English: I'm grateful to the acting Presiding Officer for calling me, and I'm very grateful to all who have taken part in the debate. I won't repeat the points that have been made very ably by my colleagues; I think the case has been powerfully put. I will try to respond to some of the points made by other Members. I was surprised to see Suzy Davies's 'delete all'. I know she doesn't usually do that, and I'm grateful to her for her explanation. And I think her point about further education is a very important one, and that needs to be taken forward. So, I'm grateful to her for that point that she's raised. But, in the end, when it comes to the provision of universal benefits, there is just a simple philosophical difference here, a political difference here, as Delyth has pointed out. We believe, in Plaid Cymru, that children are not just the responsibility of their parents, they're the responsibility of the whole community. And we have heard from others about the way in which a continued fear of stigma does prevent even many of those who are currently eligible from taking that benefit up. Universal benefits avoid those stigma issues. So, it is a simple difference of view. I respect the way that Suzy Davies has put it across, but I disagree. Mike Hedges's contribution was very interesting. His record on this is, of course, well known. He's right to remind us of the realities of poverty, of what it is really like to have to worry about whether you can afford to feed your children or turn the hot water on so you can wash their clothes. I'm glad he supports us on the expansion of eligibility - this is of primary importance. Our figures, the figures from the Child Poverty Action Group, suggest the cost would be £60 million; the Minister says £67 million. That is of course a lot of money, but not a huge thing. I rather liked Mike's point about, 'Perhaps we should take that out of the economic development budget'. If I'm Plaid's economy Minister in a new Government after the election, I'll be very happy to make my contribution towards that, because Mike is absolutely right, we have to deal with skills and underperformance in education. In terms of making it a universal eligibility, he's right to point out that there are practical issues, and that's why we would be taking a phased approach. And to all Members who have asked about how we'd do it, well, we will of course set that out in the preparation of our manifesto. And I will say to Rhianon Passmore: I'm not going to show you the working out, because we on the Plaid Cymru benches are rather tired of having our good policy proposals nicked by the Labour Party. So, Rhianon will have to wait to see the manifesto before she understands exactly how we will make that work. Other Members on the Labour benches have made some powerful points. I would say to John Griffiths, of course it is a good thing that there is discretion for free school meals to be provided for those not eligible for receipt of public funds, but I don't think it's right that that's discretionary, that should be an entitlement for those children - the poorest children. Why do we leave that to anybody's discretion? I don't understand it, and I think, in truth, he probably doesn't himself. Jenny Rathbone's points were well made, as I said, about stigma, and the pilots do provide really interesting evidence, and that evidence about academic attainment - two months ahead of their peers because they are being fed, with no stigma, and that marked impact on less-affluent children. It's been interesting, of course, to hear Labour Members make a powerful case for doing something that they won't be able to vote for today, but I think that is still - all those contributions are - part of a really important debate. Now, I have to say to the Welsh Government that this is another disappointing 'delete all' - not surprising, but disappointing. This is not the most generous food offer for schoolchildren in the UK. Don't take my word for it: Suzy Davies was in the event that I chaired last week looking at what the third sector organisations in Wales will say to the United Nations about whether we're meeting our convention requirements, and both the Bevan Foundation and the Child Poverty Action Group were absolutely clear that the Welsh Government offer is the least generous. Because it is generous to those who receive, but what about those who do not? And that's the point - the first part of our motion today. Of course, the things that they're already doing are welcome. The free breakfasts are a good thing for those who are able to access them. I worry sometimes about families not being able to get their children to school in time always for free breakfasts. But that doesn't solve the problem. It doesn't deal with the fact that we have all these children living in poverty in Wales who don't claim when they are entitled because they're worried about stigma, or those who cannot, who are not entitled. And I would say to the Minister: your backbenchers know this; there's not a single one of them who said that they didn't think that universal free school meals were the right thing to do. Quite right to raise the practical issues of how you introduce that, but they know your offer isn't the most generous in their heart of hearts. The figures the Minister provided are useful and, as I've said, this would obviously be a policy that would need to be phased in. I want to end, acting Presiding Officer, by saying this, simply and clearly, to the Welsh Government: if this Conservative United Kingdom Government, which is in charge of benefits, not notoriously generous in the way that it allows its entitlements, if this Conservative Government recognises these families as families in need of help, how can it possibly be right that this Welsh Labour Government, which calls itself a socialist Government, will not do that same? The First Minister, responding to questions from Adam Price yesterday and Delyth Jewell, referred to the very beautiful and moving pamphlet 'They shall have flowers on the table' from the 1940s. Well, I would say to the Welsh Government today, acting Presiding Officer, that there are many families living in profound poverty in Wales who would be glad to have food on their children's table at school; flowers would be nice, but food is what they really need. These are families living in poverty. They are families that the UK Government acknowledges need support to look after their children and I am - am I disappointed? Yes, I am disappointed that this Welsh Labour so-called socialist Government does not appear to agree.
Welsh: Rwy'n ddiolchgar i'r Llywydd dros dro am fy ngalw, ac rwy'n ddiolchgar iawn i bawb sydd wedi cymryd rhan yn y ddadl. Nid wyf am ailadrodd y pwyntiau sydd wedi'u gwneud yn fedrus iawn gan fy nghyd-Aelodau; credaf fod yr achos wedi'i gyflwyno'n rymus. Ceisiaf ymateb i rai o'r pwyntiau a wnaed gan Aelodau eraill. Synnais wrth weld gwelliant 'dileu popeth' Suzy Davies. Rwy'n gwybod nad yw hi'n gwneud hynny fel arfer, ac rwy'n ddiolchgar iddi am ei hesboniad. A chredaf fod ei phwynt am addysg bellach yn un pwysig iawn, ac mae angen bwrw ymlaen â hynny. Felly, rwy'n ddiolchgar iddi am y pwynt a wnaeth. Ond yn y pen draw, o ran darparu buddion cyffredinol, gwahaniaeth athronyddol syml sydd yma, gwahaniaeth gwleidyddol, fel y nododd Delyth. Ym Mhlaid Cymru, credwn nad cyfrifoldeb eu rhieni yn unig yw plant, mae'r gymuned gyfan yn gyfrifol amdanynt. Ac rydym wedi clywed gan eraill sut y mae ofn stigma parhaus yn atal llawer o'r rhai sy'n gymwys ar hyn o bryd hyd yn oed rhag manteisio ar y budd hwnnw. Mae buddion cyffredinol yn osgoi'r problemau hynny gyda stigma. Felly, gwahaniaeth barn syml ydyw. Rwy'n parchu'r ffordd y mae Suzy Davies wedi'i gyfleu, ond rwy'n anghytuno. Roedd cyfraniad Mike Hedges yn ddiddorol iawn. Mae ei hanes ar hyn yn hysbys iawn wrth gwrs. Mae'n gywir i'n hatgoffa o realiti tlodi, o sut beth yw gorfod poeni a allwch fforddio bwydo eich plant neu roi'r dŵr poeth ymlaen i chi allu golchi eu dillad. Rwy'n falch ei fod yn ein cefnogi ar fater ehangu cymhwysedd - mae hyn o'r pwys mwyaf. Mae ein ffigurau, ffigurau'r Grŵp Gweithredu ar Dlodi Plant, yn awgrymu y byddai'r gost yn £60 miliwn; dywed y Gweinidog £67 miliwn. Mae hynny wrth gwrs yn llawer o arian, ond nid yw'n anferth. Roeddwn yn hoffi pwynt Mike, 'Efallai y dylem ei dynnu o'r gyllideb datblygu economaidd'. Os mai fi fydd Gweinidog economi Plaid Cymru mewn Llywodraeth newydd ar ôl yr etholiad, byddaf yn hapus iawn i wneud fy nghyfraniad tuag at hynny, oherwydd mae Mike yn llygad ei le, mae'n rhaid inni ymdrin â sgiliau a thangyflawni mewn addysg. O ran ei wneud yn gymhwysedd cyffredinol, mae'n iawn i nodi bod yna faterion ymarferol yn codi, a dyna pam y byddem yn mabwysiadu dull gweithredu graddol. Ac i'r holl Aelodau sydd wedi gofyn sut y byddem yn gwneud hynny, wel, byddwn yn nodi hynny wrth baratoi ein maniffesto wrth gwrs. A dywedaf wrth Rhianon Passmore: nid wyf am ddangos y gwaith i chi, oherwydd rydym ni ar feinciau Plaid Cymru wedi blino ar gael ein cynigion polisi da wedi'u dwyn gan y Blaid Lafur. Felly, bydd yn rhaid i Rhianon aros i weld y maniffesto cyn iddi ddeall yn union sut y gwnawn i hynny weithio. Mae Aelodau eraill ar feinciau Llafur wedi gwneud rhai pwyntiau pwerus. Byddwn yn dweud wrth John Griffiths, wrth gwrs ei bod yn beth da fod disgresiwn i ddarparu prydau ysgol am ddim i'r rhai nad ydynt yn gymwys i gael arian cyhoeddus, ond nid wyf yn credu ei bod yn iawn ei fod yn ddisgresiwn, dylai fod yn hawl i'r plant hynny - y plant tlotaf. Pam gadael hynny i ddisgresiwn unrhyw un? Nid wyf yn ei ddeall, ac mewn gwirionedd, mae'n debyg nad yw yntau'n ei ddeall ei hun. Gwnaeth Jenny Rathbone bwyntiau da am stigma, fel y dywedais, ac mae'r cynlluniau peilot yn darparu tystiolaeth ddiddorol iawn, a'r dystiolaeth honno am gyrhaeddiad academaidd - ddeufis ar y blaen i'w cyfoedion am eu bod yn cael eu bwydo, heb unrhyw stigma, a'r effaith amlwg honno ar blant llai cefnog. Mae wedi bod yn ddiddorol clywed Aelodau Llafur yn gwneud achos pwerus dros wneud rhywbeth na fyddant yn gallu pleidleisio drosto heddiw wrth gwrs, ond credaf fod hynny - yr holl gyfraniadau hynny - yn dal i fod yn rhan o ddadl wirioneddol bwysig. Nawr, rhaid imi ddweud wrth Lywodraeth Cymru fod hwn yn 'ddileu popeth' siomedig arall - nid yw'n syndod, ond mae'n siomedig. Nid dyma'r cynnig bwyd mwyaf hael i blant ysgol yn y DU. Peidiwch â chymryd fy ngair i ar y mater: roedd Suzy Davies yn y digwyddiad a gadeiriais yr wythnos diwethaf yn edrych ar yr hyn y bydd sefydliadau'r trydydd sector yng Nghymru yn ei ddweud wrth y Cenhedloedd Unedig ynglŷn ag i ba raddau rydym yn ateb gofynion y confensiwn, ac roedd Sefydliad Bevan a'r Grŵp Gweithredu ar Dlodi Plant yn gwbl glir mai cynnig Llywodraeth Cymru yw'r lleiaf hael. Oherwydd mae'n hael i'r rhai sy'n derbyn, ond beth am y rhai nad ydynt? A dyna'r pwynt - rhan gyntaf ein cynnig heddiw. Wrth gwrs, mae'r pethau y maent eisoes yn eu gwneud i'w croesawu. Mae'r brecwastau am ddim yn beth da i'r rhai sy'n gallu eu cael. Rwy'n poeni weithiau nad yw teuluoedd yn gallu cael eu plant i'r ysgol mewn pryd bob amser i gael brecwast am ddim. Ond nid yw hynny'n datrys y broblem. Nid yw'n mynd i'r afael â'r ffaith bod gennym cymaint o blant sy'n byw mewn tlodi yng Nghymru nad ydynt yn hawlio pan fo ganddynt hawl i wneud hynny oherwydd eu bod yn poeni am stigma, neu'r rhai na allant, neu'r rhai nad oes ganddynt hawl i wneud. A hoffwn ddweud wrth y Gweinidog: mae aelodau eich meinciau cefn yn gwybod hyn; nid oes un ohonynt wedi dweud nad oeddent yn credu mai prydau ysgol am ddim i bawb oedd y peth iawn i'w wneud. Mae'n hollol iawn eu bod yn holi cwestiynau ymarferol ynglŷn â sut y'i cyflwynwch, ond maent yn gwybod nad yr hyn a gynigiwch chi yw'r mwyaf hael yn eu calonnau. Mae'r ffigurau a ddarparwyd gan y Gweinidog yn ddefnyddiol ac fel y dywedais, byddai hwn yn amlwg yn bolisi y byddai angen ei gyflwyno fesul cam. Hoffwn orffen, Lywydd dros dro, drwy ddweud hyn yn syml ac yn glir wrth Lywodraeth Cymru: os nad yw'r Llywodraeth Geidwadol yn y Deyrnas Unedig, sy'n gyfrifol am fudd-daliadau, yn nodedig o hael yn y ffordd y mae'n caniatáu ei hawliau, os yw'r Llywodraeth Geidwadol hon yn cydnabod bod y teuluoedd hyn yn deuluoedd sydd angen cymorth, sut y gall fod yn iawn nad yw'r Llywodraeth Lafur hon yng Nghymru, sy'n galw ei hun yn Llywodraeth sosialaidd, yn gwneud yr un peth? Wrth ymateb i gwestiynau gan Adam Price ddoe a Delyth Jewell, cyfeiriodd y Prif Weinidog at y pamffled hardd ac emosiynol iawn 'They shall have flowers on the table' o'r 1940au. Wel, byddwn yn dweud wrth Lywodraeth Cymru heddiw, Lywydd dros dro, fod llawer o deuluoedd yn byw mewn tlodi dwfn yng Nghymru a fyddai'n falch o gael bwyd ar fwrdd eu plant yn yr ysgol; byddai blodau'n braf, ond bwyd yw'r hyn sydd ei angen arnynt mewn gwirionedd. Teuluoedd sy'n byw mewn tlodi yw'r rhain. Teuluoedd y mae Llywodraeth y DU yn cydnabod bod angen cymorth arnynt i ofalu am eu plant ac rwy'n - a wyf yn siomedig? Ydw, rwy'n siomedig nad yw'n ymddangos bod Llywodraeth sosialaidd honedig Llafur Cymru yn cytuno.