Y Cyfarfod Llawn
Plenary
23/10/2024Cynnwys
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. Yr eitem gyntaf ar ein hagenda ni y prynhawn yma fydd y cwestiynau i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros yr Economi, Ynni a Chynllunio. Mae'r cwestiwn cyntaf y prynhawn yma gan Mabon ap Gwynfor.
Good afternoon and welcome to this afternoon's Plenary session. The first item on our agenda this afternoon will be questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning. The first question this afternoon is from Mabon ap Gwynfor.
1. Pa asesiad mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet wedi ei wneud o ba un ai ydi'r cyngor sydd yn cael ei roi i awdurdodau cynllunio ynghylch datblygu gofodol yn addas i bwrpas? OQ61752
1. What assessment has the Cabinet Secretary made of whether advice given to planning authorities in respect of spatial planning is fit for purpose? OQ61752
The development plans manual sets out detailed advice on how to prepare a local development plan. It's based on best practice and identifies the key issues to be addressed and the level of evidence required to achieve an adopted LDP.
Mae'r llawlyfr cynlluniau datblygu yn rhoi cyngor manwl ar sut i baratoi cynllun datblygu lleol. Mae'n seiliedig ar arferion gorau ac yn nodi'r materion allweddol y mae angen mynd i'r afael â hwy a lefel y dystiolaeth sydd ei hangen i gyflawni CDLl mabwysiedig.
Diolch i'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet am yr ateb yna. Wel, ges i'r fraint o fynd o amgylch Pwllheli yn ddiweddar iawn efo Katalina Harper. Mae Katalina Harper yn gaeth i gadair olwyn ac, felly, mae'n anodd iawn iddi hi deithio o amgylch y dref, neu yn wir unrhyw dref. Wrth iddi fynd o amgylch corneli weithiau, oherwydd natur y palmant, mae'r gadair olwyn yn tipio drosodd, neu mae'r palmentydd yn mynd yn gul iawn, sy'n golygu ei bod hi'n methu â chyrraedd gwasanaethau hanfodol, yn methu â mynd i siopa, ac weithiau, pan fydd hi eisiau mynd ar fws, dydy'r palmentydd ddim wedi cael eu codi i'r lefel i gyrraedd mynediad y bws yna—a llwyth o broblemau eraill.
Un enghraifft yn unig ydy Katalina Harper ym Mhwllheli; mae hyn yn wir am fywyd sawl person efo anabledd neu drafferth symudedd mewn cymunedau ar draws Cymru. Felly, mae'n rhaid inni edrych i sicrhau wrth gynllunio gofodol wrth ddatblygu cynlluniau trefol eu bod nhw'n addas ar gyfer pobl mewn cadeiriau olwyn neu efo trafferth symudedd. Felly, pa gynlluniau ydych chi am eu rhoi ar y gweill i sicrhau bod llywodraethau lleol yn mynd i gymryd i ystyriaeth anghenion pobl fel Katalina wrth ddatblygu cynlluniau trefol?
Thank you very much to the Cabinet Secretary for that response. Well, I had the privilege of going around Pwllheli very recently with Katalina Harper. Katalina Harper is in a wheelchair and so it's very difficult for her to travel around the town, or indeed any town. When she goes around corners, often, because the pavement is uneven, the wheelchair tips over, or the pavements become very narrow, which means she is unable to access essential services, unable to go shopping, and sometimes, when she wants to get on a bus, the pavements haven't been raised to a sufficient level to enable her to get on the bus—and a whole host of other problems.
Katalina Harper in Pwllheli is just one example; this is true of many other people with disability or mobility issues in communities across Wales. So, we need to ensure, in spatial planning in developing urban plans for towns, that they are suitable for people who use wheelchairs or who have mobility difficulties. So, what plans will you put in place to ensure that local governments do take into account the needs of people such as Katalina in developing their town plans?
I'm very grateful for the question this afternoon and for really highlighting the importance of placemaking in terms of our town and city centres. And it's really important, of course, that any new development is undertaken in conjunction and in alignment with our planning policies that do promote that. But equally, we have towns and villages that go back centuries, which haven't necessarily kept pace with the kind of change that we want to see for accessibility.
So, I think that the work that local government should be doing in engagement with representative groups and with disabled people themselves is really important in terms of identifying those particular parts within the community that need to be addressed through investment or, often, some relatively simple changes. And I do think that some of the disabled people fora that local authorities have would be perfect places to have those discussions about identifying often relatively simple things in the community that could change but make a very big difference.
Rwy'n ddiolchgar iawn am y cwestiwn y prynhawn yma ac am dynnu sylw at bwysigrwydd creu lleoedd mewn perthynas â chanol ein trefi a'n dinasoedd. Ac mae'n bwysig iawn, wrth gwrs, fod unrhyw ddatblygiad newydd yn cael ei gyflawni ar y cyd ac yn unol â'n polisïau cynllunio sy'n hyrwyddo hynny. Ond yn yr un modd, mae gennym drefi a phentrefi sy'n ganrifoedd oed, nad ydynt o reidrwydd wedi dal i fyny â'r math o newid yr hoffem ei weld o ran hygyrchedd.
Felly, credaf fod y gwaith y dylai llywodraeth leol fod yn ei wneud yn ymgysylltu â grwpiau cynrychiadol a phobl anabl eu hunain yn wirioneddol bwysig er mwyn nodi’r rhannau penodol o fewn y gymuned y mae angen mynd i’r afael â hwy drwy fuddsoddi neu, yn aml, gwneud rhywfaint o newidiadau cymharol syml. A chredaf y byddai rhai o'r fforymau pobl anabl sydd gan awdurdodau lleol yn lleoedd perffaith i gael y trafodaethau ynglŷn â nodi pethau cymharol syml, yn aml, yn y gymuned a allai newid ond a fyddai'n gwneud gwahaniaeth mawr iawn.
I’d like to know the extent to which spatial planning has helped or hindered house building overall since the original spatial plan was adopted by the then Welsh Assembly in 2004. House building has been in steady decline, and our housing crisis continues to magnify. There are many factors contributing to the failure to meet house building targets, but the planning system is a significant part of this, and the Wales spatial plan creates another layer of delay on planning approval and construction.
There are community-led approaches that have been suggested to supplement the existing planning system, such as the idea of so-called street votes. The previous UK Government held a consultation that ended in February of this year regarding the street vote development orders, in which residents have the ability to jointly propose a development on their street and, subject to the proposal meeting certain requirements, a vote on whether the development should be given planning permission. The intention is for developments to be implemented quickly, to give residents control and to deliver more homes as soon as possible. So, can the Cabinet Secretary outline whether the Wales spatial plan has contributed to the sluggish planning approval and has the Welsh Government considered street votes as a possible supplement to the planning system? Thank you.
Hoffwn wybod i ba raddau y mae cynllunio gofodol wedi helpu neu lesteirio adeiladu tai yn gyffredinol ers i’r cynllun gofodol gwreiddiol gael ei fabwysiadu gan y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol ar y pryd yn 2004. Mae adeiladu tai wedi bod yn dirywio’n gyson, ac mae ein hargyfwng tai yn parhau i waethygu. Mae llawer o ffactorau’n cyfrannu at y methiant i gyflawni targedau adeiladu tai, ond mae’r system gynllunio yn rhan sylweddol o hyn, ac mae cynllun gofodol Cymru yn creu haen arall o oedi cyn cymeradwyaeth gynllunio ac adeiladu.
Mae dulliau a arweinir gan y gymuned wedi’u hawgrymu er mwyn ategu’r system gynllunio bresennol, megis y syniad o bleidleisiau stryd, fel y’u gelwir. Cynhaliodd Lywodraeth flaenorol y DU ymgynghoriad a ddaeth i ben ym mis Chwefror eleni ynghylch y gorchmynion datblygu pleidleisiau stryd, lle gall trigolion gynnig datblygiad ar y cyd ar eu stryd, a chyhyd â bod y cynnig yn bodloni gofynion penodol, pleidlais i weld a ddylid rhoi caniatâd cynllunio i'r datblygiad ai peidio. Y bwriad yw i ddatblygiadau gael eu rhoi ar waith yn gyflym er mwyn rhoi rheolaeth i drigolion a darparu mwy o gartrefi cyn gynted â phosibl. Felly, a wnaiff Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet ddweud a yw cynllun gofodol Cymru wedi cyfrannu at arafwch cymeradwyaeth cynllunio, ac a yw Llywodraeth Cymru wedi ystyried pleidleisiau stryd fel atodiad posibl i'r system gynllunio? Diolch.
I'm grateful for the question, and actually, this lunchtime, I was at a round-table with Building magazine, and they brought together a large section of the construction industry's representation around the table in Wales to talk about some of the challenges that are facing us in regard to delivery on construction projects. And some of those issues that they were talking about in that meeting related to visibility of the pipeline, for example, the availability of skills. So, they weren't really talking about the street votes idea, and I'm not sure, entirely, that that's the direction that we would want to go in, because, actually, the system that we have under 'Planning Policy Wales' does actually set out significant ways in which communities can, and should be, involved at the very earliest stage in relation to developments. So, we do have those formal opportunities, and they come often multiple times during the process of planning, for communities to have their say. We have very much a plan-led approach to development, and maintaining LDPs we see as the absolutely essential tool in terms of delivering on those national and local priorities, such as sustainable development through house building, placemaking, affordable housing, climate change, air quality, renewable energy, net zero and sustainable transport. The principles, though, that we have in our approach in 'Planning Policy Wales' do move us away from simply counting houses to thinking about the outcomes and the quality of the places that we build as well. So, I think we do take a different approach, but I assume that we want to get to the same destination in terms of building sustainable communities.
Rwy’n ddiolchgar am y cwestiwn, ac mewn gwirionedd, amser cinio heddiw, roeddwn mewn cyfarfod bwrdd crwn gyda chylchgrawn Building, a daethant â nifer o gynrychiolwyr y diwydiant adeiladu o amgylch y bwrdd yng Nghymru i drafod rhai o’r heriau sy’n ein hwynebu mewn perthynas â chyflawni prosiectau adeiladu. Ac roedd rhai o'r problemau yr oeddent yn sôn amdanynt yn y cyfarfod hwnnw yn ymwneud â gwelededd y llif argaeledd sgiliau, er enghraifft. Felly, nid oeddent yn sôn am syniad y pleidleisiau stryd mewn gwirionedd, ac nid wyf yn hollol siŵr mai dyna'r cyfeiriad y byddem am fynd iddo, oherwydd, mae'r system sydd gennym o dan 'Polisi Cynllunio Cymru' yn nodi ffyrdd ystyrlon y gellid ac y dylid cynnwys cymunedau o'r cychwyn cyntaf mewn perthynas â datblygiadau. Felly, mae gennym y cyfleoedd ffurfiol hynny, ac maent yn aml yn codi droeon yn ystod y broses gynllunio, i gymunedau gael dweud eu dweud. Mae gennym ddull a arweinir gan gynlluniau o ddatblygu, ac rydym o'r farn fod cynnal CDLlau yn arf cwbl hanfodol i gyflawni’r blaenoriaethau cenedlaethol a lleol, megis datblygu cynaliadwy drwy adeiladu tai, creu lleoedd, tai fforddiadwy, newid hinsawdd, ansawdd aer, ynni adnewyddadwy, sero net, a thrafnidiaeth gynaliadwy. Fodd bynnag, mae’r egwyddorion sydd gennym yn ein dull yn 'Polisi Cynllunio Cymru' yn ein symud o gyfrif tai yn unig i feddwl am ganlyniadau ac ansawdd y lleoedd a adeiladwn hefyd. Felly, credaf fod ein dull yn wahanol, ond rwy’n cymryd ein bod am gyrraedd yr un lle o ran adeiladu cymunedau cynaliadwy.
2. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet roi diweddariad ar yr hyn y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei wneud i fynd i'r afael ag anweithgarwch economaidd yng ngogledd Cymru? OQ61759
2. Will the Cabinet Secretary provide an update on what the Welsh Government is doing to tackle economic inactivity in north Wales? OQ61759
Yes. Our economic mission sets out how we are using the levers that we have to narrow the skills divide and support better jobs, with our plan for employability and skills prioritising those most in need of help. This includes supporting people to stay in work and those furthest away from the labour market to find employment.
Gwnaf. Mae ein cenhadaeth economaidd yn nodi sut rydym yn defnyddio'r ysgogiadau sydd gennym i leihau'r bwlch sgiliau a chefnogi swyddi gwell, gyda'n cynllun ar gyfer cyflogadwyedd a sgiliau yn blaenoriaethu'r rhai sydd fwyaf angen cymorth. Mae hyn yn cynnwys cefnogi pobl i aros mewn gwaith a chefnogi'r rheini sydd bellaf o'r farchnad lafur i ddod o hyd i waith.
Thank you for your response, Cabinet Secretary. One of the routes to tackling economic inactivity is what you referenced there—having that well-trained workforce. And for younger people, in particular, a large part can be done through apprenticeships, which you will know—and I know your ministerial colleague Jack Sargeant also appreciates—provide a great way to learn a trade and genuine skills that they can use throughout their working life. Unfortunately, compared to other places in the UK, and in particular England, the range of degree apprenticeships on offer here is poor. Couple that with recent cuts that the Welsh Government have made to the apprenticeship programme, and we have problems in our degree apprenticeship programme here in Wales. I recently met with the new vice-chancellor of Wrexham University, and I also met with the Royal College of Occupational Therapists, who were both very clear that degree apprenticeships can make a big difference not just to the economy, but to the services that the Welsh Government are responsible for here as well. So, I'd like to ask what is being done to increase the range of degree apprenticeships on offer, and, importantly, how you are engaging with those educational institutions and others to see the increase in take-up that I'm sure we'd all want to see.
Diolch am eich ymateb, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Un o'r llwybrau i fynd i'r afael ag anweithgarwch economaidd yw'r hyn rydych wedi cyfeirio ato yno—cael gweithlu wedi'i hyfforddi'n dda. Ac i bobl iau yn enwedig, gellir gwneud llawer drwy brentisiaethau, sydd, fel y gwyddoch—a gwn fod eich cyd-Weinidog, Jack Sargeant, hefyd yn gwybod—yn darparu ffordd wych o ddysgu crefft a sgiliau gwirioneddol y gallant eu defnyddio drwy gydol eu bywyd gwaith. Yn anffodus, o gymharu â lleoedd eraill yn y DU, ac yn enwedig Lloegr, dim ond ystod fach o radd-brentisiaethau a gynigir yma. Golyga hynny, ynghyd â’r toriadau diweddar y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi’u gwneud i’r rhaglen brentisiaethau, fod gennym broblemau yn ein rhaglen radd-brentisiaethau yma yng Nghymru. Cyfarfûm ag is-ganghellor newydd Prifysgol Wrecsam yn ddiweddar, a chyfarfûm hefyd â Choleg Brenhinol y Therapyddion Galwedigaethol, a oedd ill dau yn glir iawn y gall gradd-brentisiaethau wneud gwahaniaeth mawr nid yn unig i’r economi, ond i’r gwasanaethau y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn gyfrifol amdanynt yma hefyd. Felly, hoffwn ofyn beth sy'n cael ei wneud i gynyddu'r nifer o radd-brentisiaethau a gynigir, ac yn bwysig, sut rydych chi'n ymgysylltu â'r sefydliadau addysgol hynny ac eraill i sicrhau'r cynnydd y byddai pob un ohonom, rwy'n siŵr, yn dymuno ei weld yn y nifer sy'n manteisio ar radd-brentisiaethau.
Again, I'm very grateful for the question. We absolutely recognise the importance of apprenticeships, while we are making really significant investment in our apprenticeship programme here in Wales. Of course, this now is being led on by Medr, and Jack Sargeant is very much involved in this particular piece of work, which he is leading on. But our approach very much is one of collaboration. So, providers absolutely have to be collaborating with our university sector, and the education sector more widely, making sure that the needs of learners, employers and the wider community, and, of course, the economy are supported. So, level 6 degree apprenticeships are available, but any changes or reviews to the existing pathways must be done in collaboration. So, I'm glad to hear that you had those conversations, and I know that Jack Sargeant would be keen to have a read-out of your meeting. Thank you.
Unwaith eto, rwy'n ddiolchgar iawn am y cwestiwn. Rydym yn llwyr gydnabod pwysigrwydd prentisiaethau, ac yn gwneud buddsoddiad sylweddol iawn yn ein rhaglen brentisiaethau yma yng Nghymru. Wrth gwrs, mae Medr yn arwain ar hyn bellach, ac mae Jack Sargeant yn ymwneud yn agos â'r gwaith penodol hwn y mae’n ei arwain. Ond cydweithio yw ein dull o weithredu, yn bendant iawn. Felly, mae'n rhaid i ddarparwyr gydweithio â'n sector prifysgolion, a'r sector addysg yn ehangach, gan sicrhau bod anghenion dysgwyr, cyflogwyr a'r gymuned ehangach, ac wrth gwrs, yr economi, yn cael eu cefnogi. Felly, mae gradd-brentisiaethau lefel 6 ar gael, ond mae'n rhaid i unrhyw newidiadau neu adolygiadau i’r llwybrau presennol gael eu gwneud ar y cyd. Felly, rwy'n falch o glywed eich bod wedi cael y sgyrsiau hynny, a gwn y byddai Jack Sargeant yn awyddus i ddarllen trawsgrifiad o'ch cyfarfod. Diolch.
Mae cwestiynau'r llefarwyr heddiw i'w hateb gan y Gweinidog Diwylliant, Sgiliau a Phartneriaeth Gymdeithasol. Llefarydd y Ceidwadwyr yn gyntaf, Tom Giffard.
Today's spokespeople questions are to be answered by the Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership. First, the Conservative spokesperson, Tom Giffard.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Minister, can I congratulate you on your appointment to the role as Minister, with responsibility particularly today for culture and for sport? I've been looking forward very much to these exchanges—I know you have as well—and I've also been very grateful for the time you've offered in meeting with me already in your brief. You are, though, the fifth Minister this year with responsibility for culture. Do you accept that there has been some degree of uncertainty within the sector because of the chaos at the heart of the Welsh Government this year?
Diolch, Lywydd. Weinidog, a gaf i eich llongyfarch ar gael eich penodi yn Weinidog, gyda chyfrifoldeb yn benodol heddiw am ddiwylliant a chwaraeon? Rwyf wedi bod yn edrych ymlaen yn fawr at y dadleuon hyn—gwn eich bod chithau hefyd—ac rwyf hefyd wedi bod yn ddiolchgar iawn am yr amser rydych chi wedi'i roi i gyfarfod â mi eisoes yn eich briff. Fodd bynnag, chi yw'r pumed Gweinidog eleni â chyfrifoldeb am ddiwylliant. A ydych chi'n derbyn bod rhywfaint o ansicrwydd wedi bod yn y sector oherwydd yr anhrefn yn Llywodraeth Cymru eleni?
Firstly, Llywydd, can I thank Tom Giffard for his warm introduction to the Chamber this afternoon, and also for taking the time to meet with me—I think it was last week—to discuss the important issues the culture and sport sectors face? I think it's fair to say, Tom, that, not just on your benches but on the benches right across this place, there is a shared commitment to see the culture sector succeed. You might want to focus on the past, Tom; I will very much focus on the future. This is a sector I am energised by, it's a workforce that are determined and ambitious, and I will focus very much on understanding the priorities of many stakeholders, like those I've met already. In the challenging budgetary period that we face, we're trying to realise the opportunities of the sector, indeed. And that very much includes making sure that culture, sport, including the creative industries in Wales, are open and accessible to all, including working-class communities like mine. So, I’ll look forward to the future work. I very much look forward to these exchanges. I think, Presiding Officer, if I were to sum up my early conversations and commitment to this industry and sector, it would be very much like the famous line from the poem 'Bread and Roses':
'give us bread, but give us roses.’
Yn gyntaf, Lywydd, a gaf i ddiolch i Tom Giffard am ei groeso cynnes i'r Siambr y prynhawn yma, a hefyd am roi amser i gyfarfod â mi—yr wythnos diwethaf, rwy'n credu—i drafod y materion pwysig y mae'r sectorau diwylliant a chwaraeon yn eu hwynebu? Credaf ei bod yn deg dweud, Tom, nid yn unig ar eich meinciau chi, ond ar yr holl feinciau yn y lle hwn, fod ymrwymiad cyfunol gennym i weld y sector diwylliant yn llwyddo. Efallai eich bod yn dymuno canolbwyntio ar y gorffennol, Tom; rwyf i am ganolbwyntio ar y dyfodol. Mae hwn yn sector sy'n fy nghyffroi, mae'n weithlu sy'n benderfynol ac yn uchelgeisiol, a byddaf yn canolbwyntio ar ddeall blaenoriaethau llawer o randdeiliaid, fel y rhai rwyf eisoes wedi cyfarfod â hwy. Yn y cyfnod ariannol heriol sydd ohoni, rydym yn ceisio gwireddu cyfleoedd y sector. Ac mae hynny'n cynnwys sicrhau bod diwylliant, chwaraeon, gan gynnwys y diwydiannau creadigol yng Nghymru, yn agored ac yn hygyrch i bawb, gan gynnwys cymunedau dosbarth gweithiol fel fy un i. Felly, edrychaf ymlaen at y gwaith yn y dyfodol. Edrychaf ymlaen yn fawr at y dadleuon hyn. Lywydd, pe bawn am grynhoi fy sgyrsiau cynnar ar ymrwymiad i’r diwydiant a’r sector hwn, byddai’n debyg iawn i’r llinell enwog o’r gerdd 'Bread and Roses’:
'rhowch i ni fara, ond rhowch i ni rosod.’
Thank you very much. I had a feeling you might say that you didn’t want to the look to the past but to the future. So, last year, the culture line in the Welsh Government’s budget suffered the biggest cut of any individual budget line. So, if this is a break from the past, and a look ahead to the new future, with this year’s budget on the horizon, how will you succeed in standing up for the sector, where your predecessors didn’t?
Diolch yn fawr. Roedd gennyf deimlad y byddech yn dweud nad oeddech am edrych tua'r gorffennol ond tua'r dyfodol. Felly, y llynedd, y llinell ddiwylliant yng nghyllideb Llywodraeth Cymru a gafodd y toriad mwyaf o unrhyw linell unigol yn y gyllideb. Felly, os yw hyn yn droi cefn ar y gorffennol, ac edrych tua'r dyfodol newydd, gyda chyllideb eleni ar y gorwel, sut y byddwch chi'n llwyddo i sefyll dros y sector, pan na lwyddodd eich rhagflaenwyr i wneud hynny?
Again, thanks to Tom Giffard for raising the question this afternoon. Look, I’m not going to enter into budget discussions now. I’m sure we’ll have those in the Cabinet, and the Cabinet Secretary for finance wouldn’t look gladly on me if I was to say those things. But what I am saying—and I’m not shying away from the fact that difficult decisions have been made in this sector in the past—is that what we’ve seen from the sector, though, is the sheer resilience and the innovation that the sector can bring to the table when looking to the future.
But you’re right, there have been difficult decisions. Those difficult decisions had to be made because of the incompetence of the previous UK Government, who left a financial black hole and the mess that the public finances are in. [Interruption.] You're right, so I will look to the future, Sam Rowlands. What we’ve seen already is the additional £5 million over the summer. That built on the £3.2 million announced in July for the industry. What I can commit to, Tom, on the floor of the Chamber today is very much being the voice for the culture, sport and creative sectors in those budget discussions. They will have a Minister in me who is proud to represent them, who believes in the sectors, and who wants to work collaboratively with the sectors to make sure the sectors succeed, which I know every single one of us in this place wants to happen.
Unwaith eto, diolch i Tom Giffard am godi’r cwestiwn y prynhawn yma. Edrychwch, nid wyf am gael trafodaethau ynglŷn â'r gyllideb nawr. Rwy’n siŵr y cawn y trafodaethau hynny yn y Cabinet, ac ni fyddai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid yn hapus gyda mi pe bawn yn dweud y pethau hynny. Ond yr hyn rwy'n ei ddweud—ac nid wyf yn gwadu'r ffaith bod penderfyniadau anodd wedi’u gwneud yn y sector hwn yn y gorffennol—yw mai'r hyn a welsom gan y sector, fodd bynnag, yw’r gwytnwch a’r arloesi y gall y sector eu cynnig wrth edrych tua’r dyfodol.
Ond rydych yn llygad eich lle, mae penderfyniadau anodd wedi bod. Bu'n rhaid gwneud y penderfyniadau anodd hynny oherwydd anghymhwysedd Llywodraeth flaenorol y DU, a adawodd dwll du ariannol a'r llanast y mae cyllid cyhoeddus ynddo. [Torri ar draws.] Rydych chi'n llygad eich lle, felly byddaf yn edrych tua’r dyfodol, Sam Rowlands. Yr hyn rydym wedi’i weld eisoes yw’r £5 miliwn ychwanegol dros yr haf. Adeiladodd hynny ar y £3.2 miliwn a gyhoeddwyd ym mis Gorffennaf ar gyfer y diwydiant. Yr hyn y gallaf ymrwymo iddo, Tom, ar lawr y Siambr heddiw, yw y byddaf yn llais i’r sectorau diwylliant, chwaraeon a chreadigol yn y trafodaethau cyllidebol hynny. Bydd ganddynt Weinidog ynof sy’n falch o’u cynrychioli, sy’n credu yn y sectorau, ac sy'n awyddus i weithio ar y cyd â’r sectorau, i sicrhau bod y sectorau'n llwyddo, sy'n rhywbeth y gwn fod pob un ohonom yn y lle hwn am iddo ddigwydd.
Organisations in the cultural sector have been warning for some time about the dire financial situation that they find themselves in. And that goes for the big national institutions as well as smaller local institutions, which many communities not only are a part of, but thrive upon many of these local organisations. A recent Institute of Welsh Affairs report from August found that funding for the arts has dropped by 30 per cent in Wales in real terms since 2017. That’s the biggest drop in the United Kingdom. And what we’ve seen under your tenure so far is, in the latest supplementary budget, a £130,000 cut for local culture and sports projects. So, whilst we can look ahead to the future, the record is clear. So, how can you reassure those institutions—small and large—across Wales, that things will be different?
Mae sefydliadau yn y sector diwylliannol wedi bod yn rhybuddio am eu sefyllfa ariannol enbyd ers peth amser. Ac mae hynny'n wir am y sefydliadau cenedlaethol mawr yn ogystal â sefydliadau lleol llai, y mae llawer o gymunedau nid yn unig yn rhan ohonynt, ond hefyd yn ffynnu ar lawer o'r sefydliadau lleol hyn. Canfu adroddiad diweddar gan y Sefydliad Materion Cymreig ym mis Awst fod cyllid ar gyfer y celfyddydau wedi gostwng 30 y cant yng Nghymru mewn termau real ers 2017. Dyna'r gostyngiad mwyaf yn y Deyrnas Unedig. A’r hyn a welsom yn eich cyfnod mewn grym hyd yma, yn y gyllideb atodol ddiweddaraf, yw toriad o £130,000 ar gyfer prosiectau diwylliant a chwaraeon lleol. Felly, er y gallwn edrych ymlaen tua'r dyfodol, mae'r hanes yn glir. Felly, sut y gallwch roi sicrwydd i'r sefydliadau hynny—yn fach a mawr—ledled Cymru, y bydd pethau'n wahanol?
Again, thanks to the opposition spokesperson for the range of questions about what the future looks like. The position is difficult, isn’t it. We recognise the position is difficult, and we’re still in those difficult challenges. As I said earlier, I will give a commitment to the industry—and I’ve met with all of our arm’s-length bodies in Wales in this portfolio—to make sure that, when I have those budget discussions with the Cabinet Secretary, we are putting the best case forward for the sector. This is a sector that I think can succeed. We need to support it. We need to be creative in the way we look at things in the future, but what better way to work collaboratively with the creative sector than in coming up with new ways to support the industry? I’m not going to comment on future budget discussions because they haven’t been discussed to a level that I’m prepared to do on the floor of the Chamber. But that commitment to ensure that the voice of the industry is very much at the heart of the Welsh Government will carry on.
In terms of the sector in general, Presiding Officer, and where we have supported successes in the sector, let me just point to Creative Wales as a positive story, particularly in the production industry. Since its introduction in 2020, £26.5 million has been invested via Creative Wales from this Welsh Government. The expected spend back in the Welsh economy is over £313 million. That is a success that I am proud of. It’s a success that we can build on, and it’s a success that I look forward to collaboratively working on, not just with the Member, but with the industry as well, going forward.
Unwaith eto, diolch i lefarydd yr wrthblaid am yr ystod o gwestiynau ynglŷn â sut olwg fydd ar y dyfodol. Mae'n wir fod y sefyllfa'n anodd, onid yw. Rydym yn cydnabod bod y sefyllfa’n anodd, ac rydym yn dal i wynebu’r heriau anodd hynny. Fel y dywedais yn gynharach, rwyf am roi ymrwymiad i’r diwydiant—ac rwyf wedi cyfarfod â phob un o’n cyrff hyd braich yng Nghymru yn y portffolio hwn—i sicrhau, pan fyddaf yn cael y trafodaethau cyllidebol hynny gydag Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ein bod yn dadlau'r achos gorau ar ran y sector. Mae hwn yn sector a all lwyddo, yn fy marn i. Mae angen inni ei gefnogi. Mae angen inni fod yn greadigol yn y ffordd yr edrychwn ar bethau yn y dyfodol, ond pa ffordd well o gydweithio â’r sector creadigol na thrwy ddod o hyd i ffyrdd newydd o gefnogi’r diwydiant? Nid wyf yn mynd i wneud sylw ar drafodaethau cyllidebol yn y dyfodol am nad ydynt wedi cael eu trafod ar lefel rwy'n barod i’w trafod ar lawr y Siambr. Ond bydd yr ymrwymiad i sicrhau bod llais y diwydiant yn hollbwysig i Lywodraeth Cymru yn parhau.
O ran y sector yn gyffredinol, Lywydd, a lle rydym wedi cefnogi llwyddiannau yn y sector, gadewch imi sôn am Cymru Greadigol fel stori gadarnhaol, yn enwedig yn y diwydiant cynhyrchu. Ers sefydlu'r corff yn 2020, mae £26.5 miliwn wedi’i fuddsoddi gan Lywodraeth Cymru drwy Cymru Greadigol. Disgwylir y bydd hyn yn arwain at dros £313 miliwn o wariant yn ôl yn economi Cymru. Mae hwnnw’n llwyddiant rwy'n falch ohono. Mae’n llwyddiant y gallwn adeiladu arno, ac mae’n llwyddiant yr edrychaf ymlaen at gydweithio arno, nid yn unig gyda’r Aelod, ond gyda’r diwydiant hefyd, wrth symud ymlaen.
Llefarydd Plaid Cymru, Heledd Fychan.
The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Heledd Fychan.
Diolch, Llywydd. Weinidog, hoffwn innau ychwanegu fy llongyfarchiadau i chi ar eich penodiad, a dwi yn gwerthfawrogi’r ffaith ein bod ni eisoes wedi cael cyfarfod i drafod y portffolios sy’n gorgyffwrdd gennym. Fel y gwnes i ddweud wrthych chi ar yr adeg hynny, a dwi’n falch eich bod chi’n gwybod nad sylw arnoch chi’n bersonol mo hyn, mi ydw i’n siomedig nad ydy diwylliant a chwaraeon o fewn portffolio Ysgrifennydd Cabinet. Maen nhw’n feysydd sydd yn allweddol o ran ein hunaniaeth, ein heconomi a’n lles fel cenedl, ac mi o’n i’n croesawu’n fawr y dyrchafiad a gafodd y portffolio pan ddaeth Vaughan Gething yn Brif Weinidog. Wnaf i ddim eich rhoi chi mewn lle cas drwy ofyn a ydych chi o’r un farn a fi, mai Ysgrifennydd Cabinet y dylech chi fod, ond a gaf i fwy o wybodaeth os gwelwch yn dda o ran beth ydy’ch gweledigaeth chi a’ch prif flaenoriaethau chi ar gyfer y portffolio hwn? Roeddech chi’n sôn am fod yn llais, ond beth fydd y llais yna’n ei ddweud wrth y Cabinet?
Thank you, Llywydd. Minister, I'd like to add my congratulations to you on your appointment, and I appreciate the fact that we've already had a meeting to discuss our overlapping portfolios. As I noted at that time, and I'm glad that you know that this isn't a comment on you personally, I am disappointed that culture and sport aren’t part of a Cabinet Secretary’s portfolio. They are key areas in terms of our identity, our economy and our well-being as a nation, and I very much welcomed the enhanced status the portfolio was given when Vaughan Gething became First Minister. I won't put you on the spot by asking whether you share my view that you should be a Cabinet Secretary, but may I have further information please in terms of what your vision and priorities are for this portfolio? You spoke about being a voice, but what will that voice be telling the Cabinet?
Diolch yn fawr, Heledd, for that. Again, thank you for taking the time out of your schedule to meet with me last week. I won’t comment on the position of the Cabinet Secretary. If you want to make that case to the First Minister then that’s for you to do, not me. I am very proud to be the Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership in the department of the economy, under my colleague Rebecca Evans, who is the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning.
My voice will be loud and clear for this sector. It’s a sector that I want to see succeed. In the conversations that I will be having with Cabinet colleagues, they will be very much about focus and how we can share our cultural identity. Because I agree with the Member, this sector is very much about the well-being of the nation. I will be making sure that we collectively come up with plans to ensure that the heritage of our nation is futureproofed, but also is accessible to everyone, no matter where you come from in Wales. And I’ll be very much taking that forward through not just budget discussions, but all the policy areas as well.
In my own portfolio, if you look at skills in particular and the role perhaps of social partnership, the conversations that we need to have in this sector to make sure it is futureproofed will be done in a way of social partnership to get the best outcome. And I’m very conscious of the role I play in skills as well, to make sure we have a skilled workforce, whether that be in production, gaming, whether that be in our cultural and heritage aspects, or whether that be in all of the other aspects around sport as well. So, I’m conscious of the role that I have to play in that as well.
Diolch, Heledd. Unwaith eto, diolch am roi eich amser i gyfarfod â mi yr wythnos diwethaf. Nid wyf am wneud sylw am safbwynt Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Os hoffech ddadlau’r achos hwnnw i’r Prif Weinidog, mater i chi yw gwneud hynny, nid fi. Rwy’n falch iawn o fod yn Weinidog Diwylliant, Sgiliau a Phartneriaeth Gymdeithasol yn adran yr economi, o dan fy nghyd-Aelod, Rebecca Evans, sef Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros yr Economi, Ynni a Chynllunio.
Bydd fy llais ar ran y sector hwn yn uchel ac yn glir. Mae’n sector yr wyf am ei weld yn llwyddo. Yn y sgyrsiau a gaf gyda chyd-Aelodau o'r Cabinet, maent yn ymwneud i raddau helaeth â ffocws a sut y gallwn rannu ein hunaniaeth ddiwylliannol. Oherwydd rwy’n cytuno â’r Aelod, mae’r sector hwn yn sicr yn ymwneud â llesiant y genedl. Byddaf yn sicrhau ein bod yn llunio cynlluniau gyda’n gilydd i sicrhau bod treftadaeth ein cenedl yn ddiogel at y dyfodol, ond hefyd yn hygyrch i bawb, ni waeth o ble yng Nghymru rydych chi'n dod. A byddaf yn bwrw ymlaen â hynny nid yn unig drwy drafodaethau'r gyllideb, ond drwy’r holl feysydd polisi hefyd.
Yn fy mhortffolio i, os edrychwch ar sgiliau'n benodol ac ar rôl partneriaeth gymdeithasol efallai, bydd y sgyrsiau y mae angen i ni eu cael yn y sector hwn i sicrhau ei fod yn ddiogel at y dyfodol yn digwydd drwy bartneriaeth gymdeithasol er mwyn sicrhau'r canlyniad gorau. Ac rwy'n ymwybodol iawn o'r rôl rwy'n ei chwarae ym maes sgiliau hefyd, a sicrhau bod gennym weithlu medrus, boed hynny mewn cynhyrchiant, gemau cyfrifiadurol, boed hynny yn ein hagweddau diwylliannol a threftadaeth, neu ym mhob un o'r agweddau eraill sy'n ymwneud â chwaraeon yn ogystal. Felly, rwy’n ymwybodol o’r rôl sydd gennyf i’w chwarae yn hynny hefyd.
Thanks for that response. If I can build on what Tom Giffard was asking you, obviously, it’s not just been challenging, it’s been devastating for a number of the institutions that fall within your portfolio. We’ve heard warnings of huge organisations having to potentially close their doors. We’ve had significant job losses. You’ve talked about being resilient. We’ve heard that sectors are at breaking point in a number of areas under your responsibility. There is no place to cut any further. Key services are being lost. National collections are at risk.
So, can I ask—? When Lesley Griffiths was in role, she was very determined in trying to secure that additional funding from health, from education, and understanding the value of those. I just want to be clear in terms of your priorities here in this portfolio. I hear about being a voice, but what will you actually deliver for these sectors? What are your priorities now to secure from Government to ensure—? It’s not about being resilient, it’s about survival.
Diolch am eich ymateb. Os caf adeiladu ar yr hyn a ofynnodd Tom Giffard i chi, mae'n amlwg, nid yn unig ei fod wedi bod yn gyfnod heriol, ond mae wedi bod yn ddinistriol i nifer o’r sefydliadau sydd yn eich portffolio. Rydym wedi clywed rhybuddion am sefydliadau enfawr yn wynebu'r posibilrwydd o orfod cau eu drysau. Rydym wedi colli nifer fawr o swyddi. Rydych chi wedi sôn am fod yn wydn. Rydym wedi clywed bod sectorau ar ymyl y dibyn mewn nifer o feysydd rydych chi'n gyfrifol amdanynt. Nid oes lle i dorri ymhellach. Mae gwasanaethau allweddol yn cael eu colli. Mae casgliadau cenedlaethol mewn perygl.
Felly, a gaf i ofyn—? Pan oedd Lesley Griffiths yn ei rôl, roedd yn benderfynol iawn o geisio sicrhau’r cyllid ychwanegol hwnnw o iechyd, o addysg, a deall gwerth y rheini. Hoffwn ddeall eich blaenoriaethau yma yn y portffolio hwn. Fe'ch clywaf yn dweud eich bod am fod yn llais, ond beth fyddwch chi'n ei gyflawni i'r sectorau hyn mewn gwirionedd? Beth yw eich blaenoriaethau nawr i’w sicrhau gan y Llywodraeth—? Nid yw hyn yn ymwneud â bod yn wydn, mae'n ymwneud â goroesi.
Well, I agree; we need to survive, but we need to look further than just survival, and we need to look to futureproof the industry, as an industry that wants to succeed. I agree, the fact that we had to make those cuts—and the Cabinet Secretary for finance and you have had an exchange on the issues that are facing us—was devastating for individual organisations. But let me just point to the September announcement from this Government of a further £5 million revenue funding to support Wales’s culture and sports arm’s-length bodies. That’s £725,000 for the National Library of Wales; £90,000 for the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales; £1.5 million for the Arts Council of Wales; £1 million for Sport Wales; for Amgueddfa Cymru £940,000; and Cadw, £745,000. That’s a significant sum of money and I’m pleased that we’ve been able to find that.
The point the Member makes around other budgets, again, I’m not going to go into opening discussions about the budget here today. But I agree with you that this portfolio and the responsibilities within it, and the actions that this portfolio delivers, do have cross-cutting impacts, particularly in the role of mental health and well-being. My colleague Sarah Murphy and I have already had discussions around the role that sport can play and around the role the arts can play in supporting people with mental health. That's what I'll be doing when I have those meetings that very much—. Not just in there, but education as well. You're right, this morning I was at the Rhondda Heritage Park, at the mining museum, and it's excellent to see the work that they do in supporting the local communities, their local schools. I want to see more of that, and, be assured, that's what I'll be pressing the case for.
Wel, rwy’n cytuno; mae angen inni oroesi, ond mae angen inni edrych ymhellach na goroesi'n unig, ac mae angen inni geisio diogelu’r diwydiant at y dyfodol, fel diwydiant sydd am lwyddo. Rwy’n cytuno, roedd y ffaith ein bod wedi gorfod gwneud y toriadau hynny—ac mae Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid a chi wedi trafod y materion sy’n ein hwynebu—yn ddinistriol i sefydliadau unigol. Ond gadewch imi dynnu sylw at y cyhoeddiad ym mis Medi gan y Llywodraeth hon o £5 miliwn ychwanegol o gyllid refeniw i gefnogi cyrff hyd braich diwylliant a chwaraeon Cymru. Dyna £725,000 i Lyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru; £90,000 i Gomisiwn Brenhinol Henebion Cymru; £1.5 miliwn i Gyngor Celfyddydau Cymru; £1 filiwn i Chwaraeon Cymru; £940,000 i Amgueddfa Cymru; a Cadw, £745,000. Mae hwnnw’n swm sylweddol o arian, ac rwy’n falch ein bod wedi gallu dod o hyd iddo.
Y pwynt y mae’r Aelod yn ei wneud ynghylch cyllidebau eraill, unwaith eto, nid wyf yn mynd i ddechrau trafodaethau am y gyllideb yma heddiw. Ond rwy’n cytuno â chi fod y portffolio hwn a'i gyfrifoldebau, a’r camau y mae’r portffolio hwn yn eu cyflawni, yn cael effeithiau trawsbynciol, yn enwedig o ran rôl iechyd meddwl a llesiant. Mae fy nghyd-Aelod Sarah Murphy a minnau eisoes wedi cael trafodaethau ynghylch y rôl y gall chwaraeon ei chwarae ac ynghylch y rôl y gall y celfyddydau ei chwarae yn cefnogi pobl gyda'u hiechyd meddwl. Dyna fyddaf i'n ei wneud pan fyddaf yn cael y cyfarfodydd hynny—. Nid yn unig yno, ond addysg hefyd. Rydych yn llygad eich lle, y bore yma, roeddwn ym Mharc Treftadaeth Cwm Rhondda, yn yr amgueddfa lofaol, ac mae'n wych gweld y gwaith a wnânt i gefnogi'r cymunedau lleol, eu hysgolion lleol. Hoffwn weld mwy o hynny, a gallaf roi sicrwydd i chi mai dyna fyddaf i'n dadlau drosto.
Thank you. As I said yesterday to the Cabinet Secretary for finance, obviously that £5 million was very welcome, but it didn't touch the surface. And, in terms of these sectors, we've lost people in these roles, we've lost expertise, we've lost the ability to actually deliver on many of those programmes that were having a positive impact in terms of people's health and well-being. So, it's not a matter of asking these institutions to do more, it's actually supporting them to do what they were doing and scaling that up. So, in terms of that vision, we're obviously expecting a cultural strategy and I would like to know the timescales, now that you are in post, in terms of that work, but in terms of the finances to support that budget as well.
Also, what assessment have you made about the impact of the cuts on the abilities of organisations that you do provide a remit letter for to deliver on those remit letters? And if that hasn't happened yet, will you commit to doing so, so that we understand the impact these cuts have had on their ability to deliver on the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015? And do you accept that the cultural element of the future generations Act is the least developed goal to date, and how should we rectify that?
Diolch. Fel y dywedais ddoe wrth Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid, yn amlwg, mae'r £5 miliwn hwnnw i'w groesawu'n fawr, ond nid yw'n crafu'r wyneb. Ac o ran y sectorau hyn, rydym wedi colli pobl yn y rolau hyn, rydym wedi colli arbenigedd, rydym wedi colli'r gallu i gyflawni ar lawer o'r rhaglenni a oedd yn cael effaith gadarnhaol ar iechyd a lles pobl. Felly, nid yw'n fater o ofyn i'r sefydliadau hyn wneud mwy, ond yn hytrach eu cefnogi i wneud yr hyn roeddent yn ei wneud a chynyddu hynny. Felly, o ran y weledigaeth honno, rydym yn amlwg yn disgwyl strategaeth ddiwylliannol a hoffwn glywed beth yw'r amserlenni, nawr eich bod yn y swydd, ar gyfer y gwaith hwnnw, ond o ran y cyllid i gefnogi'r gyllideb honno hefyd.
Hefyd, pa asesiad a wnaethoch o effaith y toriadau ar alluoedd sefydliadau yr ydych yn darparu llythyr cylch gwaith iddynt i gyflawni ar y llythyrau cylch gwaith hynny? Ac os nad yw hynny wedi digwydd eto, a wnewch chi ymrwymo i wneud hynny, fel y gallwn ddeall yr effaith y mae’r toriadau hyn wedi’i chael ar eu gallu i gyflawni ar Ddeddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol (Cymru) 2015? Ac a ydych chi'n derbyn mai ar elfen ddiwylliannol Deddf cenedlaethau’r dyfodol y gwnaed y cynnydd lleiaf arni hyd yn hyn, a sut y dylem unioni hynny?
Thank you. On that, with regard to the impact on the bodies that we do send remit letters to, where I'm very interested in hearing from in this area is the work of the culture committee, chaired by your colleague Delyth Jewell. I've understood there have been many organisations already in front of the committee, where the impacts—. Well, I'm interested in hearing their views on that, and they will have those conversations directly with me, but also the views of the committee to see how we can militate against that going forward. As I say, this is a sector that I want to succeed in.
In terms of going forward and looking around at how we can better do things, we have to think differently in these scenarios. We're still in a difficult and challenging situation when it comes to budgetary pressures, so we need to come together collectively, in that spirit of social partnership, to find, perhaps, alternative ways of doing things. That will make Wales's culture sector succeed. I'll be having those conversations with a number of stakeholders in the sector. What I am keen to do as well, as I said in response to Tom, is to have that conversation across the Senedd floor and to hear your views on where we can take this forward. Because, as I say, I think in this sector, in culture, arts, sports and heritage, we consistently punch above our weight in sport, and I want to carry on doing that and supporting grass-roots clubs and activities, and when it comes to culture and arts, it's ever so important that we don't just futureproof, but that we actually have the ambitions to grow. And I think that this is a shared commitment across the floor of the Chamber, and I look forward to having those conversations with you.
Llywydd, just in closing, as I have the opportunity to say this, and around sports as well, I think you won't mind me saying 'Pob lwc' to Cymru in the coming games of the European 2025 play-offs.
Diolch. Ar hynny, o ran yr effaith ar y cyrff yr ydym yn darparu llythyrau cylch gwaith iddynt, yr hyn y mae gennyf ddiddordeb mawr mewn clywed amdano yn y maes hwn yw gwaith y pwyllgor diwylliant, a gadeirir gan eich cyd-Aelod Delyth Jewell. Deallaf fod llawer o sefydliadau eisoes wedi bod gerbron y pwyllgor, lle mae'r effeithiau—. Wel, mae gennyf ddiddordeb mewn clywed eu barn ar hynny, a byddant yn cael y sgyrsiau hynny gyda mi yn uniongyrchol, ond hoffwn glywed safbwyntiau’r pwyllgor hefyd i weld sut y gallwn liniaru hynny wrth symud ymlaen. Fel y dywedaf, mae hwn yn sector yr wyf am lwyddo ynddo.
O ran symud ymlaen ac edrych ar sut y gallwn wneud pethau’n well, mae’n rhaid inni feddwl yn wahanol yn y senarios hyn. Rydym yn dal i fod mewn sefyllfa anodd a heriol o ran pwysau cyllidebol, felly mae angen inni ddod ynghyd, mewn ysbryd o bartneriaeth gymdeithasol, i ddod o hyd, efallai, i ffyrdd amgen o wneud pethau. Dyna fydd yn gwneud i sector diwylliant Cymru lwyddo. Byddaf yn cael y sgyrsiau hynny gyda nifer o randdeiliaid yn y sector. Yr hyn rwy'n awyddus i’w wneud hefyd, fel y dywedais mewn ymateb i Tom, yw cael sgwrs ar lawr y Senedd a chlywed eich barn ar ble y gallwn fwrw ymlaen â hyn. Oherwydd fel y dywedaf, yn y sector hwn, mewn diwylliant, y celfyddydau, chwaraeon a threftadaeth, rwy'n credu ein bod yn perfformio'n well na'r disgwyl yn gyson mewn chwaraeon, a hoffwn barhau i wneud hynny a chefnogi clybiau a gweithgareddau ar lawr gwlad, ac mae mor bwysig, mewn perthynas â diwylliant a'r celfyddydau, ein bod nid yn unig yn eu diogelu at y dyfodol, ond fod gennym uchelgais i dyfu. A chredaf fod hwn yn ymrwymiad a rennir ar draws y Siambr, ac edrychaf ymlaen at gael y sgyrsiau hynny gyda chi.
Lywydd, i gloi, gan fod cyfle gennyf i ddweud hyn, a ninnau'n trafod chwaraeon, ni chredaf y bydd ots gennych imi ddweud 'Pob lwc' i Gymru yn y gemau ail gyfle sydd ar y ffordd ar gyfer pencampwriaeth Ewrop 2025.
Dim problem o gwbl i ddymuno pob lwc i Gymru ar unrhyw lefel ac mewn unrhyw chwaraeon.
There's no problem at all in wishing Wales well at any level and in any sport.
3. Pa drafodaethau y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet wedi'u cael gyda Llywodraeth y DU ynghylch cynigion ar gyfer cynllun storio tanfor i ddal carbon yn Sir y Fflint? OQ61753
3. What discussions has the Cabinet Secretary had with the UK Government about proposals for a carbon capture undersea storage scheme in Flintshire? OQ61753
The Welsh Government has regular discussions with the UK Government at both an official and ministerial level to ensure proposed carbon capture projects across Wales are subject to robust regulatory controls, facilitate long-term decarbonisation and build a stronger, greener economy.
Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn cynnal trafodaethau rheolaidd gyda Llywodraeth y DU ar lefel swyddogol a gweinidogol i sicrhau bod prosiectau dal carbon arfaethedig ledled Cymru yn destun rheolaethau rheoleiddiol cadarn, yn hwyluso datgarboneiddio hirdymor ac yn adeiladu economi gryfach a gwyrddach.
Earlier this month, you said, and I quote, that
'it is the Welsh Government's intention to provide a clearer statement of our views and our approach to carbon capture usage and storage,'
but the reality is, of course, that it's happening now. We don't really know, clearly, where you stand on this, and it feels a little bit as if you're asleep at the wheel, might I suggest? Now, CCS as a technology, of course, risks giving carbon emitters a bit of a free pass, doesn't it, because they can carry on polluting or, at best, at least it'll slow down the transition away from carbon dioxide, and we know that there are serious public health risks and issues as well. There are examples elsewhere of leaks and explosions causing hospitalisation and asphyxiation. The Health and Safety Executive say it has major hazard potential. Is that a risk that you're willing to expose the people of north-east Wales to as they become the exhaust pipe of the United Kingdom?
Yn gynharach y mis hwn, fe ddywedoch chi mai
'bwriad Llywodraeth Cymru yw darparu datganiad cliriach o'n barn a'n dull gweithredu o ran y defnydd o ddal a storio carbon,'
ond y gwir amdani, wrth gwrs, yw bod hyn yn digwydd yn barod. Yn amlwg, nid ydym yn gwybod yn iawn beth yw eich safbwynt ar hyn, ac os caf awgrymu, mae'n teimlo fel pe baech chi'n cysgu wrth y llyw. Nawr, mae perygl y gall technoleg dal a storio carbon roi rhwydd hynt i allyrwyr carbon, gan y gallant barhau i lygru, neu ar y gorau, bydd o leiaf yn arafu'r broses o bontio oddi wrth allyrru carbon deuocsid, a gwyddom fod risgiau a phroblemau difrifol i iechyd y cyhoedd hefyd. Mae enghreifftiau mewn mannau eraill o ollyngiadau a ffrwydradau gan achosi i bobl fygu a gorfod mynd i'r ysbyty. Dywed yr Awdurdod Gweithredol Iechyd a Diogelwch fod ganddo beryglon mawr posibl. A yw hynny'n risg rydych chi'n fodlon agor pobl gogledd-ddwyrain Cymru iddi wrth iddynt ddod yn bibell egsôst i'r Deyrnas Unedig?
So, as I said previously, in the coming weeks I will be consulting on the Welsh Government policy position in terms of how we can use carbon capture and storage technology, but our clear focus is on where it can make a clear, measurable and sustained contribution to decarbonisation on our transition away from fossil fuel consumption. I would share your concerns if this was about extending the life of fossil fuels, but that's not what this is about. There are certain sectors, for example, cement, that cannot be decarbonised other than through technologies such as carbon capture and storage.
These are the kinds of areas that we have to be realistic about, and even international studies undertaken by organisations including the Climate Change Committee, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the International Energy Agency have all consistently concluded that carbon capture and storage is a pathway to reducing emissions, and we are not going to get to our targets in terms of net zero without it. So, it is a technology that we have to use, but of course it has to be safe and it has to be done through the appropriate planning regime, and so on.
I know the UK Government has undertaken a range of research in this space, and I'd be more than happy to share more of that with colleagues. One of the examples I have is the UK Government's publication of research and analysis, and that was regarding the deep geological storage of carbon dioxide, offshore UK, and that was about containment certainty. So, that was a particular piece of research that demonstrated a very high level of confidence about the long-term security of carbon dioxide containment in a typical CCS storage complex in and around the UK. So, the research is absolutely there and it's available, and we'll be sharing more of that when we do move to consultation.
But just to be really clear: the policy is about the role of carbon capture and storage on our journey to net zero, and with a particular focus on areas of the economy that can't be decarbonised through other means.
Fel rwyf wedi'i ddweud eisoes, yn yr wythnosau nesaf, byddaf yn ymgynghori ar safbwynt polisi Llywodraeth Cymru ar sut y gallwn ddefnyddio technoleg dal a storio carbon, ond rydym yn canolbwyntio ar ble y gall wneud cyfraniad clir, mesuradwy a pharhaus at ddatgarboneiddio wrth inni bontio o ddefnyddio tanwydd ffosil. Buaswn yn rhannu eich pryderon pe bai hyn yn ymwneud ag ymestyn oes tanwyddau ffosil, ond nid dyna yw hyn. Mae rhai sectorau, er enghraifft sment, na ellir eu datgarboneiddio ac eithrio drwy dechnolegau fel dal a storio carbon.
Dyma’r mathau o feysydd y mae’n rhaid inni fod yn realistig yn eu cylch, ac mae hyd yn oed astudiaethau rhyngwladol a gynhaliwyd gan sefydliadau sy'n cynnwys y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, y Panel Rhynglywodraethol ar Newid Hinsawdd a’r Asiantaeth Ynni Ryngwladol oll wedi dod i’r casgliad yn gyson fod dal a storio carbon yn llwybr tuag at leihau allyriadau, ac nad ydym yn mynd i gyflawni ein targedau sero net hebddo. Felly, mae’n dechnoleg y mae’n rhaid i ni ei defnyddio, ond wrth gwrs, mae’n rhaid iddi fod yn ddiogel, ac mae’n rhaid ei wneud drwy’r drefn gynllunio briodol, ac yn y blaen.
Gwn fod Llywodraeth y DU wedi gwneud ystod o waith ymchwil yn y maes hwn, ac rwy'n fwy na pharod i rannu mwy o hynny gyda chyd-Aelodau. Un o’r enghreifftiau sydd gennyf yw'r ddogfen ymchwil a dadansoddi a gyhoeddwyd gan Lywodraeth y DU, a oedd yn trafod storio carbon deuocsid yn ddaearegol ddwfn, oddi ar arfordir y DU, ac roedd hynny’n ymwneud â'i storio'n ddiogel. Felly, roedd hwnnw’n ymchwil penodol a ddangosai lefel uchel iawn o hyder ynghylch diogelwch hirdymor storio carbon deuocsid mewn man dal a storio carbon arferol yn y DU ac o'i chwmpas. Felly, mae'r ymchwil yno ac mae ar gael, a byddwn yn rhannu mwy ohoni pan fyddwn yn dechrau ymgynghori.
Ond er eglurder: mae'r polisi'n ymwneud â rôl dal a storio carbon mewn perthynas â'n taith at sero net, ac mae'n canolbwyntio'n benodol ar feysydd o'r economi na ellir eu datgarboneiddio drwy ddulliau eraill.
The north-west industrial cluster region stretches from Flintshire and Wrexham through Cheshire, Liverpool city region and greater Manchester into Lancashire. The HyNet North West hydrogen and carbon capture project received £72 million in funding from the Conservative UK Government in 2021 to play a critical role in the UK's transition to net zero, and the announcement that the new UK Government will continue to support this is therefore welcome. The project will convert natural gas into low-carbon hydrogen to power industry, fuel transport and generate electricity.
So, do you agree with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that carbon capture and storage has a role to play alongside other actions to tackle global emissions? And what engagement are you having with Flintshire industries, including Connah's Quay power station, Heidelberg Materials cement works in Padeswood and Parc Adfer, an energy-from-waste facility at Deeside industrial park, which proposed to transport captured carbon dioxide to permanent offshore storage facilities in repurposed depleted offshore gas fields, as part of the HyNet industrial cluster?
Mae rhanbarth clwstwr diwydiannol y gogledd-orllewin yn ymestyn o sir y Fflint a Wrecsam drwy Swydd Gaer, dinas-ranbarth Lerpwl a Manceinion fwyaf i mewn i swydd Gaerhirfryn. Darparwyd £72 miliwn o gyllid gan Lywodraeth Geidwadol y DU yn 2021 i brosiect hydrogen a dal carbon HyNet North West i chwarae rhan hollbwysig wrth i'r DU bontio i sero net, ac felly mae’r cyhoeddiad y bydd Llywodraeth newydd y DU yn parhau i gefnogi hyn i'w groesawu. Bydd y prosiect yn troi nwy naturiol yn hydrogen carbon isel i bweru diwydiant a thrafnidiaeth a chynhyrchu trydan.
Felly, a ydych chi'n cytuno â'r Panel Rhynglywodraethol ar Newid Hinsawdd fod gan dechnoleg dal a storio carbon rôl i'w chwarae ochr yn ochr â chamau gweithredu eraill i fynd i'r afael ag allyriadau byd-eang? A pha ymgysylltiad rydych chi'n ei gael â diwydiannau sir y Fflint, gan gynnwys gorsaf ynni Cei Connah, gwaith sment Heidelberg Materials yn Padeswood a Pharc Adfer, cyfleuster troi gwastraff yn ynni ym mharc diwydiannol Glannau Dyfrdwy, a oedd yn cynnig cludo carbon deuocsid wedi'i ddal i gyfleusterau storio parhaol ar y môr mewn hen feysydd nwy alltraeth wedi eu haddasu at ddibenion gwahanol, fel rhan o glwstwr diwydiannol HyNet?
I'm grateful for the question and, as I said in response to the previous question, we're very mindful of the fact that the Climate Change Committee and a range of other organisations have said that carbon capture and storage will necessarily be a part of our journey towards net zero, particularly if we are to hit our net-zero targets in a timely manner. I would just reassure you that we are having those regular discussions; officials meet regularly with HyNet and the consortium partners to better understand the proposals and to offer our support as appropriate.
And alongside the Minister for north Wales, I visited Heidelberg cement factory recently to understand more about the technology that is being proposed, and the impact that it would have on decarbonising the production of cement.
Rwy’n ddiolchgar am eich cwestiwn, ac fel y dywedais mewn ymateb i’r cwestiwn blaenorol, rydym yn ymwybodol iawn o’r ffaith bod y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd ac amrywiaeth o sefydliadau eraill wedi dweud y bydd dal a storio carbon o reidrwydd yn rhan o'n taith tuag at sero net, yn enwedig os ydym am gyflawni ein targedau sero net mewn pryd. Hoffwn roi sicrwydd i chi ein bod yn cael y trafodaethau rheolaidd hynny; mae swyddogion yn cyfarfod yn rheolaidd â HyNet a phartneriaid y consortiwm i ddeall y cynigion yn well ac i gynnig ein cefnogaeth fel y bo'n briodol.
Ac ymwelais â ffatri sment Heidelberg yn ddiweddar gyda'r Gweinidog dros ogledd Cymru i ddeall mwy am y dechnoleg sy’n cael ei hargymell, a’r effaith y byddai’n ei chael ar ddatgarboneiddio cynhyrchiant sment.
I know there are concerns about the scale of the project and questions about whether this is the right route towards decarbonisation and our net-zero ambitions, but I want to focus today on some concerns around the potential practical impact on my constituency and the communities within it, whether that’s disruption from the construction of the spur pipeline from Padeswood to the proposed above ground installations near Northop Hall. I serve, and I'm proud to serve, an area that has very much been scarred by industry in the past, and I don't wish that to be our future. So, can I ask, Cabinet Secretary, what the Welsh Government can do, working with the UK Government and other partners, to ensure people and places are fully aware and involved with the process, that disruption and impact on landscape is absolutely mitigated, and that community benefits are meaningful and mandated?
Gwn fod pryderon ynghylch maint y prosiect a chwestiynau ynglŷn ag ai dyma’r llwybr cywir tuag at ddatgarboneiddio a’n huchelgeisiau sero net, ond hoffwn ganolbwyntio heddiw ar bryderon ynghylch yr effaith ymarferol bosibl ar fy etholaeth a’r cymunedau ynddi, boed yn darfu yn sgil y gwaith o adeiladu'r bibell gangen o Padeswood i'r safleoedd arfaethedig uwchben y ddaear ger Northop Hall. Rwy’n gwasanaethu, ac rwy’n falch o wasanaethu, ardal sydd wedi’i chreithio’n ddwfn gan ddiwydiant yn y gorffennol, ac nid wyf am i hynny fod yn ddyfodol i ni. Felly, a gaf i ofyn, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, beth y gall Llywodraeth Cymru ei wneud, gan weithio gyda Llywodraeth y DU a phartneriaid eraill, i sicrhau bod pobl a lleoedd yn gwbl ymwybodol o'r broses ac yn rhan ohoni, fod y tarfu a'r effaith ar y dirwedd yn cael eu lliniaru i'r graddau mwyaf posibl, a bod buddion cymunedol yn ystyrlon ac wedi eu mandadu?
We will absolutely be making those important points in our discussions with HyNet and also with the UK Government in relation to the importance of consulting with and properly considering the views of residents in the area, and also, of course, for maximising the opportunities for the area through new jobs and so on. The impact on the area will absolutely be at the forefront of our discussions, and, of course, impressing upon those other partners the need to consult properly with communities, as appropriate, as we move these proposals on.
Byddwn yn gwneud y pwyntiau pwysig hynny yn ein trafodaethau gyda HyNet a hefyd gyda Llywodraeth y DU mewn perthynas â phwysigrwydd ymgynghori â barn trigolion yr ardal a rhoi ystyriaeth briodol iddi, ac ynglŷn â gwneud y mwyaf o'r cyfleoedd i'r ardal drwy swyddi newydd ac yn y blaen. Bydd yr effaith ar yr ardal yn cael lle blaenllaw yn ein trafodaethau, a phwysleisio wrth y partneriaid eraill wrth gwrs fod angen ymgynghori'n briodol â chymunedau, fel y bo'n briodol, wrth inni symud ymlaen ar y cynigion hyn.
4. Beth yw meini prawf cyffredinol y Llywodraeth ar gyfer cymeradwyo neu wrthod datblygiadau ffermydd solar mawr? OQ61762
4. What are the Government's overarching criteria for approving or rejecting large-scale solar farm developments? OQ61762
The Welsh Government’s planning policies for the consideration of large-scale solar farms are contained within 'Planning Policy Wales' and 'Future Wales'.
Mae polisïau cynllunio Llywodraeth Cymru ar gyfer ystyried ffermydd solar mawr wedi'u cynnwys yn 'Polisi Cynllunio Cymru' a 'Cymru'r Dyfodol'.
Diolch am yr ateb yna.
Thank you for that response.
The Gwent levels are of international significance and are truly unique for featuring a criss-cross network of fertile fields and historic watercourses, known locally as reens, with some of these wetlands originally reclaimed from the sea by the Romans. It remains largely untouched for centuries. As well as cattle, it is home to more than 200 species of insects and other invertebrates, many of them protected due to their rarity, within sites of special scientific interest.
It beggars belief, therefore, that this incredible landscape could be subject to six huge separate solar farms to go with the Llanwern solar farm that has already been approved. This means that nearly a third of the total area of individual Gwent levels SSSIs has been proposed for solar farm development. Whilst I'm in favour of solar and other forms of renewable energy, in my view, it should not be located within crucial and fragile natural habitats like these wetlands.
Minister, I know you cannot offer an opinion on the merits of such planning applications, but can you provide further insight into how such planning applications are determined, and give some indication of what criteria take precedence within the planning framework for large-scale projects like these? Where do SSSI status, 'best and most versatile' assessments and environmental impact assessments rank compared to energy production and economic benefit? Diolch.
Mae arwyddocâd rhyngwladol i wastadeddau Gwent ac maent yn wirioneddol unigryw o fod yn cynnwys rhwydwaith o gaeau ffrwythlon a chyrsiau dŵr hanesyddol, a elwir yn lleol yn ffosydd draenio, gyda rhai o'r gwlyptiroedd hyn wedi eu hadfer yn wreiddiol o'r môr gan y Rhufeiniaid. Maent yn dal heb eu cyffwrdd i raddau helaeth ers canrifoedd. Yn ogystal â gwartheg, mae'n gartref i fwy na 200 rhywogaeth o bryfed ac infertebratau eraill, gyda llawer ohonynt wedi'u gwarchod oherwydd eu prinder, o fewn safleoedd o ddiddordeb gwyddonol arbennig.
Mae'n syndod felly, y gallai'r dirwedd anhygoel hon fod yn lleoliad i chwe fferm solar enfawr i fynd gyda fferm solar Llan-wern sydd eisoes wedi'i chymeradwyo. Mae hyn yn golygu bod bron i draean o gyfanswm arwynebedd SoDdGA unigol gwastadeddau Gwent wedi'i gynnig ar gyfer datblygu ffermydd solar. Er fy mod o blaid ynni solar a mathau eraill o ynni adnewyddadwy, yn fy marn i ni ddylid ei leoli o fewn cynefinoedd naturiol allweddol a bregus fel y gwlyptiroedd hyn.
Weinidog, gwn na allwch gynnig barn ar rinweddau ceisiadau cynllunio o'r fath, ond a allwch chi roi syniad pellach o sut y penderfynir ar geisiadau cynllunio o'r fath, a rhoi rhyw arwydd o ba feini prawf sy'n cael blaenoriaeth o fewn y fframwaith cynllunio ar gyfer prosiectau mawr fel y rhain? Pa statws sydd i SoDdGA, asesiadau 'tir gorau a mwyaf amlbwrpas' ac asesiadau effaith amgylcheddol o gymharu â chynhyrchiant ynni a budd economaidd? Diolch.
The first thing to say is about the importance of the Gwent levels. I think that importance is very much reflected in 'Future Wales' policy 9 by its designation as a national natural resource area. I think that's very important. Officials are currently in the process of preparing some further planning guidance in line with policy 9 of 'Future Wales', and that will involve developing further planning guidance for the Gwent levels, working with local authorities and with stakeholders. Some work on scoping the evidence base for that is ongoing at the moment. And, of course, the Welsh Government has established a Gwent levels working group, and that's chaired by John Griffiths MS. He's looking at how better protection and management of the Gwent levels can be enabled. One of the strategic priorities for that working group is absolutely about the development of better planning guidance to enable the right developments in the right place and to avoid further unacceptable biodiversity and landscape impacts on the Gwent levels. I hope that provides at least a level of reassurance as to the seriousness that we attach to the Gwent levels and the work that John Griffiths will be leading on.
Y peth cyntaf i'w nodi yw pwysigrwydd gwastadeddau Gwent. Rwy'n credu bod y pwysigrwydd yn cael ei adlewyrchu'n gadarn ym mholisi 'Cymru'r Dyfodol' 9 drwy gael ei dynodi'n ardal adnoddau naturiol cenedlaethol. Rwy'n credu bod hynny'n bwysig iawn. Mae swyddogion wrthi'n paratoi canllawiau cynllunio pellach ar hyn o bryd yn unol â pholisi 9 'Cymru'r Dyfodol', a bydd hynny'n golygu datblygu canllawiau cynllunio pellach ar gyfer gwastadeddau Gwent, gan weithio gydag awdurdodau lleol a chyda rhanddeiliaid. Mae gwaith cwmpasu ar y sylfaen dystiolaeth ar gyfer hynny yn mynd rhagddo ar hyn o bryd. Ac wrth gwrs, mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi sefydlu gweithgor ar gyfer gwastadeddau Gwent sy'n cael ei gadeirio gan John Griffiths AS. Mae'n edrych ar sut y gellir gwella diogelwch a rheolaeth ar wastadeddau Gwent. Un o flaenoriaethau strategol y gweithgor hwnnw yw datblygu canllawiau cynllunio gwell i alluogi'r datblygiadau cywir yn y lle iawn ac i osgoi rhagor o effeithiau annerbyniol ar fioamrywiaeth a thirwedd ar wastadeddau Gwent. Rwy'n gobeithio y bydd hynny'n rhoi o leiaf rywfaint o sicrwydd ynglŷn â pha mor bwysig yw gwastadeddau Gwent i ni a'r gwaith y bydd John Griffiths yn ei arwain.
Thank you to my colleague Peredur for raising this. I've raised before, in this Chamber, about beautiful rural areas of Anglesey currently under threat from developers who want to cover 3,000 acres of valuable agricultural land with solar panels.
The Maen Hir scheme will have a detrimental effect to the point that one of the reports states that the project has the potential for adverse agricultural economic impacts as a result of reduced agricultural income. On top of that, the element of the project expected to raise income for spend on the local community is situated in one of the locations of the site most vulnerable to flooding. This is just unfair to the community. There's massive opposition to this. 'Future Wales: the national plan 2040' states:
'The Welsh Government strongly supports the principle of developing renewable and low carbon energy from all technologies and at all scales to meet our future energy needs.'
That reads to me as though you're prepared to forgo good agricultural land and farming at the risk of covering thousands of acres with solar farms. Will you look at amending the planning policy, please?
Diolch i fy nghyd-Aelod Peredur am godi hyn. Cyn hyn yn y Siambr hon, rwyf wedi nodi ardaloedd gwledig hardd Ynys Môn sydd dan fygythiad ar hyn o bryd gan ddatblygwyr sydd am osod paneli solar ar 3,000 erw o dir amaethyddol gwerthfawr.
Bydd cynllun Maen Hir yn cael effaith niweidiol i'r graddau fod un o'r adroddiadau'n nodi bod posibilrwydd y gallai'r prosiect greu effeithiau economaidd amaethyddol niweidiol o ganlyniad i lai o incwm amaethyddol. Ar ben hynny, mae elfen y prosiect y disgwylir iddo godi incwm i'w wario ar y gymuned leol wedi'i lleoli yn un o leoliadau'r safle sy'n fwyaf agored i lifogydd. Mae hyn yn annheg i'r gymuned. Mae gwrthwynebiad mawr i hyn. Mae 'Cymru'r Dyfodol: cynllun cenedlaethol 2040' yn nodi:
'Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn gryf o blaid egwyddor datblygu ynni adnewyddadwy a charbon isel o bob technoleg ac ar bob graddfa er mwyn diwallu ein hanghenion ynni yn y dyfodol.'
Mae hynny'n swnio i mi fel pe baech chi'n barod i golli tir amaethyddol a ffermio da er mwyn creu ffermydd solar dros filoedd o erwau. A wnewch chi edrych ar ddiwygio'r polisi cynllunio, os gwelwch yn dda?
I'm grateful for the question. Colleagues know I can't comment on any specific plan because most large solar projects will be determined by Welsh Ministers, but we do have comprehensive and up-to-date planning policy that allows for the consideration of the opportunities and the impacts proposed by solar developments. We do have a really ambitious target of meeting 100 per cent of our energy needs from renewable sources by 2030, but that doesn't mean that we're going to abandon policies for the protection of our most valuable environments and habitats. There absolutely has to be that balance to be struck as we move on that journey to net zero. I will say, though, that 'Future Wales' does make a clear statement on the importance of high-quality agricultural land, as it's considered as a national natural resource under policy 9, and there is a lot of detail then involved in terms of how that land is graded. But I do think that 'Future Wales', as I've said, really recognises the importance of agricultural land as well.
Rwy'n ddiolchgar am y cwestiwn. Mae cyd-Aelodau'n gwybod na allaf wneud sylw ar unrhyw gynllun penodol am y bydd y rhan fwyaf o brosiectau solar mawr yn cael eu penderfynu gan Weinidogion Cymru, ond mae gennym bolisi cynllunio cynhwysfawr a chyfredol sy'n caniatáu ystyriaeth o'r cyfleoedd a'r effeithiau a ddaw yn sgil datblygiadau solar. Mae gennym darged uchelgeisiol iawn o ddiwallu 100 y cant o'n hanghenion ynni o ffynonellau adnewyddadwy erbyn 2030, ond nid yw hynny'n golygu ein bod yn mynd i roi'r gorau i bolisïau ar gyfer diogelu ein hamgylcheddau a'n cynefinoedd mwyaf gwerthfawr. Mae'n rhaid cael cydbwysedd wrth inni symud ymlaen ar y daith i sero net. Fe ddywedaf, serch hynny, fod 'Cymru'r Dyfodol' yn gwneud datganiad clir am bwysigrwydd tir amaethyddol o ansawdd uchel, gan ei fod yn cael ei ystyried yn adnodd naturiol cenedlaethol o dan bolisi 9, ac mae llawer o fanylion ynghlwm felly wrth sut y caiff y tir hwnnw ei raddio. Ond fel y dywedais, rwy'n sicr yn credu bod 'Cymru'r Dyfodol' yn bendant yn cydnabod pwysigrwydd tir amaethyddol yn ogystal.
Thank you for your answers on these points to the Chamber today, Cabinet Secretary, and thank you for what you said about the work of the Gwent levels working group, which I do think is very important and shows the commitment in the local area to protecting that unique landscape.
Some of the issues generally in terms of 'Planning Policy Wales', Cabinet Secretary, and policy 9, are about SSSIs and the degree of protection that's provided, and I welcome some of the improvements and better safeguards that have been developed up until now. But, as you mentioned, there is further work under way, and I just wonder if you could say a little bit about that further work in general, Cabinet Secretary, and how it relates to cumulative impact. Because one of the issues with large-scale solar farms is that if a number of them have been consented, it's the cumulative impact on the area. Every time one is consented, it then would normally make further development more likely, given that that development has already taken place.
Just finally, on exceptional circumstances, there is a feeling that greater clarity is needed in terms of interpretation, because sometimes a renewable energy project seems to be considered exceptional no matter what the environmental nature of the land concerned.
Diolch am eich atebion ar y pwyntiau hyn i'r Siambr heddiw, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a diolch am yr hyn a ddywedoch chi am waith gweithgor gwastadeddau Gwent, sydd, yn fy marn i, yn bwysig iawn ac yn dangos ymrwymiad yr ardal leol i ddiogelu'r dirwedd unigryw honno.
Mae rhai o'r materion sy'n codi o ran 'Polisi Cynllunio Cymru' yn gyffredinol, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a pholisi 9, yn ymwneud â SoDdGAoedd a graddau'r diogelwch a ddarperir, ac rwy'n croesawu rhai o'r gwelliannau a'r mesurau diogelu gwell sydd wedi'u datblygu hyd yn hyn. Ond fel y sonioch chi, mae gwaith pellach ar y gweill, a tybed a allech chi ddweud ychydig am y gwaith pellach hwnnw yn gyffredinol, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a sut y mae'n ymwneud ag effaith gronnol. Oherwydd un o'r problemau gyda ffermydd solar mawr, os oes nifer ohonynt wedi cael caniatâd, yw'r effaith gronnol ar yr ardal. Bob tro y rhoddir caniatâd i un, byddai fel arfer yn gwneud datblygiad pellach yn fwy tebygol wedyn, oherwydd bod y datblygiad hwnnw eisoes wedi digwydd.
Yn olaf, ar amgylchiadau eithriadol, mae yna deimlad fod angen mwy o eglurder mewn perthynas â dehongliad, oherwydd weithiau mae'n ymddangos bod prosiect ynni adnewyddadwy yn cael ei ystyried yn eithriadol ni waeth beth yw natur amgylcheddol y tir dan sylw.
I'm grateful for the question and for the work that John Griffiths is undertaking in this space. I think the net benefit for biodiversity policy is really important in this space, and hopefully that will seek to at least mitigate some of those cumulative impacts, because it does require developers to follow the stepwise approach as a means of demonstrating the steps that have been taken to securing a net benefit for biodiversity. I think that is going to be absolutely crucial. That means working through a number of steps—so, avoiding impact in the first place, but then minimising and then seeking to mitigate and restore, and finally compensate on site for any losses. That obviously is an absolute last resort. I think that new policy approach is really important. I will give some further consideration to the specific points regarding exceptional circumstances and how we can better define those, if there are things that we can do to offer some more clarity.
Rwy'n ddiolchgar am y cwestiwn ac am y gwaith y mae John Griffiths yn ei wneud yn y maes hwn. Credaf fod budd net i bolisi bioamrywiaeth yn bwysig iawn yn y gofod hwn, a gobeithio y bydd hynny'n ceisio lliniaru o leiaf rai o'r effeithiau cronnus hynny, oherwydd mae'n ei gwneud yn ofynnol i ddatblygwyr ddilyn y dull 'stepwise' fel modd o ddangos y camau a gymerwyd i sicrhau budd net i fioamrywiaeth. Rwy'n credu y bydd hynny'n gwbl hanfodol. Mae hynny'n golygu gweithio drwy nifer o gamau—felly, osgoi effaith yn y lle cyntaf, ond lleihau a cheisio lliniaru ac adfer wedyn, ac yn y pen draw gwneud iawn ar y safle am unrhyw golledion. Mae hwnnw'n amlwg yn ddewis olaf absoliwt. Credaf fod y dull polisi newydd yn bwysig iawn. Byddaf yn rhoi ystyriaeth bellach i'r pwyntiau penodol ynghylch amgylchiadau eithriadol a sut y gallwn ddiffinio'r rheini'n well, os oes pethau y gallwn eu gwneud i gynnig mwy o eglurder.
5. Pa drafodaethau y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet wedi'u cael â chyrff chwaraeon ynghylch allgymorth cymunedol? OQ61741
5. What discussions has the Cabinet Secretary had with sporting bodies regarding community outreach? OQ61741
Diolch. I met the chair and chief executive of Sport Wales last week, where we discussed support for community and grass-roots sport, including from national governing bodies and other partners. Most sports include community outreach within their activities, and I value their important contributions.
Diolch. Cyfarfûm â chadeirydd a phrif weithredwr Chwaraeon Cymru yr wythnos diwethaf, lle buom yn trafod cefnogaeth i chwaraeon cymunedol a chwaraeon llawr gwlad, gan gynnwys gan gyrff llywodraethu cenedlaethol a phartneriaid eraill. Mae'r rhan fwyaf o chwaraeon yn cynnwys allgymorth cymunedol yn eu gweithgareddau, ac rwy'n gwerthfawrogi eu cyfraniadau pwysig.
Thank you for that answer, Minister. I've worked with a number of grass-roots sports clubs in my constituency—the ones I have in mind are Beddau welfare and Coedely welfare—all of which have developed from their traditional welfare role in mining communities to developing sporting facilities and so on. One of the contributions it's clear they make, increasingly, is not just around physical health, but it's also around the mental health and broader well-being of the communities. Could I ask the Minister what action he's talking to encourage grass-roots sports clubs to play a more specific and focused role in the development of support for mental health in the communities and broader well-being?
Diolch am yr ateb hwnnw, Weinidog. Rwyf wedi gweithio gyda nifer o glybiau chwaraeon llawr gwlad yn fy etholaeth—y rhai sydd gennyf mewn golwg yw grwpiau lles Beddau a lles Coed-elái—mae pob un ohonynt wedi datblygu o'u rôl les draddodiadol mewn cymunedau glofaol i ddatblygu cyfleusterau chwaraeon ac yn y blaen. Mae un o'r cyfraniadau amlwg a wnânt yn ymwneud yn gynyddol nid yn unig ag iechyd corfforol, ond ag iechyd meddwl a lles ehangach y cymunedau hefyd. A gaf i ofyn i'r Gweinidog pa gamau y mae'n eu cymryd i annog clybiau chwaraeon llawr gwlad i chwarae rhan fwy penodol sy'n canolbwyntio ar ddatblygu cefnogaeth i iechyd meddwl yn y cymunedau a llesiant ehangach?
Can I thank Mick for that important question and the points made within the question, but, more importantly, thank him for all of the work he does in his constituency of Pontypridd in this particular area, supporting people with their mental health, supporting sports clubs and other organisations to support people in their mental health?
The Member will be very aware that I have championed, for a number of years now, the idea of sports clubs playing a role in supporting fans and players with their own mental health. We know, don't we, Presiding Officer, that men in particular can struggle to open up and talk to one another about how they are feeling, so providing that safe space and a comfortable space is ever so important to do so. I do believe sports facilities, particularly grass-roots sport, is one of those spaces.
Llywydd, there were two football teams in Wales this year who won awards during the Football Association of Wales’s grass-roots awards for raising awareness and promoting mental well-being, both stemming from the loss of a player to suicide: Heolgerrig Red Lion FC and Connah’s Quay Town in my own constituency, in the memory of my best friend of 20 years, Jamie Wynne. This is a further example of good practice, but it's not just in football. Welsh Athletics also have a partnership with Mind Cymru, and they've recently announced that they have trained 34 mental health champions in 23 running clubs across Wales.
In terms of the specific ask from the Member, I've already had the opportunity to speak with the FAW around this, to speak to Sports Wales around this, and also to Cardiff City FC Foundation around this. My colleague Sarah Murphy and I had those conversations around where sport in particular can, perhaps, play a bigger role in supporting people with their mental health across Wales. Together, we will take that work forward to see what may be possible in the future.
A gaf i ddiolch i Mick am y cwestiwn pwysig hwnnw a'r pwyntiau a wnaed yn y cwestiwn, ond yn bwysicach, diolch iddo am yr holl waith y mae'n ei wneud yn ei etholaeth ym Mhontypridd yn y maes penodol hwn, yn cefnogi pobl gyda'u hiechyd meddwl, yn cefnogi clybiau chwaraeon a sefydliadau eraill i gefnogi pobl gyda'u hiechyd meddwl?
Bydd yr Aelod yn ymwybodol iawn fy mod, ers nifer o flynyddoedd bellach, wedi hyrwyddo'r syniad o rôl clybiau chwaraeon yn cefnogi cefnogwyr a chwaraewyr gyda'u hiechyd meddwl eu hunain. Fe wyddom, oni wyddom, Lywydd, y gall dynion yn enwedig ei chael hi'n anodd bod yn agored a siarad â'i gilydd ynglŷn â sut maent yn teimlo, felly mae darparu lle diogel a lle cyfforddus mor bwysig. Rwy'n credu bod cyfleusterau chwaraeon, yn enwedig chwaraeon llawr gwlad, yn un o'r mannau hynny.
Lywydd, fe wnaeth dau dîm pêl-droed yng Nghymru ennill gwobrau yng ngwobrau llawr gwlad Cymdeithas Bêl-droed Cymru eleni am godi ymwybyddiaeth a hyrwyddo llesiant meddyliol, yn deillio, yn y ddau achos, o golli chwaraewyr i hunanladdiad: Clybiau Pêl-droed Heolgerrig Red Lion a Chei Connah yn fy etholaeth i, er cof am fy ffrind gorau am 20 mlynedd, Jamie Wynne. Mae hon yn enghraifft arall o arfer da, ond nid mewn pêl-droed yn unig. Mae gan Athletau Cymru bartneriaeth gyda Mind Cymru hefyd, ac yn ddiweddar maent wedi cyhoeddi eu bod wedi hyfforddi 34 o hyrwyddwyr iechyd meddwl mewn 23 o glybiau rhedeg ledled Cymru.
Ar yr hyn y mae'r Aelod yn ei ofyn yn benodol, rwyf eisoes wedi cael cyfle i siarad â Chymdeithas Bêl-droed Cymru a Chwaraeon Cymru ynglŷn â hyn, yn ogystal â Sefydliad Clwb Pêl-droed Dinas Caerdydd. Cafodd fy nghyd-Aelod Sarah Murphy a minnau sgyrsiau ynglŷn â lle gall chwaraeon, yn arbennig, chwarae rhan fwy yn cefnogi pobl gyda'u hiechyd meddwl ledled Cymru. Gyda'n gilydd, fe wnawn ddatblygu'r gwaith hwnnw i weld beth allai fod yn bosibl yn y dyfodol.
Community outreach, Minister, for our sports clubs is very important, but also how they link with community health as well. What we have across Wales is an obesity epidemic, and I think sport can play a huge role in addressing the obesity crisis that we have across Wales. So, what I'm interested to learn, Minister, is what you are going to do to have better links with health to make sure that our sports clubs can play their role in ending obesity across Wales. What time frames can we see for when implementation of this is going to happen and when are we going to see the outcomes of the work that the Government is doing?
Weinidog, mae allgymorth cymunedol i'n clybiau chwaraeon yn bwysig iawn, ond hefyd y ffordd y maent yn cysylltu ag iechyd cymunedol. Yr hyn sydd gennym ar draws Cymru yw epidemig o ordewdra, ac rwy'n credu y gall chwaraeon chwarae rhan enfawr yn mynd i'r afael â'r argyfwng gordewdra sydd gennym ledled Cymru. Felly, hoffwn wybod, Weinidog, beth rydych chi'n mynd i'w wneud i gael gwell cysylltiadau ag iechyd i sicrhau y gall ein clybiau chwaraeon chwarae eu rhan yn rhoi diwedd ar ordewdra ledled Cymru. Pa amserlenni y cawn eu gweld ar gyfer pryd y bydd hyn yn cael ei weithredu a phryd y gwelwn ganlyniadau'r gwaith y mae'r Llywodraeth yn ei wneud?
Thank you, James Evans, for that. I know the Member in particular has a real passionate interest around the role sport and health can play in Wales and in his own constituency. And I know he's an avid sports player, Presiding Officer—
Diolch am hynny, James Evans. Rwy'n gwybod bod gan yr Aelod ddiddordeb angerddol yn y rôl y gall chwaraeon ac iechyd ei chwarae yng Nghymru ac yn ei etholaeth ei hun. A gwn ei fod yn chwaraewr brwd, Lywydd—
An average sports player. [Laughter.]
Chwaraewr cymedrol. [Chwerthin.]
An average sports player himself—that would be mean, Sam Kurtz. No, he's very good. Llywydd, I've played darts against James—he's much better than me.
But the role he mentions in sport and what it can do in terms of preventative measures in the health department is ever so important. I think it's something that the health Secretary and I, with his Deputy Ministers as well, will have further conversations on, around what that looks like going forward.
I will just point to the Welsh Rugby Union and Urdd programme Fit, Fed and Fun that takes place during the school holidays. That doesn't just help battle loneliness and isolation, but it very much does all of the things James Evans wishes sport to do in terms of getting people fit, getting people healthy. I'm very committed to making sure anyone who wants to access sport in Wales can do so in whatever sport that may be, at whatever level, to make sure that we do have a healthy nation, going forward.
Ag yntau'n chwaraewr cymedrol ei hun, mae hynny'n greulon, Sam Kurtz. Na, mae'n dda iawn. Lywydd, rwyf wedi chwarae dartiau yn erbyn James—mae'n llawer gwell na fi.
Ond mae'r rôl y mae'n sôn amdani mewn chwaraeon a'r hyn y gall ei wneud o ran mesurau ataliol ym maes iechyd mor bwysig. Rwy'n credu ei fod yn rhywbeth y bydd yr Ysgrifennydd iechyd a minnau, gyda'i Ddirprwy Weinidogion hefyd, yn cael sgyrsiau pellach yn ei gylch, ynglŷn â sut olwg sydd ar hynny wrth symud ymlaen.
Rwyf am nodi raglen Undeb Rygbi Cymru a rhaglen Ffit, Bwydo, Hwyl yr Urdd sy'n digwydd yn ystod gwyliau'r ysgol. Mae hynny'n helpu i frwydro yn erbyn unigrwydd ac ynysigrwydd, ac mae hefyd yn gwneud pob un o'r pethau y mae James Evans yn dymuno i chwaraeon ei wneud i gael pobl yn ffit, yn iach. Rwy'n ymrwymedig iawn i sicrhau y gall unrhyw un sydd am gymryd rhan mewn chwaraeon yng Nghymru wneud hynny ym mha bynnag gamp a ddymunant, ar ba lefel bynnag, i sicrhau bod gennym genedl iach ar gyfer y dyfodol.
6. Pa asesiad y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i wneud o'r achos busnes dros brosiectau dal carbon yng Nghymru? OQ61757
6. What assessment has the Welsh Government made of the business case for carbon capture projects in Wales? OQ61757
The responsibility for demonstrating that carbon capture and storage business cases make the necessary contribution to long-term decarbonisation and build a stronger, greener economy rests entirely with the developer. To acquire necessary consents, developers must provide evidence in line with our policies set out in 'Planning Policy Wales'.
Mae'r cyfrifoldeb am ddangos bod achosion busnes dal a storio carbon yn gwneud y cyfraniad angenrheidiol at ddatgarboneiddio hirdymor ac adeiladu economi gryfach, wyrddach yn dibynnu'n llwyr ar y datblygwr. Er mwyn cael y cydsyniadau angenrheidiol, rhaid i ddatblygwyr ddarparu tystiolaeth yn unol â'n polisïau a nodir yn 'Polisi Cynllunio Cymru'.
Cabinet Secretary, multiple reports have highlighted that carbon capture is an untested and untried science, and we've already heard some concerns about that, following Llyr Gruffydd's question. We really shouldn't be surprised that the fossil fuel industry is keen to clutch at this straw as a way of prolonging the lifespan of carbon-emitting fuels, rather than switching to alternative energy generation. Given the number of energy experts who say that CCS technology isn't worth investing in, what might the Welsh Government's business case be for sinking money into this doubtful technology, when Wales is endowed with so many renewable energy options on our doorstep, which we can use for both generation and warming our homes?
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae sawl adroddiad wedi nodi bod dal carbon yn wyddoniaeth heb ei phrofi, ac rydym eisoes wedi clywed rhai pryderon ynglŷn â hynny, yn dilyn cwestiwn Llyr Gruffydd. Ni ddylem synnu bod y diwydiant tanwydd ffosil yn awyddus i fachu ar y llygedyn bach hwn o oleuni fel ffordd o ymestyn hyd oes tanwydd allyrru carbon, yn hytrach na newid i gynhyrchu ynni amgen. O ystyried nifer yr arbenigwyr ynni sy'n dweud nad yw technoleg dal a storio carbon yn werth buddsoddi ynddi, beth allai achos busnes Llywodraeth Cymru fod dros suddo arian i'r dechnoleg amheus hon, pan fo cymaint o opsiynau ynni adnewyddadwy ar garreg ein drws yng Nghymru y gallwn eu defnyddio ar gyfer cynhyrchu ynni a chynhesu ein cartrefi?
So, in terms of Welsh Government's own investment, you will see that in the renewable sector. You'll see it through Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru and the five projects that we're seeking to develop there. You'll see it in our wider support through Ynni Cymru for more community-based renewable sources of energy as well. So, in terms of where you see the Welsh Government investment, that's where it's going, and we just are really, really clear that our preferred methods of decarbonisation do remain demand reduction, energy efficiency, use of renewables and transition away from fossil fuels. And we need to ensure that carbon capture and storage is only used where other options for decarbonisation have been explored and are justifiably discounted. We'll support the industry across Wales, which, after exhausting all of those other options, have only CCS as a possible solution to decarbonise. And then it's just worth mentioning as well that any proposal for carbon capture and storage will require planning permission, environmental permits, marine permits, a technical and economic licence for transport and storage activities, and all of those will have demanding technical and economic requirements that have to be fulfilled before any consent is granted. And each regulatory regime requires the developer to provide detailed information and evidence on processes, impacts, monitoring and mitigations, before any energy can take place. But then, just to reiterate in terms of our own investments, they are very much in the renewable space.
O ran buddsoddiad Llywodraeth Cymru ei hun, fe welwch hwnnw yn y sector ynni adnewyddadwy. Fe'i gwelwch drwy Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru a'r pum prosiect yr ydym yn ceisio eu datblygu yno. Fe'i gwelwch yn ein cefnogaeth ehangach drwy Ynni Cymru i ragor o ffynonellau ynni adnewyddadwy cymunedol hefyd. Felly, o ran ble y gwelwch fuddsoddiad Llywodraeth Cymru, dyna lle mae'n mynd, ac rydym yn glir iawn fod ein dulliau dewisol o ddatgarboneiddio yn parhau i gynnwys lleihau galw, effeithlonrwydd ynni, defnydd o ynni adnewyddadwy a phontio oddi wrth danwydd ffosil. Ac mae angen inni sicrhau nad yw dal a storio carbon ond yn cael ei ddefnyddio pan fydd opsiynau eraill ar gyfer datgarboneiddio wedi'u harchwilio ac wedi eu diystyru'n briodol. Byddwn yn cefnogi'r diwydiant ledled Cymru, os mai'r unig ateb posibl i ddatgarboneiddio ar ôl dihysbyddu pob un o'r opsiynau eraill yw dal a storio carbon. Ac mae'n werth sôn hefyd y bydd unrhyw gynnig ar gyfer dal a storio carbon yn galw am ganiatâd cynllunio, trwyddedau amgylcheddol, trwyddedau morol, trwydded dechnegol ac economaidd ar gyfer gweithgareddau cludo a storio, a bydd gan bob un o'r rheini ofynion technegol ac economaidd heriol y mae'n rhaid eu cyflawni cyn rhoi unrhyw gydsyniad. Ac mae pob cyfundrefn reoleiddiol yn ei gwneud yn ofynnol i'r datblygwr ddarparu gwybodaeth a thystiolaeth fanwl ar brosesau, effeithiau, monitro a mesurau lliniaru, cyn y gall unrhyw ynni ddigwydd. Ond i ailadrodd, o ran ein buddsoddiadau ein hunain, maent yn bendant yn canolbwyntio ar y gofod ynni adnewyddadwy.
7. Sut y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn gweithio tuag at y nod o Gymru yn dod yn genedl cyflog byw? OQ61749
7. How is the Welsh Government working towards Wales becoming a living wage nation? OQ61749
Diolch. We collaborate with the living wage movement, employers, trade unions and other stakeholders to promote the real living wage, and we encourage employers across Wales to adopt this wage and to seek accreditation for their commitment.
Diolch. Rydym yn cydweithio â'r mudiad cyflog byw, cyflogwyr, undebau llafur a rhanddeiliaid eraill i hyrwyddo'r cyflog byw gwirioneddol, ac rydym yn annog cyflogwyr ledled Cymru i fabwysiadu'r cyflog hwn a cheisio achrediad i'w hymrwymiad.
Diolch am yr ateb.
Thank you for that response.
And also congratulations on your post. It's good to be questioning you today. I'm very pleased that the new real living wage has gone up to £12.60 in Wales, and the real living wage rates are now worth over £2,262 more per year for the full-time worker in Wales than the legal minimum, the national living wage. There are 582 accredited real living wage employers in Wales, and more than 22,000 employees in Wales have received a pay rise due to the real living wage. Since 2014, all NHS Wales staff have been paid the real living wage, and I'm really pleased that in the social care field we were able to help the real living wage to be introduced for social care workers in Wales. But although things are progressing well, there are still a lot of employers who are not paying the real living wage, so could the Minister suggest ways forward that we can increase the number of employers paying the real living wage?
Hefyd, llongyfarchiadau ar eich swydd. Mae'n dda cael eich holi chi heddiw. Rwy'n falch iawn fod y cyflog byw gwirioneddol newydd wedi codi i £12.60 yng Nghymru, ac mae'r cyfraddau cyflog byw gwirioneddol bellach yn werth dros £2,262 yn fwy y flwyddyn i'r gweithiwr llawn amser yng Nghymru na'r isafswm cyfreithiol, y cyflog byw cenedlaethol. Mae 582 o gyflogwyr cyflog byw gwirioneddol achrededig yng Nghymru, ac mae mwy na 22,000 o weithwyr yng Nghymru wedi cael codiad cyflog oherwydd y cyflog byw gwirioneddol. Ers 2014, mae holl staff GIG Cymru wedi cael y cyflog byw gwirioneddol, ac yn y maes gofal cymdeithasol, rwy'n falch iawn ein bod wedi gallu helpu gyda chyflwyno'r cyflog byw gwirioneddol i weithwyr gofal cymdeithasol yng Nghymru. Ond er bod pethau'n mynd rhagddynt yn dda, mae yna lawer o gyflogwyr o hyd nad ydynt yn talu'r cyflog byw gwirioneddol, felly a allai'r Gweinidog awgrymu ffyrdd y gallwn gynyddu nifer y cyflogwyr sy'n talu'r cyflog byw gwirioneddol?
Can I personally thank Julie Morgan for that question and join with Julie Morgan in welcoming today's announcement on the real living wage rate increasing to £12.60 in Wales? It's great to have employers take this seriously in Wales—employers like Transport for Wales and Tiny Rebel. The Member is right to point to the work we do in this field in the NHS, and of course in the social care sector. We're proud to have that commitment, and I want to place on record my thanks to Julie Morgan for making that commitment a reality and her leadership when she was the Minister for social care.
Presiding Officer, the increased wage announced today will make a real difference to thousands of workers who work for real living wage employers across Cymru, and for me personally, and the working class community that I come from, I'm very conscious of the difference that this will make for lower income families with children in particular.
The real living wage not only benefits employees, but the evidence does suggest it benefits employers as well as the wider community. We are approaching Living Wage Week in November. That is an opportunity to celebrate and encourage more employers, if they are able to do so, to consider paying the real living wage and seeking accreditation for doing so.
The Member asks what more we can do in the Welsh Government, and I'm particularly interested to see if there is more to do around the economic contract here and the work of the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act 2023 in encouraging employers to do so. And can I also pay tribute, Presiding Officer, to the movement in general and the trade union movement, who have championed this case for many, many years and deliver real-term pay increases for their members?
A gaf i ddiolch yn bersonol i Julie Morgan am y cwestiwn hwnnw ac ymuno â Julie Morgan i groesawu'r cyhoeddiad heddiw am y gyfradd cyflog byw gwirioneddol yn codi i £12.60 yng Nghymru? Mae'n wych fod cyflogwyr o ddifrif ynglŷn â hyn yng Nghymru—cyflogwyr fel Trafnidiaeth Cymru a Tiny Rebel. Mae'r Aelod yn iawn i nodi'r gwaith a wnawn yn y maes hwn yn y GIG, ac yn y sector gofal cymdeithasol wrth gwrs. Rydym yn falch o gael yr ymrwymiad hwnnw, ac rwyf am gofnodi fy niolch i Julie Morgan am wireddu'r ymrwymiad hwnnw a'i harweinyddiaeth pan oedd hi'n Weinidog gofal cymdeithasol.
Lywydd, bydd y cyflog uwch a gyhoeddwyd heddiw yn gwneud gwahaniaeth gwirioneddol i filoedd o weithwyr sy'n gweithio i gyflogwyr cyflog byw gwirioneddol ledled Cymru, ac i mi'n bersonol, a'r gymuned dosbarth gweithiol rwy'n dod ohoni, rwy'n ymwybodol iawn o'r gwahaniaeth y bydd hyn yn ei wneud i deuluoedd incwm is sydd â phlant yn arbennig.
Mae'r cyflog byw gwirioneddol nid yn unig o fudd i weithwyr, mae'r dystiolaeth yn awgrymu ei fod o fudd i gyflogwyr yn ogystal â'r gymuned ehangach. Rydym yn agosáu at Wythnos Cyflog Byw ym mis Tachwedd. Mae honno'n gyfle i ddathlu ac annog mwy o gyflogwyr i ystyried talu'r cyflog byw gwirioneddol os gallant, a cheisio achrediad am wneud hynny.
Mae'r Aelod yn gofyn beth arall y gallwn ei wneud yn Llywodraeth Cymru, ac mae gennyf ddiddordeb arbennig mewn gweld a oes mwy i'w wneud yma gyda'r contract economaidd a gwaith Deddf Partneriaeth Gymdeithasol a Chaffael Cyhoeddus (Cymru) 2023 i annog cyflogwyr i wneud hynny. A gaf i hefyd dalu teyrnged, Lywydd, i'r mudiad yn gyffredinol a mudiad yr undebau llafur, sydd wedi hyrwyddo'r achos hwn ers blynyddoedd lawer, ac wedi sicrhau codiadau cyflog mewn termau real i'w haelodau?
Ac yn olaf, cwestiwn 8, Alun Davies.
And finally question 8, Alun Davies.
8. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet ddatganiad am fuddsoddiad datblygu economaidd ym Mlaenau Gwent? OQ61746
8. Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on economic development investment in Blaenau Gwent? OQ61746
The Welsh Government works with partners such as the Cardiff capital region, Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council and key businesses to deliver prosperity and the benefits of economic growth to all parts of south-east Wales, including Blaenau Gwent.
Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn gweithio gyda phartneriaid fel prifddinas-ranbarth Caerdydd, Cyngor Bwrdeistref Sirol Blaenau Gwent a busnesau allweddol i sicrhau ffyniant a manteision twf economaidd i bob rhan o dde-ddwyrain Cymru, gan gynnwys Blaenau Gwent.
I'm grateful to you for that, Cabinet Secretary. The Cabinet Secretary will, of course, be aware of the Goldworks development, which has just been opened in Blaenau Gwent, and I should take the opportunity, of course, of inviting her to Blaenau Gwent to go and see that development and to see what is being achieved in the borough. But, as the completion of the A465 dual carriageway comes to a completion, what we are seeing in the borough is a greater demand for business units and for industrial units. Will the Cabinet Secretary, on her visit to Blaenau Gwent, meet with the local authority and myself to discuss how the Welsh Government can continue to invest in the sorts of business environment we require in the borough to take full advantage of the investment that has already been made by the Welsh Government in the dualling of the A465?
Rwy'n ddiolchgar i chi am hynny, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Bydd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn ymwybodol o ddatblygiad Goldworks sydd newydd gael ei agor ym Mlaenau Gwent, a dylwn fanteisio ar y cyfle i'w gwahodd i Flaenau Gwent i fynd i weld y datblygiad hwnnw ac i weld beth sy'n cael ei gyflawni yn y fwrdeistref. Ond wrth i ffordd ddeuol yr A465 gael ei chwblhau, yr hyn a welwn yn y fwrdeistref yw mwy o alw am unedau busnes ac unedau diwydiannol. A wnaiff Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ar ei hymweliad â Blaenau Gwent, gyfarfod â'r awdurdod lleol a minnau i drafod sut y gall Llywodraeth Cymru barhau i fuddsoddi yn y mathau o amgylcheddau busnes sydd eu hangen arnom yn y fwrdeistref i fanteisio'n llawn ar y buddsoddiad a wnaed eisoes gan Lywodraeth Cymru ar ddeuoli'r A465?
Thank you very much to Alun Davies. I'd be very happy to take him up on his kind invitation to visit Blaenau Gwent. I know that my predecessor also had a very interesting tour of some of the highlights in terms of Welsh Government investment and the opportunity to talk about additional things that we could be doing together as well. And as Alun Davies says, the construction of the Goldworks business centre was funded by Welsh Government. That was a joint venture with the council, and then it was fitted out by Blaenau Gwent, using some money from the shared prosperity fund. Other premises built in Blaenau Gwent by us include the Rhyd y Blew unit—that's 50,000 sq ft, which is under offer to a local engineering business that is seeking to expand—and also the Tech Valleys House, which currently has interest from two credible inward investors as well. So, again, all very positive stuff. And between those two investments, I think that that required a budget in excess of £10 million. So, that is a really significant investment on the part of the Welsh Government. That includes, of course, the Tech Valleys House.
I know that the Northern Valleys Initiative has also identified property as one of the top three areas that it wants to look at. So, we stand ready to support that work as well. So, just to recognise the importance of having available units for businesses to move into and expand is absolutely important, and I very much look forward to my tour of Blaenau Gwent.
Diolch i Alun Davies. Rwy'n hapus iawn i dderbyn ei wahoddiad caredig i ymweld â Blaenau Gwent. Gwn fod fy rhagflaenydd hefyd wedi cael taith ddiddorol iawn o amgylch rhai o'r uchafbwyntiau mewn perthynas â buddsoddiad Llywodraeth Cymru a'r cyfle i siarad am bethau ychwanegol y gallem eu gwneud gyda'n gilydd hefyd. Ac fel y dywed Alun Davies, ariannwyd y gwaith o adeiladu canolfan fusnes Goldworks gan Lywodraeth Cymru. Menter ar y cyd oedd honno gyda'r cyngor, a'i gosod wedyn gan Blaenau Gwent, gan ddefnyddio rhywfaint o arian o'r gronfa ffyniant gyffredin. Mae adeiladau eraill a adeiladwyd gennym ym Mlaenau Gwent yn cynnwys uned Rhyd y Blew—mae honno'n 50,000 troedfedd sgwâr, ac mae cais amdani wedi dod gan fusnes peirianneg lleol sydd eisiau ehangu—a hefyd Tech Valleys House y mae dau fewnfuddsoddwr credadwy wedi dangos ddiddordeb ynddo. Felly, unwaith eto, pethau cadarnhaol iawn. A rhwng y ddau fuddsoddiad hwnnw, rwy'n credu bod hynny wedi galw am gyllideb o fwy na £10 miliwn. Felly, mae'n fuddsoddiad sylweddol iawn ar ran Llywodraeth Cymru. Mae hynny'n cynnwys Tech Valleys House wrth gwrs.
Gwn fod Menter Cymoedd y Gogledd hefyd wedi nodi eiddo fel un o'r tri phrif le y mae am edrych arnynt. Felly, rydym yn barod i gefnogi'r gwaith hwnnw hefyd. Felly, os caf gydnabod pwysigrwydd cael unedau ar gael i fusnesau symud i mewn iddynt ac ehangu yn bwysig iawn, ac rwy'n edrych ymlaen yn fawr at fy nhaith o gwmpas Blaenau Gwent.
Diolch i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet a'r Gweinidog.
I thank the Cabinet Secretary and the Minister.
Yr eitem nesaf fydd y cwestiynau i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Iechyd a Gofal Cymdeithasol. Mae'r cwestiwn cyntaf gan Jenny Rathbone.
The next item will be the questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care. The first question is from Jenny Rathbone.
1. Beth y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei wneud i sicrhau nad yw gofal sylfaenol yn ddarostyngedig i'r ddeddf gofal gwrthgyfartal? OQ61758
1. What is the Welsh Government doing to ensure primary care isn't subject to the inverse care law? OQ61758
Well, 53 years on from the establishment of the concept of the inverse care law by Julian Tudor Hart and also Brian Gibbons who, of course, went on to become a Member of this Senedd, very sadly this law remains too often a reality right across the UK. The Welsh Government wishes to work for a Wales where this law no longer applies.
Wel, 53 mlynedd ers sefydlu'r cysyniad o'r ddeddf gofal gwrthgyfartal gan Julian Tudor Hart a hefyd Brian Gibbons a aeth ymlaen i ddod yn Aelod o'r Senedd hon wrth gwrs, yn anffodus mae'r ddeddf hon yn parhau i fod yn realiti'n rhy aml ar draws y DU. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn dymuno gweithio dros Gymru lle nad yw'r ddeddf hon yn gymwys mwyach.
Thank you, and I absolutely endorse your remarks about the importance of Julian Tudor Hart's work in getting this at the forefront of most clinicians' minds. But I was therefore very sad to read research by Cardiff University with Public Health Wales, published this August, which suggested that GP surgeries in the poorest places are being disadvantaged financially. So, I wondered if you could tell us what action the Welsh Government is taking to ensure that health boards are funding primary care teams equitably so that those serving the poorest, and therefore the most sick, communities get the most support.
Diolch, ac rwy'n llwyr gymeradwyo eich sylwadau am bwysigrwydd gwaith Julian Tudor Hart yn sicrhau bod hyn yn dod yn flaenllaw ym meddyliau'r rhan fwyaf o glinigwyr. Ond roeddwn yn drist iawn i ddarllen ymchwil gan Brifysgol Caerdydd gydag Iechyd Cyhoeddus Cymru, a gyhoeddwyd fis Awst, yn awgrymu bod meddygfeydd yn y llefydd tlotaf dan anfantais ariannol. Felly, tybed a allech chi ddweud wrthym pa gamau y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn eu cymryd i sicrhau bod byrddau iechyd yn ariannu timau gofal sylfaenol yn deg fel bod y rhai sy'n gwasanaethu'r cymunedau tlotaf, ac felly, y bobl fwyaf sâl, yn cael y gefnogaeth fwyaf.
Well I, too, read the report to which the Member refers in her question, and I welcomed its publication because it casts a light on the question of funding allocations on practices that serve more deprived areas. We will as a Government continue to engage with new evidence on the health impacts of inequality and primary care funding and how we can ensure that resources are distributed fairly. One of the authors of the report was a former chair of Deep End Cymru, and I'm pleased that, in the context of primary care, we are contributing to the funding of that project during this financial year, and I very much look forward to the insights that the project will generate as to how we can best support GPs working in challenging circumstances in communities with the highest levels of deprivation. In addition to the formula, which accounts for probably two thirds of the funding for GP practices, good work is happening across GP clusters to identify the further interventions that can be funded that will assist, through that accelerated cluster development set of arrangements, in making further investment into services particularly of value to the communities to which the Member refers in her question.
Wel, darllenais innau yr adroddiad y mae'r Aelod yn cyfeirio ato yn ei chwestiwn hefyd, a chroesewais ei gyhoeddiad am ei fod yn taflu goleuni ar fater dyrannu cyllid i bractisau sy'n gwasanaethu ardaloedd mwy difreintiedig. Fel Llywodraeth fe fyddwn yn parhau i ystyried tystiolaeth newydd ar effeithiau anghydraddoldeb ar iechyd a chyllid gofal sylfaenol a sut y gallwn sicrhau bod adnoddau'n cael eu dosbarthu'n deg. Roedd un o awduron yr adroddiad yn gyn-gadeirydd Deep End Cymru, ac rwy'n falch ein bod, yng nghyd-destun gofal sylfaenol, yn cyfrannu at ariannu'r prosiect hwnnw yn ystod y flwyddyn ariannol hon, ac edrychaf ymlaen yn fawr at y canfyddiadau y bydd y prosiect yn eu cynhyrchu ar gyfer y ffyrdd gorau o gefnogi meddygon teulu sy'n gweithio mewn amgylchiadau heriol mewn cymunedau sydd â'r lefelau amddifadedd uchaf. Yn ogystal â'r fformiwla, sydd i gyfrif am ddwy ran o dair o'r cyllid ar gyfer meddygfeydd teulu yn ôl pob tebyg, mae gwaith da yn digwydd ar draws clystyrau meddygon teulu ar nodi'r ymyriadau pellach y gellir eu hariannu a fydd yn cynorthwyo, drwy'r set o drefniadau cyflym ar gyfer datblygu clwstwr, i wneud buddsoddiad pellach mewn gwasanaethau sydd o werth arbennig i'r cymunedau y mae'r Aelod yn cyfeirio atynt yn ei chwestiwn.
International evidence suggests tackling the underlying causes of early years poverty and the inverse care law are key to improving short- and long-term health outcomes. In fact, poverty in childhood can and does lead to poor health outcomes into adulthood such as asthma, obesity, poor mental health, all of which fundamentally require much-needed primary care.
As you are aware, poverty rates have remained high in Wales over the past two decades, with children consistently at the highest risk of living in poverty of any age group. The evidence is clear that children in poverty are more likely to require intensive medical support. What steps are you taking as the health Cabinet Secretary to try and tackle one of the underlying fundamental factors that result in some of the most vulnerable in our society requiring this intensive healthcare?
Mae tystiolaeth ryngwladol yn awgrymu bod mynd i'r afael ag achosion sylfaenol tlodi blynyddoedd cynnar a'r ddeddf gofal gwrthgyfartal yn allweddol i wella canlyniadau iechyd tymor byr a hirdymor. Mewn gwirionedd, gall tlodi yn ystod plentyndod arwain at ganlyniadau iechyd gwael pan fyddant yn oedolion fel asthma, gordewdra, iechyd meddwl gwael, y mae angen gofal sylfaenol mawr ar bob un ohonynt.
Fel y gwyddoch, mae cyfraddau tlodi wedi parhau'n uchel yng Nghymru dros y ddau ddegawd diwethaf, gyda phlant yn gyson yn wynebu'r risg uchaf o unrhyw grŵp oedran o fyw mewn tlodi. Mae'r dystiolaeth yn glir fod plant sy'n byw mewn tlodi yn fwy tebygol o fod angen cymorth meddygol dwys. Pa gamau rydych chi'n eu cymryd fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros iechyd i geisio mynd i'r afael ag un o'r ffactorau sylfaenol gwaelodol sy'n golygu bod rhai o'r bobl fwyaf agored i niwed yn ein cymdeithas angen y gofal iechyd dwys hwn?
The Member is correct to say that the effect of poverty, especially on the early years, can very often cause lifelong challenges and the NHS is there to support those individuals, but they are broader societal challenges in the way that the Member acknowledges, I think very fairly, in her question. That is why our commitment as a Government to Flying Start and to the first 1,000 days of a child's life is so important, because we recognise that it's by making sure that we give every individual the best start in life, the most supportive context, that we can make the biggest difference.
Mae'r Aelod yn gywir i ddweud y gall effaith tlodi, yn enwedig ar y blynyddoedd cynnar, achosi heriau gydol oes yn aml iawn ac mae'r GIG yno i gefnogi'r unigolion hynny, ond maent yn heriau cymdeithasol ehangach yn y ffordd y mae'r Aelod yn cydnabod yn ei chwestiwn, yn deg iawn yn fy marn i. Dyna pam y mae ein hymrwymiad fel Llywodraeth i Dechrau'n Deg ac i'r 1,000 diwrnod cyntaf o fywyd plentyn mor bwysig, oherwydd rydym yn cydnabod mai drwy sicrhau ein bod yn rhoi'r dechrau gorau mewn bywyd, y cyd-destun mwyaf cefnogol, i bob unigolyn y gallwn wneud y gwahaniaeth mwyaf.
2. Pa gamau y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn eu cymryd i sicrhau bod cymorth ar gael i fyfyrwyr prifysgol â meddyliau hunanladdol? OQ61742
2. What steps is the Cabinet Secretary taking to ensure that support is accessible to university students with suicidal thoughts? OQ61742
We expect higher education institutions to put learners' needs at the centre of the system to protect their mental health and well-being. There is a range of mental health support available to students, which is provided by universities, the third sector and NHS health services.
Rydym yn disgwyl i sefydliadau addysg uwch roi anghenion dysgwyr yn y canol yn y system i ddiogelu eu hiechyd meddwl a'u llesiant meddyliol. Mae ystod o gymorth iechyd meddwl ar gael i fyfyrwyr, sy'n cael ei ddarparu gan brifysgolion, y trydydd sector a gwasanaethau iechyd y GIG.
Okay, thank you for that. However, I think it's fair to say, sometimes things go wrong, and it's how they're picked up and lessons learned going forward. I by chance met the parents the other day of Mared Foulkes, the grieving parents. They're still grieving now after the shocking scenario there, where the wrong exam results were given, and she lost her life as a result.
I'm aware of the consultation on the strategic plan of the Commission for Tertiary Education and Research. As it states in the plan, 'terms and conditions of funding will become the vehicle through which we exercise our regulatory powers.' Now, what upset me was that the parents are working very hard right now to ensure this doesn't happen to anybody else, and so they've written a paper. They've distributed that paper to Parliament—every Member of Parliament, every Member of this Senedd. The response, however, has not been great. I just find it unbelievable that somebody could write in, pointing out their own evidence of what they've come across—. Even Cardiff University has been accused by the parents—and they've said I can raise it here today—of a lack of compassion, of a lack of response to what happened to Mared. Here is a young lady who will not see the life that she should have had and lessons have to be learned from a situation like this.
So, what steps are you taking to co-operate with the Cabinet Secretary for Education to ensure that every university in Wales has stronger measures in place to care for those with mental health issues, to ensure that the wrong results for exams never, ever happens again, and that—? I just find this really difficult. This is a death that could have been prevented, and lessons have to be learnt, and I would just reach out to Cardiff University, using this forum: please respond to this family, work with them to ensure that no other university in Wales, or in fact the UK, loses a student in this way. Diolch.
Iawn, diolch am hynny. Fodd bynnag, rwy'n credu ei bod hi'n deg dweud bod pethau'n mynd o chwith weithiau, ac mae'n fater o sut y cânt eu nodi a'r gwersi a ddysgir wrth symud ymlaen. Y diwrnod o'r blaen, cyfarfûm â rhieni Mared Foulkes. Maent yn dal i alaru nawr ar ôl y sefyllfa frawychus yno, pan roddwyd canlyniadau arholiadau anghywir, ac fe gollodd ei bywyd o ganlyniad.
Rwy'n ymwybodol o'r ymgynghoriad ar gynllun strategol y Comisiwn Addysg Drydyddol ac Ymchwil. Fel y mae'n dweud yn y cynllun, 'bydd telerau ac amodau cyllido'n dod yn gyfrwng ar gyfer arfer ein pwerau rheoleiddio.' Nawr, yr hyn a'm diflasodd oedd bod y rhieni'n gweithio'n galed iawn ar hyn o bryd i sicrhau nad yw hyn yn digwydd i neb arall, ac felly maent wedi ysgrifennu papur. Maent wedi dosbarthu'r papur hwnnw i'r Senedd—pob Aelod Seneddol, pob Aelod o'r Senedd hon. Fodd bynnag, nid yw'r ymateb wedi bod yn wych. Rwy'n ei chael hi'n anghredadwy y gallai rhywun ysgrifennu i mewn, i dynnu sylw at eu tystiolaeth eu hunain o'r hyn a welsant—. Mae Prifysgol Caerdydd wedi cael ei chyhuddo gan y rhieni—ac maent wedi dweud y caf ei godi yma heddiw—o ddiffyg tosturi, o ddiffyg ymateb i'r hyn ddigwyddodd i Mared. Dyma ferch ifanc na fydd yn gweld y bywyd y dylai fod wedi ei gael ac mae'n rhaid dysgu gwersi o sefyllfa fel hon.
Felly, pa gamau rydych chi'n eu cymryd i gydweithredu ag Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Addysg i sicrhau bod gan bob prifysgol yng Nghymru fesurau cryfach ar waith i ofalu am y rhai sydd â phroblemau iechyd meddwl, er mwyn sicrhau nad yw'r canlyniadau arholiadau anghywir byth yn digwydd eto, a bod—? Mae hyn yn anodd iawn i mi. Mae hon yn farwolaeth y gellid bod wedi'i hatal, ac mae'n rhaid dysgu gwersi, ac rwyf am estyn allan at Brifysgol Caerdydd, gan ddefnyddio'r fforwm hwn: ymatebwch i'r teulu hwn, gweithiwch gyda nhw i sicrhau nad oes unrhyw brifysgol arall yng Nghymru, na'r DU mewn gwirionedd, yn colli myfyriwr yn y ffordd hon. Diolch.
Yes. Thank you very much, Janet Finch-Saunders. You are right—this was a preventable death that should not have happened. My thoughts are with Mared's parents, who have written to the Welsh Government and have, in the interim whilst we prepare the response, been written to by my Welsh Government officials as well to really thank them and acknowledge them for all the work that they continue to do to make sure, as you said, that this never happens again. I'd also like to point out that the Cabinet Secretary for health now, in his role as Cabinet Secretary for education, met with the family—met with Mr and Mrs Foulkes—to discuss this as well and to assure them too that this will absolutely make a difference. I am now responsible for the suicide and self-harm prevention strategy that will be coming out in the new year. I can assure you that what they have shared has played a huge part in this.
I've also met with my colleague the Minister for Further and Higher Education, as well, in the last few weeks. It was the first question that we discussed: how do we ensure that these things don't happen? How do we ensure that students, when they're usually away from home, have the support that they really need? And that's, I think, always a worry for parents—always a worry.
In terms of Cardiff University, they have now put themselves forward to be a part of a UK-wide research project that will be looking at what interventions really make a difference. It's being led by the University of Exeter. I'm really pleased to see that they've put themselves forward for this, I think, acknowledging that they really need to learn from this and see what works. But you are right—we have got the Tertiary Education and Research (Wales) Act 2022 now, and we do have the Medr project. There will be funding going towards this, but we also expect to see results and we expect for this not to keep happening. Diolch.
Ie. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Janet Finch-Saunders. Rydych yn llygad eich lle—roedd hon yn farwolaeth y gellid bod wedi'i hatal ac na ddylai fod wedi digwydd. Rwy'n cydymdeimlo â rhieni Mared, sydd wedi ysgrifennu at Lywodraeth Cymru ac sydd, yn y cyfamser wrth inni baratoi’r ymateb, wedi cael gohebiaeth gan fy swyddogion hefyd i ddiolch o galon iddynt a chydnabod yr holl waith y maent yn parhau i'w wneud i sicrhau, fel y dywedoch chi, nad yw hyn byth yn digwydd eto. Hoffwn nodi hefyd fod Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros iechyd, bellach, yn ei rôl fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros addysg, wedi cyfarfod â’r teulu—wedi cyfarfod â Mr a Mrs Foulkes—i drafod hyn hefyd ac i roi sicrwydd iddynt y bydd hyn yn bendant yn gwneud gwahaniaeth. Rwyf bellach yn gyfrifol am y strategaeth atal hunanladdiad a hunan-niweidio a fydd yn cael ei chyhoeddi yn y flwyddyn newydd. Gallaf roi sicrwydd i chi fod yr hyn y maent wedi’i rannu wedi chwarae rhan enfawr yn hyn.
Rwyf hefyd wedi cyfarfod â fy nghyd-Aelod, y Gweinidog Addysg Bellach ac Uwch, yn yr ychydig wythnosau diwethaf. Hwn oedd y cwestiwn cyntaf i ni ei drafod: sut rydym yn sicrhau nad yw’r pethau hyn yn digwydd? Sut rydym yn sicrhau bod myfyrwyr, pan fyddant oddi cartref fel arfer, yn cael y cymorth sydd ei angen arnynt? A chredaf fod hynny bob amser yn bryder i rieni—bob amser yn bryder.
O ran Prifysgol Caerdydd, maent bellach wedi ymgeisio i fod yn rhan o brosiect ymchwil ledled y DU a fydd yn edrych ar ba ymyriadau sy'n gwneud gwahaniaeth go iawn. Mae'n cael ei arwain gan Brifysgol Caerwysg. Rwy'n falch iawn o weld eu bod wedi ymgeisio i fod yn rhan o hyn, gan gydnabod, rwy'n credu, fod gwir angen iddynt ddysgu o hyn a gweld beth sy'n gweithio. Ond rydych chi'n llygad eich lle—mae gennym Ddeddf Addysg Drydyddol ac Ymchwil (Cymru) 2022 erbyn hyn, ac mae gennym brosiect Medr. Bydd cyllid yn cael ei ddarparu ar gyfer hyn, ond rydym hefyd yn disgwyl gweld canlyniadau ac yn disgwyl i hyn beidio â pharhau i ddigwydd. Diolch.
Cwestiynau nawr gan lefarwyr y pleidiau. Llefarydd y Ceidwadwyr, Gareth Davies.
Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Gareth Davies.
Diolch, Llywydd. Firstly, I’d like to address the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010 and how this interreacts with the Mental Health Act 1983. There is, of course, uncertainty regarding the Mental Health Act, as Keir Starmer’s Government has promised to reform the Act in a phased approach, but there is no timeline set for this yet. But an issue that has been raised regarding the mental health Measure, after 14 years on the statute book, is that there is no enforcement of the Measure and there are no real consequences to contravening its edicts as opposed to the Mental Health Act, which has more bite. Given the length of time it will take to legislate for a Welsh mental health Act, it would make more sense to amend the mental health Measure to include a new code of practice that would strengthen the Measure and would ensure compliance. The Measure is also 14 years old and there are no supplementary amendments to it that have been suggested, such as those put forward by my colleague James Evans, which include removing the age limit upon those who can request a reassessment of their mental health, and amend the Measure to extend the ability to request a reassessment to people nominated by the patient. So, can the Minister outline whether the Welsh Government will reassess the mental health Measure to consider elements that may be outdated and to consider strengthening the code of practice to ensure that the Measure carries more weight than in a clinical setting?
Diolch, Lywydd. Yn gyntaf, hoffwn sôn am Fesur Iechyd Meddwl (Cymru) 2010 a sut y mae'n rhyngweithio â Deddf Iechyd Meddwl 1983. Mae ansicrwydd, wrth gwrs, ynglŷn â’r Ddeddf Iechyd Meddwl, gan fod Llywodraeth Keir Starmer wedi addo diwygio’r Ddeddf yn raddol, ond nid oes amserlen wedi'i phennu ar gyfer hyn eto. Ond un mater a godwyd ynghylch y Mesur iechyd meddwl, ar ôl 14 mlynedd ar y llyfr statud, yw nad yw'r Mesur yn cael ei orfodi ac nad yw mynd yn groes i’w orchmynion yn arwain at unrhyw ganlyniadau gwirioneddol, yn wahanol i'r Ddeddf Iechyd Meddwl, sydd â mwy o rym. O ystyried yr amser y bydd yn ei gymryd i ddeddfu ar gyfer Deddf iechyd meddwl i Gymru, byddai’n gwneud mwy o synnwyr i ddiwygio’r Mesur iechyd meddwl i gynnwys cod ymarfer newydd a fyddai’n cryfhau’r Mesur ac yn sicrhau cydymffurfiaeth. Mae’r Mesur hefyd yn 14 oed, ac nid oes unrhyw welliannau atodol wedi’u hawgrymu iddo, megis y rheini a gyflwynwyd gan fy nghyd-Aelod, James Evans, sy’n cynnwys dileu’r terfyn oedran ar gyfer pwy a all ofyn am ailasesiad o’u hiechyd meddwl, a diwygio’r Mesur i ehangu’r gallu i ofyn am ailasesiad i bobl a enwebir gan y claf. Felly, a all y Gweinidog ddweud a fydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn ailasesu’r Mesur iechyd meddwl i ystyried elfennau a allai fod wedi dyddio ac i ystyried cryfhau’r cod ymarfer i sicrhau bod mwy o bwysau gan y Mesur nag mewn lleoliad clinigol yn unig?
Thank you very much for that question. Interestingly, I actually met with the UK Government Minister who has responsibility for this, Baroness Merron, this morning. It is absolutely still happening. It was in the King’s Speech. We are thrilled that it’s going ahead because so much work had been done on this by stakeholders, by politicians. There’d been so much really constructive debate about this in Westminster, and, honestly, it was almost very much ready to go and I think it was a shame that it didn’t. So, I think that many people have welcomed, and are absolutely thrilled, that this is one of the first Bills that the incoming UK Labour Government picked up, because that’s how important they know that this work is.
So, we had a very constructive conversation this morning about it. I’m afraid, though, that I’m not going to be able to comment on a Bill that I haven’t seen. So, I agree with you—many of the things that you’ve highlighted I would also expect to see in it, and have been in initial drafts, but until we see the final draft, which I hope will be coming very soon, I won’t be able to comment on the detail of it. But I think this is an excellent Bill to be beginning with. I also met with James Evans just this week as well. It's not my place to discuss James's own Member's Bill and the future of that, but we have had some very, very constructive conversations, and I admire everything that James has done.
Diolch am eich cwestiwn. Yn ddiddorol, cyfarfûm â Gweinidog Llywodraeth y DU sydd â chyfrifoldeb am hyn, y Farwnes Merron, y bore yma. Mae'n sicr yn dal i ddigwydd. Roedd yn Araith y Brenin. Rydym yn falch iawn y bydd yn mynd rhagddo gan fod cymaint o waith wedi'i wneud ar hyn gan randdeiliaid, gan wleidyddion. Bu cymaint o ddadlau gwirioneddol adeiladol am hyn yn San Steffan, ac o ddifrif, roedd bron iawn yn barod a chredaf ei bod yn drueni na lwyddodd. Felly, credaf fod llawer o bobl wedi croesawu'r ffaith, ac wrth eu boddau, mai hwn yw un o’r Biliau cyntaf a godwyd gan Lywodraeth Lafur newydd y DU, gan y gwyddant pa mor bwysig yw'r gwaith hwn.
Felly, cawsom sgwrs adeiladol iawn amdano y bore yma. Mae arnaf ofn, serch hynny, nad wyf yn mynd i allu gwneud sylw ar Fil nad wyf wedi’i weld. Felly, rwy’n cytuno â chi—mae llawer o’r pethau rydych chi wedi eu nodi yn bethau y buaswn yn disgwyl eu gweld ynddo, ac maent wedi bod mewn drafftiau cychwynnol, ond hyd nes y gwelwn y drafft terfynol, a fydd, gobeithio, yn dod cyn bo hir, ni fyddaf yn gallu gwneud sylw ar ei fanylion. Ond credaf fod hwn yn Fil rhagorol fel man cychwyn. Cyfarfûm â James Evans yr wythnos hon hefyd. Nid fy lle i yw trafod Bil Aelod James a'i ddyfodol, ond rydym wedi cael sgyrsiau adeiladol iawn, ac rwy’n edmygu popeth y mae James wedi’i wneud.
I appreciate that response, and I understand the remarks you make in terms of the Act, but my question is more along the lines of the Measure and what we can do as a Welsh Parliament, and, indeed, you as a Welsh Government, in order to expand what was passed here 14 years ago, and how we can enhance that and move that across into a broader suite of modern measures that we can incorporate in the existing things that were agreed 14 years ago, but then also to incorporate it and it can, indeed, move with time. So, it's in terms of conversations, in terms of the Welsh Government and your work in terms of the Measure and what is devolved to Wales, and how that can work with the existing Mental Health Act of 1983, and how that can coincide and work together in a streamlined way, because, often, in mental health practice there's an internal debate among mental health professionals, who say there's confusion on how to interpret the Act and, indeed, the Measure as well. So, how can those streamline together in a more succinct way, which would make life easier for professionals, and, indeed, get the right care for the right patient at the right time?
Rwy'n gwerthfawrogi eich ymateb, ac rwy'n deall y sylwadau a wnewch ar y Ddeddf, ond mae fy nghwestiwn yn ymwneud i raddau mwy â'r Mesur a beth y gallwn ei wneud fel Senedd Cymru, ac yn wir, chi fel Llywodraeth Cymru, er mwyn ehangu’r hyn a gyflwynwyd yma 14 mlynedd yn ôl, a sut y gallwn wella hynny a chynyddu hynny'n gyfres ehangach o fesurau modern y gallwn eu hymgorffori yn y pethau presennol y cytunwyd arnynt 14 mlynedd yn ôl, ond wedyn hefyd ei ymgorffori, ac fe all, yn wir, symud gydag amser. Felly, mae a wnelo â'r sgyrsiau, mae a wnelo â Llywodraeth Cymru a’ch gwaith chi mewn perthynas â'r Mesur a’r hyn sydd wedi’i ddatganoli i Gymru, a sut y gall hynny weithio gyda Deddf Iechyd Meddwl bresennol 1983, a sut y gall hynny gyd-fynd a gweithio gyda'i gilydd mewn ffordd symlach, oherwydd yn aml, mewn ymarfer iechyd meddwl, ceir dadl fewnol ymhlith gweithwyr iechyd meddwl proffesiynol, sy'n dweud bod dryswch ynghylch sut i ddehongli'r Ddeddf, ac yn wir, y Mesur hefyd. Felly, sut y gellir symleiddio'r rheini gyda'i gilydd mewn ffordd fwy cryno, a fyddai'n gwneud bywyd yn haws i weithwyr proffesiynol, ac yn wir, yn sicrhau'r gofal iawn ar gyfer y claf iawn ar yr adeg iawn?
Thank you. I agree with everything that you're saying, and I think we're not disagreeing here. We're very much on the same page, as that's where we want to get to. The reason why James Evans's Bill had Government support was because it was going to achieve many of those things. As it stands, it is still a legislative proposal, on the time frame that we have. So, that is very much—. That's why we supported it, because that's what it was going to do—everything that you've just laid out, that's what it was going to present, and what the Welsh Government then would have done is to look at all those things that you've pointed out. So, at the moment, unfortunately, whilst we're in this place where James's Bill is still going, that is for James to discuss and to share, and we are trying to get to the same place, absolutely. So, that's where we are. I've met with James Evans this week to discuss that.
Diolch. Rwy'n cytuno â phopeth a ddywedwch, ac ni chredaf ein bod yn anghytuno yma. Rydym yn sicr ar yr un dudalen, gan mai dyna ble'r hoffem ei gyrraedd. Y rheswm pam y cafodd Bil James Evans gefnogaeth y Llywodraeth oedd am ei fod yn mynd i gyflawni llawer o’r pethau hynny. Fel y mae, mae’n gynnig deddfwriaethol o hyd, ar yr amserlen sydd gennym. Felly, mae hynny'n sicr yn—. Dyna pam y gwnaethom ei gefnogi, gan mai dyna y byddai'n ei wneud—popeth rydych chi newydd ei nodi, dyna y byddai'n ei gyflwyno, a'r hyn y byddai Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i wneud wedyn yw edrych ar yr holl bethau hynny rydych chi wedi'u nodi. Felly, ar hyn o bryd, yn anffodus, tra ydym yn y lle hwn lle mae Bil James yn dal i fynd rhagddo, mae hynny'n rhywbeth i James ei drafod a'i rannu, ac rydym yn sicr yn ceisio cyrraedd yr un lle. Felly, dyna ble rydym arni. Rwyf wedi cyfarfod â James Evans yr wythnos hon i drafod hynny.
I'm pleased you've had those discussions with James Evans regarding his legislative proposal, but, again, the question is about the Measure. The Measure has been in place for 14 years, and it compels healthcare professionals, mental health practitioners to honour what was agreed in this Senedd 14 years ago. And that's embedded in Welsh practice across all of the health authorities, and all, indeed, of those local authorities and tertiary sectors that work with mental health professionals. So, it's really important, I think, that there's a recognition from the Government, in your context, to recognise the role of the Measure, understand that it's been in place for 14 years, and how that can, indeed, move fluidly, given that it's been embedded for so long, be updated and work in a streamlined way, as mentioned, with the Act. So, in terms of the political element to it, now that we've got a Labour Government in Westminster and there's a Labour Government here in Wales, what conversations can you have with your counterparts down the M4 to make these decisions streamlined in a way, like I say, that is right for the patient, right for the delivery of care and right for the mental health professionals as well?
Rwy’n falch eich bod wedi cael y trafodaethau hynny gyda James Evans ynghylch ei gynnig deddfwriaethol, ond unwaith eto, mae'r cwestiwn yn ymwneud â’r Mesur. Mae’r Mesur wedi bod ar waith ers 14 mlynedd, ac mae’n gorfodi gweithwyr gofal iechyd proffesiynol ac ymarferwyr iechyd meddwl i anrhydeddu’r hyn y cytunwyd arno yn y Senedd hon 14 mlynedd yn ôl. Ac mae hynny wedi'i wreiddio mewn ymarfer ar draws pob un o awdurdodau iechyd Cymru, a phob un, yn wir, o'r awdurdodau lleol a'r sectorau trydyddol hynny sy'n gweithio gyda gweithwyr iechyd meddwl proffesiynol. Felly, credaf ei bod yn bwysig iawn fod cydnabyddiaeth gan y Llywodraeth, yn eich cyd-destun chi, i gydnabod rôl y Mesur, deall ei fod wedi bod ar waith ers 14 mlynedd, a sut y gall fod yn hyblyg yn wir, o ystyried ei fod wedi'i ymgorffori ers cyhyd, cael ei ddiweddaru a gweithio mewn ffordd symlach, fel y crybwyllwyd, gyda'r Ddeddf. Felly, o ran yr elfen wleidyddol, gan fod gennym Lywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan bellach a Llywodraeth Lafur yma yng Nghymru, pa sgyrsiau y gallwch eu cael gyda'ch cymheiriaid ar ben arall yr M4 i symleiddio'r penderfyniadau hyn mewn ffordd sydd, fel y dywedaf, yn iawn i'r claf, yn iawn ar gyfer darparu gofal ac yn iawn i'r gweithwyr iechyd meddwl proffesiynol hefyd?
Thank you very much. Okay, well, just to prove that we're very much on the same page here, I do recognise the role, I do recognise that it's been 14 years, I do want it to move forward, I do want it to be updated, and we do want it to be streamlined. On all of those things, we absolutely agree. At the moment, what we're looking at is that we've got a Member's Bill that aims to achieve many of those things, which is here, which I've met with James Evans about this week. So, I've looked at it in a Welsh context, with my officials, and that's exactly what we're seeing if we can achieve. And on the other side of it, as you've just asked, about what we're doing with the UK Government, I've also met with the UK Government this morning to discuss what they are looking at doing with their mental health Bill and how that would be able to work with both Governments together, so that we can achieve all the things that you've laid out. Diolch.
Diolch. Iawn, wel, i brofi ein bod ar yr un dudalen yma, rwy'n cydnabod y rôl, rwy'n cydnabod ei bod wedi bod yn 14 mlynedd, rwyf am ei symud ymlaen, rwyf am iddo gael ei ddiweddaru, ac rydym am iddo gael ei symleiddio. Ar bob un o’r pethau hynny, rydym yn cytuno’n llwyr. Ar hyn o bryd, yr hyn rydym yn edrych arno yw bod gennym Fil Aelod sy'n anelu at gyflawni llawer o'r pethau hynny, sydd yma, ac rwyf wedi cyfarfod â James Evans yn ei gylch yr wythnos hon. Felly, rwyf wedi edrych arno mewn cyd-destun Cymreig, gyda fy swyddogion, a dyna'n union rydym yn edrych i weld a allwn ei gyflawni. Ac ar yr ochr arall, fel rydych newydd ofyn, am yr hyn rydym yn ei wneud gyda Llywodraeth y DU, rwyf hefyd wedi cyfarfod â Llywodraeth y DU y bore yma i drafod yr hyn y maent yn bwriadu ei wneud gyda'u Bil iechyd meddwl a sut y gallai hwnnw weithio gyda'r ddwy Lywodraeth gyda'i gilydd, fel y gallwn gyflawni'r holl bethau a nodwyd gennych. Diolch.
Llefarydd Plaid Cymru, Mabon ap Gwynfor.
The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Mabon ap Gwynfor.
Diolch, Llywydd. Llywydd, yn ystod ymddangosiad yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet ar un o raglenni gwleidyddol y Sul yn ddiweddar, fe wnaeth o ddisgrifio’r bartneriaeth newydd rhwng yr NHS yng Nghymru a’r NHS yn Lloegr fel ffordd newydd o weithio, cyn sôn mai’r cyfan oedd y bartneriaeth yna, mewn gwirionedd, oedd dysgu arferion da. Ydy’r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn dweud wrthym ni, felly, nad oedd yr NHS yng Nghymru yn dysgu ac yn edrych ar arferion da o Loegr cyn hyn?
Thank you, Llywydd. Llywydd, during the Cabinet Secretary's appearance on one of the weekend's political programmes recently, he described the new partnership between the NHS in Wales and the NHS in England as a new way of working, before going on to say that all that partnership entailed, really, was a way to learn good practice. Is the Cabinet Secretary, therefore, telling us that the NHS in Wales wasn’t learning and looking at good practice from England before now?
Mae diddordeb yr Aelod mewn proses ar draul allbwn yn eithaf trawiadol. [Chwerthin.] Ond, er mwyn ateb ei gwestiwn e, yr hyn sy'n newydd yw’r parodrwydd a welwn ni gan Lywodraeth yn San Steffan i weithio gyda’r Llywodraeth Lafur yma yng Nghymru mewn ffordd agored, gydweithredol. Dyna sydd yn newydd yn hyn o beth. Mae e wastad yn bwysig i edrych ar arfer dda, o ble bynnag mae hynny’n dod, yn cynnwys o fewn y gwasanaeth iechyd yma yng Nghymru ac ar draws y Deyrnas Gyfunol, ond beth sydd yn newydd yw’r brwdfrydedd ar ran Llywodraeth Lafur newydd yn San Steffan i gydweithio â ni.
The Member’s interest in the process at the expense of output is rather striking. [Laughter.] But, to answer his question, what was new was the willingness that we see from a Government in Westminster to work with a Labour Government here in Wales in an open, co-operative manner. That’s what’s changed in this regard. That’s what’s new. It’s always important to look at good practice from wherever it may come, including in the health service here in Wales and across the United Kingdom, but what is new is the enthusiasm on behalf of the new Labour Government in Westminster to work with us.
Diolch am yr ateb yna.
Thank you for that response.
Now, I and, indeed, many people in Wales are unclear about the impact that this will have on waiting lists in Wales. When asked if the plan is to send Welsh patients to England, the Cabinet Secretary has said that, in his words,
‘It isn’t what we’re talking about’.
Yet, the Welsh Secretary is adamant that Welsh patients will receive elective care in theatres in English hospitals. So, how many patients from Wales, over and above those receiving elective care in England already, will receive treatment in hospital theatres in England?
Nawr, rwyf i, a llawer o bobl yng Nghymru yn wir, yn ddryslyd ynghylch yr effaith y bydd hyn yn ei chael ar restrau aros yng Nghymru. Pan ofynnwyd iddo ai’r cynllun yw anfon cleifion o Gymru i Loegr, mae Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet wedi dweud, yn ei eiriau ef,
'Nid dyma rydym yn sôn amdano'.
Ac eto, mae Ysgrifennydd Cymru yn mynnu y bydd cleifion o Gymru yn cael gofal a gynlluniwyd mewn theatrau mewn ysbytai yn Lloegr. Felly, faint o gleifion o Gymru, yn ychwanegol at y rheini sy’n derbyn gofal a gynlluniwyd yn Lloegr eisoes, fydd yn cael triniaeth mewn theatrau mewn ysbytai yn Lloegr?
I refer the Member to the publication that the Government made—I think, probably, two weeks ago, or a little under that at this point—which sets out the level of activity in terms of people from Wales treated in England and people from England treated in Wales. That is a very pragmatic set of long-standing arrangements, which are in place for very good reasons—for reasons of geography, reasons of the existence of specialisms—and I’ll be working with the Secretary of State for health to explore whether there are opportunities, as I’m sure there will be, to work more closely together. And this will of course build on that existing partnership between the two NHSs, which already see thousands of people from England receive their care in Wales and vice versa.
Cyfeiriaf yr Aelod at y cyhoeddiad a wnaeth y Llywodraeth— bythefnos yn ôl, mae’n debyg, rwy'n credu, neu ychydig o dan hynny ar y pwynt hwn—sy’n nodi lefel y gweithgarwch o ran pobl o Gymru sy’n cael eu trin yn Lloegr a phobl o Loegr sy'n cael eu trin yng Nghymru. Mae honno’n gyfres bragmatig iawn o drefniadau hirsefydlog, sydd ar waith am resymau da iawn—am resymau daearyddol, rhesymau'n ymwneud â bodolaeth arbenigeddau—a byddaf yn gweithio gyda’r Ysgrifennydd Gwladol dros iechyd i archwilio a oes cyfleoedd i gydweithio'n agosach, ac rwy’n siŵr y bydd. A bydd hyn, wrth gwrs, yn adeiladu ar y bartneriaeth bresennol rhwng y ddau GIG, sydd eisoes yn golygu bod miloedd o bobl o Loegr yn derbyn eu gofal yng Nghymru ac fel arall.
So, if I can sum up what you’ve said, and my understanding, then, it’s that best practice was, essentially, you’ve told us, already being shared between the Welsh NHS and English NHS anyway, but you’re looking at maybe a better way of working openly and together. There’s no extra capacity in the English NHS to provide more treatment to patients from Wales, but you’re looking at exploring these possibilities, and health boards and health trusts on both sides of the border have not received any correspondence regarding any form of mutual aid partnerships or any other agreements. So, the only thing to actually have come from this new policy is an advisory group to help the Cabinet Secretary deliver better policy, while patients will see no tangible benefits. Is that a fair summary, or can the Cabinet Secretary elaborate on exactly how waiting lists will fall as a consequence of this headline-grabbing policy?
Felly, os caf grynhoi'r hyn rydych wedi'i ddweud, a'm dealltwriaeth i, rydych chi wedi dweud wrthym fod yr arfer gorau, yn y bôn, eisoes yn cael ei rannu rhwng GIG Cymru a GIG Lloegr beth bynnag, ond eich bod chi'n edrych am ffordd well, efallai, o weithio'n agored gyda'n gilydd. Nid oes capasiti ychwanegol yn y GIG yn Lloegr i ddarparu mwy o driniaeth i gleifion o Gymru, ond rydych chi'n edrych ar archwilio’r posibiliadau hyn, ac nid yw byrddau iechyd ac ymddiriedolaethau iechyd ar y naill ochr i’r ffin na'r llall wedi cael unrhyw ohebiaeth ynghylch unrhyw fath o bartneriaethau cydgymorth neu unrhyw gytundebau eraill. Felly, yr unig beth sydd wedi dod o'r polisi newydd hwn mewn gwirionedd yw grŵp cynghori i helpu Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet gyflawni gwell polisi, ond na fydd cleifion yn gweld unrhyw fanteision diriaethol. A yw hwnnw’n grynodeb teg, neu a all Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet ymhelaethu ar sut yn union y bydd rhestrau aros yn lleihau o ganlyniad i’r polisi hwn sy'n bachu'r penawdau?
Well, the Member will know that I made an announcement, probably three weeks ago, which set out the arrangements that we are putting in place for a group of people with significant experience in reducing waiting lists. They will be tasked with identifying the arrangements we currently have in place, and they will also advise us on arrangements that we might consider putting in place to improve performance right across the NHS, including in relation to waiting lists. I’m expecting to meet them in the next few days as they start their work, and I will be publishing the terms of reference once they’ve considered them at their forthcoming meeting. I think it’s really important that we allow that group of people to do its work. Now, we have got a number of initiatives already in place in order to reduce waiting times, and I’ll be making announcements about more very shortly. But this group of people will bring the best knowledge, the best experience, the best practice to bear on what is a very persistent challenge. I hope they will encourage us to be bold in our response and to draw from the widest possible body of experience, because we want the NHS in Wales to be able to be inspired by good practice both within Wales and beyond.
Wel, fe ŵyr yr Aelod fy mod wedi gwneud cyhoeddiad, dair wythnos yn ôl mae’n debyg, a oedd yn nodi’r trefniadau yr ydym yn eu rhoi ar waith ar gyfer grŵp o bobl sydd â phrofiad sylweddol o leihau rhestrau aros. Byddant yn cael y dasg o nodi'r trefniadau sydd gennym ar waith ar hyn o bryd, a byddant hefyd yn ein cynghori ar drefniadau y gallem ystyried eu rhoi ar waith i wella perfformiad ar draws y GIG, gan gynnwys mewn perthynas â rhestrau aros. Rwy’n disgwyl cyfarfod â hwy yn y dyddiau nesaf wrth iddynt ddechrau ar eu gwaith, a byddaf yn cyhoeddi’r cylch gorchwyl unwaith y byddant wedi ei ystyried yn eu cyfarfod sydd i ddod. Credaf ei bod yn wirioneddol bwysig ein bod yn caniatáu i’r grŵp hwnnw o bobl wneud ei waith. Nawr, mae gennym nifer o fentrau ar waith eisoes er mwyn lleihau amseroedd aros, a byddaf yn gwneud cyhoeddiadau am ragor ohonynt cyn bo hir. Ond bydd y grŵp hwn o bobl yn dod â'r wybodaeth orau, y profiad gorau, a'r arferion gorau i fynd i'r afael â her barhaus. Rwy'n gobeithio y byddant yn ein hannog i fod yn feiddgar yn ein hymateb ac i ddysgu gan y corff ehangaf posibl o brofiad, gan ein bod am i’r GIG yng Nghymru allu cael ei ysbrydoli gan arfer da yng Nghymru a thu hwnt.
3. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet ddatganiad am ddarpariaeth gofal iechyd cymunedol yn Nyffryn Clwyd? OQ61765
3. Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on community healthcare provision in Vale of Clwyd? OQ61765
Yes. Our vision in 'A Healthier Wales' is for people to have equity of access to an increasing range of community services to support them to stay well and live independently. We expect local partners to collaborate to build community capacity and design and deliver integrated and preventative services.
Gwnaf. Ein gweledigaeth yn 'Cymru Iachach' yw i bobl gael mynediad cyfartal at ystod gynyddol o wasanaethau cymunedol i'w cefnogi i gadw'n iach a byw'n annibynnol. Disgwyliwn i bartneriaid lleol gydweithio i feithrin capasiti cymunedol a chynllunio a darparu gwasanaethau integredig ac ataliol.
Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Concerns have been raised with me regarding the ease of access to home adaptations and funding for people in Wales living with disabilities. The Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 stipulates eligibility as meeting the set of national criteria for adults, children and carers. There are many constituents I’ve met who have faced difficulties in accessing funding for home adaptations and NHS-funded disability equipment, as there is a rigid set of criteria to meet. Four conditions are set by the legislation that must be met in order to have access to the funding, but many disabled people with restricted mobility do not meet every condition. For patients with rare conditions who only meet some of the conditions, they find accessing the funding for the correct equipment for their home difficult, and what is offered to them does not meet their requirements. The red tape can also be tricky to navigate, but having access to funding for accessibility equipment can massively ease the burden placed on the health service by allowing those with disabilities to have the facilities to live at home. So, how does the Welsh Government respond to feedback from people with disabilities to simplify the process of applying for home adaptations and equipment on the NHS that will, in the long run, ease the burden on NHS service provision? Thank you.
Diolch, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Mae pryderon wedi’u codi gyda mi ynghylch pa mor hawdd yw cael addasiadau yn y cartref a chyllid i bobl sy’n byw gydag anableddau yng Nghymru. Mae Deddf Gwasanaethau Cymdeithasol a Llesiant (Cymru) 2014 yn nodi bod cymhwystra yn golygu bodloni’r set o feini prawf cenedlaethol ar gyfer oedolion, plant a gofalwyr. Mae llawer o etholwyr y cyfarfûm â hwy wedi wynebu anawsterau i gael cyllid ar gyfer addasiadau yn y cartref ac offer anabledd a ariennir gan y GIG, gan fod set anhyblyg o feini prawf i’w bodloni. Mae pedair amod wedi’u nodi gan y ddeddfwriaeth y mae’n rhaid eu bodloni er mwyn cael mynediad at y cyllid, ond ceir llawer o bobl anabl â symudedd cyfyngedig nad ydynt yn bodloni pob amod. I gleifion â chyflyrau prin sydd ond yn bodloni rhai o’r amodau, maent yn ei chael hi’n anodd cael cyllid ar gyfer yr offer cywir ar gyfer eu cartref, ac nid yw’r hyn a gynigir iddynt yn bodloni eu gofynion. Gall y fiwrocratiaeth fod yn anodd hefyd, ond gall cael mynediad at gyllid ar gyfer offer hygyrchedd ysgafnhau'r baich ar y gwasanaeth iechyd yn sylweddol drwy ganiatáu i bobl ag anableddau gael cyfleusterau i fyw gartref. Felly, sut y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ymateb i adborth gan bobl ag anableddau i symleiddio'r broses o wneud cais am gyllid ar gyfer addasiadau yn y cartref ac offer gan y GIG a fydd, yn y pen draw, yn ysgafnhau'r baich ar ddarpariaeth gwasanaethau'r GIG? Diolch.
The Member raises an important question, and I absolutely agree with the thrust of his question, which is, we know—. In fact, we’ve seen this most recently with the Darzi report for the NHS in England, haven’t we, that the increasing ability of the NHS to provide care for people in their homes or in the community is an absolutely critical part not just of making sure that the service that the NHS can provide is robust, resilient and sustainable, which is obviously crucial, but also most people would prefer to be getting appropriate healthcare as close to home as possible. So, that is absolutely the thrust of this Government’s policy. If there are particular obstacles that the Member has identified that we can help with resolving, if he could identify those to me in correspondence, I will look into what more can be done to address those particular points.
Mae’r Aelod yn gofyn cwestiwn pwysig, ac rwy’n cytuno’n llwyr â byrdwn ei gwestiwn, sef, fel y gwyddom—. Mewn gwirionedd, rydym wedi gweld hyn yn fwyaf diweddar gydag adroddiad Darzi ar gyfer y GIG yn Lloegr, onid ydym, fod gallu cynyddol y GIG i ddarparu gofal i bobl yn eu cartrefi neu yn y gymuned yn rhan gwbl hanfodol nid yn unig o sicrhau bod y gwasanaeth y gall y GIG ei ddarparu yn gadarn, yn wydn ac yn gynaliadwy, sy’n amlwg yn hollbwysig, ond hefyd y byddai’n well gan y rhan fwyaf o bobl gael y gofal iechyd priodol mor agos i’w cartrefi â phosibl. Felly, dyna’n sicr yw byrdwn polisi’r Llywodraeth hon. Os oes rhwystrau penodol y mae’r Aelod wedi’u nodi y gallwn helpu i’w datrys, os gall nodi’r rheini i mi mewn gohebiaeth, fe edrychaf i weld beth arall y gellir ei wneud i fynd i’r afael â’r pwyntiau penodol hynny.
4. Pa gamau y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn eu cymryd i wella canlyniadau i gleifion canser? OQ61739
4. What steps is the Welsh Government taking to improve outcomes for cancer patients? OQ61739
Our approach is set out in the quality statement for cancer, and the NHS set out what action it will take in the cancer improvement plan. For example, this includes our investment in a new breast centre of excellence at Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr.
Mae ein dull gweithredu wedi’i nodi yn y datganiad ansawdd ar gyfer canser, a nododd y GIG pa gamau y bydd yn eu cymryd yn y cynllun gwella gwasanaethau canser. Er enghraifft, mae hyn yn cynnwys ein buddsoddiad mewn canolfan ragoriaeth newydd ar gyfer canser y fron yn Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr.
Thank you so much, Cabinet Secretary. Every year, nearly 20,000 people in Wales are diagnosed with cancer. It is a truly cruel condition, with one in two people in the UK being diagnosed with cancer in their lifetime. My region of south-east Wales used to be home to a pioneering cancer centre that used proton beam therapy, a more targeted form of radiotherapy. The Rutherford centre closed its doors in 2022, which was a huge blow to cancer patients and the wider community at large. There were reports following the centre’s closure that a Government takeover might be on the horizon, but it doesn’t look like that materialised into anything.
Cabinet Secretary, from my understanding, all of the centre’s pioneering lifesaving equipment remains in a derelict building as of today. This equipment could indeed be put to some really good use within our health service to treat Welsh cancer patients, instead of simply gathering dust. Has the Welsh Government had any conversations about acquiring this equipment for use within our NHS? And if not, Cabinet Secretary, will you commit to looking into this matter further to see if it can indeed be done? Thank you.
Diolch yn fawr, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Bob blwyddyn, mae bron i 20,000 o bobl yng Nghymru yn cael diagnosis o ganser. Mae’n gyflwr gwirioneddol greulon, gydag un o bob dau o bobl yn y DU yn cael diagnosis o ganser yn ystod eu hoes. Roedd fy rhanbarth i yn ne-ddwyrain Cymru yn arfer bod yn gartref i ganolfan ganser arloesol a oedd yn defnyddio therapi pelydr proton, math o radiotherapi mwy targededig. Caeodd canolfan Rutherford ei drysau yn 2022, a oedd yn ergyd enfawr i gleifion canser a’r gymuned ehangach yn gyffredinol. Cafwyd adroddiadau yn dilyn cau'r ganolfan y gallai'r Llywodraeth gymryd yr awenau o bosibl, ond nid yw'n edrych fel pe bai hynny wedi digwydd.
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, o'r hyn a ddeallaf, mae holl offer achub bywyd arloesol y ganolfan yn parhau i fod mewn adeilad adfeiliedig hyd heddiw. Yn wir, gellid gwneud defnydd da iawn o’r offer hwn yn ein gwasanaeth iechyd i drin cleifion canser Cymru, yn hytrach na'i fod yn hel llwch. A yw Llywodraeth Cymru wedi cael unrhyw sgyrsiau am gaffael yr offer hwn i'w ddefnyddio yn ein GIG? Ac os na, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a wnewch chi ymrwymo i ymchwilio ymhellach i weld a ellir gwneud hyn? Diolch.
Thank you for that further question. I’m not myself aware of any discussions of that sort. The Government does invest heavily in cancer services, as the Member would expect, given the level of priority that we attach, and I know that she attaches, to good cancer services. Tens of millions of pounds for equipment, facilities and training, as well as modernising and expanding screening programmes, and, crucially, introducing rapid diagnostic centres of the sort that I referred to in my initial question. So, we will always be looking for what more we can do, what more we can do to bring together the kinds of expertise, the kinds of innovation that are required, so that we can provide the best possible service to patients in Wales.
Diolch am eich cwestiwn pellach. Yn bersonol, nid wyf yn ymwybodol o unrhyw drafodaethau o’r fath. Mae’r Llywodraeth yn buddsoddi’n drwm mewn gwasanaethau canser, fel y byddai’r Aelod yn ei ddisgwyl, o ystyried lefel y flaenoriaeth yr ydym yn ei rhoi, ac y gwn ei bod hithau'n ei rhoi, i wasanaethau canser da. Degau o filiynau o bunnoedd ar gyfer offer, cyfleusterau a hyfforddiant, yn ogystal â moderneiddio ac ehangu rhaglenni sgrinio, ac yn hollbwysig, cyflwyno canolfannau diagnosis cyflym o'r math y cyfeiriais atynt yn fy nghwestiwn cychwynnol. Felly, byddwn bob amser yn edrych i weld beth arall y gallwn ei wneud, beth arall y gallwn ei wneud i ddwyn ynghyd y mathau o arbenigedd, y mathau o arloesedd sydd eu hangen, fel y gallwn ddarparu'r gwasanaeth gorau posibl i gleifion yng Nghymru.
Cabinet Secretary, there is a campaign called Claire's Campaign, which collates women's experiences of gynaecological cancer and campaigns for service improvement. Their testimony is that too many women have their initial cancer concerns dismissed by their GP: cancer isn't suspected, other conditions are proposed and, over time, they're ruled out, and, far too often, their pain and extreme discomfort is dismissed or overlooked. This is not bashing GPs, they do a wonderful, wonderful job, but in terms of the training and support that is offered to them, perhaps that needs to be looked at. Because, for too many women, their cancer progresses before suspicion, even, let alone diagnosis and treatment starts, and too many women die as a result. We are letting women down and the whole system can do more to diagnose and to treat these women's cancers earlier. The women's health plan presents a huge opportunity here. What can women expect, please, from the plan to say and do to improve the NHS's culture of listening to women who are experiencing pain and symptoms that might be gynaecological cancers?
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae ymgyrch o’r enw Ymgyrch Claire, sy’n coladu profiadau menywod o ganser gynaecolegol ac yn ymgyrchu dros wella gwasanaethau. Eu tystiolaeth yw bod pryderon cychwynnol gormod o fenywod ynghylch canser yn cael eu diystyru gan eu meddyg teulu: ni cheir amheuaeth o ganser, caiff cyflyrau eraill eu cynnig, a thros amser, cânt eu diystyru, ac yn llawer rhy aml, mae eu poen a’u hanghysur eithafol yn cael ei ddiystyru neu ei anwybyddu. Nid lladd ar feddygon teulu mo hyn, maent yn gwneud gwaith gwych, ond o ran yr hyfforddiant a’r cymorth a gynigir iddynt, efallai fod angen edrych ar hynny. Oherwydd, i ormod o fenywod, mae eu canser yn datblygu cyn y ceir amheuaeth fod canser arnynt, hyd yn oed, heb sôn am ddechrau diagnosis a thriniaeth, ac mae gormod o fenywod yn marw o ganlyniad. Rydym yn gwneud anghymwynas â menywod, a gall y system gyfan wneud mwy i gael diagnosis a thrin canserau'r menywod hyn yn gynharach. Mae'r cynllun iechyd menywod yn gyfle enfawr yma. Beth y gall menywod ddisgwyl y bydd y cynllun yn ei ddweud a’i wneud i wella diwylliant y GIG o wrando ar fenywod sy’n dioddef poen a symptomau a allai fod yn ganserau gynaecolegol?
Well, I thank Delyth Jewell for the question and for the way that she's highlighted the work of Claire's Campaign, which I would absolutely wish to associate myself with, and the work that Claire and her colleagues are doing to highlight challenges in the system, which we would absolutely acknowledge. I was very struck by the evidence given to the Senedd committee as well in its recent inquiry.
I had a conversation this very morning in relation to the importance of responding at that first consultation to symptoms, as they're presented, and to really making sure that that is taken at its most serious, so that we can make sure that people get the rapid care that they need. I know, from discussions with the Minister, that we are looking very closely at making sure that the plan, when it is published in December, is as robust and as supportive as it possibly can be, and, actually, some of that thinking has certainly been shaped by Claire's Campaign.
Wel, diolch i Delyth Jewell am ei chwestiwn ac am y ffordd y mae wedi tynnu sylw at waith Ymgyrch Claire, y buaswn yn sicr yn dymuno ei chefnogi, a’r gwaith y mae Claire a’i chydweithwyr yn ei wneud i dynnu sylw at heriau yn y system, y byddem yn bendant yn eu cydnabod. Fe wnaeth y dystiolaeth a roddwyd i bwyllgor y Senedd yn ei ymchwiliad diweddar argraff fawr arnaf hefyd.
Cefais sgwrs y bore yma ynglŷn â phwysigrwydd ymateb i symptomau yn yr ymgynghoriad cyntaf hwnnw, fel y maent yn ymgyflwyno, a sicrhau bod hynny’n cael ei gymryd o ddifrif, fel y gallwn sicrhau bod pobl yn cael y gofal cyflym sydd ei angen arnynt. O drafodaethau gyda’r Gweinidog, rwy'n gwybod ein bod yn edrych yn fanwl iawn ar sicrhau bod y cynllun, pan gaiff ei gyhoeddi ym mis Rhagfyr, mor gadarn ac mor gefnogol ag y gall fod, ac mewn gwirionedd, mae rhywfaint o’r meddylfryd hwnnw'n sicr wedi'i siapio gan Ymgyrch Claire.
5. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet ddatganiad am brofion canser y prostad i ddynion dros 50 oed? OQ61747
5. Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on prostate cancer testing for men over 50? OQ61747
Men concerned about their risk of prostate cancer should request an appointment with their GP to discuss their concerns and come to an informed decision about further investigation. There is publicly available guidance to support men and GPs to have that discussion.
Dylai dynion sy'n pryderu am eu risg o ganser y prostad ofyn am apwyntiad gyda'u meddyg teulu i drafod eu pryderon ac i wneud penderfyniad gwybodus ynglŷn ag archwiliadau pellach. Mae canllawiau cyhoeddus ar gael i gefnogi dynion a meddygon teulu i gael y drafodaeth honno.
Thank you for the response. Since tabling this question, Sir Chris Hoy has confirmed his own terminal prostate diagnosis, and prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men, and it's risk increases with age and a range of other factors. But, caught early, it is possible to live a long and positive life. Like me, the health Secretary is over 50, which is one of the factors when men should consider seeking advice and the possibility of a test. I have the additional risk of being mixed race with black African heritage. My own experience of contact with general practice on this issue has been a positive one. What steps is the health Secretary taking to make sure that more men understand the risk factors and are encouraged to act early on them? And can he confirm what progress is being made in Wales towards more accurate testing for prostate cancer?
Diolch am eich ymateb. Ers cyflwyno’r cwestiwn hwn, mae Syr Chris Hoy wedi cadarnhau ei ddiagnosis angheuol ei hun o ganser y prostad, a chanser y prostad yw’r canser mwyaf cyffredin mewn dynion, ac mae ei risg yn cynyddu gydag oedran ac ystod o ffactorau eraill. Ond os caiff ei ddal yn gynnar, mae'n bosibl byw bywyd hir a chadarnhaol. Fel fi, mae’r Ysgrifennydd iechyd dros 50 oed, sy’n un o’r ffactorau y dylai dynion eu hystyried wrth geisio cyngor a’r posibilrwydd o brawf. Mae gennyf risg ychwanegol o fod yn hil gymysg o dras du Affricanaidd. Mae fy mhrofiad fy hun o ymgysylltu ag ymarfer cyffredinol ar y mater wedi bod yn gadarnhaol. Pa gamau y mae’r Ysgrifennydd iechyd yn eu cymryd i sicrhau bod mwy o ddynion yn deall y ffactorau risg ac yn cael eu hannog i weithredu’n gynnar arnynt? Ac a all gadarnhau pa gynnydd sy'n cael ei wneud yng Nghymru tuag at gynnal profion mwy cywir ar gyfer canser y prostad?
I thank the Member for those remarks and that question, including his reminder to me of my age. I thank him for that. It is absolutely critical in the way that the Member identified in his question to recognise how important it is to detect cancer early. There is clear national guidance in place, which is based on symptoms and risk factors, for GPs to follow when referring for suspected prostate cancer. We've augmented this with digital training materials for GPs, detailing how to assess people. If people feel that they may be at risk, then they ought to see their GP. There is clear national guidance on that to support those conversations. I think it's also important to look at approaches that are developing constantly in this space. As he will know, there is no current recommendation in relation to screening—population screening—in this space, but I'm also aware of the work that Prostate Cancer UK has been undertaking with the UK National Screening Committee, and I will be interested to look at the developments in that space.
Diolch i’r Aelod am ei sylwadau a'i gwestiwn, gan gynnwys fy atgoffa o fy oedran. Diolch am hynny. Mae’n gwbl hanfodol cydnabod, yn y ffordd a nododd yr Aelod yn ei gwestiwn, pa mor bwysig yw canfod canser yn gynnar. Mae canllawiau cenedlaethol clir ar waith, sy’n seiliedig ar symptomau a ffactorau risg, i feddygon teulu eu dilyn wrth atgyfeirio ar gyfer amheuaeth o ganser y prostad. Rydym wedi ategu hyn gyda deunyddiau hyfforddi digidol ar gyfer meddygon teulu, yn manylu ar sut i asesu pobl. Os yw pobl yn teimlo y gallent fod mewn perygl, dylent weld eu meddyg teulu. Mae canllawiau cenedlaethol clir ar hynny i gefnogi’r sgyrsiau hynny. Credaf ei bod hefyd yn bwysig edrych ar ddulliau gweithredu sy'n datblygu'n gyson yn y maes hwn. Fel y gŵyr, nid oes unrhyw argymhelliad ar hyn o bryd mewn perthynas â sgrinio—sgrinio’r boblogaeth—yn y maes hwn, ond rwyf hefyd yn ymwybodol o’r gwaith y mae Prostate Cancer UK wedi bod yn ei wneud gyda Phwyllgor Sgrinio Cenedlaethol y DU, a bydd gennyf ddiddordeb mewn edrych ar y datblygiadau yn y maes hwnnw.
Llywydd, I declare an interest, as someone living with prostate cancer, and, clearly, as someone else who is over 50 as well. Now, my understanding is that, at the moment, doctors cannot proactively offer prostate-specific antigen tests to high-risk men with no symptoms, such as men over 50, black men and men with a family history of prostate cancer, and so more clearly needs to be done in this area to address that.
Now, last week, I took part in a Prostate United walk with Haverfordwest County Association Football Club, an initiative that is raising funds for Prostate Cancer UK by encouraging people to walk, run or cycle every day in October. So, Cabinet Secretary, will you join me in celebrating the efforts of everyone who has taken part in the Prostate United challenge so far? Can you also tell us how the Welsh Government is working with health boards to be much more proactive in reaching out to men at the highest risk of prostate cancer?
Lywydd, rwy’n datgan buddiant, fel rhywun sy’n byw gyda chanser y prostad, ac yn amlwg, fel rhywun arall sydd dros 50 oed hefyd. Nawr, fy nealltwriaeth i yw na all meddygon fynd ati'n rhagweithiol ar hyn o bryd i gynnig profion antigenau penodol i’r prostad i ddynion risg uchel heb unrhyw symptomau, megis dynion dros 50 oed, dynion du a dynion â hanes teuluol o ganser y prostad, ac felly mae'n amlwg fod angen gwneud mwy yn y maes hwn i fynd i'r afael â hynny.
Nawr, yr wythnos diwethaf, cymerais ran yn nhaith gerdded Prostate United gyda Chlwb Pêl-droed Hwlffordd, menter sy’n codi arian ar gyfer Prostate Cancer UK drwy annog pobl i gerdded, rhedeg neu feicio bob dydd ym mis Hydref. Felly, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a wnewch chi ymuno â mi i ddathlu ymdrechion pawb sydd wedi cymryd rhan yn her Prostate United hyd yma? A wnewch chi ddweud wrthym hefyd sut y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn gweithio gyda byrddau iechyd i fod yn llawer mwy rhagweithiol wrth estyn allan at ddynion sydd â’r risg uchaf o ganser y prostad?
I will absolutely celebrate the work that he is referring to in his question, and it is really important that we use those opportunities to highlight the risks in the way that this set of questions is doing today, and that that happens at a local health board level as well. As I mentioned in my response to Vaughan Gething, the work that Prostate Cancer UK is doing around alternatives to testing in this space and the developments in testing in the future is absolutely a critical part of that landscape.
Byddaf yn sicr yn dathlu’r gwaith y cyfeiria ato yn ei gwestiwn, ac mae’n wirioneddol bwysig ein bod yn defnyddio’r cyfleoedd hynny i dynnu sylw at y risgiau yn y ffordd y mae’r gyfres hon o gwestiynau yn ei gwneud heddiw, a bod hynny’n digwydd ar lefel y byrddau iechyd lleol hefyd. Fel y soniais yn fy ymateb i Vaughan Gething, mae’r gwaith y mae Prostate Cancer UK yn ei wneud ar opsiynau eraill heblaw profi yn y maes hwn a’r datblygiadau o ran profi yn y dyfodol yn rhan gwbl hanfodol o’r dirwedd honno.
6. Beth y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei wneud i sicrhau bod cyn-filwyr y lluoedd arfog sy'n byw yng Nghymru yn cael y gofal iechyd y mae arnynt ei angen? OQ61744
6. What is the Welsh Government doing to ensure that armed forces veterans living in Wales receive the healthcare they need? OQ61744
We owe a debt of gratitude to our veterans. This is reflected in our policy, which provides priority access to NHS treatment for health conditions that are a result of their time in military service. We also provide access to Veterans' NHS Wales for service-related mental health issues.
Mae ein dyled yn fawr i'n cyn-filwyr. Adlewyrchir hyn yn ein polisi, sy'n rhoi mynediad blaenoriaethol i driniaeth y GIG ar gyfer cyflyrau iechyd sy'n deillio o'u hamser mewn gwasanaeth milwrol. Rydym hefyd yn darparu mynediad at GIG Cymru i Gyn-filwyr ar gyfer materion iechyd meddwl sy'n gysylltiedig â'u gwasanaeth.
Thank you, Minister. According to the recent Veterans' Commissioner for Wales's report, Veterans' NHS Wales spends around £1,600 per veteran seeking mental health services; in England, the figure is over double that at £3,400. There, veterans receive support with substance misuse, addiction and complex post-traumatic stress disorder therapies. This is unavailable here in Wales. Here, veterans are referred back to non-veteran mental health services for any issues not considered directly related to their time in service. Now, as you indicated at the beginning of your answer, these individuals have faced circumstances that we cannot begin to fathom. They have often put their lives on the line. Yet, I meet veterans on the streets of Cardiff, homeless. We are letting them down. Do you know why we have such a huge gap here in Wales compared with England, and do you think there is sufficient spend in Wales to provide the services they deserve? Diolch yn fawr.
Diolch, Weinidog. Yn ôl adroddiad diweddar Comisiynydd Cyn-filwyr Cymru, mae GIG Cymru i Gyn-filwyr yn gwario oddeutu £1,600 fesul cyn-filwr sy'n ceisio gwasanaethau iechyd meddwl; yn Lloegr, mae'r ffigur yn fwy na dwywaith hynny, sef £3,400. Yno, mae cyn-filwyr yn cael cymorth gyda chamddefnyddio sylweddau, caethiwed a therapïau anhwylder straen ôl-drawmatig cymhleth. Nid yw hyn ar gael yma yng Nghymru. Yma, caiff cyn-filwyr eu cyfeirio’n ôl at wasanaethau iechyd meddwl cyffredinol ar gyfer unrhyw faterion nad ystyrir eu bod yn uniongyrchol gysylltiedig â’u cyfnod mewn gwasanaeth. Nawr, fel y nodwyd gennych ar ddechrau eich ateb, mae'r unigolion hyn wedi wynebu amgylchiadau na allwn ddechrau eu dirnad. Maent yn aml wedi mentro eu bywydau. Ac eto, rwy’n cyfarfod â chyn-filwyr digartref ar strydoedd Caerdydd. Rydym yn gwneud cam â hwy. A ydych chi'n gwybod pam fod gennym fwlch mor enfawr yma yng Nghymru o gymharu â Lloegr, ac a ydych chi'n credu bod gwariant digonol yng Nghymru i ddarparu’r gwasanaethau y maent yn eu haeddu? Diolch yn fawr.
Thank you very much, Rhys ab Owen, for this question and for highlighting the veterans' commissioner's report that came out, the annual report, which I feel is a very helpful personal assessment of the key issues affecting veterans in Wales, many of which you have touched on just now. I also just wanted to say that we continue to invest in Veterans' NHS Wales, and mental health is one of the First Minister's four priority areas, so I will revert back to what my colleague Jack Sargeant said earlier on, in that I cannot pre-empt what will be in the upcoming budget.
However, I would say that some cross-border comparisons do need some qualifications, and the veterans' commissioner recognises that, in relation to crisis beds and specialist substance misuse services. So, yes, our mental health service for veterans, Veterans' NHS Wales, is funded by Welsh Government and it is meeting its targets with some local exceptions, where a post is gapped or recruitment is taking place. This service is now also supporting veterans in prison in Wales.
I think it's also worth mentioning as well, though, that you are right, a lot of this is centred around the NHS veterans in Wales service, but we also have a fantastic range of third sector organisations who are doing tremendous work on the ground in people's communities. So, the work of TGP Cymru includes a specific focus on restorative approaches for veterans and family services, so that's really helping them to reconnect with their families and to have a really positive, healthy family life. We also have Adferiad as well, which has a Change Step programme that works with veterans, and they're doing tremendous work again with the Places, Pathways and People programme, which is making a big difference.
So, please continue to raise it. I'm very proud to have veterans' mental health in my portfolio, and I will continue to communicate with the community as well and ensure that they're getting everything that they need. Diolch.
Diolch am y cwestiwn hwn, Rhys ab Owen, ac am dynnu sylw at adroddiad y comisiynydd cyn-filwyr a gyhoeddwyd, yr adroddiad blynyddol, sydd, yn fy marn i, yn asesiad personol defnyddiol iawn o’r materion allweddol sy'n effeithio ar gyn-filwyr yng Nghymru, ac rydych chi newydd sôn am lawer ohonynt. Hoffwn ddweud hefyd ein bod yn parhau i fuddsoddi yn GIG Cymru i Gyn-filwyr, ac mae iechyd meddwl yn un o bedwar maes blaenoriaeth y Prif Weinidog, felly dof yn ôl at yr hyn a ddywedodd fy nghyd-Aelod, Jack Sargeant, yn gynharach, sef na allaf achub y blaen ar beth fydd yn y gyllideb sydd i ddod.
Fodd bynnag, hoffwn ddweud bod angen amodi rhai o'r cymariaethau trawsffiniol, ac mae’r comisiynydd cyn-filwyr yn cydnabod hynny, mewn perthynas â gwelyau argyfwng a gwasanaethau camddefnyddio sylweddau arbenigol. Felly, ydy, mae ein gwasanaeth iechyd meddwl ar gyfer cyn-filwyr, GIG Cymru i Gyn-filwyr, yn cael ei ariannu gan Lywodraeth Cymru ac mae'n cyflawni ei dargedau gyda rhai eithriadau lleol, lle mae swydd wag neu lle mae proses recriwtio ar waith. Mae’r gwasanaeth hwn bellach hefyd yn cefnogi cyn-filwyr sydd yn y carchar yng Nghymru.
Credaf ei bod yn werth sôn hefyd, serch hynny, eich bod chi'n iawn, mae llawer o hyn yn ymwneud â gwasanaeth GIG Cymru i gyn-filwyr, ond mae gennym hefyd ystod wych o sefydliadau trydydd sector sy’n gwneud gwaith aruthrol ar lawr gwlad yng nghymunedau pobl. Felly, mae gwaith TGP Cymru yn cynnwys ffocws penodol ar ddulliau adferol ar gyfer cyn-filwyr a gwasanaethau teuluoedd, felly mae hynny'n eu helpu'n fawr i ailgysylltu â'u teuluoedd ac i gael bywyd teuluol gwirioneddol gadarnhaol ac iach. Mae gennym Adferiad hefyd, sydd â rhaglen Change Step sy'n gweithio gyda chyn-filwyr, ac maent yn gwneud gwaith aruthrol unwaith eto gyda rhaglen Places, Pathways and People, sy'n gwneud gwahaniaeth mawr.
Felly, daliwch ati i godi'r mater. Rwy'n falch iawn o gael iechyd meddwl cyn-filwyr yn rhan o fy mhortffolio, a byddaf yn parhau i gyfathrebu â'r gymuned hefyd a sicrhau eu bod yn cael popeth sydd ei angen arnynt. Diolch.
The first thing I'd like to start with is by thanking Lisa Rawlings from the Female Veterans Alliance for raising a very important issue in our recent Senedd armed forces cross-party group. She pointed out that female veterans face unique challenges, both during and after service life. Great strides have been made, of course, in veteran care since the introduction of the armed forces covenant under the previous UK Conservative Government, but way more needs to be done here in Wales particularly. One of the major barriers to supporting female veterans is that we have no dedicated female veteran peer mentors in the NHS veterans service.
In 2021, servicewomen were 10 times more likely to experience sexual harassment. A study of UK female veterans found higher rates of mental health difficulties among female veterans, compared to non-serving females. Wales having no dedicated female veteran peer mentors creates a barrier of access to the service, meaning that many are not wanting to explain issues that perhaps involved a male to a male veteran, which is currently the only offering in Wales. Feedback suggests that there is a clear need for more female veteran support in the NHS. So, Minister, could you please assure us that you'll look into this and perhaps meet with the Female Veterans Alliance so that this can be addressed with some sort of urgency? Thank you.
Y peth cyntaf yr hoffwn ddechrau gydag ef yw diolch i Lisa Rawlings o’r Female Veterans Alliance am godi mater pwysig iawn yn ddiweddar yng ngrŵp trawsbleidiol y Senedd ar gyfer y lluoedd arfog. Tynnodd sylw at y ffaith bod cyn-filwyr benywaidd yn wynebu heriau unigryw, yn ystod ac ar ôl eu gwasanaeth. Mae camau breision wedi’u cymryd, wrth gwrs, ym maes gofal cyn-filwyr ers cyflwyno cyfamod y lluoedd arfog o dan Lywodraeth Geidwadol flaenorol y DU, ond mae angen gwneud llawer mwy yma yng Nghymru yn arbennig. Un o’r prif rwystrau o ran cefnogi cyn-filwyr benywaidd yw nad oes gennym unrhyw fentoriaid cymheiriaid penodol ar gyfer cyn-filwyr benywaidd yng ngwasanaeth cyn-filwyr y GIG.
Yn 2021, roedd menywod yn y lluoedd arfog 10 gwaith yn fwy tebygol o ddioddef aflonyddu rhywiol. Canfu astudiaeth o gyn-filwyr benywaidd y DU gyfraddau uwch o anawsterau iechyd meddwl ymhlith cyn-filwyr benywaidd, o gymharu â menywod nad ydynt wedi gwasanaethu. Mae’r ffaith nad oes gan Gymru unrhyw fentoriaid cymheiriaid penodol ar gyfer cyn-filwyr benywaidd yn creu rhwystr o ran mynediad at y gwasanaeth, sy’n golygu bod llawer yn amharod i sôn am faterion a oedd efallai’n ymwneud â dyn wrth gyn-filwr gwrywaidd, sef yr unig opsiwn yng Nghymru ar hyn o bryd. Mae adborth yn awgrymu bod angen clir am fwy o gymorth i gyn-filwyr benywaidd yn y GIG. Felly, Weinidog, a allwch chi roi sicrwydd i ni, os gwelwch yn dda, y byddwch yn ymchwilio i hyn, ac efallai’n cyfarfod â’r Female Veterans Alliance fel y gellir mynd i’r afael â hyn ar fyrder? Diolch.
I really welcome your question today, Laura Anne Jones. It's very important. I'd also like to put on record my thanks to Lisa Rawlings for sharing her lived experience. I always hugely appreciate and admire anybody who can do that, especially when there can be a stigma associated with it, when it can be traumatic, when it can be painful, in the hopes that, truly, they'll make a difference for other people. So, I would like to assure you that I will, absolutely, agree to meet with the Female Veterans Alliance. I would like to hear more. I'm a big believer in the peer mentor support; it's going incredibly well. There is one Veterans’ NHS Wales embedded peer support mentor in almost every health board that we have now. However, if none of them are female, that is a huge issue. So, I would really welcome that meeting and I will absolutely go away and look into this more. Diolch.
Rwy'n croesawu eich cwestiwn heddiw, Laura Anne Jones. Mae'n bwysig iawn. Hoffwn innau hefyd gofnodi fy niolch i Lisa Rawlings am rannu ei phrofiad bywyd. Rwyf bob amser yn gwerthfawrogi ac yn edmygu unrhyw un sy'n gallu gwneud hynny, yn enwedig pan allai fod stigma'n gysylltiedig ag ef, pan all fod yn drawmatig, pan all fod yn boenus, yn y gobaith y byddant yn gwneud gwahaniaeth i bobl eraill. Felly, hoffwn eich sicrhau fy mod yn sicr yn cytuno i gyfarfod â'r Female Veterans Alliance. Hoffwn glywed mwy. Rwy'n gredwr mawr mewn cymorth gan fentoriaid cymheiriaid; mae'n mynd yn anhygoel o dda. Mae un mentor cymheiriaid GIG Cymru i Gyn-filwyr ym mhob bwrdd iechyd sydd gennym bron iawn. Fodd bynnag, os nad oes unrhyw fentoriaid cymheiriaid benywaidd, mae honno'n broblem enfawr. Felly, buaswn yn croesawu cyfarfod ac yn sicr, fe edrychaf ymhellach ar hyn. Diolch.
Mae cwestiwn 7 wedi'i dynnu nôl.
Question 7 has been withdrawn.
Ni ofynnwyd cwestiwn 7 [OQ61763].
Question 7 [OQ61763] not asked.
8. A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet roi'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf am amseroedd aros gastroenteroleg ym Mwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Caerdydd a'r Fro? OQ61730
8. Will the Cabinet Secretary provide an update on gastroenterology waiting times in Cardiff and Vale University Health Board? OQ61730
Reducing waiting times is a priority for this Government, and we are working with the health board to ensure that they prioritise cancer and urgent referral for gastroenterology and then focus on the diagnosis and treatment of the longest waiting patients.
Mae lleihau amseroedd aros yn flaenoriaeth i'r Llywodraeth hon, ac rydym yn gweithio gyda'r bwrdd iechyd i sicrhau eu bod yn blaenoriaethu canser ac atgyfeirio brys ar gyfer gastroenteroleg ac yna'n canolbwyntio ar ddiagnosis a thriniaeth y cleifion sy'n aros hiraf.
Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Early diagnosis of gastroenterological issues and access to treatment to get symptoms under control is essential for people living with Crohn's and colitis. Delays to diagnosis and treatment increase the risk of serious complication and increase the likelihood of surgery. In the Cardiff and Vale University Health Board area, the number waiting over a year for their first gastroenterological outpatient appointment has risen from three people in July 2023 to 449 at the end of July this year. With a median wait for a gastroenterological appointment of 37.6 weeks at the Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, how is the Cabinet Secretary working with the health board to prevent people living with Crohn's and colitis from having no choice but to present at A&E? Thank you.
Diolch, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Mae diagnosis cynnar o broblemau gastroenterolegol a mynediad at driniaeth i gael symptomau dan reolaeth yn hanfodol i bobl sy'n byw gyda chlefyd Crohn a llid y colon. Mae oedi i ddiagnosis a thriniaeth yn cynyddu'r risg o gymhlethdod difrifol ac yn cynyddu'r tebygolrwydd o lawdriniaeth. Yn ardal Bwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Caerdydd a'r Fro, mae'r nifer sy'n aros dros flwyddyn am eu hapwyntiad cleifion allanol gastroenterolegol cyntaf wedi codi o dri pherson ym mis Gorffennaf 2023 i 449 ddiwedd mis Gorffennaf eleni. Gydag amser aros canolrifol am apwyntiad gastroenterolegol o 37.6 wythnos ym Mwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Caerdydd a'r Fro, sut y mae Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn gweithio gyda'r bwrdd iechyd i atal pobl sy'n byw gyda chlefyd Crohn a llid y colon rhag gorfod mynd i adrannau damweiniau ac achosion brys? Diolch.
I thank the Member for that important question. I think it is absolutely fair to say that the health board have found diagnostic waiting times a real challenge. In my periodic meeting with the chair, we discussed that very question and I'm absolutely clear that the health board recognises the need to make real progress as quickly as possible, for the reasons, partly, that the Member sets out in his question. I know that the health board have secured a mobile endoscopy unit, which was used until recently, and are now increasing capacity through additional insourcing. It is a significant challenge, it is one that, unfortunately, will take some time to resolve in its entirety, but I hope I can give the Member the assurance that I raised that in my meeting with the chair and there's an absolute recognition on the part of the health board that the service needs to be improved.
Diolch i'r Aelod am y cwestiwn pwysig hwn. Rwy'n credu ei bod yn gwbl deg dweud bod y bwrdd iechyd wedi gweld amseroedd aros diagnostig yn her go iawn. Yn fy nghyfarfod cyfnodol gyda'r cadeirydd, buom yn trafod yr union gwestiwn hwnnw ac rwy'n gwbl glir fod y bwrdd iechyd yn cydnabod yr angen i wneud cynnydd go iawn cyn gynted â phosibl, yn rhannol am y rhesymau y mae'r Aelod yn eu nodi yn ei gwestiwn. Rwy'n gwybod bod y bwrdd iechyd wedi sicrhau uned endosgopi symudol, a gafodd ei defnyddio tan yn ddiweddar, a bellach yn cynyddu capasiti trwy fewnoli ychwanegol. Mae'n her sylweddol, mae'n un a fydd, yn anffodus, yn cymryd peth amser i'w datrys yn ei chyfanrwydd, ond rwy'n gobeithio y gallaf roi sicrwydd i'r Aelod fy mod wedi codi hynny yn fy nghyfarfod gyda'r cadeirydd a bod y bwrdd iechyd yn llwyr gydnabod bod angen gwella'r gwasanaeth.
Diolch i'r Gweinidog a'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet.
I thank the Cabinet Secretary and the Minister.
Y cwestiynau amserol sydd nesaf. Mae dau wedi cael eu dewis heddiw. Mae'r cyntaf i'w ateb gan Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros newid hinsawdd ac i'w ofyn gan James Evans.
The topical questions are next. Two have been selected today. The first is to be answered by the Cabinet Secretary for climate change and to be asked by James Evans.
1. Pa drafodaethau y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn eu cael gyda Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru ynghylch eu Hadroddiad Blynyddol a Chyfrifon ar gyfer 2023-24 sy'n cynnwys manylion ymchwiliadau Cyllid a Thollau EF i gydymffurfiaeth hanesyddol Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru â gofynion gweithio oddi ar y gyflogres, a maint yr atebolrwydd posibl a allai fod yn ddyledus? TQ1220
1. What discussions is the Cabinet Secretary having with Natural Resources Wales regarding their 2023-24 Annual Report and Accounts which include details of HMRC investigations into NRW's historic compliance with off-pay-roll working requirements, and the extent of the potential liability that may be owed? TQ1220
Diolch, James. Thank you for the question. The Welsh Government has increased its engagement with NRW to monitor progress in resolving the matter and to learn lessons from the how the position came about. This is an operational matter for NRW, as it continues in its discussions with HMRC to bring about resolution.
Diolch, James. Diolch am y cwestiwn. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi cynyddu ei hymgysylltiad â CNC i fonitro cynnydd ar ddatrys y mater ac i ddysgu gwersi o'r ffordd y digwyddodd y sefyllfa. Mae hwn yn fater gweithredol i CNC, wrth iddo barhau ei drafodaethau gyda CThEF i sicrhau datrysiad.
Thank you for your answer, Cabinet Secretary. It is deeply troubling to learn that Natural Resources Wales has been under investigation by HMRC, and it has been estimated in the press that Welsh taxpayers may be on the hook for as much as £19 million. That's a truly staggering figure.
And yet, this isn't the first time that NRW has misled the public when it comes to its financial competencies. The Countryside Alliance has previously accused Natural Resources Wales of misleading the public during its public consultation, following the organisation's purchase of land in Carmarthenshire.
Cabinet Secretary, looking at the numerous finance-related controversies that NRW has created since its creation in 2013, it is clear that it is incapable of managing its finances. So, I ask you: what is the total liability anticipated from this latest fiasco at NRW, and how much more Welsh taxpayer money are we going to have to fork out to cover for NRW's mess?
I would also like to ask you a question in your role as the Deputy First Minister. What work is the Welsh Government doing to look across Government and public organisations in Wales about the IR35 rules, to make sure that no other organisation, whether that be Welsh Government or local authority, has fallen foul of the rules and is going to owe HMRC millions of pounds of taxpayer money?
Diolch am eich ateb, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Mae'n peri gofid mawr i glywed bod Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru wedi bod yn destun ymchwiliad gan CThEF, ac amcangyfrifir yn y wasg y gallai trethdalwyr Cymru orfod talu gymaint â £19 miliwn. Mae hwnnw'n ffigur gwirioneddol syfrdanol.
Ac eto, nid dyma'r tro cyntaf i CNC gamarwain y cyhoedd ynghylch ei gymwyseddau ariannol. Mae'r Gynghrair Cefn Gwlad eisoes wedi cyhuddo Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru o gamarwain y cyhoedd yn ystod ei ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus, yn dilyn prynu tir yn sir Gaerfyrddin gan y sefydliad.
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, wrth edrych ar y trafferthion niferus yn gysylltiedig â chyllid y mae CNC wedi'u hwynebu ers ei greu yn 2013, mae'n amlwg nad yw'n gallu rheoli ei gyllid. Felly, gofynnaf i chi: beth yw cyfanswm yr atebolrwydd a ragwelir o'r ffiasgo diweddaraf yn CNC, a faint yn fwy o arian trethdalwyr Cymru fydd yn rhaid i ni ei dalu am lanast CNC?
Hoffwn ofyn cwestiwn i chi hefyd yn eich rôl fel y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog. Pa waith y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei wneud i edrych ar draws y Llywodraeth a sefydliadau cyhoeddus yng Nghymru ar reolau IR35, i sicrhau nad oes unrhyw sefydliad arall, boed yn Llywodraeth Cymru neu'n awdurdod lleol, wedi mynd yn groes i'r rheolau ac yn mynd i wynebu dyled o filiynau o bunnoedd o arian trethdalwyr i CThEF?
Well, Llywydd, first of all, let's acknowledge that this is a significant issue that NRW needs to resolve in its discussions with HMRC. But one thing that I will not do is engage in political attacks on the organisation, which is the principal environmental guardian and regulator within this space. As we just saw, it has expanded into a larger attack on NRW, the organisation.
Just to make crystal clear, NRW is not the only organisation that has been subject to IR35 investigations by HMRC. Indeed, under the UK Conservative Government, the MoJ and DEFRA—I’m sure there might be others as well—also have been in this predicament. But it is for NRW—a Welsh Government-sponsored body, but not run by Welsh Government—to actually engage now, as it is doing, with HMRC to resolve this.
Just to make clear—contrary, by the way, to some of the suggestions made on the Conservative Twitter pages and by the leader of the opposition during this week in the Senedd—this is not the taxpayer opening a cheque book to NRW. In fact, the reason that the Welsh Government has made, I think, the right decision to enable NRW to enter into those negotiations with HMRC with a loan was to avoid, actually, higher costs that could accrue through interest rates on that.
So, in fact, this is wise use of taxpayers’ money to avoid it getting into a more difficult situation. And, by the way, the £19 million is an indicative amount, and I made a written statement on Monday, James, as you know. I have been making great efforts, by the way, to engage with the shadow spokespeople on this issue, but unfortunately, I have had no response—
Wel, Lywydd, yn gyntaf oll, gadewch inni gydnabod bod hwn yn fater pwysig y mae angen i CNC ei ddatrys yn ei drafodaethau â CThEF. Ond un peth nad wyf yn mynd i'w wneud yw cymryd rhan mewn ymosodiadau gwleidyddol ar y sefydliad, sef y prif warcheidwad a rheoleiddiwr amgylcheddol yn y gofod hwn. Fel y gwelsom, mae wedi ehangu i fod yn ymosodiad mwy ar CNC, y sefydliad.
I fod yn hollol glir, nid CNC yw'r unig sefydliad sydd wedi bod yn destun ymchwiliadau IR35 gan CThEF. Yn wir, dan Lywodraeth Geidwadol y DU, mae'r Weinyddiaeth Amddiffyn a DEFRA—rwy'n siŵr y gallai fod eraill hefyd—wedi bod yn y sefyllfa hon. Ond mater i CNC—corff a noddir gan Lywodraeth Cymru, ond heb ei weithredu gan Lywodraeth Cymru—yw ymgysylltu nawr, fel y mae'n gwneud, gyda CThEF i ddatrys hyn.
I fod yn glir—yn groes, gyda llaw, i rai o'r awgrymiadau a wnaed ar dudalennau Twitter y Ceidwadwyr a chan arweinydd yr wrthblaid yr wythnos hon yn y Senedd—nid yw'n fater o'r trethdalwr yn agor llyfr siec i CNC. Mewn gwirionedd, y rheswm y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi gwneud y penderfyniad cywir yn fy marn i i alluogi CNC i gael benthyciad wrth ddechrau'r trafodaethau gyda CThEF oedd osgoi costau uwch a allai gronni trwy gyfraddau llog ar hynny.
Felly, mae'n ddefnydd doeth o arian trethdalwyr i'w atal rhag mynd i sefyllfa anos. Gyda llaw, mae'r £19 miliwn yn swm dangosol, a gwneuthum ddatganiad ysgrifenedig ddydd Llun, James, fel y gwyddoch. Rwyf wedi bod yn gwneud ymdrechion mawr, gyda llaw, i ymgysylltu â llefarwyr yr wrthblaid ar y mater hwn, ond yn anffodus, nid wyf wedi cael unrhyw ymateb—
I've not had an e-mail from you.
Nid wyf wedi cael e-bost oddi wrthych.
—and that's disappointing, because I would have liked to have gone through the real detail of this.
However, let me just say, NRW's annual report and accounts include details of HMRC's investigations into what is a historic compliance issue with IR35 rules and the extent of a potential liability—watch those words: a potential liability—that may be owed. Llywydd, we laid the written statement on Monday, as you know. They are discussing this matter, between NRW and HMRC, to bring forth a resolution.
We are continuing to work with NRW to provide necessary support as it goes through the process. I have discussed this with NRW's chair regularly since it has come to my attention, including as recently as Monday. I have asked my officials to work with NRW to develop enhanced monitoring arrangements and further support for capacity and capability, as is required.
But let's be clear as well: when we put these political attacks on NRW that go beyond this IR35 issue, as we saw earlier this week in this Senedd—. We are facing a climate and nature crisis. NRW's work as a regulator is of the utmost importance to us all, and the professional and passionate NRW staff work day in, day out to help protect nature and people in Wales. The Welsh Government does indeed have a clear role, Llywydd, in supporting NRW in fulfilling those responsibilities and ensuring that its vital work will continue, and we will support NRW in its discussions with HMRC.
—ac mae hynny'n siomedig, oherwydd buaswn wedi hoffi mynd drwy fanylion go iawn hyn.
Fodd bynnag, gadewch imi ddweud, mae adroddiad a chyfrifon blynyddol CNC yn cynnwys manylion ymchwiliadau CThEF i'r hyn sy'n fater cydymffurfio hanesyddol â rheolau IR35 a maint atebolrwydd posibl—gwyliwch y geiriau hynny: atebolrwydd posibl—a allai fod yn ddyledus. Lywydd, fe wnaethom osod y datganiad ysgrifenedig ddydd Llun, fel y gwyddoch. Maent yn trafod y mater hwn, rhwng CNC a CThEF, er mwyn sicrhau datrysiad.
Rydym yn parhau i weithio gyda CNC i ddarparu'r cymorth angenrheidiol wrth iddo fynd drwy'r broses. Rwyf wedi trafod hyn gyda chadeirydd CNC yn rheolaidd ers iddo ddod i fy sylw, gan gynnwys mor ddiweddar â dydd Llun. Rwyf wedi gofyn i fy swyddogion weithio gyda CNC i ddatblygu trefniadau monitro gwell a chefnogaeth bellach ar gyfer capasiti a gallu, fel sy'n ofynnol.
Ond gadewch inni fod yn glir hefyd: pan fyddwn yn gwneud ymosodiadau gwleidyddol ar CNC sy'n mynd y tu hwnt i'r mater IR35 hwn, fel y gwelsom yn gynharach yr wythnos hon yn y Senedd—. Rydym yn wynebu argyfwng hinsawdd a natur. Mae gwaith CNC fel rheoleiddiwr o'r pwys mwyaf i ni i gyd, ac mae staff proffesiynol ac angerddol CNC yn gweithio o ddydd i ddydd i helpu i ddiogelu natur a phobl yng Nghymru. Yn wir, mae gan Lywodraeth Cymru rôl glir, Lywydd, yn cefnogi Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru i gyflawni'r cyfrifoldebau hynny a sicrhau y bydd ei waith hanfodol yn parhau, a byddwn yn cefnogi CNC yn ei drafodaethau gyda CThEF.
Point of order—
Pwynt o drefn—
Delyth Jewell. No point of order.
Delyth Jewell. Dim pwynt o drefn.
Diolch, Llywydd. This payment to HMRC does raise serious concerns about management and compliance, but it also, surely, prompts questions about what processes are in place to support staff in this position. I don't know the details of what's happened here, but my instinct would tell me that no-one would have wanted things to get to this stage, that this wouldn't have come about through deliberate deception, but inadequate safeguards and, who knows, maybe staff fear. I'd like to know what support is currently being given to the staff affected by this, and I'd like to know what steps the Government took to monitor NRW's financial practices, again, yes, to hear assurances, of course, that similar failures won't happen again in public bodies under its remit. Processes have to be strengthened, clear lines of accountability have to be clarified if need be, but NRW does do hugely significant important work. My view on this is that we should be focusing on the future, ensuring that this doesn't happen again, to protect staff, as well as finances. Just focusing on calling for heads to roll doesn't get us anywhere, does it? A mistake was made, it was a very serious mistake, but surely the blame needs to be placed on processes not people.
Diolch, Lywydd. Mae'r taliad hwn i CThEF yn codi pryderon difrifol am reolaeth a chydymffurfiaeth, ond mae hefyd yn ysgogi cwestiynau ynghylch pa brosesau sydd ar waith i gefnogi staff yn y sefyllfa hon. Nid wyf yn gwybod manylion yr hyn sydd wedi digwydd yma, ond byddai fy ngreddf yn dweud wrthyf na fyddai unrhyw un wedi dymuno i bethau gyrraedd y cam hwn, na fyddai hyn wedi digwydd trwy dwyll bwriadol, ond yn hytrach, mesurau diogelwch annigonol a phwy a ŵyr, ofnau staff efallai. Hoffwn wybod pa gymorth sy'n cael ei roi i'r staff y mae hyn yn effeithio arnynt ar hyn o bryd, a hoffwn wybod pa gamau a gymerodd y Llywodraeth i fonitro arferion ariannol CNC, unwaith eto, ie, i glywed sicrwydd na fydd methiannau tebyg yn digwydd eto mewn cyrff cyhoeddus o dan ei goruchwyliaeth. Rhaid cryfhau prosesau, rhaid egluro llinellau atebolrwydd clir os oes angen, ond mae CNC yn gwneud gwaith pwysig iawn. Fy marn i yw y dylem ganolbwyntio ar y dyfodol, gan sicrhau nad yw hyn yn digwydd eto, i ddiogelu staff, yn ogystal â chyllid. Nid yw canolbwyntio ar feio'n unig yn mynd â ni i unman. Fe wnaed camgymeriad, roedd yn gamgymeriad difrifol iawn, ond mae angen rhoi'r bai ar brosesau nid ar bobl.
Delyth, thank you very much for that. You raise some really important points here, because, at the heart of this also—. This is a historic compliance issue that they're dealing with; it goes back several years. They are undertaking proper scrutiny of what happened in order to learn those lessons going forward—to avoid it. They have indeed, and I've met with the chair of the board frequently on this, put in place now strengthened governance and oversight, and risk analysis, to make sure that this doesn't happen again. I would expect that of them, and they are doing it. But right at the heart of this are people who are passionate about the work they do, at all levels, within NRW. And that's why I say very strongly, 'Let's not look at pointing the finger at individuals or NRW as an organisation', and actually say to NRW that they need to sort this out in terms of their relationship now with HMRC, this potential liability needs to be resolved, we need to see the exact quantum of what it is, and then the Welsh Government stands by to help support in one way or the other, in a responsible way, with our own proper responsibility as the sponsoring body for NRW, but not stepping into that space that they have to resolve.
And just one thing to clarify as well, Delyth, and Llywydd: whilst this is a matter for NRW itself and the board, rather than the Welsh Government, NRW has made clear that it is no longer using off-payroll contractors, and its default position is that it will not use them in the future, and that is good to hear. So, there are historic issues to deal with, to understand, to learn how this can be avoided in the future. I think that NRW have to be very frank and honest in their internal analysis of that. We are also, as the Welsh Government, in that space, trying to understand exactly what has got on in a body that we sponsor, but it is now for them to sort out. And meanwhile, they have to get on with their essential day job as a regulator of the natural environment here in Wales, and also all the work that they do on flood defences, the work that they do with communities throughout Wales. And I know this is definitely not where you were heading, but let's not try and drag them down and use this as a political opportunity to undermine them as an organisation; they've got a critical role to play.
Delyth, diolch am hynny. Rydych chi'n codi rhai pwyntiau pwysig iawn yma, oherwydd, wrth wraidd hyn hefyd—. Mae hwn yn fater cydymffurfio hanesyddol y maent yn ymdrin ag ef; mae'n mynd yn ôl sawl blwyddyn. Maent yn gwneud gwaith craffu priodol ar yr hyn a ddigwyddodd er mwyn dysgu gwersi wrth symud ymlaen—er mwyn ei osgoi. Yn wir, rwyf wedi cyfarfod â chadeirydd y bwrdd yn aml ar hyn, wedi rhoi trefniadau llywodraethu a goruchwylio cryfach ar waith, a dadansoddi risg, i sicrhau nad yw hyn yn digwydd eto. Rwy'n disgwyl hynny ac maent yn ei wneud. Ond wrth wraidd hyn mae pobl sy'n angerddol am y gwaith a wnânt ar bob lefel o fewn CNC. A dyna pam rwy'n dweud yn gryf iawn, 'Gadewch inni beidio â phwyntio bys at unigolion neu CNC fel sefydliad', a dweud wrth CNC fod angen iddynt ddatrys hyn o ran eu perthynas â CThEF, mae angen datrys yr atebolrwydd posibl hwn, mae angen inni weld union swm yr hyn ydyw, ac yna mae Llywodraeth Cymru yno i helpu i gefnogi mewn rhyw ffordd neu'i gilydd, mewn ffordd gyfrifol, gyda'n cyfrifoldeb priodol ein hunain fel y corff sy'n noddi CNC, ond heb gamu i'r gofod y mae'n rhaid iddynt hwy ei ddatrys.
Ac os caf egluro un peth hefyd, Delyth, a Lywydd: er bod hwn yn fater i CNC ei hun a'r bwrdd, yn hytrach na Llywodraeth Cymru, mae CNC wedi dweud yn glir nad yw'n defnyddio contractwyr oddi ar y gyflogres mwyach, a'i safbwynt diofyn yw na fydd yn eu defnyddio yn y dyfodol, ac mae hynny'n dda i'w glywed. Felly, mae yna faterion hanesyddol i ymdrin â hwy, i'w deall, i ddysgu sut y gellir osgoi hyn yn y dyfodol. Rwy'n credu bod yn rhaid i CNC fod yn onest yn eu dadansoddiad mewnol o hynny. Rydym ni hefyd, fel Llywodraeth Cymru, yn y gofod hwnnw, yn ceisio deall yn union beth sydd wedi digwydd mewn corff a noddir gennym, ond mater iddynt hwy yw datrys hyn nawr. Ac yn y cyfamser, mae'n rhaid iddynt fwrw ymlaen â'u gwaith hanfodol fel rheoleiddiwr yr amgylchedd naturiol yma yng Nghymru, a hefyd yr holl waith a wnânt ar amddiffynfeydd rhag llifogydd, y gwaith a wnânt gyda chymunedau ledled Cymru. Ac rwy'n gwybod yn bendant nad dyma lle roeddech chi'n mynd, ond gadewch inni beidio â cheisio eu llusgo i lawr a defnyddio hyn fel cyfle gwleidyddol i'w tanseilio fel sefydliad; mae ganddynt rôl allweddol i'w chwarae.
Just for clarification—I don't know who you were referring to—I haven't had an e-mail about this particular issue from you. I know we spoke outside, but that was about your statement yesterday and nothing to do with NRW.
I've got to be honest, this is yet another inadequacy on the part of NRW. Even your own statement yesterday, Deputy Minister, following the bail-out, was a clear admission that NRW is not only struggling, but is in need of greater oversight. This latest scandal highlights the poor—incredibly poor—leadership within NRW. Week after week, we hear many failings of this organisation.
I feel really sorry for the hard-working staff, who I work with regularly, and they feel let down by constant management inadequacies. They do a fantastic job, but they're being let down. Serious questions should be asked. I make no apology for going a step further than you: if this was a private company, people would be on notice. Why should the public sector, this Welsh Government or NRW be any different? Who was appointed to audit these accounts? Why did they not highlight this situation earlier, when it talks about NRW's historic compliance with off-payroll working? I would never get away with that in business, nor would many within the private sector.
In the Welsh NHS, we have an oversight and escalation framework. Have you never thought of having such a similar process for other public bodies, to include NRW? But I have to tell you, if I had my way here today somebody in senior management would be asked to consider their position. Diolch.
Dim ond er eglurder—nid wyf yn gwybod at bwy roeddech chi'n cyfeirio—nid wyf wedi cael e-bost oddi wrthych am y mater penodol hwn. Rwy'n gwybod ein bod wedi siarad y tu allan, ond roedd hynny'n ymwneud â'ch datganiad ddoe a dim byd i'w wneud â CNC.
Mae'n rhaid i mi fod yn onest, dyma fethiant arall gan CNC. Roedd hyd yn oed eich datganiad chi ddoe, Ddirprwy Weinidog, wedi ichi achub ei groen, yn gyfaddefiad clir fod Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru nid yn unig yn ei chael hi'n anodd, ond bod angen mwy o oruchwyliaeth. Mae'r sgandal ddiweddaraf hon yn tynnu sylw at yr arweinyddiaeth wael—anhygoel o wael—o fewn CNC. Wythnos ar ôl wythnos, clywn am fethiannau niferus y sefydliad hwn.
Rwy'n teimlo'n flin iawn dros y staff gweithgar, y byddaf yn gweithio gyda hwy'n rheolaidd, ac maent yn teimlo'n siomedig ynghylch diffygion rheoli cyson. Maent yn gwneud gwaith gwych, ond maent yn cael eu siomi. Dylid gofyn cwestiynau difrifol. Nid wyf yn ymddiheuro am fynd gam ymhellach na chi: pe bai hwn yn gwmni preifat, byddai pobl wedi cael rhybudd. Pam y dylai'r sector cyhoeddus, y Llywodraeth hon neu CNC fod yn wahanol? Pwy a benodwyd i archwilio'r cyfrifon hyn? Pam na wnaethant dynnu sylw at y sefyllfa hon yn gynharach, pan fo'n sôn am gydymffurfiaeth hanesyddol CNC â gwaith oddi ar y gyflogres? Ni fuaswn i byth yn cael dianc rhag hynny mewn busnes, na fawr o neb yn y sector preifat.
Yn y GIG yng Nghymru, mae gennym fframwaith goruchwylio ac uwchgyfeirio. A ydych chi erioed wedi meddwl am gael proses debyg ar gyfer cyrff cyhoeddus eraill, i gynnwys CNC? Ond mae'n rhaid imi ddweud wrthych, pe bawn i'n cael fy ffordd yma heddiw byddai gofyn i rywun o blith yr uwch-reolwyr ystyried eu sefyllfa. Diolch.
Llywydd, there is a genuine and serious point within this about NRW taking responsibility for how this came about, actually learning the lessons and being transparent as well, and that process is under way, Janet. But, just to be clear, you've just thrown on the line there, if I heard you correctly, incredibly poor leadership, inadequate management, whilst paying tribute to the passion of the front-line workers. Actually, there are people in NRW at every single level that are passionate about protecting our natural environment, and—[Interruption.]—and to use this as an opportunity to undermine and denigrate the organisation and those people within it—
Lywydd, mae yna bwynt dilys a difrifol yn hyn o beth am CNC yn cymryd cyfrifoldeb am y ffordd y digwyddodd hyn, gan ddysgu'r gwersi a bod yn dryloyw hefyd, ac mae'r broses honno ar y gweill, Janet. Ond i fod yn glir, rydych chi newydd sôn yno, os clywais chi'n iawn, am arweinyddiaeth anhygoel o wael, rheolaeth ddiffygiol, gan dalu teyrnged i angerdd y gweithwyr rheng flaen ar yr un pryd. A dweud y gwir, mae yna bobl yn CNC ar bob lefel sy'n angerddol ynglŷn â diogelu ein hamgylchedd naturiol, a—[Torri ar draws.]—ac mae defnyddio hyn fel cyfle i danseilio a lladd ar y sefydliad a'r bobl ynddo—
No, I've actually—
Na, mewn gwirionedd—
—I think is a poorly placed attack.
So can I just say as well, just for clarity, Llywydd, during the course of the last few days, including Monday, but actually prior to that as well, I as the Cabinet Secretary made approaches to every frontbench spokesperson. Janet, you mentioned the approach that I made to you yesterday in person wasn't on NRW. No, it was. This is NRW. [Interruption.] This is NRW and IR35, and we've made, just for clarity of purposes, on the record, Llywydd—[Interruption.]
—nid wyf yn credu y dylech chi ymosod arnynt.
Felly, a gaf i ddweud hefyd, er eglurder, Lywydd, yn ystod y dyddiau diwethaf, gan gynnwys dydd Llun, ond cyn hynny hefyd mewn gwirionedd, fe wneuthum siarad fel Ysgrifennydd Cabinet â phob llefarydd ar y fainc flaen. Janet, fe sonioch chi nad oedd y fy ymgysylltiad wyneb yn wyneb â chi ddoe yn ymwneud ag CNC. Nid yw hynny'n wir. CNC yw hyn. [Torri ar draws.] CNC ac IR35 yw hyn, ac er eglurder, er mwyn y cofnod, Lywydd, rydym wedi—[Torri ar draws.]
I'm allowing the Cabinet Secretary to conclude his comments.
Rwy'n caniatáu i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet gwblhau ei sylwadau.
In trying to be absolutely clear, we made repeated overtures by e-mail, telephone and indeed direct personal message to say could we speak about this, if you wanted to, to go through this in detail before we brought it to the floor. So those have been done to every single political party without fear or favour in order to explain this. We'll keep on trying to do that in future as well, but part of this is because of the detail behind it. Because I think what we have here in front of us is an organisation with a historical compliance issue with IR35. The organisation is working with HMRC to resolve this. There is a potential liability of up to £19 million. Welsh Government is standing by the organisation in a responsible way to make sure that that doesn't increase and to provide support where appropriate. But that is our role as the sponsor of this body, and I will not join in attacks on an organisation that is established to protect the very best of our natural environment, our rivers, our seas, our soil, everything else, and to deal with flood protection for individuals throughout Wales.
I geisio bod yn hollol glir, fe wnaethom gysylltu dro ar ôl tro trwy e-bost, ffôn a thrwy neges bersonol uniongyrchol yn wir i ddweud a allem siarad am hyn, os oeddech chi eisiau, i fynd trwy hyn yn fanwl cyn inni ddod ag ef i'r llawr. Felly mae'r rheini wedi cael eu gwneud i bob un blaid wleidyddol yn ddiwahân er mwyn egluro hyn. Byddwn yn parhau i geisio gwneud hynny yn y dyfodol hefyd, ond mae rhan o hyn oherwydd y manylion y tu ôl iddo. Oherwydd credaf mai'r hyn sydd gennym yma o'n blaenau yw sefydliad sydd â phroblem gydymffurfiaeth hanesyddol ag IR35. Mae'r sefydliad yn gweithio gyda CThEF i ddatrys hyn. Mae yna atebolrwydd posibl o hyd at £19 miliwn. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn sefyll gyda'r sefydliad mewn ffordd gyfrifol i sicrhau nad yw hynny'n cynyddu ac i ddarparu cefnogaeth lle bo hynny'n briodol. Ond dyna yw ein rôl ni fel noddwr y corff hwn, ac nid wyf am ymuno mewn ymosodiadau ar sefydliad a grëwyd i ddiogelu'r gorau o'n hamgylchedd naturiol, ein hafonydd, ein moroedd, ein pridd, popeth arall, ac i ymdrin ag amddiffyn rhag llifogydd i unigolion ledled Cymru.
Of course, IR35 issues aren't new in terms of public sector bodies. We remember the BBC being caught up in this many years ago, the Ministry of Justice and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs as well on a UK Government level a few years ago. But it would be interesting to understand what if any advice the Welsh Government issued to its own departments or to sponsored bodies as a consequence of those issues in the past, flagging up risks for those organisations that come within the Welsh Government's remit. You've now asked NRW to increase capacity and capability, particularly on financial risk and management arrangements. Is that a slight admission that they are struggling with capacity more generally? Because we as a Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee have long warned of our concerns in that respect. Is this one of the kinds of consequences that we're now seeing as a result of that unsustainable trajectory of increased duties and diminishing resources? And finally, are you expecting NRW to pay back any money out of that £19 million at the end of the day?
Wrth gwrs, nid yw'r materion IR35 yn newydd o ran cyrff sector cyhoeddus. Rydym yn cofio bod y BBC wedi cael ei ddal yn hyn flynyddoedd lawer yn ôl, a'r Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder ac Adran yr Amgylchedd, Bwyd a Materion Gwledig ar lefel Llywodraeth y DU hefyd rai blynyddoedd yn ôl. Ond byddai'n ddiddorol deall pa gyngor os o gwbl a roddwyd gan Lywodraeth Cymru i'w hadrannau ei hun neu i gyrff noddedig o ganlyniad i'r materion hynny yn y gorffennol, gan dynnu sylw at risgiau i'r sefydliadau sy'n dod o fewn cylch gwaith Llywodraeth Cymru. Rydych chi nawr wedi gofyn i CNC gynyddu capasiti a gallu, yn enwedig ar drefniadau risg a rheolaeth ariannol. A yw hynny'n gyfaddefiad bach eu bod yn cael trafferth gyda chapasiti yn fwy cyffredinol? Oherwydd rydym ni fel Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith wedi rhybuddio ers tro ynglŷn â'n pryderon yn hynny o beth. A yw hwn yn un o'r mathau o ganlyniadau a welwn bellach o ganlyniad i'r llwybr anghynaliadwy o fwy o ddyletswyddau ac adnoddau sy'n lleihau? Ac yn olaf, a ydych chi'n disgwyl i CNC ad-dalu unrhyw arian allan o'r £19 miliwn hwnnw yn y pen draw?
Llyr, thank you very much for those questions. First of all, there's an awareness of this issue right across Government. So, every Cabinet Secretary is aware of this and every sponsored body is aware of their direct responsibilities. I should say very, very clearly, whilst it's for HMRC to assess compliance or non-compliance on IR35 across all organisations, we are not aware of any other live cases in relation to Welsh Government sponsored bodies.
But you mentioned the issue of support on capacity, so one of the things we've done in this situation, which I think is a responsible way forward, is, in our engagement with NRW and the repeated meetings that I've had with the Chair and senior management, to say if they need additional support in terms of supporting their discussions with HMRC, to enable them to go ahead—. We want this to be resolved as soon as possible; the worst thing is this hangs over the head of the organisation. So, we've tried to work with them to say, ‘Let's get some timescales here’, bearing in mind that it's up to HMRC how fast they want to evolve it, but I think HMRC are also aware of a desire to get to a completion on this to see what the potential liability is. You ask pertinently as well: does this mean NRW will need to pay back any money to us? Because we have, indeed, stepped in, and I say, again, I think it's a responsible way to step in, because we're avoiding interest and other costs accruing. Now, on the basis, if we can first determine—. Sorry, 'if we can'. If NRW can first determine with HMRC what its potential liability is, then at that point I, along with the finance Cabinet Secretary here and others, will have those discussions with NRW to talk about how, actually, the taxpayer's money can head back to the place that it came from. We're not at that point yet, but it's a very pertinent question.
Just one other thing is to say this is very different from the wider pressures that some people are trying to conflate the issues into with the 'Case for Change', with the well-known budgetary pressures that NRW are facing, over recent years as well, which the Environment Agency in England is also under pressure with. This is separate from that entirely, but we are conscious that we don't want this to be an issue that detracts from, then, proceeding with the unions through the 'Case for Change' consultation, determining how they focus on their statutory responsibilities and also being fit for purpose for today and for the future.
So, we're keen to stand in the right way with support for NRW and its engagement with HMRC but, just to be clear, this is a matter for them to resolve with HMRC.
Llyr, diolch yn fawr iawn am y cwestiynau hynny. Yn gyntaf oll, mae ymwybyddiaeth o'r mater hwn ar draws y Llywodraeth. Felly, mae pob Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn ymwybodol o hyn ac mae pob corff a noddir yn ymwybodol o'u cyfrifoldebau uniongyrchol. Dylwn ddweud yn glir iawn, er mai mater i CThEF yw asesu cydymffurfiaeth neu ddiffyg cydymffurfiaeth ag IR35 ar draws pob sefydliad, nid ydym yn ymwybodol o unrhyw achosion byw eraill mewn perthynas â chyrff a noddir gan Lywodraeth Cymru.
Ond fe sonioch chi am gefnogaeth o ran capasiti, felly un o'r pethau a wnaethom yn y sefyllfa hon, sydd, yn fy marn i, yn ffordd gyfrifol ymlaen, yn ein hymgysylltiad â CNC a'r cyfarfodydd niferus a gefais gyda'r Cadeirydd a'r uwch-reolwyr, yw dweud os oes angen cymorth ychwanegol arnynt i gefnogi eu trafodaethau gyda CThEF, i'w galluogi i fynd yn eu blaen—. Rydym am i hyn gael ei ddatrys cyn gynted â phosibl; y peth gwaethaf yw bod hyn yn hongian uwchben y sefydliad. Felly, rydym wedi ceisio gweithio gyda hwy i ddweud, 'Gadewch inni gael amserlenni yma', gan gofio mai mater i CThEF yw pa mor gyflym y maent am ei ddatblygu, ond credaf fod CThEF hefyd yn ymwybodol o awydd i gwblhau hyn i weld beth yw'r atebolrwydd posibl. Rydych chi'n gofyn hefyd: a yw hyn yn golygu y bydd angen i CNC ad-dalu unrhyw arian i ni? Oherwydd rydym wedi camu i mewn, ac rwy'n dweud, unwaith eto, fy mod yn credu ei bod hi'n ffordd gyfrifol o gamu i mewn, oherwydd rydym yn osgoi llog a chostau eraill rhag cronni. Nawr, ar y sail, os gallwn ni benderfynu'n gyntaf—. Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, 'os gallwn'. Os gall CNC benderfynu gyda CThEF yn gyntaf beth yw ei atebolrwydd posibl, bryd hynny byddaf i, ynghyd ag Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid yma ac eraill, yn cael y trafodaethau hynny gyda CNC i siarad ynglŷn â sut y gall arian y trethdalwr fynd yn ôl i'r lle y daeth. Nid ydym ar y pwynt hwnnw eto, ond mae'n gwestiwn cymwys iawn.
Un peth arall i'w ddweud yw bod hyn yn wahanol iawn i'r pwysau ehangach y mae rhai pobl yn ceisio ei gyfuno gyda'r 'Achos dros Newid', gyda'r pwysau cyllidebol cyfarwydd y mae CNC yn eu hwynebu, dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf hefyd, sy'n bwysau ar Asiantaeth yr Amgylchedd yn Lloegr hefyd. Mae hyn ar wahân i hynny'n gyfan gwbl, ond rydym yn ymwybodol nad ydym am i hwn fod yn fater sy'n tynnu sylw felly rhag bwrw ymlaen gyda'r undebau drwy'r ymgynghoriad 'Achos dros Newid', a phenderfynu sut y maent yn canolbwyntio ar eu cyfrifoldebau statudol a bod yn addas i'r diben ar gyfer heddiw ac ar gyfer y dyfodol.
Felly, rydym yn awyddus i sefyll yn y ffordd iawn gyda chymorth i CNC a'i ymgysylltiad â CThEF ond i fod yn glir, mater iddynt hwy i'w ddatrys gyda CThEF yw hwn.
Minister, thank you for your responses this afternoon. I've listened intently and I was grateful for the leader of the house's response yesterday, which I think was very insightful, especially as you agreed to keep the Chamber updated.
Weinidog, diolch am eich ymatebion y prynhawn yma. Rwyf wedi gwrando'n astud ac roeddwn yn ddiolchgar am ymateb arweinydd y tŷ ddoe, a chredaf fod hwnnw'n graff iawn, yn enwedig gan i chi gytuno i roi'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf i'r Siambr.
Thank you.
Diolch.
A couple of points, if I may. I was of the understanding from the reports that I've read that the £19 million is the quantifiable amount of money that's owed to HMRC at the moment. It is not the totality of the liability and the discussions are ongoing, and certainly that liability could increase. Could you confirm that that is the case?
And secondly, are these employees, a number of them having taken redundancies, being put back onto the books of NRW via the self-employed route and subcontractor route, and therefore that is how this liability has arisen? Because, obviously, all public bodies have been reducing headcounts, but, ultimately, when you go into some of these organisations, they've re-employed the individuals as subcontractors or on a self-employed basis, and this is where the liability has obviously manifested itself. Because £19 million is a considerable sum of money in anyone's context, and it is our job as the opposition to hold the Government to account as to why that liability has crystallised.
Ambell bwynt, os caf. Roeddwn yn deall o'r adroddiadau a ddarllenais mai'r £19 miliwn yw'r swm meintiol o arian sy'n ddyledus i CThEF ar hyn o bryd. Nid cyfanswm yr atebolrwydd ydyw ac mae'r trafodaethau'n parhau, ac yn sicr gallai'r atebolrwydd hwnnw gynyddu. A allwch chi gadarnhau bod hynny'n wir?
Ac yn ail, a yw'r gweithwyr hyn, gyda nifer ohonynt wedi derbyn diswyddiadau, yn cael eu rhoi yn ôl ar lyfrau CNC drwy'r llwybr hunangyflogedig a'r llwybr is-gontractio, ac felly ai dyna sut y mae'r atebolrwydd wedi codi? Oherwydd, yn amlwg, mae pob corff cyhoeddus wedi bod yn lleihau nifer eu gweithwyr, ond yn y pen draw, pan fyddwch chi'n mynd i rai o'r sefydliadau hyn, maent wedi ailgyflogi'r unigolion fel is-gontractwyr neu ar sail hunangyflogedig, a dyma lle mae'n amlwg fod yr atebolrwydd wedi dod i'r golwg. Oherwydd mae £19 miliwn yn swm sylweddol o arian yng nghyd-destun unrhyw un, a'n gwaith ni fel yr wrthblaid yw dwyn y Llywodraeth i gyfrif ynglŷn â'r rheswm pam y digwyddodd yr atebolrwydd hwnnw.
Indeed, and, listen, thank you for the way in which you've phrased those questions, Andrew; that's really helpful. First of all, one thing to be very clear of—and this is a genuine point—is we don't comment in detail on discussions between a sponsored body and HMRC, okay. We don't, and there are good reasons why we shouldn't do that, because those discussions are ongoing. But the headline figure of £19 million—. Let me stress again: potential liability is exactly that; it's potential liability. But I don't comment on where that figure might end up; those are exactly the discussions that are currently ongoing. It's for NRW to have those discussions with HMRC.
Just to make it clear, the issue of redundancies and so on is wholly and entirely separate from the IR35 issue. This is separate from the 'Case for Change', it's separate from the wider pressures on this and other public sector organisations. So, we need to unpack it from that. And as I mentioned earlier on, it's been made clear by NRW that neither do they have any currently, or intend to have any going forward, off-payroll contractors. But, as I say, as I mentioned before, Andrew, NRW is not the first organisation to be in this territory and discussions with HMRC, either in terms of Government departments or others. I don't think they'd want to be here, neither would we as their sponsor for them, but they're going to have to get on now at pace with those discussions with HMRC so that they can get to what is the figure, and then how do we as Welsh Government actually help them through this particular issue. But I come back to the point that they've got a job of work to do as well on their day to day, and we need to make sure that they're focused on that as well.
Yn wir, a gwrandewch, diolch am y ffordd rydych chi wedi gofyn y cwestiynau hynny, Andrew; mae hynny'n ddefnyddiol iawn. Yn gyntaf oll, un peth i fod yn glir iawn yn ei gylch—ac mae hwn yn bwynt diffuant—yw nad ydym yn gwneud sylw manwl ar drafodaethau rhwng corff noddedig a CThEF, iawn. Nid ydym, ac mae rhesymau da pam na ddylem wneud hynny, oherwydd mae'r trafodaethau hynny'n parhau. Ond y ffigur penodol o £19 miliwn—. Gadewch imi bwysleisio eto: mae atebolrwydd posibl yn golygu yn union hynny; atebolrwydd posibl. Ond nid wyf yn gwneud sylwadau ar beth y gallai'r ffigur fod yn y pen draw; dyna'n hollol yw'r trafodaethau sy'n mynd rhagddynt ar hyn o bryd. Mater i CNC yw cael y trafodaethau hynny gyda CThEF.
Os caf ddweud yn glir, mae mater diswyddiadau ac yn y blaen yn gyfan gwbl ar wahân i fater IR35. Mae hyn ar wahân i'r 'Achos dros Newid', mae ar wahân i'r pwysau ehangach ar y sefydliad hwn a sefydliadau eraill yn y sector cyhoeddus. Felly, mae angen inni ei wahanu oddi wrth hynny. Ac fel y soniais yn gynharach, fe wnaed yn glir gan CNC nad oes ganddynt unrhyw gontractwyr oddi ar y gyflogres ar hyn o bryd, ac nid ydynt yn bwriadu cael unrhyw gontractwyr oddi ar y gyflogres yn y dyfodol. Ond fel y dywedais, fel y soniais o'r blaen, Andrew, nid CNC yw'r sefydliad cyntaf i fod yn y diriogaeth hon a thrafodaethau gyda CThEF, yn adrannau'r Llywodraeth neu fel arall. Nid wyf yn credu y byddent eisiau bod yma, ac ni fyddem ni fel eu noddwyr ychwaith, ond bydd yn rhaid iddynt fwrw ymlaen yn gyflym nawr â'r trafodaethau gyda CThEF fel y gallant gyrraedd y ffigur, ac yna sut rydym ni fel Llywodraeth Cymru yn eu helpu drwy hyn. Ond rwy'n dod yn ôl at y pwynt fod ganddynt waith i'w wneud hefyd ar eu gorchwylion o ddydd i ddydd, ac mae angen inni sicrhau eu bod yn canolbwyntio ar hynny hefyd.
Diolch i'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet. Y cwestiwn nesaf yw ateb gan y Gweinidog Addysg Bellach ac Uwch, ac i'w ofyn gan Cefin Campbell.
I thank the Cabinet Secretary. The next question is to be answered by the Minister for Further and Higher Education, and is to be asked by Cefin Campbell.
2. A wnaiff Llywodraeth Cymru egluro’r cymorth ariannol sydd ar gael i brifysgolion Cymru sydd mewn perygl, yn dilyn llythyr y Gweinidog Addysg Bellach ac Uwch at Aelodau'r Senedd ar 16 Hydref 2024? TQ1223
2. Will the Welsh Government explain the financial support available to at-risk Welsh universities, following the letter from the Minister for Further and Higher Education to Members of the Senedd on 16 October 2024? TQ1223
We are absolutely committed to supporting a sustainable higher education sector. The sector will receive £197 million in grant funding this financial year from Medr, previously the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales. The Welsh Government has increased the tuition fee cap to £9,250 in 2024-25, and an additional £20 million in capital support will be made available to tertiary education providers for decarbonisation.
Rydym wedi ymrwymo'n llwyr i gefnogi sector addysg uwch cynaliadwy. Bydd y sector yn derbyn £197 miliwn o gyllid grant y flwyddyn ariannol hon gan Medr, Cyngor Cyllido Addysg Uwch Cymru gynt. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi cynyddu'r cap ffioedd dysgu i £9,250 yn 2024-25, a bydd £20 miliwn ychwanegol o gymorth cyfalaf ar gael i ddarparwyr addysg drydyddol ar gyfer datgarboneiddio.
Wel, diolch yn fawr iawn am yr ateb hwnna. Mae'r cyfan yn ddirgelwch llwyr, onid yw e?
Well, thank you very much for that response. It's all a mystery, isn't it?
In response to a question from me last week regarding the financial crisis facing Welsh universities, you stated
'Medr is going to have its own funds to support our institutions.... It will be called a transformation fund'.
But, lo and behold, within 24 hours, we then received a letter from you backtracking on this commitment of support to Welsh universities. In that letter, you wrote:
'the policy in this area remains at a very exploratory stage, and we are still working through what, if any, potential support mechanism may look like, in partnership with Medr and institutions.'
So, I'm just wondering, at that stage, whether you were making things up as a Government as you went along. Just as your Government has given false hope to patients with non-existent cross-border health plans, you've also misled the higher education sector last week by spuriously raising expectations.
Now, Minister, Welsh universities need a cast-iron guarantee from you that they will be given the support they need not just to survive but to prosper. Now, you also reiterate that you don't think any Welsh universities are at risk of failure. Now, however, at least five Welsh universities are running, or have just completed, further voluntary redundancy schemes. And as I've mentioned previously in the Siambr, the collective deficits are now spiralling north of about £100 million. So, do you agree with me that giving the false impression that support is imminent erodes the confidence of the sector? Now, this can't continue. It's not sustainable, and Welsh Government needs to get a grip on this.
So, I have two specific questions: firstly, since taking post, have you or the Cabinet Secretary for Education actually had discussions via official correspondence with HEFCW, Medr, or individual Welsh universities regarding this transformation fund? And secondly, when will you make a decision on what, if any, support will be provided further to what you have just outlined today? Diolch.
Mewn ymateb i gwestiwn gennyf yr wythnos diwethaf ynglŷn â'r argyfwng ariannol sy'n wynebu prifysgolion Cymru, fe ddywedoch chi
'Mae Medr yn mynd i gael ei arian ei hun i gefnogi ein sefydliadau... Bydd yn cael ei galw'n gronfa drawsnewid'.
Ond wele, o fewn 24 awr, cawsom lythyr gennych yn cefnu ar yr ymrwymiad o gefnogaeth i brifysgolion Cymru. Yn y llythyr hwnnw, fe wnaethoch chi ysgrifennu:
'mai megis dechrau yn unig y mae'r gwaith yn y maes polisi hwn ac rydym yn dal i weithio trwy'r hyn y gallai mecanwaith cymorth posibl, os o gwbl, edrych, mewn partneriaeth gyda Medr a sefydliadau eraill.'
Felly, ar y pwynt hwnnw, tybed a oeddech chi'n creu pethau wrth ichi fynd yn eich blaen fel Llywodraeth. Yn yr un modd ag y mae eich Llywodraeth wedi rhoi gobaith ffug i gleifion â chynlluniau iechyd trawsffiniol nad ydynt yn bodoli, rydych chi hefyd wedi camarwain y sector addysg uwch yr wythnos diwethaf trwy godi disgwyliadau ffug.
Nawr, Weinidog, mae ar brifysgolion Cymru angen gwarant gadarn gennych chi y byddant yn cael y gefnogaeth sydd ei hangen arnynt nid yn unig i oroesi ond i ffynnu. Nawr, rydych chi hefyd yn ailadrodd nad ydych chi'n credu bod unrhyw brifysgolion yng Nghymru mewn perygl o fethu. Ond mae o leiaf bum prifysgol yng Nghymru yn gweithredu cynlluniau diswyddo gwirfoddol pellach neu newydd eu cwblhau. Ac fel y crybwyllais yn flaenorol yn y Siambr, mae'r diffygion cyfunol bellach yn uwch na thua £100 miliwn. Felly, a ydych chi'n cytuno â mi fod rhoi'r argraff ffug fod cefnogaeth ar y ffordd yn erydu hyder y sector? Ni all hyn barhau. Nid yw'n gynaliadwy, ac mae angen i Lywodraeth Cymru gael rheolaeth ar y sefyllfa.
Felly, mae gennyf ddau gwestiwn penodol: yn gyntaf, a ydych chi neu Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Addysg wedi cael trafodaethau drwy ohebiaeth swyddogol gyda CCAUC, Medr, neu brifysgolion unigol Cymru ynghylch y gronfa drawsnewid hon? Ac yn ail, pryd fyddwch chi'n penderfynu pa gefnogaeth, os o gwbl, fydd yn cael ei darparu yn ychwanegol at yr hyn rydych chi newydd ei amlinellu heddiw? Diolch.
Daeth y Dirprwy Lywydd (David Rees) i’r Gadair.
The Deputy Presiding Officer (David Rees) took the Chair.
Thank you, Cefin Campbell, for your supplementary questions there. I'd like to start by saying that I am absolutely committed to supporting a sustainable higher education sector, and by that I mean strong institutions that are able to deliver not just on our ambitions for students and for research but for driving economic growth across Wales as well.
I recognise the financial pressure that our HE institutions in Wales and across the UK, and, indeed, across the globe, are under, but you'll be well aware that, as universities are independent organisations, they are managing their budgets in a range of ways. And I'd add that our student support package for student living costs remains the highest in the UK, which is something I think we should be really proud of here, and that the income that that generates for Welsh institutions per student remains comparable with England and actually higher than that in Scotland and Northern Ireland as well.
You ask if I've had discussions with HEFCW. Well, no I haven't, because they don't exist any more. I've had discussions with Medr, which is the body that's been set up to replace them, and those discussions have been really positive, including a meeting with staff on the ground and a meeting with the board as well as with the chair and the CEO.
You ask if I’ve had discussions with institutions. Yes, I have started that already. As I said in the Chamber just last week, I think it’s really important that I get out there and visit each HE institution in Wales. I’ve started doing that already. I’ve been to the University of South Wales already, and I’m looking forward in the coming weeks to meeting with both Cardiff University and Cardiff Metropolitan University as well.
The conversations that I’ve had so far have been really constructive and there has been a lot of desire for further collaboration within the sector as well, which is something where I see lots of positive work already. And I explained to the Senedd that the Welsh Government is continuing to explore what, if any, potential support mechanisms are feasible to support the sector in Wales.
It is important as well to add that we do not believe that any Welsh institution is at immediate risk of failure. Medr closely monitors institutional finances and advises that there is appropriate liquidity to manage ongoing risks while those important strategic decisions are taken within each independent institution to ensure their ongoing sustainability.
And just to add there, as a final closing remark, I did say that I felt that the sector was really exploring lots of constructive ways forward. And I think that that is summed up by the fact that we’ve got this £20 million decarbonisation fund for the tertiary sector. And we’ve already received £33 million in bids for that. So, I think that that just really sums up how hard the sector is working within these new areas in order to enhance their sustainability.
Diolch am eich cwestiynau atodol, Cefin Campbell. Hoffwn ddechrau drwy ddweud fy mod wedi ymrwymo'n llwyr i gefnogi sector addysg uwch cynaliadwy, ac wrth hynny rwy'n golygu sefydliadau cryf sy'n gallu cyflawni nid yn unig ein huchelgeisiau ni ar gyfer myfyrwyr ac ar gyfer ymchwil ond ar gyfer sbarduno twf economaidd ledled Cymru hefyd.
Rwy'n cydnabod y pwysau ariannol sydd ar ein sefydliadau addysg uwch yng Nghymru ac ar draws y DU, ac ar draws y byd yn wir, ond gan fod prifysgolion yn sefydliadau annibynnol, fe fyddwch chi'n ymwybodol iawn eu bod yn rheoli eu cyllidebau mewn amryw o ffyrdd. Ac fe ychwanegaf fod ein pecyn cymorth i fyfyrwyr ar gyfer costau byw myfyrwyr yn parhau i fod yr uchaf yn y DU, sy'n rhywbeth y credaf y dylem fod yn falch iawn ohono yma, a bod yr incwm y mae hynny'n ei gynhyrchu i sefydliadau Cymru fesul myfyriwr yn parhau i fod yn debyg i Loegr ac yn uwch na'r hyn a geir yn yr Alban a Gogledd Iwerddon hefyd.
Rydych chi'n gofyn a wyf i wedi cael trafodaethau gyda CCAUC. Nac ydw, oherwydd nid ydynt yn bodoli mwyach. Rwyf wedi cael trafodaethau gyda Medr, sef y corff sydd wedi'i sefydlu i gymryd eu lle, ac mae'r trafodaethau hynny wedi bod yn gadarnhaol iawn, gan gynnwys cyfarfod â staff ar lawr gwlad a chyfarfod gyda'r bwrdd yn ogystal â'r cadeirydd a'r prif swyddog gweithredol.
Rydych chi'n gofyn a wyf i wedi cael trafodaethau gyda sefydliadau. Ydw, rwyf eisoes wedi dechrau ar hynny. Fel y dywedais yn y Siambr yr wythnos diwethaf, rwy'n credu ei bod yn bwysig iawn fy mod yn mynd allan ac yn ymweld â phob sefydliad addysg uwch yng Nghymru. Rwyf eisoes wedi dechrau gwneud hynny. Rwyf wedi bod ym Mhrifysgol De Cymru yn barod, ac rwy'n edrych ymlaen yn ystod yr wythnosau nesaf at gyfarfod â Phrifysgol Caerdydd a Phrifysgol Metropolitan Caerdydd hefyd.
Mae'r sgyrsiau a gefais hyd yma wedi bod yn adeiladol iawn ac mae llawer o awydd wedi bod am gydweithio pellach o fewn y sector hefyd, sy'n rhywbeth lle rwy'n gweld llawer o waith cadarnhaol eisoes. Ac eglurais wrth y Senedd fod Llywodraeth Cymru yn parhau i archwilio pa fecanweithiau cymorth posibl, os o gwbl, y gellid eu defnyddio i gefnogi'r sector yng Nghymru.
Mae'n bwysig ychwanegu nad ydym yn credu bod unrhyw sefydliad yng Nghymru mewn perygl uniongyrchol o fethu. Mae Medr yn monitro cyllid sefydliadol yn ofalus ac yn dweud bod hyblygrwydd priodol i reoli risgiau parhaus tra bod y penderfyniadau strategol pwysig yn cael eu gwneud ym mhob sefydliad annibynnol i sicrhau eu cynaliadwyedd parhaus.
Ac os caf ychwanegu fel sylw terfynol i gloi, dywedais fy mod yn teimlo bod y sector o ddifrif yn archwilio llawer o ffyrdd adeiladol ymlaen. Ac rwy'n credu bod hynny'n cael ei grynhoi gan y ffaith bod gennym y gronfa ddatgarboneiddio gwerth £20 miliwn ar gyfer y sector trydyddol. Ac rydym eisoes wedi derbyn £33 miliwn mewn ceisiadau ar gyfer honno. Felly, rwy'n credu bod hynny'n crynhoi pa mor galed y mae'r sector yn gweithio o fewn y meysydd newydd hyn er mwyn gwella eu cynaliadwyedd.
I think Cefin is right: you did give false hope to universities and other institutions across Wales with your statement last week. Within about 24 hours, a fund
'to support our institutions here in Wales, and I'm pleased to say it's going to be a more positive kind of fund...a transformation fund,'
within 24 hours, became
'that the policy in this area remains at a very exploratory stage, and we are still working through what, if any, potential support mechanism may look like...with Medr and institutions.'
And those institutions, obviously, are very clear about the scale of the funding challenge that they face. Cardiff University mentioned a £30 million black hole that it needs to address; Bangor University, a £9 million deficit; Aberystwyth, £15 million; Swansea University is going through 240 voluntary redundancies at the moment. So, it is a sector—I’m sorry to agree with Plaid Cymru—that you have given false hope to.
It is a mess, quite frankly, Minister, and it is a mess that happened just days after the education Cabinet Secretary changed three times in three weeks what the Government’s guidance was on reading in Wales. It does beg the question: does anybody in the education department of the Welsh Government know what they’re doing?
Rwy'n credu bod Cefin yn iawn: fe wnaethoch chi roi gobaith ffug i brifysgolion a sefydliadau eraill ledled Cymru gyda’ch datganiad yr wythnos diwethaf. O fewn tua 24 awr, daeth cronfa
'i gefnogi ein sefydliadau yma yng Nghymru, ac rwy'n falch o ddweud y bydd yn fath mwy cadarnhaol o gronfa…gronfa drawsnewid,'
o fewn 24 awr yn
'megis dechrau yn unig y mae'r gwaith yn y maes polisi hwn ac rydym yn dal i weithio trwy'r hyn y gallai mecanwaith cymorth posibl, os o gwbl, edrych…gyda Medr a sefydliadau eraill.'
Ac mae’r sefydliadau hynny, yn amlwg, yn deall maint yr her ariannu y maent yn ei hwynebu. Soniodd Prifysgol Caerdydd am dwll du o £30 miliwn y mae angen iddi fynd i’r afael ag ef; Prifysgol Bangor, diffyg o £9 miliwn; Aberystwyth, £15 miliwn; mae Prifysgol Abertawe yn mynd drwy 240 o ddiswyddiadau gwirfoddol ar hyn o bryd. Felly, mae'n sector—mae'n gas gennyf gytuno â Phlaid Cymru—yr ydych chi wedi rhoi gobaith ffug iddo.
Mae’n llanast, a dweud y gwir, Weinidog, ac mae’n llanast a ddigwyddodd ddyddiau’n unig ar ôl i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros addysg newid canllawiau’r Llywodraeth ar ddarllen yng Nghymru deirgwaith mewn tair wythnos. Mae'n codi'r cwestiwn: a oes unrhyw un yn adran addysg Llywodraeth Cymru yn gwybod beth y maent yn ei wneud?
Well, thank you, Tom. You may be in the business of hyperbole and cheap political point scoring, but I can assure you that myself and the Cabinet Secretary are in the business of delivering for students across Wales at all ages.
And there is that £197 million of grant funding that we are providing this financial year via Medr to our Welsh universities. You’ll be aware that 90 per cent of university income comes from sources outside of the Welsh Government, and that’s why I’ve already reiterated how important it is that the sector are working within those areas that they have control of, and I do see lots of green shoots there for lots of positive interventions.
The additional £20 million that we’re putting forward for decarbonisation as well, all of that is really important, and so I am quite happy with the direction of travel that we are taking and I look forward to engaging further with the sector in the months to come.
Wel, diolch, Tom. Efallai eich bod yn hoff o ormodiaith a sgorio pwyntiau gwleidyddol rhad, ond gallaf roi sicrwydd i chi fy mod i ac Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn gweithio i gyflawni ar gyfer myfyrwyr o bob oed ledled Cymru.
Ac rydym hefyd yn darparu £197 miliwn o arian grant ar gyfer y flwyddyn ariannol hon drwy Medr i'n prifysgolion yng Nghymru. Fe fyddwch yn ymwybodol fod 90 y cant o incwm prifysgolion yn dod o ffynonellau y tu hwnt i Lywodraeth Cymru, a dyna pam fy mod eisoes wedi ailadrodd pa mor bwysig yw hi fod y sector yn gweithio o fewn y meysydd y mae ganddynt reolaeth drostynt, ac rwy'n gweld llawer o arwyddion yno o lawer o ymyriadau cadarnhaol.
Y £20 miliwn ychwanegol a ddarparwn ar gyfer datgarboneiddio hefyd, mae hynny oll yn bwysig iawn, ac felly rwy'n fodlon iawn ar y cyfeiriad rydym yn mynd iddo, ac edrychaf ymlaen at ymgysylltu ymhellach â'r sector yn y misoedd i ddod.
Diolch i'r Gweinidog.
I thank the Minister.
Eitem 4 heddiw yw'r datganiadau 90 eiliad, a bydd y datganiad cyntaf gan Hannah Blythyn.
Item 4 this afternoon is the 90-second statements and the first statement is from Hannah Blythyn.
Yr wythnos hon, mae’r Wyddgrug yn dathlu Gŵyl Daniel Owen—gŵyl gelfyddydol a llenyddol ddwyieithog wythnos o hyd yn yr Wyddgrug i ddathlu’r awdur Daniel Owen. Mae hi’n cael ei chynnal bob blwyddyn tua diwedd mis Hydref. Daniel Owen yw nofelydd Cymraeg mwyaf blaenllaw'r bedwaredd ganrif ar bymtheg, a chafodd ei eni ym 1836 yn y Wyddgrug. Yn gynharach y mis hwn, roedd yn fraint ymuno â maer yr Wyddgrug, a llu o bobl eraill, i ddadorchuddio plac glas ar y tŷ lle bu’n byw ar un adeg.
Daeth Daniel yn brentis mewn siop teiliwr, a cheir sôn ei fod yn llanc a oedd yn caru llenyddiaeth. Ar ôl treulio amser yn astudio yng Ngholeg y Bala, aeth yn ôl adref i'r Wyddgrug. Cafodd ei nofel gyntaf, Y Dreflan, ei chyhoeddi yn 1881, a dilynodd Rhys Lewis, efallai ei nofel enwocaf, yn 1885, gan olrhain hanes gweinidog. Heddiw, mae Gŵyl Daniel Owen yn cynnwys teithiau cerdded, sgyrsiau, cyfleoedd i ganu a dawnsio, a llawer mwy. Braf oedd gwylio rhai o’r perfformiadau yn Sgwâr Daniel Owen dros y penwythnos. Yn wir, fe wnaeth fy nghi bach fwynhau hefyd, gan siglo ei chynffon i rythm y gerddoriaeth. Roedd yn wych gweld dathliad mor ddiwylliannol ei naws yng nghanol y dref. Hoffwn i ddiolch o galon i bob gwirfoddolwr, a dwi'n edrych ymlaen at weld yr ŵyl yn mynd o nerth i nerth.
This week, Mold is celebrating the Daniel Owen Festival—a week-long bilingual arts and literary festival held in Mold to celebrate the author Daniel Owen. The festival is held every year around the end of October. Daniel Owen is the foremost Welsh novelist of the nineteenth century, and was born in 1836 in Mold. Earlier this month, it was a privilege to join the mayor of Mold, and a whole host of other people, to unveil a blue plaque at the house where he once lived.
Daniel became an apprentice in a tailor's shop, and is said to be a youth who loved literature. Having spent time studying at Bala College, he later returned home to Mold. His first novel, Y Dreflan, was published in 1881, and Rhys Lewis, perhaps his most famous novel, followed in 1885, and tells the story of a minister’s life. Today, the Daniel Owen Festival includes walks, talks, singing and dancing, and more. It was wonderful to watch some of the performances at Daniel Owen Square over the weekend. Indeed, my puppy enjoyed it too—she wagged her tail along with the music. It was fantastic to see such a cultural celebration in the heart of the town. I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to every volunteer, and I look forward to seeing the festival going from strength to strength.
In 1790, a group of people met at the Castle Hotel in Neath, and resolved to build a canal, stretching from Glynneath to Neath. It opened in 1795, and was quickly extended through to the Brunel dock at Briton Ferry, and, in 1824, it was connected to the new Tennant canal, which allowed goods to reach Swansea docks. The Tennant canal celebrates its two-hundredth anniversary this year. At its height, some 200,000 tonnes of coal were carried along this vital artery. However, following the development of the Vale of Neath railway in the mid-nineteenth century, Neath canal steadily lost out and ceased to be used as a means of transporting goods. Revenue for the owners was maintained by supplying water to local industries, but, slowly, parts of the canal were filled in, built over and faded from memory. And now, even those industries have gone.
Today, the Tŷ Banc Canal Group, an amazing volunteer group, have begun working with the owners, St. Modwen, to ensure the canal is preserved for future generations as a vibrant, sustainable, community asset and resource. The Neath canal predates the creation of the modern postage stamp and even the United Kingdom itself. It has seen the industrialisation and de-industrialisation of the communities it runs through. But it has been a constant through centuries of revolution, war and discovery. As Neath canal is about to reach its two-hundred-and-fiftieth birthday over this next year, ours could be the generation to see the canal fade away completely, or ours could be the generation to see the canal renewed and repurposed. Diolch to all the volunteers and groups who are working so hard to ensure that the right choice for the future of the canal is taken.
Ym 1790, cyfarfu grŵp o bobl yng Ngwesty’r Castell yng Nghastell-nedd, a phenderfynwyd adeiladu camlas o Lyn-nedd i Gastell-nedd. Agorodd ym 1795, ac fe’i hymestynnwyd yn fuan wedi hynny i ddoc Brunel yn Llansawel, ac ym 1824, fe’i cysylltwyd â chamlas newydd Tennant, a oedd yn caniatáu i nwyddau gyrraedd dociau Abertawe. Mae camlas Tennant yn dathlu ei daucanmlwyddiant eleni. Ar ei anterth, roedd oddeutu 200,000 tunnell o lo yn cael ei gludo ar hyd y wythïen hanfodol hon. Fodd bynnag, yn dilyn datblygiad rheilffordd Cwm Nedd yng nghanol y bedwaredd ganrif ar bymtheg, defnyddiwyd llai a llai ar gamlas Castell-nedd, a rhoddwyd y gorau i'w defnyddio fel modd o gludo nwyddau. Cafodd y refeniw i’r perchnogion ei gynnal drwy gyflenwi dŵr i ddiwydiannau lleol, ond yn raddol, cafodd rhannau o’r gamlas eu llenwi, adeiladwyd drostynt, a chawsant eu hanghofio. A bellach, mae hyd yn oed y diwydiannau hynny wedi mynd.
Heddiw, mae Grŵp Camlas Tŷ Banc, grŵp gwirfoddol anhygoel, wedi dechrau gweithio gyda'r perchnogion, St. Modwen, i sicrhau bod y gamlas yn cael ei chadw ar gyfer cenedlaethau'r dyfodol fel ased ac adnodd cymunedol bywiog a chynaliadwy. Mae camlas Castell-nedd yn hŷn na'r stamp post modern a hyd yn oed y Deyrnas Unedig ei hun. Mae wedi gweld y cymunedau y mae'n rhedeg drwyddynt yn cael eu diwydiannu a'u dad-ddiwydiannu. Ond mae wedi para drwy ganrifoedd o chwyldro, rhyfeloedd a darganfyddiadau. Gyda chamlas Castell-nedd yn cael ei phen-blwydd yn ddau gant a hanner y flwyddyn nesaf, ein cenhedlaeth ni fydd naill ai'r un sy'n gweld y gamlas yn diflannu'n gyfan gwbl, neu'r genhedlaeth sy'n gweld y gamlas yn cael ei hadnewyddu a'i haddasu at ddibenion gwahanol. Diolch i'r holl wirfoddolwyr a'r grwpiau sy'n gweithio mor galed i sicrhau bod y dewis cywir yn cael ei wneud ar gyfer dyfodol y gamlas.
Ugain mlynedd yn ôl, fe wnaeth criw ohonom ni, o dan arweiniad a chymhelliad Rob Nicholls, ymgynnull yn festri y Tabernacl, Caerdydd, i ffurfio Côr Meibion Taf. Ers hynny, mae’r côr wedi bod yn fuddugol yn y Genedlaethol, eisteddfodau lleol, ac mewn sawl gŵyl gerddorol. Y cerddor amryddawn Steffan Jones yw’r arweinydd bellach, ac, o dan ei faton ef, mae’r côr wedi mynd o nerth i nerth, gyda rhyw 70 o gantorion. Yn gwbl allweddol i lwyddiant y côr y mae Lowri Guy, y cyfeilydd am bron y cyfnod i gyd.
Er nad yw’r côr wedi gorfod gwrando ar fy ymdrechion i i ganu ers sawl blwyddyn bellach, gallaf dystio o hyd, ar lefel bersonol, i garedigrwydd a gofal y côr—yn y llon a’r lleddf. Oherwydd mae Côr Meibion Taf yn fwy na grŵp dysgu nodau. Mae’n gymdeithas o bobl, o arddegwyr i bensiynwyr. Mae’n creu siaradwyr Cymraeg hyderus, maent yno yn gefn i’w gilydd a’u teuluoedd, ac maent wedi llwyddo cefnogi llu o elusennau ac achosion da ar draws yr 20 mlynedd diwethaf. Mae Côr Meibion Taf wedi cyfoethogi cerddoriaeth yng Nghymru, ond, yn fwy na hynny, mae wedi cyfoethogi bywydau cannoedd o aelodau, cyn aelodau, a’u teuluoedd. Diolch am yr 20 mlynedd, Côr Meibion Taf. Llongyfarchiadau i Steff, Lowri a’r bois i gyd, ac ymlaen i’r ddegawd nesaf. Diolch yn fawr.
Twenty years ago, a group of us, led and inspired by Rob Nicholls, assembled in the vestry of Tabernacl chapel in Cardiff to form Côr Meibion Taf. Since then, the choir has been victorious at the National Eisteddfod, local eisteddfods, and in several music festivals. The multitalented musician Steffan Jones now conducts the choir, and, under his baton, it has gone from strength to strength, with around 70 members. Key to the choir’s success is Lowri Guy, the accompanist for almost the entire period.
Although the choir hasn’t had to listen to my attempts at singing for several years now, I can still attest, on a personal level, to the kindness and care the choir offers, in good times and in bad—in major and minor keys. Côr Meibion Taf is more than a group learning notes. It’s a community of people, from teenagers to pensioners. It creates confident Welsh speakers, its members support each other and their families, and it has supported a host of good causes and charities over the past 20 years. Côr Meibion Taf has enriched music-making in Wales, but, more than that, it has enriched the lives of hundreds of its members, former members, and their families. Thank you for the past 20 years, Côr Meibion Taf. Congratulations to Steff, Lowri and all the lads, and onwards to the next decade. Thank you.
Diolch, bawb.
Thank you, all.
Yr eitem nesaf yw dadl Aelodau o dan Reol Sefydlog 11.21(iv): cymorth i farw. Galwaf ar Julie Morgan i wneud y cynnig.
The next item is the Member debate under Standing Order 11.21(iv): assisted dying. I call on Julie Morgan to move the motion.
Cynnig NDM8656 Julie Morgan, Adam Price, James Evans, Heledd Fychan
Cefnogwyd gan Carolyn Thomas, Jenny Rathbone, Mick Antoniw, Rhys ab Owen
Cynnig bod y Senedd:
1. Yn nodi nad yw'r cyfrifoldeb dros ddeddfu i ganiatáu cymorth i farw wedi ei ddatganoli i Gymru, gan ei fod ar hyn o bryd yn fater a gaiff ei lywodraethu gan gyfraith droseddol.
2. Yn nodi, pe bai cymorth i farw yn cael ei gyfreithloni, ac o ystyried ei chyfrifoldeb dros iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol, y byddai angen i Lywodraeth Cymru gael dealltwriaeth fanwl o unrhyw gynigion.
3. Yn credu y dylai oedolyn yn ei lawn bwyll, y mae ganddo gyflwr corfforol annioddefadwy na ellir ei wella ac y mae wedi nodi ei ddymuniad clir a phendant i farw, gael yr opsiwn o gymorth i farw, yn ddarostyngedig i fesurau diogelu cadarn.
4. Yn nodi bod ymchwiliad diweddar gan Bwyllgor Iechyd a Gofal Cymdeithasol San Steffan wedi canfod cysylltiad rhwng cyflwyno cymorth i farw a gwelliant o ran gofal lliniarol mewn sawl awdurdodaeth.
5. Yn nodi bod y Swyddfa Economeg Iechyd wedi canfod, hyd yn oed pe baent yn cael y feddygaeth liniarol orau, y byddai o leiaf 5,000 o bobl y flwyddyn yng Nghymru a Lloegr yn marw heb unrhyw ffordd effeithiol o leddfu eu poen yn eu mis olaf.
6. Yn nodi bod agweddau'r cyhoedd at roi cymorth i farw wedi newid, gyda hyd at 88% o'r cyhoedd yn ffafrio newid y gyfraith.
7. Yn nodi, o ran pobl o'r DU sy'n dioddef, bod mwy nag un yr wythnos bellach yn dewis dod â'u bywyd i ben yn un o ganolfannau diwedd oes y Swistir, a bod llawer yn rhagor a fyddai'n dewis gwneud yr un peth ond sy’n methu â fforddio'r costau uchel perthnasol, sy’n aml ymhell dros £10,000.
8. Yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i:
a) cefnogi egwyddorion cymorth i farw; a
b) cefnogi senedd San Steffan i gyflwyno deddf dosturiol o ran cymorth i farw yng Nghymru a Lloegr.
Motion NDM8656 Julie Morgan, Adam Price, James Evans, Heledd Fychan
Supported by Carolyn Thomas, Jenny Rathbone, Mick Antoniw, Rhys ab Owen
To propose that the Senedd:
1. Notes that responsibility for legislating to allow assisted dying is not devolved to Wales as it is currently a matter governed by criminal law.
2. Notes that if assisted dying were to be legalised, and given its responsibility for health and social care, the Welsh Government would require an in-depth understanding of any proposals.
3. Believes that adults of sound mind who are intolerably suffering from an incurable, physical condition and have a clear and settled wish to die should have the option of an assisted death, subject to robust safeguards.
4. Notes that a recent inquiry by the Westminster Health and Social Care Committee found that the introduction of assisted dying has been linked with an improvement in palliative care in several jurisdictions.
5. Notes that the Office of Health Economics found that even if they received the best possible palliative medicine, in England and Wales at least 5,000 per year would die without any effective pain relief in their final month.
6. Notes that public attitudes towards assisted dying have changed, with up to 88% of the public favouring a change in the law.
7. Notes that more than one suffering person a week from the UK now chooses to end their life at one of the Swiss end-of-life centres, yet many others who would choose the same cannot afford the high costs involved, often well over £10,000.
8. Calls on the Welsh Government to:
a) support the principles of assisted dying; and
b) support Westminster parliament to introduce a compassionate assisted dying law in England and Wales.
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm very pleased to bring forward this Member debate on assisted dying to the Senedd here today, submitted jointly with my cross-party colleagues, James Evans, Heledd Fychan and Adam Price. It’s been 10 years since assisted dying was last debated in the Senedd. A lot has changed since then, so now that the national conversation is ramping up about this, I think it’s absolutely right that we debate this very important issue here in the Senedd, in our Welsh Parliament today. It is a matter of great consequence, and I’m so pleased that we’re able to do this here this afternoon.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Rwy’n falch iawn o gyflwyno’r ddadl Aelodau hon ar gymorth i farw i’r Senedd yma heddiw, dadl a gyd-gyflwynir gan fy nghyd-Aelodau trawsbleidiol, James Evans, Heledd Fychan ac Adam Price. Mae 10 mlynedd ers y tro diwethaf inni drafod cymorth i farw yn y Senedd. Mae llawer wedi newid ers hynny, felly gan fod y sgwrs genedlaethol ynglŷn â hyn yn cynyddu, credaf ei bod yn gwbl briodol ein bod yn cael dadl ar y mater pwysig hwn yma yn Senedd Cymru heddiw. Mae’n fater o bwys mawr, ac rwyf mor falch ein bod yn gallu gwneud hyn yma y prynhawn yma.
And, of course, it’s particularly important in view of the fact that Kim Leadbeater MP’s private Members' Bill on assisted dying has been introduced in Westminster and will be voted on in November. If the vote is won there, the Bill will then go on to the Committee Stage. So, we have no power here to change the law on assisted dying, but because we are responsible for health and social care, we will have to deliver any new law, so we have a big stake in this debate here in this Chamber.
As well as Kim Leadbeater’s private Members' Bill in the Commons, Lord Falconer has a private Members' Bill in the Lords. There’s also one in the Scottish Parliament, introduced by Liam McArthur MSP. The Isle of Man also has a private Members' Bill going through, moving to the upper chamber this autumn, and plans for legalising assisted dying were approved in principle by the Assembly in Jersey earlier this year. So, this debate is coming up everywhere. And, of course, there are 31 jurisdictions around the world that have already legalised assisted dying. From Australia, the Netherlands, to Canada, more and more countries are taking this step forward. So, this debate cannot be ignored.
So, why am I supporting assisted dying? I believe we need to show more compassion to those people who are suffering intolerably from an incurable illness and who have a settled wish to die. At the moment, one person, every eight days, goes from the UK to Dignitas or somewhere similar in Switzerland. Under the present legislation, any relative or friend who assists them are liable for prosecution; they are criminalised. I listened to Sir Max Hill, former director of public prosecutions, who said it was very clear to him that the law is not working. During his period of office, he had 27 people referred to him—relatives of people who had died—and, in 26 cases, he took no further action. These were elderly people, usually in their 70s and their 80s, who had just lost someone very close to them, and he said it took sometimes up to two years for a decision to be made not to prosecute. Imagine having that hanging over you at a time of great loss. What a cruel law. Surely we can do better than that.
Many of you will have spoken to Sue Lawford, who’s spoken publicly, and has vividly described police action taken against her after she accompanied Sharon Johnston from Cardigan to Dignitas—Sue Lawford from Cardiff, who vividly describes the horror and the upset she experienced after she helped Sharon Johnston to go to Dignitas. This, I believe, must be a decision by Parliament rather than by an individual director of public prosecutions, which happens at the moment. The law is not clear, and I want to have a more compassionate law, so that families do not suffer in this way, that we do diminish that suffering. I think it is our duty to look at doing this.
I also believe that we need to show our compassion by increasing our support for the hospice movement. For many years, I have been closely associated with the hospice movement, and I was the vice president of a local hospice in Cardiff North, which provides care at home, for many years. And there is no way that wanting a change in the law diminishes the importance of the hospice movement. In fact, in some countries where assisted dying has been introduced, the amount of money spent on the hospices has increased. It is not one or the other. And the very in-depth report done by the Health and Social Care Committee in Westminster has shown this clearly. It’s not one or the other, and support for this Bill does not indicate any lack of support for the hospice movement. Our hospices are fantastic, born out of the charity sector, and now playing a major role with the NHS to provide end-of-life care.
And, of course, at the moment, the cost involved in having an assisted death and travelling to Dignitas is prohibitive, with the average cost being between £10,000 and £15,000. This means it is only an option for the wealthy. It is very distressing that people are forced to do this and only people who can afford it are able to do it. We must try to do something about it. Also, people are travelling to Dignitas while they feel well enough to get there, because they have to take that into account. The other big issue is the very great difficulty of having a proper funeral or a burial for somebody who had to leave the country. So, this is being forced on people because we haven’t properly addressed the law.
I know there are many different views on this subject, and I absolutely respect the views of everybody in this room. I think it’s absolutely right that we have a conscience vote on this, but I think that some of the reasons that come up—. It has been mentioned to me quite a lot about the idea that it is a slippery slope, and it will extend to people with lack of mental capacity or disabled people, for example. I absolutely respect those views, and I think those fears must be addressed, but I do believe it is possible to provide strong legal and medical safeguards.
We must ensure that at least two doctors are involved and present when assisted dying takes place—one with an expertise in assisted dying, another in the particular illness the person has. Everything should be recorded, and proper processes followed. And we’re able to learn from other countries and their practices. We have got 31 countries already doing this. There’s so much that we can learn to bring in the best possible law.
Also, lots of people say, ‘This will be the sort of law that disabled people will reject’, but I think it’s important to remember that, in many ways, disabled people have led the campaign for assisted dying. If you think of Tony Nicklinson who suffered from locked-in syndrome, he could only move his head and his eyes, and he had wanted to end his life for many years. He went to the High Court to ask for assistance for him to die. That was refused. Tony died shortly afterwards after refusing food and water.
Then there’s Debbie Purdy who had MS. She argued it was against her human rights not to know if her husband would be prosecuted if he went abroad with her to die. She won her case and the DPP was ordered to produce clearer guidance on who would not be prosecuted. Of course, there are also disabled people working for and leading pro-assisted dying organisations.
So, what evidence do we have of the views of the public? In every survey taken on legalising assisted dying in the UK, the majority of people are now supportive. There was a citizen jury that took place in England last year, and 26 out of 28 jurors voted in favour. There has been a move in public attitudes. The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, is in favour of assisted dying, saying that
'Doing whatever we can to relieve needless suffering and bring peace is a profoundly Christian act.'
In the medical profession, the royal colleges have taken the decision to have a neutral stance. The BMA has dropped its opposition and is now taking a neutral stance.
Bringing about assisted dying in the UK is not something that should be taken lightly or rushed. It’s important that we have these debates where everyone is able to air their views. My belief is that we should be able to reach a legislative result that will address all the concerns that many people feel but will enable us to provide a much more humane system. I look forward to the debate. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Ac wrth gwrs, mae'n arbennig o bwysig o ystyried y ffaith bod Bil Aelod preifat Kim Leadbeater AS ar gymorth i farw wedi'i gyflwyno yn San Steffan ac y bydd pleidlais yn cael ei chynnal arno ym mis Tachwedd. Os bydd y bleidlais honno'n llwyddo, bydd y Bil wedyn yn mynd yn ei flaen i’r Cyfnod Pwyllgor. Felly, nid oes gennym unrhyw bŵer yma i newid y gyfraith ar gymorth i farw, ond gan ein bod yn gyfrifol am iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol, ein lle ni fydd gweithredu unrhyw gyfraith newydd, felly mae llawer yn y fantol i ni yn y ddadl yma yn y Siambr hon.
Yn ogystal â Bil Aelod preifat Kim Leadbeater yn Nhŷ’r Cyffredin, mae gan yr Arglwydd Falconer Fil Aelod preifat yn Nhŷ’r Arglwyddi. Mae un hefyd yn Senedd yr Alban, a gyflwynwyd gan Liam McArthur ASA. Mae gan Ynys Manaw hefyd Fil Aelod preifat yn mynd rhagddo, a bydd yn symud i’r siambr uchaf yr hydref hwn, a chymeradwywyd cynlluniau ar gyfer cyfreithloni cymorth i farw mewn egwyddor gan y Cynulliad yn Jersey yn gynharach eleni. Felly, mae’r ddadl hon yn codi ym mhobman. Ac wrth gwrs, mae 31 o awdurdodaethau ledled y byd eisoes wedi cyfreithloni cymorth i farw. O Awstralia, yr Iseldiroedd, i Ganada, mae mwy a mwy o wledydd yn cymryd y cam hwn ymlaen. Felly, ni ellir anwybyddu’r ddadl hon.
Felly, pam fy mod i'n cefnogi cymorth i farw? Credaf fod angen inni ddangos mwy o dosturi at y bobl hynny sy’n dioddef salwch annioddefol na ellir ei wella ac sydd â dymuniad pendant i farw. Ar hyn o bryd, mae un unigolyn, bob wyth diwrnod, yn mynd o'r DU i Dignitas neu rywle tebyg yn y Swistir. O dan y ddeddfwriaeth bresennol, mae unrhyw berthynas neu ffrind sy'n eu cynorthwyo yn agored i gael eu herlyn; cânt eu troseddoli. Gwrandewais ar Syr Max Hill, y cyn gyfarwyddwr erlyniadau cyhoeddus, a ddywedodd ei bod yn amlwg iawn iddo nad yw’r gyfraith yn gweithio. Yn ei gyfnod yn y swydd, cyfeiriwyd 27 o bobl ato—perthnasau pobl a fu farw—ac mewn 26 o achosion, ni chymerodd unrhyw gamau pellach. Pobl oedrannus oedd y rhain, yn eu 70au a’u 80au fel arfer, a oedd newydd golli rhywun agos iawn, a dywedodd ei bod yn cymryd hyd at ddwy flynedd weithiau i wneud penderfyniad i beidio ag erlyn. Dychmygwch hynny'n crogi uwch eich pen ar adeg o golled. Am gyfraith greulon. Gallwn wneud yn well na hynny.
Bydd llawer ohonoch wedi siarad â Sue Lawford, sydd wedi siarad yn gyhoeddus, ac sydd wedi disgrifio’r camau a gymerwyd gan yr heddlu yn ei herbyn ar ôl iddi fynd gyda Sharon Johnston o Aberteifi i Dignitas—Sue Lawford o Gaerdydd, sy’n disgrifio’r arswyd a’r gofid a wynebodd ar ôl helpu Sharon Johnston i fynd i Dignitas. Credaf fod yn rhaid i hyn fod yn benderfyniad gan y Senedd yn hytrach na chan gyfarwyddwr erlyniadau cyhoeddus unigol, fel sy’n digwydd ar hyn o bryd. Nid yw’r gyfraith yn glir, a hoffwn gael cyfraith fwy tosturiol, fel na fydd teuluoedd yn dioddef fel hyn, fel ein bod yn lleihau’r dioddefaint hwnnw. Credaf ei bod yn ddyletswydd arnom i edrych ar wneud hyn.
Rwy'n credu hefyd fod angen inni ddangos ein tosturi drwy gynyddu ein cefnogaeth i’r mudiad hosbis. Ers blynyddoedd lawer, rwyf wedi ymwneud yn agos â’r mudiad hosbis, ac am flynyddoedd lawer, bûm yn is-lywydd hosbis leol yng Ngogledd Caerdydd sy’n darparu gofal yn y cartref. Ac nid yw'r awydd i newid y gyfraith yn lleihau pwysigrwydd y mudiad hosbis mewn unrhyw ffordd. Mewn gwirionedd, mewn rhai gwledydd lle mae cymorth i farw wedi’i gyflwyno, mae’r arian sy’n cael ei wario ar yr hosbisau wedi cynyddu. Nid yw'n fater o'r naill neu'r llall. Ac mae’r adroddiad manwl iawn gan y Pwyllgor Iechyd a Gofal Cymdeithasol yn San Steffan wedi dangos hyn yn glir. Nid yw’n fater o'r naill neu'r llall, ac nid yw cefnogaeth i’r Bil hwn yn dynodi unrhyw ddiffyg cefnogaeth i’r mudiad hosbis. Mae ein hosbisau’n wych, yn deillio o’r sector elusennol, a bellach yn chwarae rhan bwysig gyda’r GIG i ddarparu gofal diwedd oes.
Ac wrth gwrs, ar hyn o bryd, mae'r gost o gael cymorth i farw a theithio i Dignitas yn ormodol, gyda'r gost gyfartalog rhwng £10,000 a £15,000. Golyga hyn mai dim ond opsiwn i'r cyfoethog ydyw. Mae’n peri cryn ofid fod pobl yn cael eu gorfodi i wneud hyn, ac mai dim ond pobl a all ei fforddio sy’n gallu ei wneud. Mae'n rhaid inni geisio gwneud rhywbeth yn ei gylch. Hefyd, mae pobl yn teithio i Dignitas tra'u bod yn dal i deimlo'n ddigon da i gyrraedd yno, gan fod rhaid iddynt ystyried hynny. Y broblem mawr arall yw'r anhawster mawr i gael angladd neu gladdedigaeth addas i rywun y bu'n rhaid iddynt adael y wlad. Felly, mae hyn yn cael ei orfodi ar bobl am nad ydym wedi rhoi sylw priodol i’r gyfraith.
Gwn fod llawer o safbwyntiau gwahanol ar y pwnc hwn, ac rwy’n parchu barn pawb yn yr ystafell hon yn llwyr. Credaf ei bod yn iawn ein bod yn cael pleidlais gydwybod ar hyn, ond credaf fod rhai o’r rhesymau sy’n codi—. Rwyf wedi clywed llawer o sôn am y syniad ei fod yn llethr llithrig, ac y bydd yn ymestyn i bobl â diffyg galluedd meddyliol neu bobl anabl, er enghraifft. Rwy’n parchu’r safbwyntiau hynny’n llwyr, a chredaf fod yn rhaid cydnabod yr ofnau hynny, ond rwy'n credu ei bod yn bosibl darparu mesurau diogelu cyfreithiol a meddygol cryf.
Mae'n rhaid inni sicrhau bod o leiaf ddau feddyg yn cymryd rhan ac yn bresennol pan fydd rhywun yn cael cymorth i farw—un ag arbenigedd mewn cymorth i farw, un arall yn y salwch penodol sydd gan yr unigolyn. Dylid cofnodi popeth, a dylid dilyn prosesau priodol. A gallwn ddysgu gan wledydd eraill a'u harferion. Mae gennym 31 o wledydd eisoes yn gwneud hyn. Mae cymaint y gallwn ei ddysgu i gyflwyno'r gyfraith orau sy'n bosibl.
Hefyd, mae llawer o bobl yn dweud, 'Dyma’r math o gyfraith y bydd pobl anabl yn ei gwrthod’, ond rwy'n credu ei bod hi'n bwysig cofio bod pobl anabl, mewn sawl ffordd, wedi arwain yr ymgyrch dros gymorth i farw. Os meddyliwch am Tony Nicklinson, a oedd yn dioddef o syndrom cloi i mewn, ni allai ond symud ei ben a’i lygaid, ac roedd wedi dymuno dod â’i fywyd i ben ers blynyddoedd lawer. Aeth i'r Uchel Lys i ofyn am gymorth i farw. Gwrthodwyd hynny. Bu farw Tony yn fuan wedyn ar ôl gwrthod bwyd a dŵr.
Wedyn mae achos Debbie Purdy a oedd ag MS. Dadleuodd na fyddai gwybod a fyddai ei gŵr yn cael ei erlyn pe bai'n mynd dramor gyda hi i farw yn mynd yn groes i'w hawliau dynol. Enillodd ei hachos, a gorchmynnwyd y cyfarwyddwr erlyniadau cyhoeddus i gynhyrchu canllawiau cliriach ar bwy na fyddai'n cael eu herlyn. Wrth gwrs, mae pobl anabl hefyd yn arwain ac yn gweithio i sefydliadau sydd o blaid cymorth i farw.
Felly, pa dystiolaeth sydd gennym o farn y cyhoedd? Ym mhob arolwg a gynhaliwyd ar gyfreithloni cymorth i farw yn y DU, mae'r rhan fwyaf o bobl yn gefnogol bellach. Cynhaliwyd rheithgor dinasyddion yn Lloegr y llynedd, a phleidleisiodd 26 o'r 28 o reithwyr o'i blaid. Mae newid wedi bod yn agweddau'r cyhoedd. Mae cyn Archesgob Caergaint, yr Arglwydd Carey, o blaid cymorth i farw, ac mae'n dweud bod
'Gwneud yr hyn a allwn i leddfu dioddefaint diangen a dod â heddwch yn weithred Gristnogol iawn.'
Yn y proffesiwn meddygol, mae'r colegau brenhinol wedi penderfynu arddel safbwynt niwtral. Mae Cymdeithas Feddygol Prydain wedi rhoi'r gorau i'w gwrthwynebiad a bellach mae ganddynt safbwynt niwtral.
Nid yw cyflwyno cymorth i farw yn y DU yn rhywbeth y dylid ei gymryd yn ysgafn neu ei ruthro. Mae'n bwysig ein bod yn cael y dadleuon hyn lle gall pawb leisio'u barn. Fy nghred i yw y dylem allu cyrraedd canlyniad deddfwriaethol a fydd yn mynd i’r afael â’r holl bryderon y mae llawer o bobl yn eu teimlo ond a fydd yn ein galluogi i ddarparu system lawer mwy trugarog. Edrychaf ymlaen at y ddadl. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
I have many Members who wish to speak in this debate. I hope to call all Members, but I ask each Member speaking, first of all, to ensure you keep to your time, please, and I will not be accepting any requests for any other Members to speak, because the list is already full.
Mae gennyf lawer o Aelodau sy’n dymuno siarad yn y ddadl hon. Rwy'n gobeithio galw ar bob Aelod, ond gofynnaf i bob Aelod sy’n siarad sicrhau, yn gyntaf oll, eich bod yn cadw at eich amser, os gwelwch yn dda, ac ni fyddaf yn derbyn unrhyw geisiadau i unrhyw Aelodau eraill siarad, gan fod y rhestr eisoes yn llawn.
I’d like to start my contribution to this debate by highlighting in the strongest possible terms my deep concern and opposition to this motion. It has been repeatedly proven that assisted dying laws, when introduced, descend quickly into a range of problems, from coercion by relatives to the hand-picking of specific doctors willing to euthanise. It would, I believe, set a dangerous precedent and lead to a catalogue of unintended consequences if it was introduced into the UK. I appreciate that this is a very emotive subject, and I, therefore, want to focus my contribution on the evidence.
Unlike many other countries, every person in the UK has the right to high-quality palliative care, and the right to express their wishes about how they wish to receive it. There is a clear difference between what we have here in the UK and what other countries offer in terms of palliative care. I believe that this very much skews the thinking and, perhaps, the reasoning in support of assisted dying. For instance, we find that in Canada less than 30 per cent of Canadians have access to high-quality hospice palliative care, and that access to hospice palliative care is not considered a fundamental healthcare right. In the Netherlands, palliative care is not a distinct medical speciality, but it is incorporated into general hospital care, which is typically focused on diagnosis, treatment and discharge. Studies of this system have shown that the needs of dying patients are unmet, and that there are serious deficiencies in the quality of their care. In New Zealand, the right to access palliative care has only now, in October 2024, been introduced by a private member's Bill.
In terms of unintended consequences, one of the outcomes we cannot prevent is that once this door of assisted dying is open, there's no stopping future generations of politicians from adversely reforming the legislation. Evidence has shown that in those countries that have introduced assisted dying there is a trend to broaden the eligibility criteria. It has been expanded in the Netherlands and Belgium to include children, and, in Canada, from 2027, they will allow people suffering solely from mental health issues with no physical condition at all. According to data from Canada, 17.1 per cent of those assessed for assisted dying in 2022 cited loneliness or isolation as the reason for their suffering.
There's growing evidence that people are gaining access to assisted dying because of financial issues. It was revealed in post-assisted dying investigations that a 41-year-old woman who was euthanised in 2021 after telling doctors she could no longer stand the pain caused by her fibromyalgia had told friends in private that she actually wanted to die because she was so poor. There's another case where a 61-year-old man was euthanised even though the only health problem listed on his application was hearing loss. That should be a massive red flag to the dangers of introducing assisted dying legislation. [Interruption.] People are accessing it for the wrong reasons—
Hoffwn ddechrau fy nghyfraniad i’r ddadl hon drwy nodi yn y termau cryfaf posibl fy mhryder dwfn a fy ngwrthwynebiad i’r cynnig hwn. Mae wedi'i brofi dro ar ôl tro fod cyfreithiau cymorth i farw, pan gânt eu cyflwyno, yn creu llu o broblemau bron yn syth, o orfodaeth gan berthnasau i ddethol meddygon penodol sy’n barod i ewthaneiddio. Credaf y byddai'n gosod cynsail peryglus ac yn arwain at gyfres o ganlyniadau anfwriadol pe bai’n cael ei gyflwyno i’r DU. Rwy'n sylweddoli bod hwn yn bwnc emosiynol iawn, ac felly rwyf am ganolbwyntio ar y dystiolaeth yn fy nghyfraniad.
Yn wahanol i lawer o wledydd eraill, mae gan bob unigolyn yn y DU hawl i ofal lliniarol o ansawdd uchel, a hawl i fynegi eu dymuniadau ynghylch sut y maent yn dymuno ei dderbyn. Mae gwahaniaeth amlwg rhwng yr hyn sydd gennym yma yn y DU a’r hyn y mae gwledydd eraill yn ei gynnig o ran gofal lliniarol. Credaf fod hyn yn gogwyddo’r meddylfryd, ac efallai, y rhesymeg o blaid cymorth i farw. Er enghraifft, gwelwn yng Nghanada fod gan lai na 30 y cant o ddinasyddion Canada fynediad at ofal lliniarol hosbis o ansawdd uchel, ac nad yw mynediad at ofal lliniarol hosbis yn cael ei ystyried yn hawl gofal iechyd sylfaenol. Yn yr Iseldiroedd, nid yw gofal lliniarol yn arbenigedd meddygol penodol, ond mae wedi'i ymgorffori mewn gofal ysbyty cyffredinol, sydd fel arfer yn canolbwyntio ar ddiagnosis, triniaeth a rhyddhau. Mae astudiaethau o'r system hon wedi dangos nad yw anghenion cleifion sy'n marw yn cael eu diwallu, a bod diffygion difrifol yn ansawdd eu gofal. Yn Seland Newydd, dim ond nawr, ym mis Hydref 2024, y mae’r hawl i fynediad at ofal lliniarol wedi’i gyflwyno gan Fil aelod preifat.
O ran canlyniadau anfwriadol, un o'r canlyniadau na allwn eu hatal pan fydd drws cymorth i farw ar agor yw nad oes modd o atal cenedlaethau'r dyfodol o wleidyddion rhag diwygio'r ddeddfwriaeth yn andwyol. Mae tystiolaeth wedi dangos bod tuedd yn y gwledydd sydd wedi cyflwyno cymorth i farw i ehangu’r meini prawf cymhwysedd. Maent wedi’u hehangu yn yr Iseldiroedd a Gwlad Belg i gynnwys plant, ac yng Nghanada, o 2027 ymlaen, byddant yn caniatáu i bobl sy’n dioddef o broblemau iechyd meddwl yn unig, heb unrhyw gyflwr corfforol o gwbl, gael cymorth i farw. Yn ôl data o Ganada, nododd 17.1 y cant o’r rhai a aseswyd ar gyfer cymorth i farw yn 2022 unigrwydd neu ynysigrwydd fel y rheswm dros eu dioddefaint.
Ceir tystiolaeth gynyddol fod pobl yn cael mynediad at gymorth i farw oherwydd problemau ariannol. Datgelwyd mewn ymchwiliadau yn sgil achosion o gymorth i farw fod dynes 41 oed a gafodd ei hewthaneiddio yn 2021 ar ôl dweud wrth feddygon na allai ddioddef y boen a gâi ei hachosi gan ei ffibromyalgia wedi dweud wrth ffrindiau yn breifat mai'r rheswm go iawn pam y dymunai farw oedd am ei bod mor dlawd. Ceir achos arall lle cafodd dyn 61 oed ei ewthaneiddio er mai'r unig broblem iechyd a restrwyd ar ei gais oedd colled clyw. Dylai hynny fod yn faner goch enfawr i beryglon cyflwyno deddfwriaeth cymorth i farw. [Torri ar draws.] Mae pobl yn cael mynediad ato am y rhesymau anghywir—
Joel, will you give way to Lee Waters?
Joel, a wnewch chi ildio i Lee Waters?
Thank you. These examples you're citing are not examples that would fall within the legislation that's being discussed in the UK at the moment, are they?
Diolch. Nid yw'r enghreifftiau rydych chi'n eu dyfynnu yn enghreifftiau a fyddai'n berthnasol i'r ddeddfwriaeth sy'n cael ei thrafod yn y DU ar hyn o bryd.
Thank you for that intervention, Lee. What I'm trying to highlight, regardless, is that, at one point, the legislation was different to what has now happened in those countries. At every opportunity, that has changed, and my concern is that if this legislation was introduced into the UK, at some point, 10 years, five years or 20 years down the line, that criteria would be broadened.
However, my biggest concern and one that has been frequently communicated to me by constituents is that by introducing assisted dying you change the narrative from how we can provide the best possible care for someone dying to at what point do they become a burden, financially or otherwise, to the state, to their family or to their carers. Those with disabilities are often and frequently forgotten about—I've had to remind Government Members here in this Chamber to even mention them in their statements—and are terrified by the prospect of assisted dying being introduced here, because society would instinctively move to make a value judgment on their life, which is something they've already had to contend with when trying to find employment or access to services.
Dirprwy Lywydd, the internal feeling of being a burden is what elderly and disabled people have to live with on a daily basis. The external pressure they would feel from others to decide what the value of their life or death would be would be unbearable. It would be presumed that those with disabilities, particularly cognitive disabilities or those who are old and infirm, are better off dead. Evidence from other countries where assisted dying has been brought in shows that many disabled and older people fear that to show any signs of weakness, melancholy, frustration with their condition, or the fact that they may be struggling, affirms that they are no longer of any value and that they wish to die.
We all want the same for those who are suffering: dignity and compassion. But euthanasia is not the way, when there's so much evidence showing that not only eligibility criteria but the value society places on our most vulnerable quickly changes. Whilst I support the Members in raising this debate, especially given an assisted dying Bill is to be debated in Westminster, I cannot disagree with it more, and I, therefore, encourage everyone here to vote against it. Thank you.
Diolch am eich ymyriad, Lee. Yr hyn rwy'n ceisio ei nodi, er hynny, yw bod y ddeddfwriaeth, ar un adeg, yn wahanol i’r hyn sydd wedi digwydd yn y gwledydd hynny erbyn hyn. Ar bob cyfle, mae hynny wedi newid, a phe bai’r ddeddfwriaeth hon yn cael ei chyflwyno yn y DU, ar ryw adeg, 10 mlynedd, pum mlynedd neu 20 mlynedd yn ddiweddarach, fy mhryder i yw y byddai’r meini prawf hynny’n cael eu hehangu.
Fodd bynnag, fy mhryder mwyaf ac un sydd wedi’i gyfleu’n aml i mi gan etholwyr yw eich bod, drwy gyflwyno cymorth i farw, yn newid y naratif o sut y gallwn ddarparu’r gofal gorau posibl i rywun sy’n marw i pa bryd y dônt yn faich, yn ariannol neu fel arall, ar y wladwriaeth, ar eu teulu neu ar eu gofalwyr. Mae pobl ag anableddau yn cael eu hanghofio’n aml—rwyf wedi gorfod atgoffa Aelodau’r Llywodraeth yma yn y Siambr hon i'w crybwyll yn eu datganiadau—a chânt eu brawychu gan y posibilrwydd o gymorth i farw yn cael ei gyflwyno yma, gan y byddai cymdeithas yn symud yn reddfol i ffurfio barn ar werth eu bywydau, sy'n rhywbeth y maent eisoes wedi gorfod ymgodymu ag ef wrth geisio dod o hyd i waith neu fynediad at wasanaethau.
Ddirprwy Lywydd, y teimlad mewnol o fod yn faich yw'r hyn y mae'n rhaid i bobl oedrannus a phobl anabl fyw gydag ef bob dydd. Byddai'r pwysau allanol y byddent yn ei deimlo gan eraill i benderfynu beth fyddai gwerth eu bywyd neu eu marwolaeth yn annioddefol. Byddai pobl yn cymryd bod pobl ag anableddau, yn enwedig anableddau gwybyddol neu bobl sy'n hen ac yn eiddil, yn well eu byd pe baent yn marw. Mae tystiolaeth o wledydd eraill lle mae cymorth i farw wedi’i gyflwyno yn dangos bod llawer o bobl anabl a hŷn yn ofni bod dangos unrhyw arwyddion o wendid, iselder ysbryd, rhwystredigaeth ynghylch eu cyflwr, neu’r ffaith y gallent fod yn ei chael hi’n anodd, yn cadarnhau nad ydynt o unrhyw werth mwyach a'u bod yn dymuno marw.
Mae pob un ohonom yn dymuno'r un peth i bobl sy'n dioddef: urddas a thosturi. Ond nid ewthanasia yw'r ffordd, pan fo cymaint o dystiolaeth yn dangos nid yn unig fod y meini prawf cymhwysedd yn newid yn gyflym ond hefyd y gwerth y mae cymdeithas yn ei roi ar ein pobl fwyaf agored i niwed. Er fy mod o blaid gweld yr Aelodau'n codi’r ddadl hon, yn enwedig o ystyried bod Bil cymorth i farw i’w drafod yn San Steffan, rwy'n anghytuno'n llwyr ag ef, ac felly rwy'n annog pawb yma i bleidleisio yn ei erbyn. Diolch.
This is, I know, a debate prompted by compassion: the desire not to see someone we love suffer. It's an instinct I understand utterly, and I empathise with those proposing it, but I will be voting against the motion. I too am motivated here by compassion, I think we all are, because nearly everyone who approaches this debate will do so through the lens of the last moments of someone they love, someone they've seen suffer, someone whose pain they've wanted desperately to lessen. How could anyone disagree with that?
My contention, though, is that we must also look at this through the lens of those not surrounded by people they love: those marginalised, pushed to the sidelines by society—those people who could be placed under pressure in a future that is horrifyingly near at hand to end their lives because the necessary palliative care is not available, or because they feel themselves to be a burden.
My fear with this motion—well, my terror, really—is not so much with how it will begin as with how it will end. There are safeguards in what is being proposed in Westminster, indeed there are, but every precedent we see internationally shows that no safeguard is sacrosanct; the experiences of Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium and some states in the US show what can so easily, so inevitably, happen. Laws are first introduced for people who are terminally ill, as is being proposed in Westminster, and bit by bit, the safeguards have been eroded so that now people with depression, with anorexia, and many other non-terminal disorders can qualify—disorders from which people can recover, lives that will have been ended that might have got better.
But more worryingly than that normalisation is how quickly the vulnerable in those societies felt and were at risk. In the US state of Oregon, over 47 per cent of people who ended their lives cited as a reason the fact that they didn't want to be a burden on their families or care givers, and I fear those changes will be inevitable if the Bill in Westminster passes, because courts in those places have felt obliged to extend the rights given to some citizens. To others, it becomes a macabre certainty; there will be no turning back from it.
The debate around assisted dying is often presented understandably—utterly understandably—as a way of offering people a choice, but for many disabled people or people who are not close to their family, people who are worried and anxious and lonely, it would lead to them feeling they have no choice but to end their life. That's exactly what Tanni Grey-Thompson has warned about: the sense that some people will get that their lives will matter less, or that because of the high costs of their care, it would be selfish to stay on. I do not mean this as scaremongering; it is a reflection of what has happened in other parts of the world that have opened the door a crack and have had it blown open, never to be able to close it. It's why Nicola Sturgeon said earlier this year she'd moved away from supporting assisted dying because of all these quiet, terrifying inevitabilities.
A former Archbishop of Canterbury has drawn headlines recently in this debate by saying there is nothing holy about agony. Indeed, there is not. But neither would there be anything kind in causing people to feel they have no choice, because in a debate of this nature, a debate of such fundamental consequence, we have to think not just of its intentions, but likely effect, of all the lives of the people we will never meet, but who will be affected fatally by this decision.
This is probably the most difficult debate I've had to speak in since being in this Senedd. I did feel I had to speak. It's difficult because I can understand so utterly why so many people want this change; I do truly understand that, I feel it in my heart. But the terror I feel about this is not some trifling thing. It is a future that I see not as merely a worst-case scenario, but the only final scenario: a future where few safeguards remain, where there is investment that is lessened in palliative care, instead of increasing it as we should be, and where desperate people feel obliged to take a step they can never take back. It is for these reasons, Dirprwy Lywydd, that I felt compelled to speak, with every respect and empathy for those who propose it, but it is also why I feel compelled to vote against it.
Gwn fod hon yn ddadl a ysgogwyd gan dosturi: yr awydd i beidio â gweld rhywun a garwn yn dioddef. Mae'n reddf rwy'n ei deall yn llwyr, ac rwy'n cydymdeimlo â'r rhai sy'n ei chynnig, ond byddaf yn pleidleisio yn erbyn y cynnig. Rwyf innau hefyd yn cael fy ysgogi yma gan dosturi, credaf fod hynny'n wir am bob un ohonom, gan y bydd bron bawb sy’n cyfrannu at y ddadl hon yn gwneud hynny drwy lens eiliadau olaf rhywun y maent yn eu caru, rhywun y maent wedi’u gweld yn dioddef, rhywun y maent wedi ysu am allu lleihau eu poen. Sut y gallai unrhyw un anghytuno â hynny?
Fy nadl i, serch hynny, yw bod yn rhaid inni edrych ar hyn hefyd drwy lens y rhai nad ydynt wedi’u hamgylchynu gan bobl y maent yn eu caru: y rhai sydd ar y cyrion, wedi eu gwthio i’r ymylon gan gymdeithas—pobl a allai ddod o dan bwysau mewn dyfodol sy’n arswydus o agos i ddod â’u bywydau i ben am nad yw’r gofal lliniarol angenrheidiol ar gael, neu am eu bod yn teimlo eu bod yn faich.
Mae fy ofn ynghylch y cynnig hwn—wel, fy arswyd, a dweud y gwir—yn ymwneud mwy â sut y bydd pethau yn y pen draw na sut y byddant ar y cychwyn. Mae mesurau diogelu yn yr hyn sy'n cael ei gynnig yn San Steffan, oes yn wir, ond mae pob cynsail rhyngwladol a welwn yn dangos nad oes unrhyw fesur diogelu yn dragwyddol; mae profiadau Canada, yr Iseldiroedd, Gwlad Belg a rhai taleithiau yn yr UDA yn dangos beth a all ddigwydd mor hawdd, mor anochel. Mae cyfreithiau’n cael eu cyflwyno gyntaf ar gyfer pobl â salwch angheuol, fel sy’n cael ei gynnig yn San Steffan, ac o dipyn i beth, mae’r mesurau diogelu wedi’u herydu fel y gall pobl ag iselder, anorecsia, a llawer o anhwylderau eraill nad ydynt yn angheuol fod yn gymwys bellach—anhwylderau y gall pobl wella ohonynt, bywydau a allai fod wedi gwella wedi dod i ben.
Ond yr hyn sy'n peri mwy o bryder na'r normaleiddio hwnnw yw pa mor gyflym y teimlai'r bobl fregus yn y cymdeithasau hynny eu bod mewn perygl. Yn nhalaith Oregon yn yr Unol Daleithiau, nododd dros 47 y cant o’r bobl a ddaeth â’u bywydau i ben y ffaith nad oeddent am fod yn faich ar eu teuluoedd a’u gofalwyr fel rheswm, ac rwy’n ofni y bydd y newidiadau hynny’n anochel os bydd y Bil yn San Steffan yn cael ei dderbyn, gan fod llysoedd yn y mannau hynny wedi teimlo rheidrwydd i ymestyn yr hawliau a roddir i rai dinasyddion. I eraill, bydd yn dod yn sicrwydd erchyll; ni fydd troi'n ôl oddi wrtho.
Mae’r ddadl ynghylch cymorth i farw yn aml yn cael ei chyflwyno, yn ddealladwy—yn gwbl ddealladwy—fel ffordd o gynnig dewis i bobl, ond i lawer o bobl anabl neu bobl nad ydynt yn agos at eu teuluoedd, pobl sy’n bryderus ac yn ofidus ac yn unig, byddai’n arwain at y teimlad nad oes ganddynt ddewis ond dod â'u bywydau i ben. Dyna’n union y mae Tanni Grey-Thompson wedi rhybuddio yn ei gylch: yr ymdeimlad y bydd rhai pobl yn ei gael fod eu bywydau yn llai pwysig, neu oherwydd costau uchel eu gofal, y byddai’n hunanol aros yn fyw. Nid wyf yn ceisio codi bwganod; mae'n adlewyrchiad o'r hyn sydd wedi digwydd mewn rhannau eraill o'r byd sydd wedi agor y drws fymryn ac wedi'i weld yn chwythu led y pen, a dim modd o'i gau. Dyna pam y dywedodd Nicola Sturgeon yn gynharach eleni ei bod wedi rhoi'r gorau i gefnogi cymorth i farw oherwydd yr holl bethau anochel tawel a brawychus hyn.
Mae cyn Archesgob Caergaint wedi cael sylw yn y penawdau yn ddiweddar yn y ddadl hon drwy ddweud nad oes unrhyw beth yn sanctaidd ynghylch poen. Mae hynny'n berffaith wir. Ond ni fyddai unrhyw beth yn garedig ychwaith mewn achosi i bobl deimlo nad oes ganddynt ddewis, oherwydd mewn dadl o’r natur hon, dadl ag iddi ganlyniadau mor sylfaenol, mae'n rhaid inni feddwl nid yn unig am ei bwriadau, ond ei heffaith debygol ar fywydau’r holl bobl na fyddwn byth yn eu cyfarfod, ond a fydd yn cael eu heffeithio’n angheuol gan y penderfyniad hwn.
Mae’n debyg mai hon yw’r ddadl anoddaf imi orfod siarad ynddi ers dod i'r Senedd. Roeddwn yn teimlo bod yn rhaid imi siarad. Mae'n anodd am y gallaf ddeall yn llwyr pam fod cymaint o bobl yn dymuno cael y newid hwn; rwy'n llwyr ddeall hynny, rwy'n ei deimlo yn fy nghalon. Ond nid yw'r arswyd a deimlaf ynglŷn â hyn yn ddibwys. Mae’n ddyfodol rwy'n ei weld nid yn unig fel y senario waethaf, ond yr unig senario yn y pen draw: dyfodol lle nad oes fawr o fesurau diogelu ar ôl, lle bydd llai o fuddsoddi mewn gofal lliniarol, yn hytrach na'i gynyddu fel y dylem, a lle mae pobl yn eu trallod yn teimlo rheidrwydd i gymryd cam na allant byth gamu'n ôl ohono. Am y rhesymau hyn, Ddirprwy Lywydd, roeddwn yn teimlo rheidrwydd i siarad, gyda phob parch ac empathi tuag at y rhai sy'n ei gynnig, ond dyna pam y teimlaf reidrwydd hefyd i bleidleisio yn ei erbyn.
Ten years ago, I was involved in the debate that we had then on assisted dying in this Chamber, and I put my name to that motion at that particular time to support it. And during the course of the debate, I actually changed my mind. Not in terms of the principle of this, but in terms of whether there had been sufficient thought to how we might be able to implement this in society, how legislation might be designed and focused to enable it to happen, to enable the principle to be implemented, without all the concerns that I'm sure we all share with this. And it's right, it is extremely difficult legislation.
But I think during the course of those 10 years—. During that debate, I changed my mind on it, and I then voted against it, but, 10 years on, I think we've now reached a crossroads. There has been a lot more thought, a lot more analysis, a lot more research, but I think also we've reached the stage where Parliament really needs to take a decision on this, which is why I welcome the private Member's Bill, and I welcome the debate in this particular Chamber. The legislation is a very focused piece of legislation, and it's focused on a very specific description of terminal illness and, of course, there are many differing views, very sensitive and emotive views, and I respect all of those particular views that are made within here. But I believe we've reached a stage where we do have to take a decision. Can I also say that this is a matter—? Although the criminal aspect of it, which is what the legislation is about, is not a devolved matter, the implementation of what happens in this legislation clearly is a devolved matter, and perhaps the Minister will be able to confirm whether he agrees that this is a matter that will come back to this Chamber, that the issue of legislative consent will actually be required, because it does specifically engage the delivery and the implementation by devolved services.
But, for me, this is really about choice, and I can summarise them in just three or four points, I think. Firstly, I think it is about the dignity of choice, and indeed about the dignity of death. Secondly, it would be about, in certain circumstances, my right to be able to choose. It is also, I think, very clear that the role of Government is not to deny me that choice, but to set the legislative framework within which that choice can actually be exercised. I believe that I have the right to make that choice, to make that decision myself, but within the narrow confines and focus of the legislation itself. I support the Bill that is going through Westminster. I would support the idea of a debate in this Chamber in terms of legislative consent, specifically in terms of some of the details of it. But I don't believe it is right now for Parliament to continue to deny me that choice within certain, very specific circumstances. Diolch.
Ddeng mlynedd yn ôl, roeddwn yn rhan o'r ddadl a gawsom bryd hynny ar gymorth i farw yn y Siambr hon, a rhoddais fy enw wrth y cynnig hwnnw i'w gefnogi. Ac yn ystod y ddadl, fe newidiais fy meddwl mewn gwirionedd. Nid o ran egwyddor, ond o ran a fu digon o ystyriaeth i sut y gallem weithredu hyn mewn cymdeithas, sut y gellid cynllunio a ffocysu deddfwriaeth i'w alluogi i ddigwydd, er mwyn galluogi'r egwyddor i gael ei gweithredu, heb yr holl bryderon y mae pawb ohonom yn eu rhannu ynglŷn â hyn, rwy'n siŵr. Ac mae'n wir, mae'n ddeddfwriaeth hynod o anodd.
Ond yn ystod y 10 mlynedd wedyn—. Yn ystod y ddadl honno, newidiais fy meddwl yn ei gylch, ac fe bleidleisiais yn ei erbyn, ond 10 mlynedd yn ddiweddarach, rwy'n credu ein bod bellach ar groesffordd. Cafwyd llawer mwy o feddwl, llawer mwy o ddadansoddi, llawer mwy o ymchwil, ond rwy'n credu hefyd ein bod wedi cyrraedd y pwynt lle mae gwir angen i'r Senedd wneud penderfyniad ar hyn, a dyna pam rwy'n croesawu'r Bil Aelod preifat, ac rwy'n croesawu'r ddadl yn y Siambr hon. Mae'r ddeddfwriaeth yn un benodol iawn, ac mae'n canolbwyntio ar ddisgrifiad penodol iawn o salwch angheuol ac wrth gwrs, ceir llawer o safbwyntiau gwahanol, safbwyntiau sensitif ac emosiynol iawn, ac rwy'n parchu'r holl safbwyntiau a geir yma. Ond rwy'n credu ein bod wedi cyrraedd cam lle mae'n rhaid inni wneud penderfyniad. A gaf i ddweud hefyd fod hwn yn fater—? Er nad yw'r agwedd droseddol arno, sef yr hyn y mae a wnelo'r ddeddfwriaeth â hi, yn fater sydd wedi'i ddatganoli, mae gweithredu'r hyn sy'n digwydd yn y ddeddfwriaeth hon yn amlwg wedi'i ddatganoli, ac efallai y bydd y Gweinidog yn gallu cadarnhau a yw'n cytuno bod hwn yn fater a ddaw yn ôl i'r Siambr hon, y bydd angen cydsyniad deddfwriaethol mewn gwirionedd, oherwydd mae'n ymwneud yn benodol â chyflawni a gweithredu gan wasanaethau wedi'u datganoli.
Ond i mi, mae hyn yn ymwneud â dewis mewn gwirionedd, a gallaf grynhoi hynny mewn tri neu bedwar pwynt, rwy'n credu. Yn gyntaf, rwy'n credu ei fod yn ymwneud ag urddas dewis, ac yn wir am urddas marwolaeth. Yn ail, byddai'n ymwneud mewn rhai amgylchiadau â fy hawl i allu dewis. Mae hefyd, rwy'n credu, yn glir iawn mai rôl y Llywodraeth yw peidio â gwadu'r dewis hwnnw i mi, ond i osod y fframwaith deddfwriaethol y gellir arfer y dewis hwnnw o'i fewn. Credaf fod gennyf hawl i wneud y dewis hwnnw, i wneud y penderfyniad hwnnw fy hun, ond o fewn cyfyngiadau cul a ffocws y ddeddfwriaeth ei hun. Rwy'n cefnogi'r Bil sy'n mynd trwy San Steffan. Buaswn yn cefnogi'r syniad o ddadl yn y Siambr hon ynghylch cydsyniad deddfwriaethol, yn enwedig mewn perthynas â rhai o'r manylion. Ond nid wyf yn credu ei bod yn iawn i'r Senedd barhau i wadu'r dewis hwnnw i mi mewn amgylchiadau penodol iawn. Diolch.
I'm grateful for the opportunity to contribute in this important, emotional, emotive debate in this place today. I also absolutely accept the sincerity with which the Members who have proposed this motion here today, the sincerity with which they do, but I will be voting against the motion here today. And the reason why I fundamentally find this a motion that I cannot agree with is, I think, because, for me, this motion centres on how we value people in our society and all people in our society. No matter their current physical health situation, no matter their current mental health situation, no matter the stage in life in which they are, all people are precious, all lives are precious, and we should show that value to them at all times. And for me, this motion and what this motion implies is a message that says that not all lives have the same level of value in our society. That's not something that I could sign up to. I believe that the proposals within assisted suicide and within the motion before us today undermine the belief I think we'd all have in this Chamber that all lives are equal and equally precious—
Rwy'n ddiolchgar am y cyfle i gyfrannu yn y ddadl bwysig ac emosiynol hon yma heddiw. Rwyf hefyd yn llwyr dderbyn didwylledd yr Aelodau sydd wedi cyflwyno'r cynnig hwn yma heddiw, ond byddaf yn pleidleisio yn erbyn y cynnig yma heddiw. A'r rheswm pam y credaf yn sylfaenol fod hwn yn gynnig na allaf gytuno ag ef, rwy'n credu, yw bod y cynnig, i mi, yn canolbwyntio ar y ffordd y gwelwn werth pobl yn ein cymdeithas a phawb yn ein cymdeithas. Beth bynnag yw cyflwr eu hiechyd corfforol ar hyn o bryd, beth bynnag yw eu cyflwr eu hiechyd meddwl ar hyn o bryd, ar ba bynnag gam mewn bywyd y maent arno, mae pawb yn werthfawr, mae pob bywyd yn werthfawr, a dylem ddangos y gwerth hwnnw iddynt bob amser. Ac i mi, mae'r cynnig hwn a'r hyn y mae'r cynnig hwn yn ei awgrymu yn neges sy'n dweud nad oes gan bob bywyd yr un lefel o werth yn ein cymdeithas. Nid yw hynny'n rhywbeth y gallwn ei gefnogi. Credaf fod y cynigion ar gymorth hunanladdiad ac o fewn y cynnig sydd ger ein bron heddiw yn tanseilio'r gred sydd gan gan bob un ohonom yn y Siambr fod pob bywyd yn gyfartal a'r un mor werthfawr—
Would the Member give way?
A wnaiff yr Aelod dderbyn ymyriad?
Absolutely.
Yn sicr.
If we value all lives, surely we value the right of individuals to make choices about their lives and how their lives end.
Os ydym yn ystyried pob bywyd yn werthfawr, onid ydym yn ystyried hawl unigolion i wneud dewisiadau am eu bywydau a sut y daw eu bywydau i ben yn werthfawr?
And that argument is similar to how Mick Antoniw in his contribution spoke a few moments ago. But we heard from Delyth Jewell, actually, and others in the Chamber so far, that, sometimes, whilst it may be a theoretical choice, because of the burden that some people may feel, that isn't actually a real choice that they have. Because actually what happens in situations as outlined in Oregon, where a significant proportion of people feel that they are a burden to those around them, it moves from a right to die to actually a duty to die, because of the situation, and then people feel they have a duty to no longer be on Earth for the sake of those around them. That, then, is no longer a choice. It becomes a perceived duty. So, I think that argument falls down at that stage.
And when the state sanctions this, and, in some cases, as we've seen in other countries and other states in the US, when the state sanctions this, that takes it to a whole new level, and, in some instances, the state is encouraging this as well. We know that—. We could all bat around examples, I'm sure, around the Chamber this afternoon, but we know of examples where people are offered, in very much recoverable situations, as described earlier, in that perhaps people may be suffering with anorexia, where, with the right care, with the right support, with the right love and attention, people can work through those extremely difficult circumstances. I'm not undermining or trying to take away from the difficulties they are going through. People can work through those. But very sadly, far too often, in other countries where this is taking place, people are offered the option of ending their lives. For me, that does not value them in the right way in the circumstances, in the sanctity of life that they hold in that moment.
Ac mae'r ddadl honno'n debyg i'r modd y siaradodd Mick Antoniw yn ei gyfraniad ychydig eiliadau yn ôl. Ond clywsom gan Delyth Jewell, ac eraill yn y Siambr hyd yma, er y gallai fod yn ddewis damcaniaethol weithiau, oherwydd y baich y gallai rhai pobl ei deimlo, nid yw'r dewis sydd ganddynt yn un go iawn mewn gwirionedd. Oherwydd yr hyn sy'n digwydd mewn sefyllfaoedd fel y nodwyd yn Oregon, lle mae cyfran sylweddol o bobl yn teimlo eu bod yn faich ar y rhai o'u cwmpas, yw ei fod yn symud o hawl i farw i ddyletswydd i farw mewn gwirionedd, oherwydd y sefyllfa, ac yna mae pobl yn teimlo bod dyletswydd arnynt i beidio â bod ar y Ddaear mwyach er mwyn y rhai o'u cwmpas. Felly, nid yw'n ddewis mwyach. Daw'n ddyletswydd ganfyddedig. Felly, rwy'n credu bod y ddadl honno'n chwalu yn y fan honno.
A phan fydd y wladwriaeth yn caniatáu hyn, ac mewn rhai achosion, fel y gwelsom mewn gwledydd eraill a thaleithiau yn yr Unol Daleithiau, pan fydd y wladwriaeth yn caniatáu hyn, mae hynny'n mynd ag ef i lefel hollol newydd, ac mewn rhai achosion, mae'r wladwriaeth yn annog hyn hefyd. Fe wyddom—. Rwy'n siŵr y gallem i gyd gyfnewid enghreifftiau o gwmpas y Siambr y prynhawn yma, ond fe wyddom am enghreifftiau lle caiff pobl gynnig, mewn sefyllfaoedd lle gallent wella yn sicr, fel y disgrifiwyd yn gynharach, yn yr ystyr y gallai pobl fod yn dioddef gydag anorecsia, lle, gyda'r gofal iawn, gyda'r cymorth iawn, gyda'r cariad a'r sylw iawn, y gall pobl weithio drwy'r amgylchiadau anodd iawn hynny. Nid wyf yn tanseilio neu'n ceisio lleihau'r anawsterau a wynebant. Gall pobl weithio drwy'r rheini. Ond yn drist iawn, yn llawer rhy aml, mewn gwledydd eraill lle mae hyn yn digwydd, mae pobl yn cael cynnig opsiwn i ddod â'u bywydau i ben. I mi, nid yw hynny'n dangos ein bod yn gweld eu gwerth yn y ffordd iawn o dan yr amgylchiadau, a sancteiddrwydd y bywyd sydd ganddynt yn y foment honno.
We're talking about the terminally ill.
Rydym yn siarad am bobl â salwch angheuol.
Sorry, do you want to make an intervention?
Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, a ydych chi am ymyrryd?
Sorry, thank you, yes. We're talking about the terminally ill here, not people with anorexia. You're twisting the debate.
Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, diolch, ydw. Rydym yn siarad am bobl â salwch angheuol, nid pobl ag anorecsia. Rydych chi'n gwyrdroi'r ddadl.
Okay. I'll address that point as well. I feel that that has already been commented on in this Chamber here today. I know you perhaps don't accept this phase of a 'slippery slope' but it really is, because, once a law is passed in this area, with certain criteria by which some people may be able to access this, that will inevitably be challenged in the courts, as has been done in other countries, because it becomes an issue of equality—equality of access to that same level of what may be determined as a health option. So, it becomes an issue of equality, which will be challenged in the courts, and that is when it gets expanded, as it has in other countries, and most notably in Canada, and I'm sure, on that instance, you therefore would not agree with what's happening in Canada, where, in 2027, people with mental illnesses will be able to access or will be offered—not even just able to access; they will be offered this—as a way out of their situations. So, that slippery slope is not just a philosophical idea. It's a very, very real situation in other places all around the world, and I fear that that would be exactly the same in this country, because there would be a challenge in the court of law.
I will wrap up, Deputy Presiding Officer; I'm aware of time. I haven't been able to get through the points that I perhaps would have wanted to, but I'll just wrap up in my closing comments by saying that whether it's through effective mental health support or making spaces more accessible for people with disabilities, the way that we should be working through this is by properly funding, properly supporting, whether it's humane palliative care support, or ensuring that we're valuing all people in our society. Life is precious no matter the situation that you're in, reminding people that there is care, we have compassion, we have love, and there is hope, and that hope is found amongst us, and we should be sharing that, and not offering death as a way out through legislative proposals. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Iawn. Fe wnaf drafod y pwynt hwnnw hefyd. Rwy'n teimlo bod sylwadau wedi eu gwneud ar hynny eisoes yn y Siambr heddiw. Rwy'n gwybod efallai nad ydych chi'n derbyn yr ymadrodd 'llethr llithrig' ond dyna ydyw mewn gwirionedd, oherwydd, pan gaiff deddf ei phasio yn y maes hwn, gyda meini prawf penodol y gall rhai pobl eu bodloni i gael mynediad at hyn, meini prawf a fydd yn anochel yn cael eu herio yn y llysoedd, fel sydd wedi'i wneud mewn gwledydd eraill, oherwydd daw'n fater cydraddoldeb—cydraddoldeb mynediad at yr un lefel o'r hyn y gellir ei bennu fel opsiwn iechyd. Felly, daw'n fater o gydraddoldeb, a fydd yn cael ei herio yn y llysoedd, a dyna pryd y caiff ei ehangu, fel a wnaed mewn gwledydd eraill, ac yn fwyaf nodedig yng Nghanada, ac rwy'n siŵr, yn yr achos hwnnw, na fyddech chi felly'n cytuno â'r hyn sy'n digwydd yng Nghanada, lle, yn 2027, bydd pobl â mathau o salwch meddwl yn gallu cael mynediad at neu'n cael cynnig—nid dim ond gallu cael mynediad; byddant yn cael cynnig hyn—fel ffordd allan o'u sefyllfaoedd. Felly, nid syniad athronyddol yn unig yw'r llethr llithrig. Mae'n sefyllfa real iawn mewn mannau eraill ledled y byd, ac rwy'n ofni y byddai hynny'n union yr un fath yn y wlad hon, oherwydd byddai her yn y llys barn.
Rwyf am ddod i ben, Ddirprwy Lywydd; rwy'n ymwybodol o'r amser. Nid wyf wedi gallu mynd drwy'r pwyntiau y buaswn wedi bod eisiau eu gwneud o bosibl, ond rwyf am ddod â fy sylwadau i ben trwy ddweud, boed drwy gymorth iechyd meddwl effeithiol neu wneud lleoedd yn fwy hygyrch i bobl ag anableddau, mai'r ffordd y dylem weithio trwy hyn yw drwy gyllido priodol, cefnogaeth briodol, boed yn gymorth gofal lliniarol trugarog, neu sicrhau ein bod yn gweld gwerth pob unigolyn yn ein cymdeithas. Mae bywyd yn werthfawr beth bynnag yw'r sefyllfa rydych chi ynddi, gan atgoffa pobl bod gofal, ein bod yn tosturio, fod gennym gariad, a bod gobaith, a bod gobaith i'w gael yn ein plith, a dylem rannu hynny, a pheidio â chynnig marwolaeth fel ffordd allan trwy gynigion deddfwriaethol. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
As a point of principle, I'm a supporter of legalising assisted dying. I believe that individuals facing unbearable suffering and pain at the end of their life should have the right to choose how and when their life ends. However, I do recognise that many of the concerns of those who are opposed to this proposal are valid and they deserve thoughtful consideration. And rather than dismissing those concerns, what I want to focus on in my remarks is how a well-designed policy framework could address them. By building a system, a policy, around certain key principles, I believe we can bring forward legislation that combines care and compassion, not just for individuals but for society as a whole.
The first principle, for me, is the key one. It is autonomy and consent. Assisted dying must be based on the foundation of individual autonomy, the right of people to make decisions about their own bodies, about their own lives and, yes, about their own deaths. For those facing terminal illness and intolerable suffering—and let's keep them where they should be, at the centre of our focus in this debate—the decision to end their life must be theirs and theirs alone. And to protect that autonomy, it's essential that the decision is based on fully informed consent. Individuals must be given clear information about all options, including palliative care, which doesn't work in all circumstances for all people. And consent must be confirmed at multiple stages. And this should ensure that the decision is thoughtful, voluntary and made by somebody that fully understands the implications.
A second major principle is the need to safeguard the vulnerable, as we've heard—the elderly, the disabled—who might feel pressured to choose assisted dying out of a sense of obligation or duty, as others have remarked. That's a valid worry, but it can be addressed by strong protections. The system, drawing on the experience elsewhere, must include independent assessments by multiple professionals—doctors and psychological evaluators who can confirm that the decision is made freely without external pressure. Mandatory waiting periods will also prevent decisions made in haste. These safeguards will ensure that vulnerable people are protected and supported.
Another key principle: medical integrity. Some fear that legalising assisted dying could undermine the ethical responsibilities of healthcare professionals, especially the principle of 'do no harm'. But I believe that a system can be created that maintains the integrity of the medical profession while also allowing for compassionate care. Participation in assisted dying must be voluntary for healthcare professionals, and clear ethical guidelines should be in place. Doctors must be supported in their role to alleviate suffering, confident that they are acting in the best interests of patients. And there should be a proper oversight system that would ensure that the moral foundations of medicine are upheld. Accountability and transparency are critical. A system involving life-and-death decisions must be open to scrutiny. An independent body should oversee all cases of assisted dying to ensure that they meet legal and ethical criteria. Regular audits and public reporting would provide transparency, ensuring that the system is used responsibly and fairly for its intended purposes.
And compassion and dignity, finally, must be at the heart of any system and any policy. Assisted dying is about allowing people to end their lives on their own terms, avoiding unnecessary suffering. A compassionate system puts individuals at the centre, allowing them to decide when and how they die, whether they choose to be at home or in a clinical setting, for example; the system must always respect their personal values and beliefs, ensuring the final moments are peaceful and dignified.
To address the argument about a slippery slope, it's often used whenever we legislate, isn't it? And it's up to us—it's up to us in a Parliament, then, to make sure that we keep to the intended purposes. Some of the countries that have introduced systems have actually retained very, very strict guidelines; they haven't moved from them. If there is an argument at some future date, and there is a valid argument and a reasoned argument that we should amend the legislation, then we should consider that at that stage, but what we are talking about now is people who are in intolerable pain. They are facing a terminal disease with no hope of a cure and they're asking us, they are asking us as their representatives, to hear their voice, and I think we should listen to them.
Fel pwynt o egwyddor, rwy'n cefnogi cyfreithloni cymorth i farw. Credaf y dylai unigolion sy'n wynebu dioddefaint a phoen annioddefol ar ddiwedd eu hoes gael hawl i ddewis sut a phryd y daw eu bywyd i ben. Fodd bynnag, rwy'n cydnabod bod llawer o bryderon y rhai sy'n gwrthwynebu'r cynnig hwn yn ddilys ac maent yn haeddu ystyriaeth feddylgar. Ac yn hytrach na diystyru'r pryderon hynny, yn fy sylwadau rwyf am ganolbwyntio ar sut y gallai fframwaith polisi wedi'i gynllunio'n dda fynd i'r afael â hwy. Drwy adeiladu system, polisi, o amgylch egwyddorion allweddol penodol, credaf y gallwn gyflwyno deddfwriaeth sy'n cyfuno gofal a thosturi, nid yn unig i unigolion ond i gymdeithas yn ei chyfanrwydd.
Yr egwyddor gyntaf, i mi, yw'r un allweddol, sef ymreolaeth a chydsyniad. Rhaid i gymorth i farw fod yn seiliedig ar sylfaen o ymreolaeth bersonol, hawl pobl i wneud penderfyniadau am eu cyrff eu hunain, am eu bywydau eu hunain, ac am eu marwolaeth eu hunain. I'r rhai sy'n wynebu salwch angheuol a dioddefaint annioddefol—a gadewch inni eu cadw lle dylent fod, yng nghanol ein ffocws yn y ddadl hon—rhaid i'r penderfyniad i ddod â'u bywyd i ben fod yn benderfyniad ganddynt hwy eu hunain a neb arall. Ac i ddiogelu'r ymreolaeth honno, mae'n hanfodol fod y penderfyniad yn seiliedig ar gydsyniad cwbl wybodus. Mae'n rhaid rhoi gwybodaeth glir i unigolion am yr holl opsiynau, gan gynnwys gofal lliniarol, nad yw'n gweithio ym mhob amgylchiad i bawb. Ac mae'n rhaid cadarnhau cydsyniad ar gamau lluosog. A dylai hyn sicrhau bod y penderfyniad yn feddylgar, yn wirfoddol ac yn cael ei wneud gan rywun sy'n deall y goblygiadau'n llawn.
Ail egwyddor bwysig yw'r angen i ddiogelu'r rhai sy'n agored i niwed, fel y clywsom—yr henoed, yr anabl—a allai deimlo dan bwysau i ddewis cymorth i farw o ymdeimlad o rwymedigaeth neu ddyletswydd, fel y mae eraill wedi dweud. Mae hwnnw'n bryder dilys, ond gall amddiffyniadau cryf fynd i'r afael ag ef. Rhaid i'r system, gan dynnu ar y profiad mewn mannau eraill, gynnwys asesiadau annibynnol gan nifer o weithwyr proffesiynol—meddygon a gwerthuswyr seicolegol sy'n gallu cadarnhau bod y penderfyniad yn cael ei wneud yn rhydd heb bwysau allanol. Bydd cyfnodau aros gorfodol hefyd yn atal rhag gwneud penderfyniadau ar frys. Bydd y mesurau diogelu hyn yn sicrhau bod pobl sy'n agored i niwed yn cael eu diogelu a'u cefnogi.
Egwyddor allweddol arall: uniondeb meddygol. Mae rhai yn ofni y gallai cyfreithloni cymorth i farw danseilio cyfrifoldebau moesegol gweithwyr gofal iechyd proffesiynol, yn enwedig yr egwyddor o 'beidio â gwneud niwed'. Ond credaf y gellir creu system sy'n cynnal uniondeb y proffesiwn meddygol gan ganiatáu gofal tosturiol ar yr un pryd. Rhaid i gyfranogi mewn cymorth i farw fod yn wirfoddol i weithwyr gofal iechyd proffesiynol, a dylai fod canllawiau moesegol clir ar waith. Rhaid cefnogi meddygon yn eu rôl i leddfu dioddefaint, yn hyderus eu bod yn gweithredu er budd gorau cleifion. A dylai fod system oruchwylio briodol a fyddai'n sicrhau bod sylfeini moesol meddygaeth yn cael eu cynnal. Mae atebolrwydd a thryloywder yn hanfodol. Rhaid i system sy'n cynnwys penderfyniadau bywyd a marwolaeth fod yn agored i graffu. Dylai corff annibynnol oruchwylio pob achos o gymorth i farw er mwyn sicrhau eu bod yn bodloni meini prawf cyfreithiol a moesegol. Byddai archwiliadau rheolaidd ac adroddiadau cyhoeddus yn darparu tryloywder, gan sicrhau bod y system yn cael ei defnyddio'n gyfrifol ac yn deg at ei dibenion arfaethedig.
Ac yn olaf, rhaid i dosturi ac urddas fod yn y canol mewn unrhyw system ac unrhyw bolisi. Mae cymorth i farw yn golygu caniatáu i bobl ddod â'u bywydau i ben ar eu telerau eu hunain, gan osgoi dioddefaint diangen. Mae system dosturiol yn rhoi unigolion yn y canol, gan ganiatáu iddynt benderfynu pryd a sut y byddant farw, a ydynt yn dewis bod gartref neu mewn lleoliad clinigol, er enghraifft; rhaid i'r system barchu eu gwerthoedd a'u credoau personol bob amser, gan sicrhau bod yr eiliadau olaf yn heddychlon ac yn urddasol.
I droi at y ddadl am y llethr llithrig, fe'i defnyddir yn aml pryd bynnag y byddwn yn deddfu, oni wneir? A mater i ni ydyw—mater i ni mewn Senedd, felly, yw gwneud yn siŵr ein bod yn cadw at y dibenion a fwriadwyd. Mae rhai o'r gwledydd sydd wedi cyflwyno systemau wedi cynnal canllawiau llym iawn; nid ydynt wedi gwyro oddi wrthynt. Os oes dadl ar ryw ddyddiad yn y dyfodol, a bod dadl ddilys a dadl resymegol y dylem ddiwygio'r ddeddfwriaeth, dylem ystyried hynny ar y cam hwnnw, ond yr hyn y soniwn amdano nawr yw pobl sydd mewn poen annioddefol. Maent yn wynebu clefyd angheuol heb obaith o iachâd ac maent yn gofyn i ni, maent yn gofyn i ni fel eu cynrychiolwyr, glywed eu llais, ac rwy'n credu y dylem wrando arnynt.
Mae gen i deimladau cymysg iawn am y mater cymhleth yma. Mewn gwirionedd, pwy ydw i i leisio barn? Does dim diagnosis terfynol gen i. Dwi ddim yn byw bob dydd mewn poen dychrynllyd a dwi ddim yn hollol ddibynnol ar eraill am fy ngofal. Ar un llaw, mae meddygaeth yn sicrhau bod pobl yn byw yn hirach; antibiotics yn golygu bod pobl sydd â salwch marwol yn gallu goroesi afiechyd fel niwmonia a fyddai wedi eu lladd yn flaenorol. Niwmonia sydd ar dystysgrif marwolaeth fy nhadcu, oedd yn dioddef o gancr yr ysgyfaint; y morffin ychwanegol hynny i leddfu y boen hefyd yn ei gynorthwyo ar ei daith olaf o’r byd hwn.
Fel y gwyddoch chi, eleni fe gollais i Dad ar ôl iddo ddioddef 12 mlynedd o Alzheimer’s. Dros y cyfnod hwnnw, fe aeth Dad o fod yn ddyn llawn brwdfrydedd, llawn egni dros Gymru a'r Gymraeg i fedru gwneud dim byd. Methu siarad, methu bwyta, methu mynd i'r tŷ bach, dyna oedd ei flynyddoedd olaf e. Heblaw am ei deulu agos, fe gafodd Dad ei anghofio yn llwyr yn ystod ei flynyddoedd olaf. Roedden nhw’n flynyddoedd creulon. Roedden nhw'n greulon i ni fel teulu, a does dim geiriau i ddisgrifio pa mor greulon oedd y profiad iddo fe. Pwy ydw i i orfodi unrhyw berson i fynd trwy hynny os nad ydyn nhw'n dymuno gwneud hynny? Byddwn i ddim yn dymuno y profiad yna i unrhyw unigolyn nac i unrhyw deulu.
Eto, ar y llaw arall, hyd yn oed yn yr wythnosau olaf, roedd ei wên e yno o hyd, ac roedd hynny yn meddwl y byd i ni. Mae'n fater dyrys. Mae teuluoedd yn bethau cymhleth, onid ŷn nhw? Ac mae marwolaeth cymar neu riant yn aml yn amlygu llawer o densiynau blaenorol. Byddai ychwanegu cymorth i farw yn siŵr o gynyddu problemau teuluol wedi marwolaeth. Bydd yn rhaid hefyd ystyried yr impact ar y proffesiwn meddygol, yr heddlu a’r llysoedd. Ac a ydy’r impact ar ein gwasanaeth iechyd ni a gofal yng Nghymru yn cael ei ystyried yn llawn trwy fynd trwy San Steffan a thrwy fynd trwy Fil preifat?
A fydd diweddu oes yn digwydd yn yr ysbyty, lle mae achub bywyd yn digwydd mewn un gwely a helpu i farw mewn gwely arall? Yn ystod y flwyddyn ddiwethaf, dwi wedi colli nifer o bobl yn yr hosbis arbennig, Holme Towers. A fyddai'r hosbis arbennig yna, sydd mewn lleoliad mor braf, yn dod yn lleoliad cymorth i farw? Gofal lliniarol mewn un ystafell ac yna cymorth i farw mewn ystafell arall. Ac a ydyn ni'n bwriadu sicrhau gwasanaeth iechyd a gofal iawn, atebol, gwell, cyn i ni 'implement-eiddio' y gyfraith yma? Dylai neb orfod wynebu y dewis o wario miloedd o bunnoedd yr wythnos ar gartref gofal neu gymorth i farw. Dyw'r dewis yna jest ddim yn deg.
Yn olaf, dwi hefyd yn bryderus am bobl yn newid eu meddyliau nhw. Mae nifer ohonom ni wedi bod trwy gyfnodau tywyll, a thrwy hynny yn ystyried gwneud pethau, hyd yn oed yn cynllunio gwneud pethau, hyd yn oed yn cymryd y camau cyntaf at ddiweddu bywyd, ond wrth edrych yn ôl yn hynod ddiolchgar nad ydy hynny wedi digwydd. Wel, mae diagnosis terfynol, mae diagnosis o salwch poenus hefyd yn mynd i fynd â chi i gyfnod hynod, hynod dywyll. Mae'n mynd i gymryd amser i ddygymod â'r newyddion ac efallai byddai hynny yn arwain i berson yn newid eu meddyliau nhw.
I have very mixed feelings regarding this very complex matter. Truth be told, who am I to have a say? I don't have a terminal diagnosis. I don't live every day in appalling pain and I'm not dependent on others for my care. On one hand, medicine ensures that people live longer; antibiotics mean that people with a fatal illness can survive diseases such as pneumonia that would previously have been fatal. Pneumonia is noted on the death certificate of my grandfather, who suffered from lung cancer; that additional morphine to tackle the pain also helped him on his final journey from this world.
As you will know, this year I lost Dad after he suffered for 12 years with Alzheimer's. Over that period, Dad went from being a man filled with enthusiasm and energy for Wales and the Welsh language to not being able to do anything at all. He wasn't able to speak, he couldn't eat, he couldn't go to the toilet; those were his final years. Apart from his close family, Dad was forgotten entirely during those final years. They were cruel years. They were cruel to us as a family, and there are no words to describe how cruel the experience was for him. Who am I to force any person to live through that experience if they don't wish to do so? I wouldn't wish that experience on any individual or family.
Yet again, on the other hand, even in those final weeks, his smile was still there, and that meant the world to us. It's a very complex matter. Families are very complicated things, aren't they? And the death of a partner or parent often highlights many previous tensions. The addition of assisted dying would be sure to increase familial problems following loss. The impact on the medical profession, the police and the courts would have to be considered. Is the impact on our health and care service in Wales being fully taken into account by going through Westminster and by going through a private Bill?
Will assisted dying happen in a hospital, where a life is saved in one bed with assisted dying in another? Over the past year, I've lost a number of people in that very special hospice, Holme Towers. Will that hospice, which is in such a beautiful location, become a setting for assisted dying? Palliative care in one room and assisted dying in another. And do we intend to deliver a proper health and care service, an accountable, better service, before implementing this law? Nobody should have to face the choice between spending thousands of pounds per week on a care home or assisted dying. That choice just isn't fair.
Finally, I'm concerned about people changing their minds. A number of us have been through very dark times, and at those times have considered doing things, have even planned to do things, have even taken the initial steps towards ending our lives, but looking back, we're very grateful that that didn't happen. Well, a terminal diagnosis, a diagnosis of a painful illness will also take one to a very, very dark place. It's going to take time come to terms with that news and perhaps that might lead to some people changing their minds.
I don't think the use of the words 'state-sanctioned killing' helps anybody, as some have described it as such. Of course, some here who described it as state-sanctioned killing can justify the state-sanctioned killing of others, including innocent people during war.
Nid wyf yn credu bod defnyddio'r geiriau 'lladd a gymeradwywyd gan y wladwriaeth' yn helpu unrhyw un, ac mae rhai wedi ei ddisgrifio felly. Wrth gwrs, gall rhai yma a'i disgrifiodd fel lladd a gymeradwywyd gan y wladwriaeth gyfiawnhau lladd pobl eraill a gymeradwywyd gan y wladwriaeth, gan gynnwys pobl ddiniwed yn ystod rhyfel.
Mi fyddaf i'n pleidleisio o blaid heddiw, jest—jest. Mae gen i concerns mawr. Dwi'n credu ei bod hi’n drafodaeth bwysig i’w chael, a diolch i chi, Julie Morgan, am ddod â'r ddadl bwysig yma. I fi, tosturi sy'n ennill y diwrnod, ond mae’r peryglon yn amlwg iawn hefyd. Diolch yn fawr.
I will be voting in favour today—just. I do have major concerns. I believe that it's an important debate for us to have, and I thank you, Julie Morgan, for bringing forward this important debate. For me, it's mercy that wins the day, but the dangers are also very clear. Thank you very much.
I'd like to begin by acknowledging that assisted dying, or assisted suicide, as I think that's a more accurate term for what we're discussing, is a very sensitive and emotive issue. Many of us do have family, friends and loved ones who we've seen suffer, and, of course, it is those experiences that motivate us to want to prevent that from happening to other people. But the question before us today is how should that pain and suffering be minimised. Should we, as suggested by the motion before us, change the law to support people who want to end their lives prematurely, or is there another way forward?
Now, let me be clear from the outset that my views are informed and underpinned by my Christian faith, by my faith in Jesus Christ. I regard all life as sacred, I believe that all human beings are made in the image of God and that no matter what our age, circumstances or social status, every single life is precious, it has equal value and dignity and is worth living. But it's not only my faith and it's not only my conscience that draw me to the conclusion that assisted suicide is wrong. It's also the fact that legalising assisted suicide is fraught with dangers that no change in the law will ever be able to mitigate.
It's important to state this: the motion today, before us, goes far beyond the scope of the legislation that's currently being considered in the UK and Scottish Parliaments. There, proponents of a change in the law are seeking to restrict access to assisted suicide to those who are terminally ill, but here we are being asked to subscribe to the view that assisted suicide will be available to anyone of sound mind and settled will who is intolerably suffering, whether terminally ill or not. That phrase 'terminally ill' features nowhere in the motion before us today. Now, 'intolerable suffering' is a subjective term. Where it's been used in other nations, as we've already heard, assisted suicide is being granted for all sorts of conditions, even those such as tinnitus, anorexia, as we've already heard, bedsores and even blindness.
It can also be very, very difficult to determine if someone is of a sound mind and has a settled will. The Royal College of Psychiatrists have told us that evidence is limited as to whether psychological assessments and psychiatric assessments of sound mind and settled will are actually an effective safeguard in the process at all. And coercion, of course, is almost impossible, actually, to detect. The reality is that people's attitudes towards terminal illness can and often do change. Many people who feel anguish and despair at the point of a diagnosis or a significant and sudden change in their health may well feel at that point that they want to end it all, but they go on, often, to find capacity to adapt and to cope as they go on in their journey.
The motion also suggests that assisted suicide has been linked to improvements in palliative care and has popular support. But those of us who attended the excellent briefing on palliative care by Baroness Ilora Finlay yesterday, and this whole subject was discussed, know that that's not necessarily the case, because in those places where palliative care has improved, it's not done so at the rate that it has in those nations where assisted suicide remains illegal. Public support for a change in the law diminishes when current laws are explained to people and where the terms of assisted suicide are actually explained to them as well.
So, legalising assisted suicide would send a clear message that some lives are not worth living, and I don't think that that's a message that any civilised society, frankly, should be promoting to any of its citizens, especially when there are many people across Wales right now who are enjoying a fulfilling life in spite of their terminal illness, or in spite of a debilitating condition. I think that is why so many disabled people are opposed to a change in the law in this area. We received a communication yesterday, Julie—I heard your comments earlier, but we received a communication yesterday from a whole host and coalition of disability organisations. Not one of them supports a change in the law, and that is because all of them recognise the potential for people to perceive a burden, that they are someone who doesn't deserve to be alive. I think that that is something that we must make sure that we address.
There's also—finally, if I may—another concern, and that is that, where assisted suicide has been introduced, it tends to have a disproportionate impact on poorer and marginalised communities in society, and there's no doubt that that would also be the implication here in Wales. People with a decent income, a strong network of friends and loved ones and access to good healthcare, they would consider assisted suicide in a very, very different way to people who are lonely, unable to access good care, unable to access support—
Hoffwn ddechrau drwy gydnabod bod cymorth i farw, neu gymorth hunanladdiad, gan fy mod yn credu bod hwnnw'n derm mwy cywir ar gyfer yr hyn a drafodwn, yn fater sensitif ac emosiynol iawn. Mae gan lawer ohonom deulu, ffrindiau ac anwyliaid a welsom yn dioddef, ac wrth gwrs, y profiadau hynny sy'n ein cymell i fod eisiau atal hynny rhag digwydd i bobl eraill. Ond y cwestiwn sydd ger ein bron heddiw yw sut y dylid lleihau'r boen a'r dioddefaint hwnnw. A ddylem ni, fel yr awgrymir gan y cynnig sydd o'n blaenau, newid y gyfraith i gefnogi pobl sydd am ddod â'u bywydau i ben cyn pryd, neu a oes ffordd arall ymlaen?
Nawr, gadewch imi fod yn glir o'r cychwyn cyntaf fod fy marn wedi ei llywio gan, a'i seilio ar fy ffydd Gristnogol, gan fy ffydd yn Iesu Grist. Rwy'n ystyried pob bywyd yn sanctaidd, credaf fod pob bod dynol wedi ei greu ar ddelw Duw a beth bynnag y bo ein hoedran, ein hamgylchiadau neu ein statws cymdeithasol, mae pob bywyd yn werthfawr, mae iddo werth ac urddas cyfartal ac mae'n werth ei fyw. Ond nid fy ffydd yn unig ac nid fy nghydwybod yn unig sy'n gwneud imi ddod i'r casgliad fod cymorth hunanladdiad yn anghywir, ond y ffaith hefyd fod cyfreithloni cymorth hunanladdiad yn llawn peryglon na fydd unrhyw newid yn y gyfraith byth yn gallu eu lliniaru.
Mae'n bwysig datgan hyn: mae'r cynnig sydd ger ein bron heddiw yn mynd ymhell y tu hwnt i gwmpas y ddeddfwriaeth sy'n cael ei hystyried ar hyn o bryd yn Senedd y DU a'r Alban. Yno, mae'r rhai sy'n cefnogi newid yn y gyfraith yn ceisio cyfyngu cymorth hunanladdiad i'r rhai sydd â salwch angheuol, ond yma gofynnir i ni gefnogi'r farn y bydd cymorth hunanladdiad ar gael i unrhyw un yn ei lawn bwyll a chadarn ei ewyllys sy'n dioddef yn annioddefol, boed yn salwch angheuol ai peidio. Nid yw'r ymadrodd 'salwch angheuol' i'w weld yn unman yn y cynnig sydd ger ein bron heddiw. Nawr, mae 'dioddefaint annioddefol' yn derm goddrychol. Fel y clywsom eisoes, lle cafodd ei ddefnyddio mewn gwledydd eraill, mae cymorth hunanladdiad yn cael ei ganiatáu ar gyfer pob math o gyflyrau, hyd yn oed rhai fel tinitws, anorecsia, fel y clywsom eisoes, briwiau gorwedd a dallineb hyd yn oed.
Gall hefyd fod yn anodd iawn penderfynu a yw rhywun yn ei iawn bwyll ac yn gadarn ei ewyllys. Mae Coleg Brenhinol y Seiciatryddion wedi dweud wrthym fod y dystiolaeth yn gyfyngedig ynglŷn ag i ba raddau y bydd asesiadau seicolegol ac asesiadau seiciatrig o iawn bwyll ac ewyllys gadarn yn ddiogelwch effeithiol yn y broses o gwbl. Ac mae gorfodaeth bron yn amhosibl ei chanfod, mewn gwirionedd. Y gwir amdani yw y gall agweddau pobl tuag at salwch angheuol newid, ac mae hynny'n digwydd yn aml. Efallai y bydd llawer o bobl sy'n teimlo gofid ac anobaith ar adeg eu diagnosis neu newid sylweddol a sydyn yn eu hiechyd yn teimlo bryd hynny eu bod am roi diwedd ar y cyfan, ond maent yn aml yn mynd ymlaen i ddod o hyd i'r gallu i addasu ac ymdopi wrth iddynt barhau â'u taith.
Mae'r cynnig hefyd yn awgrymu bod cymorth hunanladdiad wedi ei gysylltu â gwelliannau mewn gofal lliniarol a bod cefnogaeth boblogaidd iddo. Ond mae'r rhai ohonom a fynychodd y briff ardderchog ar ofal lliniarol gan y Farwnes Ilora Finlay ddoe, a lle trafodwyd y pwnc hwn, yn gwybod nad yw hynny'n wir o reidrwydd, oherwydd yn y mannau lle mae gofal lliniarol wedi gwella, nid yw wedi gwneud hynny ar y gyfradd a wnaeth yn y gwledydd lle mae cymorth hunanladdiad yn parhau i fod yn anghyfreithlon. Mae cefnogaeth y cyhoedd i newid yn y gyfraith yn lleihau pan fydd y cyfreithiau cyfredol yn cael eu hesbonio i bobl a lle caiff telerau cymorth hunanladdiad eu hegluro iddynt.
Felly, byddai cyfreithloni cymorth hunanladdiad yn anfon neges glir nad yw rhai bywydau'n werth eu byw, ac nid wyf yn credu bod honno'n neges y dylai unrhyw gymdeithas wâr ei hyrwyddo i unrhyw un o'i dinasyddion, yn enwedig pan fo llawer o bobl ledled Cymru nawr yn mwynhau bywyd boddhaus er gwaethaf eu salwch angheuol, neu er gwaethaf cyflwr gwanychol. Rwy'n credu mai dyna pam y mae cymaint o bobl anabl yn gwrthwynebu newid yn y gyfraith yn y maes hwn. Cawsom ohebiaeth ddoe, Julie—clywais eich sylwadau yn gynharach, ond cawsom ohebiaeth ddoe gan gynghrair gyfan o sefydliadau anabledd. Nid oes yr un ohonynt yn cefnogi newid yn y gyfraith, a hynny oherwydd bod pob un ohonynt yn cydnabod y perygl i bobl gael canfyddiad o faich, eu bod yn rhywun nad yw'n haeddu bod yn fyw. Rwy'n credu bod hynny'n rhywbeth y mae'n rhaid gwneud yn siŵr ein bod yn mynd i'r afael ag ef.
Hefyd—yn olaf, os caf—pryder arall, lle mae cymorth hunanladdiad wedi ei gyflwyno, yw ei fod yn tueddu i gael effaith anghymesur ar gymunedau tlotach a mwy ymylol mewn cymdeithas, ac nid oes amheuaeth mai dyna fyddai'n digwydd yma yng Nghymru hefyd. Byddai pobl ag incwm gweddus, rhwydwaith cryf o ffrindiau ac anwyliaid a mynediad at ofal iechyd da yn ystyried cymorth hunanladdiad mewn ffordd wahanol iawn i bobl sy'n unig, yn methu cael gofal da, yn methu cael cymorth—
Darren, you need to conclude, please.
Darren, mae angen i chi orffen, os gwelwch yn dda.
That has been the experience overseas and it would almost certainly be the experience here too. So, what is the answer? The answer, in short, is investment in palliative care, investment in end-of-life care. We know that Hospice UK have told us that they are facing a fundamental finance crisis at the moment. And together, I hope that one thing we can all agree on, even if we might not agree on this motion, is that we must do more to make sure that they get the funding they deserve.
Dyna fu'r profiad dramor ac mae hi bron yn sicr mai dyna fyddai'r profiad yma hefyd. Felly, beth yw'r ateb? Yr ateb, yn fyr, yw buddsoddi mewn gofal lliniarol, buddsoddi mewn gofal diwedd oes. Gwyddom fod Hospice UK wedi dweud wrthym eu bod yn wynebu argyfwng ariannol sylfaenol ar hyn o bryd. A chyda'n gilydd, rwy'n gobeithio mai un peth y gallwn i gyd gytuno arno, hyd yn oed os nad ydym yn cytuno ar y cynnig hwn, yw bod yn rhaid inni wneud mwy i sicrhau eu bod hwy'n cael yr arian y maent yn ei haeddu.
Diolch i Julie Morgan am gyflwyno'r ddadl bwysig hon. Er bod marwolaeth yn digwydd i ni i gyd, dydyn ni fel cenedl ddim yn dda iawn am drafod marwolaeth, a dwi'n meddwl bod y ffaith ein bod ni ddim yn ei thrafod yn golygu, wedyn, ein bod ni ddim wastad yn gwrando ar bobl. Bydd gennym ni i gyd farn, ond, i fi, mae hyn am hawl bob unigolyn i allu gwneud y dewis hwn. Oherwydd mi fedrwn ni ddychmygu sut fath o beth ydy o, ond tan i chi fod yn y sefyllfa honno o fod mewn poen dirdynnol, hyd yn oed efo'r gofal lliniarol gorau, fedraf i ddim dweud bod yn rhaid i chi drio parhau. A dwi hefyd eisiau dod â bach o—wel, ein bod ni'n atgoffa ein hunain o pam fod pobl wedi gwneud y ddadl yma, a mynd nôl i'r pwyntiau cychwynnol gan Julie Morgan.
Thank you to Julie Morgan for bringing forward this important debate. Although death comes to us all, we as a nation aren't particularly good at discussing death, and I think the fact that we don't discuss the issue then means that we don't always listen to people. We will all have our own views, but, for me, this is about the right of every individual to make that choice. Because we can imagine what it would be like, but until you're in that situation of being in appalling pain, even with the best palliative care, I cannot say that you must seek to survive. And I also want to bring a little bit of—well, I want us to remind ourselves as to why people have made this case, and to go back to those initial points made by Julie Morgan.
If I may, you reminded us that people are already making this choice. They are leaving the country, without the support of loved ones, or if their loved ones are with them, risking prosecution. People are making that choice by committing suicide. And we know that that happens. I'm sure I'm not the only person here today who has received correspondence from constituents where, perhaps, their parents have committed suicide, or a loved one, because assisted dying wasn't an option. So, let's not pretend that this isn't happening. What is extremely sad in that correspondence that I've received is that people have said that they didn't know that they were intending to commit suicide, because they were afraid of what that would mean in terms of that individual knowing their plans, et cetera, and that, actually, there was no dignity in death, no farewell in that sense, as if you'd made the choice, an informed choice, with all the safeguards that my colleague Adam Price has outlined. I think those are logical steps forward. And, yes, I am scared and terrified as well, when I read about those slippery-slope situations, where people have got it wrong in terms of how this is implemented. But, at the end of the day, there are frameworks we can put in place.
I absolutely agree with Darren Millar in terms of investment in palliative care and end-of-life care. We have to be honest that end-of-life care and palliative care aren't properly funded here in Wales currently, and that people are dying without the support that they deserve. People are dying without that dignity. I absolutely also believe that, in terms of people with a terminal illness, some people can live fully supported, full lives and have a peaceful death, but not everyone has that peaceful death; not everybody has that nice death that we all see in movies as the thing that we all want to happen at the end of our lives.
Os caf, fe wnaethoch chi ein hatgoffa bod pobl eisoes yn gwneud y dewis hwn. Maent yn gadael y wlad, heb gefnogaeth anwyliaid, neu os yw eu hanwyliaid gyda hwy, gan wynebu'r perygl o erlyniad. Mae pobl yn gwneud y dewis hwnnw trwy gyflawni hunanladdiad. A gwyddom fod hynny'n digwydd. Rwy'n siŵr nad fi yw'r unig berson yma heddiw sydd wedi cael gohebiaeth gan etholwyr lle mae eu rhieni wedi cyflawni hunanladdiad, neu rywun annwyl, am nad oedd cymorth i farw yn opsiwn. Felly, gadewch inni beidio ag esgus nad yw hyn yn digwydd. Yr hyn sy'n hynod drist yn yr ohebiaeth a gefais yw bod pobl wedi dweud nad oeddent yn gwybod eu bod yn bwriadu cyflawni hunanladdiad, am eu bod yn ofni beth fyddai hynny'n ei olygu pa bai'r unigolyn hwnnw yn gwybod am eu cynlluniau, ac ati, ac nad oedd urddas mewn marwolaeth, dim ffarwel, fel pe baech chi wedi gwneud y dewis, dewis gwybodus, gyda'r holl fesurau diogelu y mae fy nghyd-Aelod Adam Price wedi'u hamlinellu. Rwy'n credu bod y rhain yn gamau rhesymegol ymlaen. Ac ydw, rwy'n ofnus iawn hefyd, pan ddarllenaf am y sefyllfaoedd llethr llithrig hynny, lle mae pobl wedi ei gael yn anghywir wrth ei weithredu. Ond yn y pen draw, mae yna fframweithiau y gallwn eu rhoi ar waith.
Rwy'n cytuno'n llwyr â Darren Millar ynglŷn â buddsoddi mewn gofal lliniarol a gofal diwedd oes. Mae'n rhaid inni fod yn onest nad yw gofal diwedd oes a gofal lliniarol yn cael eu hariannu'n iawn yma yng Nghymru ar hyn o bryd, a bod pobl yn marw heb y gefnogaeth y maent yn ei haeddu. Mae pobl yn marw heb urddas. Rwyf hefyd yn credu'n llwyr y gall rhai pobl â salwch angheuol fyw bywydau llawn wedi eu cefnogi'n llawn, a chael marwolaeth heddychlon, ond nid pawb sy'n cael y farwolaeth heddychlon honno; nid yw pawb yn cael y farwolaeth braf a welwn mewn ffilmiau a'r hyn yr hoffai pawb ohonom iddo ddigwydd ar ddiwedd ein bywydau.
Would you take an intervention on that point? We heard, in some detail yesterday, about the methods used in order to bring about an assisted death in some of the countries where it is legalised—that's not a pretty death, either. Many people struggle for many hours. In fact, we were reading reports from Oregon of 137 hours before they expire. Some people were reviving after having taken the poisons and other pills. That is not the Hollywood glamorous death either, is it, that some proponents and supporters of assisted suicide might suggest will be the case.
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad ar y pwynt hwnnw? Fe glywsom, mewn cryn fanylder ddoe, am y dulliau a ddefnyddir i gyflawni cymorth i farw yn rhai o'r gwledydd lle mae wedi ei gyfreithloni—nid yw honno'n farwolaeth braf, ychwaith. Mae llawer o bobl yn brwydro am oriau lawer. Mewn gwirionedd, roeddem yn darllen adroddiadau o Oregon am 137 awr cyn iddynt farw. Roedd rhai pobl yn adfywio ar ôl cymryd y gwenwynau a thabledi eraill. Nid dyna'r farwolaeth braf Hollywoodaidd sy'n digwydd yn ôl rhai o gefnogwyr cymorth hunanladdiad.
No, and that's why you need to get it absolutely right. But I believe that someone has the right to choose when their suffering comes to an end. I don't feel that I have that right to force that person to carry on suffering. So, I think that those safeguards, those concerns, are all very valid, but this is about compassion and people having a dignified end and having that choice.
I believe that our role here is to listen to all of our constituents. Some of them are terrified by the proposed changes, and I absolutely understand. Some do come at it from a religious point of view, but others have the reality of seeing people choose to end their life in a way that isn't of their choosing. This would allow people to have that dignity in death. I am certainly not going to stop in their way, but we do need the safeguards in place. That's why I feel that we need to have that conversation about death, but allow people to make that choice, which doesn't exist at present.
Na, a dyna pam y mae angen i chi ei gael yn hollol gywir. Ond rwy'n credu bod gan rywun hawl i ddewis pryd y daw eu dioddefaint i ben. Nid wyf yn teimlo bod gennyf hawl i orfodi'r unigolyn hwnnw i barhau i ddioddef. Felly, rwy'n credu bod y mesurau diogelwch hynny, y pryderon hynny, i gyd yn ddilys iawn, ond mae hyn yn ymwneud â thosturi a phobl yn cael diwedd urddasol a chael y dewis hwnnw.
Credaf mai ein rôl ni yma yw gwrando ar ein holl etholwyr. Mae rhai ohonynt yn ofnus iawn ynghylch y newidiadau arfaethedig, ac rwy'n deall hynny'n llwyr. Mae rhai'n edrych arno o safbwynt crefyddol, ond mae eraill yn gweld pobl yn dewis dod â'u bywyd i ben mewn ffordd nad yw o'u dewis. Byddai hyn yn caniatáu i bobl gael urddas wrth farw. Yn sicr, nid wyf i am gamu yn eu ffordd, ond mae angen y mesurau diogelu ar waith. Dyna pam rwy'n teimlo bod angen inni gael y sgwrs honno am farwolaeth, ond caniatáu i bobl wneud y dewis, nad yw'n bodoli ar hyn o bryd.
I first of all want to talk about palliative care, because I had a terrible experience about nine years ago, which I absolutely vividly remember, which was a distressing conversation with a recently widowed constituent. Her husband had been diagnosed with terminal cancer some months earlier, and the support that both of them had had from family and friends, as well as the local doctor and the pharmacy, was absolutely excellent. So, I was really unprepared for the description of his last five days in a hospice, particularly his last night.
According to his widow, he was racked with pain, crying out throughout the night, bringing up black bile all the time. This was hugely distressing to his wife, as well as other family members who were present. I apologise if this is distressing to anyone who is listening to this debate, but unfortunately, death is not always, as others have said, the peaceful experience that we would all wish for. And that includes in the setting of a place that is a respite for the terminally ill, as well as a place to die.
Assisted dying was never discussed in the case of this couple because they wanted to spend as much quality time together for as long as possible. They certainly wouldn’t have had the money to get on a plane to go to Zurich had that been the husband’s wish. So, we have to recognise that, for many people who do have the money, they already have this option to take their life if they think—. And one of my closest friends did take this option and went to Dignitas, but she had to hide it from many other people because of the implications of them being prosecuted for having assisted what was her absolute wish.
I agree with Ilora Finlay that the complexities of the issues that we are debating today are not covered adequately in the headlines or the soundbites. That’s because, as a society, we have a reluctance to discuss the event that awaits us all. Contrast that with the culture in Mexico, where, next week, because it is the two days of the dead—1 and 2 November—loved ones will be gathered around the graves of the deceased with their favourite food, their favourite drink, as well as mementoes and photos of them, and a discussion takes place about what they miss about that individual.
I’m sure that there are other cultures of the world that deal better with death than we do. Unfortunately, because we don’t discuss this absolute umbilical cord between birth and death, between loss and renewal, we fail to have those discussions with our loved ones in time. I still feel guilty about the manner in which my father died because I had failed to discuss it, either with him—it was questionable whether he still had that capacity—or with my siblings. Was he terminally ill? He was certainly coming to the end of his life because he accelerated it by eating all of the wrong things, drinking far too much, never taking any exercise, and having a series of strokes.
I was, unfortunately, abroad, on the other side of the world, when he had his penultimate stroke, and it took me 24 hours to get back. And because I'd failed to have the discussion with my siblings about whether to resuscitate him if he had another stroke, I am still racked by the fact that he ended his life being jumped on by a load of people who were obliged to resuscitate him, because that is what one of my siblings had said they wanted to happen. It wasn't appropriate and he should have been allowed to go naturally.
There are far too many ways in which modern medicine keeps alive people long beyond their capacity to enjoy life, and this is a dilemma faced by the medical profession every single day of their working lives, if they work in that emergency end of medicine. This is really difficult, but I absolutely understand that we need to proceed very cautiously on this. We absolutely need to have the safeguards in place, but, at the same time, why do we need to ensure that the state does not prohibit us from ending our lives when we think we've had enough?
Remember how we used to treat people who committed suicide. They were denied a dignified death; they were pushed into a corner and their families were made to feel like they were being scapegoated. So, we need to proceed carefully. I do support the Bill that's coming forward in the House of Commons, but I think we absolutely need to have all the safeguards in place, and, as Adam Price said, if it's not working, we need to do further legislation.
Yn gyntaf oll rwyf am siarad am ofal lliniarol, oherwydd cefais brofiad ofnadwy tua naw mlynedd yn ôl, ac rwy'n ei gofio'n fyw iawn, sef sgwrs ofidus gydag etholwr a oedd wedi newydd ddod yn wraig weddw. Roedd ei gŵr wedi cael diagnosis o ganser angheuol rai misoedd ynghynt, ac roedd y gefnogaeth a gafodd y ddau ohonynt gan deulu a ffrindiau, yn ogystal â'r meddyg lleol a'r fferyllfa, yn gwbl ardderchog. Felly, nid oeddwn yn barod o gwbl am y disgrifiad o'i bum diwrnod olaf mewn hosbis, yn enwedig ei noson olaf.
Yn ôl ei weddw, roedd mewn artaith, yn crio allan drwy'r nos, yn codi beil du drwy'r amser. Roedd hyn yn peri gofid mawr i'w wraig, yn ogystal ag aelodau eraill o'r teulu a oedd yn bresennol. Rwy'n ymddiheuro os yw hyn yn peri gofid i unrhyw un sy'n gwrando ar y ddadl hon, ond yn anffodus, nid yw marw, fel y mae eraill wedi'i ddweud, yn brofiad heddychlon fel y byddem i gyd yn dymuno ei gael. Ac mae hynny'n cynnwys mewn lleoliad sy'n gofalu am bobl â salwch angheuol, yn ogystal â lle i farw.
Ni chafodd cymorth i farw ei drafod gan y cwpl hwn am eu bod am dreulio cymaint o amser gyda'i gilydd ag y gallent. Yn sicr, ni fyddent wedi bod ag arian i fynd ar awyren i fynd i Zurich pe bai'r gŵr wedi dymuno hynny. Felly, mae'n rhaid inni gydnabod, i lawer o bobl sydd ag arian, fod ganddynt yr opsiwn eisoes i roi diwedd ar eu bywyd os ydynt yn meddwl—. Ac fe wnaeth un o fy ffrindiau agosaf ddewis yr opsiwn hwnnw a mynd i Dignitas, ond roedd yn rhaid iddi ei guddio rhag llawer o bobl eraill oherwydd y posibilrwydd y gallent gael eu herlyn am fod wedi cynorthwyo'r hyn a oedd yn ddymuniad pendant ganddi.
Rwy'n cytuno ag Ilora Finlay nad yw cymhlethdodau'r materion yr ydym yn eu trafod heddiw yn cael eu cynnwys yn ddigonol yn y penawdau na'r ystrydebau. Mae hynny oherwydd ein bod, fel cymdeithas, yn amharod i drafod y digwyddiad sy'n ein haros ni i gyd. Cyferbynnwch hynny â'r diwylliant ym Mecsico, lle, yr wythnos nesaf, oherwydd ei bod yn ddeuddydd y meirw—1 a 2 Tachwedd—bydd anwyliaid yn ymgasglu o amgylch beddau'r ymadawedig gyda'u hoff fwyd, eu hoff ddiod, yn ogystal â chofroddion a lluniau ohonynt, ac mae trafodaeth yn digwydd am yr hyn y maent yn ei golli am yr unigolyn hwnnw.
Rwy'n siŵr fod diwylliannau eraill yn y byd yn ymdrin â marwolaeth yn well na ni. Yn anffodus, am nad ydym yn trafod y llinyn bogail absoliwt hwn rhwng geni a marwolaeth, rhwng colled ac adnewyddiad, nid ydym yn cael y trafodaethau hynny gyda'n hanwyliaid mewn pryd. Rwy'n dal i deimlo'n euog am y modd y bu farw fy nhad am fy mod wedi methu ei drafod, gydag ef—mae'n amheus a oedd ganddo'r gallu i wneud erbyn hynny—neu gyda fy mrodyr/chwiorydd. A oedd ef yn dioddef o salwch angheuol? Roedd yn sicr yn dod at ddiwedd ei oes gan iddo ei gyflymu trwy fwyta'r holl bethau anghywir, yfed gormod o lawer, peidio â gwneud unrhyw ymarfer corff, a chael cyfres o strociau.
Roeddwn i dramor, yn anffodus, ar yr ochr arall i'r byd pan gafodd y strôc olaf ond un, a chymerodd 24 awr imi ddychwelyd. Ac am fy mod wedi methu cael y drafodaeth gyda fy mrodyr/chwiorydd ynglŷn ag a ddylid ei adfywio pe bai'n cael strôc arall, rwy'n dal i deimlo'n drist fod ei fywyd wedi dod i ben gyda llwyth o bobl yn neidio arno yn gorfod ei adfywio, am mai dyna a ddywedodd un o fy mrodyr/chwiorydd eu bod am iddo ddigwydd. Nid oedd yn briodol a dylai fod wedi cael mynd yn naturiol.
Mae yna ormod o lawer o ffyrdd lle mae meddygaeth fodern yn cadw pobl yn fyw ymhell y tu hwnt i'w gallu i fwynhau bywyd, ac mae hwn yn gyfyng-gyngor sy'n wynebu'r proffesiwn meddygol bob diwrnod o'u bywydau gwaith os ydynt yn gweithio mewn meddygaeth frys. Mae'n anodd iawn, ond rwy'n deall yn llwyr fod angen i ni fwrw ymlaen yn ofalus iawn â hyn. Mae gwir angen inni gael y mesurau diogelwch ar waith, ond ar yr un pryd, pam y mae angen inni sicrhau nad yw'r wladwriaeth yn ein gwahardd rhag dod â'n bywydau i ben pan gredwn ein bod wedi cael digon?
Cofiwch sut y byddem yn arfer trin pobl a oedd wedi cyflawni hunanladdiad. Byddent yn cael eu hamddifadu o farwolaeth urddasol; caent eu gwthio i gornel a byddai eu teuluoedd yn cael eu gwnaed i deimlo fel pe baent yn fychod dihangol. Felly, mae'n rhaid inni symud ymlaen yn ofalus. Rwy'n cefnogi'r Bil sy'n cael ei gyflwyno yn Nhŷ'r Cyffredin, ond rwy'n credu bod gwir angen inni gael yr holl fesurau diogelu ar waith, ac fel y dywedodd Adam Price, os nad yw'n gweithio, mae angen inni wneud deddfwriaeth bellach.
Of course, as has rightly been pointed out today, assisted dying is complex and emotional, with significant concerns against its legalisation. The changing of law in this regard is a matter for the UK Government. I can understand the Member bringing this forward, but as has already been said by my colleagues on these benches, the proposal we have before us today, the motion, does not reflect exactly what they will be asked to vote for in the UK Parliament. It is ambiguous. I would like to ask what is meant in point 3 by
'intolerably suffering from an incurable, physical condition and have a clear and settled wish to die'.
Well, we know, from evidence—. And I'd like to thank Baroness Finlay and Julian Hughes for providing all Members with a copy of this book. It's a lot of reading, and I've read it, and, I have to say, there are numerous examples of where those such complexities that we've discussed—. It's not scaremongering, they're situations that have happened in countries where this has been allowed.
We note point 1 that this is not a devolved issue and is still governed by criminal law. Let's not forget the Hippocratic oath that those in the medical field take. To me, it just seems bizarre that we're asking somebody whose main role is to help the sick to the best of their ability and judgment and abstain from harming or wronging any man by it—of course, now it's 'and women by it'—. That orders doctors to do their best in their job, and not use their skill or knowledge to harm or kill patients. This is what we're talking about.
There's the point that Darren Millar made about the fact it's not a Hollywood death here. If I was subject to assisted dying now, I could take more—. They can give you a cocktail of pills, or perhaps an injection. It could take longer, and, in some instances, up to 137 hours—from 3 minutes to 137 hours, depending on your own individual body. And, in some instances, as has already been said, people have ended up being—. What's the word when they can't move? [Interruption.] Paralysed, yes. They can be paralysed during this. I think we've got to be quite realistic about what we're asking Government to take responsibility for.
A key issue is the link between terminal illness and mental health, as emotional distress, like depression, may drive the desire to hasten death. I can tell you—we've used personal examples—my father would often say, 'I'm tired. It's time I went home.' On the night he died, he was refused resuscitation. He had no DNR on his record, and he was asking me, shouting out for me to help him, but he was not resuscitated. My own mother, 20 years ago, was given five times the amount of diamorphine, and she ultimately died as a result of this injection, and yet, on her record, no diamorphine. She was terrified, having lived through the Harold Shipman murders.
Additionally, the procedures are often far from smooth. Patients become paralysed, unable to communicate, unable to say ‘stop’. They suffer immense pain. How does this help the suffering? They can suffer immense pain whilst having assisted dying.
There's abuse of any system—we know of it. Do any of you here have any examples of the Liverpool care pathway? I have three relatives who were denied food and water so that they could have their death hastened. It is shocking that we, I believe—. I can understand that people bringing this want to do it for the right reasons, to stop that immense suffering, but you can stop immense suffering by supporting mental health, by ensuring Government funding, making sure we've got enough mental health practitioners, so that someone who wants to die one day because of their pain and their suffering is helped into a better life to live. Life is very precious, as has been mentioned here. It's a fine line between life and death, and I don't think it's for Government to take part in that.
We also know that in Canada, where assisted dying has been brought in, the numbers of those choosing this are going up and up. It has increased by about 36 per cent. At the same time, we know the amount spent on palliative care has gone down and down.
Wrth gwrs, fel y nodwyd yn briodol heddiw, mae cymorth i farw yn gymhleth ac yn emosiynol, gyda phryderon sylweddol yn erbyn ei gyfreithloni. Mater i Lywodraeth y DU yw newid y gyfraith yn hyn o beth. Gallaf ddeall pam fod yr Aelod yn cyflwyno hyn, ond fel y dywedwyd eisoes gan fy nghyd-Aelodau ar y meinciau hyn, nid yw'r cynnig sydd gennym ger ein bron heddiw yn adlewyrchu'n hollol yr hyn y gofynnir iddynt bleidleisio o'i blaid yn Senedd y DU. Mae'n amwys. Hoffwn ofyn beth a olygir ym mhwynt 3 wrth
'gyflwr corfforol annioddefadwy, na ellir ei wella ac y mae wedi nodi ei ddymuniad clir a phendant i farw'.
Wel, rydym yn gwybod, o dystiolaeth—. A hoffwn ddiolch i'r Farwnes Finlay a Julian Hughes am roi copi o'r llyfr hwn i'r holl Aelodau. Mae'n llawer o waith darllen, ac rwyf i wedi ei ddarllen, ac mae'n rhaid i mi ddweud, mae yna enghreifftiau niferus o ble mae cymhlethdodau o'r math a drafodwyd gennym—. Nid codi bwganod ydyw, maent yn sefyllfaoedd sydd wedi digwydd mewn gwledydd lle mae hyn wedi'i ganiatáu.
Nodwn bwynt 1 nad yw hwn yn fater wedi'i ddatganoli ac mae'n dal i gael ei lywodraethu gan gyfraith droseddol. Gadewch inni beidio ag anghofio'r llw Hipocratig y mae'r rheini yn y maes meddygol yn ei wneud. I mi, mae'n ymddangos yn rhyfedd ein bod ni'n gofyn i rywun y mae ei brif rôl yn galw am helpu pobl sâl hyd eithaf eu gallu a'u crebwyll ac ymatal rhag niweidio neu gam-drin unrhyw un drwy hynny—. Mae'n gorchymyn i feddygon wneud eu gorau yn eu swydd, a pheidio â defnyddio eu sgìl na'u gwybodaeth i niweidio neu ladd cleifion. Am hynny rydym ni'n sôn.
Un pwynt a wnaeth Darren Millar oedd nad yw'n farwolaeth Hollywoodaidd. Pe bawn i'n destun cymorth i farw nawr, gallwn gymryd mwy—. Gallant roi coctel o dabledi i chi, neu bigiad efallai. Gallai gymryd mwy o amser, ac mewn rhai achosion, hyd at 137 awr—o 3 munud i 137 awr, yn dibynnu ar eich corff. Ac mewn rhai achosion, fel y dywedwyd eisoes, mae pobl wedi—. Beth yw'r gair am pan na allant symud? [Torri ar draws.] Wedi'u parlysu, ie. Gallant gael eu parlysu yn ystod hyn. Rwy'n credu bod yn rhaid inni fod yn eithaf realistig ynglŷn â'r hyn y gofynnwn i'r Llywodraeth ysgwyddo cyfrifoldeb amdano.
Un mater allweddol yw'r cysylltiad rhwng salwch angheuol ac iechyd meddwl, oherwydd gall trallod emosiynol, fel iselder, hybu'r awydd i gyflymu marwolaeth. Gallaf ddweud wrthych—rydym wedi defnyddio enghreifftiau personol—byddai fy nhad yn aml yn dweud, 'Rwyf wedi blino. Mae'n hen bryd imi fynd adref.' Ar y noson y bu farw, gwrthodwyd ei ddadebru. Nid oedd ganddo DNR ar ei gofnod, ac roedd yn gofyn i mi, yn gweiddi arnaf i'w helpu, ond ni chafodd ei ddadebru. Rhoddwyd pum gwaith y diamorffin i fy mam, 20 mlynedd yn ôl, a bu farw yn y pen draw o ganlyniad i'r pigiad, ac eto, ar ei chofnod, dim diamorffin. Roedd hi'n ofnus iawn, ar ôl byw trwy lofruddiaethau Harold Shipman.
Yn ogystal, mae'r triniaethau'n aml yn bell o fod yn llyfn. Mae cleifion yn cael eu parlysu, yn methu cyfathrebu, yn methu dweud 'stop'. Maent yn dioddef poen ofnadwy. Sut y mae hyn yn helpu'r dioddefaint? Gallant ddioddef poen aruthrol wrth gael cymorth i farw.
Gellir cam-drin unrhyw system—fe wyddom amdano. A oes gan unrhyw un ohonoch chi yma unrhyw enghreifftiau o lwybr gofal Lerpwl? Mae gennyf dri pherthynas y gwrthodwyd bwyd a dŵr iddynt er mwyn prysuro eu marwolaeth. Mae'n frawychus ein bod ni—. Gallaf ddeall bod pobl sy'n cyflwyno hyn eisiau ei wneud am y rhesymau cywir, i atal y dioddefaint aruthrol hwnnw, ond gallwch atal dioddefaint aruthrol trwy gefnogi iechyd meddwl, drwy sicrhau cyllid Llywodraeth, sicrhau bod gennym ddigon o ymarferwyr iechyd meddwl, fel bod rhywun sydd eisiau marw un diwrnod oherwydd eu poen a'u dioddefaint yn cael ei helpu i fywyd gwell i'w fyw. Mae bywyd yn werthfawr iawn, fel y crybwyllwyd yma. Llinell denau yw'r ffin rhwng bywyd a marwolaeth, ac nid wyf yn credu mai mater i'r Llywodraeth yw cymryd rhan yn hynny.
Rydym hefyd yn gwybod bod nifer y rhai yng Nghanada, lle cyflwynwyd cymorth i farw, sy'n dewis hyn yn cynyddu o hyd. Mae wedi cynyddu tua 36 y cant. Ar yr un pryd, rydym yn gwybod bod y swm a werir ar ofal lliniarol wedi gostwng fwyfwy.
Janet, you need to conclude now, please.
Janet, mae angen ichi ddod i ben nawr, os gwelwch yn dda.
Yes, I will. I'll conclude by saying we shouldn't be talking about the reality of assisted dying. We should be talking about the reality of assisted living. Diolch.
Iawn, fe wnaf. Rwyf am orffen drwy ddweud na ddylem siarad am realiti cymorth i farw. Dylem fod yn siarad am realiti cymorth i fyw. Diolch.
As stated in the book The Reality of Assisted Dying, co-edited by Professor Ilora Finlay, Baroness of Llandaff, and Professor Julian C. Hughes, both advocates for a change in the law, those opposing such change are motivated by compassion. But the complexities of the issues involved are inadequately covered in the headlines or soundbites of modern media. These complexities and the unintended consequences of a change in the law are of critical concern to those responsible for designing legislation and implementing change.
When we last debated assisted dying here a decade ago, Baroness Ilora Finlay, who worked as a palliative care consultant for 40 years, told me that those of us who care for terminally ill people day in and day out are all too well aware of the vulnerability of people who are dying, how they can be prone to depression, feel a burden on those around them, be pressurised by the unscrupulous, and veer from hope one day to despair the next and back again. This is not to mention the fallibility of medical diagnosis and prognosis. That is why, she said, the majority of doctors and especially those of us who treat dying patients are opposed to a change in the law. Legalising assisting dying might meet the wishes of a small minority of highly resolute, determined people, she said, but it has the potential to put many more vulnerable patients in harm's way.
When I spoke with her last week, she told me that she stands by what she said then. And as she stated only yesterday, one in six people over 65 are affected by abuse and there's a real danger of coercion. The Journal of Pain and Symptom Management has published evidence showing that countries that have introduced assisted dying have fallen in the global rankings for end-of-life care. And although this motion states that up to 88 per cent of the public favour a change in the law, the polls do not consider the practicalities of this. In contrast, in 2019 the Royal College of Physicians found in a poll that 80 per cent of palliative care physicians, those working with dying people, remain opposed to medicine's involvement in ending patients' lives, with only 4 per cent in favour.
Baroness Grey-Thompson, the decorated wheelchair athlete, has stated that she's really worried about proposals to legalise assisted dying and warned that many disabled people could be classed as terminally ill, potentially making them vulnerable to the changes. Disability Wales and All Wales People First have warned that the implications of the private Member's Bill are far-reaching with serious potential consequences, adding that this is why no deaf and disabled people organisations in the UK are in favour of legislation.
As the Royal College of Psychiatrists Wales states, a person who has a terminal physical illness is more likely to have a mental illness and people at end of life deserve high-quality psychiatric treatment, and research suggests that, if depression is treated in people with a physical terminal illness, their wish to hasten death lessens. The recommendations of the House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee inquiry into assisted dying/assisted suicide are also relevant to the assisted dying debate in Wales, where they state:
'access to and provision of palliative and end of life care is patchy. The Government must ensure universal coverage of palliative and end of life services, including hospice care at home.'
As Hospice UK state, regardless of any change in the law, Welsh Government need to reduce inequity in access to and experience of palliative and end-of-life care. And as Marie Curie state, urgent action is needed in Wales to ensure that our palliative and end-of-life care system meets the needs of people across Wales and can respond to the growing number of people who will require palliative and end-of-life care in coming years, adding that there is an implementation gap between what the Welsh Government set out in its vision for palliative and end-of-life care and this becoming a reality for all.
If you have an illness that cannot be cured, palliative care makes you as comfortable as possible by managing your pain and other distressing symptoms. It also involves psychological, social and spiritual support for you and your family or carers. Assisted dying is the antithesis of palliative care and, as the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales states, representing the views of so, so many, the priority should be to fix the poor state of the NHS and palliative care services, not legalise assisted suicide.
Fel y nodwyd yn y llyfr The Reality of Assisted Dying, a gyd-olygwyd gan yr Athro Ilora Finlay, Barwnes Llandaf, a'r Athro Julian C. Hughes, y ddau yn hyrwyddwyr newid yn y gyfraith, mae'r rhai sy'n gwrthwynebu newid o'r fath yn cael eu cymell gan dosturi. Ond nid yw cymhlethdodau'r materion dan sylw yn cael eu cynnwys yn ddigonol ym mhenawdau neu ystrydebau'r cyfryngau modern. Mae'r cymhlethdodau hyn a chanlyniadau anfwriadol newid yn y gyfraith yn peri pryder difrifol i'r rhai sy'n gyfrifol am lunio deddfwriaeth a gweithredu newid.
Pan fuom yn dadlau ddiwethaf am gymorth i farw yma ddegawd yn ôl, dywedodd y Farwnes Ilora Finlay, a fu'n gweithio fel meddyg ymgynghorol gofal lliniarol am 40 mlynedd, wrthyf fod y rhai ohonom sy'n gofalu am bobl â salwch angheuol o ddydd i ddydd yn ymwybodol iawn o fregusrwydd pobl sy'n marw, sut y gallant fod yn dueddol o deimlo iselder, teimlo'n faich ar y rhai o'u cwmpas, dod o dan bwysau pobl ddiegwyddor, a gwyro o obaith un diwrnod i anobaith y diwrnod nesaf ac yn ôl eto, heb sôn am y posibilrwydd y gallai diagnosis a phrognosis meddygol fod yn anghywir. Dyna pam, meddai, fod mwyafrif o feddygon ac yn enwedig y rheini ohonom sy'n trin cleifion sy'n marw yn gwrthwynebu newid yn y gyfraith. Gallai cyfreithloni cymorth i farw fodloni dymuniadau lleiafrif bach o bobl benderfynol iawn, meddai, ond mae risg y gallai greu perygl o niwed i lawer mwy o gleifion bregus.
Pan siaradais â hi yr wythnos diwethaf, dywedodd wrthyf ei bod yn sefyll wrth yr hyn a ddywedodd bryd hynny. Ac fel y dywedodd hi ddoe ddiwethaf, mae un o bob chwech o bobl dros 65 oed yn cael eu heffeithio gan gamdriniaeth ac mae perygl gwirioneddol o orfodaeth. Mae'r Journal of Pain and Symptom Management wedi cyhoeddi tystiolaeth sy'n dangos bod gwledydd sydd wedi cyflwyno cymorth i farw wedi gostwng yn y safleoedd byd-eang ar gyfer gofal diwedd oes. Ac er bod y cynnig hwn yn nodi bod hyd at 88 y cant o'r cyhoedd o blaid newid yn y gyfraith, nid yw'r arolygon barn yn ystyried ymarferoldeb hyn. Mewn cyferbyniad, yn 2019, canfu Coleg Brenhinol y Meddygon mewn arolwg barn fod 80 y cant o feddygon gofal lliniarol, y rhai sy'n gweithio gyda phobl sy'n marw, yn parhau i wrthwynebu defnyddio meddygaeth i ddod â bywydau cleifion i ben, gyda dim ond 4 y cant o blaid.
Mae'r Farwnes Grey-Thompson, yr athletwr cadair olwyn arobryn, wedi datgan ei bod yn poeni'n fawr am gynigion i gyfreithloni cymorth i farw a rhybuddiodd y gallai llawer o bobl anabl gael eu hystyried yn bobl â salwch angheuol, gan eu gwneud yn agored i'r newidiadau. Mae Anabledd Cymru a Pobl yn Gyntaf Cymru wedi rhybuddio bod goblygiadau'r Bil Aelod preifat yn bellgyrhaeddol gyda chanlyniadau difrifol posibl, gan ychwanegu mai dyna pam nad oes unrhyw sefydliadau pobl fyddar ac anabl yn y DU o blaid deddfwriaeth.
Fel y dywed Coleg Brenhinol y Seiciatryddion yng Nghymru, mae unigolyn sydd â salwch corfforol angheuol yn fwy tebygol o fod â salwch meddwl ac mae pobl ar ddiwedd eu hoes yn haeddu triniaeth seiciatrig o ansawdd uchel, ac mae ymchwil yn awgrymu, os caiff iselder ei drin mewn pobl â salwch corfforol angheuol, fod eu dymuniad i gyflymu marwolaeth yn lleihau. Mae argymhellion ymchwiliad Pwyllgor Iechyd a Gofal Cymdeithasol Tŷ'r Cyffredin i gymorth i farw/cymorth hunanladdiad hefyd yn berthnasol i'r ddadl cymorth i farw yng Nghymru, lle maent yn nodi:
'mae mynediad at a darpariaeth gofal lliniarol a diwedd oes yn dameidiog. Rhaid i'r Llywodraeth sicrhau darpariaeth gyffredinol o wasanaethau lliniarol a diwedd oes, gan gynnwys gofal hosbis yn y cartref.'
Fel y mae Hospice UK yn datgan, beth bynnag am unrhyw newid yn y gyfraith, mae angen i Lywodraeth Cymru leihau annhegwch o ran mynediad at, a phrofiad o ofal lliniarol a diwedd oes. Ac fel y dywed Marie Curie, mae angen gweithredu ar frys yng Nghymru i sicrhau bod ein system gofal lliniarol a diwedd oes yn diwallu anghenion pobl ledled Cymru ac yn gallu ymateb i'r nifer gynyddol o bobl a fydd angen gofal lliniarol a diwedd oes yn y blynyddoedd i ddod, gan ychwanegu bod bwlch gweithredol rhwng yr hyn a nododd Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei gweledigaeth ar gyfer gofal lliniarol a diwedd oes a hyn yn dod yn realiti i bawb.
Os oes gennych chi salwch na ellir ei wella, mae gofal lliniarol yn eich gwneud mor gyfforddus â phosibl trwy reoli eich poen a symptomau trallodus eraill. Mae hefyd yn cynnwys cefnogaeth seicolegol, cymdeithasol ac ysbrydol i chi a'ch teulu neu ofalwyr. Gwrthwyneb gofal lliniarol yw cymorth i farw ac fel y dywed Cynhadledd Esgobion Catholig Cymru a Lloegr, sy'n cynrychioli barn cymaint o bobl, datrys cyflwr gwael y GIG a gwasanaethau gofal lliniarol ddylai'r flaenoriaeth fod, nid cyfreithloni cymorth hunanladdiad.
A galwaf ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Iechyd a Gofal Cymdeithasol, Jeremy Miles.
And I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, Jeremy Miles.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to begin by thanking Julie Morgan for tabling this important debate today and, if I may, everybody who has contributed. It's almost a decade since we last discussed assisted dying in the Senedd. It is a topic that is as complex and emotive as it is important, but it is a timely debate. A new private Member's Bill was introduced in the House of Commons by Kim Leadbeater MP last week, and Lord Falconer's latest Bill is at the Second Reading stage in the House of Lords.
As Members will be aware, assisted dying is not, of course, devolved to Wales but, should either of these backbench Bills become law, they will, of course, have huge ramifications for Wales. As a matter of conscience, I can confirm that on these benches both Government members and backbenchers will have a free vote on today's motion. As a Member of the Senedd, I have a view, which I will reflect in my vote, but, in my role as Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, I will not be speaking about the case for or against assisted dying today. I intend to focus in my response on behalf of the Government on the practical context of the two Bills in front of the Houses of Parliament and what they could mean for Wales.
The UK Parliament last voted on assisted dying in 2015, when it rejected a private Member's Bill by 330 votes to 118. The latest attempt to change the law came this summer with the introduction of Lord Falconer's private Member's Bill on assisted dying for terminally ill adults in the House of Lords. This Bill seeks to give terminally ill adults with six months or less to live medical help to end their lives through the self-administration of a prescribed medicine. This would apply only to people who are mentally able to make the decision. The decision of the terminally ill adult would need to be approved by two doctors and the High Court.
MPs will also have a vote on assisted dying, as we have heard, after Kim Leadbeater won the right to introduce her own private Member's Bill on assisted dying. We will not know the precise details until next month, when it has its Second Reading. We'll continue to closely monitor the passage of both Bills through Parliament, and we are in regular contact with the UK Government to understand and plan for the implications for the people of Wales.
In response to the question by the former Counsel General, if an assisted dying Bill were to proceed, we would continue that engagement with the UK Government to determine which aspects of the Bill were devolved. This decision would establish whether we would need to proceed with a legislative consent memorandum, but, naturally, the area of health is largely devolved and therefore it is likely that there would be devolution implications.
As I said at the start of my contribution, Dirprwy Lywydd, if the law on assisted dying is to change, there will be long-reaching implications for the health service and end-of-life care services in Wales. Whatever is the outcome of the assisted dying debate in the UK Parliament, it is vital that we continue our work in Wales to improve the quality of and access to palliative and end-of-life care.
Around 33,000 people die in Wales every year. As our population ages, an increasing number of people will have multiple chronic and potentially life-limiting illnesses. Research commissioned by the Welsh Government last year shows the number of children and young people with life-limiting conditions increased by almost a quarter in the decade from 2009 to 2019. This further underscores the importance of providing good-quality palliative care.
Last week I published a written statement about the work that we have done over the course of this Senedd term to improve access to palliative and end-of-life care. While we have made good progress, challenges certainly remain, including variation in the availability and quality of palliative care services in parts of Wales: the sustainability of hospice provision, workforce shortages and the lack of comprehensive data about patient outcomes and experience. We'll continue to work closely with the national programme board for palliative and end-of-life care to address these challenges by focusing on person-centred care. We'll continue to do this whilst closely monitoring the progress of the debate in Parliament, because the demand for high-quality palliative care will not diminish if the law on assisted dying should change.
Dirprwy Lywydd, the debate today, I think, has been one in which the complexity of the issue of assisted dying has been explored, and it is clear that Members have engaged both with matters of conscience and practicality. The Government's position is neutral, and the Government recognises that Members, both in support and against the motion, will be casting their votes motivated by compassion and care. I believe the debate, both in its content and its tone, reflects well on the Senedd, and, once again, the Government is grateful to Julie Morgan for tabling the motion.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Hoffwn ddechrau drwy ddiolch i Julie Morgan am gyflwyno'r ddadl bwysig hon heddiw ac os caf, i bawb sydd wedi cyfrannu. Mae bron i ddegawd ers inni drafod cymorth i farw ddiwethaf yn y Senedd. Mae'n bwnc cymhleth ac emosiynol, a hefyd mor bwysig, ond mae'n ddadl amserol. Cyflwynwyd Bil Aelod preifat newydd yn Nhŷ'r Cyffredin gan Kim Leadbeater AS yr wythnos diwethaf, ac mae Bil diweddaraf yr Arglwydd Falconer ar gam Ail Ddarlleniad yn Nhŷ'r Arglwyddi.
Fel y gŵyr yr Aelodau, nid yw cymorth i farw wedi'i ddatganoli i Gymru ond pe bai un o'r Biliau meinciau cefn hyn yn dod yn gyfraith, fe fyddai goblygiadau enfawr i Gymru wrth gwrs. Fel mater o gydwybod, gallaf gadarnhau y bydd aelodau'r Llywodraeth a'r meinciau cefn ar y meinciau hyn yn cael pleidlais rydd ar y cynnig heddiw. Fel Aelod o'r Senedd, mae gennyf farn, y byddaf yn ei hadlewyrchu yn fy mhleidlais, ond yn fy rôl fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Iechyd a Gofal Cymdeithasol, nid wyf am siarad am yr achos o blaid neu yn erbyn cymorth i farw heddiw. Rwy'n bwriadu canolbwyntio yn fy ymateb ar ran y Llywodraeth ar gyd-destun ymarferol y ddau Fil sydd ger bron dau Dŷ'r Senedd a'r hyn y gallent ei olygu i Gymru.
Pleidleisiodd Senedd y DU ar gymorth i farw ddiwethaf yn 2015, pan wrthododd Fil Aelod preifat o 330 pleidlais i 118. Daeth yr ymgais ddiweddaraf i newid y gyfraith yr haf hwn gyda chyflwyno Bil Aelod preifat yr Arglwydd Falconer ar gymorth i farw i oedolion â salwch angheuol yn Nhŷ'r Arglwyddi. Mae'r Bil hwn yn gais i roi cymorth meddygol byw i oedolion â salwch angheuol sydd â chwe mis neu lai i fyw i roi diwedd ar eu bywydau drwy hunanweinyddu meddyginiaeth wedi'i phresgripsiynu. Ni fyddai hyn ond yn berthnasol i bobl sy'n gallu gwneud y penderfyniad yn feddyliol. Byddai angen i benderfyniad oedolyn â salwch angheuol gael ei gymeradwyo gan ddau feddyg a'r Uchel Lys.
Bydd ASau hefyd yn cael pleidlais ar gymorth i farw, fel y clywsom, ar ôl i Kim Leadbeater ennill yr hawl i gyflwyno ei Bil Aelod preifat ei hun ar gymorth i farw. Ni fyddwn yn gwybod yr union fanylion tan fis nesaf, pan fydd ar ei Ail Ddarlleniad. Byddwn yn parhau i fonitro hynt y ddau Fil drwy'r Senedd, ac rydym mewn cysylltiad rheolaidd â Llywodraeth y DU i ddeall a chynllunio ar gyfer y goblygiadau i bobl Cymru.
Mewn ymateb i'r cwestiwn gan y cyn-Gwnsler Cyffredinol, pe bai Bil cymorth i farw yn mynd rhagddo, byddem yn parhau â'r ymgysylltiad â Llywodraeth y DU i benderfynu pa agweddau ar y Bil a ddatganolir. Byddai'r penderfyniad hwn yn sefydlu a fyddai angen i ni fwrw ymlaen â memorandwm cydsyniad deddfwriaethol, ond yn naturiol, mae'r maes iechyd wedi'i ddatganoli i raddau helaeth ac felly mae'n debygol y byddai goblygiadau o ran datganoli.
Fel y dywedais ar ddechrau fy nghyfraniad, Ddirprwy Lywydd, os yw'r gyfraith ar gymorth i farw yn newid, bydd goblygiadau pellgyrhaeddol i'r gwasanaeth iechyd a gwasanaethau gofal diwedd oes yng Nghymru. Beth bynnag yw canlyniad y ddadl ar gymorth i farw yn Senedd y DU, mae'n hanfodol ein bod yn parhau â'n gwaith yng Nghymru ar wella ansawdd gofal lliniarol a gofal diwedd oes a mynediad ato.
Mae tua 33,000 o bobl yn marw yng Nghymru bob blwyddyn. Wrth i'n poblogaeth heneiddio, bydd nifer gynyddol o bobl yn dioddef o afiechydon cronig lluosog a allai gyfyngu ar fywyd. Mae ymchwil a gomisiynwyd gan Lywodraeth Cymru y llynedd yn dangos bod nifer y plant a phobl ifanc sydd â chyflyrau sy'n cyfyngu ar eu bywydau wedi cynyddu bron i chwarter yn y degawd rhwng 2009 a 2019. Mae hyn yn tanlinellu ymhellach pa mor bwysig yw darparu gofal lliniarol o ansawdd da.
Yr wythnos diwethaf cyhoeddais ddatganiad ysgrifenedig am y gwaith a wnaethom yn ystod tymor y Senedd hon ar wella mynediad at ofal lliniarol a gofal diwedd oes. Er ein bod wedi gwneud cynnydd da, mae heriau'n parhau yn sicr, gan gynnwys amrywiadau yn argaeledd ac ansawdd gwasanaethau gofal lliniarol rhwng gwahanol rannau o Gymru: cynaliadwyedd darpariaeth hosbis, prinder gweithlu a diffyg data cynhwysfawr am ganlyniadau a phrofiad cleifion. Byddwn yn parhau i weithio'n agos gyda bwrdd y rhaglen genedlaethol ar gyfer gofal lliniarol a diwedd oes i fynd i'r afael â'r heriau hyn trwy ffocysu ar ofal sy'n canolbwyntio ar yr unigolyn. Byddwn yn parhau i wneud hyn wrth fonitro cynnydd y ddadl yn y Senedd, oherwydd ni fydd y galw am ofal lliniarol o ansawdd uchel yn lleihau os yw'r gyfraith ar gymorth i farw'n newid.
Ddirprwy Lywydd, rwy'n credu bod y ddadl heddiw wedi bod yn un lle mae cymhlethdod mater cymorth i farw wedi cael ei archwilio, ac mae'n amlwg fod yr Aelodau wedi ystyried materion cydwybod ac ymarferoldeb. Mae safbwynt y Llywodraeth yn niwtral, ac mae'r Llywodraeth yn cydnabod y bydd Aelodau, o blaid ac yn erbyn y cynnig, yn bwrw eu pleidleisiau wedi'u hysgogi gan dosturi a gofal. Credaf fod y ddadl, o ran ei chynnwys a'i naws, yn adlewyrchu'n dda ar y Senedd, ac unwaith eto, mae'r Llywodraeth yn ddiolchgar i Julie Morgan am gyflwyno'r cynnig.
Galwaf ar James Evans i ymateb i'r ddadl.
I call on James Evans to reply to the debate.
Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I personally would like to thank and pay tribute to Julie Morgan for bringing this crucial debate forward to the Senedd today, and for her insightful contributions. I know Julie was a champion of this both when she was in Government and also when she was in Westminster as well, and I want to pay true homage to Julie for all the work she's done on this issue over the time.
I want to talk about the reason why I support this motion today. We've all go into politics for certain reasons—. I'll try not to get emotional. We all enter politics for certain reasons. I got into politics because I gave my grandmother a promise that I would never let anybody go through what she went through at the end of her life—never. My grandmother had really bad dementia, and my grandmother and grandfather discussed her care, and they decided between them that, if anything bad happened, my grandfather would make the decision that my nan would not suffer. My nan had a really bad stroke. It left her incapacitated. She couldn't talk, couldn't open her eyes, but she was still alive. She had no life or quality of life. The doctors told my grandfather that they could keep my grandmother alive by introducing a feed PEG into her stomach. My grandfather took the decision, based on the conversations he had with my grandmother, that he wouldn't do that to her, and he decided that she should have the option to end her life naturally. The hospital came to my grandfather and said, 'If you do this, we're going to have you done for manslaughter.' My grandfather regretted that decision that he had to make then to extend my nan's life for the rest of his days. I made a promise to both of them that I would never let anybody suffer like that again, and that's why I support this today.
As Julie has said, 31 countries across the world have brought this in. It's because of compassion. It's because of care. Adam Price talked about compassion and care and putting the safeguards in place to look after people. That's why we're doing this; this is why this has to come forward. We owe people the right to make their own decisions. People can make decisions about their lives on a daily basis, how they choose to live it, who they choose to love, who they even vote for, but we're not giving people that right at the end of their life to make a choice about whether they wish to end their life in dignity or in pain. Some people may decide they don't want to choose the assisted dying route—they'll go down the palliative care option. It's so important that we do fund our palliative care properly. But we have to give people the right to choose. Yes, I'll take an intervention, Darren.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd, ac yn bersonol hoffwn ddiolch a thalu teyrnged i Julie Morgan am gyflwyno'r ddadl hollbwysig hon i'r Senedd heddiw, ac am ei chyfraniadau craff. Rwy'n gwybod bod Julie wedi hyrwyddo hyn pan oedd hi yn y Llywodraeth a hefyd pan oedd hi yn San Steffan, ac rwyf am dalu teyrnged i Julie am yr holl waith a wnaeth ar y mater hwn dros yr amser hwnnw.
Rwyf am siarad am y rheswm pam rwy'n cefnogi'r cynnig hwn heddiw. Rydym i gyd wedi mynd i fyd gwleidyddiaeth am resymau penodol—. Fe geisiaf i beidio â bod yn emosiynol. Mae pob un ohonom yn mynd i fyd gwleidyddiaeth am resymau penodol. Euthum innau ynghlwm wrth wleidyddiaeth oherwydd fy mod wedi rhoi addewid i fy mam-gu na fuaswn i byth yn gadael i neb fynd drwy'r hyn a aeth hi drwyddo ar ddiwedd ei hoes—byth. Roedd dementia gwael iawn ar fy mam-gu, a bu fy mam-gu a fy nhad-cu yn trafod ei gofal, ac fe wnaethant y penderfyniad rhyngddynt, pe bai unrhyw beth drwg yn digwydd, y byddai fy nhad-cu yn gwneud y penderfyniad na fyddai fy mam-gu yn dioddef. Cafodd fy mam-gu strôc wael iawn. Fe'i gadawodd hi'n anabl iawn. Ni allai siarad, ni allai agor ei llygaid, ond roedd hi'n dal yn fyw. Nid oedd ganddi fywyd nac ansawdd bywyd. Dywedodd y meddygon wrth fy nhad-cu y gallent gadw fy mam-gu yn fyw trwy osod tiwb bwydo i mewn i'w stumog. Gwnaeth fy nhad-cu y penderfyniad, yn seiliedig ar y sgyrsiau a gafodd gyda fy mam-gu, na fyddai'n gwneud hynny iddi, a phenderfynodd y dylai gael yr opsiwn i ddod â'i bywyd i ben yn naturiol. Daeth yr ysbyty at fy nhad-cu a dweud, 'Os gwnewch chi hyn, fe wnawn ni eich erlyn am ddynladdiad.' Am weddill ei ddyddiau, fe wnaeth fy nhad-cu ddifaru'r penderfyniad y bu'n rhaid iddo ei wneud ar y pryd i ymestyn bywyd fy mam-gu. Fe wneuthum addewid i'r ddau ohonynt na fuaswn i byth yn gadael i unrhyw un ddioddef fel hynny eto, a dyna pam rwy'n cefnogi hyn heddiw.
Fel y dywedodd Julie, mae 31 o wledydd ar draws y byd wedi cyflwyno hyn. Maent wedi gwneud hynny oherwydd trugaredd, oherwydd tosturi. Soniodd Adam Price am drugaredd a thosturi a rhoi'r mesurau diogelu ar waith i ofalu am bobl. Dyna pam ein bod ni'n gwneud hyn; dyna pam y mae'n rhaid i hyn ddigwydd. Mae arnom yr hawl i bobl wneud eu penderfyniadau eu hunain. Gall pobl wneud penderfyniadau am eu bywydau bob dydd, sut maent yn dewis eu byw, pwy maent yn dewis eu caru, pwy maent yn pleidleisio drostynt hyd yn oed, ond nid ydym yn rhoi hawl i bobl ar ddiwedd eu hoes i ddewis a ydynt yn dymuno rhoi diwedd ar eu bywyd mewn urddas neu mewn poen. Efallai y bydd rhai pobl yn penderfynu nad ydynt am ddewis y llwybr cymorth i farw—byddant yn ffafrio'r opsiwn gofal lliniarol. Mae mor bwysig ein bod yn ariannu ein gofal lliniarol yn iawn. Ond mae'n rhaid inni roi'r hawl i bobl ddewis. Iawn, fe wnaf dderbyn ymyriad, Darren.
Thanks, James, and thanks for sharing the family story that you have. I know that that's a difficult thing for you to share, and I appreciate you giving us that insight into your own experience. I think one of the challenges here is we assume that a lot of the discussion and debate around this issue is because of pain towards the end of life. One thing that we do know from the Oregon experience is that only 28 per cent of people who choose to end their life via assisted suicide cite pain as a reason, or future pain as a reason—only 28 per cent. Don't you find that an extraordinary statistic, and, given that we're all wanting to be here today supporting the need to alleviate suffering, wouldn't it be better to be able to continue to support the existing law, which allows the withdrawal of treatment, but doesn't allow the deliberate ending of a human life?
Diolch, James, a diolch am rannu'r stori sydd gennych am y teulu. Rwy'n gwybod bod hynny'n anodd i chi ei rannu, ac rwy'n gwerthfawrogi eich bod yn rhoi cipolwg i ni ar eich profiad personol. Rwy'n credu mai un o'r heriau yma yw ein bod yn tybio bod llawer o'r drafodaeth a'r ddadl ynghylch y mater hwn yn ymwneud â phoen tuag at ddiwedd oes. Un peth a wyddom o brofiad Oregon yw mai dim ond 28 y cant o'r bobl sy'n dewis dod â'u bywyd i ben trwy gymorth hunanladdiad sy'n nodi poen fel rheswm, neu boen yn y dyfodol fel rheswm—dim ond 28 y cant. Onid ydych chi'n gweld hwnnw'n ystadegyn rhyfeddol, ac o ystyried ein bod ni i gyd eisiau bod yma heddiw i gefnogi'r angen i leddfu dioddefaint, oni fyddai'n well gallu parhau i gefnogi'r gyfraith bresennol, sy'n caniatáu tynnu triniaeth yn ôl, ond nad yw'n caniatáu rhoi diwedd ar fywyd dynol yn fwriadol?
The problem we see is that the withdrawal of treatment is given when people have reached the end, after they've gone through immeasurable suffering, and it should be that person's right—that person's right to choose. It's not policy makers' right to choose; we should enable people to make their own decisions. We do that on a daily basis, and we should be doing that more. We talk about compassion. Julie Morgan mentioned that one in eight are going to Dignitas. That's people who feel they have no other option in this country, and that's only for people who can afford it. There are people who are suffering because they can't afford to go there. Is that right? I don't think it is. I don't think it's right for anybody.
And I do understand there are concerns around safeguarding. I really do understand that, and I recognise that myself, but if we took the view on any piece of legislation or law that it's a slippery slope, or the safeguards aren't in place, we would never legislate for anything. There are always going to be pitfalls, and that's why we legislate, that's why we have scrutiny, to go through a process to get to the right outcome in the end. We can't dismiss something because it's at an initial stage. That just isn't right. If we did that, we'd never achieve anything. We'd be an inept Parliament and never deliver anything for the people we represent.
But I talked about palliative care earlier, and I think this is an area where I think government, all Governments, of all colours—that's in Westminster, Scotland, here in Wales—all need to step up and do more. We need more money in our palliative care. Palliative care is mainly funded by charitable donations, and, if we don't have charitable donations, that palliative care treatment isn't going to be there. And as Julie did say, in some countries they've actually seen more money invested in palliative care since these laws have been introduced. I think these debates put a focus on end of life; it's not something as British people, Welsh people, that we like to talk about a great deal, but people need to die in dignity and respect, and I think, however people choose to end their lives, whether that's through palliative care or through assisted dying, we have the right to make sure that's in place.
I talked about my personal story, but I do just want to mention something that someone asked me to raise specifically in closing this debate today, and they had permission off their wife, before she passed away, to do this. He said, 'I watched my wife starve to death', because she did not want to see her husband prosecuted if they went to Dignitas. She suffered for about a whole week, starving herself, not drinking, because she wanted to end her life. There's nothing religiously moral about that: that's suffering. And I'm sorry, I don't prescribe to the fact that—. Yes, all life is sacred, we have to understand that, but people have the right to choose. No-one should have to end their life in that way. No-one should have to end their life that way. And anybody who thinks they should end their life that way, shame on you. Shame on you.
I know I haven't got much time, Deputy Presiding Officer, but there has been a shift in attitude in this sphere. I want to commend people like Dame Esther Rantzen and organisations like My Death, My Decision. They've been tireless in championing these causes—tireless—against some quite vicious attacks on them saying that they're assisting people dying, or they're killing people. They're not killing people. It's just not the way we do things. We're giving people that opportunity, the opportunity to choose.
I know I'm out of time, but I will finish. In conclusion, I do think, with robust safeguards in place, we do need to proceed with caution, but that's the way the parliamentary process works. If we are given the option to do this, I think we should do it. And I say to Members who are uncertain about this vote today, or are not sure which way they want to vote, there was an exceptionally brave lady on the weekend on Politics Wales suffering with motor neuron disease—and I commend those people who speak out—and she said to all those people who were opposed to this legislation, 'Walk in my body. Walk in my body.' And I ask all those Members who are here, don't think about yourselves, think about those people, those people who are suffering. As I've said, it's not our job to deny those people their right to choose. Walk in their body, think about them as you cast your vote today. Diolch.
Y broblem a welwn yw bod tynnu'r driniaeth yn ôl yn digwydd pan fydd pobl wedi cyrraedd y diwedd, ar ôl iddynt fynd trwy ddioddefaint anfesuradwy, a dylai'r person hwnnw gael hawl i ddewis. Nid hawl llunwyr polisi yw dewis; mae'n rhaid inni alluogi pobl i wneud eu penderfyniadau eu hunain. Rydym yn gwneud hyn bob dydd, a dylem wneud mwy o hynny. Rydym yn siarad am dosturi. Soniodd Julie Morgan fod un o bob wyth yn mynd i Dignitas. Dyna bobl sy'n teimlo nad oes ganddynt unrhyw opsiwn arall yn y wlad hon, a dim ond pobl a all ei fforddio sy'n gwneud hynny. Mae yna bobl sy'n dioddef oherwydd nad ydynt yn gallu fforddio mynd yno. A yw hynny'n iawn? Nid wyf yn meddwl ei fod. Nid wyf yn credu ei fod yn iawn i unrhyw un.
Ac rwy'n deall bod yna bryderon ynghylch diogelu. Rwy'n llwyr ddeall hynny, ac rwy'n cydnabod hynny fy hun, ond pe byddem yn arddel y farn ar unrhyw ddarn o ddeddfwriaeth neu gyfraith ei bod yn llethr llithrig, neu nad yw'r mesurau diogelu ar waith, ni fyddem byth yn deddfu ynghylch unrhyw beth. Mae yna beryglon bob amser, a dyna pam ein bod ni'n deddfu, dyna pam y mae gennym graffu, i fynd trwy broses i gyrraedd y canlyniad cywir yn y pen draw. Ni allwn ddiystyru rhywbeth am ei fod ar gam cychwynnol. Nid yw hynny'n iawn. Pe byddem yn gwneud hynny, ni fyddem byth yn cyflawni unrhyw beth. Byddem yn Senedd anfedrus a byth yn cyflawni unrhyw beth i'r bobl a gynrychiolwn.
Ond siaradais am ofal lliniarol yn gynharach, a chredaf fod hwn yn faes lle rwy'n credu bod angen i lywodraeth, pob Llywodraeth, o bob lliw—yn San Steffan, yr Alban, yma yng Nghymru—mae angen i bawb gamu i'r adwy a gwneud mwy. Mae angen mwy o arian ar ein gofal lliniarol. Mae gofal lliniarol yn cael ei ariannu'n bennaf gan roddion elusennol, ac os na chawn roddion elusennol, ni fydd y driniaeth gofal lliniarol honno yno. Ac fel y dywedodd Julie, mewn rhai gwledydd maent wedi gweld mwy o arian yn cael ei fuddsoddi mewn gofal lliniarol ers i'r cyfreithiau hyn gael eu cyflwyno. Rwy'n credu bod y dadleuon hyn yn rhoi ffocws ar ddiwedd oes; nid yw'n rhywbeth yr ydym ni ym Mhrydain, yng Nghymru, yn hoff o siarad rhyw lawer amdano, ond mae pobl angen marw gydag urddas a pharch, a sut bynnag y bydd pobl yn dewis diwedd eu bywydau, boed hynny drwy ofal lliniarol neu drwy gymorth i farw, mae gennym hawl i sicrhau bod hynny ar waith.
Siaradais am fy stori bersonol, ond hoffwn sôn am rywbeth y gofynnodd rhywun i mi ei godi'n benodol wrth gau'r ddadl hon heddiw, a chawsant ganiatâd eu gwraig, cyn iddi farw, i wneud hyn. Dywedodd, 'Gwyliais fy ngwraig yn llwgu i farwolaeth', am nad oedd am weld ei gŵr yn cael ei erlyn pe byddent yn mynd at Dignitas. Dioddefodd am oddeutu wythnos gyfan, yn newynu ei hun, yn ymatal rhag yfed, oherwydd ei bod am ddod â'i bywyd i ben. Nid oes unrhyw beth yn foesol grefyddol am hynny: dioddefaint yw hynny. Ac mae'n ddrwg gennyf, nid wyf yn cefnogi—. Ydy, mae pob bywyd yn sanctaidd, mae'n rhaid inni ddeall hynny, ond mae gan bobl hawl i ddewis. Ni ddylai unrhyw un orfod rhoi diwedd ar eu bywyd yn y ffordd honno. Ni ddylai unrhyw un orfod rhoi diwedd ar eu bywyd fel hyn. A chywilydd ar unrhyw un sy'n meddwl y dylent ddiwedd eu bywyd yn y ffordd honno. Cywilydd arnoch.
Rwy'n gwybod nad oes gennyf lawer o amser, Ddirprwy Lywydd, ond gwelwyd newid agwedd yn y maes hwn. Rwyf am ganmol pobl fel y Fonesig Esther Rantzen a sefydliadau fel My Death, My Decision. Maent wedi mynd ati'n ddiflino i hyrwyddo'r achosion hyn—yn ddiflino—yn wyneb ymosodiadau digon milain arnynt yn dweud eu bod yn cynorthwyo pobl i farw, neu eu bod yn lladd pobl. Nid ydynt yn lladd pobl. Nid dyna'r ffordd y gwnawn bethau. Rydym yn rhoi cyfle i bobl, cyfle i ddewis.
Rwy'n gwybod bod fy amser ar ben, ond rwyf ar fin gorffen. I gloi, gyda mesurau diogelu cadarn ar waith, rwy'n credu bod angen inni fwrw ymlaen yn ofalus, ond dyna'r ffordd y mae'r broses seneddol yn gweithio. Os ydym yn cael opsiwn i wneud hyn, credaf y dylem wneud hynny. Ac rwy'n dweud wrth Aelodau sy'n ansicr ynghylch y bleidlais hon heddiw, neu nad ydynt yn siŵr pa ffordd y maent am bleidleisio, roedd yna ddynes eithriadol o ddewr ar Politics Wales dros y penwythnos a oedd yn dioddef o glefyd niwronau motor—ac rwy'n cymeradwyo'r bobl hyn sy'n codi llais—a dywedodd wrth yr holl bobl a oedd yn gwrthwynebu'r ddeddfwriaeth hon, 'Cerddwch yn fy nghorff i. Cerddwch yn fy nghorff i.' A gofynnaf i'r holl Aelodau sydd yma, peidiwch â meddwl amdanoch eich hunain, meddyliwch am y bobl hynny, y bobl sy'n dioddef. Fel y dywedais, nid ein gwaith ni yw amddifadu'r bobl hynny o'u hawl i ddewis. Cerddwch yn eu cyrff hwy, meddyliwch amdanynt hwy wrth i chi fwrw eich pleidlais heddiw. Diolch.
Y cwestiwn yw: a ddylid derbyn y cynnig? A oes unrhyw Aelod yn gwrthwynebu? [Gwrthwynebiad.] Oes, felly gohirir y bleidlais ar yr eitem hon tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.
The question is whether the motion should be accepted. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, so the vote on this item is postponed until the voting period.
Gohiriwyd y pleidleisio tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.
Voting deferred until voting time.
Before we move on to the next item, can I thank all Members for their thoughtful, compassionate contributions to the debate today? I think it's reflected very well upon the Senedd to have that discussion.
Cyn inni symud ymlaen at yr eitem nesaf, a gaf i ddiolch i'r holl Aelodau am eu cyfraniadau meddylgar a thosturiol i'r ddadl heddiw? Rwy'n credu bod y drafodaeth wedi adlewyrchu'n dda iawn ar y Senedd.
Eitem 6 heddiw yw'r ddadl ar y cyd ar adroddiadau gan bwyllgorau: cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy a Chyswllt Ffermio, a galwaf ar Gadeirydd y Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig i wneud y cynnig—Paul Davies.
Item 6 today is a joint debate on committee reports: the sustainable farming scheme and Farming Connect, and I call on the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee to move the motion—Paul Davies.
Cynnig NDM8702 Paul Davies, Llyr Gruffydd
Cynnig bod y Senedd yn nodi:
1. Adroddiad Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig ar gynigion Llywodraeth Cymru ar gyfer Cynllun Ffermio Cynaliadwy a osodwyd yn y Swyddfa Gyflwyno ar 22 Gorffennaf 2024, ac y gosodwyd ymateb iddo gan Lywodraeth Cymru ar 16 Hydref 2024;
2. Adroddiad Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig ar y rhaglen Cyswllt Ffermio a osodwyd yn y Swyddfa Gyflwyno ar 27 Mehefin 2024, ac y gosodwyd ymateb iddo gan Lywodraeth Cymru ar 16 Hydref 2024; a
3. Adroddiad y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith ar Gynigion ar gyfer Cynllun Ffermio Cynaliadwy a osodwyd yn y Swyddfa Gyflwyno ar 22 Gorffennaf 2024, ac y gosodwyd ymateb iddo gan Lywodraeth Cymru ar 11 Medi 2024.
Motion NDM8702 Paul Davies, Llyr Gruffydd
To propose that the Senedd notes:
1. The report of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee on the Welsh Government’s proposals for a Sustainable Farming Scheme which was laid in the Table Office on 22 July 2024, and to which the Welsh Government laid its response on 16 October 2024;
2. The report of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee on Farming Connect which was laid in the Table Office on 27 June 2024, and to which the Welsh Government laid its response on 16 October 2024; and
3. The report of the Climate Change, Environment, and Infrastructure Committee on Proposals for a Sustainable Farming Scheme which was laid in the Table Office on 22 July 2024, and to which the Welsh Government laid its response on 11 September 2024.
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I move the motion tabled in my name. Today's motion asks the Senedd to note three committee reports: two published by the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee and one published by the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee. The two committees have worked together in the past, and given that many of the themes and issues contained in the committee reports cover the remits of both committees, it made perfect sense for the committees to work together again. Now, the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee has published reports on the sustainable farming scheme and Farming Connect, and we are debating these reports together because Farming Connect or its replacement will play a key role in supporting farmers to understand and adapt to the sustainable farming scheme in the future.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd, ac rwy'n gwneud y cynnig a gyflwynwyd yn fy enw i. Mae'r cynnig heddiw yn gofyn i'r Senedd nodi tri adroddiad pwyllgor: dau a gyhoeddwyd gan Bwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig ac un a gyhoeddwyd gan y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith. Mae'r ddau bwyllgor wedi gweithio gyda'i gilydd yn y gorffennol, ac o ystyried bod llawer o'r themâu a'r materion a gynhwysir yn adroddiadau'r pwyllgorau'n ymdrin â chylchoedd gwaith y ddau bwyllgor, roedd yn gwneud synnwyr perffaith i'r pwyllgorau gydweithio eto. Nawr, mae Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig wedi cyhoeddi adroddiadau ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy a Cyswllt Ffermio, ac rydym yn trafod yr adroddiadau hyn gyda'i gilydd oherwydd bydd Cyswllt Ffermio neu'r hyn a ddaw yn ei le yn chwarae rhan allweddol yn cefnogi ffermwyr i ddeall ac addasu i'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn y dyfodol.
Daeth y Llywydd i’r Gadair.
The Llywydd took the Chair.
At this point I'd like to thank everybody who took part in the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee inquiries. The evidence that the committee received from stakeholders was essential in helping Members fully understand what the industry's concerns were, and it helped us as a committee to reach the recommendations that we did. In a nutshell, the Agriculture (Wales) Act 2023 set out a new direction for agricultural policy, and the sustainable farming scheme, as it's called, is the Welsh Government's new approach to supporting farmers and rural communities. However, the development of the sustainable farming scheme has been plagued with setbacks, miscommunication and uncertainty. Members will remember the protests across Wales, the wellies on the Senedd steps, and the vocal criticism the scheme received from both agricultural and environmental stakeholders. And so, in May, as we know, the then newly appointed Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs decided to delay the introduction of the sustainable farming scheme from 2025 to 2026. Next year will now see a preparatory phase to develop the proposals further, which will be informed by a sustainable farming scheme round-table of stakeholders.
The Welsh Government's decision to pause the implementation of the scheme was, I believe, the right thing to do. I hope this pause has given the Deputy First Minister time to reflect on the concerns that have been raised because it's absolutely crucial that the Welsh Government gets this policy right, as it will shape the agricultural sector for generations to come. At the moment, Members are still unsure how the balance is being struck between protecting the future of the farming industry and food production with tackling the climate and nature emergencies, and that's not the only concern that the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee has raised. It is still unclear how the Welsh Government will ensure the scheme is accessible to all farmers, whether they are upland or lowland farmers, tenant farmers, owners or commoners. Professor Janet Dwyer of the University of Gloucestershire told the committee that it was an important principle that the scheme was available to all farms in Wales, with options for different types of farms and the markets they feed into. And the Cabinet Secretary told Members that the first principle was to make sure that the universal actions were genuinely available to every farmer who wants to be part of this. The committee heard that 30 per cent of Wales is farmed by someone other then the landowner, and if those farmers are unable to access the scheme, then it the Welsh Government is unlikely to meet its sustainability objectives. And so, it's crucial that the Welsh Government understands that it could be taking one step forward and two steps back if they continue to push ahead with the sustainable farming scheme without significant changes being made.
Ar y pwynt hwn, hoffwn ddiolch i bawb a gymerodd ran yn ymchwiliadau'r Pwyllgor Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig. Roedd y dystiolaeth a gafodd y pwyllgor gan randdeiliaid yn hanfodol i helpu'r Aelodau i ddeall yn llawn beth oedd pryderon y diwydiant, ac fe fu o gymorth i ni fel pwyllgor gyrraedd yr argymhellion a wnaethom. Yn gryno, mae Deddf Amaethyddiaeth (Cymru) 2023 yn nodi cyfeiriad newydd ar gyfer polisi amaethyddol, a'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, fel y'i gelwir, yw dull newydd Llywodraeth Cymru o gefnogi ffermwyr a chymunedau gwledig. Fodd bynnag, mae datblygiad y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy wedi'i lethu gan anawsterau, camgyfathrebu ac ansicrwydd. Bydd yr Aelodau'n cofio'r protestiadau ledled Cymru, y welintons ar risiau'r Senedd, a'r feirniadaeth groch i'r cynllun gan randdeiliaid amaethyddol ac amgylcheddol. Ac felly, ym mis Mai, fel y gwyddom, penderfynodd yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet newydd, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Newid Hinsawdd a Materion Gwledig, ohirio'r broses o gyflwyno'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy o 2025 i 2026. Y flwyddyn nesaf fe geir cam paratoadol i ddatblygu'r cynigion ymhellach, wedi ei lywio gan fwrdd crwn o randdeiliaid y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy.
Rwy'n credu bod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi gwneud penderfyniad cywir i ohirio gweithrediad y cynllun. Rwy'n gobeithio bod yr oedi wedi rhoi amser i'r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog fyfyrio ar y pryderon a godwyd oherwydd mae'n gwbl hanfodol fod Llywodraeth Cymru yn cael y polisi hwn yn iawn, gan y bydd yn siapio'r sector amaethyddol am genedlaethau i ddod. Ar hyn o bryd, mae'r Aelodau'n dal yn ansicr sut y caiff cydbwysedd ei daro rhwng diogelu dyfodol y diwydiant ffermio a chynhyrchiant bwyd a mynd i'r afael â'r argyfyngau hinsawdd a natur, ac nid dyna'r unig bryder y mae Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig wedi'i godi. Nid yw'n glir o hyd sut y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn sicrhau bod y cynllun yn hygyrch i bob ffermwr, boed yn ffermwyr ucheldir neu dir isel, yn ffermwyr tenant, yn berchnogion neu'n gominwyr. Dywedodd yr Athro Janet Dwyer o Brifysgol Sir Gaerloyw wrth y pwyllgor ei bod yn egwyddor bwysig fod y cynllun ar gael i bob fferm yng Nghymru, gydag opsiynau ar gyfer gwahanol fathau o ffermydd a'r marchnadoedd y maent yn bwydo iddynt. A dywedodd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet wrth yr Aelodau mai'r egwyddor gyntaf oedd sicrhau bod y gweithredoedd cyffredinol ar gael go iawn i bob ffermwr sydd am fod yn rhan o hyn. Clywodd y pwyllgor fod 30 y cant o Gymru yn cael ei ffermio gan rywun ac eithrio'r tirfeddiannwr, ac os nad yw'r ffermwyr hynny'n gallu cael mynediad at y cynllun, mae'n annhebygol y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn cyflawni ei hamcanion cynaliadwyedd. Felly, mae'n hanfodol fod Llywodraeth Cymru yn deall y gallai fod yn cymryd un cam ymlaen a dau gam yn ôl os ydynt yn parhau i fwrw ymlaen â'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy heb wneud newidiadau sylweddol.
Some of the most powerful evidence the committee received came from the Wales Federation of Young Farmers Clubs, which argued there was insufficient support for new entrants and young farmers, and they had not been meaningfully consulted. The committee's first conclusion in our report is to reinforce the fact that the needs of new entrants must be front and centre of support schemes for farmers, to protect the future of the industry. The committee heard that there was not just a lack of meaningful consultation, but also a failure to even establish a next generation working group. Now, this just reinforced the wider concerns the committee has had about how the Welsh Government's policy proposals had been communicated to stakeholders, and so I look forward to hearing what progress has been made by the Welsh Government to address just this.
The committee's second conclusion is in relation to the lack of information for the industry on payment methodology and rates. All stakeholders told us they thought the costs incurred and income foregone payment methodology would be an insufficient incentive for farmers to enter the scheme, and, frankly, if farmers do not join the scheme because of a lack of detail around payments, then the scheme will not work. Indeed, the committee's report makes seven recommendations, and over half of the recommendations are requesting further detail on the work the Welsh Government is undertaking to develop the scheme.
Now, I am pleased to say that the Welsh Government has either accepted or accepted in principle all our recommendations in the report. However, I am concerned that some of the responses to our recommendations either miss the point that the committee made or did not fully address the concerns voiced by stakeholders. For example, the Welsh Government's response to the committee notes that it is not aware of any unique impediment to tenant farmers. But we heard that tenant farmers would face challenges meeting the required actions under the scheme as their tenancy agreement could restrict their ability to change their land. For example, they may not be able to plant trees. Therefore, I hope the Welsh Government will reflect on the recommendations that have been made. The committee's intention is to drive improvements and encourage change where it is needed.
Now, the third committee conclusion was to recognise the desire of stakeholders to review and repackage the scheme's universal actions and the piecemeal introduction of different actions in the optional and collaborative layers of the scheme. NFU Cymru described 17 universal areas as totally impractical, and the Nature Friendly Farming Network and the Wales Environment Link suggested the universal actions could be packaged differently to make them less onerous. There was consensus that delaying the introduction of the optional and collaborative actions would disadvantage those currently doing more for the environment, such as common land farmers, those managing land designated as a site of special scientific interest, and organic farmers. We know that about 40 per cent of Welsh commons are designated as sites of special scientific interest, and 50 per cent fall within the protected landscape of Wales. And so, given the amount of common land in Wales, perhaps the Deputy First Minister will tell us a bit more about how the Welsh Government will ensure that these valuable habitats are included in the scheme so that they can be brought into management and restored.
Now, the committee has asked the Welsh Government to provide regular updates, at least every three months, on progress with developing the detail of the scheme actions, including the status and timescales for consulting more widely and agreeing final changes to this scheme roll-out. And that brings me on to perhaps the biggest debate within the sustainable farming scheme proposals, which has been the concerns and misunderstandings about the tree cover requirements. Farming representatives felt that there must be more flexibility on the tree planting targets, and the practicalities of achieving sustainable and permanent change need to be considered. We also heard very understandable concerns about taking land out of production and how that could make Wales more reliant on imports, offshoring carbon emissions. The Farmers Union of Wales stressed that the right tree in the right place is something that both they and the UK Climate Change Committee advocated, but felt that this approach has been lost in conversations within the Welsh Government. Therefore, I hope that the Welsh Government revisits these targets and at the very least improves the lack of data about existing tree cover.
The committee also received valuable evidence from Professor John Gilliland of Queen's University Belfast, about his work on carbon sequestration technologies, and we explored carbon sequestration options more generally, looking at agricultural methods to capture carbon relating to hedgerows, soil, peatland and energy crops. Our recommendation makes it clear that the Welsh Government should provide more information on how it is considering best practice elsewhere in the UK and evaluating different carbon capture and sequestration technologies and options. We also believe that the Deputy First Minister should set out how this work will be incorporated into the development and future evaluation of the sustainable farming scheme, and I look forward to his views on this.
Daeth peth o'r dystiolaeth fwyaf pwerus a gafodd y pwyllgor gan Ffederasiwn Clybiau Ffermwyr Ifanc Cymru, a oedd yn dadlau nad oedd digon o gefnogaeth i newydd-ddyfodiaid a ffermwyr ifanc, ac nad ymgynghorwyd yn ystyrlon â hwy. Casgliad cyntaf y pwyllgor yn ein hadroddiad yw atgyfnerthu'r ffaith bod yn rhaid i anghenion newydd-ddyfodiaid fod yn y canol yn y cynlluniau cymorth i ffermwyr, er mwyn diogelu dyfodol y diwydiant. Clywodd y pwyllgor fod diffyg ymgynghori ystyrlon, a methiant hyd yn oed i sefydlu gweithgor y genhedlaeth nesaf. Nawr, roedd hyn yn atgyfnerthu'r pryderon ehangach sydd wedi bod gan y pwyllgor ynglŷn â sut y cafodd cynigion polisi Llywodraeth Cymru eu cyfleu i randdeiliaid, ac felly edrychaf ymlaen at glywed pa gynnydd y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i wneud i fynd i'r afael â hyn.
Mae ail gasgliad y pwyllgor yn ymwneud â diffyg gwybodaeth i'r diwydiant am fethodoleg a chyfraddau talu. Dywedodd yr holl randdeiliaid wrthym eu bod o'r farn y byddai'r fethodoleg ar gyfer costau yr eir iddynt a thaliadau incwm a ildiwyd yn gymhelliant annigonol i ffermwyr ymuno â'r cynllun, ac a dweud y gwir, os nad yw ffermwyr yn ymuno â'r cynllun oherwydd diffyg manylion am daliadau, nid yw'r cynllun yn mynd i weithio. Yn wir, mae adroddiad y pwyllgor yn gwneud saith argymhelliad, ac mae dros hanner yr argymhellion yn galw am ragor o fanylion am y gwaith y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei wneud ar ddatblygu'r cynllun.
Nawr, rwy'n falch o ddweud bod Llywodraeth Cymru naill ai wedi derbyn neu dderbyn mewn egwyddor ein holl argymhellion yn yr adroddiad. Fodd bynnag, rwy'n pryderu bod rhai o'r ymatebion i'n hargymhellion naill ai'n methu'r pwynt a wnaeth y pwyllgor neu heb fynd i'r afael yn llwyr â'r pryderon a leisiwyd gan randdeiliaid. Er enghraifft, mae ymateb Llywodraeth Cymru i'r pwyllgor yn nodi nad yw'n ymwybodol o unrhyw rwystr unigryw i ffermwyr tenant. Ond clywsom y byddai ffermwyr tenant yn wynebu heriau rhag cyflawni'r gweithredoedd gofynnol o dan y cynllun gan y gallai eu cytundeb tenantiaeth gyfyngu ar eu gallu i newid eu tir. Er enghraifft, efallai na fyddant yn gallu plannu coed. Felly, rwy'n gobeithio y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn ystyried yr argymhellion a wnaed. Bwriad y pwyllgor yw ysgogi gwelliannau ac annog newid lle mae ei angen.
Nawr, trydydd casgliad y pwyllgor oedd cydnabod awydd rhanddeiliaid i adolygu ac ailbecynnu gweithredoedd cyffredinol y cynllun a chyflwyno gweithredoedd gwahanol yn dameidiog yn haenau dewisol a chydweithredol y cynllun. Disgrifiodd NFU Cymru 17 o feysydd cyffredinol fel rhai cwbl anymarferol, ac awgrymodd y Rhwydwaith Ffermio er Lles Natur a Cyswllt Amgylchedd Cymru y gallai'r gweithredoedd cyffredinol gael eu pecynnu'n wahanol i'w gwneud yn llai beichus. Roedd consensws y byddai gohirio'r gweithredoedd opsiynol a chydweithredol yn creu anfantais i'r rhai sy'n gwneud mwy dros yr amgylchedd ar hyn o bryd, megis ffermwyr tir comin, y rhai sy'n rheoli tir a ddynodwyd yn safleoedd o ddiddordeb gwyddonol arbennig, a ffermwyr organig. Gwyddom fod tua 40 y cant o dir comin Cymru wedi'i ddynodi'n safleoedd o ddiddordeb gwyddonol arbennig, ac mae 50 y cant yn dod o fewn tirwedd warchodedig Cymru. Ac felly, o ystyried faint o dir comin a geir yng Nghymru, efallai y gwnaiff y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog ddweud ychydig mwy wrthym ynglŷn â sut y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn sicrhau bod y cynefinoedd gwerthfawr hyn yn cael eu cynnwys yn y cynllun fel y gellir eu rheoli a'u hadfer.
Nawr, mae'r pwyllgor wedi gofyn i Lywodraeth Cymru ddarparu diweddariadau rheolaidd, o leiaf bob tri mis, ar gynnydd ar ddatblygu manylion gweithredoedd y cynllun, gan gynnwys y statws a'r amserlenni ar gyfer ymgynghori'n ehangach a chytuno ar newidiadau terfynol i'r broses o gyflwyno'r cynllun. A daw hynny â mi at y ddadl fwyaf yng nghynigion y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy o bosibl, sef y pryderon a'r gamddealltwriaeth ynghylch y gofynion gorchudd coed. Teimlai cynrychiolwyr ffermio fod yn rhaid cael mwy o hyblygrwydd ynghylch y targedau plannu coed, ac mae angen ystyried ymarferoldeb cyflawni newid cynaliadwy a pharhaol. Clywsom bryderon dealladwy iawn hefyd am dynnu tir allan o gynhyrchiant a sut y gallai hynny wneud Cymru'n fwy dibynnol ar fewnforion, a chreu allyriadau carbon alltraeth. Pwysleisiodd Undeb Amaethwyr Cymru fod y goeden iawn yn y lle iawn yn rhywbeth yr oeddent hwy a Phwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd y DU yn ei hyrwyddo, ond teimlai fod yr ymagwedd hon wedi'i cholli mewn sgyrsiau o fewn Llywodraeth Cymru. Felly, rwy'n gobeithio y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn ailedrych ar y targedau hyn ac o leiaf yn gwella'r diffyg data ar orchudd coed sy'n bodoli eisoes.
Cafodd y pwyllgor dystiolaeth werthfawr hefyd gan yr Athro John Gilliland o Brifysgol Queen's Belfast, am ei waith ar dechnolegau atafaelu carbon, ac fe wnaethom archwilio opsiynau atafaelu carbon yn fwy cyffredinol, gan edrych ar ddulliau amaethyddol i ddal carbon yn gysylltiedig â gwrychoedd, pridd, mawndir a chnydau ynni. Mae ein hargymhelliad yn dweud yn glir y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru ddarparu mwy o wybodaeth ynglŷn â sut y mae'n ystyried arferion gorau mewn mannau eraill yn y DU a gwerthuso gwahanol dechnolegau ac opsiynau dal ac atafaelu carbon. Credwn hefyd y dylai'r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog nodi sut y bydd y gwaith hwn yn cael ei ymgorffori yn y broses o ddatblygu a gwerthuso'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn y dyfodol, Rwy'n edrych ymlaen at ei sylwadau ar hyn.
Now, as I said in my opening remarks, this is a debate on two Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee reports, and that leads me nicely into the committee's report on Farming Connect. For Members who are not familiar with the programme, Farming Connect is the Welsh Government's programme for delivering a co-ordinated package of knowledge transfer, innovation and advisory services for farming and forestry businesses, and it's generally held in high regard by farmers. For this reason, it's disappointing that the Welsh Government has not better used Farming Connect to communicate with the industry about the sustainable farming scheme in the first place. Farming Connect, or its successor, will play a pivotal role in ensuring that sustainable land management objectives are met, and it's vital that it's also able to continue its important work in supporting and protecting farmers' mental health.
The committee's report draws six conclusions and makes one recommendation, but above all, I believe, is the need for absolute clarity on what the new Farming Connect contract is intended to deliver and why. The committee heard quite diverse evidence from different stakeholders about what the future role of Farming Connect should be and how it fits with other support available to farmers in Wales. Therefore, given the range of views on Farming Connect's future remit and functions, the Welsh Government must set out its mission and its role very clearly.
Now, the committee also heard that Farming Connect could play a vital role in the transition to the sustainable farming scheme, and we even considered demonstration farms as a way to take away farmers' nervousness about the incoming sustainable farming scheme changes and to show how production and habitat management can actually work together. We have recommended that Farming Connect set up demonstration farms to show how a farm could operate under the sustainable farming scheme. Farmers could then visit these pilot farms, learn from their experience and envisage how their own farm may look in the future. It's all about sharing best practice. Of course, the committee understands that Farming Connect does not have infinite resources and capacity, and so I urge the Welsh Government to reconsider the funding that it receives, because Farming Connect will need to help support farmers to transition to the sustainable farming scheme and continue its work in promoting awareness of mental health care in our rural communities. Farming Connect also has an important role in signposting to mental health support, particularly in light of high levels of anxiety and disquiet in the sector about the challenges that farmers face and the uncertainty of the transition period that the industry is in. The Welsh Government should ensure that there is a robust evaluation of whether Farming Connect services are sufficiently geared towards supporting mental health and reducing pressure, rather than adding to it in any way.
To sum up, Llywydd, it's a tough time for Welsh farmers and they are facing a period of huge change, and the Welsh Government needs to get the sustainable farming scheme right. We need a sustainable farming scheme with payment methodologies that are attractive to farmers, because if they decide not to join, then there is little point in having the scheme in the first place. We need a scheme that is open and accessible to all, or we may end up with tenants locked out, and we also need to foster a welcoming farming environment for new entrants through training on offer via Farming Connect. And it's also important that Farming Connect is well resourced and supported and can support farmers as they transition to the sustainable farming scheme. And finally, we know that Farming Connect already has solid working relationships with mental health charities, and it's vital that that continues so that the Farming Connect team can continue to help farmers to find the right support when they actually need it.
So, in closing, Llywydd, can I thank everyone who took part in both Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee inquiries? I look forward to hearing the Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee provide an overview of his committee's report, and I also look forward to hearing Members' views on both the sustainable farming scheme and, indeed, Farming Connect. Diolch.
Nawr, fel y dywedais yn fy sylwadau agoriadol, mae hon yn ddadl ar ddau adroddiad Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig, ac mae hynny'n fy arwain yn daclus at adroddiad y pwyllgor ar Cyswllt Ffermio. I'r Aelodau nad ydynt yn gyfarwydd â'r rhaglen, Cyswllt Ffermio yw rhaglen Llywodraeth Cymru ar gyfer darparu pecyn cydlynol o drosglwyddo gwybodaeth, arloesi a gwasanaethau cynghori ar gyfer busnesau ffermio a choedwigaeth, ac yn gyffredinol, caiff ei barchu'n fawr gan ffermwyr. Am y rheswm hwn, mae'n siomedig nad yw Llywodraeth Cymru wedi defnyddio Cyswllt Ffermio yn well i gyfathrebu â'r diwydiant am y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn y lle cyntaf. Bydd Cyswllt Ffermio, neu ei olynydd, yn chwarae rhan ganolog yn sicrhau bod amcanion rheoli tir cynaliadwy yn cael eu cyflawni, ac mae'n hanfodol ei fod hefyd yn gallu parhau â'i waith pwysig yn cefnogi a diogelu iechyd meddwl ffermwyr.
Mae adroddiad y pwyllgor yn cynnwys chwe chasgliad ac yn gwneud un argymhelliad, ond yn anad dim rwy'n credu, mae angen eglurder llwyr ar yr hyn y bwriedir i'r contract Cyswllt Ffermio newydd ei gyflawni a pham. Clywodd y pwyllgor dystiolaeth eithaf amrywiol gan wahanol randdeiliaid ar beth y dylai rôl Cyswllt Ffermio fod yn y dyfodol a sut y mae'n cyd-fynd â chymorth arall sydd ar gael i ffermwyr yng Nghymru. Felly, o ystyried yr ystod o safbwyntiau ar gylch gwaith a swyddogaethau Cyswllt Ffermio yn y dyfodol, rhaid i Lywodraeth Cymru nodi ei genhadaeth a'i rôl yn glir iawn.
Nawr, clywodd y pwyllgor hefyd y gallai Cyswllt Ffermio chwarae rhan allweddol yn y broses o drosglwyddo i'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, ac fe wnaethom ystyried ffermydd arddangos hyd yn oed fel ffordd o ddileu nerfusrwydd ffermwyr ynglŷn â newidiadau'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy sydd ar y ffordd ac i ddangos sut y gall cynhyrchiant a rheoli cynefinoedd weithio gyda'i gilydd mewn gwirionedd. Rydym wedi argymell bod Cyswllt Ffermio yn sefydlu ffermydd arddangos i ddangos sut y gallai fferm weithredu o dan y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Yna gallai ffermwyr ymweld â'r ffermydd peilot hyn, dysgu o'u profiad a rhagweld sut y gallai eu fferm eu hunain edrych yn y dyfodol. Mae'n ymwneud â rhannu arferion gorau. Wrth gwrs, mae'r pwyllgor yn deall nad oes gan Cyswllt Ffermio adnoddau a chapasiti di-ben-draw, ac felly rwy'n annog Llywodraeth Cymru i ailystyried yr arian y mae'n ei gael, oherwydd bydd angen i Cyswllt Ffermio helpu i gefnogi ffermwyr i bontio i'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy a pharhau â'i waith yn hyrwyddo ymwybyddiaeth o ofal iechyd meddwl yn ein cymunedau gwledig. Mae gan Cyswllt Ffermio rôl bwysig hefyd yn cyfeirio at gymorth iechyd meddwl, yn enwedig yng ngoleuni lefelau uchel o orbryder ac anniddigrwydd yn y sector am yr heriau y mae ffermwyr yn eu hwynebu ac ansicrwydd y cyfnod pontio y mae'r diwydiant ynddo. Dylai Llywodraeth Cymru sicrhau bod gwerthuso cadarn yn digwydd i weld a yw gwasanaethau Cyswllt Ffermio wedi'u hanelu'n ddigonol tuag at gefnogi iechyd meddwl a lleihau pwysau, yn hytrach nag ychwanegu ato mewn unrhyw ffordd.
I grynhoi, Lywydd, mae'n adeg anodd ar ffermwyr Cymru ac maent yn wynebu cyfnod o newid enfawr, ac mae angen i Lywodraeth Cymru gael y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn iawn. Mae angen cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy arnom gyda methodolegau talu sy'n ddeniadol i ffermwyr, oherwydd os byddant yn penderfynu peidio ag ymuno, nid oes fawr o bwrpas cael y cynllun yn y lle cyntaf. Mae arnom angen cynllun sy'n agored ac yn hygyrch i bawb, neu efallai y bydd tenantiaid yn cael eu cloi allan, ac mae angen inni feithrin amgylchedd ffermio croesawgar i newydd-ddyfodiaid drwy hyfforddiant sydd ar gael drwy Cyswllt Ffermio. Ac mae hefyd yn bwysig fod gan Cyswllt Ffermio ddigon o adnoddau a'i fod yn cael ei gefnogi ac yn gallu rhoi cefnogaeth i ffermwyr wrth iddynt bontio i'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Ac yn olaf, fe wyddom fod gan Cyswllt Ffermio berthynas waith gadarn ag elusennau iechyd meddwl eisoes, ac mae'n hanfodol fod hynny'n parhau fel y gall y tîm Cyswllt Ffermio barhau i helpu ffermwyr i ddod o hyd i'r cymorth cywir pan fydd ei angen arnynt.
Felly, wrth gloi, Lywydd, a gaf i ddiolch i bawb a gymerodd ran yn ymchwiliadau'r Pwyllgor Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig? Rwy'n edrych ymlaen at glywed Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith yn rhoi trosolwg o adroddiad ei bwyllgor ef, ac rwy'n edrych ymlaen hefyd at glywed barn yr Aelodau ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, a Cyswllt Ffermio yn wir. Diolch.
Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith nawr, Llyr Gruffydd.
The Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, Llyr Gruffydd.
Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd, a diolch yn fawr i Gadeirydd Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig am agor y ddadl yma. Dwi’n falch i gyflwyno barn y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, sydd yn cynrychioli dechrau pennod newydd i ffermio yng Nghymru, gan ei fod yn gwneud newidiadau sylfaenol i’r ffordd y mae ffermwyr yn cael cymorth ariannol i reoli eu tir. Mi fydd e’n llywio dyfodol ffermio yng Nghymru am genedlaethau i ddod, ac yn ystod y cyfnod hwnnw hefyd, bydd angen i Gymru gyflawni ei hymrwymiadau byd-eang a domestig i gyrraedd sero net erbyn 2050, atal a gwrthdroi colli natur erbyn 2030, a sicrhau adferiad wedyn erbyn 2050. Felly, mi fydd angen ymdrech enfawr ar y cyd i gyflawni hyn ac mi fydd gofyn am weithredu gan bob sector o’r gymdeithas, ac yn wir gan bob unigolyn yn y gymdeithas er mwyn cael y maen i’r wal.
Rŷn ni i gyd yn ymwybodol o ymateb cryf y gymuned amaethyddol i gynigion y cynllun, fel y mae Cadeirydd y pwyllgor economi eisoes wedi’i grybwyll. Wrth gymryd tystiolaeth i lywio ein gwaith ni, mi wnaethom ni ganfod, er bod barn cyfranwyr yn amrywio o ran dyluniad y cynllun, eu bod nhw i gyd yn cytuno ar un peth, sef y bydd y cynllun ddim ond yn cyflawni'r canlyniadau amgylcheddol angenrheidiol os yw digon o bobl yn manteisio ar y cynllun. Nawr, mae hynny’n golygu bod yn rhaid i’r cynllun, felly, fod yn ddeniadol ac mae'n rhaid iddo fe fod yn ymarferol i ffermwyr Cymru.
I fod yn glir, dyw hyn ddim yn fater o ddewis rhwng cefnogi ffermwyr neu gefnogi'r amgylchedd. Mae’n rhaid i’r cynllun wneud y ddau. Mae gan Lywodraeth Cymru yn wir gyfle i lunio cynllun sy’n sicrhau bod ffermio Cymru ar sylfaen wirioneddol gynaliadwy, ac sy’n sicrhau bod ffermwyr yn arwain y frwydr yn erbyn newid hinsawdd a dirywiad byd natur. Fodd bynnag, mae yna dipyn o ffordd i fynd cyn cyrraedd y pwynt hwnnw.
Wrth i ni fynd ati i baratoi ein hadroddiad ni ym mis Mai, mi gafwyd sawl cyhoeddiad allweddol, gan gynnwys cyfnod o flwyddyn o oedi cyn cyflwyno'r cynllun, ac er bod y penderfyniad yna i oedi’r broses yn amlwg wedi’i seilio ar fwriadau da, ddylem ni ddim anghofio bod y broses o ddatblygu’r cynigion wedi cymryd saith mlynedd. Ac erbyn i'r cynllun gael ei gyflwyno, mae’n debyg y bydd gan Gymru rhyw bedair blynedd yn unig ar ôl i fodloni targedau allweddol o ran newid hinsawdd a bioamrywiaeth.
Mae ymchwiliad cyfredol y pwyllgor i atal a gwrthdroi colli natur wedi ein hatgoffa ni bod amser yn prysur brinhau os ydym ni am dynnu bioamrywiaeth yn ôl o’r dibyn. I nifer o gyfranwyr, mae'r cynllun rŷn ni’n ei drafod heddiw yn un o'r arfau mwyaf pwerus, os nad yr arf mwyaf pwerus, sydd ar gael i’r Llywodraeth o ran rhoi Cymru ar y llwybr i adfer natur. Ac i'r rheini, wrth gwrs, all y cynllun ddim dod yn ddigon buan.
Gan droi at ein hadroddiad ni, ein prif neges ni, fel y byddech yn ei ddisgwyl, yw bod yn rhaid i'r cynllun terfynol gadw ffocws amgylcheddol cryf. Rŷn ni’n gwybod ei bod hi’n debygol y bydd rhai newidiadau yn dilyn yr ymgynghoriad a chanlyniadau’r ford gron weinidogol. Serch hynny, ddylai'r rheini ddim peryglu uchelgais amgylcheddol y cynllun.
Mae'n bwysig cydnabod y bu rhai datblygiadau cadarnhaol ers cyhoeddi'r cynigion, ynghylch y taliadau cynnal ar gyfer ardaloedd SSSI, er enghraifft, cyflwyno’r haenau dewisol a chydweithredol yn gynnar, a’r cadarnhad y bydd taliad gwerth cymdeithasol yn cael ei gynnwys o ddechrau'r cynllun. Ond mae'r rhain efallai yn faterion lle mae yna gonsensws wedi bod o’u cylch nhw ymhlith rhanddeiliaid. Mae yna faterion eraill, fel dwi’n gwybod y bydd yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn fwy ymwybodol nag unrhyw un, sydd yn fwy dadleuol, yn enwedig efallai mewn perthynas â rheolau'r cynllun, ac mae nifer o’r rheini eto i’w datrys.
Ac mi wnaf i droi at rai o’r rheolau hynny, felly, ac yn gyntaf, y gofyniad o 10 y cant o orchudd coed. Mae sicrhau cynnydd o ran plannu coed yn hanfodol os yw Cymru am gyrraedd sero net. Mae cyfraddau plannu coed wedi bod yn druenus yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf, yn enwedig yng nghyd-destun targed Llywodraeth Cymru, sef plannu 43,000 hectar o goetiroedd newydd erbyn 2030. Yn syml, fydd y targed yna ddim yn cael ei fodloni yn hawdd iawn, ac mae cefnogaeth y diwydiant amaeth yn bwysig iawn i hynny, gan mai ffermwyr sy'n rheoli dros 80 y cant o dir Cymru. Fodd bynnag, mae'n amlwg bod y gofyniad o 10 y cant yn llinell goch i lawer ac y byddai goblygiadau pellgyrhaeddol i lawer o ffermydd, i ddiogelwch bwyd ac yn y blaen, yn sgil hynny.
Fel pwyllgor amgylchedd, wrth gwrs, ein prif ffocws ni yw canlyniadau amgylcheddol y cynllun ac rŷn ni’n agored i fesurau amgen a all sicrhau canlyniadau tebyg, neu hyd yn oed ganlyniadau gwell o’u cymharu â phlannu coed, pan fydd hi’n dod i ddal a storio carbon a bioamrywiaeth. Serch hynny, mae’n rhaid i unrhyw fesurau arfaethedig fod yn gredadwy, a hynny’n unol â dilyn llwybr cytbwys i sero net. Mi fyddai Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd y Deyrnas Unedig, fel cynghorydd statudol Llywodraeth Cymru ar leihau allyriadau, mewn sefyllfa i roi cyngor ar hynny, dwi’n siŵr, yn unol â’r hyn rŷn ni wedi’i argymell. Fodd bynnag, dyw hi ddim yn glir o ymateb y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog a yw e'n bwriadu ymgysylltu â phwyllgor y Deyrnas Unedig ar y mater yma cyn gwneud penderfyniad terfynol, ac efallai gallwn ni gael ychydig o eglurder ar hynny heddiw.
Fel y pwyllgor, rwy'n siŵr bod y rhan fwyaf o'r Aelodau yn aros yn eiddgar am adroddiad y panel adolygu tystiolaeth atafaelu carbon. Dirprwy Brif Weinidog, rŷch chi wedi dweud y gallwn ni ddisgwyl i'r adroddiad gael ei gyhoeddi cyn diwedd y flwyddyn. Efallai y byddwch chi mewn sefyllfa i ddweud wrthyn ni pryd y byddwch chi’n gwneud penderfyniad terfynol ar y dull o blannu coed ac a ydych chi’n barod i rannu hynny gyda ni cyn i’r cynllun terfynol gael ei gyhoeddi, fel bod modd i ni ddeall yn union i ba gyfeiriad ŷch chi'n symud. Byddwch chi’n ymwybodol iawn o'r angen i roi eglurder ar y mater penodol yma i’r sector ac i bawb arall cyn gynted ag y bo modd. Felly, byddwn i’n hoffi clywed gennych chi tua pryd ŷch chi’n meddwl y cawn ni wybod, oherwydd dwi yn credu y byddai hi'n weddol anfoddhaol pe baem ni’n gorfod aros yn rhy hir cyn deall y cyfeiriad ŷch chi’n symud iddo fe.
Gan symud ymlaen i’r gofyniad rheoli cynefin o 10 y cant, yn anffodus mae Cymru eisoes yn un o’r gwledydd sydd wedi gweld y dirywiad mwyaf o ran natur yn y byd, ac mae natur yn parhau i ddirywio ar raddfa frawychus. Mae adroddiad sefyllfa byd natur 2023 yn dangos bod bywyd gwyllt Cymru wedi gostwng 20 y cant ar gyfartaledd ers 1994, a bod un o bob chwe rhywogaeth yng Nghymru o dan fygythiad o ddifodiant. Er mwyn atal a gwrthdroi dirywiad natur, mae’n rhaid sicrhau bod creu a rheoli cynefinoedd yn parhau i fod yn flaenoriaeth. Yn sgil argymhelliad y pwyllgor, mae'r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog wedi ymrwymo i sicrhau bod gofyniad yn cefnogi’r broses o greu ystod amrywiol o gynefinoedd y bydd eu hangen ar gyfer adferiad byd natur, sydd yn rhywbeth calonogol iawn.
Yn olaf, er ein bod yn gwybod y bydd Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru yn rhan o’r gwaith o gyflawni’r cynllun, mae’r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog wedi dweud wrthym ni nad oes modd iddo fe wneud sylw ar, a dwi’n dyfynnu,
'natur na hyd a lled terfynol cyfranogiad CNC na'r costau sy'n gysylltiedig ag ef.'
Er ein bod yn gwybod nad yw'r cynllun wedi'i gwblhau, mi fyddwn ni yn bryderus os nad oes hyd yn oed rhyw waith rhagarweiniol wedi'i wneud o ran cyfrifo'r costau, achos mae heriau ariannol presennol Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru yn hysbys iawn, a’r rheini efallai wedi dwysáu yn sylweddol yn y dyddiau diwethaf. Ond, fel pwyllgor, rŷn ni yn ceisio sicrwydd gan y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog nad yw effaith y cynllun ar Gyfoeth Naturiol Cymru yn rhyw fath o ôl-ystyriaeth. Mae hwn yn fater yn sicr y byddwn ni fel pwyllgor yn awyddus i ddychwelyd ato fe yn ddiweddarach yn y Senedd yma, wrth i ni barhau i graffu’r cynllun, ond hefyd i graffu gwaith Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru.
Mae'n deg dweud bod y broses o ddatblygu’r cynllun yma wedi bod yn un hir ac yn un llafurus, ac, wrth gwrs, dyw hi ddim drosodd eto. Mi fydd gan y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog, yn ddi-os, benderfyniadau anodd i’w gwneud dros y misoedd nesaf, ond wrth iddo fe wneud y penderfyniadau hynny, rŷn ni yn ei annog e i sicrhau bod y cynllun terfynol yn cefnogi ffermwyr i gyflawni camau gweithredu ystyrlon ar gyfer newid hinsawdd a natur, a hynny mewn modd sy’n sicrhau bod y cynllun yn ddeniadol ac, wrth gwrs, yn ymarferol i ffermwyr, a’i fod e’n sicrhau ar ben bob dim arall fod ffermio yng Nghymru yn cael ei roi ar sylfaen wirioneddol gynaliadwy. Diolch.
Thank you very much, Llywydd, and thank you to the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee for opening this debate. I’m very pleased to put forward the views of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee on the sustainable farming scheme, which marks the beginning of a new chapter for Welsh farming, because it makes fundamental changes to the way in which farmers receive financial support for managing their land. It will shape the future of Welsh farming for generations to come, and during that time as well, Wales will need to deliver on its global and domestic commitments to reach net zero by 2050, as well as halt and reverse the loss of nature by 2030, and then achieve recovery by 2050. So, this will require a monumental collective effort to achieve this and it demands action from every sector of society, and indeed from every individual in society to deliver upon that objective.
We’re all aware of the strong reaction from the farming community to the scheme's proposals, as the Chair of the economy committee has mentioned. In taking evidence to inform our work, we found that while contributors' views differed on the design of the scheme, there was one thing that they agreed on, namely that the scheme will only deliver the necessary environmental outcomes if there is sufficient take-up of the scheme. Now, that means that the scheme must be attractive, and it must also be workable for farmers in Wales.
To be clear, this is not a choice between supporting farmers or supporting the environment. The scheme must do both. The Welsh Government truly has an opportunity to design a scheme that puts Welsh farming on a truly sustainable footing and ensures that farmers take a lead role in the fight against climate change and nature’s decline. However, there is still some way to go before we reach that point.
As we were preparing our report in May, there were several key announcements made, including a one-year delay to the scheme’s introduction, and while that decision to delay the process was clearly well-intended, we shouldn’t forget that the process of developing the proposals took seven years. And by the time the scheme is introduced, it's likely that there'll be just four years remaining for Wales to meet key climate change and biodiversity targets.
The committee’s current inquiry into halting and reversing the loss of nature has served as a stark reminder that time is rapidly running out if we are to bring biodiversity back from the brink. For many contributors, the scheme that we're discussing today is one of the most powerful tools, if not the most powerful tool, that the Welsh Government has at its disposal to set Wales on a path towards nature recovery. And for them, of course, the scheme can’t come soon enough.
Returning to our report, our main message, as you’d expect, is that the final scheme must retain a strong environmental focus. We know that there are likely to be some changes following the consultation and the outcomes of the ministerial round-table. Despite that, they must not compromise the scheme's environmental ambitions.
It's important to acknowledge that there have already been some positive developments since the proposals were published, for example, around maintenance payments for SSSI areas, early introduction of optional and collaborative actions, and confirmation that a social value payment will be included from the scheme's very beginning. But these perhaps are matters over which there has been consensus among stakeholders. There are other matters, as the Cabinet Secretary will know better than anyone, that are more controversial, most notably perhaps around the scheme rules, and several of those are yet to be resolved.
I'll turn to some of those rules now, and first of all, the requirement for 10 per cent tree cover. Progress on tree planting is essential if Wales is to achieve net zero. Tree planting rates have been pitiful in recent years, particularly in the context of the Welsh Government’s target to plant 43,000 hectares of new woodland by 2030. Simply put, the target won’t be easily met, and the support of the agriculture industry is very important for that, because farmers manage over 80 per cent of Wales's land. However, the 10 per cent requirement is clearly a red line for many of them, and there would be far-reaching implications for many farms, for food security and so on, as a result of that rule.
As an environment committee, of course, our primary concern is the scheme's environmental outcomes and we are open to alternative measures that can deliver similar, or even better outcomes as compared with tree planting, when it comes to carbon sequestration and biodiversity. However, any proposed measures must be credible and in line with the balanced pathway towards net zero. The UK Climate Change Committee, as the Welsh Government’s statutory advisor on emissions reduction, would be well placed to advise on this, I'm sure, in line with what we’ve recommended. However, it’s unclear from the Deputy First Minister’s response whether he intends to engage with the UK CCC on this matter before reaching a final decision, so perhaps we could have a little clarity on that today.
Like the committee, I’m sure that most Members are eagerly awaiting the report from the carbon sequestration evidence review panel. Deputy First Minister, you’ve said that we can expect that report to be published before the end of the year. Perhaps you'll be in a position to tell us when you'll be making a final decision on the approach to tree planting and whether you are therefore prepared to share that with us before the final scheme is published, so that we can understand in what exact direction you are moving. You’ll be very well aware of the need to provide clarity on this particular issue to the sector and to everyone else as soon as possible. So, we would like to hear from you when you expect we will find out about that, because I do think it would be rather unsatisfactory to have to wait too long before we understand the direction that you are moving in.
Moving on to the 10 per cent habitat management requirement, unfortunately Wales is already one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world, and nature is continuing to decline at an alarming rate. The 2023 state of nature report shows that Welsh wildlife has decreased on average by 20 per cent since 1994, and one in six Welsh species are threatened with extinction. To halt and reverse nature’s decline, habitat creation and management must remain a priority within the scheme. Following the committee’s recommendation, the Deputy First Minister has committed to ensuring that the requirement supports the creation of a diverse range of habitats needed for nature recovery, which is very encouraging.
Finally, while we know that Natural Resources Wales will be involved in part of the scheme’s delivery, the Deputy First Minister has told us that he’s unable to comment on, and I quote,
'the final nature and extent of NRW involvement or the costs associated with it.'
Although we know that the scheme has yet to be finalised, we'd be really concerned if not even preliminary work has been undertaken to figure out the costs, because the current financial challenges facing Natural Resources Wales are well known, and perhaps they've intensified a great deal over the past few days. But, as a committee, we do seek assurance from the Deputy First Minister that the impact of the scheme on Natural Resources Wales is not simply an afterthought. This is certainly something that we as a committee will be keen to return to later in this Senedd, as we continue to scrutinise the scheme, but also scrutinise the work of Natural Resources Wales.
It's fair to say that the process of developing the scheme has been a long and arduous one, and, of course, it’s not over yet. The Deputy First Minister will, undoubtedly, have some tough decisions to make over the coming months, but as he makes those decisions, we urge him to ensure that the final scheme supports farmers to deliver meaningful action for climate change and nature, in a way that ensures that the scheme is attractive and, of course, workable for farmers, and that the scheme, above all else, puts Welsh farming on a truly sustainable footing. Thank you.
James Evans.
James Evans.
Diolch, Llywydd, it seems very quick to be back at the despatch box again. I'd like to thank the committees, chaired by Paul Davies and Llyr Gruffydd, for the work that they have done on scrutinising the Welsh Government around its sustainable farming scheme, because Welsh farming is at a crossroads, and it's deeply concerning, the Welsh Government's handling of the sustainable farming scheme, because it does threaten the future of an industry that is crucial both to our economy and our environment. As Conservatives, we firmly support a farming model that protects our landscape whilst securing the livelihoods of all Welsh farmers. But what are we seeing from the Government? A worrying mix of delays, poor communication and a failure to engage meaningfully with the farming community.
The Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee's recent report, which we've talked about today, on the sustainable farming scheme makes it clear that there are serious gaps that remain in the Welsh Government's approach. Despite multiple rounds of consultation, the scheme, in its current form, fails to address the fundamental concerns of farmers. NFU Cymru and the Farmers Union of Wales have both expressed disappointment that the key issues raised during the co-design discussions, particularly around the financial stability and the complexity of the scheme, have been ignored. The Government has once again pushed ahead with its policies that do not reflect the real reality of those on the ground. What's worse, the committee notes that the sustainable farming scheme proposals have not kept pace with the Agriculture (Wales) Act 2023, which was supposed to deliver a sustainable outcome whilst securing economic stability for farmers. Instead, we have a scheme that threatens to overwhelm farmers with red tape, that's creating more bureaucracy rather than practical solutions.
Recommendation 2 from the committee is particularly damning. They call for a complete rethink, urging the Government to go back to the drawing board and co-design a scheme that works. But will the Government listen? I know they've had a lot of round-table discussion events. The proof will be in the pudding, Minister, and I'm sure you'll make an announcement at the winter fair.
But let's talk about the 10 per cent tree cover requirement—a central element of the sustainable farming scheme. While we all support efforts to tackle climate change, the current proposals show how out of touch the Government is. The farming unions of Wales have made it clear that this requirement could see valuable agricultural land lost without sufficient financial compensation or flexibility. Yet, despite these concerns, the Government pressed on. We need policies that enhance biodiversity without penalising farmers for doing their job of producing the food and managing the land.
The Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee also highlighted some failings of the scheme, particularly around engagement and transparency. The farming community has been consistently left in the dark about the practical details of the scheme. The Minister, as I said earlier, has a lot of round-tables, but the industry, wider than some of the unions, don't actually know what's going on. So, they're all still in limbo, don't know whether to invest or how to plan for their futures. The committee also called for better, more consistent communication—something that the Government doesn’t really feel like doing. A recommendation that, actually, the farmers feel ignored by the Government—[Interruption.] Do you want to add anything, Mike? No?
Diolch, Lywydd, mae'n ymddangos yn fuan iawn i fod yn ôl yn siarad eto. Hoffwn ddiolch i'r pwyllgorau, dan gadeiryddiaeth Paul Davies a Llyr Gruffydd, am y gwaith y maent wedi'i wneud ar graffu ar Lywodraeth Cymru ynghylch ei chynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, oherwydd mae ffermio yng Nghymru ar groesffordd, ac mae'r modd y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ymdrin â'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn peri pryder mawr, oherwydd mae'n bygwth dyfodol diwydiant sy'n hanfodol i'n heconomi a'n hamgylchedd. Fel Ceidwadwyr, rydym yn cefnogi model ffermio sy'n diogelu ein tirwedd gan ddiogelu bywoliaeth holl ffermwyr Cymru ar yr un pryd. Ond beth a welwn gan y Llywodraeth? Cymysgedd pryderus o oedi, cyfathrebu gwael a methiant i ymgysylltu'n ystyrlon â'r gymuned ffermio.
Mae adroddiad diweddar Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig y buom yn siarad amdano heddiw ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn dweud yn glir fod bylchau difrifol yn parhau i fodoli yn null Llywodraeth Cymru o weithredu. Er gwaethaf sawl cylch ymgynghori, mae'r cynllun, ar ei ffurf bresennol, yn methu mynd i'r afael â phryderon sylfaenol ffermwyr. Mae NFU Cymru ac Undeb Amaethwyr Cymru ill dau wedi mynegi siom fod y materion allweddol a godwyd yn ystod y trafodaethau cydgynllunio, yn enwedig ynghylch sefydlogrwydd ariannol a chymhlethdod y cynllun, wedi cael eu hanwybyddu. Mae'r Llywodraeth unwaith eto wedi bwrw ymlaen â'i pholisïau nad ydynt yn adlewyrchu realiti go iawn y bobl ar lawr gwlad. Yn waeth na hynny, mae'r pwyllgor yn nodi nad yw cynigion y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy wedi cadw i fyny â Deddf Amaethyddiaeth (Cymru) 2023, a oedd i fod i sicrhau canlyniad cynaliadwy gan sicrhau sefydlogrwydd economaidd i ffermwyr ar yr un pryd. Yn hytrach, mae gennym gynllun sy'n bygwth llethu ffermwyr drwy greu mwy o fiwrocratiaeth yn hytrach nag atebion ymarferol.
Mae argymhelliad 2 gan y pwyllgor yn arbennig o ddamniol. Maent yn galw am ailfeddwl yn llwyr, gan annog y Llywodraeth i fynd yn ôl i'r dechrau a chydgynllunio cynllun sy'n gweithio. Ond a fydd y Llywodraeth yn gwrando? Rwy'n gwybod eu bod wedi cael llawer o drafodaethau bwrdd crwn. Wrth ei flas mae profi pwdin, Weinidog, ac rwy'n siŵr y byddwch yn gwneud cyhoeddiad yn y ffair aeaf.
Ond gadewch inni siarad am y gofyniad gorchudd coed 10 y cant—elfen ganolog yn y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Er ein bod i gyd yn cefnogi ymdrechion i fynd i'r afael â newid hinsawdd, mae'r cynigion presennol yn dangos cymaint allan o gysylltiad yw'r Llywodraeth. Mae undebau ffermio Cymru wedi dweud yn glir y gallai'r gofyniad hwn arwain at golli tir amaethyddol gwerthfawr heb ddigon o iawndal ariannol na hyblygrwydd. Er gwaethaf y pryderon hyn, daliodd y Llywodraeth ati. Mae angen polisïau sy'n gwella bioamrywiaeth heb gosbi ffermwyr am wneud eu gwaith o gynhyrchu'r bwyd a rheoli'r tir.
Nododd y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith ddiffygion yn y cynllun hefyd, yn enwedig ynghylch ymgysylltiad a thryloywder. Mae'r gymuned ffermio wedi cael ei gadael yn y tywyllwch droeon ynglŷn â manylion ymarferol y cynllun. Fel y dywedais yn gynharach, mae gan y Gweinidog lawer o fyrddau crwn, ond nid yw'r diwydiant, yn fwy eang na rhai o'r undebau, yn gwybod beth sy'n digwydd mewn gwirionedd. Felly, maent i gyd yn dal i fod mewn limbo, heb wybod a ddylid buddsoddi neu sut i gynllunio ar gyfer eu dyfodol. Galwodd y pwyllgor hefyd am gyfathrebu gwell, mwy cyson—rhywbeth nad yw'r Llywodraeth yn teimlo fel ei wneud mewn gwirionedd. Argymhelliad y mae ffermwyr yn teimlo ei fod wedi cael ei anwybyddu gan y Llywodraeth—[Torri ar draws.] A ydych chi eisiau ychwanegu unrhyw beth, Mike? Na?
I can't. I'd like to, but I've been out and they won't let me intervene.
Nid wyf yn cael. Hoffwn wneud hynny, ond rwyf wedi bod allan ac ni wnânt adael i mi wneud ymyriad.
You'd like to. There we go. Okay.
Stakeholders, from tenant farmers to young entrants, have repeatedly stressed that their input has been sidelined. We've seen the round-tables; not many young farmers on those round-tables. It seems as if everything is done to them and not with them.
Fe hoffech chi. Dyna ni. O'r gorau.
Mae rhanddeiliaid, o ffermwyr tenant i newydd-ddyfodiaid ifanc, wedi pwysleisio dro ar ôl tro fod eu mewnbwn wedi'i anwybyddu. Rydym wedi gweld y byrddau crwn; nid oes llawer o ffermwyr ifanc ar y byrddau crwn hynny. Mae'n ymddangos bod popeth yn cael ei wneud iddynt ac nid gyda hwy.
Could I intervene?
A gaf i ymyrryd?
You can, Minister. Yes.
Cewch, Weinidog. Iawn.
I'm just really interested in the point that there's been no meaningful engagement. After the Conservative Party were urging me to take some time to go through this properly and to meaningfully engage, how does he explain that to the NFU, the FUW, the Country Land and Business Association and the Nature Friendly Farming Network, all the people who haven't had holidays this summer, who've been actually doing this piece of work and doing the meaningful engagement? Have you missed something, James?
Mae gennyf ddiddordeb mawr yn y pwynt na fu unrhyw ymgysylltiad ystyrlon. Ar ôl i'r Blaid Geidwadol fy annog i gymryd peth amser i fynd drwy hyn yn iawn ac i ymgysylltu'n ystyrlon, sut y mae'n egluro hynny i'r NFU, Undeb Amaethwyr Cymru, y Gymdeithas Tir a Busnesau Cefn Gwlad a'r Rhwydwaith Ffermio er Lles Natur, yr holl bobl nad ydynt wedi cael gwyliau yr haf hwn, sydd wedi bod yn gwneud y gwaith ac yn gwneud yr ymgysylltu ystyrlon? A ydych chi wedi methu rhywbeth, James?
Well, farmers never take a holiday, Minister. Perhaps you should take a leaf out of their book, because the average farmer never takes a holiday; they work 365 days a year. And actually, the proof is in the pudding, isn't it, so we will see what you come out with at the winter fair, to see whether you're going to listen to those farmers—
Wel, nid yw ffermwyr byth yn cymryd gwyliau, Weinidog. Efallai y dylech chi ddysgu rhywbeth ganddynt, gan nad yw'r ffermwr cyffredin byth yn cymryd gwyliau; maent yn gweithio 365 diwrnod y flwyddyn. Mae'n wir, wrth ei flas mae profi pwdin, onid e, felly cawn weld beth fydd gennych i'w ddweud yn y ffair aeaf, i weld a ydych chi'n mynd i wrando ar y ffermwyr hynny—
Will you take an intervention? That is absolutely not true; of course farmers take holidays, just the same as everybody else—and so they should. But they pick the time of the year when it's possible to do that. That's absolute nonsense.
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad? Nid yw hynny'n wir; wrth gwrs fod ffermwyr yn cymryd gwyliau, yn union yr un fath â phawb arall—ac fe ddylent. Ond maent yn dewis adeg o'r flwyddyn pan fo'n bosibl gwneud hynny. Mae hynny'n nonsens llwyr.
As somebody who was involved in the agriculture community, Jenny, I didn't go far when I was a child. But there we go.
But there has been an issue of timing. On the Government's decision to delay the introduction of the scheme until 2026, as has been said, it needs to be got right and I do agree with that point; we do need to get things right. We do need to make sure it's right, but the reality of the delay in itself comes from mismanagement and a lack of preparedness from the Government. Farmers need certainty from the Government about what it's failing to provide. So, how can farmers expect to plan for the future, Minister, when they're left waiting for more detail? I think the committees' reports highlight that all the way through, and I think it's time that this Government supported our farmers and supported rural communities. And I think the work that the committees have done on this scheme is excellent. Diolch, Llywydd.
Fel rhywun a oedd yn rhan o'r gymuned amaeth, Jenny, nid oeddwn i'n mynd yn bell pan oeddwn yn blentyn. Ond dyna ni.
Ond mae cwestiwn yn codi am amseru. Ar benderfyniad y Llywodraeth i oedi cyn cyflwyno'r cynllun tan 2026, fel y dywedwyd, mae angen gwneud pethau'n iawn ac rwy'n cytuno â'r pwynt hwnnw; mae'n rhaid inni wneud pethau'n iawn. Mae angen inni sicrhau ei fod yn iawn, ond mae realiti'r oedi ynddo'i hun yn dod o gamreoli a diffyg paratoi gan y Llywodraeth. Mae ffermwyr angen sicrwydd gan y Llywodraeth am yr hyn y mae'n methu ei ddarparu. Felly, sut y gall ffermwyr ddisgwyl cynllunio ar gyfer y dyfodol, Weinidog, pan fyddant yn cael eu gadael i aros am fwy o fanylion? Rwy'n credu bod adroddiadau'r pwyllgorau yn tynnu sylw at hynny drwyddi draw, ac rwy'n credu ei bod yn bryd i'r Llywodraeth hon gefnogi ein ffermwyr a chefnogi cymunedau gwledig. Ac rwy'n credu bod y gwaith y mae'r pwyllgorau wedi'i wneud ar y cynllun hwn yn ardderchog. Diolch, Lywydd.
Diolch i'r ddau bwyllgor am yr adroddiadau yma ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy a Cyswllt Ffermio. Maen nhw'n adroddiadau pwysig dros ben sy'n mynd i lywio ein hymateb ni, gobeithio, i ddyfodol amaethyddiaeth yng Nghymru, yn arbennig wrth inni fynd i’r afael â’r heriau o ran newid hinsawdd a’r heriau economaidd hefyd sy’n wynebu ein cymunedau gwledig. Fel mae’n digwydd, y bore yma, roeddwn yn lansio strategaeth yn ymwneud â thlodi gwledig, ac mae sicrhau cefnogaeth economaidd i’n ffermydd teuluol ni yn rhan hanfodol o sicrhau dyfodol economaidd llewyrchus a lleihau tlodi mewn ardaloedd gwledig.
Wrth ddiolch i’r ddau bwyllgor am eu gwaith, maen nhw hefyd yn tynnu sylw at nifer o bryderon y mae’r rhai ohonom ni sy’n byw mewn ardaloedd gwledig yn hen gyfarwydd â nhw. Ymateb Plaid Cymru yw bod angen gweithredu pellach a mwy o eglurder, er enghraifft o safbwynt y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Fel rŷn ni wedi clywed gan bawb sydd wedi siarad, mae yna wrthwynebiad cryf iawn i’r orfodaeth yma i blannu coed 10 y cant ar dir fferm. Mae hyn yn broblematig iawn i nifer fawr iawn o’n ffermydd ni.
Thank you to both committees for these reports on the sustainable farming scheme and Farming Connect. They are very important reports that will steer our response, hopefully, for the future of agriculture in Wales, particularly as we tackle the challenges of climate change and the economic challenges facing our rural communities. As it happens, this morning, I launched a strategy related to rural poverty, and securing economic support for our family farms is a central part of securing a prosperous economic future and reducing poverty in rural areas.
In thanking both committees for their work, they also highlight a number of concerns that some of us who live in rural communities are very familiar with. The Plaid Cymru response is that we need further action and greater clarity, for example in relation to the sustainable farming scheme. As we have heard from everyone who has spoken, there is very strong opposition to this requirement for 10 per cent tree cover on agricultural land. This is hugely problematic for very many farms.
Plaid Cymru welcomes the committees’ recommendation that the Welsh Government should review the tree cover requirement and explore alternative ways to meet environmental goals. Farmers are not opposed to contributing to climate change action, but mandating a blanket 10 per cent tree cover will be a deciding factor for many on whether to engage with the scheme or not. And if they don’t engage with the scheme, then there is no future—
Mae Plaid Cymru yn croesawu argymhelliad y pwyllgorau y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru adolygu’r gofyniad gorchudd coed ac archwilio ffyrdd amgen o gyflawni nodau amgylcheddol. Nid yw ffermwyr yn gwrthwynebu cyfrannu at weithredoedd newid hinsawdd, ond bydd gorfodi gorchudd coed cyffredinol o 10 y cant yn ffactor allweddol i nifer o ran penderfynu a ddylent gymryd rhan yn y cynllun ai peidio. Ac os nad ydynt yn cymryd rhan yn y cynllun, nid oes dyfodol—
Will you take an intervention?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad?
Yes, of course I will.
Gwnaf, wrth gwrs.
Just on the use of 'blanket', which we hear again. It sounds familiar, in another context. There have been many statements about the requirement for tree cover on farms over, probably, the last nine months or more. What is clear—and I don't want people outside to go around the route of misunderstanding terminology that's used here—is that it's a maxiumum of 10 per cent, as I understand it, but taking account of what's already there.
I think that there has been a whole area of misunderstanding that has arisen from this. People have felt—the people whom we are asking to deliver this—that they have to do an additional 10 per cent wherever they farm. I'm also quite aware that there were other statements about the right tree in the right place, where that's appropriate. I just wanted to clarify those points, because I think that they are important points.
Ar y defnydd o'r term 'cyffredinol', a glywn eto. Mae'n swnio'n gyfarwydd, mewn cyd-destun arall. Cafwyd llawer o ddatganiadau am y gofyniad am orchudd coed ar ffermydd dros, mae'n debyg, y naw mis diwethaf neu fwy. Yr hyn sy'n glir—ac nid wyf am i'r bobl ar y tu allan gamddeall y derminoleg a ddefnyddir yma—yw ei fod yn uchafswm o 10 y cant, yn ôl yr hyn a ddeallaf, ond gan ystyried yr hyn sydd yno'n barod.
Rwy'n credu bod cryn dipyn o gamddealltwriaeth wedi codi o hyn. Mae pobl wedi teimlo—y bobl rydym y gofynnwn iddynt gyflawni hyn—fod yn rhaid iddynt gyflawni 10 y cant ychwanegol ble bynnag y maent yn ffermio. Rwyf hefyd yn ymwybodol iawn fod datganiadau eraill wedi'u gwneud am y goeden iawn yn y lle iawn, lle mae hynny'n briodol. Roeddwn am egluro’r pwyntiau hynny, gan y credaf eu bod yn bwyntiau pwysig.
Thank you for the clarity, because the lack of clarity is what has caused many of the problems that we have seen and the anger shown by farmers in recent protests that we have seen outside here a few months ago. For many farmers, they can meet those requirements. Other farmers can't. I think that we need to recognise that each farm is different, and the point that you make about the right tree in the right place is absolutely right, so I agree with you on that.
Clearly, the 10 per cent mandatory requirement has become toxic, so we need to detoxify that by being clearer about what we expect and whether current tree cover is acceptable or not, because that wasn't clear in the first consultation that was engaged with. So, we need to broaden the engagement with the stakeholders involved with the SFS. That is being done but, obviously, we await the outcomes of that engagement process. Concerns also remain regarding the sheer amount of universal actions and how achievable they are for farmers.
Within the context of decarbonising the farming sector, one set of solutions that's been largely omitted from the discussion is around renewable energy. If farmers are to play a role in reducing carbon emissions, there must be a greater emphasis on such alternatives. Therefore, I'd ask for the Cabinet Secretary's considerations in this regard. Renewable energy could provide a more flexible and practical solution, enabling farmers to meet sustainability targets while maximising land productivity. We've heard already about the tension around the need to grow our own food sustainably, rather than importing that food, if we lose valuable land to trees.
The committee's report also highlights concerns about tenant farmers—and we've heard that already—and those farming common land. This is an area we, as Plaid Cymru, strongly support, and we've consistently called for greater consideration of tenant farmers' needs, particularly their limited ability to undertake some scheme requirements due to leasing conditions. So, the Welsh Government, we believe, must ensure that tenant farmers are not penalised in any way.
We welcome the recommendation that the Welsh Government update the committee on how it plans to include tenant farmers in the scheme and protect also county council farms, and also support for new entrants and the next generation of farmers.
Diolch am egluro, gan mai diffyg eglurder sydd wedi achosi llawer o’r problemau a welsom a’r dicter a ddangoswyd gan ffermwyr yn y protestiadau diweddar a welsom y tu allan i'r fan hon ychydig fisoedd yn ôl. I lawer o ffermwyr, gallant fodloni'r gofynion hynny. Bydd yna ffermwyr eraill na allant wneud hynny. Credaf fod angen inni gydnabod bod pob fferm yn wahanol, ac mae’r pwynt a wnewch am y goeden iawn yn y lle iawn yn gwbl gywir, felly rwy'n cytuno â chi ar hynny.
Yn amlwg, mae’r gofyniad gorfodol o 10 y cant wedi dod yn fater gwenwynig, felly mae angen inni ddadwenwyno hynny drwy fod yn gliriach ynghylch yr hyn a ddisgwyliwn ac a yw gorchudd coed presennol yn dderbyniol ai peidio, gan nad oedd hynny’n glir yn yr ymgynghoriad cyntaf. Felly, mae angen inni ehangu’r ymgysylltiad â’r rhanddeiliaid sy’n ymwneud â'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Mae hynny’n digwydd, ond yn amlwg, rydym yn aros am ganlyniadau’r broses ymgysylltu honno. Mae pryderon o hyd hefyd ynghylch y nifer fawr o weithredoedd cyffredinol a pha mor gyraeddadwy ydynt i ffermwyr.
Yng nghyd-destun datgarboneiddio’r sector ffermio, un set o atebion sydd wedi bod yn absennol o’r drafodaeth i raddau helaeth yw ynni adnewyddadwy. Os yw ffermwyr am chwarae rhan yn lleihau allyriadau carbon, rhaid rhoi mwy o bwyslais ar ddewisiadau amgen o’r fath. Felly, hoffwn ofyn i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet ystyried hyn. Gallai ynni adnewyddadwy ddarparu ateb mwy hyblyg ac ymarferol, gan alluogi ffermwyr i gyflawni targedau cynaliadwyedd gan gynyddu cynhyrchiant tir i’r eithaf. Rydym eisoes wedi clywed am y tensiwn ynghylch yr angen i dyfu ein bwyd ein hunain yn gynaliadwy, yn hytrach na mewnforio’r bwyd hwnnw, os byddwn yn colli tir gwerthfawr i goed.
Mae adroddiad y pwyllgor hefyd yn tynnu sylw at bryderon ynghylch ffermwyr tenant—ac rydym wedi clywed hynny eisoes—a’r rheini sy’n ffermio tir comin. Mae hwn yn faes yr ydym ni, fel Plaid Cymru, yn ei gefnogi’n gryf, ac rydym wedi galw’n gyson am fwy o ystyriaeth i anghenion ffermwyr tenant, yn enwedig eu gallu cyfyngedig i ymgymryd â rhai o ofynion y cynllun oherwydd amodau lesio. Felly, credwn fod yn rhaid i Lywodraeth Cymru sicrhau nad yw ffermwyr tenant yn cael eu cosbi mewn unrhyw ffordd.
Rydym yn croesawu’r argymhelliad y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru roi’r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf i’r pwyllgor ynglŷn â sut y mae’n bwriadu cynnwys ffermwyr tenant yn y cynllun a diogelu ffermydd cynghorau sir hefyd, yn ogystal â chymorth i newydd-ddyfodiaid a’r genhedlaeth nesaf o ffermwyr.
You'll need to bring your contribution to an end now.
Mae angen ichi ddirwyn eich cyfraniad i ben.
Yes, okay. I'll just quickly turn, to finish off, to Farming Connect.
Ie, iawn. Rwyf am droi yn gyflym at Cyswllt Ffermio, i gloi.
Yn gyflym iawn, mae'r ddau adroddiad wedi codi pryderon difrifol am y datgysylltiad rhwng Cyswllt Ffermio a nodau polisi amaethyddol cyffredin y Llywodraeth, felly mae hwn yn rhywbeth i edrych arno. Amcanion rheoli tir cynaliadwy hefyd—mae angen bod yn gliriach ynglŷn â rôl Cyswllt Ffermio yn hynny, a hefyd rôl Cyswllt Ffermio yn rhoi cefnogaeth i ffermwyr sydd yn dioddef o broblemau iechyd meddwl. Felly, fe wnaf i adael y sylwadau fanna. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Very briefly, both reports have raised serious concerns about the disconnect between Farming Connect and the policy objectives in agriculture from Government, so this is something that needs to be considered. Sustainable land management objectives—this is another area where we need greater clarity on the role of Farming Connect, and also the role of Farming Connect in providing support to farmers who have mental health issues. So, I will leave my comments there. Thank you very much.
This is a very important debate. The sustainable farming scheme has to be aligned with our need to adapt, to become more resilient to the climate change that is inevitable. Given the deplorable state of our rivers and seas, why are we continuing to pay businesses to spread fertilisers, rather than rotating their crops, to nourish their land? Why on earth would we give planning permission for intensive chicken farms unless they have a credible management plan for disposal of the inevitable phosphates created? So, no change is not an option.
Of course we have to have a just transition and to support family farming businesses to adapt to the new reality, just as any other businesses or activity in the private or public sector will need to be supported to change. But it's very unfortunate that opposition to the sustainable farming scheme proposals has focused so much on the suggested 10 per cent tree cover, as if this would somehow interfere with the business of farming.
As the Climate Change Committee has said very clearly, increasing tree planting is essential if Wales is to meet its climate change targets. As well as afforestation being an effective means of increasing carbon sequestration, it also has the potential to deliver wider benefits, including livestock welfare, pollution reduction, flooding and soil erosion prevention, as well as protecting biodiversity.
I visited Hywel Davies's farm in Carmarthenshire over the summer, following the presentation he made at a seminar here in the Senedd earlier this year, which was organised by Wales Environment Link. He has way more trees than 10 per cent, and they provide essential shelter for sheep and cows against the rain, as well as the sun, and it is inevitable that we will have more rain, more intensive rain, as well as a lot more heat generated by a hotter climate.
Mae hon yn ddadl bwysig iawn. Mae’n rhaid i’r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy fod yn gydnaws â’n hangen i addasu, er mwyn gallu gwrthsefyll y newid yn yr hinsawdd sy’n anochel. O ystyried cyflwr truenus ein hafonydd a’n moroedd, pam ein bod yn parhau i dalu busnesau i daenu gwrtaith, yn hytrach na chylchdroi eu cnydau, i borthi eu tir? Pam ar y ddaear y byddem yn rhoi caniatâd cynllunio i ffermydd ieir dwys oni bai fod ganddynt gynllun rheoli credadwy ar gyfer gwaredu’r ffosffadau anochel a grëir? Felly, nid yw peidio â newid yn opsiwn.
Wrth gwrs, mae'n rhaid inni gael cyfnod pontio teg a chefnogi busnesau ffermio teuluol i addasu i’r realiti newydd, yn union fel y bydd angen cefnogi unrhyw fusnesau neu weithgarwch arall yn y sector preifat neu gyhoeddus i newid. Ond mae'n anffodus iawn fod gwrthwynebiad i gynigion y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy wedi canolbwyntio cymaint ar y gorchudd coed o 10 y cant a awgrymir, fel pe bai hyn rywsut yn amharu ar fusnes ffermio.
Fel y mae’r Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd wedi'i ddweud yn glir iawn, mae plannu mwy o goed yn hanfodol os yw Cymru am gyflawni ei thargedau newid hinsawdd. Yn ogystal â bod coedwigo'n ffordd effeithiol o gynyddu cyfraddau atafaelu carbon, fe allai gyflwyno buddion ehangach hefyd, gan gynnwys lles da byw, lleihau llygredd, atal llifogydd ac erydu pridd, yn ogystal â diogelu bioamrywiaeth.
Ymwelais â fferm Hywel Davies yn sir Gaerfyrddin dros yr haf, yn dilyn y cyflwyniad a wnaeth mewn seminar yma yn y Senedd yn gynharach eleni, a drefnwyd gan Cyswllt Amgylchedd Cymru. Mae ganddo lawer mwy o goed na 10 y cant, ac maent yn darparu cysgod hanfodol i ddefaid a gwartheg rhag y glaw, yn ogystal â'r haul, ac mae'n anochel ein bod yn mynd i gael mwy o law, glaw trymach, yn ogystal â llawer mwy o wres a gynhyrchir gan hinsawdd gynhesach.
Just on that point, do you think that the arbitrary figure of having 10 per cent tree cover on all farms doesn't fit into the narrative, when someone like Hywel has more than 10 per cent, but farms on the coast of Wales can't grow a single sapling?
Ar y pwynt hwnnw, a ydych chi'n credu nad yw'r ffigur mympwyol o gael gorchudd coed o 10 y cant ar bob fferm yn cyd-fynd â'r naratif, pan fo gan rywun fel Hywel fwy na 10 y cant, ond ni all ffermydd ar arfordir Cymru dyfu'r un goeden fach?
No, I don't think it should be arbitrary. I think we need to shift from blanket, which was never, I don't think, the policy, to default. I appreciate that in coastal areas it is very difficult to produce any trees because the westerly winds make it really challenging to do that. We need to absolutely—and I'm sure the Cabinet Secretary would agree with this—look at the reality of the topography of people's farms. But to say that trees are a bad thing in general, when animal welfare is at stake—
Na, nid wyf yn credu y dylai fod yn fympwyol. Credaf fod angen inni newid o cyffredinol, nad wyf yn credu ei fod yn bolisi erioed, i diofyn. Rwy'n derbyn ei bod yn anodd iawn tyfu unrhyw goed mewn ardaloedd arfordirol am fod gwyntoedd y gorllewin yn gwneud hynny'n wirioneddol heriol. Yn sicr, mae angen inni edrych—ac rwy'n siŵr y byddai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn cytuno â hyn—ar realiti topograffi ffermydd pobl. Ond mae dweud bod coed yn beth drwg yn gyffredinol, pan fo lles anifeiliaid yn y fantol—
I didn't say that.
Ni ddywedais hynny.
I know you didn't say that, but that is what some people are suggesting in the way they approach this.
Rwy'n gwybod na wnaethoch chi ddweud hynny, ond dyna mae rhai pobl yn ei awgrymu yn y ffordd yr edrychant ar hyn.
Can you understand why some farmers have scepticism around trees? Because when we were in the European Union, you were being penalised for having ground underneath trees that had been taken off your basic payment. And we had stock-excluded woodlands then as well, where people had woodland and they weren't even allowed to graze under it. It was all going back to rack and ruin underneath them. So can you understand why farmers are a little bit sceptical about tree planting? Because the position on what we do with trees keeps flip-flopping all the time.
A allwch chi ddeall pam fod rhai ffermwyr yn amheus ynghylch coed? Oherwydd pan oeddem yn yr Undeb Ewropeaidd, roeddech chi'n cael eich cosbi am gael tir o dan goed a oedd yn cael ei dynnu oddi ar eich taliad sylfaenol. Ac roedd gennym goetiroedd heb anifeiliaid bryd hynny hefyd, lle roedd gan bobl goetir ac nid oedd caniatâd i bori oddi tano. Roedd y cyfan yn mynd rhwng y cŵn a'r brain oddi tanynt. Felly a allwch chi ddeall pam y mae ffermwyr braidd yn amheus ynghylch plannu coed? Oherwydd mae'r hyn a ddywedir y dylem ei wneud gyda choed yn newid drwy'r amser.
I absolutely agree with you, James. You make a really important point. Because I am old enough, and you are not, to remember the days when people were paid to grub up their trees and their hedges, and it was devastation time as far as trees were concerned. We have to learn from our mistakes and realise that trees are an important part of the landscape. As well, I would make a small plea for orchards, of course, for food production. Nobody ever seems to think about orchards when they're saying, ‘I can't possibly have trees on my farm’, because orchards can actually produce produce that people can sell.
I think we really have to look at this holistically in relation to the way we manage our land, given the challenges we face. So, we need to have a land management strategy. This became absolutely clear to me when I chaired a seminar a couple of weeks ago on the next steps for climate change adaptation. It was so powerful to hear the concerns and priorities of the Farmers Union of Wales, the Cwm Taf Morgannwg health board and the Wildlife Trusts, and hear how the actions they wanted to see were so interlinked. For example, reintroducing beavers to slow the flow of excessive rainwater would benefit the 50 per cent of houses in Bridgend that are at risk of flooding, as well as a very large number of health facilities, which people won't be able to get to if we don't do something more imaginative than simply trying to pretend the problem doesn't exist.
Lastly, I just want to say we absolutely have to include a strategy on improving our food security in all this. I remember visiting a farm shop in Treorchy the other day, which was excellent for the business of selling the meat of the local farms, but they weren't able to provide any fruit and veg other than stuff that had come from Holland, which had been injected with horrible substances to prolong their life. We need local food production. This is something that I am very pleased to hear about going on in Powys, where there are three new farms being developed—I'm sure the Cabinet Secretary knows about it. They've identified that there are markets locally for this food, because there is such a lack of it in so many rural areas. So, we absolutely have to change, we have to do things differently, and we can't ignore that we have a different landscape than the one that we were designed for under the European scheme. We cannot just repeat what has gone before because it hasn't produced the security we need.
Rwy'n cytuno'n llwyr â chi, James. Rydych chi'n gwneud pwynt pwysig iawn. Oherwydd rwy'n ddigon hen, ac nid ydych chi, i gofio’r dyddiau pan oedd pobl yn cael eu talu i dorri eu coed a’u cloddiau, ac roedd yn amser dinistriol ar goed. Mae’n rhaid inni ddysgu o’n camgymeriadau a sylweddoli bod coed yn rhan bwysig o’r dirwedd. Yn ogystal, hoffwn wneud apêl ar ran perllannau, wrth gwrs, ar gyfer cynhyrchu bwyd. Nid yw'n ymddangos bod unrhyw un yn meddwl am berllannau pan fyddant yn dweud, 'Ni allaf gael coed ar fy fferm', gan y gall perllannau gynhyrchu cynnyrch y gall pobl ei werthu.
Credaf fod yn rhaid inni edrych ar hyn yn gyfannol mewn perthynas â'r ffordd y rheolwn ein tir, o ystyried yr heriau sy'n ein hwynebu. Felly, mae angen inni gael strategaeth rheoli tir. Daeth hyn yn gwbl amlwg i mi pan gadeiriais seminar ychydig wythnosau yn ôl ar y camau nesaf ar gyfer addasu i'r newid yn yr hinsawdd. Roedd mor bwerus clywed pryderon a blaenoriaethau Undeb Amaethwyr Cymru, bwrdd iechyd Cwm Taf Morgannwg a’r Ymddiriedolaethau Natur, a chlywed sut roedd y gweithredoedd y dymunent eu gweld mor gydgysylltiedig. Er enghraifft, byddai ailgyflwyno afancod i arafu llif dŵr glaw gormodol o fudd i’r 50 y cant o dai ym Mhen-y-bont ar Ogwr sy'n wynebu perygl llifogydd, yn ogystal â nifer fawr iawn o gyfleusterau iechyd na fydd pobl yn gallu eu cyrraedd os na wnawn rywbeth mwy dychmygus na dim ond ceisio esgus nad yw'r broblem yn bodoli.
Yn olaf, hoffwn ddweud bod yn rhaid inni gynnwys strategaeth ar wella ein diogeledd bwyd yn hyn oll. Rwy’n cofio ymweld â siop fferm yn Nhreorci y diwrnod o’r blaen, a oedd yn ardderchog o ran gwerthu cig y ffermydd lleol, ond nid oeddent yn gallu darparu unrhyw ffrwythau a llysiau heblaw rhai a oedd wedi dod o’r Iseldiroedd, a oedd wedi cael eu chwistrellu â sylweddau erchyll i ymestyn eu hoes. Mae angen inni gynhyrchu bwyd yn lleol. Mae hyn yn rhywbeth rwy'n falch iawn o glywed ei fod yn digwydd ym Mhowys, lle mae tair fferm newydd yn cael eu datblygu—rwy’n siŵr fod Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn gwybod am hyn. Maent wedi nodi bod marchnadoedd lleol ar gyfer y bwyd hwn, gan fod prinder ohono mewn cymaint o ardaloedd gwledig. Felly, mae'n rhaid inni newid, mae'n rhaid inni wneud pethau'n wahanol, ac ni allwn anwybyddu'r ffaith bod gennym dirwedd wahanol i'r un y cynlluniwyd ar ei chyfer o dan y cynllun Ewropeaidd. Ni allwn ailadrodd yr hyn sydd wedi digwydd yn y gorffennol am nad yw wedi cynhyrchu'r diogelwch sydd ei angen arnom.
I'd like to start by paying tribute to the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, Paul Davies, and thank the committee staff and those witnesses who gave evidence to us. I'm sure I can extend those tributes to Llyr Gruffydd as Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee. Although I don't sit on that committee, I did contribute, and Janet says you're a wonderful Chair.
But I am very pleased to contribute today on this debate. I won't be focusing on all three of the reports published, I'll be focusing on the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee report on the sustainable farming scheme. I don't have enough time to go into depth on the Farming Connect or climate change committee reports, so I'm glad that there are many speakers here this evening.
My primary reason for welcoming this debate is that it's necessary. The recommendations of both committees must be heard and, crucially, acted upon. I want to see agriculture thrive, Welsh agriculture thrive, as the highest quality, environmentally sustainable, food-producing industry that it already is and know that it can continue to be. It's evident from the ETRA report that there are serious issues with the sustainable farming scheme, many of which my colleagues have already highlighted. I would like to focus on certain aspects that, in my view, demonstrate a lack of forethought in the scheme, particularly the wording around social value.
Recommendation 4 of the report makes this abundantly clear, urging the Welsh Government to work swiftly, through the round-table, to define the social value element of the scheme. I find it quite hard to believe that this even needs to be stated. Surely, it shouldn't be the requirement of a committee—a recommendation—to compel the Government to clarify a key term of its own that will form part of crucial agricultural support going forward.
However, clarification of the terminology is only one aspect. The lack of adequate financial support for farmers is another. Looking at recommendation 2 of the ETRA report, there has been a failure to include tenant farmers and those working on common land in the SFS. The previous agricultural Minister, rural affairs Minister, repeatedly said that if it doesn't work for tenants, it doesn't work. Well, by that definition, the scheme does not work.
This leads me to a broader point, encapsulated in conclusion 2 of the ETRA report, which addresses both of the issues I've already touched upon: communication with farmers and the payments they will receive. There has been an alarming lack of information provided to farmers about payment methodology and the rates they can expect. While the preparatory phase allows some time for details to be worked out, it is vital that this work is completed without delay, with the Welsh Government giving full consideration to stakeholders' views, noting as well that not all farmers are members of farming unions. How can the message and that information get to them and vice versa?
The debate on the SFS has revealed one undeniable truth: farmers are desperate for that clarity on the rules, on the funding, on the future. Yet their calls have always been somewhat ignored, with farmers left sitting and asking themselves why: why have we spent so much time getting to this point only to be still without a workable system to secure the future of farming in Wales? The first consultation, 'Brexit and our land', launched in 2018, yet six years and five consultations later we're still waiting for a workable scheme that farmers want to subscribe to. Why has the Welsh Government allowed this to drag on for so long?
Why was the co-design process nothing more than a token gesture? If co-design actually meant something, we wouldn't find ourselves in this situation today debating these three committee reports. Why have farmers, unions, industry experts and entire rural communities had their concerns about the deeply-flawed sustainable farming scheme fall on deaf ears? Why did it take a series of protests across Wales, including one of the largest on the very steps of this Senedd, for the Welsh Government to finally pay attention? And why—and this is what really frustrates me, Llywydd—is it that time and time again agriculture and our farmers are treated as something that can be traded off, paid lip service to, their concerns quashed, instead of being properly supported as the backbone of our rural communities that they truly are?
In closing, Llywydd, I urge this Government to listen, to hear the voices of our farmers, our rural communities and these two Senedd committees. They're not asking for the impossible—they're asking for clarity, for fairness and for respect. Welsh farming is at the heart of our nation, the foundation of our rural communities and it, I believe, deserves better. The time for delay has long passed. This Government must act now before it's too late to protect the future of Welsh agriculture for this generation and for generations to come.
Hoffwn ddechrau drwy dalu teyrnged i Gadeirydd Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig, Paul Davies, a diolch i staff y pwyllgor a’r tystion a roddodd dystiolaeth i ni. Rwy’n siŵr y gallaf ymestyn y teyrngedau hynny i gynnwys Llyr Gruffydd fel Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith. Er nad wyf ar y pwyllgor hwnnw, fe wneuthum gyfrannu, ac mae Janet yn dweud eich bod yn Gadeirydd gwych.
Ond rwy’n falch iawn o gyfrannu at y ddadl hon heddiw. Ni fyddaf yn canolbwyntio ar bob un o’r tri adroddiad a gyhoeddwyd, ond byddaf yn canolbwyntio ar adroddiad Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Nid oes gennyf ddigon o amser i fanylu ar adroddiadau Cyswllt Ffermio na’r pwyllgor newid hinsawdd, felly rwy’n falch fod llawer o siaradwyr yma heno.
Fy mhrif reswm dros groesawu’r ddadl hon yw am ei bod yn angenrheidiol. Mae'n rhaid gwrando ar argymhellion y ddau bwyllgor, ac yn hollbwysig, mae'n rhaid gweithredu arnynt. Hoffwn weld amaethyddiaeth yn ffynnu, amaethyddiaeth Cymru yn ffynnu, fel y diwydiant cynhyrchu bwyd o ansawdd uchel, amgylcheddol gynaliadwy ag ydyw ac y gwn y gall barhau i fod. Mae'n amlwg o adroddiad Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig fod problemau difrifol gyda'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, ac mae fy nghyd-Aelodau eisoes wedi tynnu sylw at lawer ohonynt. Hoffwn ganolbwyntio ar rai agweddau sydd, yn fy marn i, yn dangos diffyg rhagofal yn y cynllun, yn enwedig y geiriad ynghylch gwerth cymdeithasol.
Mae argymhelliad 4 yn yr adroddiad yn gwneud hyn yn gwbl glir, gan annog Llywodraeth Cymru i weithio’n gyflym, drwy’r bwrdd crwn, i ddiffinio elfen gwerth cymdeithasol y cynllun. Mae'n anodd credu bod angen datgan hyn hyd yn oed. Yn sicr, ni ddylai fod angen i bwyllgor nodi gofyniad—argymhelliad—i orfodi’r Llywodraeth i egluro ei therm allweddol ei hun a fydd yn rhan o gymorth amaethyddol hollbwysig wrth symud ymlaen.
Fodd bynnag, dim ond un agwedd yw egluro'r derminoleg. Mae diffyg cymorth ariannol digonol i ffermwyr yn agwedd arall. O edrych ar argymhelliad 2 yn adroddiad Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig, mae'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy wedi methu cynnwys ffermwyr tenant a ffermwyr sy’n gweithio ar dir comin. Dywedodd y Gweinidog amaethyddol blaenorol, y Gweinidog materion gwledig, dro ar ôl tro, os nad yw’n gweithio i denantiaid, nid yw’n gweithio. Wel, yn ôl y diffiniad hwnnw, nid yw'r cynllun yn gweithio.
Mae hyn yn fy arwain at bwynt ehangach, sydd wedi'i grynhoi yng nghasgliad 2 yn adroddiad Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig, sy'n mynd i'r afael â'r ddau fater rwyf eisoes wedi eu crybwyll: cyfathrebu â ffermwyr a'r taliadau y byddant yn eu cael. Mae'r wybodaeth a ddarparwyd i ffermwyr am fethodoleg talu a’r cyfraddau y gallant eu disgwyl yn frawychus o brin. Er bod y cyfnod paratoi yn caniatáu rhywfaint o amser i drafod y manylion, mae’n hanfodol fod y gwaith hwn yn cael ei gwblhau yn ddi-oed, gyda Llywodraeth Cymru yn rhoi ystyriaeth lawn i farn rhanddeiliaid, gan nodi hefyd nad yw pob ffermwr yn aelod o undebau ffermio. Sut y gall y neges a'r wybodaeth honno eu cyrraedd, a sut y clywir eu hymateb?
Mae’r ddadl ynglŷn â'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy wedi datgelu un gwirionedd diymwad: mae ffermwyr yn ysu am eglurder ynghylch y rheolau, y cyllid, y dyfodol. Ac eto, mae eu galwadau wedi’u hanwybyddu braidd, gyda ffermwyr yn gofyn iddynt eu hunain pam: pam ein bod wedi treulio cymaint o amser yn cyrraedd y pwynt hwn ac yn dal heb system ymarferol i sicrhau dyfodol ffermio yng Nghymru? Lansiwyd yr ymgynghoriad cyntaf, 'Brexit a'n tir', yn 2018, ac eto, chwe blynedd a phum ymgynghoriad yn ddiweddarach, rydym yn dal i aros am gynllun ymarferol y mae ffermwyr yn awyddus i ymrwymo iddo. Pam fod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi caniatáu i hyn barhau cyhyd?
Pam nad oedd y broses gydgynllunio yn ddim mwy na gweithred symbolaidd? Pe bai cydgynllunio yn golygu rhywbeth mewn gwirionedd, ni fyddem yn y sefyllfa hon heddiw yn trafod y tri adroddiad pwyllgor hyn. Pam fod pryderon ffermwyr, undebau, arbenigwyr y diwydiant a chymunedau gwledig cyfan ynghylch y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy hynod ddiffygiol wedi syrthio ar glustiau byddar? Pam ei bod wedi cymryd cyfres o brotestiadau ledled Cymru, gan gynnwys un o’r rhai mwyaf ar risiau’r Senedd hon, i Lywodraeth Cymru dalu sylw o’r diwedd? A pham—a dyma sy'n peri cymaint o rwystredigaeth i mi, Lywydd—pam fod amaethyddiaeth a'n ffermwyr yn cael eu trin dro ar ôl tro fel pethau i'w diystyru, ac i wfftio at eu pryderon, yn hytrach na chael eu cefnogi'n briodol am yr hyn ydynt, sef asgwrn cefn ein cymunedau gwledig?
I gloi, Lywydd, rwy’n annog y Llywodraeth hon i wrando, i glywed lleisiau ein ffermwyr, ein cymunedau gwledig a’r ddau bwyllgor Senedd hyn. Nid ydynt yn gofyn am yr amhosibl—maent yn gofyn am eglurder, tegwch a pharch. Mae ffermio yng Nghymru yn hollbwysig i'n cenedl, yn sylfaen i’n cymunedau gwledig, a chredaf ei fod yn haeddu gwell. Mae'r amser ar gyfer oedi wedi hen fynd heibio. Mae'n rhaid i’r Llywodraeth hon weithredu nawr cyn ei bod yn rhy hwyr i ddiogelu dyfodol amaethyddiaeth Cymru ar gyfer y genhedlaeth hon a chenedlaethau i ddod.
Well, Brexit has a lot to answer for. We've heard a lot of rhetoric surrounding the sustainable farming scheme, with impassioned voices on both sides of the debate and a lot of disinformation as well. I welcome the round-table events and all the discussions that the Cabinet Secretary has been having with farmers and environmental groups trying to find a pragmatic way forward. The reality, however, is that the science and evidence are very clear: the UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world and one in six species are at risk of extinction. Unsustainable land management is the biggest driver of nature loss here in Wales, going back from the 1970s onwards—the way that we've lost our wildflower meadows, and hedges have been ripped up et cetera. When this is coupled with the fact that 90 per cent of land area in Wales is used for farming, it's obvious we need to work closely with farmers to reverse the nature crisis we face. Without nature, we have no economy, we have no food. The sustainable farming scheme is by far our greatest opportunity to take decisive and meaningful action to halt nature loss and actively restore habitats.
Central to the criticisms of the SFS so far has been the 10 per cent tree cover, which has been mentioned quite a lot already. This part of the scheme was drawn up because, without farmers playing their role, we will never be able to achieve our tree planting and carbon sequestration targets. On the face of it—
Wel, mae gan Brexit lawer i ateb drosto. Rydym wedi clywed llawer o rethreg mewn perthynas â’r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, gyda lleisiau angerddol ar ddwy ochr y ddadl a llawer o dwyllwybodaeth hefyd. Rwy'n croesawu'r digwyddiadau bwrdd crwn a’r holl drafodaethau y mae Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet wedi'u cael gyda ffermwyr a grwpiau amgylcheddol i geisio dod o hyd i ffordd bragmatig ymlaen. Y gwir amdani, fodd bynnag, yw bod y wyddoniaeth a’r dystiolaeth yn glir iawn: mae’r DU yn un o’r gwledydd lle mae natur wedi dirywio fwyaf yn y byd ac mae un o bob chwe rhywogaeth mewn perygl o ddiflannu. Rheoli tir yn anghynaliadwy yw’r rheswm mwyaf dros golledion i fyd natur yma yng Nghymru, o’r 1970au ymlaen—y ffordd yr ydym wedi colli ein gweirgloddiau blodeuog, a pherthi wedi’u rhwygo allan ac ati. Ynghyd â’r ffaith bod 90 y cant o arwynebedd tir Cymru’n cael ei ddefnyddio ar gyfer ffermio, mae’n amlwg fod angen inni weithio’n agos gyda ffermwyr i wrthdroi’r argyfwng natur sy’n ein hwynebu. Heb natur, nid oes gennym unrhyw economi, nid oes gennym unrhyw fwyd. Y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yw ein cyfle gorau o bell ffordd i weithredu'n bendant ac yn ystyrlon i atal colledion i fyd natur ac i fynd ati'n weithredol i adfer cynefinoedd.
Un feirniadaeth allweddol o’r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy hyd yn hyn yw’r 10 y cant o orchudd coed, y bu cryn dipyn o sôn amdano yn barod. Lluniwyd y rhan hon o’r cynllun oherwydd, heb i ffermwyr chwarae eu rhan, ni fyddwn byth yn gallu cyflawni ein targedau plannu coed ac atafaelu carbon. Ar y wyneb—
Will the Member give way, just on that point?
A wnaiff yr Aelod ildio, ar y pwynt hwnnw?
Yes.
Gwnaf.
Sorry, Carolyn; I appreciate you giving way. The First Minister, a couple of weeks ago, mentioned how seagrass is far more efficient at sequestering carbon. Why then is the Welsh Government persevering with a policy on carbon sequestration that doesn't work as well as other available technologies and nature-based solutions?
Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, Carolyn; diolch am ildio. Soniodd y Prif Weinidog, ychydig wythnosau yn ôl, sut y mae morwellt yn llawer mwy effeithlon am atafaelu carbon. Pam, felly, fod Llywodraeth Cymru yn dyfalbarhau â pholisi atafaelu carbon nad yw'n gweithio cystal â thechnolegau ac atebion ar sail natur eraill?
Yes, seagrass is really important, wildflower meadows—I'd like all that to be incorporated. Planting trees as well. We need to do an awful lot, because we need to halt, reverse, the decline of biodiversity and—. I'll carry on with the benefits of tree planting, if that's okay, and I will actually cover what you're going to say, if I carry on.
Ydy, mae morwellt yn bwysig iawn, gweirgloddiau blodeuog—hoffwn i hynny oll gael ei ymgorffori. Plannu coed hefyd. Mae angen inni wneud llawer iawn, gan fod angen inni atal a gwrthdroi dirywiad bioamrywiaeth a—. Rwyf am barhau i sôn am fanteision plannu coed, os yw hynny'n iawn, ac fe roddaf sylw i'r hyn rydych chi'n dweud os caf barhau.
Please do.
Os gwelwch yn dda, gwnewch hynny.
Okay, yes. So, on the face of it, 10 per cent seems a high number, but when you take into consideration that the average tree cover on farmland is already at 6 per cent to 7 per cent, you recognise how achievable this can be on many farms. I understand, though, that the topography and geography have to be taken into consideration, but it's amazing how different trees can be planted in different areas; it's just that we need to educate as well. But I agree; it shouldn't just be a numbers game. And I know that the Cabinet Secretary, through his meetings, he's taking all this into consideration, going forward.
We need to show that tree planting brings numerous benefits to farmers themselves, improving soil health, bringing animal welfare improvements by providing additional shade and shelter to livestock—they are happier and more productive when not overheating—and trees provide a natural flood defence. Hedges and edges of fields are so important as well, as nature corridors. They hold the moisture and nutrients in the earth, as they are not disturbed. Soil nutrients are being eroded by intensive farming and water run-offs, which then causes flooding onto the highway and then flooding impacts on homes. Extreme weather and climate change is impacting and will become the norm. It will pose a significant risk to food production security in Wales and the viability of farming. But those edges that aren't intensely farmed retain that moisture and the nutrients, so it just shows how different things could be if areas were managed differently.
Across Wales, the evidence shows farmers who adopt regenerative and organic practices enhance land resilience and enable them to better mitigate and adapt to droughts or floods. They're the most resilient, then, to the impacts of climate change. And we know the biggest medium- to long-term risk to food production in Wales actually comes from climate change. And, as WWF rightly pointed out, farmers who actively engage with nature restoration, nature-friendly or more diverse farming practices are more resilient to extreme weather events. For example, land is less scorched during periods of extreme heat and water stress, and less prone to flooding. We have to futureproof our farming systems to allow us to be more resilient to the impacts of climate change.
Over the years, intensive farming has been increasing, but with fertiliser and food being so expensive, those that have reduced head of livestock and reduced spend on food and fertiliser have realised they can still make a profit but with less outlay and less work under nature-friendly farming. It's like reversing and going back over many generations. The Nature Friendly Farming Network Cymru highlighted, during committee evidence sessions, that managing land for habitat does not have to come at the cost of productivity, and that integrating a diverse range of habitats and features on farmland can maintain and even increase yields. In fact, the majority of farmers who have developed nature-friendly practices say they are now more profitable.
Last week, I sponsored an event in the Senedd for Wildlife Trust Wales, and those who attended will have heard Liliana and Ellie's amazing speeches about Stand for Nature and their youth manifesto for COP16. They reminded us of the privileged positions we hold, as the elected representatives, and the changes we could make if they had a day in our shoes. We can't let them down. We must take action now before we face irreversible loss of biodiversity. Without nature—and in this I'm including every insect, every pollinator, moth, bird, worm, dung beetle; they are important parts of our ecosystems—. There is no economy without them and there is no food, so we have to find a solution, working with farmers, together. Thank you.
Iawn. Felly, ar yr wyneb, mae 10 y cant yn swnio'n ffigur uchel, ond pan fyddwch yn ystyried bod y gorchudd coed cyfartalog ar dir fferm eisoes yn 6 y cant i 7 y cant, rydych chi'n gweld pa mor gyraeddadwy y gall hyn fod ar lawer o ffermydd. Rwy'n deall, serch hynny, fod yn rhaid ystyried topograffi a’r ddaearyddiaeth, ond mae’n rhyfeddol sut y gellir plannu gwahanol goed mewn gwahanol ardaloedd; mae angen inni addysgu hefyd, dyna i gyd. Ond rwy'n cytuno; ni ddylai ymwneud â rhifau yn unig. A gwn fod Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, drwy ei gyfarfodydd, yn ystyried hyn oll, wrth symud ymlaen.
Mae angen inni ddangos bod plannu coed yn darparu manteision niferus i’r ffermwyr eu hunain, drwy wella iechyd pridd, arwain at welliannau i les anifeiliaid drwy ddarparu cysgod a lloches ychwanegol i dda byw—maent yn hapusach ac yn fwy cynhyrchiol pan nad ydynt yn gordwymo—ac mae coed yn amddiffynfa naturiol rhag llifogydd. Mae perthi ac ymylon caeau mor bwysig hefyd, fel coridorau natur. Maent yn dal y lleithedd a'r maethynnau yn y ddaear, gan nad oes unrhyw beth yn tarfu arnynt. Mae maethynnau pridd yn cael eu herydu gan ffermio dwys a dŵr ffo, sydd wedyn yn achosi llifogydd ar y briffyrdd ac yna mae'r llifogydd yn effeithio ar gartrefi. Mae tywydd eithafol a newid hinsawdd yn cael effaith, a bydd hynny'n dod yn norm. Bydd yn creu risg sylweddol i ddiogeledd cynhyrchiant bwyd yng Nghymru ac i hyfywedd ffermio. Ond mae'r ymylon nad ydynt yn cael eu ffermio'n ddwys yn cadw'r lleithedd a'r maethynnau, felly mae'n dangos pa mor wahanol y gallai pethau fod pe bai mannau'n cael eu rheoli'n wahanol.
Ledled Cymru, mae’r dystiolaeth yn dangos bod ffermwyr sy’n mabwysiadu arferion adfywiol ac organig yn gwella gwytnwch tir ac yn eu galluogi i liniaru ac addasu’n well i sychder neu lifogydd. Hwy yw'r rhai mwyaf gwydn, felly, rhag effeithiau newid hinsawdd. A gwyddom fod y risg dymor canolig i hirdymor fwyaf i gynhyrchiant bwyd yng Nghymru yn deillio o newid hinsawdd. Ac fel y nododd WWF, yn gywir ddigon, mae ffermwyr sy'n mynd ati'n weithredol i ddefnyddio arferion ffermio sy'n ystyriol o natur, sy'n adfer natur, neu sy'n fwy amrywiol yn gallu gwrthsefyll digwyddiadau tywydd eithafol yn well. Er enghraifft, mae tir yn llai llosg yn ystod cyfnodau o wres a phwysau dŵr, ac yn llai agored i lifogydd. Mae’n rhaid inni ddiogelu ein systemau ffermio at y dyfodol er mwyn ein galluogi i fod yn fwy gwydn rhag effeithiau newid hinsawdd.
Dros y blynyddoedd, mae ffermio dwys wedi bod yn cynyddu, ond gyda gwrtaith a bwyd mor ddrud, mae’r rheini sydd wedi lleihau nifer y da byw sydd ganddynt a lleihau eu gwariant ar fwyd a gwrtaith wedi sylweddoli y gallant wneud elw o hyd ond gyda llai o wariant a llai o waith drwy ffermio sy'n ystyriol o natur. Mae fel mynd yn ôl genedlaethau lawer. Amlygodd Rhwydwaith Ffermio er Lles Natur Cymru, yn ystod sesiynau tystiolaeth y pwyllgor, nad oes yn rhaid i reoli tir ar gyfer cynefin ddigwydd ar draul cynhyrchiant, ac y gall integreiddio ystod amrywiol o gynefinoedd a nodweddion ar dir fferm gynnal a hyd yn oed gynyddu pwysau’r cnwd. Mewn gwirionedd, mae'r rhan fwyaf o ffermwyr sydd wedi datblygu arferion ystyriol o natur yn dweud eu bod bellach yn fwy proffidiol.
Yr wythnos diwethaf, noddais ddigwyddiad yn y Senedd ar gyfer Ymddiriedolaeth Natur Cymru, a bydd y rheini a fynychodd wedi clywed areithiau anhygoel Liliana ac Ellie am Sefyll dros Natur a’u maniffesto ieuenctid ar gyfer COP16. Gwnaethant ein hatgoffa o’r rolau breintiedig sydd gennym, fel y cynrychiolwyr etholedig, a’r newidiadau y gallem eu gwneud pe baent yn cael diwrnod yn ein hesgidiau ni. Ni allwn eu siomi. Mae'n rhaid inni weithredu ar unwaith cyn inni wynebu colledion na ellir eu gwrthdroi i fioamrywiaeth. Heb natur—ac mae hynny'n cynnwys pob pryfyn, pob peillydd, gwyfyn, aderyn, mwydyn, chwilen y dom; maent yn rhannau pwysig o’n hecosystemau—. Nid oes economi hebddynt, ac nid oes bwyd, felly mae'n rhaid inni ddod o hyd i ateb, gan weithio gyda ffermwyr, gyda’n gilydd. Diolch.
Many of the points that I wanted to make have already been made, but I want to say 'thank you' to both of the committees for focusing on the sustainable farming scheme, and some really key points in that. I want to begin by reaffirming my belief that the sustainable farming scheme represents a really vital step forward for farmers and communities here in Wales, aiming to build a sustainable, progressive and prosperous farming industry. But it definitely has failings. Aspects of the SFS are deeply unpopular amongst farmers, and for good reasons, but I do know that the Cabinet Secretary has been working hard to engage with those farming unions, and I have heard that directly from them.
Farmers want a sustainable future. They do want to deliver on sustainable farming, and they are key allies, as has been said by the Chair of the committee for climate, environment and infrastructure—they are key allies in climate change, and they produce high-quality food for our tables. But, throughout the consultations on SFS, we keep hearing the same thing over and over again from farmers: that this scheme is too complicated, too demanding, and too unwieldy. Professor Dwyer from Cardiff University summarised it really well when she said that what's being asked of farmers is
'an awful lot of extra work for unknown but potentially insufficient reward'.
So, there are just five specific issues from me that I'd quickly like to canter through. Much can be said, of course, in relation to the reports, but I just want to concentrate on these five quickly, and I hope they're constructive.
Firstly, the baseline payment: it's obvious that, when we look at how feasible the scheme is for different farming systems, I welcome the report's recommendation that the Welsh Government should keep the committee updated on how it proposes to include support for tenant farmers and farmers on common land. We've heard from other contributors how important tenant farmers and common-land farmers are. They are farmers, they produce food, and they should be treated exactly the same as any other farmer. The NFU and FUW are demanding that no farmer is left behind, and so I do ask that the universal baseline payment is extended.
Secondly—and I put my tin hat on here—tree coverage. This is a very cumbersome requirement, and I would urge anybody who talks about this and maybe doesn't agree with this to really think: is it that you want every single farmer to have their land—some of the land would be used in food production—to be planted with trees in order to meet that requirement? If it is indeed not a minimum requirement—and we'll hear from the Cabinet Secretary later on—then please can this be clear in your response? I would welcome that, please. No-one—no-one—is denying that we need to plant more trees, but we need to be flexible and we need to be clear with our farmers that this is not a demand for a minimum of 10 per cent on their land.
Thirdly, young farmers: we need to recognise that the committee report said that, for young farmers, there isn't much to encourage that next generation. The Wales Federation of Young Farmers Clubs have said that, as it stands, the SFS would
'make it impossible to get new blood into the industry.'
So, would the Welsh Government outline the ways in which it will encourage new entrants and new farmers to come into farming?
Fourthly, the mental health crisis. It's been touched on, I realise. What we know about farming is that—. Well, in terms of mental health issues, it is the tip of the iceberg; it's no wonder that farmers of all ages are facing a mental health crisis. According to the DPJ Foundation, they've seen a 73 per cent increase in phone calls that have been referred on to a counselling service. So, I really would welcome a response to that particular issue.
Finally, around renewable energy, that provision was included as an amendment in the agricultural Bill, and I was lucky enough to push for that. I'd like to make a suggestion that all farm buildings have financial support for coverage with solar panels. Straight away, you'd be in the business of ensuring that we had a greater sustainable and, hopefully, more popular approach to renewable energy.
We need to think that—[Interruption.] I don’t know if I can take an intervention, given that I'm over time. I think I'll continue, shall I, Llywydd?
Mae llawer o’r pwyntiau yr oeddwn am eu gwneud eisoes wedi’u gwneud, ond hoffwn ddiolch i'r ddau bwyllgor am ganolbwyntio ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, a rhai pwyntiau gwirioneddol allweddol yn hynny. Hoffwn ddechrau drwy ailddatgan fy nghred fod y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn gam hollbwysig ymlaen i ffermwyr a chymunedau yma yng Nghymru, gan anelu at adeiladu diwydiant ffermio cynaliadwy, blaengar a llewyrchus. Ond yn bendant, mae ganddo wendidau. Mae agweddau ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn hynod amhoblogaidd ymhlith ffermwyr, a hynny am resymau da, ond gwn fod Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet wedi bod yn gweithio’n galed i ymgysylltu â’r undebau ffermio hynny, ac rwyf wedi clywed hynny’n uniongyrchol ganddynt.
Mae ffermwyr yn dymuno cael dyfodol cynaliadwy. Maent yn dymuno cyflawni mewn perthynas â ffermio cynaliadwy, ac maent yn gynghreiriaid allweddol, fel y dywedodd Cadeirydd y pwyllgor hinsawdd, yr amgylchedd a seilwaith—maent yn gynghreiriaid allweddol o ran newid hinsawdd, ac maent yn cynhyrchu bwyd o ansawdd uchel ar gyfer ein byrddau. Ond drwy gydol yr ymgynghoriadau ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, rydym yn clywed yr un peth dro ar ôl tro gan ffermwyr: fod y cynllun hwn yn rhy gymhleth, yn rhy feichus, ac yn rhy anhylaw. Crynhodd yr Athro Dwyer o Brifysgol Caerdydd y mater yn dda iawn pan ddywedodd mai'r hyn y gofynnir i ffermwyr ei wneud yw
'llawer iawn o waith ychwanegol am fudd amhenodol ond annigonol, o bosibl'.
Felly, mae gennyf bum mater penodol yr hoffwn eu trafod yn gyflym. Gellir dweud llawer, wrth gwrs, mewn perthynas â'r adroddiadau, ond rwyf am ganolbwyntio ar y pum peth hwn yn gyflym, ac rwy'n gobeithio eu bod yn adeiladol.
Yn gyntaf, y taliad sylfaenol: pan edrychwn ar ba mor ymarferol yw’r cynllun ar gyfer systemau ffermio gwahanol, mae'n amlwg fy mod yn croesawu argymhelliad yr adroddiad y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru roi’r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf i’r pwyllgor am sut y mae’n bwriadu cynnwys cymorth i ffermwyr tenant a ffermwyr tir comin. Rydym wedi clywed gan gyfranwyr eraill pa mor bwysig yw ffermwyr tenant a ffermwyr tir comin. Maent yn ffermwyr, maent yn cynhyrchu bwyd, a dylent gael eu trin yn union yr un fath ag unrhyw ffermwr arall. Mae'r NFU ac Undeb Amaethwyr Cymru yn mynnu na chaiff unrhyw ffermwyr eu gadael ar ôl, ac felly gofynnaf i’r taliad sylfaenol cyffredinol gael ei ymestyn.
Yn ail—ac rwy'n gwisgo fy helmed dun yma—gorchudd coed. Mae hwn yn ofyniad beichus iawn, a buaswn yn annog unrhyw un sy'n siarad am hyn a heb fod yn cytuno â hyn efallai i feddwl: a ydych am i goed gael eu plannu ar dir pob ffermwr—byddai rhywfaint o'r tir yn cael ei ddefnyddio i gynhyrchu bwyd—er mwyn bodloni'r gofyniad hwnnw? Os nad yw'n ofyniad sylfaenol, yn wir—a chawn glywed gan Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn nes ymlaen—yna os gwelwch yn dda, a all hyn fod yn glir yn eich ymateb? Buaswn yn croesawu hynny, os gwelwch yn dda. Nid oes unrhyw un—unrhyw un—yn gwadu bod angen inni blannu mwy o goed, ond mae angen inni fod yn hyblyg, ac mae angen inni ddweud yn glir wrth ein ffermwyr nad galwad am orchudd o 10 y cant o leiaf ar eu tir yw hwn.
Yn drydydd, ffermwyr ifanc: mae angen inni gydnabod bod adroddiad y pwyllgor wedi dweud, ar gyfer ffermwyr ifanc, nad oes llawer i annog y genhedlaeth nesaf. Mae Ffederasiwn Clybiau Ffermwyr Ifanc Cymru wedi dweud, fel y mae, y byddai’r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn
'ei gwneud yn amhosibl denu gwaed newydd i'r diwydiant.'
Felly, a wnaiff Llywodraeth Cymru amlinellu’r ffyrdd y bydd yn annog newydd-ddyfodiaid a ffermwyr newydd i mewn i'r byd ffermio?
Yn bedwerydd, yr argyfwng iechyd meddwl. Rwy'n sylweddoli ei fod wedi cael ei grybwyll. Yr hyn a wyddom am ffermio yw—. Wel, o ran materion iechyd meddwl, dyma grib y rhewfryn; nid yw’n syndod fod ffermwyr o bob oed yn wynebu argyfwng iechyd meddwl. Yn ôl Sefydliad DPJ, maent wedi gweld cynnydd o 73 y cant mewn galwadau ffôn sydd wedi cael eu cyfeirio at wasanaeth cwnsela. Felly, buaswn yn croesawu ymateb i'r mater penodol hwnnw.
Yn olaf, ar ynni adnewyddadwy, cafodd y ddarpariaeth honno ei chynnwys fel gwelliant yn y Bil amaethyddiaeth, ac roeddwn yn ddigon ffodus i wthio am hynny. Hoffwn awgrymu bod pob adeilad fferm yn cael cymorth ariannol ar gyfer gosod paneli solar. Ar unwaith, byddech yn dechrau sicrhau bod gennym ddull mwy cynaliadwy, a mwy poblogaidd, gobeithio, o ymdrin ag ynni adnewyddadwy.
Mae angen inni feddwl—[Torri ar draws.] Nid wyf yn gwybod a gaf i dderbyn ymyriad, o ystyried bod fy amser ar ben. A gaf i barhau, Lywydd?
Yes, you continue.
Iawn, fe gewch chi barhau.
One more sentence. I hope that I can hear from the Cabinet Secretary that there are no barriers in the SFS to farmers who may not be able to provide 10 per cent trees, to tenant farmers, to young farmers, and to those who are common farmers as well. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Un frawddeg arall. Rwy'n gobeithio y caf glywed gan Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet nad oes unrhyw rwystrau yn y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy i ffermwyr nad ydynt yn gallu darparu 10 y cant o goed, i ffermwyr tenant, i ffermwyr ifanc, ac i'r rhai sy'n ffermwyr tir comin hefyd. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Can I first refer Members to my register of interest as a farmer and a recipient of the basic payment scheme? I'd like to thank both the ETRA and climate change committees for their work on the sustainable farming scheme, and I agree with many of their findings and recommendations, and they have got well under the issues, and we thank them for that.
Their recommendations need to be taken on board, as we've already heard, as a future sustainable farming scheme will shape the future of many things. It will shape the agricultural economy. It will shape how our wonderfully diverse countryside will look. It will, as a result, shape our rural communities and, as such, our future culture and the language that thrives within those communities. All of these things make up the very fabric of Wales as we know it, so it's crucial we get these things right.
When the SFS consultation emerged last year, none of us could have envisaged that the Government could have got things so wrong and were so out of touch with rural reality, and this is, in my experience, often the case when people who design policy don't understand the subject matter enough. The raft of universal actions and expectations on farmers were unworkable, unfair, and some unachievable. The 10 per cent tree cover, the 10 per cent habitat, the ponds and scrapes were just a few of the case in points, which we've already heard today. Things weren't helped by the lack of that payment structure for farmers to consider. The concerns also around the devaluation of their own capital asset weren't addressed, and they've raised fear.
The scheme was branded 'Keep farmers farming', and the thousands of farmers that marched on the Senedd told us different, and they told us it was the opposite. And we know, and it's worth reminding ourselves, that it would have led to a 122,000 reduction of livestock units, in effect, about 10.8 per cent of the Welsh livestock numbers, and a 11 per cent cut in labour on Welsh farms, which is the equivalent of losing 5,500 jobs, based on the current employment levels of Welsh farms. And we know it would have brought a £125 million hit to output from the sector and a loss of £199 million to farm business income.
Now, I was really pleased that the new Cabinet Secretary—. Oh, sorry, Jenny.
A gaf i gyfeirio'r Aelodau at fy nghofrestr o fuddiannau yn gyntaf fel ffermwr ac un o dderbynwyr cynllun y taliad sylfaenol? Hoffwn ddiolch i bwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig a'r pwyllgor newid hinsawdd am eu gwaith ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, ac rwy'n cytuno â llawer o'u canfyddiadau a'u hargymhellion, ac maent wedi tyrchu'n drylwyr i'r materion sy'n codi, ac rydym yn diolch iddynt am hynny.
Mae angen ystyried eu hargymhellion, fel y clywsom eisoes, gan y bydd cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn y dyfodol yn llywio dyfodol llawer o bethau. Bydd yn siapio'r economi amaethyddol. Bydd yn siapio sut y bydd ein cefn gwlad rhyfeddol o amrywiol yn edrych. O ganlyniad, bydd yn siapio ein cymunedau gwledig ac o'r herwydd, ein diwylliant yn y dyfodol a'r iaith sy'n ffynnu yn y cymunedau hynny. Yr holl bethau hyn sy'n ffurfio gwead Cymru fel y'i hadwaenwn, felly mae'n hanfodol ein bod yn cael y pethau hyn yn iawn.
Pan gynhaliwyd ymgynghoriad y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy y llynedd, ni allai unrhyw un ohonom fod wedi rhagweld y gallai'r Llywodraeth fod wedi cael pethau mor anghywir a'u bod allan o gysylltiad i'r fath raddau â realiti gwledig, ac mae hyn yn aml yn wir pan nad yw pobl sy'n llunio polisi yn deall y pwnc yn ddigonol. Roedd y llu o weithredoedd cyffredinol a disgwyliadau ar ffermwyr yn anymarferol, yn annheg, ac roedd rhai yn anghyraeddadwy. Dim ond rhai o'r pethau y clywsom amdanynt eisoes heddiw yw'r gorchudd coed o 10 y cant, y 10 y cant o gynefin, y pyllau dŵr a'r pyllau dŵr tymhorol. Ni chafodd pethau eu helpu gan ddiffyg strwythur talu i ffermwyr ei ystyried. Nid aethpwyd i'r afael â'r pryderon ynghylch dibrisio eu hased cyfalaf eu hunain, ac maent wedi codi ofn.
Cafodd y cynllun ei frandio yn 'Cadw ffermwyr i ffermio', a dywedodd y miloedd o ffermwyr a orymdeithiodd i'r Senedd wrthym yn wahanol, a dywedasant wrthym mai'r gwrthwyneb oedd yn wir. Ac fe wyddom, ac mae'n werth atgoffa ein hunain, y byddai wedi arwain at ostyngiad o 122,000 o unedau da byw i bob pwrpas, tua 10.8 y cant o nifer da byw Cymru, a thoriad o 11 y cant yn y llafur ar ffermydd Cymru, sy'n cyfateb i golli 5,500 o swyddi, yn seiliedig ar lefelau cyflogaeth presennol ffermydd Cymru. Ac rydym yn gwybod y byddai wedi creu ergyd o £125 miliwn i allbwn y sector a cholled o £199 miliwn i incwm busnesau fferm.
Nawr, roeddwn yn falch iawn fod yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet newydd—. O, mae'n ddrwg gennyf, Jenny.
These sound interesting figures. Where did you get them from?
Mae'r rhain yn swnio'n ffigurau diddorol. Ble cawsoch chi hyd iddynt?
They're actual factual figures that have been produced and repeated many times in many documents that have been background to the evidence for this, and from the Government itself, I think, many of them, actually, Jenny.
As I was saying, I was very pleased the new Cabinet Secretary decided to take a breath, and it was refreshing, and take a period of time to listen—[Interruption.] You took a breath, and you took time to listen, and thousands of farmers and rural businesses are banking that you have listened. The industry knows it needs to change. It has always accepted this, but whatever the final schemes looks like, it has to be truly co-created, and I sincerely hope that is happening now.
The Petitions Committee recently considered a petition—it was number P-06-1461—that asked to scrap the universal actions and payment reductions in the proposed sustainable farming scheme. It had about 16,000 signatories and it was submitted by a Mr Jethro Small. And the committee agreed to close the petition, knowing that the petitioner's concerns would be raised on the floor of the Senedd during today's debate, and I'm pleased to be able to bring those concerns to Members on behalf of the petitioners. The petition stated, and these are their words:
'The proposed "compulsory" 10% planting of trees & 10% reverting productive land to habitat, will lead to an obvious 20%+ reduction in food produced in wales, jobs losses & businesses overall turnover in an already struggling industry, this will have a huge knock on effect'—
Ffigurau ffeithiol gwirioneddol ydynt sydd wedi cael eu cynhyrchu a'u hailadrodd sawl gwaith mewn llawer o ddogfennau sydd wedi bod yn gefndir i'r dystiolaeth ar hyn, a llawer ohonynt gan y Llywodraeth ei hun, rwy'n credu, Jenny.
Fel roeddwn i'n dweud, roeddwn i'n falch iawn fod yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet newydd wedi penderfynu cymryd seibiant, ac roedd yn adfywiol, ac wedi rhoi amser i wrando—[Torri ar draws.] Fe wnaethoch chi gymryd seibiant, ac fe wnaethoch chi gymryd amser i wrando, ac mae miloedd o ffermwyr a busnesau gwledig yn gobeithio eich bod chi wedi gwrando. Mae'r sector yn gwybod bod angen iddo newid. Mae bob amser wedi derbyn hyn, ond beth bynnag yw'r cynlluniau terfynol, mae'n rhaid iddo fod yn wirioneddol gydlynol, ac rwy'n mawr obeithio bod hynny'n digwydd nawr.
Yn ddiweddar ystyriodd y Pwyllgor Deisebau ddeiseb—rhif P-06-1461—a ofynnai am gael gwared ar y gweithredoedd cyffredinol a'r gostyngiadau i'r taliadau yn y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy arfaethedig. Fe ddenodd tua 16,000 o lofnodion ac fe'i cyflwynwyd gan Mr Jethro Small. A chytunodd y pwyllgor i gau'r ddeiseb, gan wybod y byddai pryderon y deisebydd yn cael eu codi ar lawr y Senedd yn ystod y ddadl heddiw, ac rwy'n falch o allu cyflwyno'r pryderon hynny i'r Aelodau ar ran y deisebwyr. Roedd y ddeiseb yn dweud, a'u geiriau hwy yw'r rhain:
'Bydd y cynnig i’w gwneud yn "ofynnol" plannu 10% o orchudd coed a throi 10% o dir cynhyrchiol yn dir cynefin yn arwain at ostyngiad amlwg o 20% a mwy yn y bwyd sy’n cael ei gynhyrchu yng Nghymru, colli swyddi a throsiant cyffredinol busnesau, a hynny mewn diwydiant sydd eisoes mewn cyni. Bydd hyn yn ei dro yn cael effaith enfawr'—
[Inaudible.]
[Anghlywadwy.]
Sorry. Yes, Lee.
Mae'n ddrwg gennyf. Ie, Lee.
You can't come in when you haven't been here for the whole debate.
Ni allwch ymyrryd pan nad ydych chi wedi bod yma ar gyfer y ddadl gyfan.
I obviously have very able lieutenants who watch who has been in and who has been out during the whole debate. Have you been here for the whole debate, Lee?
Yn amlwg, mae gennyf raglawiaid galluog iawn sy'n gwylio pwy sydd wedi bod i mewn a phwy sydd wedi bod allan yn ystod y ddadl gyfan. A ydych chi wedi bod yma ar gyfer y ddadl gyfan, Lee?
No, I haven't—
Nac ydw—
Okay, that's fair enough. Carry on, Peter Fox.
Iawn, digon teg. Parhewch, Peter Fox.
I'm currently quoting what—[Interruption.] I'm currently quoting what the petitioner—[Interruption.] I'm currently quoting what the petitioner has said. These are not my words; these are the petition's words:
'jobs losses & businesses overall turnover in an already struggling industry, this will have a huge knock on effect to rural businesses & communities & families overall living standards.
'Every universal action increases labour/paperwork & costs to an already strained occupation, yet this is not reflected by increased payments.
'Unworkable!'
So, I wanted to share those, because we promised the petitioners that we would put those to the Chamber. We know things have moved on since the petition opened, but the underlying sentiments that drove it still remain in the minds of farmers throughout Wales, and that's why it's fundamental to get things right. It is clear we need the creation of a scheme that will be accessible to all farmers, tenants and owners, on all types of farms in all locations. There needs to be clarity soon on potential payment structures that can offer the security going forward in the same way as the industry has benefited, over many years, from the current BPS. The Government's final sustainable farming scheme, in my view, has to recognise the value of food production, as well as creating the conditions of increased biodiversity and environmental benefit. Llywydd, I hope that the industry finds a scheme that can work, and I hope that those who strive for greater environmental benefits will also have the confidence that what comes forward will achieve what it needs also. Diolch.
Ar hyn o bryd rwy'n dyfynnu beth—[Torri ar draws.] Ar hyn o bryd rwy'n dyfynnu beth y mae'r deisebydd—[Torri ar draws.] Ar hyn o bryd, rwy'n dyfynnu'r hyn y mae'r deisebydd wedi'i ddweud. Nid fy ngeiriau i yw'r rhain; geiriau'r ddeiseb ydynt:
'colli swyddi a throsiant cyffredinol busnesau, a hynny mewn diwydiant sydd eisoes mewn cyni. Bydd hyn yn ei dro yn cael effaith enfawr ar fusnesau gwledig, ar gymunedau, ac ar safonau byw cyffredinol teuluoedd.
'Bydd pob gweithred sylfaenol yn golygu cynnydd o ran llafur/gwaith papur a chostau i alwedigaeth sydd eisoes dan straen, ond ni fydd taliadau uwch i gyd-fynd â hyn.
'Anymarferol!'
Felly, roeddwn eisiau rhannu'r rheini, oherwydd fe wnaethom addo i'r deisebwyr y byddem yn rhoi'r rheini gerbron y Siambr. Rydym yn gwybod bod pethau wedi symud ymlaen ers i'r ddeiseb agor, ond mae'r teimladau sylfaenol a'i hysgogodd yn dal i fodoli ym meddyliau ffermwyr ledled Cymru, a dyna pam ei bod yn hanfodol cael pethau'n iawn. Mae'n amlwg fod angen creu cynllun a fydd yn hygyrch i bob ffermwr, tenant a pherchennog, ar bob math o ffermydd ym mhob lleoliad. Mae angen eglurder yn fuan ar strwythurau talu posibl a all gynnig diogelwch wrth symud ymlaen yn yr un modd ag y mae'r diwydiant wedi elwa, dros nifer o flynyddoedd, o gynllun cyfredol y taliad sylfaenol. Yn fy marn i, rhaid i gynllun ffermio cynaliadwy terfynol y Llywodraeth gydnabod gwerth cynhyrchu bwyd, yn ogystal â chreu'r amodau ar gyfer mwy o fioamrywiaeth a budd amgylcheddol. Lywydd, rwy'n gobeithio y daw'r diwydiant o hyd i gynllun a all weithio, a gobeithio y bydd gan y rhai sy'n ymdrechu am fwy o fuddion amgylcheddol hyder hefyd y bydd yr hyn a gyflwynir yn cyflawni'r hyn sydd ei angen. Diolch.
We have to, of course, look at the fact that the first word in this is 'sustainable', and it has to be sustainable for everybody—those living off the land, obviously, and those who will be coming behind them. One area I think that really needs a focus is the intensive farming practices, particularly poultry and dairy, and they must be considered in relation to the management of slurry and whether you use that for energy production, or whether you have the right storage. But my contention about this is that if you have dairy farms, particularly, that are so big that they can't possibly manage those storage mechanisms, they shouldn't have the planning in the first place. The planning should address these issues at the point of allowing expansion, because, otherwise, what you're risking is the pollution of rivers, or the piling up of slurry, which is not good. And I'm going to quote Peter Fox. He said that this scheme will 'shape' the countryside and he is right—it will shape the countryside—but the sight of large barns isn't exactly the shaping of the countryside that the next generation will necessarily want to view. So, that is my starting point and, of course, what also happens with large intensive farming is the acquisition of the land next to it and the land next to that and the land next to that. So, you don't necessarily have the diversification that we're all hoping for, and I think everybody here would hope for that.
Mae'n rhaid inni edrych ar y ffaith mai'r gair allweddol yn hyn yw 'cynaliadwy', ac mae'n rhaid iddo fod yn gynaliadwy i bawb—y rhai sy'n byw oddi ar y tir, yn amlwg, a'r rhai fydd yn dod ar eu hôl. Un maes y credaf fod gwir angen ffocws arno yw'r arferion ffermio dwys, yn enwedig dofednod a llaeth, a rhaid eu hystyried mewn perthynas â rheoli slyri ac a ydych chi'n defnyddio hynny ar gyfer cynhyrchu ynni, neu a oes gennych y trefniadau storio cywir. Ond fy nghynnen ynglŷn â hyn, os oes gennych ffermydd llaeth yn enwedig, sydd mor fawr fel na allant reoli'r mecanweithiau storio hynny, yw na ddylent gael caniatâd cynllunio yn y lle cyntaf. Dylai cynllunio fynd i'r afael â'r materion hyn ar yr adeg y byddant yn caniatáu ehangu, oherwydd fel arall rydych chi'n creu perygl o lygru afonydd, neu bentyrru slyri, nad yw'n dda. Ac fe ddyfynnaf Peter Fox. Dywedodd y bydd y cynllun hwn yn 'siapio' cefn gwlad ac mae'n iawn—fe fydd yn siapio cefn gwlad—ond nid ysguboriau mawr yw'r siâp ar gefn gwlad y bydd y genhedlaeth nesaf eisiau ei weld o reidrwydd. Felly, dyna yw fy man cychwyn ac wrth gwrs, yr hyn sy'n digwydd hefyd gyda ffermio dwys mawr yw caffael y tir wrth ei ymyl a'r tir wrth ymyl hwnnw a'r tir wrth ymyl hwnnw wedyn. Felly, nid ydych o reidrwydd yn cael yr amrywiaeth y mae pawb ohonom yn gobeithio amdano, ac y credaf y byddai pawb yma'n gobeithio amdano.
Would the Member give way on that?
A wnaiff yr Aelod ildio ar hynny?
In a minute. I'm going on to the next round of farms, and those are council farms that particularly are in rural areas. I understand that they're under local authority control, but I do feel that the Welsh Government can and definitely should influence the retention of that land for those communities that they serve and prevent the large-scale sell-off that has been happening. Investment in council farms should happen, and those farms can be used to trial methods and to promote sustainability in the nature-friendly farming that would give an idea of how we could roll that out even further. I'll take your point.
Mewn munud. Rwy'n mynd ymlaen at y rownd nesaf o ffermydd, sef ffermydd cyngor a welir yn arbennig mewn ardaloedd gwledig. Rwy'n deall eu bod o dan reolaeth awdurdodau lleol, ond rwy'n teimlo y gall ac yn sicr y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru ddylanwadu ar gadw'r tir hwnnw ar gyfer y cymunedau a wasanaethant ac atal y gwerthiannau ar raddfa fawr sydd wedi bod yn digwydd. Dylai buddsoddiad mewn ffermydd cyngor ddigwydd, a gellir defnyddio'r ffermydd hynny i dreialu dulliau ac i hyrwyddo cynaliadwyedd yn y ffermio er lles natur a fyddai'n rhoi syniad o sut y gallem gyflwyno hynny hyd yn oed ymhellach. Fe gymeraf eich pwynt.
Thank you, Joyce. I appreciate that you've given way. On your point about intensification, that is a direct result of following the common agricultural policy. We're trying to handbrake-turn on 40 years of European policy in this swoop. But the other point is that more farmers will go down an intensive route if they don't sign up to this. If the scheme isn't attractive enough for farmers to say, 'Yes, I will become a sustainable farming scheme farmer', more people will go down the intensive route, exactly as you've described, and don't you think that's to the detriment of the countryside?
Diolch, Joyce. Rwy'n gwerthfawrogi eich bod wedi ildio. Ar eich pwynt ynglŷn â dwysáu, mae hynny'n ganlyniad uniongyrchol dilyn y polisi amaethyddol cyffredin. Rydym yn ceisio gwrthdroi 40 mlynedd o bolisi Ewropeaidd mewn un cam. Ond y pwynt arall yw y bydd mwy o ffermwyr yn dilyn llwybr dwys os nad ydynt yn ymuno â hyn. Os nad yw'r cynllun yn ddigon deniadol i ffermwyr ddweud, 'Ydw, rwyf am ddod yn un o ffermwyr y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy', bydd mwy o bobl yn dilyn y llwybr dwys, yn union fel rydych chi wedi disgrifio, ac onid ydych chi'n meddwl bod hynny er anfantais i gefn gwlad?
I definitely think that intensive farming is to the detriment of the countryside because I've just stated it. So, I have no argument with you there.
The other area I would like to move on to, which somebody briefly mentioned, and I think it might have been Jenny, is the use of beavers. I was at the Dyfi Osprey Project just this week—in fact, I'm there fairly regularly, I have to say—and what they're doing, again, is managing at a small scale and observing and monitoring the use of beavers for the eco management of their land. And it will prevent the wetlands drying out and also flooding. And I think, if we're talking about sustainability, we have to be talking about sustainability that uses all the tools that are in the box, and beavers have to be part of that—[Interruption.] Just a second. And I'm also really, really pleased, when we talk about land management, that the National Trust isn't any longer allowing large-scale production of foreign birds on their land—pheasants we're talking about particularly—that clearly degrade the soil, and yet somehow others are claiming, and I don't know how, that they're custodians of the land. That is clearly not the fact and the evidence says it. I'm sorry I'm out of time now.
Rwy'n bendant yn credu bod ffermio dwys yn niweidiol i gefn gwlad oherwydd rwyf newydd ei nodi. Felly, nid wyf yn dadlau gyda chi am hynny.
Y maes arall yr hoffwn symud ymlaen ato, y soniodd rhywun amdano'n fyr, ac rwy'n credu efallai mai Jenny a wnaeth, yw'r defnydd o afancod. Roeddwn ym Mhrosiect Gweilch Dyfi yr wythnos hon—a dweud y gwir, rwy'n mynd yno'n weddol rheolaidd, rhaid i mi ddweud—a'r hyn y maent yn ei wneud, unwaith eto, yw rheoli ar raddfa fach ac arsylwi a monitro'r defnydd o afancod ar gyfer eco-reoli eu tir. Ac fe fydd yn atal y gwlyptiroedd rhag sychu a rhag llifogydd hefyd. Ac os ydym yn sôn am gynaliadwyedd, mae'n rhaid inni sôn am gynaliadwyedd sy'n defnyddio'r holl offer yn y bocs, ac mae'n rhaid i afancod fod yn rhan o hynny—[Torri ar draws.] Un eiliad. A phan soniwn am reoli tir, rwyf hefyd yn falch iawn nad yw'r Ymddiriedolaeth Genedlaethol bellach yn caniatáu cynhyrchu adar tramor ar raddfa fawr ar eu tir—rydym yn sôn am ffesantod yn arbennig—sy'n amlwg yn diraddio'r pridd, ac eto rywsut mae eraill yn honni, ac ni wn sut, eu bod yn geidwaid y tir. Yn amlwg, nid dyna'r gwir ac mae'r dystiolaeth yn dweud hynny. Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, mae fy amser ar ben.
Y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog ac Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Newid Hinsawdd a Materion Gwledig i gyfrannu at y ddadl—Huw Irranca-Davies.
The Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs to contribute to the debate—Huw Irranca-Davies.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd, a diolch i'r pwyllgorau a diolch i bawb sydd wedi siarad yn y debate hwn.
Thank you very much, Llywydd, and thank you to the committees and thank you to everyone who has spoken in today's debate.
This has been a fascinating debate. I think we've had more than 10 contributions. If this was in Westminster terms, that would be over 100 MPs speaking in a debate of this nature. It's quite a testament to the importance that Members put on the committee reports but also to the future of SFS and the role of Farming Connect as well. So, I genuinely want to say 'thank you' to everybody, including those two Conservative colleagues here who have teased me and pulled my leg for the delay, having previously urged me to take some time, think this through, get it right, engage with all the stakeholders, which is exactly what I'm doing, and now they're telling me, 'Don't delay, get on with it.' This is genuinely being damned if you do and damned if you don't. [Interruption.] I will give way.
Mae hon wedi bod yn ddadl ddiddorol. Rwy'n credu ein bod wedi cael mwy na 10 o gyfraniadau. Pe bai hyn yn digwydd ar raddfa San Steffan, byddai hynny'n golygu bod dros 100 o ASau wedi siarad mewn dadl o'r fath. Mae'n dyst i'r pwysigrwydd y mae'r Aelodau yn ei roi i adroddiadau'r pwyllgor ond hefyd i ddyfodol y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy a rôl Cyswllt Ffermio hefyd. Felly, rwyf eisiau dweud 'diolch' yn ddiffuant wrth bawb, gan gynnwys y ddau gyd-Aelod Ceidwadol yma sydd wedi tynnu fy nghoes ynghylch yr oedi, ar ôl fy annog yn flaenorol i gymryd saib, i feddwl drwy hyn, cael pethau'n iawn, ymgysylltu â'r holl randdeiliaid, sef yn union beth rwy'n ei wneud, a nawr maent yn dweud wrthyf, 'Peidiwch ag oedi, bwriwch ymlaen ag ef.' Fe gewch eich diawlio os gwnewch chi, a'ch diawlio os na wnewch chi. [Torri ar draws.] Fe ildiaf.
Thank you. The delay in rolling out the SFS after six years of consultation and five consultations within those six years, the delay to implementing the SFS is welcome, but why did it take so damn long to get the scheme into the position that it is already?
Diolch. Yr oedi cyn cyflwyno'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy ar ôl chwe blynedd o ymgynghori a phum ymgynghoriad o fewn y chwe blynedd hynny, mae'r oedi cyn gweithredu'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy i'w groesawu, ond pam ei bod hi wedi cymryd mor ddiawl o hir i gael y cynllun i'r sefyllfa y mae ynddo?
Well, Llywydd, I'm really worried now that, with my use of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' we've now had—one, two, three, four—five uses of that word in this and we're going to be reprimanded. But, look, we are actually working forward very much in the spirit that has been said, with the breadth of the contributions, a genuinely sustainable farming scheme in all the sustainable land management objectives. But let me say in layperson's terms what that means. That does mean, as I've repeatedly said, sustainable farm businesses, viable farm businesses, keeping farms on the land in all their great diversity, but also sustainability in terms of the nature and climate challenges that we face as well. And in fact, if you want genuinely to make farms resilient for the future in the climate challenges that we face, then you will build in climate resilience, and that's part of what we're trying to do with the SFS. And can I just say my thanks to all of those people, having been chastised by one notable speaker here for no meaningful engagement—? Well, there were 25 meetings, some of which were full-day meetings, not an hour here or there, but full days going on into the evening, that we've had, including, by the way, James—
Wel, Lywydd, rwy'n poeni'n fawr nawr, gyda fy nefnydd i o 'cewch eich diawlio os gwnewch chi, eich diawlio os na wnewch chi', rydym bellach wedi cael—un, dau, tri, pedwar—pum defnydd o'r gair hwnnw yn hyn a'n bod yn mynd i gael cerydd. Ond edrychwch, rydym yn datblygu cynllun ffermio gwirioneddol gynaliadwy ym mhob un o'r amcanion rheoli tir yn gynaliadwy yn yr ysbryd a ddywedwyd, gydag ehangder y cyfraniadau. Ond gadewch imi ddweud yn nhermau lleygwr beth y mae hynny'n ei olygu. Mae hynny'n golygu, fel y dywedais dro ar ôl tro, busnesau fferm cynaliadwy, busnesau fferm hyfyw, cadw ffermydd ar y tir yn eu holl amrywiaeth wych, ond hefyd cynaliadwyedd o ran yr heriau natur a hinsawdd sy'n ein hwynebu hefyd. Ac mewn gwirionedd, os ydych chi wir eisiau gwneud ffermydd yn wydn ar gyfer y dyfodol yn yr heriau hinsawdd sy'n ein hwynebu, fe fyddwch chi'n ymgorffori gwytnwch hinsawdd, ac mae hynny'n rhan o'r hyn y ceisiwn ei wneud gyda'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Ac a gaf i ddweud diolch wrth yr holl bobl, ar ôl cael cerydd gan un siaradwr nodedig yma am fethu ymgysylltu'n ystyrlon—? Wel, roedd yna 25 o gyfarfodydd, gyda rhai ohonynt yn gyfarfodydd diwrnod llawn, nid awr yma ac acw, ond cawsom ddyddiau llawn yn parhau gyda'r nos, gan gynnwys, gyda llaw, James—
Will you give way?
A wnewch chi ildio?
—on the officials group—I will give way in a moment, to see what your interesting riposte to this is—including on that group, the Tenant Farmers Association, or on the officials group and the ministerial round-table, the young farmers' clubs, the ones you said weren't represented on this: well, they're actually in the officials group. They directly input into this. I can go through the others if you want to as well. All of those people who have been, all the way through the summer, on the carbon sequestration group, on the ministerial round-table, and on the officials group, doing what we said we would do originally, which was after the biggest consultation response this Welsh Government has ever seen, to take the time to go through it in detail and to get it right going forward.
We're not quite there yet, but it's progressing well, and there are going to be bumps in the road as well, but we will get through that, I'm convinced, because of the collaborative approach there. My approach all the way through this has been to listen, to engage, to bring people together in the same place, in the same room, and work through some really tricky issues about genuine sustainability, in all the things that the Chair, Llyr, has just described, and others have described, making this work for farmers, who have to be integral to taking this forward, but also for our nature imperatives, our climate imperatives, as well as that wonderful food production that we are excelling at in Wales: 10 per cent growth in the last year in food and drink in Wales. We are doing well not only domestically, but also in terms of what we're exporting. It's based on the fact of the highest standards of what we do environmentally and with animal welfare and so on, as well as the quality of the food production.
Now, the reports that have come forward, Paul and Llyr, thank you very much indeed; we read them with interest and I hope you'll agree that we've given a broadly positive response to the recommendations and the thoughts. They were actually brought forward in the summer, as we were engaging; we were in the midst of engaging and doing some of the things that you've highlighted in your reports, indeed.
Now, so far, what we've been doing, to give a brief update here, is to review all the universal actions, the key scheme rules, working through some of those tricky issues as well, including the work of the carbon sequestration evidence review panel. They will be reporting their findings to the ministerial round-table any time soon. We're waiting for it.
The work of the group is founded on the structure of the scheme, as was set out in the consultation, as was backed by stakeholders. What we're looking at doing is trying to bring forward something that is—as in the reports is touched upon—supporting the resilience of all farmers in Wales through an integrated whole-farm approach, and also the universal baseline payment. This is based on the completion of a set of universal actions. Those who want to go further will have the opportunity to do so, and we're in those discussions as well, either with the optional or collaborative actions as well, and receive additional financial support.
All of this is working towards 2026 to roll this out, but we're not waiting, because you will have seen through the summer, in many of the things—and I'll touch on some of them now—we're not waiting, we're getting ahead with some issues. So, when we have the interim scheme design, we will then undertake—and it's been touched on by Members today—further modelling work and a revised economic impact assessment, so that we have it up to date, and it reflects the design of the scheme, not something that was in the past at some point. This will be considered by the round-table before I make a final decision next year, and the groups will continue, by the way, to support the process as we go into the next stages, including the development of other elements of the scheme.
So, look, the work is bearing fruit. With the support of the round-table, during the course of the summer when these reports were coming out, I was at the Royal Welsh, we announced there that we'd reached consensus on a very important issue, which was to do with SSSIs. We were able to say something publicly. As we are able to say things and we agree that we want to say it, we will, but I've always made clear, rather than doing a running commentary, and I appreciate the frustration out there, we want to get this right and then say where we've got to, working with all the stakeholders there. There's still a lot to be done in a very short space of time, so that's why my emphasis with the group as well is that we've got to keep working at the pace and intensity that we're doing, and I genuinely thank all the partners for their contributions. [Interruption.][Laughter.] Sorry, James.
—yn y grŵp swyddogion—fe ildiaf mewn eiliad, i weld beth yw eich ateb diddorol i hyn—gan gynnwys yn y grŵp, Cymdeithas y Ffermwyr Tenant, neu'r grŵp swyddogion a'r bwrdd crwn gweinidogol, y clybiau ffermwyr ifanc, y rhai a ddywedoch chi na chafodd eu cynrychioli yn hyn: wel, maent yn y grŵp swyddogion mewn gwirionedd. Maent yn cyfrannu'n uniongyrchol at hyn. Gallaf fynd trwy'r lleill os dymunwch hefyd. Yr holl bobl hynny sydd wedi bod, yr holl ffordd drwy'r haf, yn y grŵp atafaelu carbon, ar y bwrdd crwn gweinidogol, ac yn y grŵp swyddogion, yn gwneud yr hyn y dywedasom y byddem yn ei wneud yn wreiddiol, sef rhoi amser wedi'r ymateb mwyaf i ymgynghoriad y mae Llywodraeth Cymru erioed wedi'i weld, i fynd drwyddo'n fanwl a'i gael yn iawn wrth symud ymlaen.
Nid ydym wedi cyrraedd yno eto, ond mae'n datblygu'n dda, a bydd rhwystrau ar y ffordd hefyd, ond fe ddown drwy hynny, rwy'n argyhoeddedig, oherwydd y dull cydweithredol. Fy null o weithredu yr holl ffordd drwy hyn oedd gwrando, ymgysylltu, dod â phobl ynghyd yn yr un lle, yn yr un ystafell, a gweithio drwy faterion anodd iawn am gynaliadwyedd gwirioneddol, yn yr holl bethau y mae'r Cadeirydd, Llyr, newydd eu disgrifio, ac y mae eraill wedi'u disgrifio, gan wneud i hyn weithio i ffermwyr, y mae'n rhaid iddynt fod yn rhan annatod o fwrw ymlaen â hyn, ond hefyd ar gyfer yr hyn sy'n rhaid ei wneud o ran natur a'r hinsawdd, yn ogystal â'r cynhyrchiant bwyd gwych yr ydym yn rhagori arno yng Nghymru: twf o 10 y cant yn y flwyddyn ddiwethaf mewn bwyd a diod o Gymru. Rydym yn gwneud yn dda nid yn unig yn y wlad hon, ond hefyd o ran yr hyn a allforiwn. Mae'n seiliedig ar y safonau uchaf o'r hyn a wnawn yn amgylcheddol a chyda lles anifeiliaid ac yn y blaen, yn ogystal ag ansawdd cynhyrchiant bwyd.
Nawr, yr adroddiadau sydd wedi'u cyflwyno, Paul a Llyr, diolch yn fawr iawn i chi yn wir; rydym yn eu darllen gyda diddordeb ac rwy'n gobeithio y byddwch yn cytuno ein bod wedi rhoi ymateb cadarnhaol i'r argymhellion a'r syniadau. Cawsant eu cyflwyno yn yr haf mewn gwirionedd, wrth inni ymgysylltu; roeddem yng nghanol ymgysylltu a gwneud rhai o'r pethau rydych chi wedi'u nodi yn eich adroddiadau.
Nawr, hyd yma, yr hyn y buom yn ei wneud, i roi'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf yn gryno yma, yw adolygu'r holl weithredoedd cyffredinol, rheolau allweddol y cynllun, gan weithio trwy rai o'r materion anodd hynny hefyd, yn cynnwys gwaith y panel adolygu tystiolaeth ar atafaelu carbon. Byddant yn adrodd eu canfyddiadau i'r bwrdd crwn gweinidogol yn fuan iawn. Rydym yn aros am hynny.
Mae gwaith y grŵp yn seiliedig ar strwythur y cynllun, fel y nodwyd yn yr ymgynghoriad, fel y cafodd ei gefnogi gan randdeiliaid. Yr hyn y bwriadwn ei wneud yw ceisio cyflwyno rhywbeth sydd—fel y mae'r adroddiadau wedi crybwyll—yn cefnogi gwytnwch pob ffermwr yng Nghymru drwy ddull integredig fferm gyfan o weithredu, a hefyd y taliad sylfaenol cyffredinol. Mae hwn yn seiliedig ar gwblhau set o weithredoedd cyffredinol. Bydd y rhai sydd am fynd ymhellach yn cael cyfle i wneud hynny, ac rydym yn cael y trafodaethau hynny hefyd, naill ai gyda'r gweithredoedd dewisol neu gydweithredol, ac yn cael cymorth ariannol ychwanegol.
Mae hyn i gyd yn gweithio tuag at 2026 ar gyfer cyflwyno hyn, ond nid ydym yn aros, oherwydd fe fyddwch chi wedi gweld drwy'r haf, mewn llawer o'r pethau—a byddaf yn cyffwrdd ar rai ohonynt nawr—nid ydym yn aros, rydym yn bwrw ymlaen â materion. Felly, pan fydd gennym y cynllun interim, byddwn wedyn yn ymgymryd â—ac mae Aelodau wedi crybwyll hyn heddiw—gwaith modelu pellach ac asesiad effaith economaidd diwygiedig, fel bod gennym y wybodaeth ddiweddaraf, ac mae'n adlewyrchu ffurf y cynllun, nid rhywbeth a fodolai yn y gorffennol ar ryw adeg. Bydd hyn yn cael ei ystyried gan y bwrdd crwn cyn i mi wneud penderfyniad terfynol y flwyddyn nesaf, a bydd y grwpiau'n parhau, gyda llaw, i gefnogi'r broses wrth inni ddechrau'r camau nesaf, gan gynnwys datblygu elfennau eraill o'r cynllun.
Felly, edrychwch, mae'r gwaith yn dwyn ffrwyth. Gyda chefnogaeth y bwrdd crwn, yn ystod yr haf pan oedd yr adroddiadau hyn yn cael eu cyflwyno, roeddwn yn y Sioe Frenhinol, fe wnaethom gyhoeddi yno ein bod wedi dod i gonsensws ar fater pwysig iawn, a oedd yn ymwneud â SoDdGAoedd. Gallasom ddweud rhywbeth yn gyhoeddus. Wrth inni allu dweud pethau a chytuno ein bod am eu dweud, fe fyddwn yn gwneud hynny, ond rwyf bob amser wedi dweud yn glir, yn hytrach na rhoi sylwebaeth ar y pryd, ac rwy'n deall y rhwystredigaeth sy'n bodoli, rydym am gael hyn yn iawn a dweud wedyn ble rydym wedi cyrraedd, gan weithio gyda'r holl randdeiliaid. Mae llawer i'w wneud o hyd mewn cyfnod byr iawn o amser, felly dyna pam fy mod i hefyd yn pwysleisio wrth y grŵp fod yn rhaid inni barhau i weithio yr un mor gyflym a dygn ag a wnawn, ac rwy'n wirioneddol ddiolchgar i'r holl bartneriaid am eu cyfraniadau. [Torri ar draws.][Chwerthin.] Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, James.
Can I thank the previous First Minister for telling the Cabinet Secretary I wanted to make an intervention? You did say about getting things right and you did talk earlier about bumps in the road, and maybe I was a little bit unfair on you earlier—
A gaf i ddiolch i'r Prif Weinidog blaenorol am ddweud wrth Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet fy mod am wneud ymyriad? Roeddech chi'n dweud am gael pethau'n iawn ac fe wnaethoch chi siarad yn gynt am rwystrau yn y ffordd, ac efallai fy mod ychydig yn annheg arnoch chi'n gynharach—
Yes, you were. [Laughter.]
Oeddech. [Chwerthin.]
—Cabinet Secretary. But then you have misquoted me twice today, so there we go.
There are going to be bumps in the road, as you've said, but if something isn't right and, say, the farming unions cannot agree with your final position, where do we go then? Where do we go if the farming unions say, 'Well, we're sorry, we don't agree with this. We don't think this is right for the industry, we're stepping away'? What's your position then? I don't want to see that position happen, because, as Sam said earlier, my colleague, if people don't buy into this scheme, we're going to see more and more intensive farming across Wales, which goes in contradiction to everything you're trying to do.
—Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Ond rydych chi wedi fy nghamddyfynnu ddwywaith heddiw, felly dyna ni.
Bydd rhwystrau ar y ffordd, fel rydych chi wedi dweud, ond os nad yw rhywbeth yn iawn, ac os nad yw'r undebau ffermio yn cytuno â'ch safbwynt terfynol, i ble'r awn ni wedyn? I ble'r awn ni os yw'r undebau amaeth yn dweud, 'Wel, mae'n ddrwg gennym, nid ydym yn cytuno â hyn. Nid ydym yn meddwl bod hyn yn iawn i'r diwydiant, rydym yn camu'n ôl'? Ble fyddwch chi'n sefyll wedyn? Nid wyf am weld y sefyllfa honno'n digwydd, oherwydd, fel y dywedodd fy nghyd-Aelod Sam yn gynharach, os nad yw pobl yn cefnogi'r cynllun hwn, rydym yn mynd i weld mwy a mwy o ffermio dwys ledled Cymru, sy'n mynd yn groes i bopeth rydych chi'n ceisio'i wneud.
Look, ultimately, James, in my ideal scenario, we get to a point where—it's not quite a rose garden moment, because there are some infamous rose garden moments—we all walk out together and we say, 'This may not be perfect—.' This is the classic Churchill, second world war, 'Give me radar.' 'I can give you three options. One of them will be ready, it'll be perfect in two years' time.' 'No, give me the one that's ready, because they're coming across the channel.' So, what I'm hoping we get to is a point where we have support from all the people who have been involved in this process, and they can genuinely say, 'Go out there. It's accessible to all farmers. It will do the nature and climate imperatives as well.' That's my ideal.
If we don't get to there, ultimately, that's what I take the paycheque for; I have to make the calls on this. I have to make the calls for all the imperatives that the two committees and other Members who have spoken in this debate have spoken about. I need to make the calls if there is disagreement, and I accept that entirely. But I want us all to be behind this, because the criticality, actually, of getting farmers behind this is to have the CLA, the farming unions, the Nature Friendly Farming Network and others saying, 'On balance, this is right. Get in there, get involved,' as opposed to, 'I'm not sure about this,' the cold shoulder or whatever. We've done so much work, we need to see this right through to the end and bring it forward.
Can I turn to Farming Connect and the work that has been done on analysing that as well? Just to say that one of the suggestions in there is that we should actually demonstrate on farms. Well, indeed. The Farming Connect programme now has 220 farms across Wales. They're all involved in different types of on-farm trials and projects, focusing on innovation, new technologies and, indeed, to help them and other farms reach net zero by 2050. This helps to build resilience and sustainability in this changing climate. Across 220 farms, the programme has delivered 94 sustainable land management projects. The best are being shared as best practice examples, farmer to farmer, shared, discussed, demonstrated during open days, case studies and publications.
Just to turn briefly to conclusion 2 as well, the need to explore the use of farmers as mentors, we absolutely agree. This has got to be part of the way forward. It's well catered for as part of the programme we're currently on, and it has to be going forward in the future, because some of this communication is not going to be done, and shouldn't be done, by Government saying, 'Look at this wonderful stuff.' It needs to be farmer to farmer, peer to peer, saying, 'Look what works on this type of farm. Look what works on that type of farm.'
We've got a directory now of over 90 mentors, mostly full-time farmers who have been there and done that. They develop the relationships based on trust and respect, and, as of July, 406 farmers had secured access to the mentoring programme, totalling nearly 2,500 hours of mentoring. That is not insignificant. From 2026 onwards, farmers can expect to receive as a minimum the same range of support as is on offer currently through Farming Connect, albeit it could be tailored in a different way to reflect the changing needs of the sector.
Now, just to conclude, because I don't know how much time I have, Llywydd—
Edrychwch, yn y pen draw, James, yn fy senario ddelfrydol, rydym yn cyrraedd pwynt—efallai nad yw'n foment ardd rosynnau, oherwydd mae yna rai eiliadau gardd rosynnau drwgenwog—lle rydym i gyd yn cerdded allan gyda'n gilydd ac yn dweud, 'Efallai na fydd hyn yn berffaith—.' Dyma enghraifft glasurol o Churchill yn yr ail ryfel byd, 'Rhowch radar imi.' 'Gallaf roi tri opsiwn i chi. Bydd un ohonynt yn barod, bydd yn berffaith ymhen dwy flynedd.' 'Na, rhowch yr un sy'n barod i mi, oherwydd maent yn dod ar draws y sianel.' Felly, yr hyn rwy'n gobeithio y gallwn ei gyrraedd yw pwynt lle mae gennym gefnogaeth gan yr holl bobl sydd wedi bod yn rhan o'r broses hon, a gallant ddweud yn ddiffuant, 'Ewch amdani. Mae'n hygyrch i bob ffermwr. Bydd yn gwneud y pethau sy'n rhaid eu cyflawni o ran natur a hinsawdd hefyd.' Dyna fy nelfryd.
Os na chyrhaeddwn y fan honno, yn y pen draw, dyna pam rwy'n cael fy nhalu; mae'n rhaid i mi ddyfarnu ar hyn. Rhaid i mi ddyfarnu ar gyfer yr holl bethau sy'n rhaid eu cyflawni y mae'r ddau bwyllgor a'r Aelodau eraill sydd wedi siarad yn y ddadl hon wedi siarad amdanynt. Mae angen imi ddyfarnu os oes anghytundeb, ac rwy'n derbyn hynny'n llwyr. Ond rwyf am i bob un ohonom fod y tu ôl i hyn, am ei bod hi mor bwysig cael ffermwyr y tu ôl i hyn a chael y Gymdeithas Tir a Busnes Cefn Gwlad, yr undebau ffermio, y Rhwydwaith Ffermio er Lles Natur ac eraill i ddweud, 'At ei gilydd, mae hwn yn iawn. Ewch amdani, cymerwch ran,' yn hytrach na 'Nid wyf yn siŵr am hyn,' troi cefn neu beth bynnag. Rydym wedi gwneud cymaint o waith, mae angen inni weld hwn yn cael ei gyflawni a'i gyflwyno.
A gaf i droi at Cyswllt Ffermio a'r gwaith sydd wedi'i wneud ar ddadansoddi hwnnw hefyd? Os caf ddweud mai un o'r awgrymiadau yn y fan honno yw y dylem arddangos ar ffermydd. Wel, yn wir. Bellach mae gan y rhaglen Cyswllt Ffermio 220 o ffermydd ledled Cymru. Maent i gyd yn ymwneud â gwahanol fathau o dreialon a phrosiectau ar y fferm, gan ganolbwyntio ar arloesi, technolegau newydd a'u helpu hwy a ffermydd eraill i gyrraedd sero net erbyn 2050. Mae hyn yn helpu i adeiladu gwytnwch a chynaliadwyedd yn yr hinsawdd newidiol hon. Ar draws 220 o ffermydd, mae'r rhaglen wedi cyflawni 94 o brosiectau rheoli tir yn gynaliadwy. Mae'r goreuon yn cael eu rhannu fel enghreifftiau o arfer gorau, ffermwr i ffermwr, gan rannu, trafod, dangos yn ystod diwrnodau agored, astudiaethau achos a chyhoeddiadau.
I droi'n fyr at gasgliad 2 hefyd, yr angen i archwilio'r defnydd o ffermwyr fel mentoriaid, rydym yn cytuno'n llwyr. Rhaid i hyn fod yn rhan o'r ffordd ymlaen. Darparwyd yn dda ar ei gyfer yn rhan o'r rhaglen rydym arni ar hyn o bryd, ac mae'n rhaid iddo symud ymlaen yn y dyfodol, oherwydd nid yw peth o'r cyfathrebu yn mynd i gael ei wneud, ac ni ddylid ei wneud, gan y Llywodraeth yn dweud, 'Edrychwch ar y pethau gwych hyn.' Mae angen iddo ddigwydd rhwng ffermwr a ffermwr, rhwng cymheiriaid, yn dweud, 'Edrychwch beth sy'n gweithio ar y math hwn o fferm. Edrychwch beth sy'n gweithio ar y math acw o fferm.'
Mae gennym gyfeiriadur nawr o dros 90 o fentoriaid, ffermwyr llawn amser yn bennaf sydd wedi bod yno ac wedi gwneud hynny. Maent yn datblygu'r cysylltiadau'n seiliedig ar ymddiriedaeth a pharch, ac ym mis Gorffennaf, roedd 406 o ffermwyr wedi sicrhau mynediad at y rhaglen fentora, gyda chyfanswm o bron i 2,500 awr o fentora. Nid yw hynny'n ansylweddol. O 2026 ymlaen, gall ffermwyr ddisgwyl derbyn o leiaf yr un ystod o gefnogaeth ag sydd ar gael ar hyn o bryd drwy Cyswllt Ffermio, er y gellid ei deilwra mewn ffordd wahanol i adlewyrchu anghenion newidiol y sector.
Nawr, i gloi, oherwydd nid wyf yn gwybod faint o amser sydd gennyf, Lywydd—
You have a minute to conclude.
Mae gennych funud i orffen.
A minute to conclude. Well, let me just say that I will be coming back. I hope to come back in fairly short order to provide a further update, not in response to the committee reports, but just to give an update on as far as we've got.
I genuinely think that the wide range of ideas that we've had put forward today are really helpful. We're trying to take them on board, but the point was made, quite rightly, in this debate that ultimately we have to make a call, because we need to give certainty to farmers, we need to give certainty to those out there who are very focused, amongst other stakeholders, the environmental NGOs and so on, that we have a clear direction of travel and we have to go for it. But we're not quite there yet, we're working hard on it, and I appreciate the patience of people want to see what the final design of the scheme comes forward with: design, methodology, economic impact analysis, and then we go. We have to go for this because this is a genuine opportunity. It's possibly a once-in-a-generation opportunity to get it right for all the farmers, but also everybody in Wales who wants to see the multiple benefits delivered through the SFS. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Munud i orffen. Wel, gadewch imi ddweud y byddaf yn dod yn ôl. Rwy'n gobeithio dod yn ôl yn eithaf buan i ddarparu diweddariad pellach, nid mewn ymateb i adroddiadau'r pwyllgor, ond i roi'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf ar ba mor bell y byddwn wedi mynd.
Rwy'n credu'n wirioneddol fod yr ystod eang o syniadau a glywsom heddiw yn ddefnyddiol iawn. Rydym yn ceisio eu cynnwys, ond fe wnaed y pwynt yn gwbl briodol yn y ddadl hon fod yn rhaid inni wneud penderfyniad yn y pen draw, oherwydd mae angen inni roi sicrwydd i ffermwyr, mae angen inni roi sicrwydd i'r rhai sydd allan yno sy'n gweithio'n ddyfal, ymhlith rhanddeiliaid eraill, cyrff amgylcheddol anllywodraethol ac yn y blaen, fod gennym gyfeiriad teithio clir ac mae'n rhaid inni fynd amdani. Ond nid ydym wedi cyrraedd yno eto, rydym yn gweithio'n galed arno, ac rwy'n gwerthfawrogi amynedd pobl sydd eisiau gweld beth fydd ffurf derfynol y cynllun: ffurf, methodoleg, dadansoddiad o effaith economaidd, ac yna rydym yn barod. Mae'n rhaid inni fynd amdani gyda hyn oherwydd mae'n gyfle go iawn. Mae'n bosibl ei fod yn gyfle unwaith mewn cenhedlaeth i'w gael yn iawn i'r holl ffermwyr, ond hefyd i bawb yng Nghymru sydd am weld y manteision lluosog yn cael eu darparu drwy'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Paul Davies nawr, y Cadeirydd, i ymateb i'r ddadl.
Paul Davies now, the Chair, to reply to the debate.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Can I thank the Deputy First Minister and all Members for their contributions this afternoon?
We know that over 90 per cent of Wales's land area is farmed and, as such, it's important that the sustainable farming scheme is workable and has real buy-in from the farming industry. The Welsh Government has recognised that changes need to be made and the Welsh Government has made it clear that it's committed to delivering a scheme that is accessible to all farmers and farm types. The Deputy First Minister has referred to the sustainable farming scheme's official and ministerial round-table groups and sub-groups, and I understand that they are considering all aspects of the sustainable farming scheme.
Members have raised some very important aspects of the scheme this afternoon, and I hope that the Deputy First Minister will take on board the points that have been made here today. Members, such as the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire and the Member for Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire raised the problems with communicating to farmers throughout this process, and the lack of clarity and certainty over some of the sustainable farming scheme proposals. We've heard how Farming Connect should have been better used and still needs to be used to help farmers transition to the sustainable farming scheme. Farmers must be able to follow the development of the sustainable farming scheme and understand exactly what is expected of them by the Welsh Government. And Farming Connect can play a very important role in this area.
Members, such as the Members for Mid and West Wales, Cefin Campbell and Jane Dodds, and the Member for Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire have also raised payment methodology and rates here today. I'm pleased that the Deputy First Minister has reaffirmed that the Welsh Government is committed to considering how payment rates can include factors beyond costs incurred and income forgone. Our committee has recommended that the Welsh Government should work at pace to determine the social value element of the scheme and communicate clearly what this means for farmers as part of the sustainable farming scheme payment methodology. Therefore, I look forward to further updates on payment methodology and rates in due course.
We've also heard Members' concerns regarding potential tree cover. The Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire, the Member for Mid and West Wales, Cefin Campbell, and the Member for Monmouth have all, again, raised these concerns here today. During the inquiry, both the Nature Friendly Farming Network and Wales Environment Link emphasised the value of trees for both the environment and agricultural productivity. Farming representatives were also quite clear that there must be more flexibility on the tree planting targets, and the practicalities of achieving sustainable and permanent change need to be considered further. The Member for Cardiff Central was right to say that planting trees in coastal areas is more challenging than in more inland areas, and therefore, we need to see that flexibility. Therefore, I hope the round-table groups that the Member for North Wales, Carolyn Thomas, mentioned are looking at these matters and reflecting on the feedback that the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee received.
The Member for Monmouth said that any scheme needs to include all farming types, and it needs to include organic farming. I understand that further discussions are taking place between the Welsh Government and the Welsh Organic Forum to determine the gaps between the sustainable farming scheme proposals and organic certification and practices. And I do hope that the Welsh Government is looking at organic farming schemes from across Europe, and I look forward to hearing more about how the Welsh Government will best reward organic farmers through the sustainable farming scheme.
As for Farming Connect, we heard a contribution from the Member for Mid and West Wales, Cefin Campbell, regarding how it needs to be fit for purpose, and the Welsh Government has stressed that it has a robust governance structure at its core, which includes key players from farming and environmental organisations. We've also heard that Farming Connect has introduced new technical advice categories within the Farming Connect advisory service, and this includes everything from carbon advice to timber advice, and even horticulture advice. And the Deputy First Minister also referred to the establishment of a network of demonstration farms in his contribution, and I'm pleased to see this activity taking place.
Members today have raised how Farming Connect is helping to support farmers' mental health, and it's vital that Farming Connect is well resourced and able to continue to signpost farmers to where they can receive support. There are several support organisations delivering services to the farming industry and I'm particularly pleased to hear from the Welsh Government that the DPJ Foundation—a mental health charity from my own constituency—is now representing farming charities on the sustainable farming scheme ministerial round-table.
Llywydd, in closing, can I thank everybody who has contributed to the inquiries we have debated this afternoon? Can I also thank the Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee and the members of that committee for their contributions to this debate? Finally, can I also thank the clerks and researchers of both committees for their support and work throughout these very important inquiries? The Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee will continue to monitor the sustainable farming scheme and the Farming Connect programme and we will continue to push for improvements to be made so that the scheme works for both the farming industry and our environment. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Lywydd. A gaf i ddiolch i'r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog a'r holl Aelodau am eu cyfraniadau y prynhawn yma?
Gwyddom fod dros 90 y cant o arwynebedd tir Cymru yn cael ei ffermio ac fel y cyfryw, mae'n bwysig fod y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy yn ymarferol a'i fod wedi ei gefnogi gan y diwydiant ffermio. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi cydnabod bod angen gwneud newidiadau ac mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi dweud yn glir ei bod wedi ymrwymo i ddarparu cynllun sy'n hygyrch i bob ffermwr a phob math o ffermydd. Mae'r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog wedi cyfeirio at grwpiau ac is-grwpiau bwrdd crwn swyddogol a gweinidogol y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy, ac rwy'n deall eu bod yn ystyried pob agwedd ar y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy.
Mae'r Aelodau wedi codi rhai agweddau pwysig iawn ar y cynllun y prynhawn yma, ac rwy'n gobeithio y bydd y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog yn ystyried y pwyntiau sydd wedi'u gwneud yma heddiw. Cododd Aelodau, fel yr Aelod dros Frycheiniog a Sir Faesyfed a'r Aelod dros Orllewin Caerfyrddin a De Sir Benfro y problemau'n ymwneud â chyfathrebu â ffermwyr drwy gydol y broses hon, a'r diffyg eglurder a sicrwydd ynghylch rhai o argymhellion y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Rydym wedi clywed sut y dylai Cyswllt Ffermio fod wedi cael ei ddefnyddio'n well ac mae angen ei ddefnyddio o hyd i helpu ffermwyr i bontio i'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Mae'n rhaid i ffermwyr allu dilyn datblygiad y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy a deall yn union yr hyn y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei ddisgwyl ganddynt. A gall Cyswllt Ffermio chwarae rhan bwysig iawn yn y maes hwn.
Fe wnaeth Aelodau, fel yr Aelodau dros Ganolbarth a Gorllewin Cymru, Cefin Campbell a Jane Dodds, a'r Aelod dros Orllewin Caerfyrddin a De Sir Benfro nodi methodoleg a chyfraddau talu yma heddiw. Rwy'n falch fod y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog wedi ailddatgan bod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi ymrwymo i ystyried sut y gall cyfraddau talu gynnwys ffactorau y tu hwnt i'r costau yr eir iddynt ac incwm a ildiwyd. Mae ein pwyllgor wedi argymell y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru weithio'n gyflym i bennu elfen gwerth cymdeithasol y cynllun a chyfathrebu'n glir beth y mae hyn yn ei olygu i ffermwyr fel rhan o fethodoleg dalu'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy. Felly, edrychaf ymlaen at ddiweddariadau pellach ar fethodoleg a chyfraddau talu maes o law.
Rydym hefyd wedi clywed pryderon yr Aelodau ynghylch gorchudd coed posibl. Mae Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith, yr Aelod dros Frycheiniog a Sir Faesyfed, yr Aelod dros Ganolbarth a Gorllewin Cymru, Cefin Campbell, a'r Aelod dros Fynwy wedi codi'r pryderon hyn yma heddiw. Yn ystod yr ymchwiliad, pwysleisiodd y Rhwydwaith Ffermio er Lles Natur a Cyswllt Amgylchedd Cymru werth coed i'r amgylchedd a chynhyrchiant amaethyddol. Roedd cynrychiolwyr ffermio yn glir iawn hefyd fod yn rhaid cael mwy o hyblygrwydd yn y targedau plannu coed, ac mae angen ystyriaeth bellach o ymarferoldeb cyflawni newid cynaliadwy a pharhaol. Roedd yr Aelod dros Ganol Caerdydd yn iawn i ddweud bod plannu coed mewn ardaloedd arfordirol yn fwy heriol nag mewn ardaloedd mwy mewndirol, ac felly, mae angen inni weld hyblygrwydd. Felly, rwy'n gobeithio bod y grwpiau bwrdd crwn a grybwyllwyd gan yr Aelod dros Ogledd Cymru, Carolyn Thomas, yn edrych ar y materion hyn ac yn myfyrio ar yr adborth a gafodd Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig.
Dywedodd yr Aelod dros Fynwy fod angen i unrhyw gynllun gynnwys pob math o ffermio, ac mae angen iddo gynnwys ffermio organig. Rwy'n deall bod trafodaethau pellach yn cael eu cynnal rhwng Llywodraeth Cymru a Fforwm Organig Cymru i benderfynu ar y bylchau rhwng cynigion y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy ac ardystiad ac arferion organig. Ac rwy'n gobeithio bod Llywodraeth Cymru yn edrych ar gynlluniau ffermio organig o bob rhan o Ewrop, ac edrychaf ymlaen at glywed mwy ynglŷn â sut y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn mynd ati yn y ffordd orau i wobrwyo ffermwyr organig drwy'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy.
Ar Cyswllt Ffermio, clywsom gyfraniad gan yr Aelod dros Ganolbarth a Gorllewin Cymru, Cefin Campbell, ynglŷn â sut y mae angen iddo fod yn addas i'r diben, ac mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi pwysleisio bod ganddo strwythur llywodraethu cadarn wrth ei wraidd, sy'n cynnwys gweithredwyr allweddol o sefydliadau ffermio ac amgylcheddol. Rydym hefyd wedi clywed bod Cyswllt Ffermio wedi cyflwyno categorïau cyngor technegol newydd o fewn y gwasanaeth cynghori Cyswllt Ffermio, ac mae hyn yn cynnwys popeth o gyngor ar garbon i gyngor ar bren, a hyd yn oed cyngor ar arddwriaeth. A chyfeiriodd y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog hefyd at sefydlu rhwydwaith o ffermydd arddangos yn ei gyfraniad, ac rwy'n falch o weld y gweithgaredd hwn yn digwydd.
Mae Aelodau heddiw wedi nodi sut y mae Cyswllt Ffermio yn helpu i gefnogi iechyd meddwl ffermwyr, ac mae'n hanfodol fod Cyswllt Ffermio yn cael digon o adnoddau ac yn gallu parhau i gyfeirio ffermwyr at ble y gallant gael cymorth. Mae sawl sefydliad cymorth yn darparu gwasanaethau i'r diwydiant ffermio ac rwy'n arbennig o falch o glywed gan Lywodraeth Cymru fod Sefydliad DPJ—elusen iechyd meddwl o fy etholaeth i—bellach yn cynrychioli elusennau ffermio ar fwrdd crwn gweinidogol y cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy.
Lywydd, wrth gloi, a gaf i ddiolch i bawb sydd wedi cyfrannu at yr ymchwiliadau y buom yn eu trafod y prynhawn yma? A gaf i hefyd ddiolch i Gadeirydd y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, yr Amgylchedd a Seilwaith ac aelodau'r pwyllgor hwnnw am eu cyfraniadau i'r ddadl hon? Yn olaf, a gaf i hefyd ddiolch i glercod ac ymchwilwyr y ddau bwyllgor am eu cefnogaeth a'u gwaith drwy gydol yr ymchwiliadau pwysig hyn? Bydd Pwyllgor yr Economi, Masnach a Materion Gwledig yn parhau i fonitro'r cynllun ffermio cynaliadwy a'r rhaglen Cyswllt Ffermio a byddwn yn parhau i bwyso am welliannau fel bod y cynllun yn gweithio i'r diwydiant ffermio a'n hamgylchedd fel ei gilydd. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Y cwestiwn yw: a ddylid nodi adroddiadau'r pwyllgorau? Oes unrhyw Aelod yn gwrthwynebu? Nac oes. Felly, mae'r cynnig yna wedi ei dderbyn.
The proposal is to note the committees' reports. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion is agreed.
Derbyniwyd y cynnig yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 12.36.
Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.
Eitem 7 yw'r eitem nesaf. Y ddadl ar adroddiad y Pwyllgor Deisebau yw'r eitem yma, 'Cymdeithas heb arian parod? P-06-1335: Dylai Llywodraeth Cymru gymryd camau i sicrhau y gall oedolion agored i niwed heb gerdyn banc dalu ag arian parod'. Dwi'n galw ar Gadeirydd y pwyllgor i wneud y cynnig yma. Carolyn Thomas.
Item 7 is the next item. A debate on the Petitions Committee report, 'A cashless society? P-06-1335: Welsh Government should take steps to ensure vulnerable adults without bank cards can pay with cash'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Carolyn Thomas.
Cynnig NDM8700 Carolyn Thomas
Cynnig bod y Senedd:
Yn nodi adroddiad y Pwyllgor Deisebau, ‘Cymdeithas heb arian parod?: P-06-1335 Dylai Llywodraeth Cymru gymryd camau i sicrhau y gall oedolion agored i niwed heb gerdyn banc dalu ag arian parod’, a osodwyd yn y Swyddfa Gyflwyno ar 21 Mehefin 2024.
Motion NDM8700 Carolyn Thomas
To propose that the Senedd:
Notes the report of the Petitions Committee, ‘A cashless society?: P-06-1335 Welsh Government should take steps to ensure vulnerable adults without bank cards can pay with cash’, which was laid in the Table Office on 21 June 2024.
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
On behalf of the Petitions Committee, thank you for the opportunity to introduce this debate today. The petition was submitted by Mencap Cymru and closed on 15 May with 2,504 signatures. The petition reads:
‘Welsh Government should take steps to ensure vulnerable adults without bank cards can pay with cash'
'the move to a cashless society will leave behind disabled people who cannot have access to electronic forms of payment.
'In recent months people with a learning disability have been unable to pay for goods and services and have had to leave businesses empty-handed. Support workers are not permitted to use their own cards, and nor should they be.
'This means they do not have equal access to goods and services with many businesses and organisations moving to cashless transactions.’
I would firstly like to thank Mencap Cymru for raising this vital issue via the petitions process and prompting the committee’s inquiry. The committee took powerful evidence from Mencap Cymru last October on the barriers facing vulnerable adults in being able to pay for goods and services with cash. Members heard about a young person who couldn’t buy a rugby shirt with his birthday money because the shop was cashless. I met Steven McGee who was unable to go into a cafe and buy a coffee with cash. Just two examples of people being denied their basic rights to be financially independent and to socialise. This is very distressing for vulnerable adults striving to live independently.
Our commitment to the social model of disability requires us to do everything possible to overcome barriers to full and equal participation in society, but access is about more than just physical entry to a building or having an accessible toilet. We cannot allow the rush to embrace new technology to create new barriers that exclude people. Mencap Cymru and other advocates have engaged with the Welsh Government’s disability rights taskforce on this issue, but the response to the committee’s report highlights that it’s far from resolved. Although some of the levers are reserved to the UK Government, it’s still disappointing that we are far from solutions.
Access to cash is not just an issue for vulnerable adults, of course, it affects the elderly and business owners. The older people’s commissioner has raised concerns about exclusion of older people. A 2022 report by UK Finance, the trade association for the banking and finance industry, found that almost 40 per cent of people still use cash to pay for something at least once a week, and a third of them said they had a cash payment refused.
Following the independent access to cash review, the introduction of banking hubs was seen as an important step in the right direction. Of the 11 hubs listed around Wales, six are open, two are listed as temporary, and five are still in development. The Welsh Government says that enhanced deposit facilities have been recommended in 11 communities, including Ystrad Mynach, Cowbridge and Mumbles.
The committee’s report identified the need to clearly communicate whether a business or organisation accepts cash. Something as simple as that would save the embarrassment of going in and not being able to use cash. Prominently displaying a sign with ‘We accept/don’t accept cash’, similar to the food hygiene rating signs, would help alleviate some of the anxiety and distress experienced when cash payments are not accepted at payment point.
The Government response says that it does not accept the inevitability of a cashless society, and it has rejected the first recommendation calling for all public bodies funded by the Welsh Government to be required to allow cash payments, as it says it does not have the legal levers necessary. We speak about businesses that are funded through Government money having ethical procurement and ethical employment, so I don't understand why this couldn't be part of it. Mencap Cymru says that the Welsh Government does have the power through the public sector equality duty to insist that organisations that receive public funds accept cash, so I would be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could respond on that point, or come back to us on that.
I welcome the work that the Welsh Government is undertaking with the Financial Conduct Authority and LINK to address access to cash issues, and to consult the unique viewpoints of third sector organisations in Wales. Asking the FCA to use more than just straight-line distance measurements to show the proximity of free cash ATMs is a good example of making sure that UK-wide measures take account of Wales-specific needs. This was implemented in the FCA's new rules, which came into force last month.
The report’s final recommendation is on community banking facilities, and the response states that this is a reserved matter. However, Members will be aware that there was a programme for government commitment to set up a community bank, but those plans were put on hold after Monmouthshire Building Society pulled out. They cited unpredictability in the UK economy—that's why it was all put on hold—which was disappointing, and the Government’s response focuses instead on new banking hubs and the work of its responsible lenders network.
The ongoing work within the disability rights taskforce to address practical access issues is also very welcome, although I’m sure Members are keen to see concrete changes resulting from this engagement work. We are certainly a long way from addressing the ability of Steven, who gave evidence to the committee last October, to spend his own cash as he wishes. That's what we're asking for. I thank the petitioners. This a hugely significant issue to Members, so we thank you for bringing this to our attention. I look forward to today’s debate on this issue. Thank you.
Ar ran y Pwyllgor Deisebau, diolch am y cyfle i gyflwyno'r ddadl hon heddiw. Cyflwynwyd y ddeiseb gan Mencap Cymru a daeth i ben ar 15 Mai gyda 2,504 o lofnodion. Mae'r ddeiseb yn dweud:
'Dylai Llywodraeth Cymru gymryd camau i sicrhau y gall oedolion agored i niwed heb gerdyn banc dalu ag arian parod'
'gall y newid tuag at gymdeithas heb arian parod wneud cam â phobl anabl na allant gael mynediad at ddulliau electronig ar gyfer talu.
'Yn ystod y misoedd diwethaf, mae pobl ag anableddau dysgu wedi methu talu am nwyddau a gwasanaethau ac wedi gorfod gadael busnesau’n waglaw. Ni chaniateir i weithwyr cymorth ddefnyddio’u cardiau eu hunain, ac ni ddylid disgwyl iddynt wneud hynny.
'Mae’n mynd yn anoddach iddynt brynu nwyddau a gwasanaethau wrth i nifer o fusnesau a sefydliadau droi at systemau electronig o dalu.'
Yn gyntaf, hoffwn ddiolch i Mencap Cymru am godi'r mater hollbwysig hwn drwy'r broses ddeisebau ac ysgogi ymchwiliad y pwyllgor. Cymerodd y pwyllgor dystiolaeth bwerus gan Mencap Cymru fis Hydref diwethaf ar y rhwystrau sy'n wynebu oedolion bregus rhag gallu talu am nwyddau a gwasanaethau gydag arian parod. Clywodd yr aelodau am unigolyn ifanc na châi brynu crys rygbi â'i arian pen-blwydd oherwydd bod y siop yn ddi-arian. Cyfarfûm â Steven McGee na allodd fynd i mewn i gaffi a phrynu coffi gydag arian parod. Dim ond dwy enghraifft yw'r rhain o bobl yn cael eu hamddifadu o'u hawliau sylfaenol i fod yn annibynnol yn ariannol ac i gymdeithasu. Mae'n peri gofid mawr i oedolion bregus sy'n ymdrechu i fyw'n annibynnol.
Mae ein hymrwymiad i'r model cymdeithasol o anabledd yn gofyn i ni wneud popeth posibl i oresgyn rhwystrau rhag gallu cyfranogi'n llawn a chyfartal mewn cymdeithas, ond mae mynediad yn ymwneud â mwy na mynediad corfforol i adeilad neu gael toiled hygyrch. Ni allwn ganiatáu i'r rhuthr i gofleidio technoleg newydd greu rhwystrau newydd sy'n eithrio pobl. Mae Mencap Cymru ac eiriolwyr eraill wedi ymgysylltu â thasglu hawliau anabledd Llywodraeth Cymru ar y mater hwn, ond mae'r ymateb i adroddiad y pwyllgor yn dangos ei fod ymhell o fod wedi'i ddatrys. Er bod rhai o'r ysgogiadau wedi'u cadw i Lywodraeth y DU, mae'n dal yn siomedig ein bod ymhell o gael atebion.
Mae mynediad at arian parod yn broblem i fwy nag oedolion bregus yn unig, wrth gwrs, mae'n effeithio ar yr henoed a pherchnogion busnes. Mae'r comisiynydd pobl hŷn wedi codi pryderon am eithrio pobl hŷn. Canfu adroddiad yn 2022 gan UK Finance, cymdeithas fasnach y diwydiant bancio a chyllid, fod bron i 40 y cant o bobl yn dal i ddefnyddio arian parod i dalu am rywbeth o leiaf unwaith yr wythnos, a dywedodd traean ohonynt eu bod wedi cael taliad arian parod wedi'i wrthod.
Yn dilyn yr adolygiad annibynnol o fynediad at arian parod, roedd cyflwyno hybiau bancio yn cael ei ystyried yn gam pwysig i'r cyfeiriad cywir. O'r 11 hyb sydd wedi'u rhestru o amgylch Cymru, mae chwech ar agor, mae dau wedi'u rhestru fel rhai dros dro, ac mae pump yn dal i gael eu datblygu. Dywed Llywodraeth Cymru fod cyfleusterau talu i mewn gwell wedi cael eu hargymell mewn 11 o gymunedau, gan gynnwys Ystrad Mynach, y Bont-faen a'r Mwmbwls.
Nododd adroddiad y pwyllgor yr angen i gyfleu'n glir a yw busnes neu sefydliad yn derbyn arian parod. Byddai rhywbeth mor syml â hynny yn arbed yr embaras o fynd i mewn a methu defnyddio arian parod. Byddai arddangos arwydd clir yn nodi 'Rydym yn derbyn/nid ydym yn derbyn arian parod', yn debyg i'r arwyddion sgorio hylendid bwyd, yn helpu i leddfu rhywfaint o'r pryder a'r trallod a brofir pan na dderbynnir taliadau arian parod yn y man talu.
Mae ymateb y Llywodraeth yn dweud nad yw'n derbyn bod cymdeithas ddi-arian yn anochel, ac mae wedi gwrthod yr argymhelliad cyntaf sy'n galw am ei gwneud yn ofynnol i bob corff cyhoeddus sy'n cael ei ariannu gan Lywodraeth Cymru ganiatáu taliadau arian parod, gan ei bod yn dweud nad oes ganddi'r dulliau cyfreithiol angenrheidiol at ei defnydd. Rydym yn siarad am yr angen i fusnesau sy'n cael eu hariannu drwy arian y Llywodraeth gaffael a chyflogi'n foesegol, felly nid wyf yn deall pam na allai hyn fod yn rhan ohono. Dywed Mencap Cymru fod gan Lywodraeth Cymru bŵer drwy ddyletswydd cydraddoldeb y sector cyhoeddus i fynnu bod sefydliadau sy'n cael arian cyhoeddus yn derbyn arian parod, felly buaswn yn ddiolchgar pe gallai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet ymateb ar y pwynt hwnnw, neu dewch yn ôl atom ar hynny.
Rwy'n croesawu'r gwaith y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei wneud gyda'r Awdurdod Ymddygiad Ariannol a LINK i fynd i'r afael â materion hygyrchedd arian parod, ac i ymgynghori â safbwyntiau unigryw sefydliadau'r trydydd sector yng Nghymru. Mae gofyn i'r Awdurdod ddefnyddio mwy na mesuriadau pellter llinell syth yn unig i ddangos pa mor agos yw peiriannau ATM arian parod yn enghraifft dda o sicrhau bod mesurau ledled y DU yn ystyried anghenion sy'n benodol i Gymru. Cafodd hyn ei weithredu yn rheolau newydd yr Awdurdod, a ddaeth i rym fis diwethaf.
Mae argymhelliad terfynol yr adroddiad ar gyfleusterau bancio cymunedol, ac mae'r ymateb yn nodi bod hwn yn fater a gadwyd yn ôl. Fodd bynnag, bydd yr Aelodau'n ymwybodol fod ymrwymiad yn y rhaglen lywodraethu i sefydlu banc cymunedol, ond cafodd y cynlluniau hynny eu gohirio ar ôl i Gymdeithas Adeiladu Sir Fynwy dynnu allan. Y rheswm a roddwyd ganddynt oedd na ellid rhagweld economi'r DU—dyna pam y cafodd y cyfan ei ohirio—a oedd yn siomedig, ac mae ymateb y Llywodraeth yn canolbwyntio yn lle hynny ar hybiau bancio newydd a gwaith ei rhwydwaith benthycwyr cyfrifol.
Mae croeso mawr hefyd i waith parhaus y tasglu hawliau anabledd ar fynd i'r afael â materion mynediad ymarferol, er fy mod yn siŵr fod yr Aelodau'n awyddus i weld newidiadau pendant yn deillio o'r gwaith ymgysylltu hwn. Rydym yn sicr yn bell o fynd i'r afael â gallu Steven, a roddodd dystiolaeth i'r pwyllgor fis Hydref diwethaf, i wario ei arian ei hun fel y mynno. Dyna'r hyn y gofynnwn amdano. Diolch i'r deisebwyr. Mae hwn yn fater hynod bwysig i'r Aelodau, felly diolch i chi am dynnu sylw at hyn. Edrychaf ymlaen at y ddadl heddiw ar y mater hwn. Diolch.
Daeth y Dirprwy Lywydd i'r Gadair.
The Deputy Presiding Officer took the Chair.
Can I also thank the petitioners for bringing the petition forward? The use of technology when it comes to paying for everyday items may seem to make our lives easier, and it is something that many of us take for granted—many of us don't even use cards anymore, do we, we can buy most things we want with our phones, or even our smart watches—but with the increasing number of businesses being card only, there is the very real risk that members of society are very much being shut out.
The committee heard some incredibly sad stories, as we've already heard, of people feeling left isolated after being told they could not purchase products, ranging from a cup of coffee to a rugby shirt. One young man with learning disabilities became so distressed when he was told that he we was unable to purchase a magazine that the police had to be called. It is not just those with disabilities that struggle, as we've also heard, to pay for goods and services. Older members of society can also struggle to have access to online banking and feel more comfortable paying with cash.
The use of cash only has widely been used as effective financial advice for those trying to budget, as we can easily lose a sense of the value of money when it comes to simply using a card. This is especially true for those in society who really are living pay cheque to pay cheque, making sure that every pound counts. There is clearly a lot of work that needs to be done to ensure that these members of society are not left behind. So, I hope the Welsh Government works with businesses and banks to ensure that more is done to accommodate and that there is more awareness of those who rely heavily on cash to ensure that no-one is barred from buying goods and services.
The Government must also ensure that there is greater access to community-based banking facilities to ensure that businesses can continue to access and deposit cash, and to ensure that the banking needs of those with learning disabilities are met. Thank you.
A gaf innau hefyd ddiolch i'r deisebwyr am gyflwyno'r ddeiseb? Efallai fod y defnydd o dechnoleg wrth dalu am eitemau bob dydd i'w weld yn gwneud ein bywydau yn haws, ac mae'n rhywbeth y mae llawer ohonom yn ei gymryd yn ganiataol—mae llawer ohonom heb fod yn defnyddio cardiau mwyach hyd yn oed, gallwn brynu'r rhan fwyaf o bethau rydym eu heisiau gyda'n ffonau, neu hyd yn oed ein horiorau clyfar—ond gyda'r nifer cynyddol o fusnesau'n derbyn cardiau'n unig, mae perygl gwirioneddol fod aelodau o'r gymdeithas yn cael eu cau allan.
Clywodd y pwyllgor straeon hynod o drist, fel y clywsom eisoes, am bobl yn teimlo'n ynysig ar ôl cael gwybod na allent brynu cynnyrch, yn amrywio o baned o goffi i grys rygbi. Aeth un dyn ifanc ag anableddau dysgu mor ofidus pan ddywedwyd wrtho na allai brynu cylchgrawn fel y bu'n rhaid galw'r heddlu. Fel y clywsom hefyd, nid pobl ag anableddau'n unig sy'n ei chael hi'n anodd i dalu am nwyddau a gwasanaethau. Gall aelodau hŷn o'r gymdeithas gael trafferth bancio ar-lein a theimlo'n fwy cyfforddus yn talu gydag arian parod.
Mae'r defnydd o arian parod yn unig wedi cael ei ddefnyddio'n eang fel cyngor ariannol effeithiol i'r rhai sy'n ceisio cyllidebu, gan y gallwn golli synnwyr o werth arian yn hawdd wrth ddefnyddio cerdyn. Mae hyn yn arbennig o wir i'r rhai mewn cymdeithas sy'n byw o un pecyn cyflog i'r llall, gan sicrhau bod pob punt yn cyfrif. Mae'n amlwg fod llawer o waith i'w wneud i sicrhau nad yw'r aelodau hyn o'r gymdeithas yn cael eu gadael ar ôl. Felly, rwy'n gobeithio y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn gweithio gyda busnesau a banciau i sicrhau bod mwy yn cael ei wneud i ddarparu ar gyfer hynny a bod mwy o ymwybyddiaeth o'r rhai sy'n dibynnu'n fawr ar arian parod i sicrhau nad oes unrhyw un yn cael ei wahardd rhag prynu nwyddau a gwasanaethau.
Rhaid i'r Llywodraeth sicrhau hefyd fod mwy o fynediad at gyfleusterau bancio yn y gymuned i sicrhau bod busnesau'n gallu parhau i gael gafael ar arian parod a'i dalu i mewn, ac i sicrhau bod anghenion bancio'r rhai ag anableddau dysgu yn cael eu diwallu. Diolch.
Sioned Williams. You caught me out there, Peter.
Sioned Williams. Fe wnaethoch chi fy nal i yno, Peter.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I want to thank Mencap Cymru for bringing this petition to the Senedd, and all those who’ve contributed to the inquiry. This is such an important matter because I think it goes to the heart of equality and what we mean by equality, because I think this is a plain and simple matter of fairness and inclusion. And it's a clear demonstration of what failure to practise the social model of disability looks like in day-to-day life. It's yet another example, unfortunately, of how changes and processes are put in place without consideration of the impact on disabled people, because in plain language, this is about discrimination.
Over a year ago, I raised this very concern—the detrimental impact a cashless society could have on citizens with a learning disability—with the Minister for Social Justice, and it's disheartening that little has changed since then. I'm hopeful today's debate will compel the Welsh Government to take action and they will rethink some of their half-hearted, illogical and disappointing responses to many of the report's recommendations.
We constantly hear how the Welsh Government say they want to see a fairer Wales. Well, that has to mean something, in practice, in everyday life. And allowing organisations who receive funding from the Welsh Government to follow practices that exclude people with learning disabilities, that discriminate against people with learning disabilities, that cause distress to people with learning disabilities, is simply not in keeping with that. Words really have to mean something, especially when faith in politicians' words is at an all-time low. And so the Welsh Government just has to put its money where its mouth is on this, quite literally.
It's extremely disappointing that they've rejected recommendation 1, which asks them to do just that. As chair of the cross-party group on learning disability and as Plaid Cymru spokesperson on social justice, I've continued to hear examples of this happening. I attended the launch of the report in the Senedd, with people directly impacted by these exclusionary practices.
I've heard about how people with a learning disability can't buy food or drink on a Transport for Wales train. They can't buy what they want from a shop or café and can't buy an ice cream or a programme at a theatre, even if they manage to buy tickets in the first place. Because the Welsh Government help to fund the Hynt card, the access scheme that allows cardholders to a ticket free of charge for a personal assistant or carer at theatres and arts centres participating in the scheme, but then the Government won't mandate that those venues, which are in receipt of public funds, must enable people with learning disabilities to be able to buy a ticket with cash. It just doesn't make sense.
In the cross-party group, we've heard concerns also raised about the new fines on Transport for Wales trains for people who do not buy a ticket before they get on the train. This can be difficult for people with a learning disability if they can't use the ticket machines at the station and can't pay with cash on the train. So, the consequences of not taking cash payments are as contrary to the social model of disability as physical barriers to accessibility, and I think they really should be seen in the same terms.
I was very concerned but sadly not surprised by the evidence heard by the committee. What needs to be emphasised, I think, is this isn't a matter of inconvenience. It can be an inconvenience to those of us who have a choice whether to use cash or a card or an app or whatever, a debit card. These people don't have a choice and this is having an emotional impact that is unacceptable.
I think an important point was raised that, as day centres have closed in many areas, activities in the community have increased, held in cafes, arts centres, leisure centres, but often people are unable to access services or participate in activities in the community because only card payments are accepted.
Another important point in the report is made about the future. If we are going to be moving to a cashless society then the Welsh Government must work with the UK Government and the regulatory bodies and in partnership, crucially, with people with a learning disability to ensure ways are developed in which everyone can access goods and services. And if the Welsh Government believe they currently lack the levers to ensure all organisations in receipt of public funding are requested to accept cash payments, there should be a firm commitment to explore the steps that those in receipt of public funds could take, which is within their current powers, aligned, as we heard, to the public sector equality duty.
When I raised this issue with you in the Siambr last year, Cabinet Secretary, you stated the disability rights taskforce would look at this issue and raise it with the relevant sectors. We are of course waiting still for the disability rights action plan to be produced. In your response to—
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Hoffwn ddiolch i Mencap Cymru am ddod â'r ddeiseb hon i'r Senedd, a phawb sydd wedi cyfrannu at yr ymchwiliad. Mae hwn yn fater mor bwysig oherwydd rwy'n credu ei fod yn mynd at wraidd cydraddoldeb a'r hyn a olygwn wrth gydraddoldeb, oherwydd yn fy marn i, mae'n fater syml o degwch a chynhwysiant. Ac mae'n dangos yn glir sut beth yw methiant i arfer y model cymdeithasol o anabledd mewn bywyd o ddydd i ddydd. Mae'n enghraifft arall, yn anffodus, o sut y mae newidiadau a phrosesau yn cael eu rhoi ar waith heb ystyried yr effaith ar bobl anabl, oherwydd mewn iaith blaen, mae'n ymwneud â gwahaniaethu.
Dros flwyddyn yn ôl, codais y pryder hwn—yr effaith niweidiol y gallai cymdeithas ddi-arian ei chael ar ddinasyddion ag anabledd dysgu—gyda'r Gweinidog Cyfiawnder Cymdeithasol, ac mae'n ddigalon nad oes fawr ddim wedi newid ers hynny. Rwy'n obeithiol y bydd y ddadl heddiw yn gorfodi Llywodraeth Cymru i weithredu ac y byddant yn ailystyried rhai o'u hymatebion gwangalon, afresymegol a siomedig i lawer o argymhellion yr adroddiad.
Rydym yn clywed yn gyson sut y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn dweud eu bod am weld Cymru decach. Mae'n rhaid i hynny olygu rhywbeth, yn ymarferol, mewn bywyd bob dydd. Ac nid yw caniatáu i sefydliadau sy'n derbyn cyllid gan Lywodraeth Cymru ddilyn arferion sy'n eithrio pobl ag anableddau dysgu, sy'n gwahaniaethu yn erbyn pobl ag anableddau dysgu, sy'n achosi trallod i bobl ag anableddau dysgu, yn cyd-fynd â hynny. Mae'n rhaid i eiriau olygu rhywbeth go iawn, yn enwedig pan fo ffydd yng ngeiriau gwleidyddion ar ei lefel isaf erioed. Ac felly mae'n rhaid i Lywodraeth Cymru roi ei harian ar ei gair ar hyn, yn llythrennol.
Mae'n siomedig iawn eu bod wedi gwrthod argymhelliad 1, sy'n gofyn iddynt wneud hynny. Fel cadeirydd y grŵp trawsbleidiol ar anabledd dysgu ac fel llefarydd Plaid Cymru ar gyfiawnder cymdeithasol, rwyf wedi parhau i glywed am enghreifftiau o hyn yn digwydd. Mynychais lansiad yr adroddiad yn y Senedd, gyda phobl yn cael eu heffeithio'n uniongyrchol gan yr arferion gwaharddol hyn.
Rwyf wedi clywed sut na all pobl ag anabledd dysgu brynu bwyd na diod ar drên Trafnidiaeth Cymru. Ni allant brynu'r hyn y maent ei eisiau o siop neu gaffi ac ni allant brynu hufen iâ neu raglen mewn theatr, hyd yn oed os ydynt yn llwyddo i brynu tocynnau yn y lle cyntaf. Oherwydd mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn helpu i ariannu cerdyn Hynt, y cynllun mynediad sy'n caniatáu i ddeiliaid cardiau gael tocyn yn rhad ac am ddim i gael cynorthwyydd personol neu ofalwr mewn theatrau a chanolfannau celfyddydau sy'n rhan o'r cynllun, ond nid yw'r Llywodraeth yn mynnu bod yn rhaid i'r lleoliadau hynny, sy'n derbyn cyllid cyhoeddus, alluogi pobl ag anableddau dysgu i allu prynu tocyn gydag arian parod. Nid yw'n gwneud synnwyr.
Yn y grŵp trawsbleidiol, clywsom bryderon hefyd am y dirwyon newydd ar drenau Trafnidiaeth Cymru i bobl nad ydynt yn prynu tocyn cyn iddynt fynd ar y trên. Gall hyn fod yn anodd i bobl ag anabledd dysgu os na allant ddefnyddio'r peiriannau tocynnau yn yr orsaf na thalu gydag arian parod ar y trên. Felly, mae canlyniadau peidio â chymryd taliadau arian parod yr un mor groes i'r model cymdeithasol o anabledd â rhwystrau corfforol i hygyrchedd, ac rwy'n credu y dylid eu gweld yn yr un modd.
Roeddwn yn bryderus iawn ynghylch y dystiolaeth a glywyd gan y pwyllgor ond yn anffodus, nid yw'n fy synnu. Yr hyn sydd angen ei bwysleisio, rwy'n credu, yw nad mater o anghyfleustra mohono. Gall fod yn anghyfleustra i'r rhai ohonom sydd â dewis ynghylch defnyddio arian parod neu gerdyn neu ap neu beth bynnag, cerdyn debyd. Nid oes dewis gan y bobl hyn ac mae'n cael effaith emosiynol annerbyniol.
Rwy'n credu bod pwynt pwysig wedi'i godi, gan fod canolfannau dydd wedi cau mewn sawl ardal, fod gweithgareddau yn y gymuned wedi cynyddu, ac yn cael eu cynnal mewn caffis, canolfannau celfyddydau, canolfannau hamdden, ond yn aml nid yw pobl yn gallu cael mynediad at wasanaethau na chymryd rhan mewn gweithgareddau yn y gymuned am mai dim ond taliadau cardiau sy'n cael eu derbyn.
Gwneir pwynt pwysig arall yn yr adroddiad am y dyfodol. Os ydym yn mynd i symud tuag at fod yn gymdeithas ddi-arian, rhaid i Lywodraeth Cymru weithio gyda Llywodraeth y DU a'r cyrff rheoleiddio ac mewn partneriaeth, yn hollbwysig, gyda phobl ag anabledd dysgu i sicrhau bod ffyrdd yn cael eu datblygu o sicrhau mynediad i bawb at nwyddau a gwasanaethau. Ac os yw Llywodraeth Cymru o'r farn nad oes ganddynt y dulliau ar hyn o bryd i sicrhau bod gofyn i bob sefydliad sy'n cael arian cyhoeddus dderbyn taliadau arian parod, dylai fod ymrwymiad cadarn i archwilio'r camau y gallai'r rhai sy'n cael arian cyhoeddus eu cymryd, sydd o fewn eu pwerau presennol, yn unol â dyletswydd cydraddoldeb y sector cyhoeddus, fel y clywsom.
Pan godais y mater hwn gyda chi yn y Siambr y llynedd, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, fe ddywedoch chi y byddai'r tasglu hawliau anabledd yn edrych ar y mater ac yn ei godi gyda'r sectorau perthnasol. Wrth gwrs, rydym yn dal i aros i'r cynllun gweithredu hawliau anabledd gael ei gynhyrchu. Yn eich ymateb i—
Sioned, you need to conclude, please.
Sioned, mae angen ichi orffen, os gwelwch yn dda.
Yes. In your response to recommendation 3, the work of the taskforce is mentioned, but could you detail specifically how the forthcoming disability rights action plan will address this issue?
This is an extremely important matter. It's about making fairness and equality that we all say we want to see a reality.
Iawn. Yn eich ymateb i argymhelliad 3, sonnir am waith y tasglu, ond a allech chi fanylu'n benodol ar sut y bydd y cynllun gweithredu hawliau anabledd sydd ar y ffordd yn mynd i'r afael â'r mater?
Mae hwn yn fater pwysig iawn. Mae'n ymwneud â gwireddu'r tegwch a'r cydraddoldeb y mae pawb ohonom yn dweud ein bod am eu gweld.
Diolch yn fawr i Carolyn Thomas, y Cadeirydd, am agor ac i Jack Sargeant a oedd yn Gadeirydd y rhan fwyaf o'r cyfnod y gwnaethom ni gymryd tystiolaeth. Ac roedd y dystiolaeth yn hynod bwerus gan bobl sy'n byw ag anableddau a hefyd pobl o fusnesau bach, yr impact ar elusennau. Dwi ddim yn mynd i ailadrodd yr hyn rŷch chi wedi ei ddweud ac mae Sioned Williams wedi ei ddweud yn bwerus iawn am yr effaith ar bobl ag anableddau.
Ychydig o sylwadau gen i. Mae'n rhaid i ni dderbyn y ffaith bod y defnydd o arian wedi newid yn llwyr yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf, o 50 y cant i jest ychydig dros 10 y cant nawr. Nawr, o bersbectif cenedlaetholgar a gweriniaethol—bear with me on this one—mae'n bosib efallai fod e'n beth da dydyn ni ddim gydag arian yn ein pocedi ni. Ynghyd â lleihad mewn stampiau, ciosgau ffôn a blychau postio, mae'n un arwydd llai o frenhiniaeth Lloegr o gwmpas y lle.
Ond beth am y pwynt ymarferol, yr impact ymarferol ar bobl? Dwi'n siŵr ein bod ni i gyd yn cofio defnyddio arian ffug yn yr ysgol i ddysgu cyfrif, ond, wrth chwarae siop yn ddiweddar, roeddwn i'n sylwi bod Esther, fy merch fach i, yn mynd 'blîp, blîp' fel yna wrth dalu am rhywbeth. Wrth gwrs, roedd hi'n talu am nwyddau gyda'i ffôn hi, oherwydd dyna mae'n weld ni yn ei wneud, defnyddio'r ffôn. Duw, mae arian yn beth dieithr iawn i Esther. Nawr, dyw talu gyda ffôn ddim yn mynd i helpu Esther dysgu adio a thynnu, a chyllido.
A beth am yr impact ar elusennau? Roedd gweld blwch elusen ar bwys til yn beth cyfarwydd iawn ar un adeg, a bydden ni'n rhoi'r newid mân roeddem ni'n ei dderbyn i mewn i'r blwch, ac yn ystod gemau rhyngwladol a chyngherddau yng nghanol Caerdydd byddai bwced yn mynd o gwmpas tafarndai ac ar y stryd, a phobl yn taflu arian mân i'r bwced. Nawr, wrth gwrs, mae modd i ni wneud bank transfer neu greu standing order, ond mae hwnna yn wahanol iawn, onid yw e, i dderbyn arian mân a rhoi e yn syth mewn i flwch elusen. Nawr, dwi'n siŵr bod hwn yn cael impact mawr ar elusennau llai ac ar elusennau mwy lleol.
Ac yna beth am bobl digartref? Wnaethom ni ddim clywed lot am hyn yn y dystiolaeth ond, wrth gwrs, mae nifer o bobl digartref yn hollol ddibynnol ar dderbyn arian ar y stryd, ac fel rŷm ni'n gwybod mae agor cyfrifon banc o hyd yn heriol i bobl digartref. Mae arolygon wedi dangos dro ar ôl tro mai o ardaloedd difreintiedig mae'r defnydd mwyaf o arian parod yn digwydd, ac yn aml mewn ardaloedd ble mae yna gymuned aml-ethnig fawr iawn. Felly, mae angen cofio am y bobl sydd o hyd yn ddibynnol iawn ar arian parod.
Nawr, dŷn ni ddim yn mynd i stopio'r duedd o beidio defnyddio arian parod. Mae siŵr o fod yn mynd i gynyddu, ond cofiwn ein bod ni wedi darogan diwedd y cheque book ers blynyddoedd mawr, a derbyniais i cheque dydd Sul. Mae rhai pobl o hyd yn defnyddio cheque. Felly, dyw arian ddim yn mynd i ddiflannu. Dŷn ni ddim yn mynd i gael cashless society am ddegawdau i ddod. Mae wedi bod yn rhan o'n hanes ni ers canrifoedd cyn Crist, a bydd yn parhau yn rhan o'n hanes ni. Ond yr hyn sy'n bwysig yw, wrth i gymdeithas newid, wrth i dechnoleg ddatblygu, fod yn rhaid i ni ymdrechu i sicrhau ein bod ni'n gadael neb ar ôl. Gall newid arferiad, gall datblygiad technoleg, byth, byth fod yn esgus i anwybyddu anghenion yr union bobl mae'n rhaid i ni eu hamddiffyn mwyaf, y bobl fwyaf bregus yn ein cymdeithas ni. Diolch yn fawr.
Thank you to Carolyn Thomas, the Chair, for opening the debate and to Jack Sargeant who was the Chair for the majority of the period that we took evidence on this issue. And the evidence was very powerful from people living with disabilities and owners of small businesses, and on the impact on charities. I'm not going to repeat what you've said and what Sioned Williams has said very powerfully about the impact on people living with disabilities.
A few comments from me. We do have to accept the fact that the use of cash has changed entirely over the past few years, from 50 per cent to just over 10 per cent now. From a nationalistic and republican perspective—bear with me on this one—it may be a good thing that we don't use cash or have money in our pockets. Along with a decline in stamps, phone kiosks and post boxes, it's one less symbol of the English monarchy around us.
But what about the practical point, the practical impact on people? I'm sure that we all remember using fake money at school to help us learn to count, but, whilst playing shop recently, I noticed that Esther, my young daughter, made a bleeping sound when pretending to pay for something. Of course, she was paying for goods with her phone, because that's what she sees us doing—we use our mobile phone. Cash is a very strange concept for her. But paying with a phone isn't going to help Esther learn how to add, to subtract and to budget.
And what about the impact on charities? A charity box by the till was a very familiar sight at one time, and we'd put our loose change in these boxes, and during internationals and concerts in Cardiff city centre a bucket would be passed around in pubs and on the street, and people would throw loose change into the bucket. Now, of course, it's possible for us to make a bank transfer or set up a standing order, but that's very different, isn't it, to getting change and putting it straight into a charity box. I'm sure that this is having a particular impact on smaller charities and more local charities.
And then what about homeless people? We didn't hear a great deal of evidence on this matter, but a number of homeless people are entirely dependent on the change that they receive on the street, and as we know opening bank accounts continues to be challenging for homeless people. Surveys have shown time and time again that deprived areas are most likely to use cash, and often areas where there's a large multi-ethnic community. So, we need to remember those people who continue to be highly dependent on cash.
Now, we aren't going to arrest the decline in using cash. That trend will continue, I'm sure, but we must remember that the end of the cheque book has often been predicted, and I received a cheque on Sunday. People continue to use cheque books. Cash isn't going to disappear. We're not going to have a cashless society for decades to come. It's been a part of our history as humans for centuries before the birth of Christ, and will continue to be part of human history. But what's important is that, as society changes, as technology develops, we must strive to ensure that we don't leave anyone behind. Changing habits and technological developments can never, never be an excuse to ignore the needs of the people that we need to safeguard most, namely the most vulnerable in our society. Thank you.
Yn gyntaf, hoffwn i gydnabod y gwaith sydd wedi ei wneud ar y mater pwysig yma.
First, I'd like to recognise the work that's been done on this important issue.
Can I thank Carolyn too in her capacity as Chair of the Petitions Committee for her thoughtful and thorough letters recently sent to me in response to some of my constituents' queries on this very matter that we're discussing today? Like many people here, it's something I've had conversations with individuals and organisations about in the past. More recently, it was raised with me when I went to speak to the wonderful women of Caerwys Women's Institute during August. They actually have an active campaign at the moment to raise awareness about moves to make communities cashless and how that has been impacting on people who don't have access to banking facilities and the like to make this possible. In fact, they're on the ball—they turned up at my funding fair on Friday and were gathering support for their petition whilst they were there as well, and talking to people about the campaign. Because we know not everybody, like we've heard, in my corner of the country, in north Wales, can go cashless, and many people find online banking difficult to use or are perhaps suspicious of it. And then, compounded with that, we know there have been regular closures of banks in communities right across the country, which risks leaving many sections of society behind.
And whilst I do recognise that the ability to legislate on this matter remains very much reserved in many ways to Westminster, I think there are opportunities for Welsh Government, by working in partnership with organisations across Wales, to consider further what we could do here in Wales with those levers we do have, whether that's thinking a bit differently around our public funding provisions, on procurement, through remit letters, or even very simply through how our social partnership, our partnership working, approach can be applied to bring organisations and businesses with us, whether there are things we can use around taxation, around business rates, to incentivise some things too. So, I think there are opportunities to do things differently and think differently, and we also, obviously, need to make sure that this is on the agenda of the UK Government as well and we don't just go with the assumption that everybody is comfortable, confident and able to move with the times. Because, if we do that, we are not going to be an inclusive and accessible country here in Wales. Diolch.
A gaf i ddiolch i Carolyn hefyd yn rhinwedd ei swydd fel Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor Deisebau am ei llythyrau meddylgar a thrylwyr a anfonodd ataf yn ddiweddar mewn ymateb i rai o ymholiadau fy etholwyr ar y mater a drafodir gennym heddiw? Fel llawer o bobl yma, mae'n rhywbeth y cefais sgyrsiau gydag unigolion a sefydliadau yn ei gylch yn y gorffennol. Yn fwy diweddar, fe'i codwyd gyda mi pan euthum i siarad â menywod gwych Sefydliad y Merched Caerwys ym mis Awst. Mae ganddynt ymgyrch weithredol ar hyn o bryd i godi ymwybyddiaeth am symudiadau i wneud cymunedau'n ddi-arian a sut y mae hynny wedi bod yn effeithio ar bobl nad oes ganddynt fynediad at gyfleusterau bancio ac ati i wneud hyn yn bosibl. Mewn gwirionedd, maent yn weithgar iawn—fe ddaethant i fy ffair ariannu ddydd Gwener ac roeddent yn casglu cefnogaeth i'w deiseb tra oeddent yno, ac yn siarad â phobl am yr ymgyrch. Oherwydd fe wyddom nad yw pawb yn fy rhan i o'r wlad, yng ngogledd Cymru, yn gallu mynd yn ddi-arian, fel y clywsom, ac mae llawer o bobl yn ei chael hi'n anodd defnyddio bancio ar-lein neu efallai eu bod yn amheus ohono. Ac yna, i waethygu'r sefyllfa, fe wyddom fod banciau'n cau'n rheolaidd mewn cymunedau ledled y wlad, sy'n creu risg o adael llawer o rannau o'r gymdeithas ar ôl.
Ac er fy mod yn cydnabod bod y gallu i ddeddfu ar y mater hwn yn parhau i fod wedi ei gadw'n ôl mewn sawl ffordd i San Steffan, rwy'n credu bod cyfleoedd i Lywodraeth Cymru, drwy weithio mewn partneriaeth â sefydliadau ledled Cymru, ystyried ymhellach yr hyn y gallem ei wneud yma yng Nghymru gyda'r dulliau sydd gennym, boed yn feddwl ychydig yn wahanol am ein darpariaethau cyllid cyhoeddus, ar gaffael, drwy lythyrau cylch gwaith, neu hyd yn oed drwy sut y gellir defnyddio ein dull partneriaeth gymdeithasol, ein gwaith partneriaeth, i ddod â sefydliadau a busnesau gyda ni, ac a oes pethau y gallwn eu defnyddio o ran trethiant, gydag ardrethi busnes, i gymell rhai pethau hefyd. Felly, rwy'n credu bod cyfleoedd i wneud pethau'n wahanol a meddwl yn wahanol, ac mae angen inni sicrhau hefyd, yn amlwg, fod hyn ar agenda Llywodraeth y DU hefyd, ac nad ydym yn cymryd yn ganiataol fod pawb yn gyfforddus, yn hyderus ac yn gallu symud gyda'r oes. Oherwydd, os gwnawn hynny, nid ydym yn mynd i fod yn wlad gynhwysol a hygyrch yma yng Nghymru. Diolch.
I'm glad to have the opportunity to speak in this debate today on the back of this very important petition. I concur with a lot of what's already been said, particularly by the Plaid Cymru Member for South Wales West; I thought it was very poignant what you said. And I thank the petitioners for bringing the opportunity for us to debate this today.
We live an era of rapid change, with more people using cards and phones to pay for almost everything. The shift, accelerated by the COVID pandemic, feels inevitable. However, it is so important, and it's been said numerous times today, that we don't leave people behind. According to the 'Financial Lives' 2022 survey, 3.1 million UK adults, 6 per cent of the population, still heavily rely on cash. In Wales, that figure stands at 5 per cent. These groups include, as has been said, the elderly, the vulnerable, and those unable to access online banking, with some people uncomfortable with going online—26 per cent use cash for almost every transaction—while 19 per cent of those aged 85 and over depend on it as their main payment method.
One of those significant groups affected, as has been said, is those with learning disabilities. Mencap Cymru has raised concerns that, as businesses move to card-only payments, these individuals face exclusion. For them, cash offers a manageable way to handle finances; without it, they risk humiliation and are often unable to make basic purchases. Support workers cannot use their own cards on behalf of individuals, compounding the issue. The Welsh Government acknowledges the challenge, but emphasises that these payment methods are largely a commercial decision. However, there needs to be a commitment to engaging with stakeholders, to retain cash systems and ensure inclusivity.
For many elderly people, cash is more than just a way to pay—it's a means of maintaining financial independence. As bank branches close, accessing cash becomes harder, further isolating those who rely on it. As has been said, families on tight budgets also find cash helps control spending. Small businesses, especially in rural areas, like my own, benefit from cash transactions, as they avoid card payment fees. I can think of a few businesses just off the top of my head. With unreliable internet in some regions, cash remains an essential option for both businesses and customers.
While the move towards a cashless society may seem inevitable, it's clear that it doesn't work for everybody. Incidentally, I too saw an elderly gentleman miss out on buying food and drink on a very long train journey from Cardiff to north Wales, and that's just not good enough. This isn't about halting progress; this is about ensuring fairness and compassion. We must protect the right to use cash for those who need it most, building a society that works for all, and not just for those who can easily adapt to a cashless world. I urge the Welsh Government today to take heed of this position and make these concerns heard in Westminster. Thank you.
Rwy'n falch o gael y cyfle i siarad yn y ddadl hon heddiw yn sgil y ddeiseb bwysig hon. Rwy'n cytuno â llawer o'r hyn sydd wedi cael ei ddweud eisoes, yn enwedig gan Aelod Plaid Cymru dros Orllewin De Cymru; roeddwn i'n meddwl bod yr hyn a ddywedoch chi'n deimladwy iawn. A diolch i'r deisebwyr am roi cyfle inni drafod hyn heddiw.
Rydym yn byw mewn cyfnod o newid cyflym, gyda mwy o bobl yn defnyddio cardiau a ffonau i dalu am bron bopeth. Mae'r newid, a gyflymwyd gan bandemig COVID, yn teimlo'n anochel. Fodd bynnag, mae mor bwysig, ac mae wedi cael ei ddweud sawl gwaith heddiw, nad ydym yn gadael pobl ar ôl. Yn ôl arolwg 'Bywydau Ariannol' 2022, mae 3.1 miliwn o oedolion y DU, 6 y cant o'r boblogaeth, yn dal i ddibynnu'n helaeth ar arian parod. Yng Nghymru, mae'r ffigur hwnnw'n 5 y cant. Fel y dywedwyd, mae'r grwpiau hyn yn cynnwys yr henoed, pobl fregus, a'r rhai nad ydynt yn gallu bancio ar-lein, gyda rhai pobl yn anghyfforddus ynglŷn â mynd ar-lein—mae 26 y cant yn defnyddio arian parod ar gyfer eu holl drafodion ariannol bron—tra bod 19 y cant o bobl 85 oed a hŷn yn dibynnu arno fel eu prif ddull talu.
Un o'r grwpiau arwyddocaol yr effeithir arnynt, fel y dywedwyd, yw'r rhai ag anableddau dysgu. Wrth i fusnesau symud at daliadau cardiau'n unig, mae Mencap Cymru wedi mynegi pryderon fod yr unigolion hyn yn wynebu cael eu heithrio. Iddynt hwy, mae arian parod yn cynnig ffordd hylaw o drafod cyllid; hebddo, maent yn wynebu risg o embaras ac yn aml ni allant wneud pryniannau sylfaenol. Ni all gweithwyr cymorth ddefnyddio eu cardiau eu hunain ar ran unigolion, gan waethygu'r mater. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn cydnabod yr her, ond yn pwysleisio mai penderfyniad masnachol i raddau helaeth yw'r dulliau talu hyn. Fodd bynnag, mae angen ymrwymiad i ymgysylltu â rhanddeiliaid, i gadw systemau arian parod a sicrhau cynhwysiant.
I lawer o bobl oedrannus, mae arian parod yn fwy na dim ond ffordd o dalu—mae'n fodd o gynnal annibyniaeth ariannol. Wrth i ganghennau banc gau, mae cael gafael ar arian parod yn mynd yn anos, gan ynysu'r rhai sy'n dibynnu arno ymhellach. Fel y dywedwyd, mae teuluoedd ar gyllidebau tynn hefyd yn teimlo bod arian parod yn helpu i reoli gwariant. Mae busnesau bach, yn enwedig mewn ardaloedd gwledig, fel fy un i, yn elwa o drafodion arian parod, gan eu bod yn osgoi ffioedd taliadau cardiau. Daw rhai busnesau i'r meddwl yn syth. Gyda rhyngrwyd annibynadwy mewn rhai mannau, mae arian parod yn parhau i fod yn opsiwn hanfodol i fusnesau a chwsmeriaid.
Er y gall symud tuag at gymdeithas ddi-arian ymddangos yn anochel, mae'n amlwg nad yw'n gweithio i bawb. Gyda llaw, gwelais ŵr bonheddig oedrannus yn methu prynu bwyd a diod ar daith drên hir iawn o Gaerdydd i ogledd Cymru, ac nid yw hynny'n ddigon da. Nid mater o atal cynnydd yw hyn; mae'n ymwneud â sicrhau tegwch a thrugaredd. Rhaid inni ddiogelu'r hawl i ddefnyddio arian parod i'r rhai sydd ei angen fwyaf, gan adeiladu cymdeithas sy'n gweithio i bawb, nid dim ond i'r rhai sy'n gallu addasu'n hawdd i fyd heb arian parod. Rwy'n annog Llywodraeth Cymru heddiw i wrando ar y safbwynt hwn a sicrhau bod y pryderon hyn yn cael eu clywed yn San Steffan. Diolch.
A gaf i ddiolch i'r Pwyllgor Deisebau am hyn, ond, yn bennaf, i Mencap Cymru, am ddod â'r achos hwn ger ein bron? Mae'n biti ein bod ni'n gorfod cael y ddadl yma, oherwydd mae'r ddadl wedi'i gwneud o ran pam mae hyn mor bwysig, ac mae yn siomedig dros ben yn gweld Llywodraeth Cymru yn gwrthod yr hyn sydd yn gwneud synnwyr. Rydym ni'n sôn am sicrhau bod pawb yn gallu cyfrannu, cyfranogi, fod yn rhan o gymdeithas, rhywbeth mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i ymrwymo iddo fo, rhywbeth rydym ni'n gobeithio ein bod ni i gyd wedi ymrwymo iddo fo. A'r cwestiwn sydd gen i: pam na all Llywodraeth Cymru, drwy lythyrau cylch gwaith, sicrhau bod hwn ynddyn nhw? Mi fyddai'n gweld i fi y byddai hyn yn diwallu argymhelliad 1, oherwydd, wedi'r cyfan, dwi wedi bod yn mynd nôl drwy lythyrau cylch gwaith nifer o sefydliadau, megis y cyngor celfyddydau, ac un o'r nodau a rennir, sydd yn cael ei nodi, ydy:
'Gwella mynediad a chyfranogiad i bawb'.
Ac un o'r prif amcanion sy'n cael ei nodi yn y llythyr hwnnw ydy:
'Dathlu amrywiaeth a symud i ddileu anghydraddoldeb o bob math'.
Felly, byddwn i yn hoffi eglurhad pam na allwch chi roi yn benodol, yn y llythyrau cylch gwaith hynny, fod yn rhaid i bob sefydliad sy'n cael ei ariannu gan y cyngor celfyddydau, a thrwy arian Llywodraeth Cymru yn uniongyrchol—. Pam na allwch chi ddweud bod yn rhaid iddyn nhw, felly, dderbyn arian parod?
May I thank the Petitions Committee, but mainly thank Mencap Cymru, for bringing this case forward? It's a shame that we have to have this debate, because the argument's been made in terms of why this is so very important, and it's very disappointing to see the Welsh Government rejecting what, basically, makes sense. We are talking about ensuring that everyone can contribute, participate and be part of society, something that the Welsh Government is committed to, something that we hope that we are all committed to. And the question that I have is: why can't the Welsh Government, through remit letters, ensure that this is included? This would actually deal with recommendation 1, because, after all, I've been going through the remit letters of a number of these organisations, such as the arts council, and one of the shared goals is:
'Improving access and participation for all'.
And one of the main objectives set out in that letter is to:
'Celebrate diversity and move to eliminate inequality in all of its forms.'
So, I would like an explanation as to why you can't specifically note, in those remit letters, that every organisation in receipt of funding from the arts council and through Welsh Government funding directly—. Why can you not say that they would therefore have to take cash?
Allaf jest ymyrryd yn gyflym?
May I briefly interject?
Wrth gwrs.
Of course.
I just want to draw attention to the fact that we have Neil here, a young person from Newport, and he's here with his mother. He went to the Wales Millennium Centre. It's a huge concern; the turnover must be in the millions. He wasn't able to buy himself an ice cream during the interval, because he didn't have the means to do it. They don't take cash—you know, the distress that that causes. As you say, when the arts council, who are managing these huge national institutions and venues, say that they want to see inclusivity and then something like that happens, it just doesn't make sense, does it? So, I just wanted to raise Neil's case with you.
Hoffwn dynnu sylw at y ffaith bod gennym Neil yma, unigolyn ifanc o Gasnewydd, ac mae yma gyda'i fam. Aeth i Ganolfan Mileniwm Cymru. Mae'n fusnes enfawr; rhaid bod y trosiant yn y miliynau. Ni allodd brynu hufen iâ iddo'i hun yn ystod yr egwyl, am nad oedd ganddo fodd o wneud. Nid ydynt yn derbyn arian—wyddoch chi, y gofid y mae hynny'n ei achosi. Fel y dywedwch, pan fo cyngor y celfyddydau, sy'n rheoli'r sefydliadau a'r lleoliadau cenedlaethol enfawr hyn, yn dweud eu bod am weld cynwysoldeb a bod rhywbeth fel hynny'n digwydd, nid yw'n gwneud synnwyr. Felly, roeddwn eisiau codi achos Neil gyda chi.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Sioned, and thank you to Neil for being here today, because, for every story behind that petition, there is someone who has been turned away. I've heard it from constituents. It is something that happens so, so frequently. It's not a one-off every now and then; it's something that happens day in, day out.
I was also pleased, Carolyn, that, in your introduction to the debate, you mentioned that it's not just this specific group of people. I think of children as well, many of whom are not old enough to have cards. I don't know about you, but children are still obsessed with cash. Maybe you've not reached that age yet, but, once they understand what cash means, I promise you, they are obsessed with spending their own money. And it is about independence, but learning responsibility as well, and that's much easier to do with money rather than online. So, I do feel that that's another element. Also coercive control. Many people, we hear, their spending is monitored, and, if it's online, that can be extremely difficult. So, there are many, many people who would benefit from this, as well as the arguments already made.
So, for me, I would just like clarity: why can't we use the remit letters to ensure that this change happens? It's not difficult, it's something that could be simply put right, but it would make a massive difference to so many people we represent. And if we are serious about ensuring equity to everyone here in Wales, equity of participation, let's remove this one small but significant barrier, so that people can use cash and aren't turned away from having an ice cream or being able to participate in the things that we all enjoy in life. Everyone should be able to enjoy them.
Diolch, Sioned, a diolch i Neil am ddod yma heddiw, oherwydd, am bob stori y tu ôl i'r ddeiseb honno, mae rhywun wedi ei droi ymaith. Rwyf wedi ei glywed gan etholwyr. Mae'n rhywbeth sy'n digwydd mor aml. Nid un digwyddiad bob hyn a hyn ydyw; mae'n rhywbeth sy'n digwydd bob dydd.
Roeddwn hefyd yn falch, Carolyn, eich bod chi wedi nodi yn eich cyflwyniad i'r ddadl ei fod yn effeithio ar fwy na'r grŵp penodol hwn o bobl. Rwy'n meddwl am blant hefyd, gyda llawer ohonynt heb fod yn ddigon hen i gael cardiau. Nid wyf yn gwybod amdanoch chi, ond mae plant yn dal i fod ag obsesiwn gydag arian parod. Efallai nad ydych chi wedi cyrraedd yr oedran hwnnw eto, ond pan fyddant yn deall beth y mae arian parod yn ei olygu, rwy'n addo i chi, mae gwario eu harian eu hunain yn obsesiwn. Ac mae'n ymwneud ag annibyniaeth, a dysgu cyfrifoldeb hefyd, ac mae hynny'n llawer haws i'w wneud gydag arian nag ar-lein. Felly, rwy'n teimlo bod honno'n elfen arall. Hefyd rheolaeth drwy orfodaeth. Clywn am lawer o bobl lle caiff eu gwariant ei fonitro, ac os yw ar-lein, gall hynny fod yn anodd dros ben. Felly, mae yna lawer iawn o bobl a fyddai'n elwa o hyn, yn ogystal â'r dadleuon a wnaed eisoes.
Felly, i mi, hoffwn gael eglurder: pam na allwn ni ddefnyddio'r llythyrau cylch gwaith i sicrhau bod y newid hwn yn digwydd? Nid yw'n anodd, mae'n rhywbeth y gellid ei gywiro'n syml, ond byddai'n gwneud gwahaniaeth enfawr i gymaint o'r bobl a gynrychiolwn. Ac os ydym o ddifrif ynglŷn â sicrhau tegwch i bawb yma yng Nghymru, cyfranogiad teg, gadewch inni gael gwared ar yr un rhwystr bach ond arwyddocaol hwn, fel y gall pobl ddefnyddio arian parod ac nad ydynt yn cael eu gwrthod rhag cael hufen iâ neu rhag gallu cymryd rhan yn y pethau y mae pawb ohonom yn eu mwynhau mewn bywyd. Dylai pawb allu eu mwynhau.
I support the petition. I will try and avoid repeating anything anybody else has said. But the Welsh Government should take steps to ensure vulnerable adults without bank cards and other electronic means can pay with cash, and also those who do not want to use cards can use cash. There are many things, such as home working and the move to virtual meetings, that are a post-COVID dividend; one of the disadvantages is the move to a cashless society. While many retailers, mainly larger retailers, want people to use a phone, a watch or a card, which makes keeping their accounts easier and avoids giving change, many smaller retailers prefer cash. Card processing fees can typically range from 1.5 per cent to 3.5 per cent of the cost of an item. This eats into the profits of small retailers. What we can do is use cash whenever making a purchase from a small local retailer. It will help them, and it will cost us the same.
The advantage of using cash is that you can budget and control your expenditure. How many times have people only realised how much they've spent when they look at their bank or credit card statement, or when a payment is declined? Using a card means you can easily overspend. Cash gives you control over your expenditure. When it's gone, it's gone. You can avoid interest by paying with cash and save money. It promotes careful spending. Swiping or beeping a card is easy, but withdrawal and handling physical cash can make you more aware of your spending and how much is in your bank account.
I'm now inviting Members into the world of people with limited income. There's the tin system, where people put money in tins for every regular payment, ensuring they can pay their bills when they arrive. For those with limited income, this can only be done with cash. When you use cash, you can appreciate how much an item costs. There are people who want to use debit and credit cards to pay and to order online, but others want to use cash. The choice needs to be there to use cash or card, not being forced into using card.
Finally, the Welsh Government can, and not necessarily in a remit letter, make a statement that it would like all public bodies in Wales to collect and to take cash. Remember that comprehensive education came in from a Department of Education and Science circular. An awful lot can be achieved by Government saying something without actually needing to bring in legislation.
Rwy'n cefnogi'r ddeiseb. Fe geisiaf osgoi ailadrodd unrhyw beth y mae unrhyw un arall wedi'i ddweud. Ond dylai Llywodraeth Cymru gymryd camau i sicrhau bod oedolion bregus heb gardiau banc a dulliau electronig eraill yn gallu talu gydag arian parod, a hefyd fod y rhai nad ydynt eisiau defnyddio cardiau yn gallu defnyddio arian parod. Mae llawer o bethau, fel gweithio gartref a symud i gyfarfodydd rhithwir, yn ddifidend ôl-COVID; un o'r anfanteision yw symud i gymdeithas ddi-arian. Er bod llawer o fanwerthwyr, manwerthwyr mwy o faint yn bennaf, eisiau i bobl ddefnyddio ffôn, oriawr neu gerdyn, sy'n gwneud cadw cyfrifon yn haws ac yn osgoi gorfod rhoi newid, mae'n well gan lawer o fanwerthwyr llai o faint arian parod. Fel arfer, gall ffioedd prosesu cardiau amrywio o 1.5 y cant i 3.5 y cant o gost eitem. Mae hyn yn bwyta i mewn i elw manwerthwyr bach. Yr hyn y gallwn ei wneud yw defnyddio arian parod pryd bynnag y byddwn yn prynu gan fanwerthwyr bach lleol. Bydd yn eu helpu hwy a bydd yn costio'r un faint i ni.
Y fantais o ddefnyddio arian parod yw y gallwch gyllidebu a rheoli eich gwariant. Sawl gwaith y mae pobl ond yn sylweddoli faint y maent wedi'i wario wrth edrych ar eu datganiad banc neu gerdyn credyd, neu pan fydd taliad yn cael ei wrthod? Mae defnyddio cerdyn yn golygu y gallwch chi orwario'n hawdd. Mae arian parod yn rhoi rheolaeth i chi ar eich gwariant. Pan fydd wedi mynd, fe fydd wedi mynd. Gallwch osgoi llog trwy dalu gydag arian parod ac arbed arian. Mae'n hyrwyddo gwariant gofalus. Mae sweipio neu bipian cerdyn yn hawdd, ond gall tynnu arian allan a'i drin yn eich llaw eich gwneud yn fwy ymwybodol o'ch gwariant a faint sydd yn eich cyfrif banc.
Rwy'n gwahodd yr Aelodau i fyd pobl sydd ag incwm cyfyngedig. Mae gennych y system tun, lle mae pobl yn rhoi arian mewn tuniau ar gyfer pob taliad rheolaidd, gan sicrhau y gallant dalu eu biliau pan fyddant yn cyrraedd. I'r rhai sydd ag incwm cyfyngedig, dim ond gydag arian parod y gellir gwneud hyn. Pan fyddwch chi'n defnyddio arian parod, gallwch ddeall faint y mae eitem yn ei gostio. Mae yna bobl sydd eisiau defnyddio cardiau debyd a chredyd i dalu ac i archebu ar-lein, ond mae eraill eisiau defnyddio arian parod. Mae angen i'r dewis fod yno i ddefnyddio arian parod neu gerdyn, heb orfodi neb i ddefnyddio cerdyn.
Yn olaf, gall Llywodraeth Cymru wneud datganiad, ac nid o reidrwydd mewn llythyr cylch gwaith, y byddai'n hoffi i bob corff cyhoeddus yng Nghymru gymryd a derbyn arian parod. Cofiwch fod addysg gyfun wedi'i chyflwyno yn sgil cylchlythyr o'r Adran Addysg a Gwyddoniaeth. Gellir cyflawni llawer iawn drwy fod y Llywodraeth yn dweud rhywbeth heb orfod cyflwyno deddfwriaeth.
A nawr dwi'n galw ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol, Jane Hutt.
And I now call on the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Jane Hutt.
Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Llywydd am y cyfle i ymateb i'r ddadl bwysig iawn hon ar adroddiad y Pwyllgor Deisebau.
Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, for the opportunity to respond to this very important debate on the Petition’s Committee's report.
Let's again state what this is about—a cashless society: 'Welsh Government should take steps to ensure vulnerable adults without bank cards can pay with cash'. This has been an excellent debate, hasn't it? It's really been important. The Petitions Committee, I have to say—. I do welcome, of course, the new Chair of the Petitions Committee to the role and for addressing us today and giving us such insightful recommendations, and also talking about the evidence that you received. So, I do thank the Chair and the members of the committee for your hard work on this important issue, and the evidence that you gathered. Of course, it's very good that we've got some of those who influenced the committee here today in the public gallery. We really welcome you and recognise that there's lived experience here, isn't there? And not just here today, listening and sharing on this occasion in terms of this debate, but also giving that evidence of how their lives have been affected, how they've been disadvantaged by the access-to-cash deficit, which I would call it.
I remember not only meeting with Mencap Cymru and colleagues, but that this came up in the disability rights taskforce, as you asked the question, Sioned, about how we engage with these issues. We heard first hand, as we have done today, examples of where disabled people had been excluded from accessing businesses and services because of cash refusal. So, yes, in terms of financial inclusion, yes that is devolved, and we do work very closely with LINK and Cash Access UK to ensure that cash continues to be available in communities, through banks and, increasingly now, of course, through post offices in areas where banks have closed, and also ATMs, some with deposit facilities. We have got the OneBanx kiosk in the Principality Building Society, in the Cowbridge branch, but also they're rolling that out, and I regularly meet with ethical finance responsible lenders through their network.
But I'm very mindful of the concerns raised about that recommendation 1 today. That actually did say, 'Couldn't we do something as a Welsh Government to ensure that, particularly those we fund, should accept cash?' I think the concerns raised that business, sporting venues and art centres don't always accept cash payments at their venues are very clear from the debate today. So, I'd like to say today, as Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, I would like to follow this up. I'd like to seek a meeting with Mencap to discuss this further, but also look at it in terms of what we could do. I think, Chair, you mentioned the public sector equality duty. Well, of course I want to look at that. Hannah Blythyn mentioned the campaign from the Women’s Institute, so I would probably want to engage with other campaign groups as well, and maybe you can draw attention to the ones who gave evidence, because I think this is something where, okay, we might not have all the powers, we might not be able to mandate, but ask what is it we can do. And I actually think that recommendation 1 is very reasonable, because it actually says that some organisations will no longer have facilities to accept cash or deposit cash, and, therefore, will require support and guidance. So, we do need to talk to organisations. This is about us working together in social partnership as well, of course, with businesses and employers.
And I think the Arts Council of Wales has been mentioned. The arts council is very concerned to ensure that all their services are accessible. That’s part of the remit in terms of funding, but, obviously, we know there have been changes. There are issues in terms of security, administration about managing. That’s why the benefits of cashless purchases to venues have developed, haven’t they, but the account of what that has meant has not, I don’t think, been fully understood and measured. And can I just say that Cadw has no plans to phase out cash payment routes to its buildings across Wales? Sioned.
Gadewch inni ddatgan eto beth yw pwrpas hyn—cymdeithas heb arian parod: 'Dylai Llywodraeth Cymru gymryd camau i sicrhau y gall oedolion agored i niwed heb gardiau banc dalu ag arian parod'. Mae hon wedi bod yn ddadl wych, onid yw? Mae wedi bod yn wirioneddol bwysig. Mae'n rhaid imi ddweud bod y Pwyllgor Deisebau—. Rwy'n croesawu Cadeirydd newydd y Pwyllgor Deisebau i'r rôl ac am ein hannerch heddiw a rhoi argymhellion mor graff inni, a hefyd am siarad am y dystiolaeth a gawsoch. Felly, rwy'n diolch i'r Cadeirydd ac aelodau'r pwyllgor am eich gwaith caled ar y mater pwysig hwn, a'r dystiolaeth a gasglwyd gennych. Wrth gwrs, mae'n dda iawn fod gennym rai o'r bobl a ddylanwadodd ar y pwyllgor yma heddiw yn yr oriel gyhoeddus. Rydym yn eich croesawu'n gynnes ac yn cydnabod bod profiad bywyd yma, onid oes? Ac nid yn unig yma heddiw, yn gwrando a rhannu ar y ddadl hon, ond hefyd yn rhoi tystiolaeth ynglŷn â sut yr effeithiwyd ar eu bywydau, sut y cawsant eu rhoi dan anfantais gan ddiffyg mynediad at arian parod.
Rwy'n cofio cyfarfod â Mencap Cymru a chyd-Aelodau, a bod hyn wedi codi yn y tasglu hawliau anabledd, gan i chi ofyn y cwestiwn, Sioned, ynglŷn â'n gwaith ar y materion hyn. Clywsom yn uniongyrchol, fel y gwnaethom heddiw, am enghreifftiau o bobl anabl yn cael eu heithrio rhag cael mynediad at fusnesau a gwasanaethau yn sgil gwrthod arian parod. Felly, ydy, mae cynhwysiant ariannol wedi'i ddatganoli, ac rydym yn gweithio'n agos iawn gyda LINK a Cash Access UK i sicrhau bod arian parod yn parhau i fod ar gael mewn cymunedau, trwy fanciau ac yn gynyddol nawr wrth gwrs, trwy swyddfeydd post mewn ardaloedd lle mae banciau wedi cau, a pheiriannau ATM, gyda rhai ohonynt â chyfleusterau talu i mewn. Mae gennym y ciosg OneBanx yng Nghymdeithas Adeiladu'r Principality yng nghangen y Bont-faen, ond maent hefyd yn cyflwyno hynny, ac rwy'n cyfarfod â benthycwyr cyfrifol ariannu moesegol yn rheolaidd trwy eu rhwydwaith.
Ond rwy'n ymwybodol iawn o'r pryderon a godwyd am argymhelliad 1 heddiw. Roedd yn dweud, 'Oni allem ni wneud rhywbeth fel Llywodraeth Cymru i sicrhau y dylai'r rhai yr ydym yn eu cyllido, yn enwedig, dderbyn arian parod?' Rwy'n credu bod y pryderon a godwyd nad yw busnesau, lleoliadau chwaraeon a chanolfannau celfyddydol bob amser yn derbyn taliadau arian parod yn eu lleoliadau yn glir iawn o'r ddadl heddiw. Felly, hoffwn ddweud heddiw, fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol, yr hoffwn fynd ar drywydd hyn. Hoffwn ofyn am gyfarfod gyda Mencap i drafod hyn ymhellach, ac edrych arno hefyd o ran yr hyn y gallem ni ei wneud. Gadeirydd, rwy'n credu eich bod wedi sôn am ddyletswydd cydraddoldeb y sector cyhoeddus. Rwyf am edrych ar honno wrth gwrs. Soniodd Hannah Blythyn am yr ymgyrch gan Sefydliad y Merched, felly mae'n debyg y buaswn am ymgysylltu â grwpiau ymgyrchu eraill hefyd, ac efallai y gallwch dynnu sylw at y rhai a roddodd dystiolaeth, oherwydd credaf fod hyn yn rhywbeth lle gallem ofyn beth y gallwn ei wneud, er efallai na fydd gennym yr holl bwerau, efallai na fyddwn yn gallu mandadu. Ac rwy'n credu bod argymhelliad 1 yn rhesymol iawn mewn gwirionedd, oherwydd mae'n dweud na fydd gan rai sefydliadau gyfleusterau i dderbyn arian parod mwyach, neu dalu arian parod i mewn, ac felly, bydd angen cymorth ac arweiniad. Felly, mae angen inni siarad â sefydliadau. Mae hyn yn golygu gweithio gyda'n gilydd mewn partneriaeth gymdeithasol gyda busnesau a chyflogwyr hefyd wrth gwrs.
Ac rwy'n credu bod Cyngor Celfyddydau Cymru wedi cael ei grybwyll. Mae cyngor y celfyddydau'n awyddus iawn i sicrhau bod eu holl wasanaethau'n hygyrch. Mae hynny'n rhan o'r cylch gwaith mewn perthynas â chyllid, ond yn amlwg, fe wyddom fod newidiadau wedi bod. Mae yna faterion yn codi ynghylch diogelwch, gweinyddiaeth, ynglŷn â rheoli. Dyna pam y mae manteision pryniannau di-arian i leoliadau wedi datblygu, ond nid wyf yn credu bod yr hyn y mae hynny wedi'i olygu wedi'i ddeall a'i fesur yn llawn. Ac a gaf i ddweud nad oes gan Cadw unrhyw gynlluniau i ddileu llwybrau talu arian parod yn ei adeiladau ledled Cymru? Sioned.
Can I just ask you, as well, to have conversations with the Minister for transport, because the issue around trains, and Transport for Wales, is a very real one as well, especially with this introduction of the fining system? I know we're always thinking of accessibility in terms of physical accessibility; this is just as much of a barrier, and, so, in the same way we had to fight that fight years ago, when people said, ‘No, we can’t widen doors because the building would fall down’, this is the same kind of issue. We have to say, 'Transport has to be accessible and you're able to use cash'.
A gaf i ofyn i chi gael sgyrsiau gyda'r Gweinidog trafnidiaeth, oherwydd mae mater trenau, a Trafnidiaeth Cymru, yn un real iawn hefyd, yn enwedig gyda chyflwyno'r system ddirwyo? Rwy'n gwybod ein bod bob amser yn meddwl am hygyrchedd corfforol; mae hyn yn llawn cymaint o rwystr, ac felly, yn yr un ffordd ag y bu'n rhaid inni ymladd y frwydr honno flynyddoedd yn ôl, pan oedd pobl yn dweud, 'Na, ni allwn ledu drysau oherwydd byddai'r adeilad yn disgyn', mae hon yn broblem debyg. Mae'n rhaid inni ddweud, 'Rhaid i drafnidiaeth fod yn hygyrch ac fe gewch chi ddefnyddio arian parod'.
I will obviously take that up as well; thank you for that. And an example was given, anyway, of an elderly person who wasn’t able to buy a cup of tea. Now, this should not be the case. So, we will look at that as well.
So, finally, really, from me, Dirprwy Lywydd—you’ve been very generous with time—just to reassure you, I see this as a key social justice issue, and I will take this up in the way that we need to do. We need to also work across Government to raise awareness of the issue. Service providers, businesses, equality groups—I will meet with you. It has got to be a collective effort, cross-Government, cross-sectoral, and it also involves the new UK Government, so I want to engage with them as well.
Fe af ar ôl hynny hefyd; diolch am hynny. A rhoddwyd enghraifft, beth bynnag, o berson oedrannus nad oedd yn gallu prynu paned o de. Nawr, ni ddylai hyn fod yn digwydd. Felly, fe edrychwn ar hynny hefyd.
Felly, yn olaf gennyf i, Ddirprwy Lywydd—rydych chi wedi bod yn hael iawn gydag amser—os caf eich sicrhau, rwy'n ystyried hwn yn fater cyfiawnder cymdeithasol allweddol, a byddaf yn mynd ar ei drywydd yn y ffordd y mae angen inni wneud. Mae angen inni weithio ar draws y Llywodraeth hefyd i godi ymwybyddiaeth o'r mater. Darparwyr gwasanaethau, busnesau, grwpiau cydraddoldeb—fe wnaf gyfarfod â chi. Mae'n rhaid iddi fod yn ymdrech ar y cyd, yn drawslywodraethol, yn draws-sector, ac mae hefyd yn cynnwys Llywodraeth newydd y DU, felly rwyf am ymgysylltu â hwythau hefyd.
Diolch am y cyfle i ymateb i’r ddadl bwysig hon.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to respond to this very important debate.
Thank you for this debate today. I think we can open doors to address this issue here in Wales. Diolch.
Diolch am y ddadl hon heddiw. Rwy'n credu y gallwn agor drysau i fynd i'r afael â'r mater hwn yma yng Nghymru. Diolch.
A galwaf ar Gadeirydd y pwyllgor, Carolyn Thomas, i ymateb i’r ddadl.
And I call on the Chair of the committee, Carolyn Thomas, to reply to the debate.
Thank you. I’d like to thank all the Members for their contributions today. Peter spoke about the sense of value of money, so did Rhys as well, and Heledd, especially for children, learning about the value of money. Sioned spoke about equality, fairness and inclusion, and highlighted the need for businesses that receive public funds to abide by their ethical social value and allow people to use cash, and I am really pleased that the Cabinet Secretary will be taking that forward.
Rhys also spoke about the declining use of cash and the impact on charities as well, with collection boxes, and homeless people as well, for those on-the-go donations—it’s really important. And deprived areas are more likely to use cash. Hannah spoke about procurement and remit letters, and taxation and business rates, and writing to the UK Government as well, and so did Heledd.
Laura Anne mentioned that we mustn’t leave people behind. Decisions shouldn’t just be based on commercialism, and Heledd also mentioned coercive control for people who just use online banking rather than cash. And Mike spoke about how cash is king, and the importance of it for budgeting as well, especially, like I said, in deprived areas.
So, I find this has been a really good debate, and thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your positive response, and agreeing to meet with Mencap as well to go through everything—that’s really good—and talking to the Cabinet Secretary for transport as well.
I thank the Business Committee for granting time for this important debate, and Mencap Cymru, and all those involved in that piece of work. It shows that speaking out, having a petition, can make a difference, and we're all here to listen and work through this. So, thank you so much. We have been trying to tear down the barriers that prevent disabled people from living their lives to the full. It's clear that the growing reliance on cashless transactions creates a new, unforeseen barrier. So, I hope people across the room and across Wales have maybe listened to this debate and that businesses will think long and hard about this and change the way that they're behaving. It shouldn't just be based on commercialism; we've got to think about people, too. So, thank you very much for having this debate.
Diolch. Hoffwn ddiolch i'r holl Aelodau am eu cyfraniadau heddiw. Siaradodd Peter am y teimlad o werth arian, a Rhys hefyd, a Heledd, yn enwedig i blant, yn dysgu am werth arian. Siaradodd Sioned am gydraddoldeb, tegwch a chynhwysiant, gan dynnu sylw at yr angen i fusnesau sy'n cael arian cyhoeddus lynu wrth eu gwerthoedd cymdeithasol moesegol a chaniatáu i bobl ddefnyddio arian parod, ac rwy'n falch iawn y bydd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn bwrw ymlaen â hynny.
Siaradodd Rhys hefyd am y defnydd o arian parod yn lleihau a'r effaith ar elusennau hefyd, gyda blychau casglu, a phobl ddigartref hefyd, ar gyfer cyfrannu wrth fynd—mae'n bwysig iawn. Ac mae ardaloedd difreintiedig yn fwy tebygol o ddefnyddio arian parod. Siaradodd Hannah am gaffael a llythyrau cylch gwaith, a threthiant ac ardrethi busnes, ac ysgrifennu at Lywodraeth y DU hefyd, a gwnaeth Heledd hynny hefyd.
Soniodd Laura Anne na ddylem adael pobl ar ôl. Ni ddylai penderfyniadau fod yn seiliedig ar fasnacheiddiwch yn unig, a soniodd Heledd hefyd am reolaeth drwy orfodaeth i bobl sydd ond yn defnyddio bancio ar-lein yn hytrach nag arian parod. A siaradodd Mike ynglŷn â sut y mae arian yn frenin, a'i bwysigrwydd ar gyfer cyllidebu hefyd, yn enwedig, fel y dywedais, mewn ardaloedd difreintiedig.
Felly, rwy'n ystyried bod hon wedi bod yn ddadl dda iawn, a diolch, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, am eich ymateb cadarnhaol, ac am gytuno i gyfarfod â Mencap i fynd trwy bopeth—mae hynny'n dda iawn—a siarad gydag Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros drafnidiaeth hefyd.
Diolch i'r Pwyllgor Busnes am roi amser i'r ddadl bwysig hon, a Mencap Cymru, a phawb sy'n ymwneud â'r gwaith hwnnw. Mae'n dangos bod codi llais, cael deiseb, yn gallu gwneud gwahaniaeth, ac rydym i gyd yma i wrando a gweithio drwy hyn. Felly, diolch yn fawr iawn. Rydym wedi bod yn ceisio chwalu'r rhwystrau sy'n atal pobl anabl rhag byw eu bywydau i'r eithaf. Mae'n amlwg fod y ddibyniaeth gynyddol ar drafodion di-arian parod yn creu rhwystr newydd, annisgwyl. Felly, rwy'n gobeithio bod pobl ar draws yr ystafell a ledled Cymru wedi gwrando ar y ddadl hon ac y bydd busnesau'n meddwl yn hir ac yn galed am hyn ac yn newid y ffordd y maent yn ymddwyn. Ni ddylai fod yn seiliedig ar fasnacheiddiwch yn unig; mae'n rhaid inni feddwl am bobl yn ogystal. Felly, diolch yn fawr am gael y ddadl hon.
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 gwelliannau canlynol: gwelliant 1 yn enw Darren Millar, a gwelliant 2 yn enw Jane Hutt. Os derbynnir gwelliant 1, caiff gwelliant 2 ei ddad-dethol.
The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Darren Millar, and amendment 2 in the name of Jane Hutt. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected.
Symudwn ymlaen at eitem 8, dadl Plaid Cymru: cyllideb Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig. Galwaf ar Heledd Fychan i wneud y cynnig.
We'll move now to item 8, the Plaid Cymru debate on the UK Government budget. I call on Heledd Fychan to move the motion.
Cynnig NDM8701 Heledd Fychan
Cynnig bod y Senedd:
1. Yn nodi:
a) cyllideb Llywodraeth y DU sydd ar ddod; a
b) y sefyllfa cyllid cyhoeddus hynod heriol, gyda chyllideb Llywodraeth Cymru ar gyfer y flwyddyn ariannol bresennol gwerth £700 miliwn yn llai mewn termau real o'i gymharu â phan gafodd ei gosod gyntaf.
2. Yn gresynu fod Llywodraeth Lafur y DU wedi gwrthod:
a) darparu unrhyw gyllid canlyniadol i Gymru o brosiect HS2;
b) datganoli Ystâd y Goron yng Nghymru i sicrhau bod elw o'i hasedau yn mynd yn syth i gyllideb Cymru; ac
c) disodli fformiwla Barnett gyda fframwaith ariannu sy'n seiliedig ar anghenion.
3. Yn gresynu at fethiant y 'bartneriaeth o bŵer' rhwng Llywodraeth Lafur Cymru a Llywodraeth Lafur y DU i sicrhau buddion diriaethol i Gymru.
4. Yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i osod gofynion brys ar Lywodraeth Lafur y DU, ac i gyhoeddi'r ohebiaeth, gan ofyn i'r gyllideb gynnwys:
a) ailddosbarthu HS2 yn brosiect i Loegr yn unig;
b) ymrwymiad bod Cymru'n derbyn £4 biliwn o gyllid canlyniadol HS2, fel y mae Gweinidogion Llywodraeth Cymru ac Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru wedi galw amdano;
c) ymrwymiad i ddatganoli Ystâd y Goron cyn gynted â phosibl, gydag amserlenni perthnasol;
d) ymrwymiad i ddisodli fformiwla Barnett cyn gynted â phosibl, gydag amserlenni perthnasol;
e) ymrwymiad i adfer lwfans tanwydd y gaeaf i bensiynwyr; ac
f) ymrwymiad i gael gwared ar y cap budd-dal dau blentyn.
Motion NDM8701 Heledd Fychan
To propose that the Senedd:
1. Notes:
a) the upcoming UK Government budget; and
b) the acutely challenging state of public finances, with the Welsh Government budget for the current financial year worth £700 million less in real terms compared to when it was first set.
2. Regrets that the UK Labour Government has refused:
a) to provide Wales with any consequential funding from the HS2 project;
b) to devolve the Crown Estate in Wales to ensure that profit from its assets goes directly into the Welsh budget; and
c) to replace the Barnett formula with a needs-based funding framework.
3. Regrets the failure of the "partnership of power" between the Welsh Labour Government and the UK Labour Government to deliver tangible benefits for Wales.
4. Calls on the Welsh Government to make urgent representations to the UK Labour Government, and publish the communication, requesting that the budget contains:
a) the reclassifying of HS2 as an England-only project;
b) a commitment that Wales receives £4 billion of HS2 consequentials, as Welsh Government Ministers and the Secretary of State for Wales have called for;
c) a commitment to devolve the Crown Estate as soon as possible, with relevant timescales;
d) a commitment to replacing the Barnett formula as soon as possible, with relevant timescales;
e) a commitment to restoring the winter fuel allowance for pensioners; and
f) a commitment to disposing of the two-child benefit cap.
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
Pwrpas dadl heddiw ydy rhoi llais i’r Senedd hon o ran y gyllideb fydd yn cael ei chyflwyno'r wythnos nesaf gan Lywodraeth Lafur y Deyrnas Unedig. O ystyried y goblygiadau i Gymru, y Senedd hon a’r holl gyrff rydym yn eu hariannu, mae’n bwysig bod llais Cymru yn cael ei glywed yn glir, a dyna pam mae'r cynnig yn canolbwyntio ar bum gofyniad.
The purpose of today’s debate is to give this Senedd a voice in terms of the budget that will be presented next week by the UK Labour Government. Considering the implications for Wales, for the Senedd and for all of the bodies we fund, it’s important that Wales’s voice is clearly heard, which is why the motion today focuses on five asks.
In the run-up up to the general election, Wales was promised change. For years, we have heard Government Ministers in this Chamber say time and time again that once we had a Labour Government in Westminster, it would be different for Wales. To date, the so-called partnership in power has underdelivered for Wales, and we hope that by putting forward this motion, which demands fairness for Wales and fairness for the people of Wales, we as a Senedd can unite, and in some cases reaffirm demands we have previously, and across the party divide, agreed on.
In response to Rhun ap Iorwerth’s questions yesterday, the First Minister told us that she is having direct conversations with the UK Government and has stated that she’s made clear the priorities of the Welsh Government. But what are those priorities, because they seem very different now to what they were prior to the election? If we are to take that at face value and to look at what's in the Government amendment, they're vastly different. Take, for example, our first ask in the motion, relating to HS2, where we call for the reclassification of HS2 as an England-only project and that Wales receives the £4 billion HS2 consequential previously demanded by the Welsh Government as well as the now Secretary of State for Wales as recently as 2022. Now, the Government’s amendment waters down those previous demands and states that the Welsh Government is now requesting a commitment to further discussion about funding in relation to HS2. So, let’s break that down: a commitment to further discussion. I’d be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could clarify today if that is the ask from the Welsh Government in relation to HS2 in those direct conversations, and, if so, then why that ask has been diluted. After all, we previously heard from the Welsh Government that this funding was something Wales was plainly entitled to. Surely, as a Senedd, we should be united in reiterating calls we made to the previous UK Government in relation to this. Requesting a commitment to talk is not the same as demanding what is rightfully ours.
Our second ask is also one that the Welsh Government supported: a commitment to devolve the Crown Estate. This ask is missing from the Welsh Government’s amendment. Why? Do we take from this that the First Minister isn’t making that ask by now? After all, it is only a few months since the now Deputy First Minister said that he looked forward to a future Government of a different colour making sure that the benefits in Wales from Crown Estate assets are retained here within Wales. What’s changed? Do Welsh Labour no longer support this call, which would guarantee that profits from our wealth of natural resources go directly into the Welsh budget? And if you do, then why has it been deleted?
Yn y cyfnod cyn yr etholiad cyffredinol, addawyd newid i Gymru. Ers blynyddoedd, rydym wedi clywed Gweinidogion y Llywodraeth yn y Siambr hon yn dweud dro ar ôl tro, pan fyddai Llywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan, y byddai pethau'n wahanol i Gymru. Hyd yma, mae'r bartneriaeth honedig sydd mewn grym wedi tangyflawni dros Gymru, a thrwy gyflwyno'r cynnig hwn, sy'n mynnu tegwch i Gymru a thegwch i bobl Cymru, gobeithiwn y gallwn ni fel Senedd uno, ac mewn rhai achosion ailddatgan galwadau y gwnaethom gytuno arnynt o'r blaen, ac ar draws y rhaniadau rhwng pleidiau.
Mewn ymateb i gwestiynau Rhun ap Iorwerth ddoe, dywedodd y Prif Weinidog wrthym ei bod yn cael sgyrsiau uniongyrchol gyda Llywodraeth y DU ac mae wedi dweud ei bod wedi egluro blaenoriaethau Llywodraeth Cymru. Ond beth yw'r blaenoriaethau hynny, oherwydd maent yn ymddangos yn wahanol iawn nawr i'r hyn roeddent cyn yr etholiad? Os ydym am dderbyn hynny ar ei olwg ac edrych ar yr hyn sydd yng ngwelliant y Llywodraeth, maent yn wahanol iawn. Cymerwch, er enghraifft, ein gofyniad cyntaf yn y cynnig, sy'n ymwneud â HS2, lle rydym yn galw am ailddosbarthu HS2 fel prosiect i Loegr yn unig a bod Cymru'n derbyn swm canlyniadol HS2 gwerth £4 biliwn y galwyd amdano yn flaenorol gan Lywodraeth Cymru yn ogystal ag Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru mor ddiweddar â 2022. Nawr, mae gwelliant y Llywodraeth yn glastwreiddio'r gofynion blaenorol hynny ac yn nodi bod Llywodraeth Cymru bellach yn gofyn am ymrwymiad i drafodaeth bellach am gyllid mewn perthynas â HS2. Felly, gadewch inni edrych yn fanylach ar hynny: ymrwymiad i drafodaeth bellach. Buaswn yn ddiolchgar pe gallai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet egluro heddiw ai dyna y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn gofyn amdano mewn perthynas â HS2 yn y sgyrsiau uniongyrchol hynny, ac os felly, pam y mae'r cais hwnnw wedi'i lastwreiddio. Wedi'r cyfan, clywsom yn flaenorol gan Lywodraeth Cymru fod y cyllid hwn yn rhywbeth yr oedd gan Gymru hawl i'w gael. Yn sicr, fel Senedd, dylem fod yn unedig wrth ailadrodd galwadau a wnaethom i Lywodraeth flaenorol y DU mewn perthynas â hyn. Nid yw gofyn am ymrwymiad i siarad yr un fath â mynnu'r hyn y mae gennym hawl iddo.
Mae ein hail ofyniad hefyd yn un y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i gefnogi: ymrwymiad i ddatganoli Ystad y Goron. Mae'r gofyniad hwn ar goll o welliant Llywodraeth Cymru. Pam? A ydym yn cymryd felly nad yw'r Prif Weinidog yn gofyn am hynny bellach? Wedi'r cyfan, ychydig fisoedd sydd yna ers i'r Dirprwy Brif Weinidog nawr ddweud ei fod yn edrych ymlaen at Lywodraeth o liw gwahanol yn y dyfodol yn sicrhau bod y buddion yng Nghymru o asedau Ystad y Goron yn cael eu cadw yma yng Nghymru. Beth sydd wedi newid? Onid yw Llafur Cymru yn cefnogi'r alwad hon mwyach, galwad a fyddai'n gwarantu bod elw o'n cyfoeth o adnoddau naturiol yn mynd yn uniongyrchol i gyllideb Cymru? Ac os ydych, pam ei fod wedi cael ei ddileu?
A dyma ddod wedyn at ein trydydd galwad, sef ymrwymiad i ddisodli fformiwla Barnett cyn gynted â phosibl, gydag amserlenni perthnasol. Mae gwelliant y Torïaid yn cadw’r alwad hon, ond beth am welliant y Llywodraeth? Unwaith eto, dim cyfeiriad at ddiwygio fformiwla Barnett. Pam gwanhau y galwadau y buoch yn eu gwneud mor groch pan oedd plaid arall wrth y llyw yn San Steffan? Ond efallai na ddylem ni fod yn synnu at y gwelliant hwn, efo'r Prif Weinidog wedi cadarnhau mewn gohebiaeth ysgrifenedig gyda Rhun ap Iorwerth ei bod yn bwriadu gweithio am gymhwysiad teg o Barnett. Ond sut mae sicrhau tegwch o system sy’n sylfaenol ddim yn deg? Hyd yn oed ym mis Mai, fe bleidleisioch chi o blaid disodli Barnett yn y Senedd hon; beth sydd wedi newid ers hynny?
Pan ddaw at ein pedwerydd a'n pumed galwad, sef ymrwymiad i adfer y lwfans tanwydd gaeaf i bensiynwyr a chael ymrwymiad i gael gwared ar y cap budd-dal dau blentyn, unwaith eto wedi eu dileu o welliant y Llywodraeth. Pam? O ran y cap budd-dal dau blentyn, rhywbeth y mae Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyfiawnder Cymdeithasol wedi ei alw’n frad cywilyddus ar y 30 y cant o blant Cymru sy’n byw mewn tlodi ar hyn o bryd, pam eich bod bellach mor dawedog?
Ac mae’r un peth yn wir o ran dileu y lwfans tanwydd gaeaf. Pe byddai’r Llywodraeth flaenorol yn San Steffan wedi gwneud hyn, mi fyddech chi wedi bod yn gweiddi’n groch ynglŷn â chreulondeb y polisi. Pam yr amharodrwydd i godi llais dros y rhai rydyn ni’n eu cynrychioli yma? Fel rhybuddiodd Comisiynydd Pobl Hŷn Cymru, bydd hyn yn arwain at rai o’n hetholwyr yn marw. Ond eto, nid yw hyn yn un o’ch galwadau.
And that then brings us to our third ask, namely a commitment to replace the Barnett formula as soon as possible, along with the relevant timetable. The Conservative amendment retains this demand, but what of the Government amendment? Once again, no reference made to reforming the Barnett formula. And why water down the calls that you made so robustly when another party was at the helm in Westminster? But perhaps we shouldn't be surprised by this amendment, with the First Minister having confirmed in written correspondence to Rhun ap Iorwerth that she intends to work towards a fair application of Barnett. But how can we deliver fairness through a system that is fundamentally unfair? Even in May, you voted in favour of replacing the Barnett formula in the Senedd; what's happened since then?
And when it comes to our fourth and fifth asks, namely a commitment to restore the winter fuel allowance for pensioners and a commitment to abolish the two-child benefit cap, once again these have been deleted by the Government's amendment. Why? In terms of the two-child benefit cap, something that the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice has described as a shameful betrayal of the 30 per cent of children in Wales who currently live in poverty, why are you now so quiet on this point?
And the same is true in terms of abolishing the winter fuel allowance. If it was the previous Westminster Government doing this, you would have been unstinting in calling out the cruelty of this policy. So, why this unwillingness to speak out for the people we represent here? As the Older People’s Commissioner for Wales warned, this will lead to some of our constituents dying. But again, this isn't one of your asks.
Wales has been shortchanged by Westminster and we can see the direct impact of this on our public services and on the people of Wales. As a Senedd, it is our duty to work cross-party and stand up for those we represent by demanding the funding owed to us, irrespective of which party is in power in Westminster. This isn't about party politics; it's about putting people before party, and ensuring we have the resources needed to do our job here in Wales. And whilst Labour used to be united with both Plaid Cymru and the Liberal Democrats in opposing austerity, why are you now allowing the UK Labour Government to continue with austerity?
So, I urge those Labour backbenchers who have been vocal in supporting the demands of our motion previously to stand up today, so that this Senedd can send a clear message to Westminster about what we want to see next week's budget delivering for Wales. Putting out messages on social media or writing articles for Nation.Cymru outlining your opposition to cuts to winter fuel payments and so on is meaningless if you then proceed in this Chamber to vote down motions that oppose them.
I look forward to the debate and hope that all Members read in detail the motions put forward, as well as both amendments, and vote according to their values and with the people of Wales in mind, by supporting our motion today as it is and without being amended.
Mae Cymru wedi cael cam gan San Steffan a gallwn weld effaith uniongyrchol hyn ar ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus ac ar bobl Cymru. Fel Senedd, mae'n ddyletswydd arnom i weithio'n drawsbleidiol a sefyll dros y rhai a gynrychiolwn drwy fynnu cyllid sy'n ddyledus i ni, pa bynnag blaid sydd mewn grym yn San Steffan. Nid gwleidyddiaeth plaid yw hyn; mae'n ymwneud â rhoi pobl o flaen plaid, a sicrhau bod gennym yr adnoddau sydd eu hangen i wneud ein gwaith yma yng Nghymru. Ac er bod Llafur yn arfer bod yn unedig gyda Phlaid Cymru a'r Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol wrth wrthwynebu cyni, pam rydych chi bellach yn caniatáu i Lywodraeth Lafur y DU barhau â chyni?
Felly, rwy'n annog y meinciau cefn Llafur sydd wedi galw'n glir am gefnogi galwadau ein cynnig yn flaenorol i sefyll heddiw, fel y gall y Senedd hon anfon neges glir i San Steffan ynglŷn â'r hyn rydym am weld cyllideb yr wythnos nesaf yn ei ddarparu i Gymru. Mae rhoi negeseuon ar y cyfryngau cymdeithasol neu ysgrifennu erthyglau i Nation.Cymru yn amlinellu eich gwrthwynebiad i doriadau i daliadau tanwydd y gaeaf ac yn y blaen yn ddiystyr os ydych chi wedyn yn bwrw ymlaen yn y Siambr hon i bleidleisio yn erbyn cynigion sy'n eu gwrthwynebu.
Edrychaf ymlaen at y ddadl a gobeithio y bydd pob Aelod yn darllen y cynigion a gyflwynwyd yn fanwl, yn ogystal â'r ddau welliant, ac yn pleidleisio yn unol â'u gwerthoedd a chyda phobl Cymru mewn cof, drwy gefnogi ein cynnig heddiw fel y mae a heb ei ddiwygio.
Rwyf wedi dethol y ddau welliant i'r cynnig. Os derbynnir gwelliant 1, caiff gwelliant 2 ei ddad-ddethol, a galwaf ar Peter Fox i gynnig gwelliant 1 a gyflwynwyd yn enw Darren Millar.
I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected, and I call on Peter Fox to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar.
Gwelliant 1—Darren Millar
Dileu'r cyfan a rhoi yn ei le:
Cynnig bod y Senedd:
1. Yn nodi cyllideb Llywodraeth y DU sydd ar ddod.
2 Yn gresynu fod Llywodraeth Lafur y DU wedi gwrthod:
a) dileu'r toriad mewn taliadau tanwydd gaeaf, a fydd yn gweld tua 400,000 o aelwydydd yng Nghymru yn colli hyd at £300 y pen;
b) diystyru unrhyw gynnydd i gyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol;
c) sicrhau bod Cymru'n derbyn ei symiau canlyniadol o HS2;
d) ariannu'r gwaith o drydaneiddio prif reilffordd Gogledd Cymru; ac
e) cyflwyno trefniant ariannu newydd i Gymru i ddisodli'r fformiwla Barnett hen ffasiwn.
3. Yn galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i osod gofynion brys ar Lywodraeth Lafur y DU, ac i gyhoeddi’r ohebiaeth, gan ofyn i'r gyllideb gynnwys cynlluniau i:
a) dileu toriad taliadau tanwydd y gaeaf;
b) sicrhau nad oes cynnydd i gyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol;
c) galluogi Cymru i dderbyn ei chyfran deg o gyllid canlyniadol HS2;
d) trydaneiddio prif reilffordd Gogledd Cymru; ac
e) dileu'r fformiwla Barnett hen ffasiwn a'i ddisodli â fformiwla ariannu newydd yn seiliedig ar anghenion, sy'n deg, yn dryloyw ac yn darparu ar gyfer pobl Cymru.
Amendment 1—Darren Millar
Delete all and replace with:
To propose that the Senedd:
1. Notes the upcoming UK Government budget.
2 Regrets that the UK Labour Government has refused to:
a) scrap the winter fuel payment cut, which will see around 400,000 households in Wales lose up to £300 per person;
b) rule out any increase to national insurance contributions;
c) ensure Wales receives its consequentials from HS2;
d) fund the electrification of the North Wales main line; and
e) introduce a new funding arrangement for Wales to replace the outdated Barnett formula.
3. Calls on the Welsh Government to make urgent representations to the UK Labour Government, and publish the communication, requesting that the budget contains plans to:
a) scrap the winter fuel payment cut;
b) ensure there is no increase to national insurance contributions;
c) enable Wales to receive its fair share of HS2 consequentials;
d) electrify the North Wales main line; and
e) scrap the outdated Barnett formula and replace it with a new needs-based funding formula that is fair, transparent and delivers for the people of Wales.
Cynigiwyd gwelliant 1.
Amendment 1 moved.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Yes, and I move the amendment in the name of Darren Millar. I want to begin by saying there is much I agree with in this motion. It is clear that Labour in Westminster and Labour here in Wales are not working for the people of Wales. However, there are a couple of elements—or certainly one element—within the motion that we don't agree with, and that's the devolution of the Crown Estate. Wales is on the cusp of being a global leader in the renewable energy sector and has so much potential, devolving that responsibility would simply throw this into doubt, and it would not be in the best interests of Wales at this time. Next week—[Interruption.] Well, that's our position. [Interruption.] Because it's our position. [Interruption.]
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Ie, ac rwy'n cynnig y gwelliant yn enw Darren Millar. Rwyf am ddechrau drwy ddweud bod llawer rwy'n cytuno ag ef yn y cynnig hwn. Mae'n amlwg nad yw Llafur yn San Steffan a Llafur yma yng Nghymru yn gweithio dros bobl Cymru. Fodd bynnag, mae yna un neu ddwy o elfennau—neu un elfen yn sicr—o fewn y cynnig nad ydym yn cytuno ag ef, sef datganoli Ystad y Goron. Mae Cymru ar fin bod yn arweinydd byd-eang yn y sector ynni adnewyddadwy ac mae ganddi gymaint o botensial, a byddai datganoli'r cyfrifoldeb hwnnw'n creu amheuaeth ynghylch hyn, ac ni fyddai hynny er lles gorau Cymru ar hyn o bryd. Yr wythnos nesaf—[Torri ar draws.] Wel, dyna yw ein safbwynt. [Torri ar draws.] Am mai dyna yw ein safbwynt. [Torri ar draws.]
We don't know why.
Nid ydym yn gwybod pam.
It is our position.
Dyna yw ein safbwynt.
The Member has given an answer.
Mae'r Aelod wedi rhoi ateb.
It's not a very good one, is it? Come on.
Nid yw'n un da iawn. Dewch, wir.
And it's the Member's choice.
A dyna ddewis yr Aelod.
It's our position. [Interruption.] That's right.
So, next week, we finally get to see the long-awaited budget from this new Labour Government in Westminster. I would like to say I'm hopeful, but it really seems that this is set to follow in the incredibly disappointing footsteps of the first 100 days of Labour. We have seen nothing but spin, deception and u-turns from Labour Ministers in Westminster, and sadly their colleagues here in the Senedd seem to be jumping into line.
The older people's commissioner has said that the axing of the winter fuel payments could lead to 4,000 excess deaths. Why are Labour Ministers here not up in arms about this? As Heledd pointed out, I guarantee that if it was the Conservatives who were taking this measure, they would be bouncing up and down, shouting at us constantly.
Sadly, it looks like the Chancellor is set to break a manifesto promise next week by raising national insurance on employers. And I want to be clear: this is a breaking of their manifesto promise. It's not just me who is saying this, but the director of the Institute of Fiscal Studies, and the Federation of Small Businesses have said so as well. This breaking of a promise is going to have a profound impact on businesses and taxpayers here in Wales. When it comes to the public sector alone, if national insurance on employers were to rise by just 1 per cent, then the bill for local authorities as employers of some 140,000 people would be set to rise by tens of millions on top of the current eye-watering £540 million-worth of pressures that they currently face. As shadow Chancellor, Rachel Reeves argued that the national insurance on businesses will
'make each new recruit more expensive and increase the costs to business'.
She went on to say that national insurance contributions from employers and workers
'takes money out of people’s pockets'.
Labour Ministers here in Cardiff Bay and Westminster both say they want to see economic growth, yet businesses here in Wales pay the highest levels of non-domestic rates and will now have to pay more tax on hiring employees. If this is what Labour thinks is the best way to get economic growth, then I despair.
This isn't the only case of Labour MPs performing a u-turn following an election. Before coming into power, as we've heard already today, the shadow Welsh Secretary argued that Wales was owed billions of pounds from HS2 and then changed her position with ministerial resistance from Labour Ministers here too. We used to hear from Labour Members, shouting about the billions that were owed, but now the same voices seem to be happy to settle for comparative pennies, simply because their colleagues down the M4 are now in power.
So, how is all of this standing up for the people of Wales? Llywydd, next week is set to be a hard budget for people across Wales, and we urgently need Labour MPs and Members here to stand up to their leadership in Westminster. We urgently need to see the winter fuel payments reinstated, ensuring no pensioners die because of Labour's choices. Our businesses need Labour to rule out any increase in national insurance, stunting growth and keeping unemployment high. We also want to see the replacement of the outdated Barnett formula, and we must see Wales receiving its fair share of the HS2 consequentials and for Ministers here not to settle for less. We also want to see the electrification of the north Wales main line. Dirprwy Lywydd—
Dyna yw ein safbwynt. [Torri ar draws.] Dyna ni.
Felly, yr wythnos nesaf, rydym o'r diwedd yn mynd i gael gweld y gyllideb hirddisgwyliedig gan y Llywodraeth Lafur newydd hon yn San Steffan. Hoffwn ddweud fy mod yn obeithiol, ond mae'n ymddangos y bydd yn dilyn ôl troed hynod siomedig 100 diwrnod cyntaf Llafur. Nid ydym wedi gweld dim ond sbin, twyll a throeon pedol gan Weinidogion Llafur yn San Steffan, ac yn anffodus, ymddengys bod eu cymheiriaid yma yn y Senedd yn eu dilyn ar hynny.
Mae'r comisiynydd pobl hŷn wedi dweud y gallai dileu taliadau tanwydd y gaeaf arwain at 4,000 o farwolaethau ychwanegol. Pam nad yw Gweinidogion Llafur yma yn gandryll ynglŷn â hyn? Fel y nododd Heledd, rwy'n berffaith siŵr, pe bai'r Ceidwadwyr yn gwneud hyn, y byddent yn bownsio i fyny ac i lawr, ac yn gweiddi arnom yn ddiddiwedd.
Yn anffodus, mae'n edrych yn debyg y bydd y Canghellor yn torri addewid maniffesto yr wythnos nesaf drwy godi yswiriant gwladol ar gyflogwyr. Ac rwyf am fod yn glir: maent yn torri eu haddewid maniffesto. Nid fi yn unig sy'n dweud hyn, mae cyfarwyddwr y Sefydliad Astudiaethau Cyllid, a Ffederasiwn y Busnesau Bach wedi dweud hynny hefyd. Mae torri'r addewid hwn yn mynd i gael effaith ddofn ar fusnesau a threthdalwyr yma yng Nghymru. O ran y sector cyhoeddus yn unig, pe bai yswiriant gwladol ar gyflogwyr yn codi 1 y cant yn unig, byddai'r bil i awdurdodau lleol fel cyflogwyr oddeutu 140,000 o bobl yn codi degau o filiynau ar ben y pwysau enfawr cyfredol gwerth £540 miliwn sy'n eu hwynebu ar hyn o bryd. Pan oedd yn Ganghellor yr wrthblaid, dadleuodd Rachel Reeves y bydd yr yswiriant gwladol ar fusnesau
'yn gwneud pob gweithiwr newydd yn ddrytach ac yn cynyddu'r costau i fusnesau'.
Aeth ymlaen i ddweud bod cyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol gan gyflogwyr a gweithwyr
'yn mynd ag arian o bocedi pobl'.
Mae gweinidogion Llafur yma ym Mae Caerdydd a San Steffan fel ei gilydd yn dweud eu bod am weld twf economaidd, ac eto mae busnesau yma yng Nghymru yn talu'r lefelau uchaf o ardrethi annomestig a bydd yn rhaid iddynt dalu mwy o dreth ar gyflogi gweithwyr nawr. Os mai dyma mae Llafur yn ei feddwl yw'r ffordd orau o gael twf economaidd, rwy'n anobeithio.
Nid dyma'r unig achos o ASau Llafur yn gwneud tro pedol yn dilyn etholiad. Cyn dod i rym, fel y clywsom heddiw yn barod, dadleuodd Ysgrifennydd Cymru yr wrthblaid fod biliynau o bunnoedd yn ddyledus i Gymru o HS2 a newidiodd ei safbwynt yn sgil gwrthwynebiad gweinidogol gan Weinidogion Llafur yma hefyd. Roeddem yn arfer clywed Aelodau Llafur yn gweiddi am y biliynau a oedd yn ddyledus, ond nawr mae'n ymddangos bod yr un lleisiau yn hapus i fodloni ar geiniogau cymharol, a hynny am fod eu cymheiriaid ar ben arall yr M4 mewn grym bellach.
Felly, sut y mae hyn i gyd yn sefyll dros bobl Cymru? Lywydd, bydd yr wythnos nesaf yn gyllideb galed i bobl ledled Cymru, ac mae gwir angen i ASau ac Aelodau Llafur yma sefyll yn erbyn eu harweinyddion yn San Steffan. Mae angen inni weld taliadau tanwydd y gaeaf yn cael eu hadfer ar frys, gan sicrhau nad oes unrhyw bensiynwyr yn marw oherwydd dewisiadau Llafur. Mae ein busnesau angen i Lafur ddiystyru unrhyw gynnydd i yswiriant gwladol, a fydd yn crebachu twf ac yn cadw diweithdra'n uchel. Hefyd, rydym am weld y fformiwla Barnett sydd wedi dyddio yn cael ei disodli, a rhaid inni weld Cymru'n cael ei chyfran deg o symiau canlyniadol HS2 ac i Weinidogion yma beidio â bodloni ar lai. Rydym hefyd am weld trydaneiddio prif reilffordd gogledd Cymru. Ddirprwy Lywydd—
Will you take an intervention?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad?
Sorry, yes, I will.
Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, fe wnaf.
Just briefly, I agree with many of the points that you're making on rail, but the first railway lines were electrified in the UK in the late nineteenth century. Do you agree with me that successive Labour and Conservative Governments have failed Wales over rail?
Yn fyr, rwy'n cytuno â llawer o'r pwyntiau rydych chi'n eu gwneud ar y rheilffyrdd, ond cafodd y rheilffyrdd cyntaf eu trydaneiddio yn y DU ar ddiwedd y bedwaredd ganrif ar bymtheg. A ydych chi'n cytuno bod Llywodraethau Llafur a Cheidwadol olynol wedi gwneud cam â Chymru dros y rheilffyrdd?
I've just forgotten your question.
Rwyf newydd anghofio eich cwestiwn.
Rail—
Rheilffyrdd—
Rail.
Rheilffyrdd.
Underinvestment in rail.
Tanfuddsoddiad yn y rheilffyrdd.
You haven't much time left—
Nid oes gennych lawer o amser ar ôl—
No, I haven't got any time left. But, clearly, we do want to see that. I can't make excuses for what's gone on before, but what we need to see in the future is that main line electrified, and that's one thing we will be asking for. Dirprwy Lywydd, it is the responsibility of elected representatives here to stand up for the people of Wales, and it is what I and my colleagues are doing on these benches. We now need Labour Members and Labour MPs to do the same. Diolch.
Na, nid oes gennyf amser ar ôl. Ond yn amlwg, rydym am weld hynny. Ni allaf wneud esgusodion dros yr hyn sydd wedi digwydd o'r blaen, ond yr hyn sydd angen inni ei weld yn y dyfodol yw'r brif reilffordd honno wedi'i thrydaneiddio, a dyna un peth y byddwn yn gofyn amdano. Ddirprwy Lywydd, cyfrifoldeb cynrychiolwyr etholedig yma yw sefyll dros bobl Cymru, a dyna beth rwyf i a fy nghyd-Aelodau'n ei wneud ar y meinciau hyn. Nawr mae angen i Aelodau Llafur ac ASau Llafur wneud yr un peth. Diolch.
Dwi'n galw ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyllid a’r Gymraeg i gynnig yn ffurfiol welliant 2, a gyflwynwyd yn enw Jane Hutt.
I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language to move formally amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.
Gwelliant 2—Jane Hutt
Dileu pwyntiau 2, 3 a 4 a rhoi yn eu lle:
Yn sylweddoli bod y sefyllfa ariannol a etifeddodd Llywodraeth Lafur y DU gan Lywodraeth flaenorol y DU yn un hynod heriol.
Yn cydnabod bod ethol Llywodraeth newydd y DU yn gyfle i ailosod a gwella’r berthynas rynglywodraethol.
Yn nodi mai blaenoriaethau Llywodraeth Cymru ar gyfer cyllideb Llywodraeth y DU yn yr hydref yw:
a) cynnydd mewn gwariant adnoddau a chyfalaf uwchlaw’r lefel a bennwyd gan Lywodraeth flaenorol y DU;
b) hyblygrwydd cyllidebol ychwanegol;
c) rhaglen fuddsoddi ar y cyd i fynd i'r afael â diogelwch tomenni glo; a
d) ymrwymiad i ragor o drafodaethau am gyllid mewn perthynas â HS2, ac am fuddsoddi yn y seilwaith rheilffyrdd yn y dyfodol.
Amendment 2—Jane Hutt
Delete points 2, 3 and 4 and replace with:
Recognises the financial position the UK Labour Government inherited from the previous UK Government is extremely challenging.
Acknowledges the election of the new UK Government is an opportunity to reset and improve inter-governmental relationships.
Notes the Welsh Government’s priorities for the UK Government autumn budget are:
a) increases in resource and capital spending over and above the level set by the previous UK Government;
b) additional budget flexibilities;
c) a joint programme of investment to address coal tips safety; and
d) a commitment to further discussions about funding in relation to HS2, and future rail infrastructure investment.
Cynigiwyd gwelliant 2.
Amendment 2 moved.
Yn ffurfiol.
Formally.
It shouldn't be a surprise to see that in the motion we have yet again called for the devolution of the Crown Estate. For anyone elected to the Senedd, I find it hard to understand how you would argue against control over the wealth potential here in Wales. Surely it is our role to ensure that profits from resources in Wales benefit the people of Wales, not just the UK Government and the monarchy. This is a matter of natural justice, a matter of fairness predicated on a fundamental principle that those who produce the wealth should also benefit from that wealth. It's long overdue for us to have control over the wealth generated from our wind, from our seas and our land, because currently the Crown Estate's assets in Wales generate hundreds of millions in revenue annually, yet none of that wealth actually stays in Wales, instead it flows directly into the UK Treasury, with a cosy 25 per cent of the profit set aside, by the way, for the reigning monarch, including a 10 per cent uplift to refurbish Buckingham Palace—by the way, at a time when we know that our social housing stock in Wales is in desperate need of retrofitting.
In 2007, the Crown Estate assets in Wales were valued at £21.1 million. Fast forward to 2023-24 and that figure has soared to over £853 million, largely driven by offshore wind and marine energy. An independent study also revealed that the Crown Estate's planned 4.5 GW offshore wind project in the Celtic sea alone could generate £1.4 billion in gross value added and create 5,300 jobs. Yet, unless action is taken, the bulk of that economic benefit will bypass Wales entirely, just as it did during the era of coal. It really is, I think, a sad reality that Wales has been treated as little more than a resource provider for centuries. It really is, I think, a sad reality that we're still debating and calling for parity with Scotland. You know, it's good enough for the Scots, but it's not good enough for the Welsh. And this extractive model has failed to benefit the Welsh economy and our communities, and—
Ni ddylai fod yn syndod ein bod wedi galw unwaith eto yn y cynnig am ddatganoli Ystad y Goron. I unrhyw un a etholwyd i'r Senedd, mae'n anodd deall sut y byddech chi'n dadlau yn erbyn rheolaeth dros y potensial cyfoeth yma yng Nghymru. Ein rôl ni yw sicrhau bod elw o adnoddau yng Nghymru yn creu budd i bobl Cymru, nid i Lywodraeth y DU a'r frenhiniaeth yn unig. Mae hwn yn fater o gyfiawnder naturiol, mater o degwch sy'n seiliedig ar egwyddor sylfaenol y dylai'r rhai sy'n cynhyrchu'r cyfoeth elwa ar y cyfoeth hwnnw hefyd. Mae'n hen bryd i ni gael rheolaeth dros y cyfoeth a gynhyrchir o'n gwynt, o'n moroedd a'n tir, oherwydd ar hyn o bryd mae asedau Ystad y Goron yng Nghymru yn cynhyrchu cannoedd o filiynau mewn refeniw bob blwyddyn, ond eto nid oes dim o'r cyfoeth hwnnw'n aros yng Nghymru, ac yn lle hynny mae'n llifo'n uniongyrchol i mewn i Drysorlys y DU, gyda 25 y cant o'r elw wedi'i neilltuo i'r sawl sy'n teyrnasu, gan gynnwys codiad o 10 y cant i adnewyddu Palas Buckingham—ar adeg, gyda llaw, pan wyddom fod gwir angen ôl-osod ein stoc tai cymdeithasol yng Nghymru.
Yn 2007, gwerth asedau Ystad y Goron yng Nghymru oedd £21.1 miliwn. Symudwch ymlaen at 2023-24 ac mae'r ffigur hwnnw wedi codi i dros £853 miliwn, wedi'i ysgogi'n bennaf gan ynni gwynt ar y môr ac ynni morol. Dangosodd astudiaeth annibynnol hefyd y gallai prosiect gwynt ar y môr 4.5 GW arfaethedig Ystad y Goron yn y môr Celtaidd yn unig gynhyrchu £1.4 biliwn mewn gwerth ychwanegol gros a chreu 5,300 o swyddi. Ac eto, oni bai bod camau'n cael eu cymryd, bydd Cymru'n cael ei hamddifadu'n llwyr o'r rhan fwyaf o'r budd economaidd hwnnw, yn union fel y câi yn ystod oes y glo. Mae'n realiti trist fod Cymru wedi cael ei thrin fel fawr mwy na darparwr adnoddau ers canrifoedd. Mae'n realiti trist ein bod yn dal i ddadlau ac yn galw am gydraddoldeb â'r Alban. Wyddoch chi, mae'n ddigon da i'r Albanwyr, ond nid yw'n ddigon da i'r Cymry. Ac mae'r model echdynnol hwn wedi methu bod o fudd i economi Cymru a'n cymunedau, a—
Will you take an intervention?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad?
Yes, of course.
Gwnaf, wrth gwrs.
Do you recognise that the Crown Estate, managed by the Scottish Government, has been massively undersold, and Audit Scotland pointed to the billions of pounds that the Scottish Government is missing out on in revenue, because they just weren't capable of being able to auction the rights of the seabed and maximise their value? I think they put a value, over the lifetime of the licences, of £60 billion.
A ydych chi'n cydnabod bod Ystad y Goron a reolir gan Lywodraeth yr Alban wedi cael ei gwerthu am lawer llai na'i gwerth, a bod Audit Scotland wedi cyfeirio at y biliynau o bunnoedd y mae Llywodraeth yr Alban yn eu colli mewn refeniw am nad oeddent yn gallu arwerthu hawliau gwely'r môr a gwneud y mwyaf o'u gwerth? Rwy'n credu eu bod wedi dweud mai £60 biliwn yw eu gwerth dros oes y trwyddedau.
Well, I think that's a question more for the Scottish Government than what we would be doing in terms of the Welsh Government. The Welsh Government could make its own decisions, separate to what the Scottish Government has done, so I really think that's a question for the Scottish Government there.
I mean, look, let's be totally honest here, the renewable energy potential in the Crown Estate is substantial. A renewable-based energy system over which Wales exercises full control would allow us to decarbonise our power, our industries, our heating and transport, whilst supporting the development of local infrastructure, supply chains and jobs. It is a fundamental step towards a green future, but also towards a future where the wealth generated by our natural resources stays in Wales, to benefit its people.
I think we do also need to touch on an issue caused by this UK Labour Government. The Crown Estate's recent partnership with the proposed Great British Energy has done little to quell concerns about extractivism. In fact, it threatens to deepen the problem with the Crown Estate profiting from leasing Welsh lands and sea for offshore wind, while the economic returns are siphoned away to benefit other parts of the UK. The National Infrastructure Commission for Wales described the current situation perfectly: a transfer of wealth from Wales to England with
'no guarantee that Wales receives an equivalent amount back.'
The revenue generated by the Crown Estate activities in Wales must be invested back into Wales. That should be the bottom line for any Welsh Government, and this is why Plaid Cymru proposes the establishment of a Welsh sovereign wealth fund, ensuring that the profits from the renewable energy sector and renewable energy projects in Wales's waters are reinvested for the long-term benefit of the Welsh people. But the opposite is being proposed by the UK Government, with seemingly little resistance on this side of the M4.
Dirprwy Lywydd, the economic prize is far greater than what is currently on offer. The devolution of the Crown Estate is not just a step towards a more prosperous Wales, it's a step towards a fairer and more just Wales, where the wealth of our land and seas is finally put to work for the people of this nation. Now, this is an opportunity before us and it's one we must seize.
Wel, rwy'n credu bod hwnnw'n fwy o gwestiwn i Lywodraeth yr Alban na'r hyn y byddem ni'n ei wneud o ran Llywodraeth Cymru. Gallai Llywodraeth Cymru wneud ei phenderfyniadau ei hun ar wahân i'r hyn y mae Llywodraeth yr Alban wedi'i wneud, felly rwy'n credu mai cwestiwn i Lywodraeth yr Alban yw hwnnw.
Hynny yw, edrychwch, gadewch inni fod yn hollol onest yma, mae'r potensial ynni adnewyddadwy yn Ystad y Goron yn sylweddol. Byddai system ynni adnewyddadwy wedi ei rheoli'n llawn gan Gymru yn ein galluogi i ddatgarboneiddio ein pŵer, ein diwydiannau, ein gwres a'n trafnidiaeth, gan gefnogi datblygiad seilwaith lleol, cadwyni cyflenwi a swyddi ar yr un pryd. Mae'n gam sylfaenol tuag at ddyfodol gwyrdd, ond hefyd tuag at ddyfodol lle mae'r cyfoeth a gynhyrchir gan ein hadnoddau naturiol yn aros yng Nghymru, er budd ei phobl.
Rwy'n credu hefyd fod angen inni grybwyll problem a achoswyd gan y Llywodraeth Lafur hon yn y DU. Nid yw partneriaeth ddiweddar Ystad y Goron â'r Great British Energy arfaethedig wedi gwneud fawr ddim i dawelu pryderon am ddiwydiant echdynnol. Mewn gwirionedd, mae'n bygwth dyfnhau'r broblem gydag Ystad y Goron yn elwa o brydlesu tiroedd a môr Cymru ar gyfer gwynt ar y môr, tra bod yr enillion economaidd yn cael eu sugno ymaith i fod o fudd i rannau eraill o'r DU. Disgrifiodd Comisiwn Seilwaith Cenedlaethol Cymru y sefyllfa bresennol yn berffaith: trosglwyddiad cyfoeth o Gymru i Loegr ac
'nid oes sicrwydd bod Cymru’n cael swm cyfatebol yn ôl.'
Rhaid buddsoddi'r refeniw a gynhyrchir gan weithgareddau Ystad y Goron yng Nghymru yn ôl i Gymru. Dylai honno fod yn llinell waelod i unrhyw Lywodraeth Cymru, a dyma pam y mae Plaid Cymru yn argymell y dylid sefydlu cronfa gyfoeth sofran Gymreig, gan sicrhau bod yr elw o'r sector ynni adnewyddadwy a phrosiectau ynni adnewyddadwy yn nyfroedd Cymru yn cael ei ailfuddsoddi er budd hirdymor pobl Cymru. Ond y gwrthwyneb sy'n cael ei gynnig gan Lywodraeth y DU, heb fawr iawn o wrthwynebiad ar yr ochr hon i'r M4 yn ôl pob golwg.
Ddirprwy Lywydd, mae'r wobr economaidd yn llawer mwy na'r hyn sydd ar gael ar hyn o bryd. Nid cam tuag at Gymru fwy ffyniannus yn unig yw datganoli Ystad y Goron, mae'n gam tuag at Gymru decach a mwy cyfiawn, lle mae cyfoeth ein tir a'n moroedd yn cael ei roi o'r diwedd i weithio dros bobl y genedl hon. Nawr, mae hwn yn gyfle y mae'n rhaid inni ei fachu.
A commitment to devolve the Crown Estate as soon as possible, with relevant timescales, will not generate any extra money. It will come off the block grant. How do I know that? This is what happened when income tax was partially devolved and when stamp duty and landfill taxes were devolved. I actually support the devolution of the Crown Estate, because there are many good reasons why it would benefit Wales, but I do not believe that it would bring any additional money—
Ni fydd ymrwymiad i ddatganoli Ystad y Goron cyn gynted â phosibl, gydag amserlenni perthnasol, yn cynhyrchu unrhyw arian ychwanegol. Bydd yn dod oddi ar y grant bloc. Sut y gwn i hynny? Dyma a ddigwyddodd pan gafodd treth incwm ei datganoli'n rhannol a phan ddatganolwyd treth stamp a threth tirlenwi. Rwy'n cefnogi datganoli Ystad y Goron mewn gwirionedd, oherwydd mae yna lawer o resymau da pam y byddai o fudd i Gymru, ond nid wyf yn credu y byddai'n dod ag unrhyw arian ychwanegol—
Will you take an intervention?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad?
Please.
Os gwelwch yn dda.
To me, it's not about the money going to London now coming to Wales, it's about us making more use of the potential that we have in our resources.
I mi, nid yw'n ymwneud â'r arian sy'n mynd i Lundain yn dod i Gymru, mae'n ymwneud â ni'n gwneud mwy o ddefnydd o'r potensial sydd gennym yn ein hadnoddau.
That's quite interesting. I'm not quite sure how it takes us any iota further forward. I mean, the point is that it would come off the block grant. I actually support it coming to Wales, because there are things we can do with it, but I don't think that money is one of them.
HS2 is an England-only project; there's no rational argument to describe it as an England-and-Wales project. It goes between London and Birmingham. Any future expenditure on HS2 should generate a Barnett consequential. Wales should get its share of the expenditure. Unfortunately, it’s a Treasury decision. As we go forward, we need a mechanism to allow arbitration on expenditure such as HS2. The same happened with the London Olympics—the clue is in the name. This was a regeneration project in east London, and we should have had a Barnett consequential from it. We did get some, but it amounted to about 2.5 per cent of what we should have got.
The Barnett formula is a mechanism used by the Treasury to automatically adjust the amount of public expenditure allocated in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales to reflect changes in spending levels allocated to public services in England. The formula applies to a large proportion but not the whole of the devolved Governments’ budgets. The city and regional deals in Wales, for example, are outside the formula. Northern Ireland has regularly got additional money beyond its Barnett consequentials. Barnett is the minimum, it’s not the maximum. The Barnett formula has no legal standing and the convention can be changed by the Treasury at any time. There’s been near-universal opposition to the Barnett formula as a means of determining annual increases.
There are three ways of changing it. The Scottish National Party proposed full fiscal autonomy for Scotland, which would end up giving the Scottish Parliament full control of Scottish taxation. The results would have been a reversal in the current funding, with the Scottish Parliament paying the UK Government a grant to cover the Scottish share of reserved issues spending. This option was rejected by the UK Government. Do Plaid Cymru support this option for Wales? I take that to be a ‘no’.
Another way would be to give Wales its population share of the expenditure in devolved areas. This would also have a catastrophic effect on the Welsh budget. In 2009, the House of Lords Select Committee on the Barnett Formula concluded it should no longer be used to determine annual increases in the block grant for the United Kingdom’s devolved administrations. A new system that allocates resources to the devolved administrations based on explicit assessment of their relative needs should be introduced. Who could disagree with that?
From 2018, a new needs-based factor was included in the Barnett formula to determine changes to Welsh Government grant funding in relation to spending. It’s possible to produce a needs-based formula. The local government formula is a needs-based formula, but it’s not without controversy and opposition to it. The formula is exceedingly long and complicated, and everybody thinks they’re being done down by it.
How do you, in the formula, decide weightings for sparsity, poverty and age? Work needs to start on this now. Whilst most will be driven by population and population change, as is currently done with the local government formula, items such as sparsity of population, cost of travel, unemployment rates, health, age, distribution of the population, road length, recorded crimes, numbers of substandard dwellings and age weighting will need to be built into the formula. I could go on, but I don’t think anybody would want me to.
Once the formula is created, it can be updated each year and updated as necessary with changes in weightings. There is no guarantee that Wales would do better with a needs-based formula than it does under the current Barnett formula with the Barnett floor. This is a question to Plaid Cymru: is Wales a rich nation, as promoted by a former Plaid Cymru Senedd candidate, that does not need financial support, or is it a nation that currently needs financial support? ‘Just give us our population share’ would be the answer, wouldn’t it? We don’t need additional support. Are Plaid Cymru arguing that?
I think we need to have a system where we talk seriously about the future of a needs-based formula. But the needs-based formula is going to be awfully complicated, and it will generate an awful lot of disagreement on what the needs are.
Mae hynny'n eithaf diddorol. Nid wyf yn hollol siŵr sut y mae'n mynd â ni gam ymhellach ymlaen. Hynny yw, y pwynt yw y byddai'n dod oddi ar y grant bloc. Rwy'n cefnogi ei weld yn dod i Gymru, oherwydd mae pethau y gallwn eu gwneud ag ef, ond nid wyf yn credu bod arian yn un ohonynt.
Mae HS2 yn brosiect i Loegr yn unig; nid oes dadl resymol dros ei ddisgrifio fel prosiect i Gymru a Lloegr. Mae'n mynd rhwng Birmingham a Llundain. Dylai unrhyw wariant yn y dyfodol ar HS2 gynhyrchu swm canlyniadol Barnett. Dylai Cymru gael ei chyfran o'r gwariant. Yn anffodus, penderfyniad y Trysorlys ydyw. Wrth inni symud ymlaen, mae angen mecanwaith arnom i ganiatáu cymrodeddu ar wariant fel HS2. Digwyddodd yr un peth gyda Gemau Olympaidd Llundain—mae'r cliw yn yr enw. Prosiect adfywio yn nwyrain Llundain oedd hwn, a dylem fod wedi cael swm canlyniadol Barnett ohono. Cawsom rywfaint, ond roedd oddeutu 2.5 y cant o'r hyn y dylem fod wedi'i gael.
Mae fformiwla Barnett yn fecanwaith a ddefnyddir gan y Trysorlys i addasu faint o wariant cyhoeddus a ddyrennir yng Ngogledd Iwerddon, yr Alban a Chymru yn awtomatig i adlewyrchu newidiadau yn y lefelau gwariant a ddyrennir i wasanaethau cyhoeddus yn Lloegr. Mae'r fformiwla'n berthnasol i gyfran fawr ond nid y cyfan o gyllidebau'r Llywodraethau datganoledig. Mae'r bargeinion dinesig a rhanbarthol yng Nghymru, er enghraifft, y tu allan i'r fformiwla. Mae Gogledd Iwerddon wedi cael arian ychwanegol yn rheolaidd y tu hwnt i'w symiau canlyniadol Barnett. Barnett yw'r isafswm, nid yr uchafswm. Nid oes gan fformiwla Barnett unrhyw statws cyfreithiol a gall y Trysorlys newid y confensiwn ar unrhyw adeg. Gwelwyd gwrthwynebiad bron yn llwyr i fformiwla Barnett fel modd o bennu cynnydd blynyddol.
Ceir tair ffordd o'i newid. Cynigiodd Plaid Genedlaethol yr Alban ymreolaeth ariannol lawn i'r Alban, a fyddai'n rhoi rheolaeth lawn i Senedd yr Alban ar drethiant yr Alban yn y pen draw. Byddai'r canlyniadau wedi arwain at wrthdroi'r cyllid presennol, gyda Senedd yr Alban yn talu grant i Lywodraeth y DU i dalu am gyfran yr Alban o faterion a gedwir yn ôl. Cafodd yr opsiwn hwn ei wrthod gan Lywodraeth y DU. A yw Plaid Cymru'n cefnogi'r opsiwn hwn i Gymru? Rwy'n cymryd mai 'na' yw'r ateb.
Ffordd arall fyddai rhoi cyfran ei phoblogaeth i Gymru o'r gwariant mewn meysydd datganoledig. Byddai hyn hefyd yn cael effaith drychinebus ar gyllideb Cymru. Yn 2009, daeth Pwyllgor Dethol Tŷ'r Arglwyddi ar Fformiwla Barnett i'r casgliad na ddylid ei defnyddio mwyach i bennu cynnydd blynyddol yn y grant bloc ar gyfer gweinyddiaethau datganoledig y Deyrnas Unedig. Dylid cyflwyno system newydd sy'n dyrannu adnoddau i'r gweinyddiaethau datganoledig yn seiliedig ar asesiad penodol o'u hanghenion cymharol. Pwy allai anghytuno â hynny?
O 2018, cafodd ffactor newydd yn seiliedig ar anghenion ei gynnwys yn fformiwla Barnett i bennu newidiadau i gyllid grant Llywodraeth Cymru mewn perthynas â gwariant. Mae'n bosibl cynhyrchu fformiwla sy'n seiliedig ar anghenion. Mae'r fformiwla llywodraeth leol yn fformiwla sy'n seiliedig ar anghenion, ond fe geir dadleuon yn ei chylch a gwrthwynebiad iddi. Mae'r fformiwla'n hynod hir a chymhleth, ac mae pawb yn meddwl eu bod yn cael cam ganddi.
Sut rydych chi'n penderfynu pwysoliadau yn y fformiwla ar gyfer teneurwydd poblogaeth, tlodi ac oedran? Mae angen i'r gwaith ddechrau ar hyn nawr. Er y bydd y rhan fwyaf yn cael eu hysgogi gan boblogaeth a newid yn y boblogaeth, fel sy'n cael ei wneud ar hyn o bryd gyda fformiwla llywodraeth leol, bydd angen adeiladu elfennau fel teneurwydd poblogaeth, cost teithio, cyfraddau diweithdra, iechyd, oedran, dosbarthiad poblogaeth, hyd ffyrdd, troseddau a gofnodwyd, niferoedd anheddau is na'r safon a phwysoliad oedran yn rhan o'r fformiwla. Fe allwn barhau, ond nid wyf yn meddwl y byddai unrhyw un yn dymuno i mi wneud hynny.
Pan gaiff y fformiwla ei chreu, gellir ei ddiweddaru bob blwyddyn a'i diweddaru yn ôl yr angen gyda newidiadau i'r pwysoliadau. Nid oes unrhyw sicrwydd y byddai Cymru'n gwneud yn well gyda fformiwla sy'n seiliedig ar anghenion nag y mae o dan y fformiwla Barnett bresennol gyda llawr Barnett. Cwestiwn i Blaid Cymru yw hwn: a yw Cymru'n genedl gyfoethog, fel y mae un o gyn ymgeiswyr Plaid Cymru i'r Senedd yn ei honni, yn genedl nad oes angen cymorth ariannol arni, neu a yw'n genedl sydd angen cymorth ariannol ar hyn o bryd? 'Rhowch ein cyfran o'r boblogaeth i ni' fyddai'r ateb, onid e? Nid oes angen unrhyw gefnogaeth ychwanegol arnom. A yw Plaid Cymru'n dadlau hynny?
Rwy'n credu bod angen inni gael system lle rydym yn siarad o ddifrif am ddyfodol fformiwla sy'n seiliedig ar anghenion. Ond mae'r fformiwla sy'n seiliedig ar anghenion yn mynd i fod yn gymhleth ofnadwy, a bydd yn cynhyrchu llawer iawn o anghytuno ynglŷn â beth yw'r anghenion.
Wales is being denied billions of pounds from the spending on HS2 in England. This is not just the view of Plaid Cymru, it’s the view of many transport experts that I’ve spoked to recently. It used to be the consensus view in this Senedd.
The HS2 project has been mismanaged and funded unfairly by the previous Conservative Government, but disappointingly the new Labour Government in Westminster is happy to perpetuate this unfairness. Whilst Scotland and Northern Ireland are set to receive additional funding as a result of HS2, Wales is left with nothing even though not a single inch of track is being laid in Wales. Let’s call this what it is: it’s the great Welsh train robbery.
Before Keir Starmer became Prime Minister, Welsh Labour had been calling for Wales to receive the billions it is owed from HS2. The Senedd, the democratically elected Welsh Parliament, had demanded a fair share, and the current Welsh transport Secretary had specifically called for £5 billion. Even Jo Stevens, now Secretary of State for Wales, had once advocated for Wales to receive what it deserves from HS2. But now that they are in power, they have backtracked. It’s clear that Welsh Labour is willing to short-change Wales to appease Keir Starmer.
Whether it’s a Conservative or Labour Government in Westminster, Wales is being neglected by a Westminster Government that will never prioritise our needs. Just imagine what we could achieve with the money for a transport system. With less than 4 per cent of our railways electrified, and no direct rail connection between Aberystwyth and Cardiff without going through England, the billions owed to us could transform our bus and rail networks. This investment could boost our local economies, create jobs and attract new businesses and industries, bringing prosperity and opportunity to communities who desperately need it across Wales.
This is not just about transport, it's also about tackling climate change. Fair funding from HS2 could help Wales make significant progress towards achieving net zero. Improving public transport is one of the most effective ways of reducing carbon emissions. By enhancing our train and bus services, we could encourage more people to choose sustainable transport over cars, reducing our carbon footprint and protecting our environment for future generations. This is clearly not a priority for the Labour Government in Wales. By refusing to fight for fair funding, you are leaving people in Wales without access to the opportunities they deserve. Our communities remain isolated, and our transport network is left to crumble. It's time for change; time for Wales to get the investment it's owed and the future it deserves. Diolch.
Mae Cymru'n cael ei hamddifadu o biliynau o bunnoedd o'r gwariant ar HS2 yn Lloegr. Nid barn Plaid Cymru yn unig yw hyn, ond barn llawer o arbenigwyr trafnidiaeth y siaradais â hwy yn ddiweddar. Arferai fod yn farn gonsensws yn y Senedd hon.
Cafodd prosiect HS2 ei gamreoli a'i ariannu'n annheg gan y Llywodraeth Geidwadol flaenorol, ond yn siomedig, mae'r Llywodraeth Lafur newydd yn San Steffan yn hapus i barhau'r annhegwch. Er bod yr Alban a Gogledd Iwerddon ar fin derbyn cyllid ychwanegol o ganlyniad i HS2, nid yw Cymru'n cael unrhyw beth er nad oes un fodfedd o drac yn cael ei osod yng Nghymru. Gadewch inni ei alw yr hyn ydyw: lladrad trên mawr Cymru.
Cyn i Keir Starmer ddod yn Brif Weinidog, roedd Llafur Cymru wedi bod yn galw am y biliynau sy'n ddyledus i Gymru o HS2. Roedd y Senedd, y Senedd Cymru a etholwyd yn ddemocrataidd, wedi mynnu cyfran deg, ac roedd Ysgrifennydd trafnidiaeth presennol Cymru wedi galw'n benodol am £5 biliwn. Roedd hyd yn oed Jo Stevens, sydd bellach yn Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru, wedi argymell unwaith y dylai Cymru gael yr hyn y mae'n ei haeddu o HS2. Ond gan eu bod bellach mewn grym, maent wedi newid eu meddyliau. Mae'n amlwg fod Llafur Cymru yn fodlon gwneud cam â Chymru er mwyn plesio Keir Starmer.
Boed yn Llywodraeth Geidwadol neu Lafur yn San Steffan, caiff Cymru ei hesgeuluso gan Lywodraeth San Steffan na fydd byth yn blaenoriaethu ein hanghenion. Dychmygwch beth y gallem ei gyflawni gyda'r arian ar gyfer system drafnidiaeth. Gyda llai na 4 y cant o'n rheilffyrdd wedi'u trydaneiddio, a dim cysylltiad rheilffordd uniongyrchol rhwng Aberystwyth a Chaerdydd heb fynd trwy Loegr, gallai'r biliynau sy'n ddyledus i ni drawsnewid ein rhwydweithiau bysiau a threnau. Gallai'r buddsoddiad hwn roi hwb i'n heconomïau lleol, creu swyddi a denu busnesau a diwydiannau newydd, gan ddod â ffyniant a chyfleoedd i gymunedau sydd eu hangen yn ddybryd ledled Cymru.
Mae hyn yn ymwneud â mwy na thrafnidiaeth yn unig, mae hefyd yn ymwneud â mynd i'r afael â newid hinsawdd. Gallai cyllid teg o HS2 helpu Cymru i wneud cynnydd sylweddol tuag at gyflawni sero net. Gwella trafnidiaeth gyhoeddus yw un o'r ffyrdd mwyaf effeithiol o leihau allyriadau carbon. Drwy wella ein gwasanaethau trên a bysiau, gallem annog mwy o bobl i ddewis trafnidiaeth gynaliadwy dros geir, gan leihau ein hôl troed carbon a diogelu ein hamgylchedd ar gyfer cenedlaethau'r dyfodol. Yn amlwg, nid yw hyn yn flaenoriaeth i'r Llywodraeth Lafur yng Nghymru. Drwy wrthod brwydro am gyllid teg, rydych chi'n gadael pobl yng Nghymru heb fynediad at y cyfleoedd y maent yn eu haeddu. Mae ein cymunedau'n parhau i fod wedi'u hynysu, ac mae ein rhwydwaith trafnidiaeth wedi'i adael i ddadfeilio. Mae'n bryd newid; mae'n bryd i Gymru gael y buddsoddiad sy'n ddyledus iddi a'r dyfodol y mae'n ei haeddu. Diolch.
There is no doubt that the Conservatives' legacy in Government is one of economic devastation: our public services in tatters, our finances decimated, mortgages spiralling out of control and families forced to choose between heating and eating. I was left speechless by Peter Fox saying that the Welsh Labour Government had failed to stand up for Wales, when the Welsh Conservatives for 14 years did nothing to stand up for Wales. The people of Wales—[Interruption.] No, I'm not going to. The people of Wales rightfully expect—[Interruption.]
Nid oes amheuaeth fod gwaddol y Ceidwadwyr yn y Llywodraeth yn un o ddinistr economaidd: ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yn llarpiau, ein cyllid wedi dirywio, morgeisi'n codi allan o reolaeth a theuluoedd yn gorfod dewis rhwng gwresogi a bwyta. Fe'm synnwyd yn fawr gan Peter Fox yn dweud bod Llywodraeth Lafur Cymru wedi methu sefyll dros Gymru, a'r Ceidwadwyr Cymreig heb wneud unrhyw beth am 14 mlynedd i sefyll dros Gymru. Mae pobl Cymru—[Torri ar draws.] Na, ni wnaf. Mae pobl Cymru yn disgwyl—[Torri ar draws.]
I think it's fair to allow the Member to speak and contribute to the debate without interruptions.
Rwy'n credu ei bod yn deg caniatáu i'r Aelod siarad a chyfrannu at y ddadl heb ymyrraeth.
Thank you. The people of Wales quite rightly expect that a Labour Government in Westminster would forge a meaningful and challenging partnership and relationship with the Welsh Government—one that would secure the funding and the co-operation needed to reverse the years of decline that we've been left with.
Their decision to cut winter fuel payments and continue with the damaging two-child benefit cap policy introduced by the Conservatives is outrageous and punishing. At a time when people need more support, not less, these measures only increase the hardship faced by vulnerable families. Within my own home region of Powys, this means more than 30,000 people facing the harsh reality of cold homes, and 2,200 children continuing to suffer.
Equally concerning are the rumours that Labour will increase national insurance contributions. With 99.3 per cent of businesses in Wales being small and medium-sized enterprises, these businesses cannot suffer; they remain the key to driving growth in our economy. Keir Starmer has said that this budget would be painful and part of a shared struggle. This is really insulting and rings hollow for so many across Wales. I want to ask why there is a war on the poor. What we need to do is to tax the rich.
Britain now has one of the highest wealth gaps in the developed world—only the United States fares worse. The gap between the wealthiest and the poorest 10 per cent has ballooned by 47 per cent in 10 years. We need to be clear that there is plenty of money out there. The richest 10 per cent of households own 57 per cent of the wealth in the UK, and a modest 2 per cent wealth tax on the very richest, just 0.04 per cent of the population, could raise up to £24 billion annually, which is what we're hearing all the time, both from Welsh Labour and from the UK Labour Government, is what the hole is that they need to fill. Just tax the rich, that's what we need to do.
Our biggest four banks—Lloyds Bank, NatWest, Barclays and HSBC—reaped £40 billion in profits last year, yet they continue to benefit from Conservative tax cuts. By reversing these tax cuts, we could help fund our public services and prevent the closure of high-street banks in rural areas, which is what the four banks are doing constantly. This is why we, the Liberal Democrats, have put forward a bold but fair plan. By reversing the cuts for big banks, closing the loopholes in capital gains tax and ensuring that companies pay their fair share, we can create a tax system—
Diolch. Mae pobl Cymru'n disgwyl yn gwbl briodol y byddai Llywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan yn creu partneriaeth a pherthynas ystyrlon a heriol gyda Llywodraeth Cymru—un a fyddai'n sicrhau'r cyllid a'r cydweithrediad sydd ei angen i wyrdroi'r blynyddoedd o ddirywiad y cawsom ein gadael gyda hwy.
Mae eu penderfyniad i dorri taliadau tanwydd y gaeaf a pharhau â pholisi niweidiol y cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau a gyflwynwyd gan y Ceidwadwyr yn warthus ac yn gosbol. Ar adeg pan fo angen mwy o gymorth ar bobl, nid llai, nid yw'r mesurau hyn ond yn cynyddu'r caledi sy'n wynebu teuluoedd bregus. Yn fy rhanbarth i ym Mhowys, mae hyn yn golygu bod dros 30,000 o bobl yn wynebu realiti llwm cartrefi oer, a 2,200 o blant yn parhau i ddioddef.
Yr un mor bryderus yw'r sibrydion y bydd Llafur yn cynyddu cyfraniadau yswiriant gwladol. Gyda 99.3 y cant o fusnesau yng Nghymru yn fentrau bach a chanolig, ni all y busnesau hyn ddioddef; maent yn parhau i fod yn allweddol i ysgogi twf yn ein heconomi. Mae Keir Starmer wedi dweud y byddai'r gyllideb hon yn boenus ac yn rhan o frwydr a rennir. Mae hyn yn sarhaus iawn ac yn ddadl wag i gymaint o bobl ar draws Cymru. Rwyf am ofyn pam y ceir rhyfel yn erbyn y tlawd. Yr hyn sy'n rhaid inni ei wneud yw trethu'r cyfoethog.
Gan Brydain bellach y mae un o'r bylchau cyfoeth mwyaf yn y byd datblygedig—dim ond yr Unol Daleithiau sy'n gwneud yn waeth. Mae'r bwlch rhwng y 10 y cant cyfoethocaf a'r 10 y cant tlotaf wedi chwyddo 47 y cant mewn 10 mlynedd. Mae angen inni fod yn glir fod digon o arian ar gael. Mae'r 10 y cant cyfoethocaf o aelwydydd yn berchen ar 57 y cant o'r cyfoeth yn y DU, a gallai treth gyfoeth gymedrol o 2 y cant ar y cyfoethocaf oll, dim ond 0.04 y cant o'r boblogaeth, godi hyd at £24 biliwn bob blwyddyn, sef y twll y mae angen iddynt ei lenwi yn ôl yr hyn a glywn drwy'r amser gan Lafur Cymru a Llywodraeth Lafur y DU. Trethu'r cyfoethog, dyna beth sydd angen inni ei wneud.
Fe wnaeth ein pedwar banc mwyaf—Lloyds Bank, NatWest, Barclays a HSBC—elw o £40 biliwn y llynedd, eto maent yn parhau i elwa o doriadau treth y Ceidwadwyr. Drwy wrthdroi'r toriadau treth hyn, gallem helpu i ariannu ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus ac atal cau banciau'r stryd fawr mewn ardaloedd gwledig, fel y mae'r pedwar banc yn ei wneud yn gyson. Dyna pam ein bod ni, y Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol, wedi cyflwyno cynllun beiddgar ond teg. Drwy wyrdroi'r toriadau i fanciau mawr, cau'r bylchau yn y dreth enillion cyfalaf a sicrhau bod cwmnïau'n talu eu cyfran deg, gallwn greu system dreth—
Will you take an intervention?
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad?
Of course I will.
Wrth gwrs.
I do agree with some of the sentiments that you say about taxing the rich, but would you agree that has to be done in a fair and proportionate way so that we avoid a system like the 1970s, when we had a mass exodus of wealth and talent that contributes such significance to the economic profile of our country?
Rwy'n cytuno â rhai o'r pethau yr ydych yn eu dweud am drethu'r cyfoethog, ond a fyddech chi'n cytuno bod yn rhaid gwneud hynny mewn ffordd deg a chymesur fel ein bod yn osgoi system fel y 1970au, pan welsom ecsodus torfol o gyfoeth a thalent sy'n gwneud cyfraniad mor bwysig i broffil economaidd ein gwlad?
Thank you for saying that you would tax the rich. I just want to respond to that by saying I looked at a very interesting website. It was called Patriotic Millionaires. They say very clearly that they want to be taxed more and they will not leave the country. So this is a clear myth that's being peddled all the time. A millionaire businessman called Phil White has said:
‘We're not about to give up on this country. We need a wealth tax now.’
I urge everybody to consider how we are going to help the poorest here in Wales, and we need to tax the rich. The burden of cleaning up the Tory mess should not fall on ordinary people. It should fall on those with the broadest shoulders.
Let me finish by focusing on an issue close to my heart, and that is child poverty. I urge Welsh Labour to stand up and challenge the UK Labour Government to act decisively. This head-in-the-sand attitude around the two-child benefit cap is really appalling whilst our children suffer. So, Cabinet Secretary, will you commit to challenging this cruel policy, and call on the UK Government to act now to scrap the two-child benefit cap? Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Diolch i chi am ddweud y byddech chi'n trethu'r cyfoethog. Rwyf eisiau ymateb i hynny drwy ddweud fy mod wedi edrych ar wefan ddiddorol iawn. Ei henw oedd Patriotic Millionaires. Maent yn dweud yn glir iawn eu bod eisiau cael eu trethu fwy ac na fyddant yn gadael y wlad. Felly mae'n amlwg mai myth yw hyn sy'n cael ei bedlera drwy'r amser. Dywedodd un dyn busnes, miliwnydd o'r enw Phil White:
'Nid ydym yn mynd i gefnu ar y wlad hon. Mae angen treth gyfoeth arnom nawr.'
Rwy'n annog pawb i ystyried sut y gallwn helpu'r tlotaf yma yng Nghymru, ac mae angen inni drethu'r cyfoethog. Ni ddylai'r baich o lanhau'r llanast Torïaidd ddisgyn ar bobl gyffredin. Dylai ddisgyn ar y rhai sydd â'r ysgwyddau lletaf.
Gadewch imi orffen trwy ganolbwyntio ar fater sy'n agos at fy nghalon, a thlodi plant yw hwnnw. Rwy'n annog Llafur Cymru i sefyll a herio Llywodraeth Lafur y DU i weithredu'n bendant. Mae'r agwedd ben yn y tywod ynghylch y cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau yn ofnadwy tra bod ein plant yn dioddef. Felly, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a wnewch chi ymrwymo i herio'r polisi creulon hwn, a galw ar Lywodraeth y DU i weithredu nawr i gael gwared ar y cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau? Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Our motion calls on the Welsh Labour Government to make urgent representations to the UK Labour Government to request a commitment to two measures in the budget that would protect some of the most vulnerable Welsh citizens from hardship and would also alleviate the certain added pressure on Welsh services and finances that would stem from that hardship. No-brainer, right? No-brainer, you'd think, for the party of Attlee and of Bevan, the party that so many Welsh people who believe passionately in social justice support and campaign for. And actually it's a no-brainer for a Welsh Government of any colour who want to see less pressure on already-strained budgets. Because restoring the winter fuel allowance for pensioners and disposing of the two-child limit and benefit cap would do just that.
Limiting the winter fuel payment to pensioners receiving pension credit has raised wide concerns. As we heard, the older people's commissioner warned it could cost thousands of lives. The UK Government's own figures show that 83 per cent of people over 80 would lose the payment and 71 per cent of pensioners with disabilities will have to face the winter without the payment. This just as winter is approaching, just as energy prices have risen and remain far above pre-crisis levels. And this when both the south and north of Wales remain in the top three most expensive regions across the UK for energy prices.
I don't really have to rehearse again the reasons why this is a shameful decision, do I? Because Welsh Labour politicians know this is a disaster for Wales. But they put party before country. What they must do is put the people they represent before that—the almost half a million pensioners who will now be at risk this winter—before the interests of those who can afford to make sacrifices if needed. They should push for the right choices to be made when there is a need to make tough choices.
Taking money off Welsh pensioners, so many of whom will always be on the edge of poverty, while the 50 richest families in the UK own a combined £500 billion, is obscene. And who's going to pick up the tab when there is a need for increased health and social care support due to this cut? I've asked this many times. I've never had an answer. What assessment has the Welsh Government made of the financial impact of the inevitable increased demand on the services they fund?
I know what we'll hear in response, because we will inevitably hear them parrot the UK Labour lines, the lines written in London, the lines we hear from Sir Keir: ‘Oh, but the triple lock’, that increase in state pension that will offset the winter fuel payment losses. Well, a quick fact check for you: according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, it's not as simple as that. Not everyone gets the same amount of state pension, so whether or not this outstrips the loss of payments would depend on their pension entitlement. The amount people get for the winter fuel payment also varies. For example, single people above state pension age—66—and couples where at least one person is above state pension age but both below the age of 80 will lose £200 this winter. But single people above the age of 80 and couples where at least one person is above the age of 80 will lose £300 this winter. And, of course, the state pension uprating takes place in April next year; changes to the winter fuel payments are happening this year. Winter fuel payment is also a tax-free payment, whereas state pension is subject to income tax.
And the IFS has also noted, and I quote,
'pensioners would have expected their state pension to increase in line with the triple lock anyway because Labour promised to keep the triple lock in their manifesto.'
So,
'in that sense removing Winter Fuel Payments while keeping the triple lock commitment is a cut compared to what they were expecting'—
to what they were led to expect. Welsh Government, First Ministers and Ministers past and present have made the case here over many years for scrapping the two-child cap and benefit limit, a monstrous Tory policy that punishes children for the size of their family. Either they didn't mean it then or they are being hypocritical now, because either you believe in upholding children's rights or you don't. You can't have it both ways, even when that's politically inconvenient.
Sixty five thousand children in Wales are pushed down, disadvantaged for the rest of their lives by this policy. It is nothing less than a dereliction of duty on behalf of this Welsh Government if they continue to put party before country. Those who voted to get rid of the Tories, to end austerity measures, are being betrayed by Labour politicians who disgrace the best traditions and values of their party. All the calls in our motion are ones that socialists, that those who have the best interests of the people of Wales at heart, should be proud to back.
Mae ein cynnig yn galw ar Lywodraeth Lafur Cymru i gyflwyno sylwadau brys i Lywodraeth Lafur y DU i ofyn am ymrwymiad i ddau fesur yn y gyllideb a fyddai'n diogelu rhai o ddinasyddion mwyaf bregus Cymru rhag caledi ac a fyddai hefyd yn lleddfu'r pwysau ychwanegol ar wasanaethau a chyllid Cymru a fyddai'n deillio o'r caledi hwnnw. Fe fyddech chi'n meddwl y dylai hynny fod yn amlwg i blaid Attlee a Bevan, y blaid y mae cymaint o Gymry sy'n credu'n angerddol mewn cefnogi ac ymgyrchu dros gyfiawnder cymdeithasol. Ac mewn gwirionedd mae'n amlwg i Lywodraeth Cymru o unrhyw liw sydd eisiau gweld llai o bwysau ar gyllidebau sydd eisoes dan straen. Oherwydd byddai adfer lwfans tanwydd y gaeaf i bensiynwyr a chael gwared ar y cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau yn gwneud hynny.
Mae cyfyngu taliad tanwydd y gaeaf i bensiynwyr sy'n derbyn credyd pensiwn yn unig wedi codi pryderon eang. Fel y clywsom, rhybuddiodd y comisiynydd pobl hŷn y gallai gostio miloedd o fywydau. Mae ffigurau Llywodraeth y DU ei hun yn dangos y byddai 83 y cant o bobl dros 80 oed yn colli'r taliad a bydd yn rhaid i 71 y cant o bensiynwyr ag anableddau wynebu'r gaeaf heb y taliad. Mae hyn yn digwydd wrth i'r gaeaf agosáu, yn union fel y mae prisiau ynni wedi codi ac yn parhau i fod yn llawer uwch na'r lefelau cyn yr argyfwng. A hyn pan fo de a gogledd Cymru yn dal i fod yn y tri rhanbarth drytaf ledled y DU o ran prisiau ynni.
Nid oes raid imi ailadrodd y rhesymau pam fod hwn yn benderfyniad cywilyddus. Oherwydd mae gwleidyddion Llafur Cymru yn gwybod bod hyn yn drychineb i Gymru. Ond maent yn rhoi plaid o flaen y wlad. Yr hyn sy'n rhaid iddynt ei wneud yw rhoi'r bobl y maent yn eu cynrychioli—y bron i hanner miliwn o bensiynwyr a fydd mewn perygl y gaeaf hwn—o flaen buddiannau'r rhai sy'n gallu fforddio aberthu rhai pethau os oes angen. Dylent bwyso am i'r dewisiadau cywir gael eu gwneud pan fo angen gwneud dewisiadau anodd.
Mae mynd ag arian oddi wrth bensiynwyr Cymru, y bydd cymaint ohonynt bob amser ar gyrion tlodi, tra bod y 50 teulu cyfoethocaf yn y DU yn berchen ar £500 biliwn cyfunol, yn gywilyddus. A phwy sy'n mynd i dalu pan fydd angen mwy o gymorth iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol oherwydd y toriad hwn? Rwyf wedi gofyn hyn sawl gwaith. Nid wyf wedi cael ateb eto. Pa asesiad y mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi'i wneud o effaith ariannol y galw cynyddol anochel am y gwasanaethau y maent yn eu hariannu?
Rwy'n gwybod beth y byddwn yn ei glywed mewn ymateb, oherwydd mae'n anochel y byddwn yn eu clywed yn ailadrodd llinellau Llafur y DU, y llinellau a ysgrifennwyd yn Llundain, y llinellau a glywn gan Syr Keir: 'O, ond beth am y clo triphlyg', y cynnydd i bensiwn y wladwriaeth a fydd yn gwrthbwyso colledion taliadau tanwydd y gaeaf. Wel, gwiriad ffeithiau cyflym i chi: yn ôl y Sefydliad Astudiaethau Cyllid, nid yw mor syml â hynny. Nid yw pawb yn cael yr un swm o bensiwn y wladwriaeth, felly byddai p'un a fyddai hyn yn fwy na'r taliadau a gollir ai peidio yn dibynnu ar eu hawl pensiwn. Mae'r swm y mae pobl yn ei gael ar gyfer taliad tanwydd y gaeaf hefyd yn amrywio. Er enghraifft, bydd pobl sengl dros oedran pensiwn y wladwriaeth—66—a chyplau lle mae o leiaf un person yn hŷn nag oedran pensiwn y wladwriaeth ond y ddau o dan 80 oed yn colli £200 y gaeaf hwn. Ond bydd pobl sengl dros 80 oed a chyplau lle mae o leiaf un person dros 80 oed yn colli £300 y gaeaf hwn. Ac wrth gwrs, mae uwchraddio pensiwn y wladwriaeth yn digwydd ym mis Ebrill y flwyddyn nesaf; mae newidiadau i daliadau tanwydd y gaeaf yn digwydd eleni. Mae taliad tanwydd y gaeaf hefyd yn daliad di-dreth, tra bod pensiwn y wladwriaeth yn agored i dreth incwm.
Ac mae'r Sefydliad Astudiaethau Cyllid hefyd wedi nodi, ac rwy'n dyfynnu,
'byddai pensiynwyr wedi disgwyl i'w pensiwn y wladwriaeth gynyddu yn unol â'r clo triphlyg beth bynnag oherwydd bod Llafur wedi addo cadw'r clo triphlyg yn eu maniffesto.'
Felly
'yn yr ystyr hwnnw mae cael gwared ar Daliadau Tanwydd y Gaeaf gan gadw'r ymrwymiad clo triphlyg yn doriad o'i gymharu â'r hyn roeddent yn ei ddisgwyl'—
i'r hyn y cawsant eu harwain i'w ddisgwyl. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru, Prif Weinidogion a Gweinidogion Cymru ddoe a heddiw wedi cyflwyno'r achos yma dros nifer o flynyddoedd dros ddileu'r cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau, polisi Torïaidd gwrthun sy'n cosbi plant am faint eu teulu. Naill ai nad oeddent yn ei olygu bryd hynny neu maent yn rhagrithio nawr, oherwydd naill ai rydych chi'n credu mewn cynnal hawliau plant neu nid ydych chi'n credu mewn gwneud hynny. Ni allwch ei chael hi'r ddwy ffordd, hyd yn oed pan fydd hynny'n anghyfleus yn wleidyddol.
Mae 65,000 o blant yng Nghymru yn cael eu gwasgu i lawr, wedi eu rhoi dan anfantais am weddill eu bywydau gan y polisi hwn. Nid yw'n ddim llai nag esgeuluso dyletswydd ar ran Llywodraeth Cymru os ydynt yn parhau i roi plaid o flaen y wlad. Mae'r rhai a bleidleisiodd dros gael gwared ar y Torïaid, dros roi diwedd ar fesurau cyni, yn cael eu bradychu gan wleidyddion Llafur sy'n warth ar draddodiadau a gwerthoedd gorau eu plaid. Mae'r holl alwadau yn ein cynnig yn rhai y dylai sosialwyr, y dylai'r rhai sydd â buddiannau gorau pobl Cymru yn agos at eu calonnau, fod yn falch o'u cefnogi.
I think it was Willie John McBride, wasn't it, the 1974 Lions, who advised us to get our retaliation in first, and it's certainly good to see Plaid Cymru registering their disappointment at a budget that hasn't yet been delivered. I would certainly advise anybody today to listen to the budget before they condemn it. Where we are today is not where any of us would wish to be, except, potentially, the Conservatives. Austerity has been a disaster for the United Kingdom. It was a disaster in 2011, it's a disaster today, and that disaster has been further strengthened by Brexit, which has undermined our ability to trade and to promote growth. And the one advice I would give to the Chancellor of the Exchequer is this: if you want to see growth in the UK economy in the next few years, rejoin the single market—that will deliver some growth and that will deliver what the people in Wales want to see. [Interruption.] They might not like it but I think people on this side of the Chamber certainly would.
But let's look at what we need to do. I would say in this debate that we can all agree or disagree on certain individual issues. It is clear that HS2 should deliver a consequential to Wales. Now, that consequential should be delivered to this country. It is unacceptable that a railway that will deliver economic disadvantage to Wales, which we've seen from the UK's own analysis, will then not deliver a consequential to this country. I give way.
Rwy'n credu mai Willie John McBride, onid e, Llewod 1974, a'n cynghorodd i gael ein dial i mewn i ddechrau, ac mae'n sicr yn dda gweld Plaid Cymru yn cofnodi eu siom am gyllideb nad yw wedi cael ei chyflwyno eto. Buaswn yn sicr yn cynghori unrhyw un heddiw i wrando ar y gyllideb cyn iddynt ei chondemnio. Nid oes yr un ohonom lle byddem yn dymuno bod heddiw, ac eithrio'r Ceidwadwyr o bosibl. Mae cyni wedi bod yn drychineb i'r Deyrnas Unedig. Roedd yn drychineb yn 2011, mae'n drychineb heddiw, ac mae'r trychineb hwnnw wedi'i gryfhau ymhellach gan Brexit, sydd wedi tanseilio ein gallu i fasnachu a hyrwyddo twf. A'r un gair o gyngor yr hoffwn ei roi i Ganghellor y Trysorlys yw hyn: os ydych chi am weld twf yn economi'r DU yn ystod y blynyddoedd nesaf, ailymunwch â'r farchnad sengl—bydd hynny'n sicrhau rhywfaint o dwf a bydd yn cyflawni'r hyn y mae pobl Cymru am ei weld. [Torri ar draws.] Efallai nad ydynt hwy yn ei hoffi ond rwy'n credu y byddai'r bobl ar yr ochr hon i'r Siambr yn sicr yn ei hoffi.
Ond gadewch inni edrych ar yr hyn sydd angen i ni ei wneud. Buaswn yn dweud yn y ddadl hon y gall pob un ohonom gytuno neu anghytuno ar rai materion unigol. Mae'n amlwg y dylai HS2 sicrhau cyllid canlyniadol i Gymru. Nawr, dylai'r swm canlyniadol hwnnw gael ei gyflwyno i'r wlad hon. Mae'n annerbyniol na fydd rheilffordd a fydd yn creu anfantais economaidd i Gymru, fel y gwelsom o ddadansoddiad y DU ei hun, yn darparu cyllid canlyniadol i'r wlad hon. Fe ildiaf.
Thank you for taking the intervention. Why is it, therefore, that Labour have taken out of our motion today, by seeking to amend it, that call for the full consequentials to be given to Wales? And isn't the truth here that we have an admission in that Labour amendment today that, now that we have a UK Labour Government, the Welsh Labour Government will pull its punches and will not roll up its sleeves prioritising the best interests of Wales? And it is Labour interests before the interests of the people of Wales.
Diolch am dderbyn yr ymyriad. Pam felly fod Llafur wedi tynnu'r alwad yn ein cynnig ni heddiw, drwy geisio ei ddiwygio, sy'n galw am roi'r arian canlyniadol llawn i Gymru? Ac onid y gwir yw bod gennym gyfaddefiad yng ngwelliant Llafur heddiw, a ninnau â Llywodraeth Lafur yn y DU erbyn hyn, y bydd Llywodraeth Lafur Cymru yn camu'n ôl ac na fydd yn torchi ei llewys i flaenoriaethu buddiannau gorau Cymru? Ac mae'n fater o roi buddiannau Llafur o flaen buddiannau pobl Cymru.
As I tried to say in my introductory remarks, Rhun, wait for the budget before you condemn it, right. Now, I do believe—[Interruption.] I do believe—. I will carry on, if you don't mind, because we also need to look at the future of the shared prosperity fund. There are some investments that have taken place in my constituency in Blaenau Gwent, where there are organisations employing individuals whose contracts will be running out soon. We need the certainty to know what is going to happen in the next financial year. We need to ensure that there is a successor to the shared prosperity fund that will deliver the funding that people are relying on today.
But we also need—and I agree with my friend Mike Hedges and others—to see the devolution of the Crown Estate because of the opportunities that that will provide to us.
But all of these individual things, by themselves, are not good enough. The United Kingdom, if it is anything at all, must be an engine of redistribution of wealth and the eradication of inequality. Those are the fundamental things that we should keep our eyes on. All the different items that that have dominated so far this debate this afternoon are important as individual things—I don't disagree with that—but what we actually need to see, and this is what I would like to see over the next few years, is a redesign and a re-engineering of the financial structures of the United Kingdom. What we have seen in too many parts of the United Kingdom—Wales suffers from it, my constituency suffers from it, but so do other parts of the United Kingdom as well—is that they suffer from structural inequality, where, as a consequence of policy that has been pursued for decade after decade after decade, we've seen the City of London dominate the UK economy as a matter of policy. And what I want to see is a redistribution of wealth that is created throughout the United Kingdom, and that that wealth is distributed fairly amongst the countries of the United Kingdom and the communities of the United Kingdom. We need to see financial equality across the United Kingdom. Darren.
Fel y ceisiais ddweud yn fy sylwadau rhagarweiniol, Rhun, arhoswch am y gyllideb cyn i chi ei chondemnio, iawn. Nawr, rwy'n credu—[Torri ar draws.] Rwy'n credu—. Fe wnaf barhau, os nad oes ots gennych, oherwydd mae angen inni edrych hefyd ar ddyfodol y gronfa ffyniant gyffredin. Mae rhai buddsoddiadau wedi digwydd yn fy etholaeth i ym Mlaenau Gwent, lle mae yna sefydliadau'n cyflogi unigolion y bydd eu contractau'n dod i ben yn fuan. Mae angen sicrwydd arnom i wybod beth fydd yn digwydd yn y flwyddyn ariannol nesaf. Mae angen inni sicrhau bod olynydd i'r gronfa ffyniant gyffredin a fydd yn darparu'r cyllid y mae pobl yn dibynnu arno heddiw.
Ond hefyd—ac rwy'n cytuno gyda fy nghyfaill Mike Hedges ac eraill—mae angen gweld Ystad y Goron yn cael ei datganoli oherwydd y cyfleoedd y bydd hynny'n eu darparu i ni.
Ond nid yw'r holl bethau unigol hyn, ar eu pen eu hunain, yn ddigon da. Rhaid i'r Deyrnas Unedig, os yw'n unrhyw beth o gwbl, fod yn beiriant ailddosbarthu cyfoeth a dileu anghydraddoldeb. Dyna'r pethau sylfaenol y dylem gadw ein llygaid arnynt. Mae'r holl wahanol eitemau sydd wedi dominyddu'r ddadl hyd yn hyn y prynhawn yma yn bwysig fel pethau unigol—nid wyf yn anghytuno â hynny—ond yr hyn sydd angen inni ei weld mewn gwirionedd, a dyma beth y buaswn i'n hoffi ei weld dros y blynyddoedd nesaf, yw ailgynllunio ac ailbeiriannu strwythurau ariannol y Deyrnas Unedig. Yr hyn a welsom mewn gormod o rannau o'r Deyrnas Unedig—mae Cymru'n dioddef ohono, mae fy etholaeth i'n dioddef ohono, ond mae'n wir hefyd am rannau eraill o'r Deyrnas Unedig—yw eu bod yn dioddef o anghydraddoldeb strwythurol, lle rydym wedi gweld Dinas Llundain, o ganlyniad i bolisi yr aethpwyd ar ei drywydd ddegawd ar ôl degawd ar ôl degawd, yn dominyddu economi'r DU fel mater o bolisi. A'r hyn rwyf am ei weld yw ailddosbarthu cyfoeth sy'n cael ei greu ledled y Deyrnas Unedig, a bod y cyfoeth hwnnw'n cael ei ddosbarthu'n deg ymhlith gwledydd y Deyrnas Unedig a chymunedau'r Deyrnas Unedig. Mae angen inni weld cydraddoldeb ariannol ar draws y Deyrnas Unedig. Darren.
I'm grateful for you taking the intervention. Would you also agree that we need to see financial equality within Wales: instead of all of the investment going to certain parts of Wales, that places like north Wales, which have missed out significantly on capital investment in recent years, get their fair share too?
Rwy'n ddiolchgar i chi am dderbyn yr ymyriad. A fyddech chi hefyd yn cytuno bod angen inni weld cydraddoldeb ariannol yng Nghymru: yn lle'r holl fuddsoddiad sy'n mynd i rai rhannau o Gymru, fod lleoedd fel gogledd Cymru, sydd wedi bod ar eu colled yn sylweddol o ran buddsoddiad cyfalaf yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf, yn cael eu cyfran deg hefyd?
If you have the analysis that supports that, I will support you, but, in 15 years in this place, I've never seen the analysis that actually delivers that sort of conclusion. [Interruption.] Show me the analysis, Darren, and I will support you, right. But you haven't got the analysis.
So, let me conclude—[Interruption.] Let me conclude, let me conclude. I believe that we need a new financial structure, new financial engineering within the United Kingdom. We need to replace Barnett; I do believe that a needs-based formula will deliver the sort of equality that we're looking towards. But, more than that, we need a United Kingdom that is committed equally to all parts of the United Kingdom, that doesn't prioritise one part over another, where Wales plays its full part, and where everyone in Wales has the equal treatment as we have elsewhere. And I hope that, whatever happens in one or two single financial events or fiscal events—next week's budget and subsequent budgets—what we'll actually see is something more important and more fundamental than individual shopping-list items, that we will see a United Kingdom that generates wealth, that redistributes wealth and has the objective of eradicating inequality, which applies to every single one of us.
Os oes gennych ddadansoddiad sy'n cefnogi hynny, fe wnaf eich cefnogi, ond mewn 15 mlynedd yn y lle hwn, nid wyf erioed wedi gweld y dadansoddiad sy'n dod i'r math hwnnw o gasgliad mewn gwirionedd. [Torri ar draws.] Dangoswch y dadansoddiad i mi, Darren, ac fe wnaf eich cefnogi, iawn. Ond nid oes gennych y dadansoddiad.
Felly, gadewch imi orffen—[Torri ar draws.] Gadewch imi orffen, gadewch imi orffen. Credaf fod angen strwythur ariannol newydd, peirianneg ariannol newydd o fewn y Deyrnas Unedig. Mae angen inni gael rhywbeth yn lle Barnett; rwy'n credu y bydd fformiwla sy'n seiliedig ar anghenion yn darparu'r math o gydraddoldeb yr ydym yn edrych amdano. Ond yn fwy na hynny, mae angen Teyrnas Unedig arnom sydd wedi ymrwymo'n gyfartal i bob rhan o'r Deyrnas Unedig, nad yw'n blaenoriaethu un rhan dros y llall, lle mae Cymru'n chwarae ei rhan lawn, a lle mae pawb yng Nghymru yn cael y driniaeth gyfartal â'r hyn sydd gennym mewn mannau eraill. A beth bynnag sy'n digwydd mewn un neu ddau o ddigwyddiadau ariannol unigol neu ddigwyddiadau cyllidol—cyllideb yr wythnos nesaf a chyllidebau dilynol—rwy'n gobeithio y bydd yr hyn a welwn mewn gwirionedd yn bwysicach ac yn fwy sylfaenol nag eitemau unigol ar restr siopa, ac y gwelwn Deyrnas Unedig sy'n cynhyrchu cyfoeth, sy'n ailddosbarthu cyfoeth ac sydd â'r nod o ddileu anghydraddoldeb, fel sy'n berthnasol i bob un ohonom.
Galwaf nawr ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Gyllid a'r Gymraeg, Mark Drakeford.
I now call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language, Mark Drakeford.
Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. Well, I listened carefully to the debate. The Government will oppose the motion and the Conservative Party amendment. There are aspects in the original motion with which we would agree, and I'll try and return to those later. What we can't agree is the underlying assertion of the motion, repeated time after time by Plaid Cymru Members, that the election of a Labour Government in Westminster—a preference endorsed in 27 of the 32 constituencies in Wales—makes no difference, and that all those Welsh people who did so much to secure that Government simply got it wrong.
Now, I will demonstrate, Dirprwy Lywydd, that there is, for this Labour Government, on the basis that Alun Davies has already set out, a different political economy, a different approach to the way in which the economics of the United Kingdom will benefit people across the United Kingdom. I'm not interested, as Luke Fletcher is, in a nationalist approach to the Crown Estate, in which money cannot be spent anywhere else in the United Kingdom, even when that is to the benefit of people who have needs that need to be satisfied. We will show that a Labour Government in Westminster, working with a Labour Government in Wales, really will make that difference. And we wait for the budget to see it.
The motion, and those who support it, are a mixture of the student union debating society—. I lost count of the number of times in which Plaid Cymru Members used the word 'demand', as though the volume of our voice mattered more than the quality of our argument. And alongside that student union approach to debating, you have a sort of Mystic Meg approach to the construction of propositions for debate. We don't know, and, actually, you don't know, what is going to be in the budget next week, and yet your motion tells us already that it's let Wales down.
Diolch yn fawr, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Wel, fe wneuthum wrando'n astud ar y ddadl. Bydd y Llywodraeth yn gwrthwynebu'r cynnig a gwelliant y Blaid Geidwadol. Mae yna agweddau ar y cynnig gwreiddiol y byddem yn cytuno â hwy, ac fe geisiaf ddychwelyd at y rheini'n ddiweddarach. Yr hyn na allwn gytuno yn ei gylch yw honiad sylfaenol y cynnig, a ailadroddwyd dro ar ôl tro gan Aelodau Plaid Cymru, nad yw ethol Llywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan—dewis a gymeradwywyd mewn 27 o'r 32 etholaeth yng Nghymru—yn gwneud unrhyw wahaniaeth, a bod yr holl Gymry a wnaeth cymaint i sicrhau'r Llywodraeth honno wedi gwneud camgymeriad.
Nawr, fe ddangosaf, Ddirprwy Lywydd, fod gan y Llywodraeth Lafur hon economi wleidyddol wahanol ar y sail y mae Alun Davies eisoes wedi'i nodi, agwedd wahanol tuag at y ffordd y bydd economeg y Deyrnas Unedig o fudd i bobl ledled y Deyrnas Unedig. Nid oes gennyf ddiddordeb, fel sydd gan Luke Fletcher, mewn ymagwedd genedlaetholgar tuag at Ystad y Goron, lle na ellir gwario arian yn unman arall yn y Deyrnas Unedig, hyd yn oed pan fydd hynny o fudd i bobl sydd ag anghenion y mae angen eu diwallu. Fe ddangoswn y bydd Llywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan, gan weithio gyda Llywodraeth Lafur yng Nghymru, yn gwneud y gwahaniaeth hwnnw. Ac fe arhoswn am y gyllideb i'w weld.
Mae'r cynnig, a'r rhai sy'n ei gefnogi, yn gymysgedd o gymdeithas drafod undeb myfyrwyr—. Collais gyfrif ar y nifer o weithiau y defnyddiodd Aelodau Plaid Cymru y gair 'galw', fel pe bai grym ein llais yn bwysicach nag ansawdd ein dadl. Ac ochr yn ochr â'r dull undeb myfyrwyr o drafod, mae gennych ryw fath o ddull Mystic Meg o adeiladu cynigion ar gyfer dadl. Nid ydym yn gwybod, ac nid ydych chi'n gwybod mewn gwirionedd, beth fydd yn y gyllideb yr wythnos nesaf, ac eto mae eich cynnig yn dweud wrthym eisoes ei bod wedi gwneud cam â Chymru.
Will you take an intervention? Thank you. This is a very, very clear motion put before the Senedd today. This is asking what the partnership in power brings us in Wales, what the benefits are. And, no, we don't know what is in the budget next week, but we should surely be able to know what it is that this Labour Welsh Government has as a set of expectations that have been made to UK Government about the kinds of things that would really make a difference to communities and individuals in Wales. That is what we have today, and we're seeing in Labour's amendment here a very clear indication that this Labour Welsh Government will not stand up for the people of Wales in making those, yes, demands, asks, call it what you like, to UK Government.
A wnewch chi dderbyn ymyriad? Diolch. Mae'r cynnig a gyflwynwyd gerbron y Senedd heddiw yn glir iawn. Mae'n gofyn beth y mae'r bartneriaeth bŵer yn ei roi i ni yng Nghymru, beth yw'r manteision. A na, nid ydym yn gwybod beth sydd yn y gyllideb yr wythnos nesaf, ond yn sicr dylem allu gwybod beth sydd gan y Llywodraeth Lafur hon yng Nghymru yn set o ddisgwyliadau a wnaed i Lywodraeth y DU am y mathau o bethau a fyddai'n gwneud gwahaniaeth gwirioneddol i gymunedau ac unigolion yng Nghymru. Dyna sydd gennym ni heddiw, ac rydym yn gweld arwydd clir iawn yng ngwelliant Llafur yma na fydd y Llywodraeth Lafur hon yng Nghymru yn sefyll dros bobl Cymru drwy wneud y galwadau hynny, y gofynion hynny, beth bynnag yr hoffech eu galw, i Lywodraeth y DU.
Well, of course, I completely reject that. I'll come, in a few moments, to the things that we have already said to the UK Government. It's there in the letter that I wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the first week that I became the Cabinet Secretary for finance. I'll come to those issues in a moment.
I would simply say, Llywydd, as far as the Conservative amendment is concerned, it is the product of collective amnesia. Who would have believed, reading that amendment, that the finances of the United Kingdom had been in their hands for 14 long years? I agreed with everything that Jane Dodds had to say on that. And I was reminded earlier this afternoon—. My colleague the Deputy First Minister referred to Winston Churchill. Churchill was asked, after the defeat of the Conservative Party in 1945, what message he thought that the people of the United Kingdom had given to the Conservative Party, and he said he thought that the message was that the people of the United Kingdom would appreciate a lengthy period of silence on the part of that party. And if the party were to reflect—[Interruption.] Yes, of course. Of course. A lengthy—[Interruption.] I'll just repeat: a lengthy period of silence is what Sir Winston recommended.
Wrth gwrs, rwy'n gwrthod hynny'n llwyr. Mewn ychydig eiliadau, fe ddof at y pethau yr ydym eisoes wedi'u dweud wrth Lywodraeth y DU. Mae yno yn y llythyr a ysgrifennais at Ganghellor y Trysorlys yn ystod yr wythnos gyntaf wedi imi ddod yn Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid. Fe af i'r afael â'r materion hynny mewn munud.
Hoffwn ddweud yn syml, Lywydd, o ran gwelliant y Ceidwadwyr, ei fod yn gynnyrch amnesia cyfunol. Pwy fyddai wedi credu, wrth ddarllen y gwelliant hwnnw, fod cyllid y Deyrnas Unedig wedi bod yn eu dwylo hwy ers 14 mlynedd hir? Roeddwn yn cytuno â phopeth a oedd gan Jane Dodds i'w ddweud ar hynny. A chefais fy atgoffa yn gynharach y prynhawn yma—. Cyfeiriodd fy nghyd-Aelod y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog at Winston Churchill. Gofynnwyd i Churchill, ar ôl i'r Blaid Geidwadol gael ei threchu yn 1945, pa neges y credai fod pobl y Deyrnas Unedig wedi ei rhoi i'r Blaid Geidwadol, a dywedodd ei fod yn credu mai'r neges oedd y byddai pobl y Deyrnas Unedig yn gwerthfawrogi cyfnod hir o dawelwch ar ran y blaid honno. A phe bai'r blaid yn myfyrio—[Torri ar draws.] Iawn, wrth gwrs. Wrth gwrs. Hir —[Torri ar draws.] Fe ailadroddaf: cyfnod hir o dawelwch yw'r hyn a argymhellodd Syr Winston.
Of course, the lengthy period of silence we've had from the former First Minister and finance Minister and all those Members is not one criticism of the failure of the Labour Government to deliver the winter fuel allowance for pensioners that will see 4,000 pensioners die, on your own figures. That's where the silence is, and that's why you should hang your head in shame.
Wrth gwrs, mae'r cyfnod hir o dawelwch a gawsom gan y cyn Brif Weinidog a'r Gweinidog cyllid a'r holl Aelodau hynny yn golygu na chafwyd unrhyw feirniadaeth o fethiant y Llywodraeth Lafur i ddarparu lwfans tanwydd y gaeaf i bensiynwyr a fydd yn gweld 4,000 o bensiynwyr yn marw, yn ôl eich ffigurau eich hun. Dyna lle mae'r distawrwydd, a dyna pam y dylai fod cywilydd arnoch.
There we are. Well, Llywydd, I'm afraid I think that the leader of the opposition draws attention to the wisdom of what Sir Winston Churchill had to say.
Look, what I'm going to do next is I'm going to set out briefly four key ways in which a Labour Government will make a difference to the UK economy and to the economic prospects of Wales.
It was surely one of the more shameful legacies of Jeremy Hunt that, when he left his responsibilities of Chancellor of the Exchequer, he had a five-year plan to reduce capital investment in the UK economy from 2.4 per cent to 1.7 per cent of GDP. You cannot grow an economy like the United Kingdom's unless you have public investment there to crowd in private investment and to create the conditions for growth. That, I believe, will start to be put right on 30 October. It will be a Government for investment, an investment for growth, and that agenda will make an enormous difference to Wales.
Secondly, it will be a Government that pays its bills. If Jeremy Hunt had no ideas on the capital side of his responsibilities, he left a £22 billion black hole on the revenue side of the Government. I know—[Interruption.] I know—. I know you think that if you shout loud enough—
Dyna ni. Wel, Lywydd, mae arnaf ofn fy mod yn credu bod arweinydd yr wrthblaid yn tynnu sylw at ddoethineb yr hyn a oedd gan Syr Winston Churchill i'w ddweud.
Edrychwch, yr hyn rwy'n mynd i'w wneud nesaf yw rhoi amlinelliad byr o bedair ffordd allweddol y bydd Llywodraeth Lafur yn gwneud gwahaniaeth i economi'r DU ac i ragolygon economaidd Cymru.
Mae'n sicr yn un o'r pethau mwyaf cywilyddus a adawodd Jeremy Hunt ar ei ôl, pan adawodd ei gyfrifoldebau fel Canghellor y Trysorlys, fod ganddo gynllun pum mlynedd i leihau buddsoddiad cyfalaf yn economi'r DU o 2.4 y cant i 1.7 y cant o'r cynnyrch domestig gros. Ni allwch dyfu economi fel un y Deyrnas Unedig oni bai bod gennych fuddsoddiad cyhoeddus yno i dyrru buddsoddiad preifat i mewn ac i greu'r amodau ar gyfer twf. Credaf y bydd hynny'n dechrau cael ei unioni ar 30 Hydref. Fe fydd yn Llywodraeth ar gyfer buddsoddi, buddsoddiad ar gyfer twf, a bydd yr agenda honno'n gwneud gwahaniaeth enfawr i Gymru.
Yn ail, fe fydd yn Llywodraeth a fydd yn talu ei biliau. Os nad oedd gan Jeremy Hunt unrhyw syniadau ar ochr gyfalaf ei gyfrifoldebau, fe adawodd dwll du gwerth £22 biliwn ar ochr refeniw'r Llywodraeth. Rwy'n gwybod—[Torri ar draws.] Rwy'n gwybod—. Rwy'n gwybod eich bod chi'n meddwl os gwaeddwch chi'n ddigon uchel—
I would like to listen to the response from the Cabinet Secretary in some silence, please.
Hoffwn wrando ar ymateb Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet mewn distawrwydd, os gwelwch yn dda.
There is absolutely no doubt at all, Dirprwy Lywydd, that the £22 billion black hole is the irresponsible result of a decision to reduce taxation with no plan at all of how to deal with the consequences. And £19 billion—£19 billion—of that £22 billion goes on recurring year after year after year. Now, I think that the incoming Labour Government will take those difficult decisions to make sure that the revenue side of the responsibilities of that Government are put right. And it will do it, I believe, in the way that Jane Dodds has suggested. Because the Government is committed not to raise the burden of taxation on working people who are already, as a result of Jeremy Hunt’s decisions, taxed at a level that is the highest in the last 70 years. It will be done by raising taxes on the shoulders of those who are able to pay for it.
And a third way in which this Government in Westminster, working with a Labour Government, is so very different to what has gone before is that it will begin to repair the damage done to our public services. You see, for the Conservative Party, public services are a luxury—they're what you get when you squeeze out a bit from the dividend of growth. What a Labour Government understands is that public services are not the product of growth—they are the precondition of growth. You cannot have growth in the economy unless you have public services that deliver a workforce fit to be in work, and a workforce with the skills that are needed to be there. I think the budget next week will make a start on repairing the damage of those 14 years of the starvation of our public services.
And, finally, in a final contrast, a final reason why people in Wales will know why they voted for that Labour Government, it will be a Labour Government that delivers on our commitment on workers' rights. Fourteen years of Conservatives' attack on the precious resource we have in our economy, the people who work in it, will be put right by that Labour Government, because the result of 14 years of sustained attack on workers' rights is that we have a stagnant United Kingdom. Social mobility is stagnant. Geographical movement is stagnant. Our economy has been stagnant for 14 years. Why would you, as a worker, take the risk of moving with your family to another part of the United Kingdom to take up a better job and to promote growth when you know that, in doing so, you will lose all the rights that you have accrued in the workplace in which you have made that start? [Interruption.]
Nid oes unrhyw amheuaeth o gwbl, Ddirprwy Lywydd, fod y twll du gwerth £22 biliwn yn ganlyniad anghyfrifol penderfyniad i leihau trethiant heb unrhyw gynllun o gwbl ar gyfer sut i ymdrin â'r canlyniadau. Ac mae £19 biliwn—£19 biliwn—o'r £22 biliwn hwnnw'n parhau flwyddyn ar ôl blwyddyn. Nawr, rwy'n credu y bydd y Llywodraeth Lafur newydd yn gwneud y penderfyniadau anodd hynny i sicrhau bod ochr refeniw cyfrifoldebau'r Llywodraeth honno'n cael eu hunioni. Ac rwy'n credu y bydd yn ei wneud yn y ffordd y mae Jane Dodds wedi awgrymu. Oherwydd mae'r Llywodraeth wedi ymrwymo i beidio â chodi baich trethiant ar bobl sy'n gweithio, sydd eisoes, o ganlyniad i benderfyniadau Jeremy Hunt, yn cael eu trethu ar y lefel uchaf yn y 70 mlynedd diwethaf. Bydd yn cael ei wneud drwy godi trethi ar y rhai sy'n gallu talu.
A thrydedd ffordd y mae'r Llywodraeth hon yn San Steffan, gan weithio gyda Llywodraeth Lafur, mor wahanol i'r hyn sydd wedi mynd o'r blaen yw y bydd yn dechrau atgyweirio'r niwed a wnaed i'n gwasanaethau cyhoeddus. Welwch chi, i'r Blaid Geidwadol, mae gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yn foethusrwydd—dyna beth a gewch pan fyddwch chi'n gwasgu tamaid bach allan o ddifidend twf. Yr hyn y mae Llywodraeth Lafur yn ei ddeall yw nad yw gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yn gynnyrch twf—rhagamod twf ydynt. Ni allwch gael twf yn yr economi oni bai bod gennych wasanaethau cyhoeddus sy'n darparu gweithlu sy'n ffit i fod mewn gwaith, a gweithlu gyda'r sgiliau angenrheidiol. Rwy'n credu y bydd y gyllideb yr wythnos nesaf yn dechrau atgyweirio niwed y 14 mlynedd o newyn yn ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus.
Ac yn olaf, mewn cyferbyniad terfynol, rheswm olaf pam y bydd pobl yng Nghymru yn gwybod pam y gwnaethant bleidleisio dros Lywodraeth Lafur, yw y bydd yn Llywodraeth Lafur a fydd yn cyflawni ein hymrwymiad ar hawliau gweithwyr. Bydd 14 mlynedd o ymosodiad y Ceidwadwyr ar yr adnodd gwerthfawr sydd gennym yn ein heconomi, y bobl sy'n gweithio ynddi, yn cael ei unioni gan y Llywodraeth Lafur, oherwydd canlyniad 14 mlynedd o ymosodiad parhaus ar hawliau gweithwyr yw bod gennym Deyrnas Unedig farwaidd. Mae symudedd cymdeithasol yn farwaidd. Mae symudiad daearyddol yn farwaidd. Mae ein heconomi wedi bod yn farwaidd ers 14 mlynedd. Pam y byddech chi, fel gweithiwr, yn cymryd y risg o symud gyda'ch teulu i ran arall o'r Deyrnas Unedig i gymryd swydd well ac i hyrwyddo twf pan fyddwch chi'n gwybod, wrth wneud hynny, y byddwch chi'n colli'r holl hawliau a gronnwyd gennych yn y gweithle lle dechreuoch chi? [Torri ar draws.]
Cabinet Secretary—
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet—
A Labour Government will put that right, and when it does that, alongside all the other things it will do, we will have a platform, a platform that Ministers here, Labour Ministers here, will, of course, stand up for and fight for—
Bydd Llywodraeth Lafur yn unioni hynny, a phan fydd yn gwneud hynny, ochr yn ochr â'r holl bethau eraill y bydd yn eu gwneud, bydd gennym lwyfan, llwyfan lle bydd Gweinidogion yma, Gweinidogion Llafur yma, wrth gwrs, yn sefyll dros ac yn ymladd drost—
Cabinet Secretary, I have given additional time.
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, rwyf wedi rhoi amser ychwanegol.
—the interests here in Wales. That's why I urge Members to vote against the motion, vote against the Conservative amendment, support the Labour amendment, and create that platform for future success.
—y buddiannau yma yng Nghymru. Dyna pam rwy'n annog yr Aelodau i bleidleisio yn erbyn y cynnig, pleidleisio yn erbyn gwelliant y Ceidwadwyr, cefnogi gwelliant Llafur, a chreu'r llwyfan hwnnw ar gyfer llwyddiant yn y dyfodol.
Galwaf ar Heledd Fychan i ymateb i'r ddadl.
I call on Heledd Fychan to reply to the debate.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. Well, we've been criticised for our motion, and I don't quite understand why, because the premise of this debate, as I set out at the very start, was to try and influence the budget. It wasn't predicting, but it was making sure, cross-party, on the things that we previously agreed on, especially the majority of us, that are we were reaffirming our commitment as a Senedd to those so that we could influence the budget. And, quite frankly, we just heard a robust defence of a budget that we haven't seen. The First Minister said last week that she doesn't know what's going to be in the upcoming budget. So, which is it? Do you, by now, know what's going to be in it and, therefore, you've got this robust defence? We weren't criticising a budget that we haven't seen—we're trying to influence it. And what we want to be clear on here is what are the Welsh Government's demands, calls, and the substance of them. And I asked a number of questions about why certain things have been deleted from the amendment. I asked if these were still your commitment as a Welsh Government. I received no response. It seemed to be a speech written by 10 Downing Street, putting this Welsh Government in its place. [Interruption.]
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Wel, rydym wedi cael ein beirniadu am ein cynnig, ac nid wyf yn deall yn iawn pam, oherwydd cynsail y ddadl hon, fel y nodais ar y dechrau, oedd ceisio dylanwadu ar y gyllideb. Nid oedd yn rhagweld, roedd yn gwneud yn siŵr, yn drawsbleidiol, o'r pethau y cytunwyd arnynt yn flaenorol, y mwyafrif ohonom yn enwedig, ein bod yn ailddatgan ein hymrwymiad fel Senedd i'r rheini fel y gallem ddylanwadu ar y gyllideb. Ac a dweud y gwir, fe glywsom amddiffyniad cadarn o gyllideb nad ydym wedi'i gweld. Dywedodd y Prif Weinidog yr wythnos diwethaf nad yw'n gwybod beth fydd yn y gyllideb sydd i ddod. Felly beth yw hi am fod? A ydych chi, erbyn hyn, yn gwybod beth fydd ynddi ac felly, fod gennych yr amddiffyniad cadarn hwn? Nid oeddem yn beirniadu cyllideb nad ydym wedi'i gweld—rydym yn ceisio dylanwadu arni. A'r hyn rydym am fod yn glir yn ei gylch yma yw beth yw gofynion, galwadau, Llywodraeth Cymru a'u sylwedd. A gofynnais nifer o gwestiynau ynghylch pam y mae rhai pethau wedi cael eu dileu o'r gwelliant. Gofynnais a oedd y rhain yn dal i fod yn ymrwymiad i chi fel Llywodraeth Cymru. Ni chefais ymateb. Ymddengys mai araith a ysgrifennwyd gan 10 Stryd Downing oedd hi, yn rhoi'r Llywodraeth hon yng Nghymru yn ei lle. [Torri ar draws.]
As I asked for silence for the Cabinet Secretary, it is fair also that we have silence for the response.
Gan imi ofyn am dawelwch i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae'n deg hefyd ein bod yn cael tawelwch ar gyfer yr ymateb.
You talked about those voters that voted for change only a few months ago. They voted change for the better, not change for the worse. And I'm sure they would like to see us united in standing up for our communities, calling out any cruel policies that are going to directly impact on them. Whilst I welcome some of the comments made by Peter Fox in his contribution, I too have to say it has been quite a turnaround after the election. I do recall, only a few months ago, you saying, Peter, that we had ample funding here in Wales. Well, which is it? And I think we do need to work cross-party here to make sure that we serve the people of Wales. After all, we all see the devastating impact of austerity. And the fact that there’s been—. Alun Davies is criticising austerity, whilst we see the UK Labour Government perpetuating austerity with the policies, and this is something we should all be united in calling out. The people of Wales have had enough of excuses, the delays, the u-turns. They are crying out for a Welsh Government that can actually punch above its weight and hold their Westminster partners to account, to demonstrate that it has real power in this partnership.
We haven’t seen the letter that was written by the Cabinet Secretary to the Chancellor. We don’t know what those demands are. So, we have to take it on face value that this amendment reflects the Welsh Government’s priorities. One thing I clearly asked was about HS2 funding, and I’m happy to take an intervention here. What are the Welsh Government’s demands? Is it really requesting a commitment to further discussions about funding in relation to HS2? A commitment to further discussion—isn’t the time for talking over? It’s time for delivery of what is owed to Wales. No intervention—okay.
So, by supporting this motion, we can, cross-party, send a strong message to the UK Labour Government that Wales cannot be taken for granted. This is about influencing next week’s budget. It’s about delivering fairness for the people of Wales. We should be united in standing up for everyone we represent. The fact that Labour will not condemn the continuation of the two-child benefit cap, and have deleted from our motion in terms of what will happen to pensioners here in Wales, is not just disappointing, it’s astounding, and so far removed from what people in Wales voted for when they voted for that change.
So, can we, please, put the people of Wales and those we represent first, not party before people, not party before Wales? We are elected to this Senedd. We should listen to the people of Wales, not the masters of this Welsh Labour Government who are in London?
Fe wnaethoch chi siarad am y pleidleiswyr a bleidleisiodd dros newid ychydig fisoedd yn ôl. Fe wnaethant bleidleisio dros newid er gwell, nid newid er gwaeth. Ac rwy'n siŵr y byddent yn hoffi ein gweld yn sefyll yn unedig dros ein cymunedau, gan dynnu sylw at unrhyw bolisïau creulon sy'n mynd i effeithio'n uniongyrchol arnynt. Er fy mod yn croesawu rhai o'r sylwadau a wnaed gan Peter Fox yn ei gyfraniad, mae'n rhaid i minnau hefyd ddweud ei fod yn dipyn o dro pedol ar ôl yr etholiad. Rwy'n eich cofio'n dweud, Peter, ychydig fisoedd yn ôl, fod gennym ddigon o arian yma yng Nghymru. Beth yw hi am fod? Ac rwy'n credu bod angen inni weithio'n drawsbleidiol yma i sicrhau ein bod yn gwasanaethu pobl Cymru. Wedi'r cyfan, rydym i gyd yn gweld effaith ddinistriol cyni. A'r ffaith bod—. Mae Alun Davies yn beirniadu cyni, tra bo Llywodraeth Lafur y DU yn parhau â chyni gyda'r polisïau, ac mae hyn yn rhywbeth y dylem i gyd dynnu sylw ato'n unedig. Mae pobl Cymru wedi cael digon o esgusodion, yr oedi, y troeon pedol. Maent yn crefu am Lywodraeth Cymru sy'n gallu gwneud yn well na'r disgwyl a dwyn eu partneriaid yn San Steffan i gyfrif, i ddangos bod ganddi bŵer gwirioneddol yn y bartneriaeth hon.
Nid ydym wedi gweld y llythyr a ysgrifennwyd gan Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet at y Canghellor. Nid ydym yn gwybod beth yw'r galwadau hynny. Felly, mae'n rhaid inni dderbyn ar ei olwg fod y gwelliant hwn yn adlewyrchu blaenoriaethau Llywodraeth Cymru. Un peth y gofynnais yn glir yn ei gylch oedd am gyllid HS2, ac rwy'n hapus i dderbyn ymyriad yma. Beth yw galwadau Llywodraeth Cymru? A yw'n gofyn am ymrwymiad i drafodaethau pellach am gyllid mewn perthynas â HS2? Ymrwymiad i drafod ymhellach—onid yw'r amser i siarad ar ben? Mae'n bryd darparu'r hyn sy'n ddyledus i Gymru. Dim ymyriad—iawn.
Felly, drwy gefnogi'r cynnig hwn, fe allwn, yn drawsbleidiol, anfon neges gref at Lywodraeth Lafur y DU na ellir cymryd Cymru'n ganiataol. Mae hyn yn ymwneud â dylanwadu ar gyllideb yr wythnos nesaf. Mae'n ymwneud â thegwch i bobl Cymru. Dylem fod yn unedig wrth sefyll dros bawb a gynrychiolwn. Mae'r ffaith nad yw Llafur am gondemnio parhad y cap dau blentyn ar fudd-daliadau, ac wedi dileu o'n cynnig yr hyn a fydd yn digwydd i bensiynwyr yma yng Nghymru, nid yn unig yn siomedig, mae'n syfrdanol, ac mor bell o'r hyn y pleidleisiodd pobl Cymru amdano pan wnaethant bleidleisio dros newid.
Felly, os gwelwch yn dda, a gawn ni roi pobl Cymru a'r rhai a gynrychiolwn yn gyntaf, yn lle rhoi plaid o flaen pobl, na phlaid o flaen Cymru? Cawn ein hethol i'r Senedd hon. Dylem wrando ar bobl Cymru, nid ar feistri'r Llywodraeth Lafur sydd yn Llundain.
Y cwestiwn yw: a ddylid derbyn y cynnig heb ei ddiwygio? A oes unrhyw Aelod yn gwrthwynebu? [Gwrthwynebiad.] Oes. Felly, gohiriaf y bleidlais ar yr eitem hon tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.
The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there are objections. I will, therefore, defer voting under this item until voting time.
Gohiriwyd y pleidleisio tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.
Voting deferred until voting time.
A daw hynny â ni at y cyfnod pleidleisio. Oni bai bod tri Aelod yn dymuno i mi ganu’r gloch, symudwn yn syth i’r cyfnod pleidleisio.
And that brings us to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I’ll proceed directly to the votes.
Felly, mae’r bleidlais gyntaf heddiw ar eitem 5, dadl Aelodau o dan Reol Sefydlog 11.21(iv)—cymorth i farw. Galwaf ar bleidlais ar y cynnig, a gyflwynwyd yn enw Julie Morgan. Agor y bleidlais. Cau’r bleidlais. O blaid 19, naw yn ymatal, 26 yn erbyn. Felly, mae’r cynnig wedi ei wrthod.
The first vote this afternoon is on item 5, the Member debate under Standing Order 11.21(iv) on assisted dying. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Julie Morgan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 19, nine abstentions and 26 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.
Eitem 5. Dadl Aelodau o dan Reol Sefydlog 11.21(iv) - Cymorth i farw: O blaid: 19, Yn erbyn: 26, Ymatal: 9
Gwrthodwyd y cynnig
Item 5. Member Debate under Standing Order 11.21(iv) - Assisted dying: For: 19, Against: 26, Abstain: 9
Motion has been rejected
Mae’r bleidlais nesaf ar eitem 8, dadl Plaid Cymru. Galwaf am bleidlais ar y cynnig heb ei ddiwygio, a gyflwynwyd yn enw Heledd Fychan. Os gwrthodir y cynnig, byddwn yn pleidleisio ar y gwelliannau a gyflwynwyd i’r cynnig. Agor y bleidlais. Cau’r bleidlais. O blaid 12, neb yn ymatal, 42 yn erbyn. Felly, mae'r cynnig wedi ei wrthod.
The next vote is on item 8, the Plaid Cymru debate. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. If the motion is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 42 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.
Eitem 8. Dadl Plaid Cymru - Cyllideb Llywodraeth y DU. Cynnig heb ei ddiwygio: O blaid: 12, Yn erbyn: 42, Ymatal: 0
Gwrthodwyd y cynnig
Item 8. Plaid Cymru Debate - UK Government budget. Motion without amendment: For: 12, Against: 42, Abstain: 0
Motion has been rejected
Galwaf nawr am bleidlais ar welliant 1, a gyflwynwyd yn enw Darren Millar. Os derbynnir gwelliant 1, caiff gwelliant 2 ei ddad-ddethol. Agor y bleidlais. Cau'r bleidlais. O blaid 15, 10 yn ymatal, 29 yn erbyn. Felly, mae gwelliant 1 wedi ei wrthod.
I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, 10 abstentions, 29 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.
Eitem 8. Dadl Plaid Cymru - Cyllideb Llywodraeth y DU. Gwelliant 1, cyflwynwyd yn enw Darren Millar: O blaid: 15, Yn erbyn: 29, Ymatal: 10
Gwrthodwyd y gwelliant
Item 8. Plaid Cymru Debate - UK Government budget. Amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar: For: 15, Against: 29, Abstain: 10
Amendment has been rejected
Nesaf, galwaf am bleidlais ar welliant 2, a gyflwynwyd yn enw Jane Hutt. Agor y bleidlais. Cau'r bleidlais. Mae'r bleidlais yn gyfartal, felly, fel sy'n ofynnol o dan Reol Sefydlog 6.20, rwy'n arfer fy mhleidlais fwrw i bleidleisio yn erbyn y gwelliant. Felly, 27 o blaid, neb yn ymatal, 28 yn erbyn. Mae gwelliant 2 wedi ei wrthod.
I now call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied and, as required under Standing Order 6.20, I exercise my casting vote to vote against the amendment. Therefore, the result is that there 27 in favour, no abstentions and 28 against. Amendment 2 is, therefore, not agreed.
Eitem 8. Dadl Plaid Cymru - Cyllideb Llywodraeth y DU. Gwelliant 2, cyflwynwyd yn enw Jane Hutt: O blaid: 27, Yn erbyn: 27, Ymatal: 0
Gan fod nifer y pleidleisiau yn gyfartal, defnyddiodd y Dirprwy Lywydd ei bleidlais fwrw yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 6.20(ii).
Gwrthodwyd y gwelliant
Item 8. Plaid Cymru Debate - UK Government budget. Amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt: For: 27, Against: 27, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Deputy Presiding Officer used his casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejected
Gan nad yw'r Senedd wedi derbyn y cynnig heb ei ddiwygio nac wedi derbyn y gwelliannau a gyflwynwyd i'r cynnig, caiff y cynnig, felly, ei wrthod.
As the Senedd has not agreed the motion without amendment and has not agreed to the amendments tabled to the motion, the motion is, therefore, not agreed.
And that brings the voting to an end today. Please leave quietly as the short debate is about to start.
Daw hynny â'r pleidleisio i ben am heddiw. Os gwelwch yn dda, gadewch yn dawel gan fod y ddadl fer ar fin dechrau.
Symudwn nawr at y ddadl fer, a galwaf ar Mike Hedges i siarad am y pwnc a ddewiswyd ganddo. Mike.
We'll move now to the short debate, and I call on Mike Hedges to speak on the topic that he has chosen. Mike.
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I have given a minute to Tom Giffard.
The Welsh economy is performing poorly compared to the rest of Great Britain and has done so for many years. GVA per head in Wales in 2021 was £22,380, which was 74.1 per cent of the UK figure, the second lowest of the UK countries and English regions. London had the highest GVA per head at £54,686, which was significantly above the UK average. These figures highlight the economic disparity, with London being much wealthier than the other parts.
The economic differences between regions, such as those observed in the UK’s GVA per head, can be attributed to a variety of factors: industrial structure, investment levels, workforce skills, economic policy and geographical factors. But, the development of fast broadband reduces the need for proximity to markets for many areas of the economy. Wales has a greater proportion of its population working in manufacturing, public administration, health and social services, agriculture, forestry and fishing than either the UK as a whole or the south-east of England. Wales has a smaller proportion of its workforce in ICT, real estate, administrative and support services, professional, scientific and technical activities, arts and entertainment and, crucially, life sciences than either the UK as a whole or the south-east of England. That identifies where our problems are with our economy. There is a shortage of employment in higher paid sectors such as ICT and life sciences, and that is one of the major causes of our GDP and GVA being low.
The most successful regions in Europe are based around capital cities, and that is also true of Wales, with the area around Cardiff the most successful. But, this success does not go as far as the Glamorgan and Gwent valleys that are part of the Cardiff city region or as far as Swansea. Outside capital cities there are successful regions in and around cities such as Hamburg, Bavaria, and Salzburg. In all three, life sciences and ICT, both via inward investment and, more importantly, growing companies with support from universities, are a major part of their economy. They’ve decided that their key are life sciences and ICT. We’ve never done that. I keep on asking for it, but we’ve never done that. And I think that if you look at successful economies throughout Europe, those are the two driving factors. I could talk about Ireland, but Ireland is even more complicated because of the way that they deal with tax and headquarters. But, in general, those are the two industries that really do drive economies.
From the 1940s to the 1970s, British Governments steered manufacturing businesses to peripheral regions designated as needing more employment. In the 1930s, we had the Treforest industrial estate. We had lots of things coming into Wales, but the most successful Government regional policy was in the 1960s, when it brought various Government bodies to Wales, such as the Royal Mint to Llantrisant, Companies House to Cardiff, the Office for National Statistics to Newport and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Centre to Swansea. DVLC has now become the major non-local authority and health employer in the whole of west Glamorgan, and that's a role that used to be held by Tata Steel, but unfortunately, due to changes that are taking place there, we're now highly dependent on the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Rwyf wedi rhoi munud i Tom Giffard.
Mae economi Cymru yn perfformio'n wael o'i gymharu â gweddill Prydain ac wedi gwneud hynny ers blynyddoedd lawer. Roedd gwerth ychwanegol gros y pen yng Nghymru yn 2021 yn £22,380, sef 74.1 y cant o ffigur y DU, yr ail isaf o wledydd y DU a rhanbarthau Lloegr. Llundain oedd â'r gwerth ychwanegol gros uchaf y pen, sef £54,686, a oedd yn sylweddol uwch na chyfartaledd y DU. Mae'r ffigurau hyn yn amlygu'r anghyfartaledd economaidd, gyda Llundain yn llawer cyfoethocach na'r rhannau eraill.
Gellir priodoli'r gwahaniaethau economaidd rhwng rhanbarthau, fel y rhai a welwyd yng ngwerth ychwanegol gros y pen y DU, i amrywiaeth o ffactorau: strwythur diwydiannol, lefelau buddsoddi, sgiliau'r gweithlu, polisi economaidd a ffactorau daearyddol. Ond mae datblygu band eang cyflym yn lleihau'r angen am agosrwydd at farchnadoedd i lawer o feysydd o'r economi. Mae gan Gymru gyfran uwch o'i phoblogaeth yn gweithio ym maes gweithgynhyrchu, gweinyddiaeth gyhoeddus, iechyd a gwasanaethau cymdeithasol, amaethyddiaeth, coedwigaeth a physgota na naill ai'r DU gyfan neu dde-ddwyrain Lloegr. Mae gan Gymru gyfran lai o'i gweithlu mewn TGCh, eiddo tirol, gwasanaethau gweinyddol a chymorth, gweithgareddau proffesiynol, gwyddonol a thechnegol, y celfyddydau ac adloniant ac yn hollbwysig, gwyddorau bywyd na naill ai'r DU gyfan neu dde-ddwyrain Lloegr. Mae hyn yn nodi lle mae ein problemau gyda'n heconomi. Ceir prinder cyflogaeth mewn sectorau cyflog uwch fel TGCh a gwyddorau bywyd, a dyna un o brif achosion ein cynnyrch domestig gros a'n gwerth ychwanegol gros isel.
Mae'r rhanbarthau mwyaf llwyddiannus yn Ewrop wedi'u lleoli o amgylch prifddinasoedd, ac mae hynny hefyd yn wir am Gymru, a'r ardal o amgylch Caerdydd yw'r fwyaf llwyddiannus. Ond nid yw'r llwyddiant hwn yn mynd mor bell â chymoedd Morgannwg a Gwent sy'n rhan o ddinas-ranbarth Caerdydd na chyn belled ag Abertawe. Y tu allan i brifddinasoedd mae rhanbarthau llwyddiannus o fewn ac o amgylch dinasoedd fel Hamburg, Bafaria, a Salzburg. Ym mhob un o'r tair, mae gwyddorau bywyd a TGCh, trwy fewnfuddsoddiad ac yn bwysicach fyth, cwmnïau sy'n tyfu gyda chefnogaeth gan brifysgolion, yn rhan fawr o'u heconomi. Maent wedi penderfynu mai eu hallwedd yw gwyddorau bywyd a TGCh. Nid ydym erioed wedi gwneud hynny. Rwy'n dal i ofyn amdano, ond nid ydym erioed wedi gwneud hynny. Ac os edrychwch chi ar economïau llwyddiannus ledled Ewrop, dyna'r ddau ffactor ysgogol. Gallwn siarad am Iwerddon, ond mae Iwerddon hyd yn oed yn fwy cymhleth oherwydd y ffordd y maent yn ymdrin â threthiant a phencadlysoedd. Ond yn gyffredinol, dyna'r ddau ddiwydiant sy'n gyrru economïau mewn gwirionedd.
O'r 1940au i'r 1970au, cyfeiriodd Llywodraethau Prydeinig fusnesau gweithgynhyrchu tuag at ranbarthau ymylol a ddynodwyd fel rhai sydd angen mwy o gyflogaeth. Yn y 1930au, cawsom ystad ddiwydiannol Trefforest. Cawsom lawer o bethau yn dod i mewn i Gymru, ond gwelwyd y polisi rhanbarthol mwyaf llwyddiannus gan y Llywodraeth yn y 1960au, pan ddaeth ag amryw o gyrff Llywodraeth i Gymru, megis y Bathdy Brenhinol i Lantrisant, Tŷ'r Cwmnïau i Gaerdydd, y Swyddfa Ystadegau Gwladol i Gasnewydd a'r Ganolfan Trwyddedu Gyrwyr a Cherbydau i Abertawe. Mae'r DVLC bellach wedi dod yn brif gyflogwr nad yw'n gysylltiedig ag awdurdod lleol na iechyd yng ngorllewin Morgannwg gyfan, a Tata Steel a arferai fod â'r rôl honno, ond yn anffodus, oherwydd newidiadau sy'n digwydd yno, rydym bellach yn ddibynnol iawn ar yr Asiantaeth Trwyddedu Gyrwyr a Cherbydau.
In the early 1980s, enterprise zones were created by the Conservative Government at Westminster in order to stimulate the economy. Wales had three such zones, at Milford, Delyn and the largest in Britain in Swansea. Initially, retail was excluded from enterprise zones, but in many, including Swansea, it became a significant part of the zone. And as the Minister knows, in Swansea, the term 'enterprise zone' is used for 'out-of-city shopping centre'. Their purpose was to stimulate private sector economic activity, thus creating employment in less well-off areas. The report from the Work Foundation stated that 80 per cent of the jobs created in enterprise zones are displaced from other places; the prosperity they bring is short-lived; and each job costs £23,000 to create. It has been suggested that many of the new jobs were displaced from within the same town or city, and actually, quite often, from an industrial estate nearby.
In the 2011 budget, a new round of enterprise zones were created. Wales swiftly followed, setting up enterprise zones across Wales. Whilst the Cardiff Central enterprise zone and Deeside enterprise zone have been successful, having been based in growth areas, the other zones have been much less successful, and I think there needs to be review of whether we are actually getting economic benefit from the other enterprise zones. I would say, 'no'. I’m sure the Minister will go and tell me, 'yes'. But if you look at the number of jobs created in those enterprise zones, they are pitifully small.
The Welsh Development Agency was established in 1976, set up to improve the Welsh economy by encouraging business development and investment in Wales, clearing areas that had previously been used for industry, and improving the environment. Those were some of the aims, and it got a lot of credit back in the 1970s and 1980s. It brought in, secured and safeguarded investment from major companies such as Ford, Bosch, Panasonic, Sony, Hoover, TRW, Anglesey Aluminium, Toyota and British Airways. The question is: how many of them are still here?
And I think that’s been one of the things about our inward investment: they come, they take, they go. And that, to me, is a serious cause for concern. It costs us a lot of money in the short term to attract these companies and we really feel pleased, and everybody goes and gets a photograph with it being opened, and then, it closes very quickly. I mean, Bosch is the classic example, and I think Bosch has opened and closed during the time I’ve been a Member here. You cannot be a successful economy on branch factories. And those that survived, are the employment levels anywhere near what was promised or what was achieved at the beginning?
We also had financial service companies such as Legal & General and Lloyds Bank. And we’ve never really been very good at getting them in large numbers. The one great success, South Glamorgan County Council and the WDA helped establish Admiral Insurance, which is now a FTSE 100 company and one of the few major start-up successes in Wales. I think we really need to see how we can create more Admiral Insurances, because that is really important to us. It’s something that was a start-up here, and not only was it a start-up here, a number of other companies spun off it, so that it isn’t just Admiral Insurance, it’s some of the other companies that have spun off it and also been very successful.
Technium was the brand name of a business incubation scheme in Wales. The scheme provided tenants with office space, business support, fast telecom links and venture finance. The concept was originally developed by a partnership between Swansea University and the WDA, which built an innovation centre. This project led to the construction of the first technium building, a facility to house general technology. There have been successes from the Swansea technium programme, and there are companies still there, and there are companies still developing there and there’s employment being developed there. But what we learned was, branding every advanced factory in Wales as techniums was bound to fail; they were just advanced factories by another name.
The model where Government, academia, and industry work together to create a vibrant innovation economy is one of the holy grails for policy makers around the world, and it has really worked in a number of places. I'm thinking of Cambridge, but also around Bristol, and I think around Leamington Spa. This is where it's been really successful. And it's been driven by the universities and supported by Government, not run as a Government initiative. The key is university buy-in and university support.
Ar ddechrau'r 1980au, crëwyd ardaloedd menter gan y Llywodraeth Geidwadol yn San Steffan er mwyn ysgogi'r economi. Roedd gan Gymru dair ardal o'r fath, yn Aberdaugleddau, Delyn a'r fwyaf ym Mhrydain yn Abertawe. I ddechrau, cafodd manwerthu ei eithrio o ardaloedd menter, ond mewn llawer, gan gynnwys Abertawe, daeth yn rhan sylweddol o'r ardal. Ac fel y gŵyr y Gweinidog, yn Abertawe, defnyddir y term 'ardal fenter' ar gyfer 'canolfan siopa y tu allan i'r ddinas'. Eu pwrpas oedd ysgogi gweithgarwch economaidd y sector preifat, a thrwy hynny greu cyflogaeth mewn ardaloedd llai cefnog. Nododd adroddiad y Sefydliad Gwaith fod 80 y cant o'r swyddi sy'n cael eu creu mewn ardaloedd menter yn cael eu dadleoli o lefydd eraill; byrhoedlog yw'r ffyniant a ddaw yn eu sgil; ac mae pob swydd yn costio £23,000 i'w chreu. Awgrymwyd bod llawer o'r swyddi newydd wedi cael eu dadleoli o'r un dref neu ddinas, ac yn eithaf aml mewn gwirionedd, o ystad ddiwydiannol gerllaw.
Yng nghyllideb 2011, crëwyd rownd newydd o ardaloedd menter. Dilynodd Cymru yn gyflym, gan sefydlu ardaloedd menter ledled Cymru. Er bod ardal fenter Canol Caerdydd ac ardal fenter Glannau Dyfrdwy wedi bod yn llwyddiannus, ar ôl cael eu lleoli mewn ardaloedd twf, mae'r ardaloedd eraill wedi bod yn llawer llai llwyddiannus, ac rwy'n credu bod angen adolygu i weld a ydym yn cael budd economaidd o'r ardaloedd menter eraill mewn gwirionedd. Buaswn i'n dweud, 'na'. Rwy'n siŵr y bydd y Gweinidog yn dweud ein bod. Ond os edrychwch chi ar nifer y swyddi sy'n cael eu creu yn yr ardaloedd menter hynny, maent yn druenus o fach.
Sefydlwyd Awdurdod Datblygu Cymru ym 1976, i wella economi Cymru drwy annog datblygu busnes a buddsoddiad yng Nghymru, clirio mannau a ddefnyddid yn flaenorol ar gyfer diwydiant, a gwella'r amgylchedd. Dyna rai o'r nodau, a chafodd lawer o glod yn ôl yn y 1970au a'r 1980au. Fe wnaeth ddenu, sicrhau a diogelu mewnfuddsoddiad gan gwmnïau mawr fel Ford, Bosch, Panasonic, Sony, Hoover, TRW, Alwminiwm Môn, Toyota a British Airways. Y cwestiwn yw: faint ohonynt sydd yma o hyd?
Ac rwy'n credu bod hynny wedi bod yn un o'r pethau am ein mewnfuddsoddiad: maent yn dod, maent yn cymryd, maent yn mynd. Ac i mi, mae hynny'n achos pryder difrifol. Mae'n costio llawer o arian i ni yn y tymor byr i ddenu'r cwmnïau hyn ac rydym yn teimlo'n falch iawn, ac mae pawb yn mynd i gael tynnu ei lun yn yr agoriad, ac yna, mae'n cau'n gyflym iawn. Hynny yw, Bosch yw'r enghraifft glasurol, ac rwy'n credu bod Bosch wedi agor a chau yn ystod yr amser y bûm yn Aelod yma. Ni allwch fod yn economi lwyddiannus ar ffatrïoedd cangen. A'r rhai a oroesodd, a yw'r lefelau cyflogaeth yn agos at yr hyn a addawyd neu'r hyn a gyflawnwyd ar y dechrau?
Roedd gennym gwmnïau gwasanaethau ariannol hefyd fel Legal & General a Lloyds Bank. Ac nid ydym erioed wedi bod yn dda iawn am eu cael mewn niferoedd mawr. Yr un llwyddiant mawr, y cynorthwyodd Cyngor Sir De Morgannwg ac Awdurdod Datblygu Cymru i'w sefydlu, yw Admiral Insurance, sydd bellach yn gwmni FTSE 100 ac yn un o'r ychydig lwyddiannau mawr a ddechreuodd yng Nghymru. Rwy'n credu bod gwir angen inni weld sut y gallwn greu mwy o Admiral Insurances, oherwydd mae hynny'n bwysig iawn i ni. Mae'n rhywbeth a ddechreuodd yma, ac nid yn unig ei fod wedi dechrau yma, fe wnaeth nifer o gwmnïau eraill ymsefydlu ohono, fel nad Admiral Insurance yn unig ydyw, ond rhai o'r cwmnïau eraill sydd wedi deillio ohono a hefyd wedi dod yn llwyddiannus iawn.
Technium oedd yr enw brand ar gynllun deori busnes yng Nghymru. Roedd y cynllun yn darparu gofod swyddfa i denantiaid, cymorth busnes, cysylltiadau telathrebu cyflym a chyllid menter. Datblygwyd y cysyniad yn wreiddiol gan bartneriaeth rhwng Prifysgol Abertawe ac Awdurdod Datblygu Cymru, a adeiladodd ganolfan arloesi. Arweiniodd y prosiect hwn at adeiladu'r adeilad technium cyntaf, cyfleuster i gartrefu technoleg gyffredinol. Mae llwyddiannau wedi bod o raglen technium Abertawe, ac mae cwmnïau'n dal yno, ac mae cwmnïau'n dal i ddatblygu yno ac mae cyflogaeth yn cael ei datblygu yno. Ond yr hyn a ddysgwyd gennym oedd bod brandio pob ffatri uwch yng Nghymru fel technium yn sicr o fethu; ffatrïoedd uwch dan enw arall oeddent, dyna i gyd.
Mae'r model lle mae'r Llywodraeth, y byd academaidd a diwydiant yn gweithio gyda'i gilydd i greu economi arloesi fywiog yn un o'r grealau sanctaidd i wneuthurwyr polisi ledled y byd, ac mae wedi gweithio'n dda mewn nifer o leoedd. Rwy'n meddwl am Gaergrawnt, ond hefyd o gwmpas Bryste, ac o gwmpas Leamington Spa. Dyma lle mae wedi bod yn llwyddiannus iawn. Ac mae wedi cael ei ysgogi gan y prifysgolion a'i gefnogi gan y Llywodraeth, nid ei redeg fel cynllun Llywodraeth. Yr allwedd yw cefnogaeth a chymorth prifysgol.
The most recent innovation was the Sêr Cymru programme, which was designed to build a strong and dynamic scientific research base in Wales. Phase 4 of the programme is now focusing on inspiring the next generation of scientists and developing innovations to help solve the socioeconomic challenges faced in Wales. The Sêr programme has adapted to align with changing research developments and innovation drivers, which, in turn, have responded to economic and health issues.
We know that the Welsh economy is doing less well than the British economy. One development that I would like to highlight, and which I'm very supportive of, is M-SParc in the Bangor area. Part of Bangor University in Menai Science Park, or M-SParc, is where exciting and cutting-edge companies in the science and technology sectors, particularly low-carbon, digital and life science sectors, are making their home, and receive support to develop their businesses. The thing to note about this is that it came from Bangor University; it wasn't a Government initiative. It had Government support, and a former Government Minister became head of it at one time, but it was being supported by the Government, but driven by the university. It wasn’t that the Government decided to plonk a building down there and said, 'This is going to work', because it doesn't; you need the university to buy in.
Bangor University has been very supportive of it, with industrial collaboration, whilst providing opportunities to graduates and to people who are underemployed or who wish to upskill and those wanting a career change. It's starting to make a difference up in north-west Wales. It's only a small development, but I think it's got to grow organically. The worst thing we could do is if the Welsh Government and the Senedd were say, 'M-SParc is going really well; if we go and build them two more buildings and tell them that they can have some money, then they're bound to grow two or three times as fast.' It has to grow organically. That's how successes happen. It's not by somebody saying, 'We've got a great idea. This is bound to work.'
The skills academy at M-SParc has been built to bridge the skills gap in north Wales, particularly in digital science and technology and the creative fields, providing opportunities including degree apprenticeships, work placements and career opportunities. M-SParc is the ecosystem that brings academia, business, industry and enterprise together. Bangor University students are encouraged to take work placements and internships there, with their tenants, and over 70 per cent of internships become careers at M-SParc. So, you've got the university, the university is churning out graduates, they're then going to work in M-SParc, having gone through internships there. That is a virtuous circle.
As I said earlier, we know that Wales has substantially less than its population share of its workforce in ICT, life sciences, real estate activities, administrative and support services, professional, scientific and technical activities, arts and entertainment than either the UK as a whole or the south-east of England. Successful economies have a mix of inward investment from international companies and locally developed companies. What you really want, though, if you can have inward investment, you want to be their regional centre, not their branch factory. I think that's what Salzburg has done and what Hamburg has done, and much more so Cork and Dublin. They've become the regional centre—the 'region' being Europe—rather than being a sort of branch factory, which is the easiest place to close.
Major universities are very important to develop the economy. The key growth areas of life sciences and ICT are important to successful economies. Continuing to search for the golden bullet of economic development has not worked. There have been successes and failures with each strategy, but not enough successes, apart from the relocation of Government departments and agencies. We need to learn from successes such as Admiral in Wales and successes in other parts of Europe. I think one of the problems we have is that we're not very good at learning from other places in Europe. We believe that we are Welsh/British and we're different. If it works in Salzburg, if it works in Hamburg, why wouldn't it work here? Building advanced factories and even giving them a new name does not work.
I'm calling for five key actions: produce a strategy to increase ICT and life science employment in Wales via inward investment and growing and creating Welsh firms; negotiate with the Welsh Government the relocation of Westminster Government services to Wales; hold a summit followed by an action plan with the universities in Wales on developing companies from university research; set a target that, each year, Welsh GDP will increase by 1 per cent compared to the UK. In 25 years' time, we'll be at 100 per cent of it. It's easy to say that we can go faster than that, but that really is a direction. The final thing is that we need to make sure that everybody’s working together and nobody is trying to tell the developers, no-one’s trying to tell the universities what to do, you have to get their buy-in. Sorry, Tom, over to you.
Yr arloesedd diweddaraf oedd rhaglen Sêr Cymru, a gynlluniwyd i adeiladu sylfaen ymchwil wyddonol gref a deinamig yng Nghymru. Mae cam 4 y rhaglen bellach yn canolbwyntio ar ysbrydoli'r genhedlaeth nesaf o wyddonwyr a datblygu datblygiadau arloesol i helpu i ddatrys yr heriau economaidd-gymdeithasol sy'n wynebu Cymru. Mae rhaglen Sêr wedi addasu i gyd-fynd â datblygiadau ymchwil newidiol ac ysgogwyr arloesi, sydd, yn eu tro, wedi ymateb i faterion economaidd ac iechyd.
Gwyddom nad yw economi Cymru yn gwneud cystal nag economi Prydain. Un datblygiad yr hoffwn dynnu sylw ato, ac a gefnogaf yn fawr, yw M-SParc yn ardal Bangor. Rhan o Brifysgol Bangor ym Mharc Gwyddoniaeth Menai, neu M-SParc, yw lle mae cwmnïau cyffrous a blaengar yn y sectorau gwyddoniaeth a thechnoleg, yn enwedig sectorau carbon isel, digidol a gwyddorau bywyd, yn ymgartrefu ac yn derbyn cymorth i ddatblygu eu busnesau. Y peth i'w nodi am hyn yw ei fod wedi deillio o Brifysgol Bangor; nid cynllun Llywodraeth ydoedd. Cafodd gefnogaeth y Llywodraeth, a daeth cyn Weinidog y Llywodraeth yn bennaeth arno ar un adeg, ond câi ei gefnogi gan y Llywodraeth, a'i yrru gan y brifysgol, yn hytrach na bod y Llywodraeth wedi penderfynu cael adeilad yno a dweud, 'Mae hyn yn mynd i weithio', oherwydd ni wnaiff; mae angen cefnogaeth y brifysgol.
Mae Prifysgol Bangor wedi bod yn gefnogol iawn iddo, gyda chydweithrediad diwydiannol, gan ddarparu cyfleoedd i raddedigion ac i bobl sydd wedi'u tangyflogi neu sy'n dymuno uwchsgilio a'r rhai sydd eisiau newid gyrfa. Mae'n dechrau gwneud gwahaniaeth i fyny yng ngogledd-orllewin Cymru. Dim ond datblygiad bach ydyw, ond rwy'n credu bod yn rhaid iddo dyfu'n organig. Y peth gwaethaf y gallem ni ei wneud yw pe bai Llywodraeth Cymru a'r Senedd yn dweud, 'Mae M-SParc yn mynd yn dda iawn; os awn i adeiladu dau adeilad arall iddynt a dweud wrthynt y gallant gael rhywfaint o arian, maent yn siŵr o dyfu ddwy neu dair gwaith mor gyflym.' Mae'n rhaid iddo dyfu'n organig. Dyna sut y mae llwyddiant yn digwydd. Nid yw'n digwydd am fod rhywun yn dweud, 'Mae gennym syniad gwych. Mae hyn yn sicr o weithio.'
Mae'r academi sgiliau yn M-SParc wedi'i hadeiladu i bontio'r bwlch sgiliau yng ngogledd Cymru, yn enwedig mewn gwyddoniaeth a thechnoleg ddigidol a'r meysydd creadigol, gan ddarparu cyfleoedd gan gynnwys gradd-brentisiaethau, lleoliadau gwaith a chyfleoedd gyrfa. M-SParc yw'r ecosystem sy'n dod â'r byd academaidd, busnes, diwydiant a menter at ei gilydd. Anogir myfyrwyr Prifysgol Bangor i ymgymryd â lleoliadau gwaith ac interniaethau yno, gyda'u tenantiaid, ac mae dros 70 y cant o interniaethau'n dod yn yrfaoedd yn M-SParc. Felly, mae gennych chi'r brifysgol, mae'r brifysgol yn cynhyrchu graddedigion, maent yn mynd i weithio yn M-SParc, ar ôl mynd trwy interniaethau yno. Mae hwnnw'n gylch rhinweddol.
Fel y dywedais yn gynharach, gwyddom fod gan Gymru lawer llai na'i chyfran o'r boblogaeth o'i gweithlu mewn TGCh, gwyddorau bywyd, gweithgareddau eiddo tirol, gwasanaethau gweinyddol a chymorth, gweithgareddau proffesiynol, gwyddonol a thechnegol, y celfyddydau ac adloniant na naill ai'r DU gyfan neu dde-ddwyrain Lloegr. Mae gan economïau llwyddiannus gymysgedd o fewnfuddsoddiad gan gwmnïau rhyngwladol a chwmnïau a ddatblygwyd yn lleol. Yr hyn rydych chi ei eisiau mewn gwirionedd, serch hynny, os gallwch chi gael mewnfuddsoddiad, rydych chi am fod yn ganolfan ranbarthol iddynt, nid yn ffatri gangen. Rwy'n credu mai dyna y mae Salzburg wedi'i wneud a'r hyn y mae Hamburg wedi'i wneud, a Cork a Dulyn yn fwy o lawer. Maent wedi dod yn ganolfan ranbarthol—y 'rhanbarth' yw Ewrop—yn hytrach na bod yn fath o ffatri gangen, sef y lle hawsaf i'w gau.
Mae prifysgolion mawr yn bwysig iawn i ddatblygu'r economi. Mae meysydd twf allweddol gwyddorau bywyd a TGCh yn bwysig i economïau llwyddiannus. Nid yw parhau i chwilio am ateb i bob dim o ran datblygu economaidd wedi gweithio. Cafwyd llwyddiannau a methiannau gyda phob strategaeth, ond dim digon o lwyddiannau, ar wahân i adleoli adrannau ac asiantaethau'r Llywodraeth. Mae angen inni ddysgu o lwyddiannau fel Admiral yng Nghymru a llwyddiannau mewn rhannau eraill o Ewrop. Rwy'n credu mai un o'r problemau sydd gennym yw nad ydym yn dda iawn am ddysgu o leoedd eraill yn Ewrop. Credwn ein bod yn Gymry/Prydeinwyr a'n bod yn wahanol. Os yw'n gweithio yn Salzburg, os yw'n gweithio yn Hamburg, pam na fyddai'n gweithio yma? Nid yw adeiladu ffatrïoedd uwch a hyd yn oed rhoi enw newydd iddynt yn gweithio.
Rwy'n galw am bum cam allweddol: llunio strategaeth i gynyddu cyflogaeth TGCh a gwyddorau bywyd yng Nghymru drwy fewnfuddsoddiad a thyfu a chreu cwmnïau o Gymru; trafod adleoli gwasanaethau Llywodraeth San Steffan i Gymru gyda Llywodraeth Cymru; cynnal uwchgynhadledd a chynllun gweithredu i ddilyn gyda'r prifysgolion yng Nghymru ar ddatblygu cwmnïau o ymchwil prifysgol; gosod targed y bydd cynnyrch domestig gros Cymru, bob blwyddyn, yn cynyddu 1 y cant o'i gymharu â'r DU. Mewn 25 mlynedd, byddwn ar 100 y cant ohono. Mae'n hawdd dweud y gallwn fynd yn gyflymach na hynny, ond mae hwnnw'n gyfeiriad go iawn. Y peth olaf yw bod angen inni sicrhau bod pawb yn gweithio gyda'i gilydd ac nad oes neb yn ceisio dweud wrth y datblygwyr, neb yn ceisio dweud wrth y prifysgolion beth i'w wneud, mae'n rhaid ichi gael eu cefnogaeth. Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, Tom, draw atoch chi.
I will call Tom to reply. [Laughter.] Tom Giffard.
Fe alwaf ar Tom i ymateb. [Chwerthin.] Tom Giffard
Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to Mike for bringing this debate to the floor of the Senedd on the structural issues in the Welsh economy, and for his usual unvarnished assessment, I think, of the economy here in Wales. I just wanted to use my minute to make the case for our planning system, which I think is something that we know does hold back economic growth in this country. I welcome the fact that the UK Labour Government has made noises about working in this space. The two biggest things I think that hold us back are housing and transport. For too many people my age and younger, housing is an aspiration not a reality. We know that the planning system is both burdensome, it’s time consuming, and adds expenses, which frankly, in lots of instances, don’t need to be there, onto the cost of buying a home.
Then secondly, to look at transport, we’ve debated at length in this Chamber, including today on HS2, only to see European neighbours like France and Italy and others build high-speed rail infrastructure at a fraction of the cost that we are doing it in the United Kingdom. That is also because of our planning system. So, I welcome the warm words from the Labour Government in this space at a UK level, and I hope that that is met with action and the reality that we deserve, because we know that we are wilfully, if you like, being held back by the constraints that we put on ourselves as a consequence of our planning system.
Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd, a diolch i Mike am ddod â'r ddadl hon i lawr y Senedd ar faterion strwythurol yn economi Cymru, ac am ei asesiad di-flewyn-ar-dafod arferol o'r economi yma yng Nghymru. Roeddwn eisiau defnyddio fy munud i gyflwyno'r achos dros ein system gynllunio, sydd, yn fy marn i, yn rhywbeth y gwyddom ei bod yn dal twf economaidd yn ôl yn y wlad hon. Rwy'n croesawu'r ffaith bod Llywodraeth Lafur y DU wedi gwneud synau ynglŷn â gweithio yn y gofod hwn. Y ddau beth mwyaf y credaf eu bod yn ein dal yn ôl yw tai a thrafnidiaeth. I ormod o bobl fy oedran i ac iau, mae tai yn ddyhead nid yn realiti. Rydym yn gwybod bod y system gynllunio yn feichus, mae'n cymryd llawer o amser, ac yn ychwanegu treuliau, nad oes angen iddynt fod yno mewn nifer o achosion, at y gost o brynu cartref.
Yna'n ail, i edrych ar drafnidiaeth a drafodwyd yn helaeth gennym yn y Siambr hon, gan gynnwys heddiw ar HS2, dim ond i weld cymdogion Ewropeaidd fel Ffrainc a'r Eidal ac eraill yn adeiladu seilwaith rheilffyrdd cyflym am ffracsiwn o'r gost rydym ni'n ei wneud yn y Deyrnas Unedig. Mae hyn hefyd oherwydd ein system gynllunio. Felly, rwy'n croesawu'r geiriau cynnes gan y Llywodraeth Lafur yn y gofod hwn ar lefel y DU, ac rwy'n gobeithio mai'r ymateb i hynny fydd gweithredu a'r realiti rydym yn ei haeddu, oherwydd gwyddom ein bod yn fwriadol, os mynnwch, yn cael ein dal yn ôl gan y cyfyngiadau a osodwn arnom ein hunain o ganlyniad i'n system gynllunio.
Galwaf ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros yr Economi, Ynni a Chynllunio i ymateb i'r ddadl. Rebecca Evans.
I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning to reply to the debate. Rebecca Evans.
Thank you, and also thank you, of course, to Mike Hedges for bringing forward this important short debate today, but also for the thought pieces that he regularly produces as well. And thank you to Tom for his contribution in relation to planning.
Of course, the economy touches every part of our lives, and we do have many levers across Government in areas such as finance, skills, education, procurement, economic support, transport, health, and of course planning, which we want to fully utilise to help create a more vibrant economy and a prosperous nation. We’ll work right across Cabinet, but also crucially with partners across the private and public sectors, trade unions, academia, and of course the UK Government, to look at how we can continue to create the environment that we need for economic growth.
We’ve faced the ongoing challenges of public finance and investment, and the austerity measures of recent years have strained public finances and they have hindered our ability to invest in essential infrastructure and support programmes. However, we have been able to work collaboratively in the development of our economic mission to set out a compelling and focused way forward to utilise the levers at our disposal.
Work has now commenced on the Welsh Government spending review. That’s an exercise that will consider the longer term fiscal planning for Wales. Extending beyond the next budget period, this is an opportunity to look at all of the fiscal levers that we have available to us, but the size of that task can’t be underestimated. The shift from the short-term tactical decisions and the crisis response that have been a necessity over recent years, towards that longer term strategic planning through a more preventative lens, will ensure that we make the most effective spending decisions within the challenging fiscal climate that we have ahead of us.
The global economy continues to change, and we have to embrace the challenges and the opportunities that this brings. We do need to look at the industries of the now, but also the future, to ensure that we have the right jobs, the skills, the infrastructure in place, to make Wales the best place in which to live and work. We’ll demonstrate that we’re pro-business and pro-worker, building on our reputation for and commitment to fair work and well-being.
I really welcomed Mike Hedges’s really thoughtful research paper, which he published in August, and we’ve heard some of that informing the debate this evening, particularly the recommendations at the end. The paper was called ‘The Welsh Economy and Improving GVA’. I absolutely recognise some of the challenges around economic growth, but also welcome the consideration of potential solutions that are made in the paper, especially those relating to life sciences and the digital economy. We've got some important opportunities to consider how these areas can help grow the economy, and we'll continue to draw upon our regional strengths to focus our approach to economic growth.
Diolch, a diolch hefyd i Mike Hedges am gyflwyno'r ddadl fer bwysig hon heddiw, ond hefyd am y darnau sy'n ysgogi'r meddwl y mae'n eu cynhyrchu'n rheolaidd hefyd. A diolch i Tom am ei gyfraniad mewn perthynas â chynllunio.
Wrth gwrs, mae'r economi yn cyffwrdd â phob rhan o'n bywydau, ac mae gennym lawer o ddulliau at ein defnydd ar draws y Llywodraeth mewn meysydd fel cyllid, sgiliau, addysg, caffael, cymorth economaidd, trafnidiaeth, iechyd, a chynllunio, wrth gwrs, yr ydym am eu defnyddio'n llawn i helpu i greu economi fwy bywiog a chenedl lewyrchus. Byddwn yn gweithio ar draws y Cabinet, ond hefyd yn allweddol gyda phartneriaid ar draws y sectorau preifat a chyhoeddus, undebau llafur, y byd academaidd, a Llywodraeth y DU wrth gwrs, i edrych ar sut y gallwn barhau i greu'r amgylchedd sydd ei angen arnom ar gyfer twf economaidd.
Rydym wedi wynebu heriau parhaus i gyllid cyhoeddus a buddsoddiad, ac mae mesurau cyni y blynyddoedd diwethaf wedi cyfyngu ar gyllid cyhoeddus ac wedi rhwystro ein gallu i fuddsoddi mewn seilwaith a rhaglenni cymorth hanfodol. Fodd bynnag, rydym wedi gallu gweithio ar y cyd i ddatblygu ein cenhadaeth economaidd i nodi ffordd ymlaen gymhellol ag iddi ffocws i ddefnyddio'r dulliau sydd ar gael inni.
Mae gwaith bellach wedi dechrau ar adolygiad o wariant Llywodraeth Cymru. Mae hwnnw'n ymarfer a fydd yn ystyried y cynlluniau cyllidol mwy hirdymor i Gymru. Gan ymestyn y tu hwnt i'r cyfnod cyllidebol nesaf, dyma gyfle i edrych ar yr holl ddulliau cyllidol sydd gennym ar gael i ni, ond ni ellir tanamcangyfrif maint y dasg honno. Bydd y newid o'r penderfyniadau tactegol tymor byr a'r ymatebion i argyfwng a fu'n angenrheidiol dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf, tuag at y cynllunio strategol hirdymor hwnnw drwy lens fwy ataliol, yn sicrhau ein bod yn gwneud y penderfyniadau gwariant mwyaf effeithiol o fewn yr hinsawdd gyllidol heriol sydd o'n blaenau.
Mae'r economi fyd-eang yn parhau i newid, ac mae'n rhaid inni groesawu'r heriau a'r cyfleoedd a ddaw yn sgil hyn. Mae angen inni edrych ar ddiwydiannau'r presennol, ond hefyd y dyfodol, er mwyn sicrhau bod gennym y swyddi, y sgiliau, y seilwaith cywir ar waith, er mwyn sicrhau mai Cymru yw'r lle gorau i fyw a gweithio ynddo. Byddwn yn dangos ein bod o blaid busnes ac o blaid y gweithiwr, gan adeiladu ar ein henw da a'n hymrwymiad i waith teg a llesiant.
Roeddwn yn croesawu'r papur ymchwil meddylgar a gyhoeddodd Mike Hedges ym mis Awst yn fawr, a chlywsom rywfaint o hynny yn y ddadl heno, yn enwedig yr argymhellion ar y diwedd. Enw'r papur oedd 'The Welsh Economy and Improving GVA'. Rwy'n llwyr gydnabod rhai o'r heriau sy'n ymwneud â thwf economaidd, ond rwyf hefyd yn croesawu'r ystyriaeth o atebion posibl yn y papur, yn enwedig y rhai sy'n ymwneud â gwyddorau bywyd a'r economi ddigidol. Mae gennym gyfleoedd pwysig i ystyried sut y gall y meysydd hyn helpu i dyfu'r economi, a byddwn yn parhau i ddefnyddio ein cryfderau rhanbarthol i ffocysu ein dull o weithredu ar dwf economaidd.
In relation to GDP, we don't currently get quarterly estimates for Wales; they've been paused by the ONS for over a year now. So, the latest data that we have is from April this year, which shows that, in 2022, economic growth per person in Wales was broadly similar to the rest of the UK, and that reflects the close integration between the economy in Wales and the rest of the UK. Welsh annual growth in real GDP per head outperformed Yorkshire and the Humber, Northern Ireland, the west midlands and the east midlands, but I do want to stress that economic output is only one dimension of economic performance. And on measures such as household income, which might actually be a better measure of economic well-being, Wales is actually much closer to the rest of the UK.
In relation to economic growth, we do have opportunities to strengthen future delivery, but to do so in partnership. The UK Government's Green Paper on the industrial strategy, which was just published last week, points to eight growth sectors, and it's a 10-year plan offering the certainty and stability businesses need to invest to drive economic growth. So, we'll work with the UK Government and other partners on several complex issues that are barriers to investment across the eight priority sectors. Those include areas such as skills, recruitment of talent, data, research and development, technology adoption, access to finance, competition, regulation, energy prices, grid connections, infrastructure and, of course, planning, all through the lens of promoting investment.
We'll also work really closely with the UK Government to consider further job growth and creation across the industrial strategy, and that will consider where we can continue to grow a basis for public sector job creation across developing sectors highlighted across those eight priority areas. And we already have some really significant sector strengths in Wales. For example, our life sciences are absolutely critical for economic growth and for delivering better patient outcomes, and I'm really grateful to Mike for the recognition of that, in the paper but also in the debate today.
During the period 2021-22, this sector employed more than 13,000 people over 300 companies, ranging from SMEs and start-ups to large blue-chips, with an approximate turnover of £2.8 billion. The skills and recruitment opportunities in life science companies can provide chances of shared and degree apprenticeships, and also, co-ordinating activities can help to build on our approach to the foundational economy. So, we're working really closely with the Office for Life Sciences to determine how we can place a focus on growth, and we'll also look at how we can bring increased investment in.
In regard to digital and technologies, our digital strategy for Wales is aimed at anyone creating, designing, providing or using digital tools and services. We want to use the opportunities that technology can bring, where, for example, I've established a short-term review, looking at artificial intelligence, to see where we can harness the impact and look at the economic opportunities, and that's going to commence in the autumn.
We're also investing in specific sectors. For example, our cyber sector action plan includes investments and partnerships across academia and industry, and our sector is underpinned by a vibrant small and medium enterprise community, and cyber clusters of excellence, with clear links between multinationals, academia, SMEs and Government. The ecosystem that we have in Wales helps to draw on our home-grown talent, bringing fresh ideas and new ways of thinking into the market, and supports our SMEs to flourish.
We've also put developing a culture of innovation at the heart of everything we do through our innovation strategy for Wales. We know that schools, colleges, universities and research organisations create knowledge through research, and that research can lead to commercialisation, create societal value and support a stronger economy. So, I really want to explore and consider how to harness the economic benefits of that for Wales. I think Mike referred to it as the holy grail, and so we're absolutely going to chase that holy grail, and recognising that, as Mike said, it does have to be university led in many ways, and absolutely needs university leadership and buy-in.
Research groups in the academic, private and public sectors have been dependant on EU structural funds to support research and innovation activities. A transition to alternative funding sources, including UK Government, UK Research and Innovation, charities and businesses is necessary. So, we'll be putting a focus on a strategic approach that focuses on areas of strength that are intentionally and internationally competitive and aligned to our priorities.
A critical area to infrastructure is the skills gap in our workforce. As we move towards a knowledge-based economy, the demand for skilled labour is growing, and we need to invest in education and vocational training programmes that align with the needs of our economy. By fostering a culture of lifelong learning, we can empower our workforce and prepare them for the jobs of the future. So our employability and skills action plan, net-zero skills action plan and apprenticeship policy statements provide us with this really strong policy framework, and we've already taken steps to create two national advice and signposting gateways to enable access to support via Working Wales for individuals and via Business Wales for businesses.
We've delivered on our commitments to create a young person's guarantee and launched our Jobs Growth Wales+ programme for young people who are not in employment, education or training, and we're also improving the vocational education system and higher education system through the creation of a new tertiary body, Medr, with a £900 million budget, and of course we've introduced our own qualifications regulator to ensure qualifications are nimble and also relevant to the needs of employers in Wales.
We can continue to deliver growth and infrastructure development in a uniquely Welsh way through partnership. It's fundamental to the way that we do business and we know that locally rooted leadership is important because it means decisions about investment in infrastructure and services are informed by regional and local priorities.
One of the foremost structural problems that we face is regional inequality, so we have to address that imbalance by fostering economic development in all regions, ensuring that no community is left behind. Our regional economic frameworks help to bring together partners to agree a clear approach, and the Welsh Government has established a collaborative relationship with the city and growth deals and each of the four corporate joint committees to maximise delivery. We're absolutely learning those lessons that Mike Hedges talked about in relation to the previous experience of the enterprise zones, and how they drew investment out of our town centres in the past.
We know the previous UK Government's levelling-up agenda and its shared prosperity fund have led to a complex patchwork of different investments without meaningful strategic direction, but we are confident that we can work with the UK Government on a new approach that doesn't bypass the Welsh Government or the Senedd, and we'll work in partnership with local authorities and other sectors on a longer term regional investment approach that meets our priorities for green jobs and growth.
I will finish on an important point, and that's the need to have diverse economic growth—it's essential for building inclusive communities. I also want to put a focus on women in leadership. Under the remit of the Business Wales strategic board, the supporting entrepreneurial women in Wales panel was established as a sub-group to increase participation in entrepreneurship, and we've commissioned a research project to understand the challenges that women exporters in Wales face. We want to drive gender equality at the heart of that economic approach.
In conclusion, the structural problems in the Welsh economy are complex and they're multifaceted. However, they're not insurmountable. By addressing regional inequalities, investing in skills and education, diversifying our economic base and enhancing infrastructure we can build a stronger, more resilient Welsh economy with better working relations with the UK Government, and we have real opportunities to focus upon growth.
O ran cynnyrch domestig gros, nid ydym yn cael amcangyfrifon chwarterol ar gyfer Cymru ar hyn o bryd; maent wedi cael eu hoedi gan y Swyddfa Ystadegau Gwladol ers dros flwyddyn bellach. Felly, daw'r data diweddaraf sydd gennym o fis Ebrill eleni, sy'n dangos, yn 2022, fod twf economaidd fesul person yng Nghymru yn debyg ar y cyfan i weddill y DU, ac mae hynny'n adlewyrchu'r integreiddio agos rhwng yr economi yng Nghymru a gweddill y DU. Mae twf blynyddol Cymru mewn cynnyrch domestig gros gwirioneddol y pen yn perfformio'n well na swydd Efrog a Humber, Gogledd Iwerddon, gorllewin canolbarth Lloegr a dwyrain canolbarth Lloegr, ond rwyf am bwysleisio mai dim ond un dimensiwn o berfformiad economaidd yw allbwn economaidd. Ac ar fesurau fel incwm aelwydydd, a allai fod yn fesur gwell o les economaidd, mae Cymru'n llawer agosach at weddill y DU mewn gwirionedd.
Mewn perthynas â thwf economaidd, mae gennym gyfleoedd i gryfhau darpariaeth yn y dyfodol, ond i wneud hynny mewn partneriaeth. Mae Papur Gwyrdd Llywodraeth y DU ar y strategaeth ddiwydiannol, a gyhoeddwyd yr wythnos diwethaf, yn cyfeirio at wyth sector twf, ac mae'n gynllun 10 mlynedd sy'n cynnig y sicrwydd a'r sefydlogrwydd sydd ei angen ar fusnesau i fuddsoddi er mwyn hybu twf economaidd. Felly, byddwn yn gweithio gyda Llywodraeth y DU a phartneriaid eraill ar nifer o faterion cymhleth sy'n rhwystrau i fuddsoddiad ar draws yr wyth sector blaenoriaeth. Mae'r rheini'n cynnwys meysydd fel sgiliau, recriwtio talent, data, ymchwil a datblygu, mabwysiadu technoleg, mynediad at gyllid, cystadleuaeth, rheoleiddio, prisiau ynni, cysylltiadau grid, seilwaith a chynllunio wrth gwrs, a'r cyfan drwy lens hyrwyddo buddsoddiad.
Byddwn hefyd yn gweithio'n agos iawn gyda Llywodraeth y DU i ystyried creu a thyfu swyddi pellach ar draws y strategaeth ddiwydiannol, a bydd hynny'n ystyried lle gallwn barhau i dyfu sylfaen ar gyfer creu swyddi'r sector cyhoeddus ar draws sectorau sy'n datblygu a nodir ar draws yr wyth maes blaenoriaeth hynny. Ac mae gennym gryfderau sector sylweddol iawn yng Nghymru eisoes. Er enghraifft, mae ein gwyddorau bywyd yn gwbl allweddol ar gyfer twf economaidd ac i sicrhau gwell canlyniadau i gleifion, ac rwy'n ddiolchgar iawn i Mike am gydnabod hynny, yn y papur ac yn y ddadl heddiw hefyd.
Yn ystod y cyfnod 2021-22, cyflogodd y sector hwn fwy na 13,000 o bobl dros 300 o gwmnïau, yn amrywio o BBaChau a busnesau newydd i gwmnïau mawr o'r radd flaenaf, gyda throsiant bras o £2.8 biliwn. Gall y cyfleoedd sgiliau a recriwtio mewn cwmnïau gwyddor bywyd ddarparu cyfleoedd rhannu gradd-brentisiaethau, a hefyd, gall cydlynu gweithgareddau helpu i adeiladu ar ein dull o ymdrin â'r economi sylfaenol. Felly, rydym yn gweithio'n agos iawn gyda'r Swyddfa Gwyddorau Bywyd i benderfynu sut y gallwn ganolbwyntio ar dwf, a byddwn hefyd yn edrych ar sut y gallwn ddod â mwy o fuddsoddiad i mewn.
O ran digidol a thechnolegau, mae ein strategaeth ddigidol ar gyfer Cymru wedi'i hanelu at unrhyw un sy'n creu, dylunio, darparu neu ddefnyddio offer a gwasanaethau digidol. Rydym am ddefnyddio'r cyfleoedd y gall technoleg eu cynnig, lle rwyf wedi sefydlu adolygiad tymor byr, er enghraifft, i edrych ar ddeallusrwydd artiffisial, i weld ble y gallwn harneisio'r effaith ac edrych ar y cyfleoedd economaidd, ac mae hynny'n mynd i ddechrau yn yr hydref.
Rydym hefyd yn buddsoddi mewn sectorau penodol. Er enghraifft, mae ein cynllun gweithredu sector seiber yn cynnwys buddsoddiadau a phartneriaethau ar draws y byd academaidd a diwydiant, ac mae ein sector wedi'i seilio ar gymuned fenter fach a chanolig fywiog, a chlystyrau rhagoriaeth seiber, gyda chysylltiadau clir rhwng cwmnïau rhyngwladol, y byd academaidd, BBaChau a'r Llywodraeth. Mae'r ecosystem sydd gennym yng Nghymru yn helpu i wneud defnydd o'n talent cartref, gan ddod â syniadau ffres a ffyrdd newydd o feddwl i'r farchnad, ac mae'n cefnogi ein busnesau bach a chanolig i ffynnu.
Rydym hefyd wedi rhoi datblygu diwylliant o arloesi wrth wraidd popeth a wnawn drwy ein strategaeth arloesi ar gyfer Cymru. Gwyddom fod ysgolion, colegau, prifysgolion a sefydliadau ymchwil yn creu gwybodaeth trwy ymchwil, a bod ymchwil yn gallu arwain at fasnacheiddio, creu gwerth cymdeithasol a chefnogi economi gryfach. Felly, rwy'n awyddus iawn i archwilio ac ystyried sut i harneisio manteision economaidd hynny i Gymru. Rwy'n credu bod Mike wedi cyfeirio ato fel y greal sanctaidd, ac felly rydym yn mynd i fynd ar drywydd y greal sanctaidd hwnnw, a chan gydnabod, fel y dywedodd Mike, fod yn rhaid iddo gael ei arwain gan y brifysgol mewn sawl ffordd, ac yn sicr, mae angen arweinyddiaeth a chefnogaeth prifysgol.
Mae grwpiau ymchwil yn y sectorau academaidd, preifat a chyhoeddus wedi bod yn ddibynnol ar gronfeydd strwythurol yr UE i gefnogi gweithgareddau ymchwil ac arloesi. Mae angen pontio i ffynonellau cyllid amgen, gan gynnwys Llywodraeth y DU, Ymchwil ac Arloesi y DU, elusennau a busnesau. Felly, byddwn yn ffocysu ar ddull strategol sy'n canolbwyntio ar feysydd cryfder sy'n fwriadol ac yn rhyngwladol gystadleuol ac yn cyd-fynd â'n blaenoriaethau.
Maes hanfodol i seilwaith yw'r bwlch sgiliau yn ein gweithlu. Wrth inni symud tuag at economi sy'n seiliedig ar wybodaeth, mae'r galw am lafur medrus yn cynyddu, ac mae angen inni fuddsoddi mewn rhaglenni addysg a hyfforddiant galwedigaethol sy'n cyd-fynd ag anghenion ein heconomi. Drwy feithrin diwylliant o ddysgu gydol oes, gallwn rymuso ein gweithlu a'u paratoi ar gyfer swyddi'r dyfodol. Felly mae ein cynllun gweithredu cyflogadwyedd a sgiliau, cynllun gweithredu sgiliau sero net a datganiadau polisi prentisiaethau yn rhoi'r fframwaith polisi cryf hwn i ni, ac rydym eisoes wedi cymryd camau i greu dau borth cyngor a chyfeirio cenedlaethol i alluogi mynediad at gymorth drwy Cymru'n Gweithio i unigolion a thrwy Busnes Cymru i fusnesau.
Rydym wedi cyflawni ein hymrwymiadau i greu gwarant i bobl ifanc ac wedi lansio ein rhaglen Twf Swyddi Cymru+ ar gyfer pobl ifanc nad ydynt mewn cyflogaeth, addysg na hyfforddiant, ac rydym hefyd yn gwella'r system addysg alwedigaethol a'r system addysg uwch trwy greu corff trydyddol newydd, Medr, gyda chyllideb o £900 miliwn, ac wrth gwrs rydym wedi cyflwyno ein rheoleiddiwr cymwysterau ein hunain i sicrhau bod cymwysterau'n ystwyth a hefyd yn berthnasol i anghenion cyflogwyr yng Nghymru.
Gallwn barhau i ddarparu twf a datblygu seilwaith mewn ffordd unigryw Gymreig drwy bartneriaeth. Mae'n sylfaenol i'r ffordd yr ydym yn gwneud busnes a gwyddom fod arweinyddiaeth wedi'i gwreiddio'n lleol yn bwysig oherwydd mae'n golygu bod penderfyniadau ynghylch buddsoddi mewn seilwaith a gwasanaethau yn cael eu llywio gan flaenoriaethau rhanbarthol a lleol.
Un o'r problemau strwythurol mwyaf sy'n ein hwynebu yw anghydraddoldeb rhanbarthol, felly mae'n rhaid inni fynd i'r afael â'r anghydbwysedd hwnnw trwy feithrin datblygu economaidd ym mhob rhanbarth, gan sicrhau nad oes unrhyw gymuned yn cael ei gadael ar ôl. Mae ein fframweithiau economaidd rhanbarthol yn helpu i ddod â phartneriaid ynghyd i gytuno ar ddull clir, ac mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi sefydlu perthynas gydweithredol â'r bargeinion dinesig a thwf a phob un o'r pedwar cyd-bwyllgor corfforedig i sicrhau'r cyflawniad mwyaf posibl. Rydym yn dysgu'r gwersi y soniodd Mike Hedges amdanynt mewn perthynas â phrofiad blaenorol yr ardaloedd menter, a sut y gwnaethant dynnu buddsoddiad allan o ganol ein trefi yn y gorffennol.
Rydym yn gwybod bod agenda ffyniant bro Llywodraeth flaenorol y DU a'i chronfa ffyniant gyffredin wedi arwain at glytwaith cymhleth o fuddsoddiadau gwahanol heb gyfeiriad strategol ystyrlon, ond rydym yn hyderus y gallwn weithio gyda Llywodraeth y DU ar ddull newydd nad yw'n anwybyddu Llywodraeth Cymru na'r Senedd, a byddwn yn gweithio mewn partneriaeth ag awdurdodau lleol a sectorau eraill ar ddull buddsoddi rhanbarthol mwy hirdymor sy'n bodloni ein blaenoriaethau ar gyfer swyddi a thwf gwyrdd.
Fe ddof i ben ar bwynt pwysig, sef yr angen i gael twf economaidd amrywiol—mae'n hanfodol ar gyfer adeiladu cymunedau cynhwysol. Rwyf hefyd eisiau canolbwyntio ar fenywod mewn arweinyddiaeth. O dan gylch gwaith bwrdd strategol Busnes Cymru, sefydlwyd y panel cefnogi menywod entrepreneuraidd yng Nghymru fel is-grŵp i gynyddu cyfranogiad mewn entrepreneuriaeth, ac rydym wedi comisiynu prosiect ymchwil i ddeall yr heriau y mae allforwyr benywaidd yng Nghymru yn eu hwynebu. Rydym am hybu cydraddoldeb rhywiol wrth galon y dull economaidd hwnnw.
I gloi, mae'r problemau strwythurol yn economi Cymru yn gymhleth ac maent yn amlochrog. Fodd bynnag, nid ydynt yn anorchfygol. Drwy fynd i'r afael ag anghydraddoldebau rhanbarthol, buddsoddi mewn sgiliau ac addysg, amrywio ein sylfaen economaidd a gwella seilwaith, gallwn adeiladu economi gryfach a mwy gwydn yng Nghymru gyda gwell perthynas waith â Llywodraeth y DU, ac mae gennym gyfleoedd go iawn i ganolbwyntio ar dwf.
Diolch, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, a diolch i Tom a Mike hefyd. Daw hynny â thrafodion heddiw i ben.
I thank the Cabinet Secretary, and I also thank Tom and Mike. That brings today's proceedings to a close.
Daeth y cyfarfod i ben am 20:38.
The meeting ended at 20:38.