English: Thank you, Presiding Officer. We heard the First Minister graciously concede that Brexit is going to happen, and this at least is an advance, because I'm not quite sure about last year, when you did reject Mrs May's deal despite my passionate appeals that that was as positive a Brexit as we were likely to get. Of course, I was a keen remainer and I'm not happy that we're in this situation, but we are, as the result of a massive democratic vote that I think, by any interpretation, was further strengthened in the general election. I think that's the only reasonable explanation to make of recent political developments. However, the First Minister then insisted that the only way he would support any future relationship with the EU was that if that met the interests of Wales as he sees them. There then followed in the bulk of his speech - he spent two thirds of his time on this - a long list of reasons why Brexit is bad and ought to make us just implement it in as insipid a way as possible, so in effect you remain in the political and economic orbit of the EU. And that's just not reality. It's something I accepted immediately after the referendum. Of course, I was hoping we would remain fully in the economic and political orbit with all the rights of a member, but there are consequences if we move out, and they are that we will be pursuing in some areas quite distinctively different paths, and to try and defang Brexit of all meaning I think is a highly questionable process on democratic grounds. But at least, in his approach, we know that his real objection is political and not much to do with constitutional propriety. What he is aiming to do this afternoon is not dishonourable at all. He wants to make Brexit a matter that is purely owned by the Conservative Party, and this is part of that great play he's making to the public - 'Nothing to do with us. We never supported it or facilitated it in any way.' And, on rational grounds, I do see there's a certain logic if you believe there's a path back for Labour on these sorts of grounds, especially in some of their former heartland areas. I'll leave it to you to determine your tactics on these matters. But what we've not had is an explanation on the grounds of high constitutional principle why this LCM should be rejected. And let's remember, it's about enacting, taking forward, a referendum decision on a major constitutional matter. These are not trivial - I do agree with some of the Labour Members that have spoken on that score - but they are indeed very, very solemn moments. The First Minister did spend some time as an afterthought - . I'll give way.
Welsh: Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Clywsom y Prif Weinidog yn cyfaddef yn haelionus fod Brexit yn mynd i ddigwydd, ac mae hyn o leiaf yn gam ymlaen, gan nad wyf i'n hollol siŵr am y llynedd, pryd y gwnaethoch chi wrthod cytundeb Mrs May er gwaethaf fy apeliadau angerddol bod hynny yn Brexit mor gadarnhaol ag yr oeddem ni'n debygol o'i gael. Wrth gwrs, roeddwn i'n frwd dros aros ac nid wyf i'n hapus ein bod ni yn y sefyllfa hon, ond rydym ni ynddi, yn sgil pleidlais ddemocrataidd enfawr a gafodd, yn fy marn i, drwy unrhyw ddehongliad, ei chryfhau ymhellach yn yr etholiad cyffredinol. Rwy'n credu mai dyna'r unig esboniad rhesymol o'r datblygiadau gwleidyddol diweddar. Fodd bynnag, mynnodd y Prif Weinidog wedyn mai'r unig ffordd y byddai'n cefnogi unrhyw berthynas â'r UE yn y dyfodol oedd pe byddai hynny'n bodloni buddiannau Cymru fel y mae ef yn eu gweld nhw. Wedyn daeth y rhan fwyaf o'i araith - treuliodd ddwy ran o dair o'i amser ar hyn - rhestr faith o resymau pam mae Brexit yn ddrwg i ni ac y dylai ein gwneud ni ei weithredu mewn modd mor wan â phosibl, felly i bob pwrpas rydych chi'n aros yng nghylch dylanwad gwleidyddol ac economaidd yr UE. Ond nid yw hynny'n realiti. Mae'n rhywbeth y gwnes i ei dderbyn yn syth ar ôl y refferendwm. Wrth gwrs, roeddwn i'n gobeithio y byddem ni'n aros yn gyfan gwbl yn y cylch dylanwad economaidd a gwleidyddol gyda holl hawliau aelodaeth, ond mae canlyniadau os byddwn ni'n symud allan, sef y byddwn ni'n mynd ar drywydd llwybrau eithaf gwahanol mewn rhai meysydd, ac mae ceisio dileu pob ystyr ar Brexit, yn fy marn i, yn broses hynod amheus ar sail ddemocrataidd. Ond o leiaf, yn ei ddull o weithredu, fe wyddom mai gwrthwynebiad gwleidyddol sydd ganddo ac nad oes gan hynny fawr i'w wneud â phriodoldeb cyfansoddiadol. Nid yw'r hyn y mae'n ceisio ei wneud y prynhawn yma yn waradwyddus o gwbl. Mae e'n dymuno gwneud Brexit yn fater sy'n eiddo i'r Blaid Geidwadol yn unig, ac mae hyn yn rhan o'r neges fawr sydd ganddo i'r cyhoedd - 'Dim byd i'w wneud â ni. Ni wnaethom ni erioed ei gefnogi na'i hwyluso mewn unrhyw ffordd.' Ac, ar sail resymol, rwy'n gweld bod rhyw fath o resymeg os ydych chi'n credu bod yna lwybr yn ôl i Lafur ar y mathau hyn o sail, yn enwedig yn rhai o'u cyn gadarnleoedd. Fe adawaf i i chi benderfynu ar eich tactegau ar y materion hyn. Ond yr hyn nad ydym ni wedi ei gael yw esboniad ar sail egwyddor gyfansoddiadol uchel pam y dylai'r cynnig cydsyniad deddfwriaethol hwn gael ei wrthod. A gadewch i ni gofio, mae'n ymwneud â deddfu, gweithredu, penderfyniad refferendwm ar fater cyfansoddiadol hynod bwysig. Nid yw'r rhain yn ddibwys - rwy'n cytuno â rhai o'r Aelodau Llafur sydd wedi siarad i'r perwyl hwnnw - ond maen nhw wir yn funudau difrifol iawn, iawn. Treuliodd y Prif Weinidog rywfaint o amser fel ôl-ystyriaeth - . Fe wnaf i ildio.