English: I'm pleased to speak in this debate, and I'd like to thank the Chair of the committee, the rest of the committee members and the clerking team for the important work that they've done with the report and the consultation. Storm overflows are an important issue and, as we've heard, this is also an emotional issue. Concerns were raised with us about how frequently storm overflows lead to sewage discharge and the detrimental effect that this has on the environment and public health. Concerns were also raised about the lack of reporting by water companies, again as we've heard, and the failure by environmental regulators to take stronger action against companies when pollution takes place. I am sure, Dirprwy Lywydd, that we were all shocked to hear, earlier this year, that there were 105,000 cases of sewage discharge recorded in Wales. And worse still, as the committee Chair has said, we, as a committee, came to understand that the actual figure is probably significantly higher, given the lack of recording, or illegal discharges. Storm overflows should be used infrequently only, and, as the Chair said, only in exceptional circumstances, but that is not the case. What is clear is that the number of cases of discharge is increasing. And, as Llyr Gruffydd has said in the past, this situation cannot continue, where a parent is afraid to let their child swim in a river in Wales because they are so worried about sewage. It's revolting. It's a terrible situation. It's clear that it's high time for the water industry to clean up the way that it works. It needs to reform and invest, and do what it is paid to do, namely protect areas of water for people, but also for the environment. The many cases that we've heard about show that there is a gap in the environmental regulation process and in the way that environmental law works in reality. When will the Government tackle the environmental governance gap? Could the Minister please give us an update on this? The Government's response to our report mentions £40 million-worth of investment over three years, as we've heard previously, in SuDS, namely sustainable urban drainage solutions. I don't know how to say that in Welsh. That is to be welcomed. But SuDS alone cannot solve the problem of the increase in urban development and the decrease in how permeable the land is. Other countries have looked at other ways to improve drainage. Austria has tried to reduce urban sprawl; Belgium is re-using brownfield land for developments; the Czech Republic has led the way in protecting agricultural land through landscape fragmentation. I would like to hear from the Minister whether this Government in Wales has looked at what happens outside Wales, or internationally, when they respond to this challenge. By the way, when we talk about urban development, I would agree entirely with what Janet Finch-Saunders said about plastic grass. Again, I'm not sure how to say that in Welsh. I am pleased that the Government has accepted the recommendations, but I remain concerned. Welsh Water told the committee that removing all storm overflows and avoiding all spills would involve duplicating the drainage network at a cost of between £9 billion and £14 billion. It also said that the cost would mean an increase in customer bills during a cost-of-living crisis, so how will the Government respond to this challenge, relating to cost? Thank you.
Welsh: Mae'n bleser siarad yn y ddadl hon, a hoffwn i ddiolch i Gadeirydd y pwyllgor, gweddill y pwyllgor a'r tîm clercio am y gwaith pwysig maen nhw wedi'i wneud gyda'r adroddiad a'r ymgynghoriad byr. Mae gorlifoedd storm yn fater pwysig, ac, fel dŷn ni wedi'i glywed, hefyd mae hyn yn fater emosiynol. Codwyd pryderon gyda ni am ba mor aml mae'r gorlifoedd storm yn gollwng carthion, yr effaith niweidiol mae hyn yn ei chael ar yr amgylchfyd ac iechyd cyhoeddus. Codwyd pryderon am y diffyg adrodd sy'n digwydd gan gwmnïau dŵr, eto fel dŷn ni wedi'i glywed, a'r methiant gan reoleiddwyr amgylcheddol i gymryd camau cryfach yn erbyn cwmnïau pan fo llygredd yn digwydd. Rwy'n siŵr, Dirprwy Lywydd, roedd pob un ohonom ni wedi'n brawychu i glywed, yn gynharach eleni, fod 105,000 o achosion o ddadlwytho carthion wedi'u recordio yng Nghymru. A beth sy'n waeth ydy, fel mae Cadeirydd y pwyllgor wedi'i ddweud, gwnaethon ni fel pwyllgor ddod i ddeall fod y ffigwr go iawn siŵr o fod yn sylweddol uwch, gan fod cymaint o ddiffyg recordio yn digwydd, neu ddadlwytho sy'n anghyfreithlon. Dylai gorlifoedd storm ond cael eu defnyddio yn anaml, eto fel oedd y Cadeirydd wedi'i ddweud, dan amgylchiadau eithriadol, ond nid fel yna y mae. Beth sy'n glir ydy bod y nifer o achosion o ddadlwytho yn cynyddu. Ac fel mae Llyr Gruffydd wedi dweud yn y gorffennol, all y sefyllfa hon ddim parhau, lle mae rhiant yn ofni gadael i'w plentyn nofio mewn afon yng Nghymru oherwydd maen nhw'n poeni cymaint am garthion. Mae fe'n ffiaidd. Mae jest yn sefyllfa hollol echrydus. Mae'n amlwg bod hi'n hen amser i'r diwydiant dŵr lanhau'r ffordd maen nhw'n gweithio. Diwygio, buddsoddi, gwneud beth maen nhw'n cael eu talu i'w wneud, sef diogelu llefydd dŵr ar gyfer pobl ond hefyd ar gyfer yr amgylchfyd. Mae nifer yr achosion dŷn ni wedi clywed amdanyn nhw, mae hwnna'n dangos fod gap yn y broses reoleiddio amgylcheddol, ac yn y ffordd mae cyfraith amgylcheddol yn gweithio mewn realiti. Pryd bydd y Llywodraeth yn taclo'r gap llywodraethu amgylcheddol? A fydd y Gweinidog, plîs, yn gallu rhoi diweddariad inni am hyn? Mae ymateb y Llywodraeth i'n hadroddiad yn sôn am £40 miliwn o fuddsoddiad dros dair blynedd, eto fel dŷn ni wedi'i glywed, mewn i SuDS, neu sustainable urban drainage solutions. Does gen i ddim syniad sut i ddweud hwnna yn Gymraeg. Mae hwnna i'w groesawu, ond all SuDS ar eu pennau eu hunain ddim ateb y broblem ynghylch y cynnydd mewn datblygiadau trefol a'r lleihad mewn pa mor permeable mae'r tir. Mae gwledydd eraill wedi edrych mewn i ffyrdd eraill o wella'r draeniad, y drainage: mae Awstria wedi ceisio lleihau sprawl trefol; mae Gwlad Belg yn ailddefnyddio tiroedd brownfield ar gyfer datblygiadau; mae'r Czech Republic wedi arwain y ffordd wrth ddiogelu tir amaethyddol trwy ffragmenteiddio tirlun, neu landscape fragmentation. Buaswn i'n hoffi clywed gan y Gweinidog os ydy'r Llywodraeth yma yng Nghymru wedi edrych ar beth sy'n digwydd yn rhyngwladol, neu y tu fas i Gymru, pan fyddan nhw yn ymateb i'r her yma. Gyda llaw, pan ŷn ni'n sôn am ddatblygiadau trefol, buaswn i'n cytuno'n gyfan gwbl gyda beth oedd Janet Finch-Saunders wedi'i ddweud ynglŷn â plastic grass. Eto, dwi ddim yn siŵr sut i ddweud hynna yn Gymraeg, o dop fy mhen. I gloi, Dirprwy Lywydd, rwy'n falch bod y Llywodraeth wedi derbyn ein hargymhellion, ond rwy'n dal i bryderu. Dywedodd Dŵr Cymru wrth y pwyllgor y byddai cymryd mas pob gorlifydd storm, ac osgoi pob spill, yn golygu dyblygu'r rhwydwaith draeniad gyda chost o rhwng £9 biliwn a £14 biliwn. Dywedon nhw y byddai'r gost yn golygu cynnydd mewn biliau cwsmeriaid ar adeg o greisis costau byw, felly sut bydd y Llywodraeth yn ymateb i'r sialens yma o ran y gost, os gwelwch yn dda? Diolch.