English: We've also been told that the pro-Brexit campaign was founded upon lies. Well, truth is many-sided, as we know, and all election campaigns on both sides or all sides are characterised by distortions, exaggerations, misrepresentation and, yes, by outright lies. What about the 3 million jobs that we were going to lose if we even contemplated the prospect of leaving the EU, or the Treasury's own prediction that if the public had the temerity to vote for Brexit, let alone complete the process, then unemployment in this country would rise to 800,000 two years ago, since when, of course, it has halved and we now have the lowest levels of unemployment for 45 years. I well remember when we were debating going into the European Union, as it now is, 50 years ago, we were told it was a common market and it was nothing to do with political union at all and that Britain had nothing to fear - it was no more really than a free trade area with a few bells and whistles. And I remember Edward Heath saying in order to get his majority - it got through by a majority of eight, actually, in the House of Commons on the crucial motion; I was there outside at the time; I remember it very vividly - he said that it was no intention of the Government of the day to take Britain into the European Economic Community, as it then was, without the full-hearted consent of Parliament and people. Well, the people were never consulted because it wasn't in the Conservative manifesto, even in the 1970 election, and it was rammed through by the most ruthless whipping, as I said a moment ago, on a majority of eight in the crucial vote. There was never full-hearted consent, and that is why this debate has rumbled on for all these years. In the intervening period of time, of course, we've had numerous treaties which have enlarged the competence of the European institutions and have reduced the roles of national parliaments, therefore have increased the power of unelected technocrats at the expense of those who owe their positions to election by the people. And there's never been a referendum in Britain on any of those, in spite of the fact that it has, from time to time, been promised. Let's look back to the Lisbon treaty itself, which was originally called the European constitution. If it's a European constitution, it gives the lie to the idea that the EU is never going to develop into some kind of federal superstate; that was the whole point of it in the first place. That's what Monnet and Schuman actually wanted back in the 1940s, but the people have never been allowed to have their say. And Gordon Brown promised a referendum and then he denied it to them, and the Conservatives have done exactly the same thing, until David Cameron was forced by UKIP, breathing down the necks of Tory MPs who feared losing their seats, to promise one, which eventually produced the reason why we're debating this today. So, the founders of the EU, Monnet and Schuman, saw democracy as a problem, because in the 1930s dictators had managed to whip up emotions amongst the mob, and therefore they thought that if you allowed the people to decide on who had the levers of power in their hands, that that was a very bad thing and, therefore, democracy was a problem. It was a 1940s answer to a 1930s problem, and that's why the structure of the EU is as it is. We have an unelected commission that is appointed for five years, with a Council of Ministers that is very, very indirectly elected through the governmental systems of the individual member states, and there is no means of the people holding these to account, because it's a shifting membership all the time. We don't have elections for the whole of Europe. There is no way in which you can turf out the Government of the European Union, and that is why we've arrived at the place today where a majority of the British people want to leave the EU. And it is the politicians who don't accept that who are causing the difficulties. Forty nine out of the 60 Members of this Assembly are remainers. Four hundred and eighty out of the 650 MPs are remainers, and it's because of their shenanigans trying to deny to the people of this country what they voted for by a majority just two and a half years ago that all the shot and shell that we hear about is taking place. What we've discovered, I think, in the last couple of years, though, is the utter pointlessness of the Tory party as a vehicle to deliver Brexit. They triggered article 50 without a plan; they've done nothing since to prepare for life outside the EU; their nominal policy is to leave the single market, the customs union and the jurisdiction of the European court; they've done nothing to build the infrastructure and facilities required by independent countries to manage their trade, and all that should have started in 2016 - it hasn't started yet. We should have done all that by the time the article 50 process was completed. The article 50 process is effectively completed because we've had to ask for an extension, but absolutely nothing has been done by the Government of the day to prepare us for life outside the EU. So, yes, it would cost us more than it need do if we were to leave without a deal this week, but that is not the fault of Brexit; that is the fault of having a remainer Prime Minister with a remainer Cabinet in a remainer House of Commons, which has been determined to try to frustrate the will of the British people, and, yes, I do believe that that is a betrayal of the trust that the electorate has placed in them. I believe that the Prime Minister always intended this process to fail, and that's why she has not made those preparations. Negotiations about a future trade deal should have started in 2016. They haven't even started three years later, and it's clear from the deal that we have paid £39 billion to be stuck in the EU indefinitely, with no voice, no vote, no veto, no unilateral freedom to leave. We are actually in a worse place than we were at the time that article 50 was triggered. It's a Carthaginian peace without a war, an unparalleled humiliation for Britain and a betrayal of Brexit. We are the fifth largest economy in the world, the eighth largest manufacturing country, we have English as a global language, London as the world's greatest financial centre, we have a massive trade deficit with the EU, we pay a huge amount in budgetary contributions, and the EU is shrinking as a force in world trade. I'm amazed - this is my last point I shall come to - that the Tory party in this place has deleted from our motion, 'Regrets thatthe EU has taken power away from elected national parliaments', that it will not note that 'national vetoes in favour of majority voting' have become the order of the day within the EU, and that it doesn't accept that 'the European project is a relentless force, promoted by the EU's permanent institutions' and it doesn't call 'on the UK Government to focus all efforts on reaching a free trade agreement'. That tells you all you need to know about the Tory party as a vehicle for Brexit and as a party that has good intentions and good faith to deliver on what the British people voted for two and a half years ago, and I urge the Assembly therefore to vote for our motion this afternoon.
Welsh: Dywedwyd wrthym ninnau hefyd fod yr ymgyrch o blaid Brexit yn seiliedig ar gelwyddau. Wel, mae sawl ochr i wirionedd, fel y gwyddom, a nodweddir pob ymgyrch etholiadol ar y ddwy ochr neu bob ochr gan gamystumiadau, gorliwio, camliwio ac ie, gan gelwydd llwyr. Beth am y 3 miliwn o swyddi y byddwn yn eu colli hyd yn oed pe baem yn ystyried y posibilrwydd o adael yr UE, neu ragfynegiad y Trysorlys ei hun pe bai gan y cyhoedd yr hyfrdra i bleidleisio dros Brexit, heb sôn am gwblhau'r broses, y byddai diweithdra yn y wlad hon yn codi i 800,000 ddwy flynedd yn ôl, ac ers hynny, wrth gwrs, mae wedi haneru a bellach mae gennym y lefelau isaf o ddiweithdra ers 45 mlynedd. Cofiaf yn dda pan oeddem yn trafod mynd i mewn i'r Undeb Ewropeaidd fel y mae yn awr, 50 mlynedd yn ôl, dywedwyd mai marchnad gyffredin oedd hi ac nad oedd ganddi ddim i'w wneud ag undeb gwleidyddol o gwbl ac nad oedd gan Brydain ddim i'w ofni - nid oedd yn ddim mwy nag ardal fasnach rydd mewn gwirionedd gydag ychydig o fanion ychwanegol dibwys. A chofiaf Edward Heath yn dweud er mwyn cael ei fwyafrif - fe basiodd gyda mwyafrif o wyth, mewn gwirionedd, yn Nhŷ'r Cyffredin ar y cynnig allweddol; roeddwn yno y tu allan ar y pryd; fe'i cofiaf yn glir iawn - dywedodd nad oedd yn fwriad gan Lywodraeth y dydd i fynd â Phrydain i mewn i'r Gymuned Economaidd Ewropeaidd, fel yr oedd ar y pryd, heb gydsyniad brwd y Senedd a'r bobl. Wel, ni wnaethant ymgynghori â'r bobl gan nad oedd ym maniffesto'r Ceidwadwyr, hyd yn oed yn etholiad 1970, a chafodd ei wthio drwodd yn sgil y chwip mwyaf didostur, fel y dywedais eiliad yn ôl, ar fwyafrif o wyth yn y bleidlais dyngedfennol. Ni chafwyd cydsyniad brwd, a dyna pam y mae'r ddadl hon wedi llusgo yn ei blaen am yr holl flynyddoedd hyn. Yn y cyfamser, wrth gwrs, rydym wedi cael nifer o gytuniadau sydd wedi ehangu cymhwysedd y sefydliadau Ewropeaidd ac wedi lleihau rôl seneddau cenedlaethol, gan gynyddu pŵer technocratiaid anetholedig ar draul y rhai a gafodd eu swyddi yn sgil eu hethol gan y bobl. Ac ni fu erioed refferendwm ym Mhrydain ar unrhyw un o'r rheini, er cael addewid i'r perwyl hwnnw o bryd i'w gilydd. Gadewch i ni edrych yn ôl ar gytuniad Lisbon ei hun, a gâi ei alw'n wreiddiol yn gyfansoddiad Ewropeaidd. Os yw'n gyfansoddiad Ewropeaidd, mae'n gwrthbrofi'r syniad nad yw'r UE byth yn mynd i ddatblygu'n rhyw fath o uwchwladwriaeth ffederal; dyna oedd ei holl bwynt yn y lle cyntaf. Dyna oedd Monnet a Schuman ei eisiau yn ôl yn y 1940au, ond nid yw'r bobl erioed wedi cael lleisio barn. Ac addawodd Gordon Brown refferendwm ac yna fe'i gwadodd iddynt, ac mae'r Ceidwadwyr wedi gwneud yn union yr un peth, hyd nes y gorfodwyd David Cameron gan UKIP, yn gwasgu ar ASau Torïaidd a oedd ofn colli eu seddau i addo un, gan arwain yn y pen draw at y rheswm pam ein bod yn dadlau ynglŷn â hyn heddiw. Felly, gwelodd sylfaenwyr yr UE, Monnet a Schuman, fod democratiaeth yn broblem, oherwydd yn y 1930au roedd unbeniaid wedi llwyddo i ennyn emosiynau ymhlith y dorf, ac felly roeddent yn meddwl pe baech yn caniatáu i'r bobl benderfynu i bwy i roi awenau grym, fod hynny'n beth gwael iawn ac felly, roedd democratiaeth yn broblem. Ateb yr 1940au i broblem y 1930au ydoedd, a dyna pam y mae strwythur yr UE fel y mae. Mae gennym gomisiwn anetholedig a benodir am bum mlynedd, gyda Chyngor y Gweinidogion wedi'i ethol yn anuniongyrchol tu hwnt drwy systemau llywodraethol yr aelod-wladwriaethau unigol, ac nid oes unrhyw ffordd o ddwyn y bobl hyn i gyfrif, am fod yr aelodaeth yn newid drwy'r amser. Nid oes gennym etholiadau ar gyfer Ewrop gyfan. Nid oes unrhyw ffordd y gallwch gael gwared ar Lywodraeth yr Undeb Ewropeaidd, a dyna pam ein bod wedi cyrraedd lle'r ydym heddiw lle mae mwyafrif o bobl Prydain eisiau gadael yr UE. A'r gwleidyddion sy'n amharod i dderbyn hynny sy'n peri'r anawsterau. Roedd 49 o'r 60 Aelod yn y Cynulliad hwn cefnogi aros yn yr UE. Roedd 480 o'r 650 o Aelodau Seneddol yn cefnogi aros, a'u castiau'n ceisio amddifadu pobl y wlad hon o'r hyn y pleidleisiasant o'i blaid drwy fwyafrif ddwy flynedd a hanner yn unig yn ôl sy'n gyfrifol am yr holl ffraeo y clywn amdano. Ond yr hyn a ddarganfuwyd gennym yn y blynyddoedd diwethaf, fodd bynnag, yw pa mor ddibwynt oedd y blaid Dorïaidd fel cyfrwng i ddarparu Brexit. Fe wnaethant sbarduno erthygl 50 heb gynllun; nid ydynt wedi gwneud dim ers hynny i baratoi ar gyfer bywyd y tu allan i'r UE; eu polisi mewn enw yw gadael y farchnad sengl, yr undeb tollau ac awdurdodaeth Llys Ewrop; nid ydynt wedi gwneud dim i adeiladu'r seilwaith a'r cyfleusterau sydd eu hangen ar wledydd annibynnol i reoli eu masnach, a dylai hynny i gyd fod wedi dechrau yn 2016 - nid yw wedi dechrau eto. Dylem fod wedi gwneud hynny i gyd erbyn cwblhau proses erthygl 50. Mae proses erthygl 50 wedi'i chwblhau i bob pwrpas oherwydd ein bod wedi gorfod gofyn am estyniad, ond ni wnaed unrhyw beth gan Lywodraeth y dydd i'n paratoi ar gyfer bywyd y tu allan i'r UE. Felly, fe fyddai'n costio mwy inni nag y byddai angen iddo ei wneud pe baem yn gadael heb gytundeb yr wythnos hon, ond nid yw hynny'n fai ar Brexit; bai'r ffaith bod gennym Brif Weinidog sydd eisiau aros yn yr UE a Chabinet sydd eisiau aros yn yr UE mewn Tŷ'r Cyffredin sydd eisiau aros yn yr UE, ac sydd wedi bod yn benderfynol o geisio rhwystro ewyllys pobl Prydain, ac ydw, rwy'n credu bod hynny'n bradychu'r ffydd sydd gan yr etholwyr ynddynt. Credaf fod y Prif Weinidog bob amser wedi bwriadu i'r broses hon fethu, a dyna pam nad yw wedi gwneud y paratoadau hynny. Dylai negodiadau ynghylch cytundeb masnach yn y dyfodol fod wedi dechrau yn 2016. Nid ydynt wedi dechrau dair blynedd yn ddiweddarach hyd yn oed, ac mae'n amlwg o'r cytundeb ein bod wedi talu £39 biliwn i fod yn gaeth yn yr UE am gyfnod amhenodol, heb lais, heb bleidlais, heb feto, heb ryddid unochrog i adael. Rydym mewn lle gwaeth nag yr oeddem ar yr adeg y cafodd erthygl 50 ei sbarduno. Mae'n heddwch Carthaginaidd heb ryfel, testun gwaradwydd digyffelyb i Brydain a brad yn erbyn Brexit. Ni yw'r bumed economi fwyaf yn y byd, yr wythfed wlad weithgynhyrchol fwyaf, mae gennym Saesneg fel iaith fyd-eang, Llundain fel canolfan ariannol fwyaf y byd, mae gennym ddiffyg masnach enfawr gyda'r UE, rydym yn talu swm enfawr mewn cyfraniadau cyllidebol, ac mae'r UE yn crebachu fel grym ym masnach y byd. Rwy'n synnu - hwn yw fy mhwynt olaf - fod y blaid Dorïaidd yn y lle hwn wedi dileu ein cynnig, 'Yn gresynu bod yr UE wedi cymryd pŵer oddi ar seneddau cenedlaethol etholedig', na wnaiff nodi bod 'fetoau cenedlaethol wrth ffafrio pleidlais y mwyafrif' wedi dod yn y drefn reolaidd o fewn yr UE, ac nad yw'n derbyn bod 'y prosiect Ewropeaidd yn rym di-baid, yn cael ei hyrwyddo gan sefydliadau parhaol yr UE' ac nad yw'n galw 'ar Lywodraeth y DU i ganolbwyntio ei holl ymdrechion ar ddod i gytundeb masnach rydd'. Mae hynny'n dweud popeth sydd angen i chi ei wybod am y Blaid Dorïaidd fel cyfrwng ar gyfer Brexit ac fel plaid sydd â bwriadau da ac ewyllys da i gyflawni'r hyn y pleidleisiodd pobl Prydain drosto ddwy flynedd a hanner yn ôl, ac rwy'n annog y Cynulliad felly i bleidleisio o blaid ein cynnig y prynhawn yma.