English: Unfortunately, I do reject amendment 107. In 2018, the then Minister for the environment confirmed that national park authorities would be retained and their purpose of conserving and enhancing natural beauty would not be weakened. The decision was to retain the existing powers of national parks. And whilst I consider the general power will be a valuable tool for principal and eligible community councils, I have seen insufficient evidence that the existing powers and purposes of a national park authority are a barrier to practical delivery. Whilst I acknowledge there have been some calls for these authorities to have access to a general power, I remain unconvinced what positive difference a general power would realistically make for a single-purpose authority. This does not mean that national park authorities shouldn't pursue innovative activity that supports the social and economic resilience of communities in their areas with some focus on commercial income. They should, and I do not consider there to be any barrier to them doing so within their existing powers. On this amendment, I will also note that the provisions are intended for application to principal and eligible community councils. If it were intended to provide national park authorities with a general power, it could not be achieved by simply inserting them into these provisions as there is a range of legislation that would need to be considered. I also reject amendments 108 and 109, which would remove the requirement that a community council's two most recent audit opinions from the Auditor General for Wales must be unqualified before it can resolve itself eligible to use the general power of competence. There have been concerns that it places Audit Wales in a position of measuring the competence of a council, but the Bill does not provide for that nor have I ever said that it does. This is one of three criteria a council must satisfy before resolving itself eligible to use the general power of competence and it provides a measurable, objective indicator that a council carries out governance procedures properly. Preparing a strategy is not an appropriate condition for eligibility in itself as it provides no verifiable indication that the community council is ready to exercise the general power, just that it can prepare a strategy. In addition, a consequence of removing this criteria is that a community council with qualified audits in the past two years could, in theory, exercise the general power. I'm surprised that a Member would be content to propose this step. The principle that community councils should prepare for exercising the general power does have merit, and this will be set out in statutory guidance to community councils. Having considered the arguments put forward during Stage 2 proceedings and again today, I remain of the view that the criteria for community councils to be eligible for the general power are all appropriate and required. They collectively provide objective, proportionate and measurable conditions of eligibility, covering the democratic, governance and professional aspects of a community council. I therefore call on Members to reject amendments 108 and 109, and also amendment 110, which is consequential to those amendments. Turning to the amendments I have tabled, amendment 3 is a minor technical amendment that alters the drafting in section 29 so as to ensure consistency with other provisions within the Bill. This does not change the effect of the provision. Amendments 68, 69 and 74 are technical in nature and omit consequential amendments that would have removed principal councils and eligible community councils from section 95 of the Local Government Act 2003. Section 95 of the 2003 Act enables the Welsh Ministers to make an Order authorising them to do for a commercial purpose anything they are able to do for the purposes of carrying on any of their ordinary functions. It is necessary for principal and community councils to be retained within the definition of a relevant authority in section 95 of the 2003 Act, as the Bill only provides for authorities doing something for a commercial purpose where it is being done under the general power of competence. Diolch.
Welsh: Yn anffodus, rwy'n gwrthod gwelliant 107. Yn 2018, cadarnhaodd Gweinidog yr Amgylchedd ar y pryd y byddai awdurdodau parciau cenedlaethol yn cael eu cadw ac na fyddai eu diben o warchod a gwella harddwch naturiol yn cael ei wanhau. Y penderfyniad oedd cadw pwerau presennol y parciau cenedlaethol. Ac er fy mod i o'r farn y bydd y pŵer cyffredinol yn arf gwerthfawr i brif gynghorau cymuned a chynghorau cymuned cymwys, nid wyf wedi gweld digon o dystiolaeth bod pwerau a dibenion presennol awdurdod parc cenedlaethol yn rhwystr o ran cyflawni'n ymarferol. Er fy mod i'n cydnabod y bu rhai galwadau i'r awdurdodau hyn gael defnyddio pŵer cyffredinol, nid wyf wedi fy argyhoeddi o hyd pa wahaniaeth cadarnhaol y byddai pŵer cyffredinol yn ei wneud yn realistig i awdurdod un pwrpas. Nid yw hyn yn golygu na ddylai awdurdodau parciau cenedlaethol ddilyn gweithgarwch arloesol sy'n cefnogi cadernid cymdeithasol ac economaidd cymunedau yn eu hardaloedd gan ganolbwyntio rhywfaint ar incwm masnachol. Fe ddylent wneud hynny, ac nid wyf i o'r farn bod unrhyw rwystr iddynt wneud hynny o fewn eu pwerau presennol. O ran y gwelliant hwn, rwy'n nodi hefyd mai bwriad y darpariaethau yw eu cymhwyso i brif gynghorau cymuned a chynghorau cymuned cymwys. Pe bai'n fwriad rhoi pŵer cyffredinol i awdurdodau parciau cenedlaethol, ni fyddai modd ei gyflawni drwy eu cynnwys yn y darpariaethau hyn yn unig gan fod amrywiaeth o ddeddfwriaeth y byddai angen ei hystyried. Rwyf hefyd yn gwrthod gwelliannau 108 a 109, a fyddai'n dileu'r gofyniad bod yn rhaid i ddwy farn archwilio ddiweddaraf cyngor cymuned gan Archwilydd Cyffredinol Cymru fod yn ddiamod cyn y gall osod ei hun yn gymwys i ddefnyddio'r pŵer cymhwysedd cyffredinol. Bu pryderon ei fod yn rhoi Archwiliad Cymru mewn sefyllfa o fesur cymhwysedd cyngor, ond nid yw'r Bil yn darparu ar gyfer hynny ac nid wyf i erioed wedi dweud ei fod yn gwneud hynny. Dyma un o dri maen prawf y mae'n rhaid i gyngor eu bodloni cyn gosod ei hun yn gymwys i ddefnyddio'r pŵer cymhwysedd cyffredinol ac mae'n darparu dangosydd mesuradwy, gwrthrychol bod cyngor yn cynnal gweithdrefnau llywodraethu'n briodol. Nid yw paratoi strategaeth ynddo'i hun yn amod priodol ar gyfer cymhwysedd, gan nad yw'n rhoi unrhyw arwydd gwiriadwy bod y cyngor cymuned yn barod i arfer y pŵer cyffredinol, dim ond y gall baratoi strategaeth. Yn ogystal â hyn, un o ganlyniadau dileu'r meini prawf hyn yw y gallai cyngor cymuned ag archwiliadau cymwysedig yn ystod y ddwy flynedd ddiwethaf, mewn theori, arfer y pŵer cyffredinol. Rwy'n synnu y byddai Aelod yn fodlon cynnig y cam hwn. Mae rhinwedd i'r egwyddor y dylai cynghorau cymuned baratoi ar gyfer arfer y pŵer cyffredinol, a chaiff hyn ei nodi mewn canllawiau statudol i gynghorau cymuned. Ar ôl ystyried y dadleuon a gyflwynwyd yn ystod trafodion Cyfnod 2 ac eto heddiw, rwyf i'n dal o'r farn bod y meini prawf er mwyn i gynghorau cymuned fod yn gymwys i gael y pŵer cyffredinol i gyd yn briodol ac yn ofynnol. Ar y cyd, maen nhw'n darparu amodau cymhwysedd gwrthrychol, cymesur a mesuradwy, gan gynnwys agweddau democrataidd, llywodraethu a phroffesiynol cyngor cymuned. Rwy'n galw felly ar yr Aelodau i wrthod gwelliannau 108 a 109, a hefyd welliant 110, sy'n ganlyniadol i'r gwelliannau hynny. Gan droi at y gwelliannau yr wyf i wedi'u cyflwyno, mae gwelliant 3 yn fân welliant technegol sy'n newid y drafftio yn adran 29 er mwyn sicrhau cysondeb â darpariaethau eraill yn y Bil. Nid yw hyn yn newid effaith y ddarpariaeth. Mae gwelliannau 68, 69 a 74 yn dechnegol eu natur ac yn hepgor diwygiadau canlyniadol a fyddai wedi dileu prif gynghorau a chynghorau cymuned cymwys o adran 95 o Ddeddf Llywodraeth Leol 2003. Mae adran 95 o Ddeddf 2003 yn galluogi Gweinidogion Cymru i wneud Gorchymyn yn eu hawdurdodi i wneud, at ddiben masnachol, unrhyw beth y gallant ei wneud at ddibenion cyflawni unrhyw un o'u swyddogaethau arferol. Mae'n angenrheidiol bod prif gynghorau a chynghorau chymunedau yn cael eu cadw o fewn diffiniad awdurdod perthnasol yn adran 95 o Ddeddf 2003, gan mai dim ond i awdurdodau sy'n gwneud rhywbeth at ddiben masnachol y mae'r Bil yn darparu pan fo'n cael ei wneud o dan bŵer cymhwysedd cyffredinol. Diolch.