English: Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I thank everyone who contributed to it. If I could focus on predominantly, in the time that I am limited to, responding to the Counsel General's reply. I believe that the first part of the argument was trying to set the First Minister up above the law, if you take the interpretation that he has given us that, actually, he is not accountable under the Government of Wales Act for the functions that he exercises, whilst, in fairness, Ministers are accountable under that law. That is dictatorship, and, as I said to you, the only example we could find anywhere was Egypt. That's the only example we can find. I read out - and you didn't challenge it, Counsel General - I read out the legal note that we are basing our argument on, and you didn't challenge it. I'm more than happy for you to challenge me on what I've put before the Assembly today in the legal note. No? Okay. You then said that the Government wrote to the Presiding Officer yesterday to try and seek consensus. I will read again what I opened my remarks with this afternoon, which was point 3 of the letter: 'First, the Table Office, on behalf of the Presiding Officer, has' - not 'could have' - 'has acted unlawfully by accepting the motion. '4. Second, the Presiding Officer' - not 'could have' - 'has actedunlawfully, by not withdrawing the motion.' You were telling the Presiding Officer what she should do yesterday and, by association, you are telling the Assembly what it should do. No democracy can function under that level of duress, I would suggest, and it will be a very dark day if, after listening to the arguments that I have put today, Members of the governing party on the back bench do follow the whip and do listen to your arguments, because, actually, what you have implied is to ignore the law and just run roughshod over what we're governed by, which is democracy. I have not heard a single counterargument come from you today, Counsel General, to challenge any point that I have put before this Assembly. Not one. I systematically went through the three arguments that the Government have deployed over the last three months as to why this report should not see the light of day: (1) protecting the confidentiality of individuals who have contributed to the inquiry; (2) release could prejudice further inquiries; (3) exercising the law and the provisions of the Government of Wales Act. You have not sought to undermine any one of those arguments. I therefore call on the governing back bench to respond to the motion before us today, because, ultimately, if you do not, then, as I said, the Government whip might well win the day, but morally you will be found wanting.
Welsh: Diolch yn fawr iawn, Lywydd. Diolch i bawb a gyfrannodd. Os caf ganolbwyntio'n bennaf, yn yr amser sydd gennyf, ar ymateb i ateb y Cwnsler Cyffredinol. Credaf fod rhan gyntaf y ddadl yn ceisio gosod y Prif Weinidog uwchben y gyfraith, os cymerwch y dehongliad a roddodd inni nad yw, mewn gwirionedd, yn atebol o dan Ddeddf Llywodraeth Cymru am y swyddogaethau y mae'n eu harfer, er bod Gweinidogion, a bod yn deg, yn atebol o dan y gyfraith honno. Unbennaeth yw hynny, ac fel y dywedais wrthych, yr unig enghraifft y gallasom ddod o hyd iddi yn unrhyw le yw'r Aifft. Dyna'r unig enghraifft y gallem ei chanfod. Darllenais - ac ni wnaethoch ei herio, Gwnsler Cyffredinol - darllenais y nodyn cyfreithiol rydym yn seilio ein dadl arno, ac ni wnaethoch ei herio. Rwy'n fwy na bodlon i chi fy herio ar yr hyn a gyflwynais gerbron y Cynulliad heddiw yn y nodyn cyfreithiol. Na? Iawn. Fe ddywedoch chi wedyn fod y Llywodraeth wedi ysgrifennu at y Llywydd ddoe i geisio cael consensws. Fe ddarllenaf eto yr hyn yr agorais fy sylwadau ag ef y prynhawn yma, sef pwynt 3 yn y llythyr: Yn gyntaf, mae'r Swyddfa Gyflwyno, ar ran y Llywydd, wedi nid 'gallai fod wedi' - gweithredu'n anghyfreithlon drwy dderbyn y cynnig. 4. Yn ail, mae'r Llywydd wedi - nid 'gallai fod wedi' - gweithredu'n anghyfreithlon, drwy beidio â thynnu'r cynnig yn ôl. Roeddech yn dweud wrth y Llywydd beth y dylai ei wneud ddoe a thrwy gysylltiad, rydych yn dweud wrth y Cynulliad beth y dylai ei wneud. Carwn awgrymu na all unrhyw ddemocratiaeth weithredu o dan y lefel honno o bwysau, a bydd hi'n ddiwrnod tywyll iawn pe bai'r Aelodau ar feinciau cefn y blaid sy'n llywodraethu, ar ôl gwrando ar y dadleuon a gyflwynais heddiw, yn dilyn y chwip ac yn gwrando ar eich dadleuon, oherwydd, mewn gwirionedd, yr hyn rydych wedi ei awgrymu yw anwybyddu'r gyfraith a sathru ar yr hyn sy'n ein llywodraethu, sef democratiaeth. Ni chlywais un wrthddadl gennych heddiw, Gwnsler Cyffredinol, i herio unrhyw bwynt a gyflwynais gerbron y Cynulliad hwn. Dim un. Euthum yn systematig drwy'r tair dadl a ddefnyddiodd y Llywodraeth dros y tri mis diwethaf ynglŷn â pham na ddylai'r adroddiad hwn weld golau dydd: (1) diogelu cyfrinachedd unigolion sydd wedi cyfrannu at yr ymchwiliad; (2) gallai ei ryddhau beryglu ymchwiliadau pellach; (3) arfer y gyfraith a darpariaethau Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru. Nid ydych wedi ceisio tanseilio unrhyw un o'r dadleuon hynny. Galwaf felly ar feinciau cefn y llywodraeth i ymateb i'r cynnig ger ein bron heddiw, oherwydd, yn y pen draw, os na wnewch hynny, yna fel y dywedais, gallai chwip y Llywodraeth ennill, ond yn foesol fe fyddwch yn gwneud cam mawr.