English: Thank you for your statement, Minister. I'll begin with matters that we agree on. I'd like to support your words of thanks to Welsh Government and public sector staff who have been working so diligently to prepare Wales for the catastrophic possibility of a 'no deal' Brexit. Their hard work is appreciated. I agree with you as well that it is scandalous that resources are being squandered on preparing for an eventuality that should have been ruled out from the outset. It's particularly galling to consider how this money could otherwise have been spent, given that our public services are under such financial pressures as a result of the austerity policies of the British Government. The Prime Minister's actions in this regard are truly disgraceful, throwing money away for the sake of appeasing the extremists within her own party - money that could have been spent otherwise on the NHS, on schools, on improving infrastructure, on improving people's lives. It goes to show that the welfare of Welsh citizens means nothing to the negligent British state and that the only way to secure our own future is by taking it into our own hands as an independent country. Westminster is not exactly doing itself any favours at the moment. But, Minister, I'd like to turn to your criticism of the length of the article 50 extension as being neither short enough to force an outcome nor long enough to rethink the doomed endeavour. I asked you on 30 March how long you believed the extension should be, but you chose not to answer my question. At that point, you relied on strategic ambiguity rather than stating a view, and it's ironic that you're now critical of others for doing the same. Plaid Cymru was clear that the extension should be a long one, up to the end of 2020, to give time and space to deal with Brexit appropriately. Do you, therefore, now regret not supporting our call in this regard? I'd also like to ask you for some clarity in terms of your claim that you're putting pressure on the opposition, that is, your own party, to achieve real progress in cross-party negotiations. Does this mean that Welsh Government's negotiating priorities differ in some respect from Jeremy Corbyn's, and, if so, could you please provide this Chamber with details in terms of what Welsh Government is asking for specifically? You also say that you're pressing for discussion with the devolved administrations. I welcome this, and I hope that you're successful in securing the parallel meaningful negotiations that you've mentioned. Of course, in a parallel reality, the Labour Party would have taken a principled stand on Brexit and would have a clear policy on holding a public vote so that any deal goes back to the people to decide whether to accept it or remain in the EU. Instead, we have an incomprehensible policy wrapped in convolution. When asked by BBC journalists today about how he would vote on the matter in Labour's NEC, Welsh Labour's representative, Mick Antoniw, gave an answer that succeeded only in raising the level of confusion to a new level. He said he supported a legitimisation of any Brexit deal through a vote, but that this should not be in the form of a referendum, because referendums give a range of options, as opposed to, presumably, letting people have a narrow choice of accepting or rejecting a deal that does not exist. If the definition of a referendum is 'a choice between a range of options', then I'm not sure what exactly happened on 23 June 2016. What he seemed to be saying was that the policy has now morphed into actually supporting a referendum - without calling it that - as long as remain is not an option on the ballot paper. I may have misunderstood him, so I'll quote his response. He said, 'A referendum can give you a number of options. You could actually put the key issue of whether we want to remain in the EU or not; a legitimisation could actually be saying, "This is the deal we have. Are you prepared to accept this deal and these negotiations?"' Minister, can you therefore confirm whether or not Mick Antoniw is reflecting Welsh Government policy on that committee, or is the stance of Welsh Labour somehow not the same as that of the Government? I'm unclear as to whether Welsh Government support having a confirmatory vote on any deal or just on a deal it doesn't agree with. If so, what is the democratic justification for this stance? Finally, I welcome your call for the UK Government to begin preparations for a referendum, even though it's currently unclear whether or not you would wish this referendum to actually happen. This Assembly agreed on 13 January that work should begin immediately on preparing for a public vote. Could you set out what steps your Government has taken in this regard, either in terms of Executive action or making the case to the UK Government or the opposition?
Welsh: Diolch ichi am eich datganiad, Gweinidog. Dechreuaf gyda materion yr ydym ni'n cytuno arnyn nhw. Fe hoffwn i ategu eich geiriau o ddiolch i staff Llywodraeth Cymru a'r sector cyhoeddus sydd wedi bod yn gweithio mor ddiwyd i baratoi Cymru ar gyfer y posibilrwydd trychinebus o Brexit heb gytundeb. Gwerthfawrogir eu gwaith caled. Cytunaf â chi hefyd ei bod hi'n gywilyddus bod adnoddau'n cael eu gwastraffu ar baratoi ar gyfer digwyddiad a ddylai fod wedi cael ei ddiystyru o'r cychwyn. Mae'n arbennig o anodd meddwl sut y gellid bod wedi gwario'r arian hwn fel arall, o gofio bod ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus o dan y fath bwysau ariannol o ganlyniad i bolisïau cyni Llywodraeth Prydain. Mae gweithredoedd Prif Weinidog y DU yn hyn o beth yn gwbl warthus, gan afradu arian er mwyn tawelu'r eithafwyr yn ei phlaid ei hun - arian y gellid bod wedi ei wario fel arall ar y GIG, ar ysgolion, ar wella seilwaith, ar wella bywydau pobl. Mae'n dangos nad yw lles dinasyddion Cymru yn golygu dim i'r wladwriaeth Brydeinig esgeulus ac mai'r unig ffordd o sicrhau ein dyfodol ein hunain yw drwy ei roi yn ein dwylo ein hunain fel gwlad annibynnol. Nid yw San Steffan yn gwneud unrhyw gymwynas â'i hun ar hyn o bryd. Ond, Gweinidog, fe hoffwn i droi at eich beirniadaeth o hyd estyniad Erthygl 50 fel un nad yw'n ddigon byr i orfodi canlyniad nac yn ddigon hir i ailfeddwl am yr ymgais ffaeledig. Gofynnais ichi ar 30 Mawrth pa mor hir y credech chi y dylai'r estyniad fod, ond fe wnaethoch chi ddewis peidio ag Fcyhydateb fy nghwestiwn. Bryd hynny, roeddech chi'n dibynnu ar amwysedd strategol yn hytrach na datgan barn, ac mae'n eironig eich bod bellach yn feirniadol o eraill am wneud yr un peth. Roedd Plaid Cymru yn glir y dylai'r estyniad fod yn un hir, hyd at ddiwedd 2020, i roi amser a modd i ymdrin â Brexit yn briodol. A ydych chi'n edifar, felly, am beidio â chefnogi ein galwad yn hyn o beth? Hoffwn hefyd ofyn i chi am rywfaint o eglurder o ran eich honiad eich bod yn rhoi pwysau ar y gwrthbleidiau, hynny yw, eich plaid eich hun, i sicrhau cynnydd gwirioneddol mewn trafodaethau trawsbleidiol. A yw hyn yn golygu bod blaenoriaethau negodi Llywodraeth Cymru yn wahanol mewn rhyw ffordd i rai Jeremy Corbyn, ac, os felly, a allech chi roi manylion i'r Siambr hon o ran yr hyn y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn gofyn amdano'n benodol? Rydych chi hefyd yn dweud eich bod yn pwyso am drafodaeth gyda'r gweinyddiaethau datganoledig. Rwyf yn croesawu hyn, ac rwy'n gobeithio eich bod yn llwyddo i sicrhau'r cyd-drafodaethau ystyrlon cyfochrog yr ydych chi wedi'u crybwyll. Wrth gwrs, mewn realiti cyfochrog, byddai'r Blaid Lafur wedi gwneud safiad egwyddorol o ran Brexit a byddai ganddi bolisi clir ynglŷn â chynnal pleidlais gyhoeddus fel bod unrhyw gytundeb yn mynd yn ôl at y bobl i benderfynu a ddylid ei dderbyn neu aros yn yr UE. Yn hytrach, mae gennym ni bolisi annealladwy sy'n ddryslyd ar y naw. Pan ofynnwyd iddo gan newyddiadurwyr y BBC heddiw sut y byddai'n pleidleisio ar y mater ym Mhwyllgor Gweithredu Lleol Llafur, rhoddodd cynrychiolydd Llafur Cymru, Mick Antoniw, ateb a lwyddodd i wneud dim ond creu mwy fyth o ddryswch. Dywedodd ei fod o blaid dilysu unrhyw gytundeb Brexit drwy bleidlais, ond na ddylai hyn fod ar ffurf refferendwm, gan fod refferenda yn rhoi amrywiaeth o ddewisiadau, yn hytrach na bod pobl yn cael dewis syml o dderbyn neu wrthod cytundeb nad yw'n bodoli. Os mai'r diffiniad o refferendwm yw 'dewis rhwng ystod o ddewisiadau', yna nid wyf yn siŵr beth yn union ddigwyddodd ar 23 Mehefin 2016. Yr hyn yr oedd yn ei ddweud am wn i oedd bod y polisi wedi ymffurfio bellach i gefnogi refferendwm mewn gwirionedd - heb ei alw'n hynny - ar yr amod nad yw aros yn ddewis ar y papur pleidleisio. Efallai fy mod i wedi ei gamddeall, felly dyfynnaf ei ymateb. Dywedodd gall refferendwm roi nifer o ddewisiadau i chi. Mewn gwirionedd, fe allech chi ofyn y cwestiwn allweddol, sef a ydym ni eisiau aros yn yr UE ai peidio; gallai dilysu olygu dweud mewn gwirionedd, "Dyma'r cytundeb sydd gennym ni. A ydych chi'n barod i dderbyn y cytundeb hwn a'r trafodaethau hyn?" Gweinidog, a wnewch chi gadarnhau felly a yw Mick Antoniw yn adlewyrchu polisi Llywodraeth Cymru ar y pwyllgor hwnnw, neu a yw safiad Llafur Cymru rywsut yn wahanol i safbwynt y Llywodraeth? Nid wyf yn siŵr a yw Llywodraeth Cymru yn cefnogi cael pleidlais gadarnhau ar unrhyw gytundeb neu dim ond ar gytundeb nad yw'n cytuno ag ef. Os felly, beth yw'r cyfiawnhad democrataidd dros y safiad hwn? Yn olaf, croesawaf eich galwad ar i Lywodraeth y DU ddechrau paratoi ar gyfer refferendwm, er nad yw hi'n glir ar hyn o bryd a ydych chi'n dymuno i'r refferendwm hwn ddigwydd mewn gwirionedd ai peidio. Cytunodd y Cynulliad ar 13 Ionawr y dylai gwaith ddechrau ar unwaith i baratoi ar gyfer pleidlais gyhoeddus. A allwch chi amlinellu beth mae eich Llywodraeth wedi ei wneud yn hyn o beth, naill ai o ran camau gweithredol neu wrth ddadlau'r achos i Lywodraeth y DU neu'r wrthblaid?