi'i ddrafftio, a byddwn yn ei gyflwyno cyn bo hir, felly mae'r terfynau amser yn dynn iawn ar gyfer hyn. [Torri ar draws.] Yn sicr.
In terms of the legislation that you referred to earlier, will that contain the element in the report related to future conduct Orders, so the change in the Government of Wales Act so that all future conduct Orders will have this offence of deliberate deception within it? And in relation to Members, I understand that you're bringing forward legislation in relation to recall, but your commitment is to legislate to introduce disqualification via an independent judicial process for Members. The committee's proposals relate to the standards process, so they are out of scope for that. So, are you committing in your legislation to legislating for an independent judicial process in relation to Members as well?
Ar y ddeddfwriaeth y cyfeirioch chi ati'n gynharach, a fydd honno'n cynnwys yr elfen yn yr adroddiad sy'n ymwneud â Gorchmynion cynnal etholiadau yn y dyfodol, felly y newid yn Neddf Llywodraeth Cymru fel bod pob Gorchymyn cynnal etholiadau yn y dyfodol yn cynnwys y drosedd o ddichell fwriadol? Ac mewn perthynas ag Aelodau, rwy'n deall eich bod yn cyflwyno deddfwriaeth mewn perthynas ag adalw, ond eich ymrwymiad yw deddfu i gyflwyno anghymhwyso drwy broses farnwrol annibynnol ar gyfer Aelodau. Mae cynigion y pwyllgor yn ymwneud â'r broses safonau, felly nid ydynt yn rhan o'r cwmpas hwnnw. Felly, a ydych chi'n ymrwymo yn eich deddfwriaeth i ddeddfu ar gyfer proses farnwrol annibynnol mewn perthynas ag Aelodau hefyd?
Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm going to make a bit of progress, and then you'll see where I'm getting on some of that. I was about to say, actually, Adam, that we need to consider whether changes to the Government of Wales Act 2006 are required to make this possible, and we need to do that properly. We need to make a proper assessment of that, but I'm happy to do that with Members who are interested, as well as with my officials, to see what is possible.
We've got to work very closely with the Senedd Commission to keep everything aligned here as well, and I want to make sure that we work with the Commission so the Government is not overstepping. So, it's a matter for the Commission how the standards system works, but the Government is prepared to legislate to put that into place on a statutory footing, and that's why I want to include Members in the conversation, including members of the Commission.
We want to carefully co-ordinate the timelines for both, but what you've just suggested is perfectly possible. We need the Commission to agree, though, that its procedures be dealt with in that way, so we need a collective agreement. The Government can't just legislate for the parliamentary Commission, and does not want to do so, but it is perfectly possible to do so. So, I've asked my officials to work closely with the Senedd Commission to keep everything lined up, and to make sure that we're working together on that. The Dirprwy Lywydd and the Llywydd are aware that we've asked to do that.
We also welcome recommendation 5, which proposes a new way for candidates to correct the record quickly alongside the new offence, and we'll consider that as part of the work on recommendation 3.
On recommendation 11, on appeals, I know that the Senedd removed its previous process in 2022. That's a decision for the Senedd. But, as I've just said, the Government's ready to support any discussions on possible options, taking into account why that previous process was scrapped. Whether legislation is required depends on the scope of the desired appeals process that the Senedd wishes to adopt, but the Government is interested in exploring an appeals process by way of a judge-led panel, effectively, for the appeal process, outside of the Commission, and we are very keen to discuss that. And that could be put into the Bill. That would be my intention, subject to a discussion with the Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee and with the Llywydd and Dirprwy Lywydd. And so we get a little bit of a combination of both in the same Bill.
Some Members, Dirprwy Lywydd, will know that I've discussed with them the fact that I don't think it's possible—and I have oversight of the legislation programme overall—to get two Bills in play and get them both passed. So, I want to be absolutely straightforward here: we gave a commitment to bring a Bill forward, and I want to get a Bill passed, and those are very different things. So, I'm very happy to work with people to see what it's possible to do, given the time constraints we're up against—and boy are we up against them. So, I've instructed officials already to explore what provisions may be required and included in the Bill that I will bring forward to establish a system of recall to encompass the offence of deliberate deception. And actually, for the record, Dirprwy Lywydd, and expressing a personal view, I think that there are other offences that could also be included in that that are equally egregious—for example, offences of a sexual nature, which I think also require serious consideration.
So, I want to thank the committee Chair for today's debate on this important topic, and I want to thank all of the Members who have contributed. We don't agree on every detail, but we all agree that deliberate deception by politicians is wrong. It undermines our democracy and we must tackle it head on. It is essential that we restore trust in politics. People need to believe that the decisions that we make on their behalf are the right decisions, done honestly. I look forward to continuing this work and bringing about important changes to strengthen our democracy, and I look forward to working intensively with Members across the Chamber in order to make this happen. Diolch.
Ddirprwy Lywydd, rwy'n mynd i wneud ychydig o gynnydd, ac fe welwch i ble rwy'n mynd ar rywfaint o hynny. Roeddwn ar fin dweud, mewn gwirionedd, Adam, fod angen inni ystyried a oes angen newidiadau i Ddeddf Llywodraeth Cymru 2006 i wneud hyn yn bosibl, ac mae angen inni wneud hynny'n iawn. Mae angen inni wneud asesiad priodol o hynny, ond rwy'n hapus i wneud hynny gydag Aelodau sydd â diddordeb, yn ogystal â fy swyddogion, i weld beth sy'n bosibl.
Mae'n rhaid inni weithio'n agos iawn gyda Chomisiwn y Senedd i gadw popeth yn gyson yma hefyd, ac rwyf am wneud yn siŵr ein bod yn gweithio gyda'r Comisiwn fel nad yw'r Llywodraeth yn mynd yn rhy bell. Felly, mater i'r Comisiwn yw sut y mae'r system safonau'n gweithio, ond mae'r Llywodraeth yn barod i ddeddfu i roi hynny ar waith ar sail statudol, a dyna pam rwyf eisiau cynnwys Aelodau yn y sgwrs, gan gynnwys aelodau'r Comisiwn.
Rydym eisiau cydlynu'r amserlenni ar gyfer y ddau beth yn ofalus, ond mae'r hyn rydych chi newydd ei awgrymu yn berffaith bosibl. Mae angen i'r Comisiwn gytuno, fodd bynnag, i'w weithdrefnau gael eu trin yn y modd hwnnw, felly mae angen cytundeb cyfunol. Ni all y Llywodraeth ddeddfu ar ran y Comisiwn seneddol, ac nid yw eisiau gwneud hynny, ond mae'n berffaith bosibl gwneud hynny. Felly, gofynnais i fy swyddogion weithio'n agos gyda Chomisiwn y Senedd i gadw popeth yn ei drefn, ac i wneud yn siŵr ein bod ni'n gweithio gyda'n gilydd ar hynny. Mae'r Dirprwy Lywydd a'r Llywydd yn ymwybodol ein bod wedi gofyn am wneud hynny.
Rydym hefyd yn croesawu argymhelliad 5, sy'n cynnig ffordd newydd i ymgeiswyr gywiro'r cofnod yn gyflym ochr yn ochr â'r drosedd newydd, a byddwn yn ystyried hynny'n rhan o'r gwaith ar argymhelliad 3.
Ar argymhelliad 11, ar apelio, rwy'n gwybod bod y Senedd wedi dileu ei phroses flaenorol yn 2022. Penderfyniad i'r Senedd yw hynny. Ond fel y dywedais nawr, mae'r Llywodraeth yn barod i gefnogi unrhyw drafodaethau ar opsiynau posibl, gan ystyried pam y cafodd y broses flaenorol ei dileu. Mae'r angen am ddeddfwriaeth ai peidio yn dibynnu ar gwmpas y broses apelio y mae'r Senedd yn dymuno ei mabwysiadu, ond mae gan y Llywodraeth ddiddordeb mewn archwilio proses apelio drwy banel dan arweiniad barnwr, i bob pwrpas, ar gyfer y broses apelio, y tu allan i'r Comisiwn, ac rydym yn awyddus iawn i drafod hynny. A gellid rhoi hynny yn y Bil. Dyna fyddai fy mwriad, yn amodol ar drafodaeth gyda Chadeirydd y Pwyllgor Safonau Ymddygiad a'r Llywydd a'r Dirprwy Lywydd. Ac o wneud hynny cawn gyfuniad bach o'r ddau yn yr un Bil.
Ddirprwy Lywydd, bydd rhai o'r Aelodau'n gwybod fy mod wedi trafod gyda hwy nad wyf yn credu ei bod hi'n bosibl—a gennyf i y mae goruchwyliaeth ar y rhaglen ddeddfwriaeth yn gyffredinol—cael dau Fil ar y gweill a phasio'r ddau ohonynt. Felly, rwyf am fod yn hollol agored yma: fe wnaethom roi ymrwymiad i gyflwyno Bil, ac rwyf eisiau cael Bil wedi'i basio, ac mae'r rhain yn bethau gwahanol iawn. Felly, rwy'n hapus iawn i weithio gyda phobl i weld beth sy'n bosibl ei wneud, o ystyried y cyfyngiadau amser arnom—ac maent yn dynn iawn. Felly, rwyf wedi cyfarwyddo swyddogion eisoes i archwilio pa ddarpariaethau y gallai fod eu hangen a'u cynnwys yn y Bil y byddaf yn ei gyflwyno i sefydlu system adalw i gwmpasu'r drosedd o ddichell fwriadol. Ac ar gyfer y cofnod, Ddirprwy Lywydd, ac os caf fynegi barn bersonol, rwy'n credu bod troseddau eraill y gellid eu cynnwys hefyd yn hynny sydd yr un mor ddybryd—er enghraifft, troseddau o natur rywiol, y credaf fod angen rhoi ystyriaeth ddifrifol iddynt hefyd.
Felly, hoffwn ddiolch i Gadeirydd y pwyllgor am y ddadl heddiw ar y pwnc pwysig hwn, ac rwyf am ddiolch i'r holl Aelodau sydd wedi cyfrannu. Nid ydym yn cytuno ar bob manylyn, ond rydym i gyd yn cytuno bod dichell fwriadol gan wleidyddion yn anghywir. Mae'n tanseilio ein democratiaeth ac mae'n rhaid inni fynd benben ag ef. Mae'n hanfodol ein bod yn adfer ymddiriedaeth mewn gwleidyddiaeth. Mae angen i bobl gredu mai'r penderfyniadau a wnawn ar eu rhan yw'r penderfyniadau cywir, wedi'u gwneud yn onest. Edrychaf ymlaen at barhau â'r gwaith hwn a chyflwyno newidiadau pwysig i gryfhau ein democratiaeth, ac edrychaf ymlaen at weithio'n ddyfal gydag Aelodau ar draws y Siambr i wneud i hyn ddigwydd. Diolch.
Galwaf ar Gadeirydd y pwyllgor, Hannah Blythyn, i ymateb i'r ddadl.
I call on the Chair of the committee, Hannah Blythyn, to reply to the debate.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, ac a gaf i ddiolch i bawb am eu cyfraniadau heddiw?
Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and could I thank everyone for their contributions today?
When I thanked everybody previously in my opening remarks for their contributions to the evidence sessions we took, I didn't actually thank those who sat on the committee for all of their contributions, too, and I think that it was certainly a very interesting piece of work to cover. I'd also like to express my thanks, as Chair, to the whole committee team for all of their work, because I know that this wasn't a simple task, and I know that they put a lot of effort in to try and bring us to a place where we could suggest some practical solutions to take us in the direction that we wanted to go in. And I take on board the comments from those who would wish for this report to go further. I think that we can agree that they are a step in the right direction and there are things that we can build upon here in our Senedd.
Thanks to Mick for passing this piece of work to the committee in a former role, before I was Chair—
Pan ddiolchais i bawb yn fy sylwadau agoriadol am eu cyfraniadau i'r sesiynau tystiolaeth a gynhaliwyd gennym, ni wneuthum ddiolch i'r rhai a oedd ar y pwyllgor am eu holl gyfraniadau hwythau hefyd, ac rwy'n credu ei fod yn sicr yn waith diddorol iawn. Hoffwn fynegi fy niolch hefyd, fel Cadeirydd, i dîm cyfan y pwyllgor am eu holl waith, oherwydd rwy'n gwybod nad oedd hon yn dasg syml, ac rwy'n gwybod eu bod wedi rhoi llawer o ymdrech i geisio dod â ni i le lle gallem awgrymu atebion ymarferol i fynd â ni i'r cyfeiriad yr oeddem am fynd iddo. Ac rwy'n derbyn sylwadau gan y rhai a fyddai'n dymuno i'r adroddiad fynd ymhellach. Rwy'n credu y gallwn gytuno eu bod yn gam i'r cyfeiriad cywir a bod yna bethau y gallwn adeiladu arnynt yma yn ein Senedd.
Diolch i Mick am drosglwyddo'r gwaith hwn i'r pwyllgor mewn rôl flaenorol, cyn imi ddod yn Gadeirydd—
And then sitting on it.
Ac am fod yn aelod ohono wedyn.
Yes, and then contributing as a member.
I just want to focus on one specific point and then just address a couple of things more generally, and that is some of the points around the differentiation in recommendations for candidates and Members. I just want to refer colleagues to a point in the committee's report, where we say that adopting
'different mechanisms for addressing deliberate deception recognises the unique status and different governance and characteristics of these two groups, but still allows the issue of deliberate deception to be addressed with equal gravity.'
So, that was one of the rationales behind it, but I take on board the comments, as we said, that we've also heard from the Counsel General, too. And thank you to the Counsel General for her offer to meet with me as Chair and other interested Members to take this work forward, because we've heard in many contributions—from Jane, from Adam, from Lee, from Sam—that this is part of a bigger picture, a bigger problem, a bigger challenge that we need to rise to, and we need to build progressive coalitions not just here in the Senedd, but right around the world as well. I know, when we were discussing this as a committee, it went beyond the issue of a politician deliberately deceiving, but actually then how that can potentially travel the world and how misinformation is a growing problem. I only wish that we did have the powers within this place to tackle Trump and Elon Musk, but that is beyond the gift we have at the moment. But it did raise, for us as a committee, in all seriousness, in the discussions, other things that we might need to be able to look at as a committee, and as a Senedd, around how we can perhaps have greater transparency on things like political advertising and donations, and a range of issues like that that also serve to undermine our democracy. And hopefully, as Jane Dodds was saying, all of this work, all the work of the committee that I'm proud to chair, is about restoring trust and transparency in our politics, and not just in our politics, but our politicians and this place. Given the support I've heard here today, and I welcome the commitments and the comments from the Counsel General to do the best we can to get to the point to legislate ahead of the Senedd selections, if that's not possible, I think, as a committee, we very much and sincerely hope that any remaining work would be undertaken at speed by a future administration after the 2026 election.
In closing, we do have a chance here, in the heart of our devolved democracy, to set not just higher standards, but to set our future Senedd's standards as an institution that not just expects integrity and honesty, but actually very much values it as something that is essential to our democracy to restore trust and transparency, and I'm very much looking forward to continuing this work and working with colleagues across parties and within this place and with the Welsh Government. Diolch yn fawr.
Ie, ac am gyfrannu fel aelod wedyn.
Rwyf am ganolbwyntio ar un pwynt penodol cyn mynd i'r afael ag un neu ddau o bethau yn fwy cyffredinol, sef rhai o'r pwyntiau ynghylch y gwahaniaethu rhwng argymhellion ar gyfer ymgeiswyr ac Aelodau. Rwyf am gyfeirio cyd-Aelodau at bwynt yn adroddiad y pwyllgor, lle dywedwn fod mabwysiadu
'mecanweithiau gwahanol ar gyfer mynd i’r afael â dichell fwriadol yn cydnabod statws unigryw a threfn lywodraethu a nodweddion gwahanol y ddau grŵp hyn ond ar yr un pryd, mae’n golygu bod modd pennu’r un difrifoldeb i’r mater o ddichell fwriadol.'
Felly, dyna oedd un o'r rhesymau y tu ôl iddo, ond rwy'n derbyn y sylwadau, fel y dywedasom, fel y'u clywsom gan y Cwnsler Cyffredinol hefyd. A diolch i'r Cwnsler Cyffredinol am ei chynnig i gyfarfod â mi fel Cadeirydd ac Aelodau eraill sydd â diddordeb i fynd â'r gwaith hwn ymlaen, oherwydd rydym wedi clywed mewn llawer o gyfraniadau—gan Jane, gan Adam, gan Lee, gan Sam—fod hyn yn rhan o ddarlun mwy, problem fwy, her fwy y mae angen inni ei hwynebu, ac mae angen inni adeiladu cynghreiriau blaengar nid yn unig yma yn y Senedd, ond ledled y byd hefyd. Pan oeddem yn trafod hyn fel pwyllgor, rwy'n gwybod ei fod yn mynd y tu hwnt i fater gwleidydd yn camarwain drwy ddichell fwriadol, ond i'r modd y gall hynny deithio'r byd a sut y mae camwybodaeth yn broblem gynyddol. O na fyddai gennym y pwerau yn y lle hwn i fynd i'r afael â Trump ac Elon Musk, ond mae hynny y tu hwnt i'r hyn y cawn ei wneud ar hyn o bryd. Ond i ni fel pwyllgor yn y trafodaethau, yn gwbl ddifrifol, fe gododd bethau eraill y gallai fod angen inni allu edrych arnynt fel pwyllgor, ac fel Senedd, yn ymwneud â sut y gallwn gael mwy o dryloywder ar bethau fel hysbysebu a rhoddion gwleidyddol, ac ystod o faterion fel hynny sydd hefyd yn tanseilio ein democratiaeth. Ac fel y dywedodd Jane Dodds, gobeithio y bydd yr holl waith hwn, holl waith y pwyllgor yr wyf yn falch o'i gadeirio, yn adfer ymddiriedaeth a thryloywder yn ein gwleidyddiaeth, ac nid yn unig yn ein gwleidyddiaeth, ond yn ein gwleidyddion a'r lle hwn. O ystyried y gefnogaeth a glywais yma heddiw, ac rwy'n croesawu'r ymrwymiadau a'r sylwadau gan y Cwnsler Cyffredinol i wneud y gorau posibl i gyrraedd pwynt pan allwn ddeddfu cyn etholiadau'r Senedd, os nad yw hynny'n bosibl, rwy'n credu, fel pwyllgor, ein bod yn gobeithio'n fawr y byddai unrhyw waith sy'n weddill yn cael ei wneud yn gyflym gan weinyddiaeth yn y dyfodol ar ôl etholiad 2026.
I gloi, mae gennym gyfle yma, yng nghalon ein democratiaeth ddatganoledig, nid yn unig i osod safonau uwch, ond i osod safonau Senedd ein dyfodol fel sefydliad sydd nid yn unig yn disgwyl uniondeb a gonestrwydd, ond sy'n gweld eu gwerth ar gyfer adfer ymddiriedaeth a thryloywder fel pethau hanfodol i'n democratiaeth, ac rwy'n edrych ymlaen yn fawr at barhau â'r gwaith hwn a gweithio gyda chyd-Aelodau ar draws y pleidiau ac yn y lle hwn a chyda Llywodraeth Cymru. Diolch yn fawr.
Y cwestiwn yw: a ddylid nodi adroddiad y pwyllgor? A oes unrhyw Aelod yn gwrthwynebu? Nac oes, felly derbynnir y cynnig yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 12.36.
The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No. The motion is, therefore, agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.
Derbyniwyd y cynnig yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 12.36.
Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.
Detholwyd y gwelliant canlynol: gwelliant 1 yn enw Jane Hutt.
The following amendment has been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Jane Hutt.
Eitem 8 yw dadl Plaid Cymru: taliadau plant. Dwi'n galw ar Sioned Williams i wneud y cynnig.
Item 8 is the Plaid Cymru debate on child payments. I call on Sioned Williams to move the motion.
Cynnig NDM8875 Heledd Fychan
Cynnig bod y Senedd:
Yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i weithredu taliad plant.
Motion NDM8875 Heledd Fychan
To propose that the Senedd:
Calls on the Welsh Government to implement a child payment.
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. In Wales today, we bear a scar of injustice, a national stain of inequality that stretches across our communities from north to south, east to west, rural to urban, and that stain is child poverty. It is nothing short of a disgrace that 32.3 per cent of children in Wales live in poverty, a figure set to rise by January 2029 to 34.4 per cent, making us the worst in the UK. Think about that for moment. That's almost one in three of all of our children, one in three of our children going to bed hungry. Parents working every hour they can and still not being able to meet ends meet, and the social security, the support they receive, not adequate. Barnardo's Cymru say they are seeing an increasing number of families coming to them for crisis support, and those are parents that are working, their social security not sufficient. These are families forced to make impossible choices that result in unconscionable inequalities of outcome for our youngest citizens.
Responding to the recent welfare cuts made by the Labour Government in Westminster, Oxfam Cymru said,
'We live in the sixth richest country in the world where billionaires alone saw their wealth soar by £11 billion last year. It is morally repugnant that children, disabled people and carers are the ones who are taking the hit',
and Plaid Cymru agrees. But child poverty is not an intractable problem. We must always remember that it's political choices that leads to child poverty, that deepen child poverty, and thus it takes political will, deliberate political decisions to eradicate it. And safeguarding the future of the nation, the well-being of its children, is every Government's responsibility.
I'd remind you all of the frank words of Chris Birt, associate director at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, to the Equality and Social Justice Committee when we were scrutinising the Government's child poverty strategy. He said,
'Now, I know he Welsh Government says its powers are more restricted than those of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government, but if we think that there is nothing that the Welsh Government or Senedd can do to reduce poverty in Wales, I’d pack up. Of course there are things to do.'
And yet, what has this Labour Welsh Government done? They scrapped child poverty targets and then instituted a monitoring framework for their new child poverty strategy that has no teeth. They're refusing to call out a UK Government that refuses to scrap the two-child cap, a policy that actively pushes families deeper into hardship and which they themselves denounced before their party got the keys to No. 10, and we have just disappointingly heard them refuse to denounce the welfare cuts that will push more children into poverty. The Child Poverty Action Group says that, since 2010, about £50 billion has been taken from the annual social security budget through policies such as benefit freezes, the two-child limit, the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. Cuts in housing benefit mean that many families have to make up a shortfall in rent. The support net that needs to cope with rising costs and global economic shocks, they say, is actually weaker when it needs to be stronger, and the misguided welfare cuts announced last week by a Labour Chancellor will tear even more holes in that net. The Welsh Government speak of ambition, yet these are warm words while children go without. How long have we been calling for the powers we need to make a difference, such as those over welfare, to make the fairer Wales we all say we want to see a reality? The Government amendment notes a commitment
'to engage with the Scottish Government to better understand the Scottish Child Payment and how it operates.'
Great. But where have you been? We can't support more of this exploring, engaging and considering when what we need is action. Universal free school meals for primary children—that was something we in Wales, in Chris Birt's phrase, could do, and something we did, though, of course, time and again, it was dismissed as unworkable, unaffordable and voted down by the Labour benches. It was a matter of political will, and we were able to persuade you to find that will through your need to work with us, and you now shout about this policy from the rooftops, as do we, and rightly so. That's the kind of action we need more of, action that ensured there are no gaps of geography and circumstance that can reduce the effectiveness of purely targeted measures. That's the kind of action we've outlined in our motion, the kind of action that won't be driven by a child poverty strategy that has no targets.
We have seen how the Scottish statutory and target-driven overall child poverty approach works, and the latest poverty data has borne this approach out. We must remember deepest poverty lies in those families with children aged under four. So, support delivered through school will not help them, and that's why we are committed to delivering a transformational child payment, learning from Scotland, where their equivalent scheme is already lifting tens of thousands of children out of poverty. Scotland is set to be the only UK nation where child poverty is falling. Meanwhile, here in Wales, under Labour in Cardiff Bay and Westminster, it's rising.
Our plan, Cynnal, will do exactly that: sustain families, support communities, give every child the start in life they deserve. And this is not just about tackling poverty in the here and now, it's about the future. A child lifted out of poverty today grows up to be healthier, happier, more prosperous as an adult. Money spent in struggling households is money reinvested in our high streets, in our local businesses, in our economy. Pressures and costs on our public services will be reduced.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Yng Nghymru heddiw, cawn ein creithio gan anghyfiawnder, staen cenedlaethol o anghydraddoldeb sy'n ymestyn ar draws ein cymunedau o'r gogledd i'r de, o'r dwyrain i'r gorllewin, o'r ardaloedd gwledig i'r ardaloedd trefol, a'r staen hwnnw yw tlodi plant. Mae'n destun cywilydd fod 32.3 y cant o blant yng Nghymru yn byw mewn tlodi, ffigur sy'n mynd i godi erbyn Ionawr 2029 i 34.4 y cant, gan ein gwneud ni'n waeth nag unrhyw le arall yn y DU. Meddyliwch am hynny am foment. Dyna bron i un o bob tri o'n holl blant, un o bob tri o'n plant yn mynd i'r gwely'n llwglyd. Mae rhieni'n gweithio bob awr y gallant eu gweithio ac yn dal i fethu cael dau ben llinyn ynghyd, ac nid yw'r nawdd cymdeithasol, y cymorth a gânt, yn ddigon. Mae Barnardo's Cymru yn dweud eu bod yn gweld nifer cynyddol o deuluoedd yn dod atynt am gymorth argyfwng, ac mae'r rheini'n rhieni sy'n gweithio, ond nid yw eu nawdd cymdeithasol yn ddigon. Mae'r rhain yn deuluoedd sy'n cael eu gorfodi i wneud dewisiadau amhosibl sy'n arwain at anghydraddoldebau gormodol o ran y canlyniadau i'n dinasyddion ieuengaf.
Wrth ymateb i'r toriadau lles diweddar a wnaed gan y Llywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan, dywedodd Oxfam Cymru,
'Rydym yn byw yn y chweched wlad gyfoethocaf yn y byd lle gwelodd biliwnyddion gynnydd o £11 biliwn i'w cyfoeth y llynedd. Mae'n foesol ffiaidd mai plant, pobl anabl a gofalwyr yw'r rhai sy'n cael eu taro',
ac mae Plaid Cymru yn cytuno. Ond nid yw tlodi plant yn broblem na ellir gwneud dim yn ei chylch. Mae'n rhaid inni gofio bob amser mai dewisiadau gwleidyddol sy'n arwain at dlodi plant, sy'n dyfnhau tlodi plant, ac felly mae angen ewyllys wleidyddol, penderfyniadau gwleidyddol bwriadol i'w ddileu. A diogelu dyfodol y genedl, lles ei phlant, yw cyfrifoldeb pob Llywodraeth.
Rwyf am eich atgoffa o eiriau gonest Chris Birt, cyfarwyddwr cyswllt Sefydliad Joseph Rowntree ar gyfer yr Alban, Cymru a Gogledd Iwerddon, i'r Pwyllgor Cydraddoldeb a Chyfiawnder Cymdeithasol pan oeddem yn craffu ar strategaeth tlodi plant y Llywodraeth. Meddai
'Nawr, rwy'n gwybod bod Llywodraeth Cymru yn dweud bod ei phwerau'n fwy cyfyngedig na phwerau Senedd yr Alban a Llywodraeth yr Alban, ond os credwn nad oes unrhyw beth y gall Llywodraeth Cymru na'r Senedd ei wneud i leihau tlodi yng Nghymru, fe roddwn y gorau iddi. Wrth gwrs bod yna bethau i'w gwneud.'
Ac eto, beth y mae'r Llywodraeth Lafur hon wedi'i wneud? Fe wnaethant ddileu targedau tlodi plant a sefydlu fframwaith monitro ar gyfer eu strategaeth tlodi plant newydd ddiddannedd. Maent yn gwrthod beirniadu Llywodraeth y DU sy'n gwrthod cael gwared ar y cap dau blentyn, polisi sy'n gwthio teuluoedd yn ddyfnach i galedi a pholisi yr oeddent hwy eu hunain yn ei gondemnio cyn i'w plaid gael yr allweddi i Rif 10, ac rydym newydd eu clywed yn gwrthod condemnio'r toriadau lles a fydd yn gwthio mwy o blant i fyw mewn tlodi. Mae'r Grŵp Gweithredu ar Dlodi Plant yn dweud, ers 2010, fod tua £50 biliwn wedi'i gymryd o'r gyllideb nawdd cymdeithasol flynyddol drwy bolisïau fel rhewi budd-daliadau, y terfyn dau blentyn, y dreth ystafell wely a'r cap ar fudd-daliadau. Mae toriadau i fudd-dal tai yn golygu bod llawer o deuluoedd yn gorfod talu'r gwahaniaeth yn eu rhent. Dywedant fod y rhwyd gymorth sydd ei hangen i ymdopi â chostau cynyddol a siociau economaidd byd-eang yn wannach pan fo angen iddi fod yn gryfach, a bydd y toriadau lles cyfeiliornus a gyhoeddwyd yr wythnos diwethaf gan Ganghellor Llafur yn torri mwy fyth o dyllau yn y rhwyd honno. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn sôn am uchelgais, ond geiriau cynnes yn unig yw'r rhain tra bo plant yn cael eu hamddifadu. Pa mor hir y buom yn galw am y pwerau sydd eu hangen arnom i wneud gwahaniaeth, fel y rhai dros les, i sicrhau bod y Gymru decach yr ydym i gyd yn dweud ein bod am ei gweld yn cael ei gwireddu? Mae gwelliant y Llywodraeth yn nodi ymrwymiad
'i drafod gyda Llywodraeth yr Alban i gael gwell dealltwriaeth o Daliad Plant yr Alban a'r ffordd mae'n gweithredu.'
Gwych. Ond ble rydych chi wedi bod? Ni allwn gefnogi mwy o archwilio, trafod ac ystyried gan mai'r hyn sydd ei angen yw gweithredu. Prydau ysgol am ddim i bob plentyn cynradd—dyna rywbeth y gallem ni yng Nghymru ei wneud, fel y dywedodd Chris Birt, ac fe'i gwnaethom, er iddo gael ei ddiystyru dro ar ôl tro fel rhywbeth na ellid ei gyflawni, rhywbeth anfforddiadwy, y pleidleisiodd y meinciau Llafur yn ei erbyn. Mater o ewyllys gwleidyddol ydoedd, ac fe lwyddasom i'ch perswadio i ddod o hyd i'r ewyllys honno drwy eich angen i weithio gyda ni, ac rydych chi bellach yn gweiddi am y polisi hwn o ben y toeau, fel y gwnawn ni, a hynny'n briodol. Dyna'r math o weithredu y mae angen gweld mwy ohono, gweithredu a sicrhaodd nad oes unrhyw fylchau o ran daearyddiaeth ac amgylchiadau a all leihau effeithiolrwydd mesurau wedi'u targedu. Dyna'r math o weithredu a nodwyd gennym yn ein cynnig, y math o weithredu na fydd yn cael ei yrru gan strategaeth tlodi plant heb dargedau.
Rydym wedi gweld sut y mae dull statudol a thargededig cyffredinol yr Alban o weithredu ar dlodi plant yn gweithio, ac mae'r data diweddaraf ar dlodi wedi cadarnhau'r dull hwn. Rhaid inni gofio bod y tlodi dyfnaf yn y teuluoedd sydd â phlant dan bedair oed. Felly, ni fydd cymorth a ddarperir drwy'r ysgol yn eu helpu, a dyna pam rydym wedi ymrwymo i ddarparu taliad plant trawsnewidiol, gan ddysgu gan yr Alban, lle mae eu cynllun cyfatebol eisoes yn codi degau o filoedd o blant allan o dlodi. Yr Alban fydd yr unig genedl yn y DU lle mae tlodi plant yn gostwng. Yn y cyfamser, yma yng Nghymru, o dan Lafur ym Mae Caerdydd a San Steffan, mae'n codi.
Bydd ein cynllun, Cynnal, yn gwneud yn union hynny: cynnal teuluoedd, cefnogi cymunedau, rhoi'r dechrau mewn bywyd y maent yn ei haeddu i bob plentyn. Ac nid mater o fynd i'r afael â thlodi nawr yn unig yw hyn, mae'n ymwneud â'r dyfodol. Mae plentyn sy'n cael ei godi allan o dlodi heddiw yn tyfu i fyny i fod yn iachach, yn hapusach, yn fwy ffyniannus fel oedolyn. Mae arian sy'n cael ei wario mewn cartrefi sy'n cael trafferth yn arian sy'n cael ei ailfuddsoddi yn ein strydoedd mawr, yn ein busnesau lleol, yn ein heconomi. Bydd costau a phwysau ar ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yn lleihau.
Daeth y Llywydd i’r Gadair.
The Llywydd took the Chair.
Professor Ruth Patrick, professor in social policy at the University of York, has said:
'The progress Scotland has made on driving poverty rates down shows another way is possible. The UK government could lift 700,000 children out of poverty overnight by matching Scotland’s fiscal commitment to driving poverty down.'
And this is the time. I've no doubt, in her response, that the Cabinet Secretary will refer to the work of the child poverty taskforce set up by the Labour UK Government. Devolution of welfare so that devolved nations can ensure support is more effective and more responsive to the needs of its citizens must be central to that work. Children in Wales otherwise suffer what has been called by members of the End Child Poverty Network a particular disadvantage resulting from our devolution settlement. So, can you confirm that the taskforce is taking this approach? Are you asking for these powers?
Labour insists they're not continuing with austerity politics, but it doesn't feel that way to the children in poverty in Wales. We need to take a different path. I urge you to vote for those children today. This is something we can do and we can afford. Our young people deserve it, and Wales demands it.
Mae'r Athro Ruth Patrick, athro polisi cymdeithasol ym Mhrifysgol Efrog, wedi dweud:
'Mae'r cynnydd y mae'r Alban wedi'i wneud ar yrru cyfraddau tlodi i lawr yn dangos bod ffordd arall yn bosibl. Gallai llywodraeth y DU godi 700,000 o blant allan o dlodi dros nos drwy ymrwymiad cyllidol fel un yr Alban i yrru tlodi i lawr.'
Ac mae'n bryd gwneud hynny. Nid oes gennyf unrhyw amheuaeth, yn ei hymateb, y bydd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn cyfeirio at waith y tasglu tlodi plant a sefydlwyd gan Lywodraeth Lafur y DU. Rhaid i ddatganoli lles, fel y gall y gwledydd datganoledig sicrhau bod cefnogaeth yn fwy effeithiol ac yn fwy ymatebol i anghenion eu dinasyddion, fod yn ganolog i'r gwaith hwnnw. Fel arall, mae plant yng Nghymru yn dioddef yr hyn a alwyd gan aelodau o'r Rhwydwaith Dileu Tlodi Plant, yn anfantais arbennig sy'n deillio o'n setliad datganoli. Felly, a allwch chi gadarnhau bod y tasglu'n gweithredu yn y ffordd hon? A ydych chi'n gofyn am y pwerau hyn?
Mae Llafur yn mynnu nad ydynt yn parhau gyda gwleidyddiaeth cyni, ond nid yw'n teimlo felly i'r plant sy'n byw mewn tlodi yng Nghymru. Mae angen inni ddewis llwybr gwahanol. Rwy'n eich annog i bleidleisio dros y plant hynny heddiw. Mae hyn yn rhywbeth y gallwn ei wneud ac y gallwn ei fforddio. Mae ein pobl ifanc yn ei haeddu, ac mae Cymru'n ei fynnu.
Rwyf wedi dethol y gwelliant i'r cynnig, a dwi'n galw ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol i gynnig gwelliant 1.
I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice to move amendment 1.
Gwelliant 1—Jane Hutt
Dileu popeth a rhoi yn ei le:
Cynnig bod y Senedd:
1. Yn cefnogi’r ystod o gamau y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn eu cymryd i roi sylw i ddiben taliadau plant, megis y buddsoddiadau ychwanegol sy’n cael eu gwneud drwy gyllideb derfynol Llywodraeth Cymru 2025-26, gan gynnwys £30 miliwn yn ychwanegol ar gyfer gofal plant ac £1.4 miliwn ychwanegol ar gyfer gwaith i sicrhau bod pobl Cymru yn hawlio pob punt sy’n ddyledus iddynt.
2. Yn nodi’r ymrwymiad fel rhan o gyllideb derfynol Llywodraeth Cymru 2024-25 i drafod gyda Llywodraeth yr Alban i gael gwell dealltwriaeth o Daliad Plant yr Alban a’r ffordd mae’n gweithredu.
Amendment 1—Jane Hutt
Delete all and replace with:
To propose that the Senedd:
1. Supports the range of actions the Welsh Government is taking to address the purpose of a child payment such as the additional investments being made through the Welsh Government’s final budget for 2025-26, including an extra £30 million for childcare and additional £1.4 million for the work to ensure people in Wales are claiming every pound they are entitled to.
2. Notes the commitment as part of the Welsh Government’s final budget for 2024-25 to engage with the Scottish Government to better understand the Scottish Child Payment and how it operates.
Cynigiwyd gwelliant 1.
Amendment 1 moved.
Yn ffurfiol.
Formally.
Mae wedi ei wneud yn ffurfiol. Felly, Lesley Griffiths.
It's been formally moved. Therefore, I call on Lesley Griffiths.
Diolch, Llywydd. It is vital that the Welsh Government uses every lever available to it in order to reduce child poverty, whilst we, of course, recognise that we are dependent on the UK Government ensuring that its policies have the same effect, and that was certainly something we didn't see under successive Tory Governments.
One UK Government policy that I think would have a significant impact on reducing child poverty is the removal of the two-child benefit cap. And I really would urge the Welsh Government to continue to exert as much pressure as possible on the UK Government to do so, because it was a cruel policy when the Tories introduced it in 2017 and it remains a cruel policy in 2025.
Diolch, Lywydd. Mae'n hanfodol fod Llywodraeth Cymru yn defnyddio pob dull sydd ar gael iddi er mwyn lleihau tlodi plant, er ein bod, wrth gwrs, yn cydnabod ein bod yn ddibynnol ar Lywodraeth y DU i sicrhau bod ei pholisïau'n cael yr un effaith, ac roedd hynny'n sicr yn rhywbeth na welsom o dan Lywodraethau Torïaidd olynol.
Un polisi Llywodraeth y DU a fyddai'n cael effaith sylweddol ar leihau tlodi plant yw dileu'r cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau. Ac rwy'n annog Llywodraeth Cymru yn gryf i barhau i roi cymaint o bwysau â phosibl ar Lywodraeth y DU i wneud hynny, oherwydd roedd yn bolisi creulon pan gafodd ei gyflwyno gan y Torïaid yn 2017 ac mae'n parhau i fod yn bolisi creulon yn 2025.
Will you take an intervention? Thank you. For a short time, you were the Cabinet Secretary for social justice—did you make that ask of the UK Government?
A wnewch chi derbyn ymyriad? Diolch. Am gyfnod byr, roeddech chi'n Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyfiawnder cymdeithasol—a wnaethoch chi ofyn hynny i Lywodraeth y DU?
Absolutely I did, and if you remember—
Fe wneuthum hynny, yn sicr, ac os cofiwch—
And what was the response?
A beth oedd yr ateb?
I absolutely made that ask, because I think it's very important. Research I saw showed that it would lift thousands of children out of poverty, and I know that the Cabinet Secretary continues to try and exert that pressure, and that's why I'm encouraging her to continue to do so.
Fe wneuthum hynny yn sicr, oherwydd rwy'n credu ei fod yn bwysig iawn. Dangosodd ymchwil a welais y byddai'n codi miloedd o blant allan o dlodi, ac rwy'n gwybod bod Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn parhau i geisio pwyso yn y ffordd honno, a dyna pam rwy'n ei hannog i barhau i wneud hynny.
So, the response was 'no' from the UK Labour Government.
Felly, yr ymateb oedd 'na' gan Lywodraeth Lafur y DU.
Sorry, I wasn't a Minister with the Labour Government.
It is absolutely imperative that every pound that the Welsh Government spends to alleviate child poverty gives it the desired outcomes. It is difficult, sometimes, to stop programmes and introduce new ones, but I think what we need to see is some really bold action here. And now that we have two Labour Governments at either end of the M4, we need to make the most of the increased funding that we have seen come to the Welsh Government and ensure that any policies or initiatives to tackle child poverty are successful.
In relation to Welsh Government policies, next year's budget will, I know, build on additional investments such as universal free school meals, the holiday hunger programme and support for our foodbanks. So, I would be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary, in her response to this debate, updates Members on her officials' discussions with the Scottish Government regarding the Scottish child payment. This scheme has now been operating for a year, so has there been a meaningful assessment undertaken that will help the Welsh Government come to a policy position about the introduction of such a scheme here in Wales? I appreciate fully that the financial position would be for another day. Diolch.
Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, nid oeddwn yn Weinidog gyda'r Llywodraeth Lafur.
Mae'n gwbl hanfodol fod pob punt y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei gwario ar leddfu tlodi plant yn rhoi'r canlyniadau a ddymunir. Mae'n anodd, weithiau, dod â rhaglenni i ben a chyflwyno rhai newydd, ond rwy'n credu mai'r hyn sydd angen inni ei weld yw gweithredu beiddgar iawn yma. A chan fod gennym ddwy Lywodraeth Lafur ar y naill ben a'r llall i'r M4 bellach, mae angen inni wneud y gorau o'r cyllid cynyddol a welsom yn dod i Lywodraeth Cymru a sicrhau bod unrhyw bolisïau neu gynlluniau i fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant yn llwyddiannus.
Mewn perthynas â pholisïau Llywodraeth Cymru, bydd cyllideb y flwyddyn nesaf, rwy'n gwybod, yn adeiladu ar fuddsoddiadau ychwanegol megis prydau ysgol am ddim i bawb, y rhaglen llwgu yn ystod y gwyliau a chefnogaeth i'n banciau bwyd. Felly, hoffwn pe bai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, yn ei hymateb i'r ddadl hon, yn rhoi'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf i'r Aelodau am drafodaethau ei swyddogion gyda Llywodraeth yr Alban ynglŷn â thaliad plant yr Alban. Mae'r cynllun hwn bellach wedi bod yn gweithredu ers blwyddyn, felly a oes asesiad ystyrlon wedi'i gynnal a fydd yn helpu Llywodraeth Cymru i ddod i safbwynt polisi ynglŷn â chyflwyno cynllun o'r fath yma yng Nghymru? Rwy'n deall yn iawn y byddai'n rhaid trafod y sefyllfa ariannol rywdro eto. Diolch.
As we've heard, one child in three—that's what poverty means in Wales today, not some abstract statistic, not a line on a graph; real children, with names and faces and dreams, trapped in circumstances that crush hope as surely as the empty stomachs. Across our nation, parents make impossible choices daily: heat or eat? Warm coats or full lunch boxes? Dignity or despair? This isn't happening in some distant land, it's happening here on our doorstep, in our midst. We call Wales a nation of compassion. We celebrate our solidarity, our sense of justice, but what justice allows one child in three to grow up knowing only hardship? What compassion permits talent to wither and potentially to die before it's even had the chance to grow? Make no mistake, child poverty, as we've heard, isn't inevitable, it's a political choice, and we in this Chamber can make a different choice. Scotland has. Their child payment has turned the tide, not through complex schemes or vague targets, but through direct action that puts money into the pockets of those families who need it most. While child poverty rises across these islands, in Scotland, it falls. That's not coincidence, that's not luck, that's political will made real.
The Government of Wales Act 2006 gives us that power. Our existing budgets give us the means, if we have the courage to prioritise what truly matters. Ten pounds a week per child, through Cynnal—the Welsh child payment would transform lives. Some people might think that, for them, £10 is insignificant. Well, I'll tell you this, £10 can mean a child sleeping warm at night. It means a kitchen cupboard that isn't bare by month's end. It means the chance of dignity—that precious thing that poverty strips away first and most cruelly. This isn't charity we propose, this is justice, this is investment in our collective future. Every pound spent lifting a child from poverty produces a return many times over, in better health, better education, greater prosperity. The economic case is overwhelming, but the moral case is unanswerable. I've heard some of the excuses: too difficult, too expensive, too complex. But when the history of this moment is written, these excuses will ring hollow indeed. What price do you put on a child's future? What budget priority ranks higher than ending the scandal of children going hungry in a wealthy nation? I've sat in this Chamber and heard the words, fine words, about Welsh values, about our compassion, about our commitment to future generations. But values without action are merely sentiment, and sentiment never filled an empty stomach or warmed a freezing home. Scotland found the will. Scotland found the way. Are we in Wales to confess that we care less for our children, that we lack the courage to follow where others have led?
The choice before us is simple. We can continue to manage poverty or we can begin to end it. We can draft another strategy or we can deliver tangible change. We can offer more sympathy or we can provide real support. So, let us today resolve, tonight, to create the Welsh child payment, not as a political gesture but as a covenant with our children. A covenant that says poverty will not be your inheritance. A covenant that says your birthplace will not determine your future. A covenant that says that the measure of our nation is how we treat our most vulnerable. History will judge us, not by our words but by our deeds, and when that judgment comes, let it be said of our Senedd, 'They saw what needed to be done, and they did it.'
Fel y clywsom, un plentyn o bob tri—dyna beth yw ystyr tlodi yng Nghymru heddiw, nid rhyw ystadegyn haniaethol, nid llinell ar graff; plant go iawn, gydag enwau ac wynebau a breuddwydion, wedi'u caethiwo mewn amgylchiadau sy'n chwalu gobeithion mor sicr â stumogau gwag. Ar draws ein gwlad, mae rhieni'n gwneud dewisiadau amhosibl bob dydd: gwresogi neu fwyta? Cotiau cynnes neu focsys bwyd llawn? Urddas neu anobaith? Nid mewn gwlad bell y mae hyn yn digwydd, mae'n digwydd yma ar garreg ein drws, yn ein plith. Rydym yn galw Cymru yn genedl dosturiol. Rydym yn dathlu ein hundod, ein synnwyr o gyfiawnder, ond pa gyfiawnder sy'n caniatáu i un plentyn o bob tri dyfu i fyny gan adnabod dim byd ond caledi? Pa dosturi sy'n caniatáu i dalent ddiflannu ac o bosibl i farw cyn iddo gael cyfle i dyfu hyd yn oed? Peidiwch â chamgymryd, fel y clywsom, nid yw tlodi plant yn anochel, mae'n ddewis gwleidyddol, a gallwn ni yn y Siambr hon wneud dewis gwahanol. Mae'r Alban wedi gwneud hynny. Mae eu taliad plant wedi troi'r llanw, nid drwy gynlluniau cymhleth neu dargedau amwys, ond drwy weithredu uniongyrchol sy'n rhoi arian ym mhocedi'r teuluoedd sydd ei angen fwyaf. Wrth i dlodi plant gynyddu ar draws yr ynysoedd hyn, yn yr Alban, mae'n gostwng. Nid cyd-ddigwyddiad yw hynny, nid lwc, ewyllys wleidyddol wedi'i gwireddu yw hynny.
Mae Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru 2006 yn rhoi'r pŵer hwnnw i ni. Mae ein cyllidebau presennol yn rhoi'r modd i ni, os ydym yn ddigon dewr i flaenoriaethu'r hyn sy'n wirioneddol bwysig. Deg punt yr wythnos y plentyn, drwy Cynnal—byddai taliad plant Cymru yn trawsnewid bywydau. Efallai y bydd rhai pobl yn meddwl bod £10 yn bitw iddynt. Wel, fe ddywedaf hyn wrthych, gall £10 olygu bod plentyn yn cysgu'n gynnes yn y nos. Mae'n golygu cwpwrdd cegin nad yw'n wag cyn diwedd y mis. Mae'n golygu gobaith o urddas—y peth gwerthfawr hwnnw y mae tlodi'n cael ei wared yn gyntaf ac yn fwyaf creulon. Nid elusen yw'r hyn a gynigiwn, ond cyfiawnder, buddsoddiad yn ein dyfodol ni i gyd. Mae pob punt a werir yn codi plentyn o dlodi yn cynhyrchu enillion sawl gwaith drosodd, mewn gwell iechyd, gwell addysg, mwy o ffyniant. Mae'r achos economaidd yn llethol, ond mae'r achos moesol yn ddiymwad. Clywais rai o'r esgusodion: rhy anodd, rhy ddrud, rhy gymhleth. Ond pan fydd hanes y foment hon wedi'i ysgrifennu, bydd yr esgusodion hyn yn swnio'n wag iawn. Pa bris a roddwch ar ddyfodol plentyn? Pa flaenoriaeth gyllidebol sy'n uwch na dod â sgandal plant yn llwgu mewn gwlad gyfoethog i ben? Rwyf wedi eistedd yn y Siambr hon a chlywed y geiriau, geiriau cynnes, am werthoedd Cymru, am ein tosturi, am ein hymrwymiad i genedlaethau'r dyfodol. Ond dim ond teimlad yw gwerthoedd heb weithredoedd, ac nid yw teimlad byth yn llenwi stumog wag nac yn cynhesu cartref rhewllyd. Daeth yr Alban o hyd i'r ewyllys. Daeth yr Alban o hyd i'r ffordd. A ydym ni yng Nghymru'n cyfaddef ein bod yn malio llai am ein plant, nad ydym yn ddigon dewr i ddilyn lle mae eraill wedi arwain?
Mae'r dewis ger ein bron yn syml. Gallwn barhau i reoli tlodi neu gallwn ddechrau rhoi diwedd arno. Gallwn ddrafftio strategaeth arall neu gallwn gyflawni newid diriaethol. Gallwn gynnig mwy o gydymdeimlad neu gallwn ddarparu cefnogaeth go iawn. Felly, gadewch inni benderfynu heddiw, heno, ein bod yn creu taliad plant Cymru, nid fel ystum wleidyddol ond fel cyfamod â'n plant. Cyfamod sy'n dweud nad tlodi fydd yr hyn a etifeddwch. Cyfamod sy'n dweud nad lle cawsoch chi eich geni sy'n mynd i benderfynu eich dyfodol. Cyfamod sy'n dweud mai mesur o'n cenedl yw sut rydym yn trin ein pobl fwyaf agored i niwed. Bydd hanes yn ein barnu ni, nid yn ôl ein geiriau ond yn ôl ein gweithredoedd, a phan ddaw'r farn honno, gadewch iddi ddweud am ein Senedd, 'Fe welsant beth oedd angen ei wneud, ac fe'i gwnaethant.'
As we know, poverty isn't just about lacking basic goods, lacking services or lacking social participation. It's also about the limited opportunity to improve one's own economic situation, the limited opportunity to withstand economic changes, and the limited opportunity to prevent future generations from experiencing the same cycle.
For decades the Welsh Government have tried to reduce poverty, especially child poverty, by attempting to increase living standards through financial aid. However, this approach is limited because it can only really provide temporary relief. Economic shocks like the 2008 financial crash, COVID-19 and even the current war in Ukraine will, I'm afraid, always feature. Therefore, the economically vulnerable and those living in poverty almost always are continuously exposed. And whilst I believe that providing financial assistance is important to relieve poverty, we have to face the fact that it will always require more and more money.
The Welsh Government have also attempted to increase the services available to those in poverty and reduce the stigma associated with it, in the hope that people will be able to access work, feel more positive and improve their situation. But this, however noble the intention, hasn't worked. The poverty rates in Wales are persistently stagnant, and I would argue that the reason for this is that they have fundamentally failed to grasp and properly address some of the root causes as to why this poverty cycle continues. Some of the most advanced research within this field—and this chimes with what I've previously discussed in this chamber—shows that factors such as speech and language development play just an important role in poverty creation as ever more well-known factors. Struggles in language development affect executive function and memory and the neurological stress found in adults with poor language skills means that they face challenges that others don't, in terms of securing employment, in terms of advancing to higher paying positions and even in terms of making financial decisions, all of which we probably take for granted in this Chamber and give no second thought to.
The cycle continues across generations and shows how important it is to take a wider look at poverty and indeed child poverty across Wales. The evidence shows that parents with poor language skills use less effective communication, leading their children to also struggle with language development. If we are to break the cycle of poverty, we need to fundamentally improve how we look at the root societal causes of it. I honestly think that speech and language development is key. This is something that I've repeatedly called for in this Chamber, and we have all seen the evidence that shows it is at the heart of many of our societal problems. We just have to look at the numbers that are in the youth and adult criminal justice system who suffer from speech and language difficulties.
Ultimately, Plaid Cymru's proposed child payment won't solve these issues in the long term. I have no doubt that it may provide some financial relief, but with water bills up 27 per cent, council tax up on average just over 7 per cent and energy bills up by £111 per year, this money will be quickly absorbed. It won't be enough to permanently lift families out of poverty and, as we have seen in Scotland, will need to be continually raised. So, I'm concerned that whilst it might help meet the statistical criteria for children who no longer will be in poverty, it won't fundamentally change their long-term prospects. It won't help prevent them from poverty in the future.
Llywydd, to eradicate child poverty we must break the intergenerational cycle by addressing its root causes. High child poverty rates persist because we haven't tackled these fundamental issues. Successive Governments have focused on larger welfare payments without sufficiently investing in solutions to eliminate poverty's root causes, trapping too many people in a cycle of poverty and dependency.
I was disappointed that the amendments our group proposed were not accepted, as they would have gone some way in trying to address some of these issues. They recognise that poverty trap of worklessness that exists due to the high cost and poor availability of childcare. Many parents who have what we would class as good-paying jobs will still look at the cost of childcare as prohibitive to work, because it is more than they earn, and whilst the Welsh Government have made considered efforts to address this, I think substantially more is needed.
Scotland, as we have heard, has seen a 4 per cent drop in child poverty, but we need to be cautious with this statistic. They have failed to meet their legally binding targets, child poverty still remains high, and relative child poverty, after housing costs, actually rose, and so too did levels of persistent poverty. Many are calling it a failure. Oxfam Scotland have called it a 'national embarrassment'. IPPR Scotland's research also shows that reducing child poverty by just another 4 per cent would require doubling the payment to £52 per child per week, adding £500 million to the budget by 2030. This is unaffordable.
In Wales, with 550,000 children under 15, if the 30 per cent who live in child poverty qualified for the £26.70 weekly payment, it would cost £4.4 million per week or £230 million per year. Plaid Cymru's token payment of £10 a week, as was initially the case in Scotland, is utterly pointless and it can only last for just over a year and a half without more funding.
Llywydd, we need a serious discussion on eliminating child poverty in this Chamber, but this is not it. It is nothing more, in my opinion, than blatant electioneering. Child payments will never address the root causes of poverty. They will never break the generational cycle and they will never deliver long-term prosperity, all of which we must try to do if we are to end child poverty. Thank you.
Fel y gwyddom, mae tlodi'n ymwneud â mwy na diffyg nwyddau sylfaenol, diffyg gwasanaethau neu ddiffyg cyfranogiad cymdeithasol. Mae hefyd yn ymwneud â'r cyfle cyfyngedig i wella sefyllfa economaidd bersonol, y cyfle cyfyngedig i wrthsefyll newidiadau economaidd, a'r cyfle cyfyngedig i atal cenedlaethau'r dyfodol rhag profi'r un cylch.
Ers degawdau mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi ceisio lleihau tlodi, yn enwedig tlodi plant, drwy geisio gwella safonau byw drwy gymorth ariannol. Fodd bynnag, mae'r dull hwn yn gyfyngedig am mai dim ond rhyddhad dros dro y gall ei gynnig. Bydd siociau economaidd fel cwymp ariannol 2008, COVID-19 a hyd yn oed y rhyfel presennol yn Wcráin bob amser i'w teimlo, mae arnaf ofn. Felly, mae'r rhai sy'n fregus yn economaidd a'r rhai sy'n byw mewn tlodi bron bob amser yn agored i niwed. Ac er fy mod yn credu bod darparu cymorth ariannol yn bwysig i leddfu tlodi, mae'n rhaid inni wynebu'r ffaith y bydd angen mwy a mwy o arian bob amser i wneud hynny.
Mae Llywodraeth Cymru hefyd wedi ceisio cynyddu'r gwasanaethau sydd ar gael i'r rhai sy'n byw mewn tlodi a lleihau'r stigma sy'n gysylltiedig â hynny, yn y gobaith y bydd pobl yn gallu cael mynediad at waith, teimlo'n fwy cadarnhaol a gwella eu sefyllfa. Ond er mor wych yw'r bwriad, nid yw hyn wedi gweithio. Mae'r cyfraddau tlodi yng Nghymru yn parhau'n ddigyfnewid, a byddwn yn dadlau mai'r rheswm am hyn yw eu bod wedi methu deall a mynd i'r afael yn briodol â rhai o'r achosion sylfaenol pam y mae cylch tlodi'n parhau. Mae peth o'r ymchwil fwyaf datblygedig yn y maes hwn—ac mae hyn yn cyd-fynd â'r hyn a drafodais o'r blaen yn y siambr hon—yn dangos bod ffactorau fel datblygiad lleferydd ac iaith yn chwarae rhan lawn mor bwysig yn creu tlodi ag y mae ffactorau mwy cyfarwydd. Mae trafferthion gyda datblygiad iaith yn effeithio ar weithrediad yr ymennydd a'r cof ac mae'r straen niwrolegol a welir mewn oedolion â sgiliau iaith gwael yn golygu eu bod yn wynebu heriau nad yw eraill yn eu hwynebu wrth ddod o hyd i waith, a chamu ymlaen i swyddi sy'n talu mwy a hyd yn oed wrth wneud penderfyniadau ariannol, pethau rydym yn debygol o fod yn eu cymryd yn ganiataol yn y Siambr hon a phethau nad ydym yn meddwl ddwywaith amdanynt.
Mae'r cylch yn parhau ar draws y cenedlaethau ac yn dangos pa mor bwysig yw hi i edrych yn ehangach ar dlodi, ac ar dlodi plant yn wir, ledled Cymru. Mae'r dystiolaeth yn dangos bod rhieni â sgiliau iaith gwael yn cyfathrebu'n llai effeithiol, gan olygu bod eu plant hefyd yn cael trafferth gyda datblygiad iaith. Os ydym am dorri cylch tlodi, mae angen inni wella'n sylfaenol y ffordd yr edrychwn ar ei achosion cymdeithasol sylfaenol. Rwy'n credu'n onest fod datblygiad lleferydd ac iaith yn allweddol. Mae hyn yn rhywbeth y gelwais amdano dro ar ôl tro yn y Siambr hon, ac rydym i gyd wedi gweld y dystiolaeth sy'n dangos ei fod yn ganolog i lawer o'n problemau cymdeithasol. Nid oes ond angen inni edrych ar y niferoedd sydd yn y system cyfiawnder troseddol ieuenctid ac oedolion sy'n dioddef o anawsterau lleferydd ac iaith.
Yn y pen draw, ni fydd taliad plant arfaethedig Plaid Cymru yn datrys y materion hyn yn y tymor hir. Nid oes gennyf unrhyw amheuaeth y gallai roi rhywfaint o ryddhad ariannol, ond gyda biliau dŵr i fyny 27 y cant, y dreth gyngor i fyny ychydig dros 7 y cant ar gyfartaledd a biliau ynni i fyny £111 y flwyddyn, bydd yr arian hwn yn cael ei amsugno'n gyflym. Ni fydd yn ddigon i godi teuluoedd allan o dlodi'n barhaol ac fel y gwelsom yn yr Alban, bydd angen ei godi'n barhaus. Felly, er y gallai helpu i fodloni'r meini prawf ystadegol ar gyfer plant na fydd mewn tlodi mwyach, rwy'n bryderus na fydd yn newid eu rhagolygon hirdymor yn sylfaenol. Ni fydd yn helpu i'w hatal rhag tlodi yn y dyfodol.
Lywydd, er mwyn dileu tlodi plant rhaid inni dorri'r cylch rhwng cenedlaethau drwy fynd i'r afael â'i achosion sylfaenol. Mae cyfraddau tlodi plant uchel yn parhau am nad ydym wedi mynd i'r afael â'r materion sylfaenol hyn. Mae Llywodraethau olynol wedi canolbwyntio ar daliadau lles mwy heb fuddsoddi'n ddigonol mewn atebion i ddileu achosion sylfaenol tlodi, gan gaethiwo gormod o bobl mewn cylch o dlodi a dibyniaeth.
Roeddwn yn siomedig na chafodd y gwelliannau a gynigiodd ein grŵp mo'u derbyn, gan y byddent wedi mynd rywfaint o'r ffordd i geisio mynd i'r afael â rhai o'r materion hyn. Maent yn cydnabod y trap tlodi o ddiweithdra sy'n bodoli oherwydd cost uchel ac argaeledd gwael gofal plant. Bydd llawer o rieni sydd â'r hyn y byddem yn eu hystyried yn swyddi sy'n talu'n dda yn dal i edrych ar gost gofal plant fel rhywbeth sy'n eu gwahardd rhag gweithio, am ei fod yn fwy na'r hyn a enillant, ac er bod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi gwneud ymdrechion da i fynd i'r afael â hyn, rwy'n credu bod angen llawer mwy.
Fel y clywsom, mae'r Alban wedi gweld gostyngiad o 4 y cant mewn tlodi plant, ond mae angen inni fod yn ofalus gyda'r ystadegyn hwn. Maent wedi methu cyflawni eu targedau cyfreithiol rwymol, mae tlodi plant yn dal i fod yn uchel, ac mae tlodi plant cymharol, ar ôl costau tai, wedi codi, ac felly hefyd lefelau tlodi parhaus. Mae llawer yn ei alw'n fethiant. Mae Oxfam Scotland wedi ei alw'n 'embaras cenedlaethol '. Mae ymchwil IPPR Scotland hefyd yn dangos y byddai lleihau tlodi plant 4 y cant arall yn galw am ddyblu'r taliad i £52 y plentyn yr wythnos, gan ychwanegu £500 miliwn at y gyllideb erbyn 2030. Mae hyn yn anfforddiadwy.
Yng Nghymru, gyda 550,000 o blant dan 15 oed, pe bai'r 30 y cant sy'n byw mewn tlodi plant yn gymwys ar gyfer y taliad wythnosol o £26.70, byddai'n costio £4.4 miliwn yr wythnos neu £230 miliwn y flwyddyn. Mae taliad symbolaidd Plaid Cymru o £10 yr wythnos, fel yr oedd yn yr Alban i ddechrau, yn gwbl ddibwynt a dim ond am ychydig dros flwyddyn a hanner y gall bara heb fwy o gyllid.
Lywydd, mae angen trafodaeth ddifrifol ar ddileu tlodi plant yn y Siambr hon, ond nid hon yw'r ddadl honno. Yn fy marn i, nid yw'n ddim mwy nag ymgyrchu cyn etholiad. Ni fydd taliadau plant byth yn mynd i'r afael ag achosion sylfaenol tlodi. Ni fyddant byth yn torri'r cylch sy'n pontio'r cenedlaethau ac ni fyddant byth yn cyflawni ffyniant hirdymor, ac mae'n rhaid inni geisio gwneud hynny i gyd os ydym am roi diwedd ar dlodi plant. Diolch.
Mae yna fyth yn bodoli rywsut fod tlodi yn bodoli mewn ardaloedd trefol ôl-ddiwydiannol, ond mae'r dystiolaeth yn dangos bod plant mewn ardaloedd gwledig yr un mor debygol o ddioddef o effeithiau tlodi â'u cymheiriaid sydd yn byw mewn dinasoedd a threfi mawrion. Ymhlith y pum awdurdod lleol sydd â'r cyfraddau tlodi plant uchaf yng Nghymru mae Ynys Môn a Cheredigion, y ddau yn awdurdodau gwledig yn bennaf.
Mae cyfraddau tlodi plant yng nghefn gwlad Cymru wedi gwaethygu, wrth gwrs, yn ddiweddar oherwydd yr argyfwng costau byw, y cap dau blentyn a'r cynnydd mewn yswiriant gwladol, sydd wedi'i deimlo yn fwy difrifol gan aelwydydd gwledig. Mae'r aelwydydd hyn wedi cael eu taro gan yr hyn y mae Sefydliad Bevan wedi ei alw yn wasgfa driphlyg o gostau uchel, incwm isel a chymorth cyfyngedig gan y wladwriaeth.
There is a myth that somehow poverty exists in post-industrial urban areas, but the evidence shows that children in rural areas are just as likely to suffer the effects of poverty as their peers who live in cities and large towns. Among the five local authorities that have the highest rates of child poverty in Wales are Ynys Môn and Ceredigion, both of which are rural authorities in the main.
Child poverty rates in rural Wales have worsened, of course, in recent times because of the cost-of-living crisis, the two-child benefit cap and the national insurance rise, which has been felt more seriously by rural households. These households have been struck by what the Bevan Foundation calls the triple squeeze of high costs, low income and limited support from the state.
The net result is that across rural Wales, thousands of children are growing up in households with high expenditure and low incomes, many of them forced to choose between heating and eating, as we've already heard.
We know that child poverty has an impact that can last a lifetime. It has lasting consequences for physical and mental health, confidence and self-esteem and education attainment. It can also impact subsequent career paths as well. So, as Plaid Cymru's education spokesperson, it'll come as no surprise that the impact of poverty on educational attainment is of particular concern to me. In 2021-22, pupils eligible for free school meals were 28 percentage points less likely to get an A* to a C grade at GCSE than pupils not eligible for free school meals. In Programme for International Student Assessment results, pupils from disadvantaged households were ranked amongst the lowest in the UK. And there's been a significant reduction in university applications from students living in deprived communities.
This is the legacy of the Welsh Government's failure to tackle child poverty, condemning a whole generation to chronic underachievement, condemning them also to missed opportunities and diminishing aspiration. In rural Wales, these effects are compounded by a lack of opportunities for young people in terms of access to work, to training and further education, which are reflected in patterns of youth out-migration.
Y canlyniad net yw bod miloedd o blant yn tyfu i fyny mewn cartrefi gyda gwariant uchel ac incwm isel, a llawer ohonynt yn cael eu gorfodi i ddewis rhwng gwresogi a bwyta, fel y clywsom eisoes.
Rydym yn gwybod bod tlodi plant yn cael effaith sy'n gallu para am oes. Mae'n cael canlyniadau parhaol i iechyd corfforol a meddyliol, hyder a hunan-barch a chyrhaeddiad addysgol. Gall hefyd effeithio ar lwybrau gyrfa dilynol hefyd. Felly, fel llefarydd Plaid Cymru ar addysg, ni fydd yn syndod fod effaith tlodi ar gyrhaeddiad addysgol yn peri pryder arbennig i mi. Yn 2021-22, roedd disgyblion sy'n gymwys i gael prydau ysgol am ddim 28 pwynt canran yn llai tebygol o gael gradd A* i radd C yn eu harholiadau TGAU na disgyblion nad oeddent yn gymwys i gael prydau ysgol am ddim. Yng nghanlyniadau'r Rhaglen Ryngwladol Asesu Myfyrwyr, roedd disgyblion o aelwydydd difreintiedig ymhlith yr isaf yn y DU. Ac mae gostyngiad sylweddol wedi bod yn nifer y ceisiadau prifysgol gan fyfyrwyr sy'n byw mewn cymunedau difreintiedig.
Dyma waddol methiant Llywodraeth Cymru i fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant, gan gondemnio cenhedlaeth gyfan i dangyflawniad cronig, a'u condemnio hefyd i gyfleoedd a gollwyd a dyheadau sy'n lleihau. Yng nghefn gwlad Cymru, mae'r effeithiau hyn yn waeth yn sgil diffyg cyfleoedd i bobl ifanc gael mynediad at waith, hyfforddiant ac addysg bellach, a gaiff ei adlewyrchu ym mhatrymau allfudo pobl ifanc.
Bydd mynd i'r afael â thlodi plant yng Nghymru ac yn y cymunedau gwledig rwy'n eu cynrychioli yn benodol yn gofyn am ddull gweithredu penodol wedi'i dargedu ac yn strategol, un sy'n ei gydnabod fel her polisi penodol ac sy'n mynd law yn llaw ag ymdrech o'r newydd i hybu bywiogrwydd economaidd a chyfleoedd, yn enwedig i bobl ifanc i aros yn eu cymunedau gwledig.
Y llynedd, fe gyhoeddais i strategaeth tlodi gwledig, ac ymhlith y mesurau roeddwn i'n hamlinellu yn y strategaeth honno oedd taliad plentyn tebyg i'r Alban, sef pwrpas ein cynnig ni y prynhawn yma. Mae'r rheswm yn syml: mae'r holl tystiolaeth—ac rwy'n golygu'r holl tystiolaeth—yn dangos taw taliadau arian parod i deuluoedd tlawd yw'r ffordd unigol orau o frwydro yn erbyn tlodi. Mae gan Lywodraeth bresennol Cymru gyfle hanesyddol yma i'n cefnogi ni a gweithio gyda ni i ddatblygu taliad plentyn sy'n cyflawni i Gymru mewn ardaloedd gwledig a rhai trefol.
Fel rŷn ni wedi clywed yn barod, mae'r dystiolaeth yn dangos ei fod e'n gweithio i yrru lefelau tlodi i lawr. Ond dyw dileu ein cynnig ni, fel ŷch chi wedi'i wneud, ddim yn awgrymu i fi eich bod am gymryd y mater hwn o ddifri. Felly, os dŷch chi, Llywodraeth, ddim yn fodlon gwneud hyn, gaf i awgrymu, felly, y dylech chi wneud lle i Lywodraeth Cymru newydd sydd yn fodlon mynd i'r afael â'r heriau penodol yma, a mynd i'r afael â'r mater mwyaf sydd yn ein hwynebu ni fel cenedl?
Tackling child poverty in Wales and in the rural communities that I represent will require a specific approach that is targeted and strategic and that recognises this as a specific policy challenge and that goes hand in hand with a new effort to boost the economy and opportunities, particularly for young people to remain in their rural communities.
Last year, I published a rural poverty strategy, and among the measures that I outlined in that strategy was a child payment similar to the one in Scotland, namely the purpose of our motion this afternoon. The reason is simple: all of the evidence—and I mean all of the evidence—shows that cash payments to poor families are the best single way of combatting poverty. The current Welsh Government has an historic opportunity here to support us and to work with us to develop a child payment that delivers for Wales in rural areas and in urban areas.
As we've already heard, the evidence shows that it does work to drive down poverty levels. But deleting our motion, as you've suggested, doesn't suggest to me that you are taking this seriously. So, if you, as a Government, are not willing to do this, could I suggest that you should stand aside and make room for a new Welsh Government that is willing to tackle these specific challenges and tackle the greatest issue facing us as a nation?
I do thank Plaid Cymru for bringing this forward this evening. And with the greatest of respect to Joel and the Conservative Party, if you would like to bring a debate forward to look at a resolution on child poverty, we'd all like to hear it and we'd all like to partake in it. There's a responsibility on all of us to make sure that we have that debate and that we listen to each other and that we listen to ideas; so please, perhaps after Easter, we'll see the Conservatives outlining a motion that you would like to bring to reduce child poverty.
Poverty is not just about lack of food, not just about lack of heat, not just about lack of clothes; it's about the stress that it brings to you if you can't afford to find the money. As we've heard, the Scottish Government's child payment scheme actually reduces stress, as well as ensures that children have enough food on their plates.
Listen to the experience of one mother in Scotland who was interviewed by Nesta, a charity who conducted research on the Scottish child payment scheme. She said that the payment
'did lessen my worries quite a lot to be honest. Money's the one thing I'm always stressing about, always thinking about, always worrying about. It was a relief to have that extra boost.'
She was a young care-experienced mother with three children. Another said that the Scottish child payment helps with
'not having to stress out because you know it's coming. When I get stressed, I don't sleep. I don’t deal well with stress. I don't want the kids to see me stressed.'
Again, a single parent who is very young.
Forty-five per cent of children aged seven to 11 and 26 per cent of young people aged 12 to 18 told the children's commissioner here in Wales that they worry about having enough to eat. Thirty-six per cent of parents here in Wales worry about their children having enough food. I have to say, I think most of us in this Siambr have never had to think about that. As a child protection social worker, I met many families who were simply stressed out by lack of money. They then, sadly, took behaviour that they didn't want to take, because that was a way of them dealing with the stress of not knowing where the next meal was coming from. We know that debt results in stress and anxiety.
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation cited the child payment in Scotland as contributing, as we've heard, directly to lower levels of child poverty. The success of that payment in Scotland shows that targeted financial support makes a significant difference. So, the evidence is there. We don't need to find the evidence here in Wales—it's already there. We don't need a committee. We don't need a specialist purpose group. We know exactly what's needed to help reduce child poverty here in Wales. It is time for us to adopt a Welsh child payment here in Wales to ensure that no child goes hungry and that every parent can deliver food to their children. So, it's disappointing that here we are, seeing that what Labour does best is a delete-all motion and stifling debate in this Siambr. That's, of course, your prerogative, but the rhetoric is getting so stale, and the people of Wales are getting tired, and what's more important to me, and I think many of us, is that our children continue to go hungry: 31 per cent—31 per cent—of our children. And it's going up; it's not going down. I note in your delete-all that there is a commitment of the Welsh Government’s final budget for 2024-25—that is the year that's just gone, I think—to engage with the Scottish Government to better understand the Scottish child payment and how it operates. Therefore, would you, Cabinet Secretary, please give an update here to the Siambr on what you found in engaging with the Scottish Government on their child payment?
Secondly, as has been said by Sioned, could you tell us once again why we've no targets here in Wales? Why we've no ambition? I know it may seem stale and, again, we keep repeating this, but, without targets, we have no ambition. We have to start now. We have to start now, because, unless we do that, the 31 per cent will be 35 per cent before we know it. Reducing child poverty has to be the most important thing to us all, and I look forward to your response. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Diolch i Blaid Cymru am gyflwyno hyn heno. A chyda'r parch mwyaf i Joel a'r Blaid Geidwadol, os hoffech chi gyflwyno dadl i edrych ar ddatrys tlodi plant, hoffem i gyd ei chlywed a byddai pawb ohonom am gymryd rhan ynddi. Mae cyfrifoldeb ar bob un ohonom i wneud yn siŵr ein bod yn cael y ddadl honno a'n bod ni'n gwrando ar ein gilydd ac yn gwrando ar syniadau; felly os gwelwch yn dda, ar ôl y Pasg efallai, fe welwn y Ceidwadwyr yn amlinellu cynnig yr hoffech ei gyflwyno ar leihau tlodi plant.
Nid ymwneud â diffyg bwyd, diffyg gwres, diffyg dillad yn unig y mae tlodi; mae'n ymwneud â'r straen y mae'n ei hachosi i chi os na allwch fforddio dod o hyd i'r arian. Fel y clywsom, mae cynllun taliadau plant Llywodraeth yr Alban yn lleihau straen, yn ogystal â sicrhau bod gan blant ddigon o fwyd ar eu platiau.
Gwrandewch ar brofiad un fam yn yr Alban a gafodd ei chyfweld gan Nesta, elusen a wnaeth waith ymchwil ar gynllun taliadau plant yr Alban. Dywedodd fod y taliad
'wedi lleihau fy ngofidiau gryn dipyn a bod yn onest. Arian yw'r un peth sydd bob amser yn achosi straen i mi, yr hyn rwyf i bob amser yn meddwl amdano, bob amser yn poeni amdano. Roedd yn rhyddhad cael yr hwb ychwanegol hwnnw.'
Mam ifanc â phrofiad o ofal a chanddi dri o blant oedd hi. Dywedodd un arall fod taliad plant yr Alban yn helpu gyda
'pheidio â gorfod teimlo straen am eich bod chi'n gwybod ei fod yn dod. Pan fyddaf i'n teimlo dan straen, nid wyf yn cysgu. Nid wyf yn ymdopi'n dda â straen. Nid wyf eisiau i'r plant fy ngweld dan straen.'
Unwaith eto, rhiant sengl sy'n ifanc iawn.
Dywedodd 45 y cant o blant rhwng saith ac 11 oed a 26 y cant o bobl ifanc rhwng 12 a 18 oed wrth y comisiynydd plant yma yng Nghymru eu bod yn poeni ynglŷn â chael digon i'w fwyta. Mae 36 y cant o rieni yma yng Nghymru yn poeni a yw eu plant yn cael digon o fwyd. Rhaid imi ddweud, nid wyf yn credu bod y rhan fwyaf ohonom yn y Siambr erioed wedi gorfod meddwl am hynny. Fel gweithiwr cymdeithasol amddiffyn plant, cyfarfûm â llawer o deuluoedd a oedd dan straen oherwydd prinder arian. Yna, yn anffodus, byddent yn ymddwyn mewn ffyrdd nad oeddent am ei wneud, am fod honno'n ffordd o ymdopi â'r straen o beidio â gwybod o ble y dôi'r pryd nesaf. Fe wyddom fod dyled yn arwain at straen a phryder.
Cyfeiriodd Sefydliad Joseph Rowntree at y taliad plant yn yr Alban fel rhywbeth sy'n cyfrannu'n uniongyrchol, fel y clywsom, at lefelau is o dlodi plant. Mae llwyddiant y taliad yn yr Alban yn dangos bod cymorth ariannol wedi'i dargedu yn gwneud gwahaniaeth sylweddol. Felly, mae'r dystiolaeth yno. Nid oes angen inni ddod o hyd i'r dystiolaeth yma yng Nghymru—mae hi yno eisoes. Nid oes angen pwyllgor arnom. Nid oes angen grŵp diben arbennig arnom. Rydym yn gwybod yn union beth sydd ei angen i helpu i leihau tlodi plant yma yng Nghymru. Mae'n bryd inni fabwysiadu taliadau plant Cymru yma yng Nghymru er mwyn sicrhau nad oes unrhyw blentyn yn llwglyd a bod pob rhiant yn gallu darparu bwyd i'w plant. Felly, mae'n siomedig ein bod ni lle rydym, yn gweld mai'r hyn y mae Llafur yn ei wneud orau yw cynnig dileu popeth a mygu dadl yn y Siambr. Mae gennych chi hawl i wneud hynny wrth gwrs, ond mae'n rhethreg dreuliedig, ac mae pobl Cymru yn blino, a'r hyn sy'n bwysicach i mi, ac i lawer ohonom, rwy'n credu, yw bod ein plant yn parhau i fynd yn llwglyd: 31 y cant—31 y cant—o'n plant. Ac mae'n codi; nid yw'n gostwng. Rwy'n nodi yn eich gwelliant dileu popeth fod yna ymrwymiad yng nghyllideb derfynol Llywodraeth Cymru ar gyfer 2024-25—y flwyddyn sydd newydd orffen, rwy'n meddwl—i drafod gyda Llywodraeth yr Alban i gael gwell dealltwriaeth o daliad plant yr Alban a'r ffordd y mae'n gweithredu. Felly, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a wnewch chi roi'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf i'r Siambr ar yr hyn a ddarganfuoch chi wrth drafod eu taliadau plant gyda Llywodraeth yr Alban?
Yn ail, fel y dywedodd Sioned nawr, a wnewch chi ddweud wrthym unwaith eto pam nad oes gennym dargedau yma yng Nghymru? Pam nad oes gennym unrhyw uchelgais? Rwy'n gwybod y gall ymddangos yn anniddorol ac unwaith eto, rydym yn parhau i ailadrodd hyn, ond heb dargedau, nid oes gennym unrhyw uchelgais. Mae'n rhaid inni ddechrau nawr. Mae'n rhaid inni ddechrau nawr, oherwydd, oni bai ein bod ni'n gwneud hynny, bydd y 31 y cant yn 35 y cant cyn inni sylweddoli. Rhaid i leihau tlodi plant fod yn flaenoriaeth bwysicaf i ni i gyd, ac edrychaf ymlaen at eich ymateb. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
The health challenges we face as a nation are multifaceted and complex, but, when we consider the root causes, a common theme emerges time after time—poverty. Because poverty doesn't merely suffocate social mobility, corrode ambition and debilitate the economy—it is also the single biggest driver of ill health in our society, and child poverty in particular is the most potent strain, as it virtually locks in poor health outcomes for life.
We often talk about the first 1,000 days of a child’s life as being instrumental to their life chances, and the influence of poverty during this crucial period has been shown to have profoundly detrimental and often irreversible impacts on their immune system, heart function and brain development. Children in poor households are also over four times as likely to have a severe mental health problem compared to those in the most well-off households. Over three quarters are more likely to suffer from obesity, and face mortality rates that are 70 per cent higher.
We don't pretend that our proposal for a Welsh child payment is an immediate panacea in itself, and we will continue to make the case for devolving relevant welfare powers to enable us to eventually introduce a scheme with the broader scope of the Scottish model. But the international evidence, supported by Public Health Wales’s own research, conclusively underlines the positive health benefits that can be derived from direct cash transfers to low-income families. If we want to seriously confront the toxic relationship between poverty and ill health, this is the place to start. And based on the Bevan Foundation’s damning recent report, which found that the Welsh Government’s actions up to now have made little difference in reducing child poverty, the case for a fresh approach is undeniable, especially as a new wave of poverty-producing measures is about to hit our communities, courtesy of the Government’s partners in power.
It's fair to say that the Labour Party in Wales now stands at a pivotal juncture in its history. For years, they assured us that the election of a Labour Government at Westminster would arrest the alarming rise of poverty that ravaged Wales during a decade and a half of Tory-led austerity. To quote the Cabinet Secretary for finance during the 2023 Labour conference, a Starmer premiership would be
'motivated by duty, by public service, and that burning sense...that this party’s mission is not to tinker at the edges, not to offer some mild amelioration, but to eradicate poverty’.
But these hopes have since been comprehensibly shattered. Not only has Starmer’s Government steadfastly ignored the most glaring fix to alleviate child poverty, by refusing to scrap the two-child cap that for years was rightly decried by Labour Members across this place, it is now actively exacerbating the problem, charting a policy direction that will knowingly push an extra 0.25 million into poverty, including 50,000 children. And, once again, I’m reminded of the words of the Cabinet Secretary for finance, who, in November 2021, denounced Tory cuts to welfare as the actions of
‘a Government that knows what it is doing, knows that there will be thousands more children in poverty in Wales because of their cuts...but simply don’t care.'
Oh for that kind of righteous fury towards Westminster from the Labour frontbenches now.
So, the decision that lies before the Labour Party in Wales is simple: either they can persist with their hitherto supine obsequiousness to their UK headquarters, timidly acquiescing to the devastating blow that the Starmer Government is about to deliver to the fight against poverty, or they finally square up to the reality that the version of the UK Labour Party they thought would take power in July simply doesn’t exist, and urgently utilise the resources at their disposal to proactively mitigate the worst excesses of Starmer’s austerity agenda. Anything less would be a betrayal of that fundamental mission that the Cabinet Secretary spoke so passionately about, and, indeed, a mockery of their claim to be the party of Nye Bevan and the NHS.
Mae'r heriau iechyd sy'n ein hwynebu fel cenedl yn amlochrog ac yn gymhleth, ond pan ystyriwn yr achosion sylfaenol, daw thema gyffredin i'r golwg dro ar ôl tro—tlodi. Oherwydd nid mygu symudedd cymdeithasol, cyrydu uchelgais a gwanhau'r economi yn unig a wna tlodi—dyna hefyd yw'r sbardun mwyaf i salwch yn ein cymdeithas, a thlodi plant yn arbennig yw'r straen mwyaf pwerus, gan ei fod bron yn anochel yn arwain at ganlyniadau iechyd gwael am oes.
Rydym yn aml yn siarad am y 1,000 diwrnod cyntaf o fywyd plentyn fel rhai sy'n allweddol i'w cyfleoedd bywyd, a dangoswyd bod dylanwad tlodi yn ystod y cyfnod tyngedfennol hwn yn cael effeithiau hynod niweidiol a di-droi'n-ôl yn aml ar eu system imiwnedd, gweithrediad y galon a datblygiad yr ymennydd. Mae plant ar aelwydydd tlawd hefyd dros bedair gwaith yn fwy tebygol o fod â phroblem iechyd meddwl difrifol o gymharu â'r rhai ar yr aelwydydd mwyaf cyfoethog. Mae dros dri chwarter ohonynt yn fwy tebygol o ddioddef o ordewdra, a wynebu cyfraddau marwolaeth sydd 70 y cant yn uwch.
Nid ydym yn esgus bod ein cynnig ar gyfer taliadau plant yng Nghymru yn ateb i bob dim ar unwaith ynddo'i hun, a byddwn yn parhau i ddadlau'r achos dros ddatganoli pwerau lles perthnasol i'n galluogi i gyflwyno cynllun ag iddo gwmpas ehangach model yr Alban yn y pen draw. Ond mae'r dystiolaeth ryngwladol, a gefnogir gan ymchwil Iechyd Cyhoeddus Cymru ei hun, yn tanlinellu'n bendant y manteision iechyd cadarnhaol a all ddeillio o drosglwyddiadau arian parod uniongyrchol i deuluoedd incwm isel. Os ydym o ddifrif yn awyddus i wrthsefyll y berthynas wenwynig rhwng tlodi a salwch, dyma'r lle i ddechrau. Ac yn seiliedig ar adroddiad damniol diweddar Sefydliad Bevan, a ganfu nad yw gweithredoedd Llywodraeth Cymru hyd yma wedi gwneud fawr o wahaniaeth i leihau tlodi plant, mae'r achos dros ddull newydd yn ddiamheuol, yn enwedig gan fod ton newydd o fesurau sy'n cynhyrchu tlodi ar fin taro ein cymunedau, drwy garedigrwydd partneriaid mewn grym y Llywodraeth.
Mae'n deg dweud bod y Blaid Lafur yng Nghymru bellach ar adeg dyngedfennol yn ei hanes. Ers blynyddoedd, roeddent yn ein sicrhau y byddai ethol Llywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan yn atal y cynnydd brawychus mewn tlodi a ddinistriodd Gymru dros ddegawd a hanner o gyni dan arweiniad y Torïaid. I ddyfynnu Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid yn ystod cynhadledd y Blaid Lafur yn 2023, byddai prif weinidogaeth Starmer
'wedi'i hysgogi gan ddyletswydd, gan wasanaeth cyhoeddus, a'r teimlad angerddol... nad cenhadaeth y blaid hon yw tincran ar yr ymylon a chynnig rhyw fân welliant bach, ond dileu tlodi'.
Ond mae'r gobeithion hyn yn amlwg wedi cael eu chwalu. Nid yn unig y mae Llywodraeth Starmer wedi anwybyddu'r ateb mwyaf amlwg i leddfu tlodi plant, drwy wrthod dileu'r cap dau blentyn a gafodd ei feirniadu'n briodol ddigon am flynyddoedd gan Aelodau Llafur yn y lle hwn, mae bellach yn gwaethygu'r broblem, gan fynd ar drywydd polisi a fydd yn gwthio 0.25 miliwn ychwanegol i mewn i dlodi, yn cynnwys 50,000 o blant. Ac unwaith eto, caf fy atgoffa o eiriau Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid ym mis Tachwedd 2021, yn condemnio toriadau'r Torïaid i les fel gweithredoedd
'gan Lywodraeth sy'n gwybod beth mae'n ei wneud, yn gwybod y bydd miloedd yn fwy o blant mewn tlodi yng Nghymru oherwydd eu toriadau...ond nid oes ots ganddyn nhw.'
O, am y math hwnnw o gynddaredd cyfiawn tuag at San Steffan oddi ar feinciau blaen Llafur nawr.
Felly, mae'r penderfyniad sydd gerbron y Blaid Lafur yng Nghymru yn syml: naill ai gallant barhau gyda'u hymagwedd wasaidd hyd yma tuag at eu pencadlys yn y DU, gan gydymffurfio'n llywaeth â'r ergyd ddinistriol y mae Llywodraeth Starmer ar fin ei rhoi i'r frwydr yn erbyn tlodi, neu o'r diwedd gallant wynebu'r gwirionedd nad yw'r fersiwn o Blaid Lafur y DU y credent y byddai'n dod i rym ym mis Gorffennaf yn bodoli, a defnyddio'r adnoddau sydd ar gael iddynt ar frys i liniaru effeithiau gwaethaf agenda gyni Starmer yn rhagweithiol. Byddai unrhyw beth llai yn bradychu'r genhadaeth sylfaenol y siaradodd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet mor angerddol amdani, ac yn dangos pa mor chwerthinllyd yw eu honiad mai hwy yw plaid Nye Bevan a'r GIG.
Yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet, nawr, dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol sy'n ymateb i'r ddadl. Jane Hutt.
The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice to reply to the debate. Jane Hutt.
Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. The poverty data published last week is stark, and shows the scale of the challenge that we continue to face. The Welsh Government is fully committed to tackling child poverty as an absolute priority, using all the levers that we have at our disposal, and we are, and will continue to do so. Our child poverty strategy sets out how we’re working across Government, and with partners, to maximise the impact of the levers available to us to tackle child poverty. And to tackle child poverty, we have invested over £7 billion between 2022 and 2026, in this budget year we’re now in, in interventions that reduce costs and maximise incomes for families. Keep money in the pockets of Welsh citizens—that was the key objective of the child poverty strategy.
And I want to just refer to some of those interventions: our childcare offer, providing up to 30 hours of Welsh Government-funded nursery education and childcare for 48 weeks a year for eligible families; £50 million for childcare is available in this financial year, on top of our £100 million annual investment, and, of course, that includes £25 million for that increase in the hourly rate to £6.40 for the childcare offer, and a similar level of support for the childcare element of the Flying Start programme. And, of course, our budget for this year—again, an additional £25 million to continue expanding our Flying Start childcare for two-year-olds in Wales, bringing Wales closer to that step we want to take for universal provision for childcare for all two-year-olds.
I’m really pleased that the Minister for Children and Social Care announced on Tuesday that we’ve made £2.5 million available for baby bundles, the programme that is now funded for this financial year, providing a baby bundle to every expectant family living within a core Flying Start area, with some discretionary provisions for health practitioners outside these areas.
Diolch, Lywydd. Mae'r data tlodi a gyhoeddwyd yr wythnos diwethaf yn llwm, ac yn dangos graddau'r her yr ydym yn parhau i'w hwynebu. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi ymrwymo'n llwyr i fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant fel blaenoriaeth absoliwt, gan ddefnyddio'r holl ddulliau sydd gennym ar gael inni, ac rydym yn gwneud hynny, a byddwn yn parhau i wneud hynny. Mae ein strategaeth tlodi plant yn nodi sut rydym yn gweithio ar draws y Llywodraeth, a chyda phartneriaid, i wneud y mwyaf o effaith y dulliau sydd ar gael i ni i fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant. Ac i fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant, rydym wedi buddsoddi dros £7 biliwn rhwng 2022 a 2026, yn y flwyddyn gyllidebol yr ydym ynddi bellach, mewn ymyriadau sy'n lleihau costau i deuluoedd ac yn sicrhau eu bod yn manteisio i'r eithaf ar incwm. Cadw arian ym mhocedi dinasyddion Cymru—dyna oedd prif amcan y strategaeth tlodi plant.
Ac rwyf am gyfeirio at rai o'r ymyriadau hynny: ein cynnig gofal plant, sy'n darparu hyd at 30 awr o addysg feithrin a gofal plant a ariennir gan Lywodraeth Cymru am 48 wythnos y flwyddyn i deuluoedd cymwys; mae £50 miliwn ar gael ar gyfer gofal plant yn y flwyddyn ariannol hon, ar ben ein buddsoddiad blynyddol o £100 miliwn, ac wrth gwrs, mae hynny'n cynnwys £25 miliwn ar y cynnydd i'r gyfradd fesul awr i £6.40 ar gyfer y cynnig gofal plant, a lefel debyg o gymorth ar gyfer elfen gofal plant y rhaglen Dechrau'n Deg. Ac wrth gwrs, ein cyllideb ar gyfer eleni—unwaith eto, £25 miliwn ychwanegol i barhau i ehangu ein gofal plant Dechrau'n Deg i blant dwy oed yng Nghymru, gan ddod â Chymru'n agosach at y cam yr ydym am ei gymryd tuag at ddarpariaeth gofal plant i bob plentyn dwy oed.
Rwy'n falch iawn fod y Gweinidog Plant a Gofal Cymdeithasol wedi cyhoeddi ddydd Mawrth ein bod wedi rhyddhau £2.5 miliwn ar gyfer bwndeli babanod, y rhaglen a ariannir ar gyfer y flwyddyn ariannol hon sy'n darparu bwndel babanod i bob teulu sy'n disgwyl plentyn ac sy'n byw yn un o ardaloedd craidd Dechrau'n Deg, gyda rhai darpariaethau yn ôl disgresiwn i ymarferwyr iechyd y tu allan i'r ardaloedd hyn.
Just on the baby bundles, of course, that was a programme for government commitment to roll that out universally. I wonder, if you'd had targets, whether you would have made a different decision.
Ar y bwndeli babanod, roedd yn ymrwymiad yn y rhaglen lywodraethu i gyflwyno hynny i bawb. Pe bai gennych chi dargedau, a fyddech chi wedi gwneud penderfyniad gwahanol.
There's £2.5 million available in this budget—a budget that you didn't support, I have to say. There's £2.5 million for the baby bundles programme for this year. It is important that there is going to be that discretionary provision. I can go on to say that this would be, for example—and I'm sure you will welcome this—for migrant mothers and other harder to reach groups.
But the Welsh Government is committed to ensuring that no child goes hungry, and as a result of our co-operation agreement, part of the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, we did become the first UK nation to offer free school meals to all primary learners, and that means 174,500 primary school children becoming eligible for a free school meal—30 million additional meals. I know that that is widely welcomed across this Chamber, but also by all those children and families who are benefiting from that universal offer, alongside our school milk scheme and the commitment to maintaining free breakfasts in primary schools. That does mean Wales has the most generous food on offer in the UK.
But also, our school essentials grant enables children from low-income families to attend school and take part in activities at the same level as their peers, and our Welsh benefits charter, working with local government, simplifying access to free school meals, the school essentials grants, as well as our £290 million council tax reduction scheme. And, Llywydd, we know, and as I said this afternoon and yesterday, there are up to £2 billion of benefit entitlements unclaimed in Wales. We have an absolute duty, in partnership with the UK Government and local government, to improve the uptake of these benefits, and we're stepping up efforts to do so, with a 10 per cent increase in our single advice fund as part of the spring statement announced last week. And our £550,000 pilot, enabling local authorities with the Policy in Practice LIFT tool to identify entitlement to a range of means-tested support for people who are missing out, including missing out on Healthy Start vouchers, which are crucial for maximising incomes in low-income families. So, we continue to invest in our 'Claim what's yours' and single advice fund services, and of course that has been increased by this 10 per cent uplift this year. And can I just say, Llywydd, I could go on with many other—
Mae £2.5 miliwn ar gael yn y gyllideb hon—cyllideb na wnaethoch chi ei chefnogi, rhaid imi ddweud. Mae £2.5 miliwn ar gyfer y rhaglen bwndeli babanod eleni. Mae'n bwysig fod yna ddarpariaeth yn ôl disgresiwn. Gallaf fynd ymlaen i ddweud y byddai hyn, er enghraifft—ac rwy'n siŵr y byddwch chi'n croesawu hyn—i famau mudol a grwpiau eraill sy'n anos eu cyrraedd.
Ond mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi ymrwymo i sicrhau nad oes unrhyw blentyn yn mynd yn llwglyd, ac o ganlyniad i'n cytundeb cydweithio, rhan o'r cytundeb cydweithio gyda Phlaid Cymru, ni oedd y genedl gyntaf yn y DU i gynnig prydau ysgol am ddim i bob dysgwr cynradd, ac mae hynny'n golygu bod 174,500 o blant ysgol gynradd yn dod yn gymwys i gael pryd ysgol am ddim—30 miliwn o brydau ychwanegol. Rwy'n gwybod bod hynny'n cael ei groesawu'n eang ar draws y Siambr, ond hefyd gan yr holl blant a theuluoedd sy'n elwa o'r cynnig cyffredinol hwnnw, ochr yn ochr â'n cynllun llaeth ysgol a'r ymrwymiad i gynnal brecwast am ddim mewn ysgolion cynradd. Mae hynny'n golygu mai gan Gymru y mae'r cynnig bwyd mwyaf hael yn y DU.
Ond hefyd, mae ein grant hanfodion ysgol yn galluogi plant o deuluoedd incwm isel i fynychu'r ysgol a chymryd rhan mewn gweithgareddau ar yr un lefel â'u cyfoedion, a'n siarter budd-daliadau Cymru, sy'n gweithio gyda llywodraeth leol, i symleiddio mynediad at brydau ysgol am ddim, y grantiau hanfodion ysgolion, yn ogystal â'n cynllun gostyngiadau'r dreth gyngor gwerth £290 miliwn. Ac fel y dywedais y prynhawn yma a ddoe, Lywydd, mae gwerth hyd at £2 biliwn o fudd-daliadau heb eu hawlio yng Nghymru. Mae gennym ddyletswydd absoliwt, mewn partneriaeth â Llywodraeth y DU a llywodraeth leol, i wella'r nifer sy'n hawlio'r budd-daliadau hyn, ac rydym yn cynyddu ymdrechion i wneud hynny, gyda chynnydd o 10 y cant i'n cronfa gynghori sengl fel rhan o ddatganiad y gwanwyn a gyhoeddwyd yr wythnos diwethaf. A'n cynllun peilot gwerth £550,000, sy'n galluogi awdurdodau lleol gydag offeryn olrhain teuluoedd incwm isel Policy in Practice i nodi hawl i ystod o gymorth prawf modd i bobl nad ydynt yn ei gael, gan gynnwys talebau Cychwyn Iach, sy'n hanfodol ar gyfer manteisio i'r eithaf ar incwm mewn teuluoedd incwm isel. Felly, rydym yn parhau i fuddsoddi yn ein gwasanaethau 'Hawliwch yr hyn sy'n ddyledus i chi' a'r gronfa gynghori sengl, ac wrth gwrs cafodd honno gynnydd o 10 y cant eleni. Lywydd, gallwn barhau gyda llawer o—
Would you take an intervention, a brief intervention?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad, un byr?
Jane.
Jane.
Thank you so much. In my contribution, I specifically asked what conversations you had had with the Scottish Government about their child payment. I wonder if you could just outline where that's up to. You may be coming on to that, but we'd be really interested to hear what specifically you've heard from Scotland. Diolch.
Diolch. Yn fy nghyfraniad, fe ofynnais yn benodol pa sgyrsiau yr oeddech chi wedi'u cael gyda Llywodraeth yr Alban am eu taliad plant. A wnewch chi amlinellu ble rydych chi wedi cyrraedd gyda hynny. Efallai eich bod chi'n dod at hynny, ond hoffem glywed beth yn benodol rydych chi wedi'i glywed gan yr Alban. Diolch.
Thank you very much, Jane Dodds. I am coming straight onto that. As Members are aware, we simply do not have the devolved powers to legislate for a scheme along the lines of the Scottish child payment. But I can confirm, and indeed Lesley Griffiths raised this point as well, that we are engaging with the Scottish Government, to better understand the fiscal, legislative and other resources that would be required to make a child payment of this type. We are engaged with them. I hope you will welcome this. But also, we have an opportunity now with our four nations child poverty taskforce, and that includes the Government Cabinet Secretary from the Scottish Government, myself and Northern Ireland, as well as the UK Government Ministers, and at those meetings we share ways in which we're seeking to tackle child poverty.
And I also just want to respond to points made. We're also undertaking a research project to explore the infrastructure required to devolve the administration of welfare and identify the elements of the reserved social security system that the Welsh Government could administer. And John Griffiths, it goes back to your time when you chaired that committee and we looked at that. So, yes, we are looking at the Scottish Government's recent report on the impacts, not just of the child payment, I have to say—they also include a whole range of other policy areas that very much accord with ours as well.
So, can I just finally thank Lesley Griffiths for asking about my representations to the UK Government about the need to address the adverse impact of the two-child benefit limit? Let's go back to the End Child Poverty coalition, who actually reported that the two-child limit affects families entitled to benefits who have had a third or subsequent child after 6 April 2017, and stated that these parents are denied £3,235 per year, per child, and recognise and also identify what this means to children and families in Wales—recognising that, for example, Cardiff is the local authority where the highest number of children are affected by the two-child limit. And of course we know that social security policies impact on child poverty, and it is important to examine the impact of social security policy as a whole, not just a piecemeal approach looking at individual policies, to ensure that people and families can meet essential costs.
So, I can assure you in my concluding comments that I've raised the issue at every single child poverty four nations taskforce. I've raised it with the Government Ministers—UK Government—and shared it, of course, with colleagues from across the UK. I've raised the issue of the two-child limit, I've raised the issue of the benefits cap with the UK Government, and also called for this to be addressed as part of the UK Government child poverty strategy. That would be the most important lever in terms of tackling child poverty, if that two-child limit was addressed. And that message comes strongly from me and, I know, the Welsh Government.
So, as we conclude, we're focusing our budget, our resources, our efforts, our powers on making a difference today to the children and families that need it most, and we will continue to do what we can do, using our powers and raising our voices. Diolch yn fawr.
Diolch, Jane Dodds. Rwy'n dod yn syth at hynny. Fel y gŵyr yr Aelodau, nid oes gennym y pwerau datganoledig i ddeddfu ar gyfer cynllun tebyg i daliad plant yr Alban. Ond gallaf gadarnhau, ac yn wir cododd Lesley Griffiths y pwynt hwn hefyd, ein bod yn ymgysylltu â Llywodraeth yr Alban, i ddeall yn well pa adnoddau cyllidol a deddfwriaethol ac adnoddau eraill y byddai eu hangen i wneud taliad plant o'r math hwn. Rydym yn trafod gyda hwy. Gobeithio y gwnewch chi groesawu hyn. Ond hefyd, mae gennym gyfle nawr gyda thasglu tlodi plant y pedair gwlad, ac mae hynny'n cynnwys yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet o Lywodraeth yr Alban, a Gogledd Iwerddon, a minnau yn ogystal â Gweinidogion Llywodraeth y DU, ac yn y cyfarfodydd hynny rydym yn rhannu ffyrdd o geisio mynd i'r afael â thlodi plant.
Ac rwyf eisiau ymateb i bwyntiau a wnaed. Rydym yn cyflawni prosiect ymchwil hefyd i archwilio'r seilwaith sydd ei angen i ddatganoli gweinyddu lles a nodi'r elfennau o'r system nawdd cymdeithasol a gadwyd yn ôl y gallai Llywodraeth Cymru eu gweinyddu. A John Griffiths, mae'n mynd yn ôl at eich amser chi pan oeddech chi'n cadeirio'r pwyllgor hwnnw a phan fuom yn edrych ar hynny. Felly, rydym yn edrych ar adroddiad diweddar Llywodraeth yr Alban ar effeithiau, nid yn unig y taliad plant, mae'n rhaid i mi ddweud—maent hefyd yn cynnwys ystod eang o feysydd polisi eraill sy'n cyd-fynd yn agos â'n meysydd ni.
Felly, yn olaf, a gaf i ddiolch i Lesley Griffiths am ofyn ynghylch fy sylwadau i Lywodraeth y DU am yr angen i fynd i'r afael ag effaith niweidiol y terfyn dau blentyn i fudd-daliadau? Gadewch inni fynd yn ôl at y gynghrair Dileu Tlodi Plant, a adroddodd fod y terfyn dau blentyn yn effeithio ar deuluoedd sydd â hawl i fudd-daliadau sydd wedi cael trydydd plentyn neu blentyn dilynol ar ôl 6 Ebrill 2017, a nododd fod y rhieni hyn yn cael eu hamddifadu o £3,235 y flwyddyn y plentyn, ac roeddent yn cydnabod ac yn nodi beth a olygai i blant a theuluoedd yng Nghymru—gan gydnabod, er enghraifft, mai Caerdydd yw'r awdurdod lleol lle mae'r terfyn dau blentyn yn effeithio ar y nifer fwyaf o blant. Ac wrth gwrs fe wyddom fod polisïau nawdd cymdeithasol yn effeithio ar dlodi plant, ac mae'n bwysig archwilio effaith polisi nawdd cymdeithasol yn ei gyfanrwydd, nid dim ond dull tameidiog sy'n edrych ar bolisïau unigol, er mwyn sicrhau bod pobl a theuluoedd yn gallu talu costau hanfodol.
Felly, gallaf eich sicrhau yn fy sylwadau terfynol fy mod wedi codi'r mater ym mhob cyfarfod o dasglu tlodi plant y pedair gwlad. Rwyf wedi ei godi gyda Gweinidogion y Llywodraeth—Llywodraeth y DU—a'i rannu, wrth gwrs, gyda chymheiriaid o bob cwr o'r DU. Rwyf wedi codi mater y terfyn dau blentyn, rwyf wedi codi mater y cap ar fudd-daliadau gyda Llywodraeth y DU, a hefyd wedi galw am fynd i'r afael â hyn yn rhan o strategaeth tlodi plant Llywodraeth y DU. Dyna fyddai'r dull pwysicaf o fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant, pe bai'r terfyn dau blentyn yn cael ei ddatrys. Ac rwy'n gwybod bod y neges honno'n dod yn gryf oddi wrthyf i ac oddi wrth Lywodraeth Cymru.
Felly, wrth inni ddod i ben, rydym yn canolbwyntio ein cyllideb, ein hadnoddau, ein hymdrechion, ein pwerau ar wneud gwahaniaeth heddiw i'r plant a'r teuluoedd sydd ei angen fwyaf, a byddwn yn parhau i wneud yr hyn y gallwn ei wneud, gan ddefnyddio ein pwerau a chodi ein lleisiau. Diolch yn fawr.
Rhun ap Iorwerth nawr i ymateb i'r ddadl.
Rhun ap Iorwerth to reply to the debate.
Gaf i ddiolch am yr holl gyfraniadau i'r ddadl y prynhawn yma? Dadl sydd eto, fel y drafodaeth frys ar fudd-daliadau yn gynharach heddiw, wedi ein hatgoffa ni fod yna ddyletswydd arnom ni uwchlaw popeth arall, siawns, i edrych ar ôl a rhoi help llaw, cynhaliaeth, hwb a chefnogaeth i'r rhai mwyaf bregus.
Bues i'n ddigon ffodus i gael cwmni, efo Peredur Owen Griffiths, Chris, yn gynharach, yng Nghasnewydd—cwmni dros baned. Mae Chris yn cysgu ar y stryd. Mae e angen cefnogaeth. Mae e'n cael cefnogaeth gan Fyddin yr Iachawdwriaeth, ond mae o'n cysgu yn yr awyr agored ac mae o ofn. Ac mae methiant Llywodraethau i fynd i'r afael â thlodi ar y lefel yna yn arwydd o fethiant y Llywodraethau hynny, ac mae hynny'n gorfod bod yn wir fwy nag unrhyw beth arall pan fydd hi'n dod at fethiant i fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant.
Dwi am droi at eiriau eraill. 'Dwi wedi gweithio yn fy ysgol i am 25 mlynedd. Dyma'r tlodi gwaethaf dwi erioed wedi ei weld. Dydy'r rhan fwyaf o blant ddim yn cael bwyd gartref.'
May I thank everyone for their contributions in the debate this afternoon? It's a debate, like the urgent debate on benefits earlier this afternoon, that has reminded us that we are duty bound above all else, surely, to look after and to help, sustain, boost and support those who are most vulnerable.
I was fortunate enough, along with Peredur Owen Griffiths, to be joined by Chris earlier in Newport. We spoke over a cup of tea. Chris sleeps rough. He needs support. He is receiving support from the Salvation Army, but he is sleeping rough and he's afraid. And the failure of Governments to tackle poverty at that level is a sign of the failure of those Governments, and that has to be true above all else when it comes to the failure to tackle child poverty.
I will turn to the words of others. 'I've worked in my school for 25 years. This is the worst poverty I've ever seen. Most children aren't fed at home.'
'Children will often hoard food when it's available in case they don't have any when they get home. I see children begging other students for food. Some children are sleeping on the floor in the dining room and sharing beds in shifts.' That's testimony not from a Charles Dickens novel, but from teachers working in Welsh schools today and who witness the scale of child poverty day in, day out.
And here in Wales today, in the twenty-first century, in an average class of 30 children, nine of them will be living in poverty—nine going without the basics, nine children going without an equal chance to achieve their potential, nine children who seek enough to get by, not huge wealth. Llywydd, there is no brighter tomorrow if today we fail those on whose future we depend.
So, I can stand here, rightly, and condemn the injustice of austerity, the lack of meaningful child poverty targets, even, the impending welfare cuts and the proponents of a so-called smarter state who, in reality, believe in a smaller state, which narrows the window of opportunity to help create equality and further diminishes the sense of dignity. The case can be well made that decisions by Governments at both ends of the M4—and, yes, that means now both Conservative and Labour—have entrenched child poverty. But whilst all of that is true and it's important to reflect on that and remind ourselves of that, at the same time, we have to offer solutions too. I've listened very carefully to the contributions from all sides. But I would in particular encourage Members of the Labour and Conservative benches, who have, of course, recognised the scale of child poverty, to reflect on whether their contributions meet the scale of the challenge.
Lesley Griffiths is absolutely right: Government has to use all the levers at its disposal to deal with child poverty, and I agree that Labour must lift the two-child benefit cap—something echoed by the Cabinet Secretary. But where’s the indignation within the ranks of elected Members—elected Labour Members both here and at Westminster—and the realisation that these are injustices that they are allowing to prevail?
Joel James, the criticism of Plaid Cymru’s proposal around a direct child payment appears to be centred around it not being enough—I agree, but it’s a start. It’s pointless, he says, as this money will be quickly absorbed. Yes, because it’s so needed. And, yes, of course, we have to break cycles, but dealing with child poverty today is about breaking the cycles for children, thousands and thousands of them, living in poverty.
And the Cabinet Secretary reminded us that the latest data on child poverty is indeed stark. She reminded us of money invested, but the lack of targets, as we've mentioned, and the lack of positive results above all else, not just in statistical terms, but in terms of the children still living in poverty who shouldn’t be—and on the contrary, of course, child poverty is getting worse as I speak—proves that this is a Labour Government that’s not got a grip on this most serious of issues. Now is not the time to say what we can’t do, but to say what we can to redress the balance between the haves and the have nots, to start implementing here what has been proven to work elsewhere.
Scottish policies are working to start shifting the dial on child poverty. That’s the conclusion of the Child Poverty Action Group only last week. Lisa is an individual who took part in the Changing Realities project, documenting life on a low income in Scotland. She described the Scottish child payment as a game changer, which has given her and her son more breathing space to enjoy life. Is there more to do in Scotland? Of course there is. The Scottish Government has fallen short of meeting its child poverty target, but as the Child Poverty Action Group said, these latest statistics show that Holyrood policies, especially the Scottish child payment, are working to shift the dial for children in Scotland in the face of poverty rising to record highs across the rest of the UK.
So, my challenge to every Member here is this: if not the child payment, then what? This is what Plaid Cymru is proposing, putting forward as part of our suite of anti-poverty policies for Government in a year’s time. Experts in the field of child poverty have called on the current Labour Welsh Government to implement child poverty targets and it’s refused to do so. The Government says that it supports a range of actions to address child poverty, and yet it’s been unable to move the dial.
Managing child poverty and managing it badly is not the answer. All the available evidence supports the introduction of a child payment. A Welsh response demands it and families living in poverty deserve it. This in front of us today is another Labour ‘delete all’ motion on child poverty. The Government benches have lately been keen on framing debates as days of reckoning. Today, I humbly suggest, is another one of theirs.
'Bydd plant yn aml yn cronni bwyd pan fydd ar gael rhag ofn na chânt fwyd pan fyddant yn cyrraedd adref. Rwy'n gweld plant yn gofyn am fwyd gan fyfyrwyr eraill. Mae rhai plant yn cysgu ar y llawr yn yr ystafell fwyta ac yn rhannu gwelyau mewn shifftiau.' Daw'r dystiolaeth honno, nid o nofel gan Charles Dickens, ond gan athrawon sy'n gweithio mewn ysgolion yng Nghymru heddiw ac sy'n dyst i raddfa tlodi plant o ddydd i ddydd.
Ac yma yng Nghymru heddiw, yn yr unfed ganrif ar hugain, mewn dosbarth cyfartalog o 30 o blant, bydd naw ohonynt yn byw mewn tlodi—naw yn mynd heb y pethau sylfaenol, naw o blant yn mynd heb gyfle cyfartal i gyflawni eu potensial, naw o blant sy'n ceisio dod o hyd i ddigon i ddod i ben, nid cyfoeth enfawr. Lywydd, nid oes yfory mwy disglair os gwnawn gam heddiw â'r rhai y dibynnwn ar eu dyfodol.
Felly, gallaf sefyll yma, yn gywir ddigon, a chondemnio anghyfiawnder cyni, diffyg targedau tlodi plant ystyrlon, toriadau lles sydd ar ffordd a chefnogwyr gwladwriaeth yr honnant ei bod yn fwy clyfar ond sydd, mewn gwirionedd, yn credu mewn gwladwriaeth lai, sy'n culhau'r ffenestr o gyfle i helpu i greu cydraddoldeb, ac sy'n cyfyngu fwyfwy ar yr ymdeimlad o urddas. Mae modd dadlau bod penderfyniadau gan Lywodraethau ar ddau ben yr M4—ac mae hynny bellach yn golygu y Ceidwadwyr a Llafur—wedi dyfnhau tlodi plant. Ond er bod hynny i gyd yn wir a'i bod hi'n bwysig myfyrio ar hynny ac atgoffa ein hunain o hynny, ar yr un pryd, mae'n rhaid inni gynnig atebion. Rwyf wedi gwrando'n ofalus iawn ar y cyfraniadau o bob ochr. Ond hoffwn yn arbennig annog Aelodau oddi ar y meinciau Llafur a Cheidwadol sydd wedi cydnabod graddfa tlodi plant i ystyried a yw eu cyfraniadau'n ateb i raddfa'r her.
Mae Lesley Griffiths yn hollol iawn: rhaid i'r Llywodraeth ddefnyddio'r holl ddulliau sydd ar gael iddi i fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant, ac rwy'n cytuno bod rhaid i Lafur godi'r cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau—rhywbeth a adleisiwyd gan Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Ond ble mae'r dicter yn rhengoedd yr Aelodau etholedig—Aelodau Llafur etholedig yma ac yn San Steffan—a'r sylweddoliad fod y rhain yn anghyfiawnderau y maent yn caniatáu iddynt barhau?
Joel James, mae'n ymddangos bod y feirniadaeth o gynnig Plaid Cymru ynglŷn â thaliad plant uniongyrchol yn canolbwyntio ar y ffaith nad yw'n ddigon—rwy'n cytuno, ond mae'n ddechrau. Mae'n ddibwynt, meddai, gan y bydd yr arian hwn yn cael ei amsugno'n gyflym. Bydd, oherwydd ei fod mor angenrheidiol. Ac wrth gwrs bod rhaid inni dorri cylchoedd, ond mae mynd i'r afael â thlodi plant heddiw yn ymwneud â thorri'r cylchoedd i blant, miloedd a miloedd ohonynt, sy'n byw mewn tlodi.
Ac fe wnaeth Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet ein hatgoffa bod y data diweddaraf ar dlodi plant yn wirioneddol ddigalon. Cawsom ein hatgoffa ganddi am arian a fuddsoddwyd, ond mae'r diffyg targedau, fel rydym wedi sôn, a'r diffyg canlyniadau cadarnhaol yn anad dim, nid yn unig mewn termau ystadegol ond yn nhermau plant sy'n dal i fyw mewn tlodi na ddylent fod—ac wrth gwrs, mae tlodi plant yn groes i hynny'n gwaethygu wrth imi siarad—yn profi bod hon yn Llywodraeth Lafur nad oes ganddi unrhyw reolaeth ar y mater hynod ddifrifol hwn. Nid nawr yw'r amser i ddweud beth na allwn ei wneud, ond i ddweud yr hyn y gallwn ei wneud i unioni'r cydbwysedd rhwng y cyfoethog a'r tlawd, i ddechrau gweithredu yma yr hyn y profwyd ei fod yn gweithio mewn mannau eraill.
Mae polisïau'r Alban yn gweithio i ddechrau newid y sefyllfa mewn perthynas â thlodi plant. Dyna gasgliad y Grŵp Gweithredu ar Dlodi Plant yr wythnos diwethaf. Mae Lisa'n unigolyn a gymerodd ran yn y prosiect Changing Realities, sy'n dogfennu bywyd ar incwm isel yn yr Alban. Disgrifiodd daliad plant yr Alban fel rhywbeth sy'n sicrhau newid sylfaenol, ac wedi rhoi mwy o gyfle iddi hi a'i mab allu mwynhau bywyd. A oes mwy i'w wneud yn yr Alban? Oes, wrth gwrs. Mae Llywodraeth yr Alban wedi methu cyrraedd ei tharged tlodi plant, ond fel y dywedodd y Grŵp Gweithredu ar Dlodi Plant, mae'r ystadegau diweddaraf hyn yn dangos bod polisïau Holyrood, yn enwedig taliad plant yr Alban, yn gweithio i newid y sefyllfa i blant yn yr Alban yn wyneb tlodi sy'n codi i lefelau uwch nag erioed ar draws gweddill y DU.
Felly, fy her i bob Aelod yma yw hyn: os nad y taliad plant, beth? Dyma beth y mae Plaid Cymru yn ei gynnig, yn ei gyflwyno yn rhan o'n cyfres o bolisïau gwrth-dlodi pan fyddwn yn Llywodraeth ymhen blwyddyn. Mae arbenigwyr ym maes tlodi plant wedi galw ar Lywodraeth Lafur bresennol Cymru i roi targedau tlodi plant ar waith ac mae wedi gwrthod gwneud hynny. Mae'r Llywodraeth yn dweud ei bod yn cefnogi ystod o gamau gweithredu i fynd i'r afael â thlodi plant, ac eto nid yw wedi gallu sicrhau newid.
Nid rheoli tlodi plant a'i reoli'n wael yw'r ateb. Mae'r holl dystiolaeth sydd ar gael yn cefnogi cyflwyno taliad plant. Mae ymateb Cymreig yn mynnu hynny ac mae teuluoedd sy'n byw mewn tlodi yn ei haeddu. Ger ein bron heddiw gwelwn gynnig 'dileu popeth' arall gan Lafur ar dlodi plant. Yn ddiweddar, mae meinciau'r Llywodraeth wedi bod yn awyddus i fframio dadleuon fel dyddiau o brysur bwyso. Rwy'n awgrymu'n ostyngedig fod heddiw'n un arall iddynt.
Y cwestiwn yw: a ddylid derbyn y cynnig heb ei ddiwygio? A oes unrhyw Aelod yn gwrthwynebu? [Gwrthwynebiad.] Oes, mae yna wrthwynebiad, felly, fe wnawn ni ohirio tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.
The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object. [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. I will defer voting under this item until voting time.
Gohiriwyd y pleidleisio tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.
Voting deferred until voting time.
And before we move to the vote, just to inform Members that our next meeting will be in the Tŷ Hywel Chamber, and it'll be very different. There are only six Members sitting here today who sat in that original Chamber. That's a pub quiz question for you: who are those six? I know that those six will be the ones who will be keen to avoid the seats behind the pillars. And we have staff also who worked in that original Chamber, and one of them is sitting next to me here. Sian Wilkins is retiring tomorrow after 25 years working for this Senedd. [Applause.] She'll be very embarrassed by that round of applause.
A chyn inni symud at y bleidlais, rwyf am roi gwybod i'r Aelodau y bydd ein cyfarfod nesaf yn Siambr Tŷ Hywel, ac fe fydd yn wahanol iawn. Dim ond chwe Aelod sy'n eistedd yma heddiw oedd yn eistedd yn y Siambr wreiddiol honno. Dyna gwestiwn cwis tafarn i chi: pwy yw'r chwech? Rwy'n gwybod mai'r chwech hynny fydd y rhai a fydd yn awyddus i osgoi'r seddi y tu ôl i'r pileri. Ac mae gennym staff hefyd a oedd yn gweithio yn y Siambr wreiddiol honno, ac mae un ohonynt yn eistedd wrth fy ymyl yma. Mae Sian Wilkins yn ymddeol yfory ar ôl 25 mlynedd yn gweithio i'r Senedd hon. [Cymeradwyaeth.] Bydd y gymeradwyaeth honno wedi peri embaras iddi.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Sian, am y gwaith.
Thank you very much, Sian, for your work.
I guess it's hasta la vista to this Chamber. We'll see you next year.
Mae'n debyg ei bod hi'n hasta la vista i'r Siambr hon. Fe'ch gwelwn y flwyddyn nesaf.
Mi wnawn ni symud nawr at y cyfnod pleidleisio, oni bai bod tri Aelod eisiau i fi ganu'r gloch.
We will now move to voting time, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung.
Byddwn ni'n pleidleisio nawr ar eitem 8, sef y ddadl Plaid Cymru ar daliadau plant. Dwi'n galw yn gyntaf am bleidlais ar y cynnig heb ei ddiwygio, a gyflwynwyd yn enw Heledd Fychan. Agor y bleidlais. Cau'r bleidlais. O blaid 13, neb yn ymatal, 39 yn erbyn. Ac felly, mae'r cynnig wedi ei wrthod.
We'll vote now on item 8, which is the Plaid Cymru debate on child payments. I call first for a vote on the motion without endment, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 39 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.
Eitem 8. Dadl Plaid Cymru - Taliadau plant. Cynnig heb ei ddiwygio: O blaid: 13, Yn erbyn: 39, Ymatal: 0
Gwrthodwyd y cynnig
Item 8. Plaid Cymru Debate - Child payments. Motion without amendment: For: 13, Against: 39, Abstain: 0
Motion has been rejected
Gwelliant 1 fydd nesaf, pleidlais ar welliant 1 a gyflwynwyd yn enw Jane Hutt. Agor y bleidlais. Mae'r bleidlais yn gyfartal, ac felly bydda i yn bwrw fy mhleidlais fwrw yn erbyn y gwelliant. Felly, canlyniad y bleidlais yw bod 26 o blaid, neb yn ymatal, 27 yn erbyn. Ac felly mae'r cynnig a'r gwelliant wedi eu gwrthod, a bydd dim mwy o bleidleisiau o dan yr eitem yna.
Amendment 1 is next. I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. The vote is tied, and therefore I will exercise my casting vote in the negative against the amendment. Therefore, the result of the vote is that there were 26 in favour, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore, both the motion and the amendment have not been agreed and there will be no further voting under that item.
Eitem 8. Dadl Plaid Cymru - Taliadau plant. Gwelliant 1, cyflwynwyd yn enw Jane Hutt: O blaid: 26, Yn erbyn: 26, Ymatal: 0
Gan fod nifer y pleidleisiau yn gyfartal, defnyddiodd y Llywydd ei phleidlais fwrw yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 6.20(ii).
Gwrthodwyd y gwelliant
Item 8. Plaid Cymru Debate - Child payments. Amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejected
Dyna ddiwedd ar y cyfnod pleidleisio.
That concludes voting time.
Rŷn ni nawr yn symud ymlaen i'r ddadl fer, ac mae'r ddadl fer y prynhawn yma gan Lesley Griffiths.
We now move to the short debate, and today's short debate is to be presented by Lesley Griffiths.
Lesley Griffiths can start her short debate if Members have left the Chamber quietly, please. If Members can leave the Chamber if they are not staying for the short debate.
Gall Lesley Griffiths ddechrau ei dadl fer os yw'r Aelodau wedi gadael y Siambr yn dawel, os gwelwch yn dda. Os gall yr Aelodau adael y Siambr os nad ydynt yn aros ar gyfer y ddadl fer.
Diolch, Llywydd. I'm grateful to Hannah Blythyn, Mick Antoniw, Jane Dodds and Sam Rowlands for contributing to my short debate.
A little over 90 years ago, Wrexham experienced its darkest day. On Saturday 22 September 1934, one of the worst mining disasters in British history and the worst in north Wales occurred at Gresford colliery. Two hundred and sixty-six men and boys lost their lives, and its impact on the community was seismic. I've chosen this short debate today to continue to raise awareness of the tragedy.
Gresford colliery was one of the largest in the region. It was a major employer, with over 2,200 employees, with 1,850 working underground. There were two main districts to the colliery, the Dennis shaft and the Martin shaft, and both went down some 680m. On that Saturday, at around 02:00, halfway through the night shift, a devastating explosion ripped through the Dennis section of the mine. Ferocious fires spread rapidly through the dust-laden air. The men in the Martin shaft knew nothing about the explosion until word came for them to get out. Rescue parties equipped with fire extinguishers and oxygen masks endured the heat, but it is said it scorched the clothes on their backs and burned the soles from their boots.
Wooden pit props burst into flames, causing the fires to spread, and further explosions occurred, which led to more rock fall, and many of the miners who'd got out of the Martin section worked to extinguish the fires. After 40 hours, all rescue parties were called up and the mineshaft was sealed. The only way to extinguish the fires would be to starve them of oxygen.
Two hundred and sixty-one men and boys were killed in the explosion underground and the fires that raged as a result. The youngest was just 16 years of age, Ernest Edwards, and the oldest was 69 years old, Edward Wynn. There were just six survivors from the disaster area: Cyril Challoner, Teddy Andrews, brothers John and Bert Samuel, Dai Jones and Tom Fisher. John, who led the five others out of the mine, received the Edward medal for private bravery, the highest accolade for miners and civilians at the time.
The ferocity of the explosion and subsequent fires resulted in only 11 bodies being recovered. There was unspeakable grief for the relatives whose loved ones remained underground and they could not lay their husband, father, son or brother to rest. Two hundred and fifty-three bodies remain entombed.
Diolch, Lywydd. Rwy'n ddiolchgar i Hannah Blythyn, Mick Antoniw, Jane Dodds a Sam Rowlands am gyfrannu at fy nadl fer.
Ychydig dros 90 mlynedd yn ôl, profodd Wrecsam ei diwrnod tywyllaf. Ddydd Sadwrn 22 Medi 1934, digwyddodd un o'r trychinebau mwyngloddio gwaethaf yn hanes Prydain a'r gwaethaf yng ngogledd Cymru, a hynny ym mhwll glo Gresffordd. Collodd 266 o ddynion a bechgyn eu bywydau, ac roedd ei effaith ar y gymuned yn seismig. Rwyf wedi dewis y ddadl fer hon heddiw i barhau i godi ymwybyddiaeth o'r drasiedi.
Roedd pwll glo Gresffordd ymhlith y mwyaf yn y rhanbarth. Roedd yn gyflogwr mawr, gyda dros 2,200 o weithwyr, gyda 1,850 yn gweithio o dan y ddaear. Roedd dwy brif ran i'r pwll glo, siafft Dennis a siafft Martin, ac roedd y ddwy tua 680m o ddyfnder. Ar y dydd Sadwrn hwnnw, tua 02:00, hanner ffordd drwy'r shifft nos, rhwygodd ffrwydrad dinistriol drwy ran Dennis o'r pwll. Lledaenodd tanau ffyrnig yn gyflym drwy'r aer llawn llwch. Nid oedd y dynion yn siafft Martin yn gwybod dim am y ffrwydrad nes y daeth neges iddynt fynd allan. Dioddefodd criwiau achub gyda diffoddwyr tân a masgiau ocsigen y gwres, ond dywedir ei fod wedi llosgi'r dillad ar eu cefnau a llosgi'r gwadnau ar eu hesgidiau.
Cydiodd y fflamau ym mhropiau pren y pyllau glo, gan achosi i'r tanau ledaenu, a digwyddodd ffrwydradau pellach, a achosodd i fwy o'r graig gwympo, a gweithiodd llawer o'r glowyr a oedd wedi dod allan o siafft Martin i ddiffodd y tanau. Ar ôl 40 awr, galwyd yr holl bartïon achub i mewn a seliwyd y siafft. Yr unig ffordd o ddiffodd y tanau fyddai eu llwgu o ocsigen.
Lladdwyd 261 o ddynion a bechgyn yn y ffrwydrad o dan y ddaear a'r tanau a losgodd o ganlyniad. Dim ond 16 oed oedd yr ieuengaf, Ernest Edwards, ac roedd yr hynaf yn 69 oed, Edward Wynn. Dim ond chwech o ddynion a oroesodd lle digwyddodd y trychineb: Cyril Challoner, Teddy Andrews, y brodyr John a Bert Samuel, Dai Jones a Tom Fisher. Derbyniodd John, a arweiniodd y pump arall allan o'r pwll, fedal Edward am ddewrder personol, yr anrhydedd fwyaf i lowyr a sifiliaid ar y pryd.
Golygodd ffyrnigrwydd y ffrwydrad a'r tanau a'i dilynodd mai dim ond 11 o gyrff a gafodd eu hadfer. Roedd y galar yn annirnadwy i'r perthnasau yr arhosodd eu hanwyliaid o dan y ddaear, teuluoedd na allent roi angladd i'w gŵr, eu tad, eu mab neu eu brawd. Mae 253 o gyrff yn dal i fod wedi'u claddu o dan y ddaear.
Daeth y Dirprwy Lywydd i’r Gadair.
The Deputy Presiding Officer took the Chair.
In addition to the 261 miners who died in the explosion, three rescuers lost their lives. One miner died the following Tuesday from a secondary explosion on the surface, and the two hundred and sixty-sixth man, Frederick Strange, died in October, collapsing at a memorial service.
The management were under pressure to increase productivity, so they allowed illegal double shifts, and, tragically, the colliery was busier than usual on that night shift, as many men were working double shifts to free themselves up for a very big weekend, where Wrexham AFC were playing Tranmere Rovers on the Saturday, a fair was in town, and Blackpool illuminations, a huge tourist attraction at the time, were taking place over the weekend.
The inquiry that took place following the disaster was a sham. The pressure for more coal outweighed the safety regulations, and there was a catalogue of failings and mismanagement. Conditions were beyond awful, and very few men were members of a union, if one was available, as they could not afford the extra cost. Record-keeping was never a strong point at Gresford, with many reports not kept correctly, and important paperwork destroyed. There are strong allegations that certain documents were fabricated and falsified in order to protect the owners.
At the court of inquiry convened after the disaster, attention was drawn to innumerable breaches of the law and of regulations laid down for the protection of those who worked in the mine, also the fact that the behaviour of the inspectorate had been deplorable. However, after concluding a spark from a telephone caused the explosion, the managers and deputies were fined a paltry sum, amounting to less than 25p per man. No-one was ever held accountable, with the fine of around £150 relating to bookkeeping errors, rather than circumstances surrounding the explosion.
News of the disaster spread around the UK and the world, and over 10,000 letters of sympathy were received. A disaster relief fund was set up by the mayor of Wrexham, which raised over £0.5 million. Every deserving case was said to be carefully investigated by the committee, and grants and weekly allowances were paid so that distress could be alleviated at once.
The impact of this disaster on the community is unfathomable, with every village in and around Wrexham affected. While those in authority were devoid of compassion, countless gifts and donations of clothing and food were sent to Wrexham by members of the public. Salted fish was sent from Grimsby, and Aberdeen fish merchants sent 200 boxes of kippered herrings, and lamb was received from New Zealand. A fruit grower in Kent sent 3 tonnes of apples, and residents of Deal, also in Kent, raised money for the widows and children to invite them for a holiday. Approximately three bus loads of people travelled down to Kent on an all-expenses-paid trip, and there are many accounts of those who went in disbelief as to how far Deal is away from Wrexham. [Laughter.]
Friday at the colliery was payday, so many of the miners had their pay packet on their person. Local shopkeepers gave credit to victims' families, as they knew the wages had been buried with the miners. Shockingly, men who worked that fateful night were docked four hours' pay, or half their wages, for not completing their shift.
We are fortunate to have the Wrexham miners project, led by George Powell, who, in restoring the Wrexham mines rescue station, is saving our mining history. At the rescue station, there is a wall bearing the names of the 266 men and boys, and it was here I delved into the history of the disaster in preparation for this debate. Alan Jones, who I spoke to when researching this speech, was a ventilation officer at Gresford colliery. His grandad swapped shifts with his cousin that night, and although he then avoided the tragedy, he was so consumed with guilt that he never worked again. There was the Nicholls family, four brothers, John, William, Harry and an unnamed gentleman, who was a widower with four little girls. So, he asked his brother Harry to change shifts with him, so he could take his children to the fair.
Trevor Lloyd Jones was aged 10 when news came through that his father David was caught up in the disaster. He was told under no circumstances to go to the scene, but he went anyway, and he went into a cycle shed, and the only bicycle in there was his father's. Trevor told this story at the eighty-fifth anniversary commemorations of the disaster, when he was 95 years old. It was the first time his family had ever heard the story, and Trevor broke down in tears whilst recalling the memory, which he'd kept to himself for decades.
Local reporter and photographer Geoff Charles was the first member of the press on site, and upon arriving at the scene, he had the idea to inspect the lanterns, realising that if they counted how many lanterns were not in storage, they'd be able to gain a good idea about how many lanterns, and therefore people, were down the mine. Initial estimates had reported that around 100 miners were underground, but Geoff was the first person to realise that over 200 were missing.
There are many individuals whose tireless work and campaigning has ensured that the Gresford disaster has not been forgotten. Emily Capper, who wrote to everyone in authority begging them to bring the bodies out, started petitions, visiting the pit every Friday once it reopened to gather signatures, and those records still exist at the national archives. Thousands of people signed their names on whatever they had available—envelopes, leaflets and pieces of scrap paper. Emily also campaigned for a memorial, as so many families did not have a body to bury or a grave to mourn. After Emily died, here daughter, Margaret, dedicated her life to securing the memorial.
Another key individual was Ted McKay, a miners' agent for north Wales and a prolific letter writer. Margaret spotted his letters in the local paper and she and Ted arranged a meeting inviting the deceased miners' relatives and friends. This meeting became the catalyst to the creation of a memorial, with the memorial finally being unveiled in November 1982 by the then Prince of Wales. The memorial features an original wheel from the winding gear and it remains the key focal point for the disaster, with over 200 people attending last September's service.
The mine was re-entered in 1935, and coal production was gradually resumed from January 1936 until the pit closed in 1974. Many people in Wrexham continue to feel that the disaster was overlooked, with the politics of the day enabling those in authority to not be held accountable. Surviving relatives I met with wish to see a further inquiry. I wrote to the UK Government Secretary of State for Wales, Jo Stevens MP, last autumn requesting this. Regretfully, the response was rejected, as, according to her, further investigation would not be able to uncover the answers that the community desires.
Despite the disaster happening 90 years ago, gratitude must go to the many people who continue to ensure that memories are kept alive. Others, including Ruby McBurney, daughter of William Crump, who was killed in the disaster, together with her sister, Evelyn, and her friend Margery Morrison, were instrumental in raising funds to pay for a plaque at the memorial containing the names of the 266 men and boys who lost their lives, and also the past and present friends of the Gresford colliery disaster memorial, who still continue to meet regularly. I also wish to pay tribute to the Reverend Canon David Griffiths, who conducted the memorial services for 33 years. A big thank you to George Powell and to Alan and Margaret Jones, who, 90 years later, are still uncovering more information about the disaster and the impact on the community. The book The Gresford Letters: Aftermath of a Disaster by Beverley Tinson is also a fascinating read.
Looking back at our history allows us to learn vital lessons that can inform present-day actions and decisions. One way in which we can honour those who died in Gresford is to maintain legislation for robust workers' rights. We've grown accustomed to the modern working practices of today, but we must never forget the desperate and dangerous conditions that the miners of Gresford faced day after day. Having strong representative bodies provides workers with a collective voice to challenge grievances, negotiate better wages and secure improved conditions and fairer treatment. I believe that maintaining these is an appropriate way to honour and remember those who lost their lives in the Gresford colliery disaster. Diolch.
Yn ogystal â'r 261 o lowyr a fu farw yn y ffrwydrad, collodd tri achubwr eu bywydau. Bu farw un glöwr y dydd Mawrth canlynol o ffrwydrad dilynol ar yr wyneb, a bu farw'r olaf o'r 266, Frederick Strange, ym mis Hydref, ar ôl cwympo mewn gwasanaeth coffa.
Roedd y rheolwyr dan bwysau i gynyddu cynhyrchiant, felly fe wnaethant ganiatáu shifftiau dwbl anghyfreithlon, ac yn drasig, roedd y pwll glo'n brysurach nag arfer ar y shifft y noson honno, gan fod llawer o ddynion yn gweithio shifftiau dwbl i fod yn rhydd ar gyfer penwythnos mawr iawn, pan oedd Clwb Pêl-droed Wrecsam yn chwarae Tranmere Rovers ar y dydd Sadwrn, roedd yna ffair yn y dref, ac roedd goleuadau Blackpool, atyniad enfawr i dwristiaid ar y pryd, yn digwydd dros y penwythnos.
Esgus o beth oedd yr ymchwiliad a gynhaliwyd yn dilyn y trychineb. Roedd y pwysau am fwy o lo wedi gorbwyso'r rheoliadau diogelwch, a chafwyd cyfres o fethiannau ac enghreifftiau o gamreoli. Roedd yr amodau y tu hwnt i ofnadwy, ac ychydig iawn o ddynion a oedd yn aelodau o undeb, os oedd un ar gael, am na allent fforddio'r gost ychwanegol. Nid oedd cadw cofnodion erioed wedi bod yn gryfder yng Ngresffordd, gyda llawer o adroddiadau heb eu cadw'n gywir, a gwaith papur pwysig wedi'i ddinistrio. Mae honiadau cryf fod rhai dogfennau wedi'u ffugio er mwyn gwarchod y perchnogion.
Yn llys yr ymchwiliad a gynhaliwyd ar ôl y trychineb, tynnwyd sylw at y modd y torrwyd y gyfraith niferoedd o weithiau ynghyd â'r rheoliadau a osodwyd i ddiogelu'r rhai a oedd yn gweithio yn y pwll glo, ac at y ffaith bod ymddygiad yr arolygiaeth wedi bod yn druenus. Fodd bynnag, ar ôl dod i'r casgliad fod gwreichionen o ffôn wedi achosi'r ffrwydrad, cafodd y rheolwyr a'r dirprwyon ddirwy bitw, a oedd yn cyfateb i lai na 25c am bob dyn. Ni chafodd neb erioed eu dwyn yn gyfrifol, gyda'r ddirwy o tua £150 yn ymwneud â gwallau cadw cyfrifon, yn hytrach nag amgylchiadau'n gysylltiedig â'r ffrwydrad.
Lledaenodd y newyddion am y trychineb ledled y DU a'r byd, a derbyniwyd dros 10,000 o lythyrau o gydymdeimlad. Sefydlwyd cronfa yn sgil y trychineb gan faer Wrecsam, a gododd dros £0.5 miliwn. Dywedid bod pob achos haeddiannol yn cael ei ymchwilio'n ofalus gan y pwyllgor, a thalwyd grantiau a lwfansau wythnosol fel y gellid lleddfu trallod ar unwaith.
Mae effaith y trychineb hwn ar y gymuned yn amhosibl ei ddirnad, gyda phob pentref yn Wrecsam a'r cyffiniau wedi cael eu heffeithio. Tra bo'r rhai mewn awdurdod heb ddangos fawr ddim tosturi, anfonwyd rhoddion di-ri o ddillad a bwyd i Wrecsam gan aelodau o'r cyhoedd. Anfonwyd pysgod hallt o Grimsby, ac anfonodd masnachwyr pysgod Aberdeen 200 bocs o benwaig cochion, a derbyniwyd cig oen o Seland Newydd. Anfonodd tyfwr ffrwythau yng Nghaint 3 tunnell o afalau, a chododd trigolion Deal, hefyd yng Nghaint, arian i'r gweddwon a'r plant allu mynd yno ar wyliau. Teithiodd tua thri llond bws o bobl i lawr i Gaint ar daith y talwyd amdani, a cheir sawl cofnod o bobl na allai gredu pa mor bell yw Deal o Wrecsam. [Chwerthin.]
Roedd dydd Gwener yn y pwll glo yn ddiwrnod cyflog, felly roedd gan lawer o'r glowyr eu pecyn cyflog yn eu meddiant. Rhoddodd siopwyr lleol gredyd i deuluoedd dioddefwyr, am eu bod yn gwybod bod y cyflogau wedi'u claddu gyda'r glowyr. Yn syfrdanol, tynnwyd tâl pedair awr o gyflog y dynion a weithiodd ar y noson dyngedfennol honno, neu hanner eu cyflog, am fethu cwblhau eu shifft.
Rydym yn ffodus i gael prosiect glowyr Wrecsam, dan arweiniad George Powell, sydd, drwy adfer gorsaf achub pyllau glo Wrecsam, yn achub ein hanes glofaol. Yn yr orsaf achub, mae wal yn dangos enwau'r 266 o ddynion a bechgyn, a dyma lle bûm yn ymchwilio i hanes y trychineb i baratoi ar gyfer y ddadl hon. Roedd Alan Jones, y siaradais ag ef wrth wneud ymchwil ar gyfer yr araith hon, yn swyddog awyru ym mhwll glo Gresffordd. Newidiodd ei daid shifftiau â'i gefnder y noson honno, ac er iddo osgoi'r drasiedi, cafodd ei lorio gan y fath euogrwydd fel na weithiodd byth wedyn. Teulu Nicholls wedyn, pedwar brawd, John, William, Harry ac un gŵr di-enw, a oedd yn ŵr gweddw a chanddo bedair merch fach. Felly, fe ofynnodd i'w frawd Harry newid shifftiau ag ef, fel y gallai fynd â'i blant i'r ffair.
Roedd Trevor Lloyd Jones yn 10 oed pan ddaeth y newyddion fod ei dad David wedi ei ddal gan y trychineb. Dywedwyd wrtho na ddylai fynd i'r lleoliad ar unrhyw gyfrif, ond fe aeth beth bynnag, ac aeth i mewn i sied feiciau, a'r unig feic yno oedd un ei dad. Adroddodd Trevor y stori hon mewn digwyddiad i nodi 85 mlynedd wedi'r trychineb, pan oedd yn 95 oed. Dyma'r tro cyntaf i'w deulu glywed y stori, ac roedd yn ei ddagrau wrth gofio'r atgof a gadwodd iddo'i hun am ddegawdau.
Y gohebydd a'r ffotograffydd lleol Geoff Charles oedd yr aelod cyntaf o'r wasg ar y safle, ac ar ôl cyrraedd y lleoliad, cafodd syniad i archwilio'r lanternau, gan sylweddoli, pe baent yn cyfrif faint o lanternau nad oedd wedi cael eu storio, y gallent gael syniad o faint o lanternau, ac felly pobl, a oedd i lawr yn y pwll glo. Roedd amcangyfrifon cychwynnol wedi adrodd bod tua 100 o lowyr o dan y ddaear, ond Geoff oedd y person cyntaf i sylweddoli bod dros 200 ar goll.
Mae yna lawer o unigolion y mae eu gwaith a'u hymgyrchu diflino wedi sicrhau nad yw trychineb Gresffordd wedi cael ei anghofio. Dechreuwyd deiseb gan Emily Capper, a ysgrifennodd at bawb mewn awdurdod i erfyn arnynt ddod â'r cyrff allan, ac fe ymwelai â'r pwll bob dydd Gwener ar ôl iddo ailagor i gasglu llofnodion, ac mae'r cofnodion hynny'n dal i'w gweld yn yr archifau cenedlaethol. Llofnododd miloedd o bobl eu henwau ar beth bynnag a oedd ganddynt ar gael—amlenni, taflenni a darnau o bapur sgrap. Ymgyrchodd Emily dros gofeb hefyd, am nad oedd gan gymaint o deuluoedd gorff i'w gladdu na bedd i alaru wrtho. Ar ôl i Emily farw, fe wnaeth ei merch, Margaret, hi'n ymgyrch oes i sicrhau'r gofeb.
Unigolyn allweddol arall oedd Ted McKay, asiant glowyr yng ngogledd Cymru ac ysgrifennwr llythyrau toreithiog. Gwelodd Margaret ei lythyrau yn y papur lleol a threfnodd hi a Ted gyfarfod yn gwahodd perthnasau a ffrindiau'r glowyr a fu farw. Daeth y cyfarfod hwn yn gatalydd i greu cofeb, ac fe'i dadorchuddiwyd o'r diwedd ym mis Tachwedd 1982 gan Dywysog Cymru ar y pryd. Mae'r gofeb yn cynnwys olwyn wreiddiol y pwll ac mae'n parhau i fod yn ganolbwynt allweddol ar gyfer y trychineb, a mynychodd dros 200 o bobl wasanaeth yno fis Medi diwethaf.
Aethpwyd yn ôl i mewn i'r pwll ym 1935, ac ailddechreuwyd cynhyrchu glo yn raddol o fis Ionawr 1936 nes cau'r pwll ym 1974. Mae llawer o bobl yn Wrecsam yn parhau i deimlo bod y trychineb wedi cael ei anwybyddu, gyda gwleidyddiaeth y dydd yn galluogi'r rhai mewn awdurdod i beidio â chael eu dwyn i gyfrif. Mae perthnasau y cyfarfûm â hwy yn dymuno gweld ymchwiliad pellach. Ysgrifennais at Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru Llywodraeth y DU, Jo Stevens AS, yr hydref diwethaf yn gofyn am hyn. Yn anffodus, gwrthodwyd yr ymateb, oherwydd, yn ôl yr hyn a ddywedai, ni fyddai ymchwiliad pellach yn gallu datgelu'r atebion y mae'r gymuned yn eu dymuno.
Er i'r trychineb ddigwydd 90 mlynedd yn ôl, rhaid diolch i'r bobl niferus sy'n parhau i sicrhau bod atgofion yn cael eu cadw'n fyw. Roedd eraill, gan gynnwys Ruby McBurney, merch William Crump, a laddwyd yn y trychineb, ynghyd â'i chwaer, Evelyn, a'i ffrind Margery Morrison, yn allweddol yn yr ymdrechion i godi arian i dalu am blac wrth y gofeb yn dangos enwau'r 266 o ddynion a bechgyn a gollodd eu bywydau, a hefyd cyfeillion y gofeb i drychineb pwll glo Gresffordd yn y gorffennol a'r presennol, sy'n dal i gyfarfod yn rheolaidd. Hoffwn dalu teyrnged hefyd i'r Parchedig Ganon David Griffiths, a arweiniodd y gwasanaethau coffa am 33 mlynedd. Diolch yn fawr iawn i George Powell ac i Alan a Margaret Jones, sydd, 90 mlynedd yn ddiweddarach, yn dal i ganfod mwy o wybodaeth am y trychineb a'r effaith ar y gymuned. Mae'r llyfr The Gresford Letters: Aftermath of a Disaster gan Beverley Tinson hefyd yn ddiddorol iawn.
Mae edrych yn ôl ar ein hanes yn caniatáu inni ddysgu gwersi allweddol a all lywio gweithredoedd a phenderfyniadau heddiw. Un ffordd y gallwn anrhydeddu'r rhai a fu farw yng Ngresffordd yw cynnal deddfwriaeth gadarn ar gyfer hawliau gweithwyr. Rydym wedi dod i arfer ag arferion gwaith modern heddiw, ond rhaid inni beidio ag anghofio'r amodau dybryd a pheryglus a wynebai glowyr Gresffordd o ddydd i ddydd. Mae cael cyrff cynrychiadol cryf yn rhoi llais cyfunol i weithwyr herio cwynion, negodi cyflogau gwell a sicrhau amodau gwell a thriniaeth decach. Rwy'n credu bod cynnal y rhain yn ffordd briodol o anrhydeddu a chofio am y rhai a gollodd eu bywydau yn nhrychineb pwll glo Gresffordd. Diolch.
I remind the four remaining speakers that you have one minute each.
Rwy'n atgoffa'r pedwar siaradwr sy'n weddill mai munud yr un sydd gennych.
Diolch. I'd like to start by thanking my colleague and friend Lesley Griffiths for bringing this moving and memorable short debate today. It's right that we remember in this way and at this time, and in north-east Wales, we have a proud industrial past and very much recognise the lives it touched and the legacy it left behind.
Like many, I come from a family rooted in this industrial heritage; my taid, uncle and many more members of my family worked at the Point of Ayr colliery in my constituency. The colliery was the last deep pit in north Wales, closing in 1996. In recent years, a group of retired miners have sought to bring the history of the site back to life. Ffynnongroyw, the village where most of the men once worked down the pit is now home to the Point of Ayr memorial made from the No. 2 shaft from the colliery. On the coast path nearby, there is a circular trail with interpretation panels, as well as one of the restored winding wheels. Memorabilia, sometimes alongside friendly former miners, can be found at the Holywell Area Community Museum.
Together, we will continue to recognise the contribution made to our communities and country, and to remember those whose lives were changed forever.
Diolch. Hoffwn ddechrau drwy ddiolch i fy nghyd-Aelod a fy nghyfaill Lesley Griffiths am gyflwyno'r ddadl fer deimladwy a chofiadwy hon heddiw. Mae'n iawn ein bod ni'n cofio yn y modd hwn ac ar yr adeg hon, ac yng ngogledd-ddwyrain Cymru, mae gennym orffennol diwydiannol balch ac mae ein cydnabyddiaeth i'r bywydau y cyffyrddodd â hwy a'r gwaddol a adawodd ar ei ôl yn fawr.
Fel llawer, rwy'n dod o deulu sydd wedi'i wreiddio yn y dreftadaeth ddiwydiannol hon; roedd fy nhaid, a fy ewythr a llawer mwy o aelodau fy nheulu yn gweithio ym mhwll glo'r Parlwr Du yn fy etholaeth. Y pwll glo hwnnw oedd y pwll dwfn olaf yng ngogledd Cymru, ac fe'i caewyd ym 1996. Yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf, mae grŵp o lowyr wedi ymddeol wedi ceisio dod â hanes y safle yn ôl yn fyw. Mae Ffynnongroyw, y pentref lle roedd y rhan fwyaf o'r dynion yn gweithio i lawr y pwll ar un adeg, bellach yn gartref i gofeb y Parlwr Du a wnaed o siafft Rhif 2 y pwll glo. Ar lwybr yr arfordir gerllaw, mae llwybr cylchol gyda phaneli dehongli, yn ogystal ag un o olwynion y pwll glo wedi'i hadfer. Gellir dod o hyd i femorabilia, yn ogystal â chyn-lowyr cyfeillgar, yn Amgueddfa Gymunedol Ardal Treffynnon.
Gyda'n gilydd, fe wnawn barhau i gydnabod y cyfraniad a wnaed i'n cymunedau a'n gwlad, a chofio'r rhai y newidiwyd eu bywydau am byth.
We owe a debt of honour to those who worked in the mining industry and to the mining industry over so many decades. The legacy to our politics, to our culture and to our economy is there, and only a couple of weeks ago, I and Mark Drakeford were commemorating the end of the, 40 years ago, year-long miners' strike, and remembering that legacy of those people and what they were fighting for. The best I can do is, actually, just to remember some of the impact of the mining industry on our communities: Senghenydd lost 439, Gresford 266, Ocean lost 190, Tynewydd lost 144, Abercarn 268, Llay 51, Mardy colliery 77, Albion 26, Hafod 96, Ynyshir 38, Risca 146, Risca 120, Abersychan 176, and the list goes on to just about every community in Wales. The full list is well over 6,000, and on top of that are the tens of thousands who gave their lives through occupational illness, and the tens of thousands who suffered severe injuries in the mining industry over those years. We remember that legacy. We remember those who fought for their industry and for their communities during that miners' strike 40 years ago, and the reasons, the politics and the commitment they gave to fighting for their communities. It's embedded in our history and it's important that the next generations in our education system actually know that history as well.
Mae arnom ddyled i'r rhai a weithiai yn y diwydiant mwyngloddio ac i'r diwydiant mwyngloddio dros gymaint o ddegawdau. Mae'r gwaddol i'n gwleidyddiaeth, i'n diwylliant ac i'n heconomi yno, ac ychydig wythnosau yn ôl, roeddwn i a Mark Drakeford yn coffáu diwedd streic y glowyr, a barhaodd am flwyddyn, 40 mlynedd yn ôl, ac yn cofio gwaddol y bobl hynny a'r hyn yr ymladdent drosto. Y gorau y gallaf ei wneud yw cofio peth o effaith y diwydiant mwyngloddio ar ein cymunedau: collodd Senghennydd 439, Gresffordd 266, collodd Ocean 190, collodd Tynewydd 144, Aber-carn 268, Llai 51, pwll glo Maerdy 77, yr Albion 26, Hafod 96, Ynys-hir 38, Rhisga 146, Rhisga 120, Abersychan 176, ac mae'r rhestr yn parhau i bron bob cymuned yng Nghymru. Mae'r rhestr lawn ymhell dros 6,000, ac ar ben hynny mae'r degau o filoedd a roddodd eu bywydau drwy salwch galwedigaethol, a'r degau o filoedd a ddioddefodd anafiadau difrifol yn y diwydiant mwyngloddio dros y blynyddoedd hynny. Rydym yn cofio'r gwaddol hwnnw. Rydym yn cofio'r rhai a ymladdodd dros eu diwydiant a'u cymunedau yn ystod streic y glowyr 40 mlynedd yn ôl, a'r rhesymau, y wleidyddiaeth a'u hymrwymiad i ymladd dros eu cymunedau. Mae wedi'i ymgorffori yn ein hanes ac mae'n bwysig fod y cenedlaethau nesaf yn ein system addysg yn gwybod yr hanes hwnnw hefyd.
Thank you so much to Lesley Griffiths for bringing this up this evening. If you've been born and brought up in Wrexham, it's really clear that the Gresford colliery mining disaster defined the community. I was born and raised five minutes away from Gresford colliery and, all of my life at school, there was talk and discussion in our household and in my school around the importance of remembering the Gresford colliery mining disaster. My nain used to talk about hearing the sirens going off when the explosion happened and hearing people rush there. She wasn't able to go and nor was her family, but she talked about the effect it had had on her.
My final point is this: we must never, ever forget the debt of gratitude we owe to those people who gave their lives, because they improved the conditions—working conditions—and began to form the unions that represent people, and, hopefully, ensure that things like this never, ever happen again. We must never, ever erode the rights that were hard fought for, and we must never, ever erode our unions into the future either. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Diolch i Lesley Griffiths am godi hyn heno. Os ydych chi wedi cael eich geni a'ch magu yn Wrecsam, mae'n amlwg iawn fod trychineb pwll glo Gresffordd wedi diffinio'r gymuned. Cefais fy ngeni a fy magu bum munud i ffwrdd o bwll glo Gresffordd a thrwy gydol fy amser yn yr ysgol, cafwyd sôn a thrafod yn ein cartref ac yn fy ysgol am bwysigrwydd cofio trychineb pwll glo Gresffordd. Roedd fy nain yn arfer siarad am glywed y seirenau’n canu pan ddigwyddodd y ffrwydrad a chlywed pobl yn rhuthro yno. Ni allodd fynd yno na'i theulu ychwaith, ond siaradai am yr effaith a gafodd arni.
Fy mhwynt olaf yw hyn: ni ddylem byth anghofio'r ddyled sydd arnom i'r bobl a roddodd eu bywydau, oherwydd fe wnaethant wella'r amodau—amodau gwaith—a dechrau ffurfio'r undebau sy'n cynrychioli pobl, ac sy'n sicrhau, gobeithio, na fydd pethau fel hyn byth yn digwydd eto. Ni ddylem byth erydu'r hawliau yr ymladdwyd yn galed amdanynt, ac ni ddylem byth erydu ein hundebau yn y dyfodol ychwaith. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
I'm grateful for a moment to speak this evening. As has already been outlined, the Gresford mining disaster was one of the most tragic and worst mining disasters that we've seen, with 266 men losing their lives. The Member for Wrexham, Lesley Griffiths, has rightly paid credit to those people who've kept the memory of those men alive over the decades. But, also, I'd like to pay credit to the Member herself for doing her part in keeping the memory of those who died on that tragic day alive, and for, again, raising this here in the Chamber this evening, because it wasn't just a tragedy that took the lives of the men on that day and in the time afterwards, but it affected families in Wrexham and beyond for many years to come. As has just been outlined by Jane there, it continues to affect people even to this day, and it's right that we, even 90 years on, or 90 plus years now, still commemorate these events. I'd like to also just support Mick Antoniw in his comments on, actually, the importance of younger generations and generations to come understanding and learning from events like this, and I think there's a part for us all to play to remind younger generations and generations to come of these tragedies so that we do not experience such things again in the future. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Rwy'n ddiolchgar am gyfle i siarad heno. Fel sydd eisoes wedi'i amlinellu, trychineb pwll glo Gresffordd oedd un o'r trychinebau mwyngloddio mwyaf trasig a gwaethaf a welsom, gyda 266 o ddynion yn colli eu bywydau. Mae'r Aelod dros Wrecsam, Lesley Griffiths, wedi rhoi clod priodol i'r bobl hynny sydd wedi cadw'r cof am y dynion hynny'n fyw dros y degawdau. Ond hoffwn innau hefyd roi clod i'r Aelod ei hun am wneud ei rhan yn cadw'r cof am y rhai a fu farw ar y diwrnod trasig hwnnw'n fyw, ac am godi hyn yma yn y Siambr heno, oherwydd roedd yn fwy na thrasiedi a gymerodd fywydau'r dynion y diwrnod hwnnw ac yn yr amser wedyn, fe effeithiodd ar deuluoedd yn Wrecsam a thu hwnt am flynyddoedd lawer i ddod. Fel y nodwyd nawr gan Jane, mae'n parhau i effeithio ar bobl hyd heddiw, ac mae'n iawn ein bod ni, 90 mlynedd yn ddiweddarach hyd yn oed, neu 90 mlynedd a mwy bellach, yn dal i goffáu'r digwyddiadau hyn. Hoffwn ategu sylwadau Mick Antoniw hefyd ynglŷn â pha mor bwysig yw hi fod cenedlaethau i ddod a chenedlaethau iau yn deall ac yn dysgu o ddigwyddiadau fel hyn, ac rwy'n credu bod rhan i bawb ohonom ei chwarae yn atgoffa cenedlaethau iau a chenedlaethau i ddod am y trasiedïau hyn fel na phrofwn bethau o'r fath eto yn y dyfodol. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Galwaf ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyllid a'r Gymraeg i ymateb i'r ddadl—Mark Drakeford.
I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language to reply to the debate—Mark Drakeford.
Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thanks to Lesley for such a moving account of those devastating events in Gresford 90 years ago. Dirprwy Lywydd, it seems very fitting to me that the last thing we will talk about in this Chamber before it is remodelled is something that has such resonance into the history of Wales, such connections with so many other communities, as Mick Antoniw has said, because what happened at Gresford continues to resonate, as we’ve heard, through the generations.
Diolch yn fawr, Ddirprwy Lywydd, a diolch i Lesley am gofnod mor deimladwy o'r digwyddiadau dinistriol hynny yng Ngresffordd 90 mlynedd yn ôl. Ddirprwy Lywydd, mae'n ymddangos yn briodol iawn i mi fod y peth olaf y byddwn yn siarad yn ei gylch yn y Siambr hon cyn iddi gael ei hailfodelu yn rhywbeth sy'n adleisio cymaint yn hanes Cymru, sydd â chymaint o gysylltiadau â chymaint o gymunedau eraill, fel y dywedodd Mick Antoniw, oherwydd fel y clywsom, mae'r hyn a ddigwyddodd yng Ngresffordd yn parhau i atseinio drwy'r cenedlaethau.
Now, early in the 1920s, recruitment to the North Wales Miners' Federation rose for the first time to over 16,000 people, but the decade that followed was hard in the mining communities of north-east Wales, as in any other coalfield. The general strike of 1926 around Wrexham saw demonstrations, arrests and a distress committee set up to help people who were being starved back into work, but the determination and the courage that was so displayed by people dissolved into the bitterness of a forced return. And by the time, only a few short years later, of the overwhelming tragedy at the Gresford colliery, as you’ve heard from Lesley, the ability of workers at the colliery to organise and to make sure that their interests were defended had been eroded over those 15 years.
You’ve heard already how, in the early hours of that Saturday morning, a huge explosion took place, and that extra poignancy to the tragedy that there were many men at work that morning who wouldn’t otherwise have been at work had they not made special arrangements to be there because of the other events that they wanted to attend, and for 266 of them, as we know, that would never happen. The scale of the tragedy is difficult to comprehend—those hundreds of husbands, fathers, sons and brothers lost in that single and catastrophic event, a disaster that devastated and marked an entire community in that single instance.
Locally, the subsequent inquiry opened on 25 October. It was held in Church House in Wrexham. It was led by Sir Henry Walker, the chief inspector of mines. The inquiry found, as you’ve heard, serious safety failings, inadequate ventilation, poor gas monitoring, but, as was so often the case in Welsh mining disasters, no owner was ever found accountable and no prosecutions ever took place. The National Archives in Kew, as Lesley said, contains a harrowing collection of letters from women affected by the explosion, still waiting years later for the return of any sign of the remains of their loved ones.
The aftermath, Dirprwy Lywydd, was both immediate and long lasting. Just further down the north Wales coast that day, in Llandudno, one of the greatest artists of the twentieth century, Paul Robeson, was performing in a concert. He’d been in Caernarfon the day before and he was in Wrexham on 22 September. He immediately donated the whole proceeds of his concerts to the disaster appeal. He was soon to embark upon the making of that remarkable film, The Proud Valley, which culminates, of course, in an underground explosion. The impact of Gresford was felt far beyond Wrexham itself, even as Paul Robeson returned to the town again during the 1930s for further fundraising concerts for that appeal.
Now, the North Wales Miners’ Association was represented at the inquiry. It was represented by Sir Stafford Cripps. He used the evidence presented at the inquiry to bolster the case for nationalisation of the mines, and, of course, in 1947, when that nationalisation took place, he was Chancellor of the Exchequer in that great 1945 Labour Government. While, of course, both the findings of the inquiry and not simply the nationalisation but the safety measures that went alongside with it came too late for the men who were killed at Gresford, the important reforms that the inquiry indirectly gave rise to quite certainly led to safety regulations that would protect future generations of miners. And, as others have said, our modern commitment to workers' rights and to community resilience can be traced directly back to those events and the other events that Mick Antoniw spoke of. The story of Gresford speaks to enduring questions of social justice, about workplace safety, corporate accountability and support for communities facing devastating loss.
Nawr, yn gynnar yn y 1920au, cododd y nifer a recriwtiwyd i Ffederasiwn Glowyr Gogledd Cymru i dros 16,000 o bobl am y tro cyntaf, ond roedd y degawd a ddilynodd yn anodd yng nghymunedau glofaol gogledd-ddwyrain Cymru, fel mewn unrhyw faes glo arall. Yn ystod streic gyffredinol 1926 gwelwyd gwrthdystiadau ac arestiadau o amgylch Wrecsam a sefydlwyd pwyllgor trallod i helpu pobl a oedd yn llwgu yn ôl i'r gwaith, ond trodd y penderfyniad a'r dewrder a ddangoswyd i'r fath raddau gan bobl yn chwerwder wrth gael eu gorfodi i ddychwelyd. Ac erbyn y drasiedi eithriadol ychydig flynyddoedd yn ddiweddarach ym mhwll glo Gresffordd, fel y clywsoch gan Lesley, roedd gallu gweithwyr y pwll glo i drefnu a gwneud yn siŵr fod eu buddiannau'n cael eu diogelu wedi erydu dros y 15 mlynedd hynny.
Rydych chi wedi clywed eisoes sut y digwyddodd ffrwydrad enfawr yn oriau mân y bore Sadwrn hwnnw, a'r tristwch ychwanegol fod llawer o ddynion yn y gwaith y bore hwnnw na fyddent wedi bod yno oni bai eu bod wedi gwneud trefniadau arbennig i fod yno oherwydd y digwyddiadau eraill yr oeddent am eu mynychu, ac i 266 ohonynt, fel y gwyddom, ni fyddai hynny byth yn digwydd. Mae'n anodd deall graddfa'r drasiedi—y cannoedd o wŷr, tadau, meibion a brodyr a gollwyd mewn un digwyddiad trychinebus, trychineb a ddinistriodd ac a effeithiodd ar gymuned gyfan mewn amrantiad.
Yn lleol, agorodd yr ymchwiliad dilynol ar 25 Hydref. Fe'i cynhaliwyd yn Nhŷ'r Eglwys yn Wrecsam. Fe'i harweiniwyd gan Syr Henry Walker, prif arolygydd y mwyngloddiau. Canfu'r ymchwiliad, fel y clywsoch, fethiannau diogelwch difrifol, awyru annigonol, trefniadau monitro nwy gwael, ond fel y byddai'n digwydd mor aml mewn trychinebau mwyngloddio yng Nghymru, ni chafwyd unrhyw berchennog yn gyfrifol ac ni chafwyd unrhyw erlyniadau. Mae'r Archifau Cenedlaethol yn Kew, fel y dywedodd Lesley, yn cynnwys casgliad dirdynnol o lythyrau gan fenywod yr effeithiwyd arnynt gan y ffrwydrad, menywod a oedd yn dal i aros flynyddoedd yn ddiweddarach i unrhyw arwydd o weddillion eu hanwyliaid gael eu dychwelyd.
Roedd y canlyniadau, Ddirprwy Lywydd, yn uniongyrchol ac yn hirhoedlog ar yr un pryd. Ychydig ymhellach draw ar arfordir gogledd Cymru y diwrnod hwnnw, yn Llandudno, roedd un o artistiaid mwyaf yr ugeinfed ganrif, Paul Robeson, yn perfformio mewn cyngerdd. Roedd wedi bod yng Nghaernarfon y diwrnod cynt ac roedd yn Wrecsam ar 22 Medi. Rhoddodd holl elw ei gyngherddau ar unwaith i apêl y trychineb. Yn fuan iawn roedd yn dechrau creu'r ffilm ryfeddol honno, The Proud Valley, sy'n gorffen, wrth gwrs, gyda ffrwydrad tanddaearol. Câi effaith Gresffordd ei deimlo ymhell y tu hwnt i Wrecsam ei hun, hyd yn oed wrth i Paul Robeson ddychwelyd i'r dref eto yn ystod y 1930au ar gyfer cyngherddau codi arian pellach ar gyfer yr apêl.
Nawr, cynrychiolwyd Cymdeithas Glowyr Gogledd Cymru yn yr ymchwiliad. Fe'i cynrychiolwyd gan Syr Stafford Cripps. Defnyddiodd y dystiolaeth a gyflwynwyd yn yr ymchwiliad i gryfhau'r achos dros wladoli'r pyllau glo, ac wrth gwrs, ym 1947, pan ddigwyddodd y gwladoli, roedd yn Ganghellor y Trysorlys yn y Llywodraeth Lafur wych honno a ddaeth i rym ym 1945. Er bod canfyddiadau'r ymchwiliad ac nid yn unig y gwladoli ond y mesurau diogelwch a âi ochr yn ochr â hynny'n rhy hwyr i'r dynion a laddwyd yng Ngresffordd, yn sicr fe arweiniodd y diwygiadau pwysig a ddeilliodd yn anuniongyrchol o'r ymchwiliad at reoliadau diogelwch a fyddai'n diogelu cenedlaethau'r dyfodol o lowyr. Ac fel y mae eraill wedi dweud, gellir olrhain ein hymrwymiad modern i hawliau gweithwyr ac i wytnwch cymunedol yn uniongyrchol i'r digwyddiadau hynny a'r digwyddiadau eraill y soniodd Mick Antoniw amdanynt. Mae stori Gresffordd yn codi cwestiynau parhaus ynghylch cyfiawnder cymdeithasol, am ddiogelwch yn y gweithle, atebolrwydd corfforaethol a chefnogaeth i gymunedau sy'n wynebu colledion dinistriol.
Now, every year at the miners memorial at Gresford, the haunting miners hymn is played every year at the memorial service, and this year, one of my sons was in the brass band that took part in that ninetieth anniversary commemoration. He phoned me that evening to tell me that he’d seen Lesley Griffiths at three separate events—morning, afternoon and evening—as they’d moved about on that very important memorial day. And it’s very striking, isn’t it, as Jane Dodds said, how, even 90 years later, there is a sense of community solidarity that comes from having been connected to one of those profoundly significant events.
We have here in Wales so many tragedies to remember, and I was honoured, last year, to play a small part in the formal recognition of the memorial garden in Senghenydd, as the national mining disaster memorial garden of Wales. It’s a remarkable place. You feel very directly connected to the disaster that happened there in 1913—connected both by the physical proximity to where the disaster happened, but also by the fact that, every single day, volunteers from that community come to the garden to make sure that it is kept in good order. Every mining disaster that Mick Antoniw mentioned is commemorated there. Every paving stone you walk on has another disaster beneath your feet, and there is something very moving about those names. Lesley, I thought it was very moving to hear the names that you read out of the individuals who were there on that day, their families and what happened to them. We do some honour to them simply by mentioning them on the floor of the national Senedd here in Wales.
And today, in contemporary Wales, the legacy of our industrial past continues to shape our communities. The landslide in Tylorstown in 2020 brought the issue of disused tip safety into sharp focus, and the slip in Cwmtillery just last year again reminded us of what it means in Wales to be faced with that new threat of climate change and extreme weather events when it coincides with that very visible history of our communities. In response, we are taking through the Senedd the law, the Disused Mine and Quarry Tips (Wales) Bill, which will ensure long-term effective management of disused tips and reduce the threat to public safety.
Just last month, I was lucky enough to visit the Duffryn Rhondda site in Neath Port Talbot, alongside the Deputy First Minister, where we saw in front of us some of that coal tip safety work actually taking place, and immediately after that visit, Huw left south Wales to go to Wrexham to attend an event there too, reminding us—because we do sometimes forget—that the coal industry in north-east Wales was just as significant to its local population as the coal industry in south Wales has been to ours. The Bill in front of the Senedd will ensure that our coalfield communities today can co-exist peacefully with the remains of our industrial past, and it's entirely fitting that the start of that journey was made by the Senedd Member for Wrexham, because it was Lesley who sponsored that first report of the Law Commission that analysed the current state of the statute book and created the foundations for the reforms that we are now taking forward.
In remembering the events of Gresford 90 years ago, we remind ourselves of those principles of social justice, of community solidarity, of collective action in the workplace, and that sense of community resilience that we're so fortunate still to have present here in Wales today. As I said, to have a chance to do that for the last time in this Chamber before we see it transformed into its new future, I hope that does something to recognise the strength of feeling and the memories that still exist in that community. Diolch yn fawr.
Nawr, bob blwyddyn wrth gofeb y glowyr yng Ngresffordd, mae emyn dirdynnol y glowyr yn cael ei chwarae bob blwyddyn yn y gwasanaeth coffa, ac eleni, roedd un o fy meibion yn y band pres a gymerodd ran yn y digwyddiad a nodai 90 mlynedd ers y trychineb. Fe wnaeth fy ffonio y noson honno i ddweud wrthyf ei fod wedi gweld Lesley Griffiths mewn tri digwyddiad gwahanol—bore, prynhawn a nos— wrth iddynt symud o gwmpas ar y diwrnod coffa pwysig hwnnw. Ac mae'n drawiadol iawn, onid yw, fel y dywedodd Jane Dodds, sut y ceir ymdeimlad o undod cymunedol, 90 mlynedd yn ddiweddarach hyd yn oed, o fod yn gysylltiedig ag un o'r digwyddiadau hynod arwyddocaol hynny.
Yma yng Nghymru mae gennym gymaint o drasiedïau i'w cofio, ac roedd yn anrhydedd i mi, y llynedd, gael chwarae rhan fach yn y gydnabyddiaeth ffurfiol i'r ardd goffa yn Senghennydd, gardd goffa genedlaethol trychinebau mwyngloddio Cymru. Mae'n lle rhyfeddol. Rydych chi'n teimlo cysylltiad uniongyrchol iawn â'r trychineb a ddigwyddodd yno yn 1913—wedi eich cysylltu gan yr agosrwydd ffisegol at ble y digwyddodd y trychineb, ond hefyd gan y ffaith bod gwirfoddolwyr, bob dydd, o'r gymuned honno yn dod i'r ardd i wneud yn siŵr ei bod yn cael ei chadw'n daclus. Mae pob trychineb mwyngloddio a grybwyllodd Mick Antoniw yn cael ei goffáu yno. Mae gan bob carreg balmant y cerddwch arni enw trychineb arall o dan eich traed, ac mae rhywbeth emosiynol iawn am yr enwau hynny. Lesley, roeddwn yn meddwl ei bod yn emosiynol iawn eich clywed yn darllen enwau'r unigolion a oedd yno ar y diwrnod hwnnw, eu teuluoedd a'r hyn a ddigwyddodd iddynt. Rydym yn eu hanrhydeddu drwy eu crybwyll ar lawr y Senedd genedlaethol yma yng Nghymru.
A heddiw, yn y Gymru gyfoes, mae gwaddol ein gorffennol diwydiannol yn parhau i siapio ein cymunedau. Daeth y tirlithriad yn Tylorstown yn 2020 â sylw mawr i fater diogelwch tomenni nas defnyddir, ac fe wnaeth y tirlithriad yng Nghwmtyleri y flwyddyn diwethaf ein hatgoffa unwaith eto o'r hyn y mae'n ei olygu yng Nghymru i wynebu bygythiad newydd newid hinsawdd a digwyddiadau tywydd eithafol pan fo'n cyd-daro â hanes gweladwy iawn ein cymunedau. Mewn ymateb, rydym yn mynd â deddf drwy'r Senedd, y Bil Tomenni Mwyngloddiau a Chwareli nas Defnyddir (Cymru), a fydd yn sicrhau rheolaeth effeithiol hirdymor ar domenni nas defnyddir ac yn lleihau'r bygythiad i ddiogelwch y cyhoedd.
Y mis diwethaf, bûm yn ddigon ffodus i ymweld â safle Duffryn Rhondda yng Nghastell-nedd Port Talbot, gyda'r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog, lle gwelsom beth o'r gwaith diogelwch hwnnw'n digwydd, ac yn syth ar ôl yr ymweliad hwnnw, gadawodd Huw dde Cymru i fynd i Wrecsam i fynychu digwyddiad yno hefyd, gan ein hatgoffa—oherwydd rydym weithiau'n anghofio—fod y diwydiant glo yng ngogledd-ddwyrain Cymru yr un mor arwyddocaol i'w phoblogaeth leol ag y mae'r diwydiant glo yn ne Cymru i'n poblogaeth ni. Bydd y Bil gerbron y Senedd yn sicrhau y gall cymunedau ein maes glo heddiw gydfodoli'n heddychlon â gweddillion ein gorffennol diwydiannol, ac mae'n gwbl briodol mai'r Aelod Senedd dros Wrecsam a gychwynnodd y daith honno, oherwydd Lesley a gomisiynodd adroddiad cyntaf Comisiwn y Gyfraith a ddadansoddai gyflwr presennol y llyfr statud a chreu'r sylfeini ar gyfer y diwygiadau yr ydym yn eu datblygu nawr.
Wrth gofio digwyddiadau Gresffordd 90 mlynedd yn ôl, atgoffwn ein hunain am egwyddorion cyfiawnder cymdeithasol, undod cymunedol, gweithredu cyfunol yn y gweithle, a'r ymdeimlad o wytnwch cymunedol yr ydym mor ffodus o'i gael yma yng Nghymru hyd heddiw. Fel y dywedais, rwy'n gobeithio bod y cyfle i wneud hynny am y tro olaf yn y Siambr hon cyn inni ei gweld wedi'i thrawsnewid ar gyfer ei dyfodol newydd, yn gwneud rhywbeth i gydnabod cryfder y teimlad a'r atgofion sy'n dal i fodoli yn y gymuned honno. Diolch yn fawr.
Diolch i chi i gyd am eich cyfraniadau. Daw hynny â thrafodion heddiw i ben.
Thank you all for your contributions. That brings today's proceedings to a close.
To remind everyone, next time we sit we will meet in Siambr Tŷ Hywel. That said, I hope you all have a good recess, have a rest, and come back refreshed for our new Chamber.
I atgoffa pawb, y tro nesaf y byddwn yn cyfarfod, byddwn yn gwneud hynny yn Siambr Tŷ Hywel. Wedi dweud hynny, gobeithio y caiff pob un ohonoch chi doriad da, a seibiant, ac y byddwch yn dychwelyd wedi eich adfywio ar gyfer ein Siambr newydd.
Daeth y cyfarfod i ben am 19:31.
The meeting ended at 19:31.