English: Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. On behalf of the Petitions Committee, I welcome the opportunity to introduce this afternoon's debate on this petition and our report on the evidence we received. The petition we are discussing was submitted by Tim Deere-Jones, and received 7,171 signatures. It relates to sediment that will be dredged from the Severn estuary close to the site where the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant is currently being constructed. As all Members will know, this petition has sparked a significant level of interest and debate. By way of background, EDF Energy has, via a subsidiary company, applied for a marine licence to dispose of the dredged sediment elsewhere within the Severn estuary. Because the site chosen - the Cardiff Grounds - is on the Welsh side of the channel, the licence was considered and issued by Natural Resources Wales. It is important that I address up front some of the timing challenges that the Petitions Committee has faced during our consideration of the petition. We first considered the petition during November 2017, although, as I will cover later, the marine licence had, in fact, been issued several years earlier. It was also our understanding that the dredging operations could be set to take place within a relatively short space of time. As a result, we gathered evidence as quickly as we were able to. This included sessions with the petitioner, EDF Energy, NRW and CEFAS - the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science - who conducted the analysis of the sediment. The committee also received and considered a significant volume of written correspondence. This is all documented in our report on the petition, which was published on 14 May. During their evidence, EDF informed us that the dredging was due to take place this summer. Therefore, in order to enable this debate to take place in a timely fashion, the committee chose to report the evidence we have received at the earliest opportunity. Because of this, we have not had the luxury of time to draw conclusions or produce recommendations. I hope that this overview provides the necessary context to Members and anyone watching proceedings today. I would also like to briefly thank everyone who provided evidence to the committee. We appreciate the fact that the people and organisations we consulted recognised our timescales and made their time and expertise available to us within them. I will now turn to the evidence that we received. May I say at the outset that, as a committee, we have sought to deal with the petition and the wider issue with the seriousness required? We have also sought to give priority to the scientific evidence received and, hopefully, to avoid alarmism or sensationalism. In 2014, NRW issued a marine licence for the disposal of the sediment. The original application had been submitted in 2012, and it is worth noting that, at that time, the licensing process was managed directly by the Welsh Government. Therefore, the licence was handed over from the Welsh Government to NRW during its consideration. The licence issued contained a number of conditions, including a requirement that samples of the material had to be taken and analysed, and that NRW have to be satisfied that it is suitable for deposit. The petition was driven by concern that this testing had not been sufficient, and that the sediment could be radioactive as a result of over 50 years of operations at the existing Hinkley sites. The primary concerns of the petitioner related to two elements of the testing: the depths to which samples had been taken and the methodology used for analysis.
Welsh: Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Ar ran y Pwyllgor Deisebau, rwy'n croesawu'r cyfle i gyflwyno'r ddadl hon y prynhawn yma ar y ddeiseb hon a'n hadroddiad ar y dystiolaeth a gawsom. Cyflwynwyd y ddeiseb yr ydym yn ei thrafod gan Tim Deere-Jones, a derbyniwyd 7,171 o lofnodion. Mae'n ymwneud â gwaddodion a gaiff eu carthu o aber afon Hafren ger y safle lle mae safle niwclear Hinkley Point C yn cael ei adeiladu ar hyn o bryd. Fel y bydd pob Aelod yn gwybod, mae'r ddeiseb hon wedi ennyn cryn dipyn o ddiddordeb a dadl. O ran y cefndir, mae EDF Energy, drwy is-gwmni, wedi gwneud cais am drwydded forol i waredu'r gwaddodion a gaiff eu carthu mewn man arall yn aber afon Hafren. Gan fod y safle a ddewiswyd - Cardiff Grounds - ar ochr Cymru i Fôr Hafren, cafodd y drwydded ei hystyried a'i chyhoeddi gan Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru. Mae'n bwysig fy mod yn ymdrin yn syth â rhai o'r heriau o ran amseru y mae'r Pwyllgor Deisebau wedi'u hwynebu wrth inni ystyried y ddeiseb. Ystyriwyd y ddeiseb yn gyntaf yn ystod mis Tachwedd 2017, er bod y drwydded forol, fel y byddaf yn trafod yn nes ymlaen, wedi'i chyhoeddi sawl blwyddyn yn gynharach mewn gwirionedd. Yn ôl ein dealltwriaeth ni hefyd, gellid trefnu i'r gwaith carthu ddigwydd o fewn cyfnod cymharol fyr o amser. O ganlyniad, aethom ati i gasglu tystiolaeth mor gyflym ag y gallem. Roedd hyn yn cynnwys sesiynau gyda'r deisebydd, EDF Energy, Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru a CEFAS - Canolfan Gwyddorau'r Amgylchedd, Pysgodfeydd a Dyframaethu - a gynhaliodd y dadansoddiad o'r gwaddod. Hefyd, derbyniodd ac ystyriodd y pwyllgor gryn dipyn o ohebiaeth ysgrifenedig. Mae hyn i gyd wedi ei ddogfennu yn ein hadroddiad ar y ddeiseb, a gyhoeddwyd ar 14 Mai. Yn ystod eu tystiolaeth, dywedodd EDF wrthym fod y carthu i ddigwydd yr haf hwn. Felly, er mwyn galluogi i'r ddadl hon ddigwydd mewn modd amserol, dewisodd y pwyllgor lunio adroddiad ar y dystiolaeth a gawsom ar y cyfle cynharaf. Oherwydd hyn, nid ydym wedi cael amser i ddod i gasgliadau na chynhyrchu argymhellion. Gobeithio bod y trosolwg hwn yn darparu'r cyd-destun angenrheidiol i'r Aelodau ac unrhyw un sy'n gwylio'r trafodion heddiw. Hoffwn ddiolch yn fyr hefyd i bawb a ddarparodd dystiolaeth i'r pwyllgor. Rydym yn gwerthfawrogi'r ffaith bod y bobl a'r sefydliadau yr ymgynghorasom â hwy wedi cydnabod ein hamserlenni ac wedi rhoi eu hamser a'u harbenigedd inni o fewn yr amserlenni hynny. Trof yn awr at y dystiolaeth a gawsom. A gaf fi ddweud ar y cychwyn ein bod, fel pwyllgor, wedi ceisio ymdrin â'r ddeiseb a'r mater ehangach gyda'r difrifoldeb sy'n ofynnol? Hefyd rydym wedi ceisio rhoi blaenoriaeth i'r dystiolaeth wyddonol ac yn gobeithio ein bod wedi osgoi codi bwganod neu gamliwio. Yn 2014, cyhoeddodd Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru drwydded forol ar gyfer gwaredu'r gwaddodion. Cyflwynwyd y cais gwreiddiol yn 2012, ac mae'n werth nodi, ar y pryd hwnnw, fod y broses drwyddedu'n cael ei rheoli'n uniongyrchol gan Lywodraeth Cymru. Felly, trosglwyddwyd y drwydded gan Lywodraeth Cymru i Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru yn ystod y broses o ystyried y drwydded. Roedd y drwydded a gyhoeddwyd yn cynnwys nifer o amodau, gan gynnwys gofyniad i gasglu samplau o'r deunydd er mwyn eu dadansoddi, a bod yn rhaid i Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru fod yn fodlon ei fod yn addas ar gyfer ei waredu. Ysgogwyd y ddeiseb gan bryder nad oedd y profion hyn yn ddigon, ac y gallai'r gwaddodion fod yn ymbelydrol o ganlyniad i dros 50 mlynedd o waith ar safleoedd presennol Hinkley. Roedd prif bryderon y deisebwyr yn ymwneud â dwy elfen o'r profion: y dyfnder y casglwyd y samplau ohono a'r fethodoleg a ddefnyddiwyd ar gyfer dadansoddi.