English: Before I move on to the substance of this discussion, I just wanted to express huge praise for the campaign group from my constituency, which is totally community led, for the work they have done to date to bring this petition to the Chamber. I know their dedication will continue beyond today to make sure that Port Talbot has a good way forward, and some of the members are in the gallery this afternoon. The petition being discussed this afternoon calls on the Welsh Government to reject the Ministry of Justice's proposals to release the land for the development of the superprison. David Rowlands, as Chair of the Petitions Committee, highlighted that as the main focus, but can I also highlight that the public services that are being impacted upon are also devolved to the Welsh Government, so there's actually a second issue that you may want to consider? Many of the arguments that will be raised this afternoon were raised during the Plaid Cymru debate on 20 September, and I'm not going to apologise for repeating any of those, as they are core to the reasons for rejecting this proposal. However, since that date, further evidence has been uncovered that supports our calls in this petition. There are two aspects that need to be addressed in this debate: (1) the appropriateness of the site for a superprison, and (2) the penal policy of the UK Government and the role the Welsh Government plays in its delivery. With regard to the first point, there are numerous reasons as to why this site is inappropriate. First, it's on a C1 flood zone, as has already been mentioned, which was a C2 flood zone when the site was identified by the Welsh Government and given to the MOJ as one on the list, even though the criteria from the MOJ actually said, for suitable sites, 'Good ground conditions which do not have a high possibility of flooding'. Now, Cabinet Secretary, I did ask about this before, and I asked why it was included in the criteria. I was given the answer, 'It's not for the Welsh Government to determine that - it's for the developers'. I'm sorry, but that's simply abdicating the responsibility of the Welsh Government. The site should never have been included in any list the Welsh Government gave, and even now should be withdrawn on that basis, particularly as the conditions on the site haven't changed. Secondly, the site is in the enterprise zone - Port Talbot Waterfront enterprise zone - as has already been mentioned. That should be used for economic growth of existing businesses and attraction of inward investment that would bring further economic benefits to the community. I know the claims of the MOJ are that a prison will deliver economic benefits, but research has shown that claims that the development of a superprison will win economic benefits - including the creation of jobs - fail to take account of the broader social costs of incarcerating a large number of inmates, and that simple job numbers are not an accurate measure of economic growth. Also, the identified employment it would create does not necessarily benefit the local community immediately around the area - undeniably true in this case, because it's known that Swansea and Cardiff are up for closing. If they close, the direct employment of those will be transferred to this new site and all the supply-chain employment that feeds in. That is reality; those are the views of the UK Government about Victorian prisons. Additionally, the research shows that there can be economic downturns on investment for communities that become known as prison towns. We are experiencing that, with one business preparing to leave the town if it is given the go-ahead. So, the claim that the prison will be a vehicle for economic growth in Port Talbot is totally false. Thirdly, there's the issue of the covenant on the land, and another criteria specified by the MOJ when they asked for the sites was that it should not have a covenant. Others may have more time to explore this matter, but I'm sure you're aware that we've already explored it with the Counsel General and the First Minister and I can assure you that will not go away. I wish to spend a little bit more time now on the second consideration, because we must give it to any new superprison proposal - the ability of the penal policy to reduce reoffending, improve rehabilitation, and the impact upon the services delivered by the Welsh Government to support that ambition. Again, numerous reports and research show that the creation of a superprison fails to deliver on that ambition. In fact, they do the opposite. Cabinet Secretary, building crime-free lives is about a more equal society. It's about poverty, healthcare, housing and education. It's about prisons that seek to build long-lasting change and not a prison industrial complex, which assumes that profound change will come through stuffing a building to capacity with humans, like they are bottles of wine that will mature over time when they're shut away in the cold and the dark. Let's not support an agenda that is financially driven by the MOJ. Let's rather deliver one that will address the needs of society. Cabinet Secretary, considering the role the Welsh Government has in delivering services to prisoners, is it now time for penal policy to be devolved to Wales? Perhaps you should be pushing that agenda forward. I agree with the comments that were made in the Plaid Cymru debate - I've turned around, I've come around to your way of thinking - that perhaps penal policy should now be devolved. But if it was, would the Welsh Government consider superprisons a good model, let alone build one in the heart of a community on such flimsy evidence? I very much hope not. Llywydd, I'll conclude with the following because I see my time is up - I've got a lot more to say but I see my time is up. This afternoon, we'll be asked to vote to note the petition, but I actually want more than that. I want the Welsh Government to listen to the people who signed the petition and act on their behalf. I said in September that there is clearly no justice coming to Port Talbot from the Ministry of Justice, and I called on Welsh Government to deliver that by setting our economy as the priority and not the MOJ's decision to save money. Cabinet Secretary, it's quite simple: when the MOJ comes asking for that land to be developed on, just say 'no'. Listen to the petitioners: Port Talbot can do better and deserves much more.
Welsh: Cyn symud ymlaen at sylwedd y drafodaeth hon, roeddwn am roi canmoliaeth enfawr i grŵp ymgyrchu yn fy etholaeth, sydd wedi ei arwain gan y gymuned yn llwyr, am y gwaith y maent wedi'i wneud hyd yn hyn ar ddod â'r ddeiseb hon i'r Siambr. Gwn y bydd eu hymroddiad yn parhau y tu hwnt i heddiw i wneud yn siŵr fod gan Bort Talbot ffordd dda ymlaen, ac mae rhai o'r aelodau yn yr oriel y prynhawn yma. Mae'r ddeiseb sy'n cael ei thrafod y prynhawn yma'n galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i wrthod cynigion y Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder i ryddhau'r tir ar gyfer datblygu'r archgarchar. Cafodd hynny ei amlygu fel y prif ffocws gan David Rowlands, Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor Deisebau, ond a gaf innau hefyd dynnu sylw at y ffaith fod y gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yr effeithir arnynt hefyd wedi'u datganoli i Lywodraeth Cymru, felly mae yna ail fater y gallech fod yn awyddus i'w ystyried mewn gwirionedd? Cafodd nifer o'r dadleuon a leisir y prynhawn yma eu crybwyll yn ystod dadl Plaid Cymru ar 20 Medi, ac nid wyf am ymddiheuro am ailadrodd unrhyw un o'r rheini, gan eu bod yn greiddiol i'r rhesymau dros wrthod y cynnig hwn. Fodd bynnag, ers y dyddiad hwnnw, datgelwyd tystiolaeth bellach sy'n cefnogi ein galwadau yn y ddeiseb hon. Ceir dwy agwedd sydd angen ymdrin â hwy yn y ddadl hon: (1) priodoldeb y safle ar gyfer archgarchar, a (2) polisi cosbi Llywodraeth y DU a'r rôl y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei chwarae yn ei gyflawni. O ran y pwynt cyntaf, ceir nifer o resymau pam y mae'r safle hwn yn amhriodol. Yn gyntaf, mae mewn parth llifogydd C1, fel y crybwyllwyd eisoes, ac roedd yn barth llifogydd C2 pan nodwyd y safle gan Lywodraeth Cymru a'i roi i'r Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder fel un lle ar y rhestr, er bod y meini prawf gan y Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder yn dweud mewn gwirionedd, ar gyfer safleoedd addas, fod angen tir mewn cyflwr da heb bosibilrwydd mawr o lifogydd. Nawr, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, fe ofynnais i chi ynglŷn â hyn o'r blaen, a gofynnais pam ei fod wedi'i gynnwys yn y meini prawf. Cefais yr ateb nad mater i Lywodraeth Cymru yw pennu hynny ond mater i'r datblygwyr. Mae'n ddrwg gennyf, ond esgeuluso cyfrifoldeb Llywodraeth Cymru yw hynny. Ni ddylai'r safle fod wedi'i gynnwys mewn unrhyw restr a roddodd Llywodraeth Cymru, a hyd yn oed yn awr, dylai gael ei dynnu'n ôl ar y sail honno, yn enwedig gan nad yw'r amodau ar y safle wedi newid. Yn ail, mae'r safle yn yr ardal fenter - ardal fenter Glannau Port Talbot - fel y crybwyllwyd eisoes. Dylid ei defnyddio ar gyfer twf economaidd busnesau presennol a denu mewnfuddsoddiad a fyddai'n dwyn manteision economaidd pellach i'r gymuned. Gwn fod y Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder yn honni y bydd carchar yn sicrhau manteision economaidd, ond mae ymchwil wedi dangos bod honiadau y bydd datblygu archgarchar yn creu manteision economaidd - gan gynnwys creu swyddi - yn methu ystyried costau cymdeithasol ehangach carcharu nifer fawr o garcharorion, ac nad yw niferoedd swyddi ynddynt eu hunain yn fesur cywir o dwf economaidd. Hefyd, nid yw'r gwaith y nodwyd y byddai'n ei greu o reidrwydd yn mynd i fod o fudd i'r gymuned leol sy'n ffinio â'r ardal - mae hynny'n sicr yn wir yn yr achos hwn, oherwydd gwyddys bod Abertawe a Chaerdydd yn wynebu cau. Os byddant yn cau, bydd swyddi'r rheini'n trosglwyddo'n uniongyrchol i'r safle newydd hwn a holl waith y gadwyn gyflenwi sy'n bwydo i mewn iddo. Dyna'r realiti; dyna yw barn Llywodraeth y DU am garchardai Fictoraidd. Yn ogystal, mae ymchwil yn dangos y gallai cymunedau sy'n dod i gael eu hadnabod fel trefi carchar wynebu dirywiad economaidd ar fuddsoddiad. Rydym yn profi hynny, gydag un busnes yn paratoi i adael y dref os rhoddir caniatâd i adeiladu'r carchar. Felly, nid yw'r honiad y bydd y carchar yn gyfrwng i sicrhau twf economaidd ym Mhort Talbot yn wir o gwbl. Yn drydydd, ceir mater y cyfamod ar y tir, a maen prawf arall a bennwyd gan y Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder pan oeddent yn gofyn am safleoedd oedd na ddylai fod ynghlwm wrth gyfamod. Efallai y bydd gan eraill fwy o amser i archwilio'r mater hwn, ond rwy'n siŵr eich bod yn ymwybodol ein bod eisoes wedi edrych arno gyda'r Cwnsler Cyffredinol a'r Prif Weinidog, a gallaf eich sicrhau nad yw'n mynd i ddiflannu. Hoffwn dreulio ychydig mwy o amser yn awr ar yr ail ystyriaeth, oherwydd rhaid inni roi sylw o'r fath i unrhyw gynnig newydd ynghylch archgarchar - gallu'r polisi cosbi i leihau aildroseddu, gwella adsefydlu, a'r effaith ar y gwasanaethau a ddarperir gan Lywodraeth Cymru i gefnogi'r uchelgais hwnnw. Unwaith eto, dengys nifer o adroddiadau ac ymchwil fod creu archgarchar yn methu cyflawni'r uchelgais hwnnw. Yn wir, mae'n gwneud y gwrthwyneb. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae adeiladu bywydau di-drosedd yn ymwneud â chymdeithas fwy cyfartal. Mae a wnelo â thlodi, gofal iechyd, tai ac addysg. Mae a wnelo â charchardai sy'n ceisio meithrin newid hirdymor ac nid cyfadeilad carchar diwydiannol, sy'n tybio bod newid arwyddocaol yn dod o lenwi adeilad i'r ymylon â bodau dynol, fel pe baent yn boteli gwin a fydd yn aeddfedu dros amser pan gânt eu cau mewn tywyllwch ac oerfel. Gadewch i ni beidio â chefnogi agenda a ysgogir yn ariannol gan y Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder. Yn hytrach, gadewch i ni ddarparu un i fynd i'r afael ag anghenion y gymdeithas. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ag ystyried y rôl sydd gan Lywodraeth Cymru yn darparu gwasanaethau i garcharorion, a yw'n bryd bellach i bolisi cosbi gael ei ddatganoli i Gymru? Efallai y dylech fod yn hyrwyddo'r agenda honno. Cytunaf â'r sylwadau a wnaed yn nadl Plaid Cymru - rwyf wedi newid fy meddwl, rwyf wedi dod i gytuno â'ch safbwynt chi - y dylid datganoli polisi cosbi o bosibl bellach. Ond pe bai'n cael ei ddatganoli, a fyddai Llywodraeth Cymru yn ystyried archgarchardai'n fodel da, heb sôn am adeiladu un ynghanol cymuned ar dystiolaeth mor wan? Mawr obeithiaf na fyddai'n gwneud hynny. Lywydd, fe orffennaf gyda'r canlynol oherwydd gwelaf fod fy amser wedi dod i ben - mae gennyf lawer mwy i'w ddweud, ond rwy'n gweld bod fy amser wedi dod i ben. Y prynhawn yma, bydd gofyn i ni bleidleisio i nodi'r ddeiseb, ond rwyf eisiau mwy na hynny mewn gwirionedd. Rwyf eisiau i Lywodraeth Cymru wrando ar y bobl sydd wedi llofnodi'r ddeiseb a gweithredu ar eu rhan. Dywedais ym mis Medi ei bod hi'n amlwg nad oes unrhyw gyfiawnder i Bort Talbot yn dod oddi wrth y Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder, a gelwais ar Lywodraeth Cymru i ddarparu'r cyfiawnder hwnnw drwy osod ein heconomi fel blaenoriaeth ac nid penderfyniad y Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder i arbed arian. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, mae'n eithaf syml: pan ddaw'r Weinyddiaeth Gyfiawnder i ofyn am gael datblygu ar y tir hwnnw, dywedwch 'na'. Gwrandewch ar y deisebwyr: gall Port Talbot wneud yn well ac mae'n haeddu cymaint mwy.