English: I welcome the debate this afternoon. I welcome the Government bringing forward a debate on this important matter so early following the election. It's absolutely essential that if the UK is to mean anything at all, the wealth of the United Kingdom is shared fairly between the constituent parts of the United Kingdom, both across the nations of the UK, but also within the nations of the United Kingdom. It's also important that that wealth is shared with a purpose, and is done so transparently and with accountability. The issue with the regional policy that is being invented behind closed doors in Whitehall is that none of those things seem to matter to the current UK administration. What seems to matter to them is the funnelling of public money to constituencies and regions of England where they have won elections in recent years. And that is something to be deeply ashamed of. When I was the Minister, Paul - and Paul Davies will remember this; he seems to have forgotten a lot of other things he said previously here, but we'll give him some time this afternoon - who published the report on Objective 1, when I was a European programmes Minister back in 2011, that report outlined all the lessons that were learnt from Objective 1. It was a very positive report in all sorts of different ways, but it also said there are lessons to be learnt, that we need to improve the way in which we deliver regional funds and public investment. Those improvements were built then into the system that was used up until our friend Huw Irranca-Davies then chaired the committee that led that in the previous Senedd. That was learning the lessons of what was done. What this and these schemes seem to be doing is repeating the mistakes of that time. But the mistakes that were made 20 years ago on Objective 1 were made - by a Labour administration, I accept that - as a new system was introduced in order to dispatch of some of the structures that might be introduced, to provide the money straight to the communities that were targeted by that. It was done in goodwill and it was done with the best of intentions. The issue you have here is that these structures have been established not in order to reach the communities and the people most in need, not to achieve objectives, because they haven't got any objectives. It's been done without any consultation. There hasn't been any consultation, not with local government. If you'd carried on reading from what Rosemarie Harris said, she would have said in the paragraph after the one you quoted that they hadn't been consulted by the United Kingdom Government on these matters, that they didn't know how it was going to work. So, there was no consultation. We know there's been no transparency, because I've sat on the committees, and we brought the Ministers in to explain to us what they're doing, and they didn't know what they were going to be doing, because they hadn't done it yet. It wasn't a very impressive performance, let me tell you that. And so there's been no transparency. There's no accountability, there's been no debate, there's been no consultation. What there's been has been a determination to undermine Welsh democracy, because they can't win elections. If you were all sitting here and we were sitting there, I can tell you now there'd be Welsh Ministers around that table. What this is about is the use of public money for political objectives, to alter the balance of power within the United Kingdom, and that is something to be deeply ashamed of - deeply ashamed of. What I would like to see us being able to do, Presiding Officer, is to establish a relationship with the United Kingdom Government of equals, where we work together, bringing in the structures that involve local government. You talk about devolution within Wales; well, I support that. I put forward proposals to entrench that in the last Senedd, and you voted and argued against it -
Welsh: Rwy'n croesawu'r ddadl y prynhawn yma. Rwy'n croesawu'r ffaith bod y Llywodraeth wedi cyflwyno dadl ar y mater pwysig hwn mor gynnar ar ôl yr etholiad. Mae'n gwbl hanfodol, os yw'r DU am olygu unrhyw beth o gwbl, bod cyfoeth y Deyrnas Unedig yn cael ei rannu'n deg rhwng rhannau cyfansoddol y Deyrnas Unedig, ar draws gwledydd y DU, ond hefyd o fewn gwledydd y Deyrnas Unedig. Mae hefyd yn bwysig bod y cyfoeth hwnnw'n cael ei rannu â phwrpas, ac y gwneir hynny yn dryloyw a gydag atebolrwydd. Y broblem gyda'r polisi rhanbarthol sy'n cael ei ddyfeisio y tu ôl i ddrysau caeedig yn Whitehall yw nad yw'n ymddangos bod yr un o'r pethau hynny o bwys i weinyddiaeth bresennol y DU. Yr hyn sy'n ymddangos yn bwysig iddyn nhw yw sianelu arian cyhoeddus i etholaethau a rhanbarthau Lloegr lle maen nhw wedi ennill etholiadau yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf. Ac mae hynny'n rhywbeth i fod â chywilydd mawr ohono. Pan mai fi oedd y Gweinidog, Paul - a bydd Paul Davies yn cofio hyn; mae'n ymddangos ei fod wedi anghofio llawer o bethau eraill a ddywedodd o'r blaen yma, ond fe rown ni ychydig o amser iddo y prynhawn yma - a gyhoeddodd yr adroddiad ar Amcan 1, pan oeddwn i'n Weinidog rhaglenni Ewropeaidd yn ôl yn 2011, amlinellodd yr adroddiad hwnnw'r holl wersi a ddysgwyd o Amcan 1. Roedd yn adroddiad cadarnhaol iawn ym mhob math o wahanol ffyrdd, ond roedd yn dweud hefyd fod gwersi i'w dysgu, bod angen inni wella'r ffordd yr ydym yn darparu cronfeydd rhanbarthol a buddsoddiad cyhoeddus. Cafodd y gwelliannau hynny, bryd hynny, eu cynnwys yn y system a ddefnyddiwyd hyd nes i'n cyfaill Huw Irranca-Davies gadeirio'r pwyllgor a arweiniodd hynny yn y Senedd flaenorol. Dysgu gwersi o'r hyn a wnaethpwyd oedd hynny. Yr hyn y mae hwn a'r cynlluniau hyn yn ei wneud, mae'n ymddangos, yw ailadrodd camgymeriadau'r adeg honno. Ond gwnaed y camgymeriadau a wnaethpwyd 20 mlynedd yn ôl ar Amcan 1 - gan weinyddiaeth Lafur, rwy'n derbyn hynny - wrth i system newydd gael ei chyflwyno er mwyn gwaredu rhai o'r strwythurau y gellid eu cyflwyno, i ddarparu'r arian yn uniongyrchol i'r cymunedau a dargedwyd gan hynny. Gwnaed hynny gydag ewyllys da a gwnaed hynny gyda'r bwriadau gorau. Y broblem sydd gennych yma yw nad yw'r strwythurau hyn wedi'u sefydlu er mwyn cyrraedd y cymunedau a'r bobl fwyaf anghenus, nid er mwyn cyflawni amcanion, oherwydd nid oes ganddyn nhw unrhyw amcanion. Mae wedi'i wneud heb unrhyw ymgynghori. Ni fu unrhyw ymgynghori, nid â llywodraeth leol. Pe baech wedi parhau i ddarllen o'r hyn a ddywedodd Rosemarie Harris, byddai hi wedi dweud yn y paragraff ar ôl yr un a ddyfynnwyd gennych chi nad oedd Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig wedi ymgynghori â nhw ar y materion hyn, nad oedden nhw'n gwybod sut yr oedd yn mynd i weithio. Felly, ni chafwyd ymgynghoriad. Gwyddom na fu tryloywder, oherwydd rwyf wedi eistedd ar y pwyllgorau, a daethom â'r Gweinidogion i mewn i egluro wrthym beth y maen nhw'n ei wneud, ac nid oedden nhw'n gwybod beth yr oedden nhw'n mynd i fod yn ei wneud, oherwydd nid oedden nhw wedi gwneud hynny eto. Nid oedd yn berfformiad trawiadol iawn, gadewch i mi ddweud hynny wrthych chi. Ac felly ni fu tryloywder. Nid oes atebolrwydd, ni chafwyd dadl, ni chafwyd ymgynghoriad. Yr hyn sydd wedi bod yw penderfyniad i danseilio democratiaeth Cymru, oherwydd ni allan nhw ennill etholiadau. Pe baech chi i gyd yn eistedd yma a'n bod ni yn eistedd fan yna, gallaf ddweud wrthych chi yn awr y byddai Gweinidogion Cymru o amgylch y bwrdd yna. Mae hyn yn ymwneud â defnyddio arian cyhoeddus ar gyfer amcanion gwleidyddol, newid cydbwysedd grym o fewn y Deyrnas Unedig, ac mae hynny'n rhywbeth i fod â chywilydd mawr yn ei gylch - cywilydd mawr. Yr hyn yr hoffwn i ein gweld yn gallu ei wneud, Llywydd, yw sefydlu perthynas â Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig sy'n gyfartal, lle yr ydym yn gweithio gyda'n gilydd, yn cyflwyno'r strwythurau sy'n cynnwys llywodraeth leol. Rydych chi'n sôn am ddatganoli yng Nghymru; wel, rwy'n cefnogi hynny. Fe wnes i gyflwyno cynigion i ymwreiddio hynny yn y Senedd ddiwethaf, ac fe wnaethoch chi bleidleisio a dadlau yn ei erbyn -