techiaith/cofnodycynulliad_en-cy huggingface dataset:
English: I'd like to thank Julie Morgan for her questions. And it would perhaps be appropriate at this point to say that any questions concerning S4C's decision, based on their competition to relocate, whether it be to Carmarthen or Caernarfon, are for S4C to answer. Likewise, the matter of relocating from Cardiff is an issue for S4C rather than Welsh Government to address, in terms of the questions about why the decision was taken. We would not be subsidising S4C's move if we were to support this project. This project must demonstrate additionality. The vision of Yr Egin is for a creative hub - a major creative hub - and, in scrutinising the business plan, we need to be confident that the support that may be forthcoming would, indeed, lead to the creation of jobs that would not otherwise be generated solely by S4C's move to Carmarthen.
Welsh: Hoffwn ddiolch i Julie Morgan am ei chwestiynau. Ac efallai y byddai'n briodol ar y pwynt hwn i ddweud mai lle S4C yw ateb unrhyw gwestiynau ynghylch penderfyniad S4C, ar sail eu cystadleuaeth i adleoli, boed hynny i Gaerfyrddin neu Gaernarfon. Yn yr un modd, mae'r mater o adleoli o Gaerdydd yn fater i S4C ymdrin ag ef yn hytrach na Llywodraeth Cymru, o ran y cwestiynau ynghylch pam y gwnaed y penderfyniad. Ni fyddem yn rhoi cymhorthdal i S4C symud pe byddem yn cefnogi'r prosiect hwn. Mae'n rhaid i'r prosiect hwn ddangos chwanegedd. Gweledigaeth Yr Egin yw bod yn ganolfan greadigol - yn ganolfan greadigol o bwys - ac, wrth graffu ar y cynllun busnes, mae angen i ni fod yn hyderus y byddai'r cymorth a allai fod ar gael, mewn gwirionedd, yn arwain at greu swyddi na fyddai'n cael eu creu fel arall ond trwy fod S4C yn symud i Gaerfyrddin.
English: I now call on Jeremy Miles to ask the third urgent question.
Welsh: Rwy'n galw nawr ar Jeremy Miles i ofyn y trydydd cwestiwn brys.
English: Well, thank you for that urgent question. I can tell you that my assessment is, indeed, at a very preliminary stage. I think we were all made aware of this issue in an article that appeared over the weekend, which was the first announcement that there might be legal action. The British Influence think tank plan to write to the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, to ask him to clarify his position on UK membership of the European Economic Area after Brexit. This process may see proceedings being brought, but no court proceedings are currently live. So, it's clear that any litigation is still some way off. The UK Government has been asked to clarify its position on withdrawal from the European Economic Area under article 127 of that agreement, and we look forward to hearing what they have to say about that.
Welsh: Wel, diolch i chi am y cwestiwn brys yna. Gallaf ddweud wrthych fod fy asesiad, mewn gwirionedd, ar gyfnod cynnar iawn. Rwy'n credu ein bod i gyd yn ymwybodol o'r mater hwn trwy erthygl a ymddangosodd dros y penwythnos, sef y cyhoeddiad cyntaf y gellid cymryd camau cyfreithiol. Mae'r felin drafod British Influence yn bwriadu ysgrifennu at yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol dros Adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd, i ofyn iddo egluro ei safbwynt ar aelodaeth y DU o'r Ardal Economaidd Ewropeaidd ar ôl gadael yr UE. Gallai'r broses hon arwain at ddwyn achos, ond nid oes achos llys yn bodoli ar hyn o bryd. Felly, mae'n amlwg bod unrhyw ymgyfreitha yn dal i fod ymhell yn y dyfodol. Gofynnwyd i Lywodraeth y DU egluro ei safbwynt ar dynnu allan o'r Ardal Economaidd Ewropeaidd o dan erthygl 127 o'r cytundeb hwnnw, ac edrychwn ymlaen at glywed yr hyn sydd ganddi i'w ddweud am hynny.
English: I thank the Counsel General for his answer. Would he not agree with me that the principles being discussed here, in a sense, lie on the fault line between a hard and a soft Brexit, if you like? The UK will now leave the EU, but the question is: do we then also leave the EEA and the access to the single market that that brings? Article 127 suggests that that is a separate question and - if I may say - one that the voters haven't been asked. So, would he share my concern that the UK Government seems to be losing sight of its legal obligations here in its rush to make political judgments about what the British people have voted for.
Welsh: Diolch i'r Cwnsler Cyffredinol am ei ateb. Oni fyddai'n cytuno â mi bod yr egwyddorion sydd dan sylw yma, i raddau, yn dibynnu ar y ffawtlin rhwng Brexit caled a meddal, os mynnwch chi? Bydd y DU bellach yn gadael yr UE, ond y cwestiwn yw: a fyddwn ni wedyn yn gadael yr AEE a'r mynediad at y farchnad sengl a ddaw yn sgil hynny? Mae erthygl 127 yn awgrymu bod hwnnw yn gwestiwn ar wahân ac - os caf ddweud - un na ofynnwyd i'r pleidleiswyr. Felly, a yw'n rhannu fy mhryder ei bod yn ymddangos bod Llywodraeth y DU yn colli golwg ar ei rhwymedigaethau cyfreithiol trwy ruthro i wneud penderfyniadau gwleidyddol am yr hyn y mae pobl Prydain wedi pleidleisio drosto.
English: Well, we also have, as you know, the hearing starting in a week's time, on 5 December, at which the Welsh Government will be represented, which is going to certainly determine the mechanism for constitutional change. What I can say is that I think the litigation exposes, even now, the UK Government's total lack of planning, strategy and preparedness for Brexit, and there appears to be a complete lack of thought regarding the UK's constitution and the rule of law. A state of unparalleled chaos appears to exist at the heart of the Government whose sole strategy appears to be to want to have their cake and to eat it.
Welsh: Wel, mae gennym hefyd, fel y gwyddoch, y gwrandawiad yn cychwyn ymhen wythnos, ar 5 Rhagfyr, a bydd cynrychiolaeth o Lywodraeth Cymru yno, a fydd yn sicr yn penderfynu ar ddull y newid cyfansoddiadol. Yr hyn y gallaf ei ddweud yw fy mod i o'r farn bod yr ymgyfreitha yn datgelu, hyd yn oed yn awr, diffyg llwyr Llywodraeth y DU o ran cynllunio, strategaeth a pharodrwydd ar gyfer Brexit, ac ymddengys bod diffyg ystyriaeth llwyr o gyfansoddiad y DU a rheolaeth y gyfraith. Ymddengys y ceir sefyllfa o anhrefn digynsail yn bodoli wrth wraidd y Llywodraeth, a'i hunig strategaeth yn ôl pob golwg yw ei bod eisiau cael ei ffordd ei hun ym mhopeth.
English: I thank the Member for Neath for tabling this urgent question. Can the Counsel General clarify his view on this matter - whether the triggering of article 127 is a necessary legal step, and whether that should be done concurrently with the triggering of article 50? If so, can he also clarify whether - if there is litigation down the line - the Welsh Government will intervene in any legal proceedings, as it has done in the UK Government's appeal to the Supreme Court on the triggering of article 50? And finally, can he also give a commitment that he will assess whether there are opportunities in the process of triggering article 127 for sub-state entities, such as Wales, to potentially leave or remain in a different way than the state as a whole?
Welsh: Diolch i'r Aelod dros Gastell-nedd am gyflwyno'r cwestiwn brys hwn. A all y Cwnsler Cyffredinol egluro ei farn ar y mater hwn - pa un a yw sbarduno erthygl 127 yn gam cyfreithiol angenrheidiol, ac a ddylai hynny ddigwydd ar yr un pryd â chychwyn erthygl 50? Os felly, a wnaiff hefyd egluro pa un a - os bydd proses ymgyfreitha yn y dyfodol - fydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn ymyrryd mewn unrhyw achos cyfreithiol, fel y mae wedi gwneud yn apêl Llywodraeth y DU i'r Goruchaf Lys ar gychwyn erthygl 50? Ac yn olaf, a all ef hefyd ymrwymo i asesu pa un a oes cyfleoedd yn y broses o gychwyn erthygl 127 i endidau is-wladwriaeth, fel Cymru, o bosibl i adael neu aros mewn ffordd wahanol i'r wladwriaeth yn ei chyfanrwydd?
English: Well, thank you. You've asked a number of questions, I think, that raise complex, specific and highly technical legal questions, which the Welsh Government will want to consider carefully and thoroughly in due course. With regard to the triggering of article 127, I think some of those issues may well be determined on the matter of principle in the article 50 case that's being heard in the Supreme Court next week, where we will probably anticipate judgment sometime in early January. So, in terms of the process, that may actually be the mechanism. In terms of what the implications might be for Wales, the agreement on the European Economic Area is one of the EU treaties that is woven into the fabric of our constitutional settlement by the Government of Wales Act 2006, so, when we know precisely what has happened, when we know precisely what the UK Government's response is to that, and when we've seen the outcome of the article 50 case, if there are any specific issues that are directly relevant to Wales and Wales's interest, then we will consider those accordingly and I will advise accordingly.
Welsh: Wel diolch. Rydych chi wedi gofyn nifer o gwestiynau, yn fy marn i, sy'n codi cwestiynau cyfreithiol cymhleth, penodol a hynod dechnegol, a bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn awyddus i ystyried y rhain yn ofalus ac yn drylwyr maes o law. O ran cychwyn erthygl 127, rwy'n credu y gall rhai o'r materion hynny gael eu penderfynu gan y mater o egwyddor yn yr achos erthygl 50 sy'n cael gwrandawiad yn y Goruchaf Lys yr wythnos nesaf, a byddwn yn ôl pob tebyg yn rhagweld dyfarniad rywbryd yn gynnar ym mis Ionawr. Felly, o ran y broses, efallai mai hynny fydd y dull mewn gwirionedd. O ran yr hyn y gallai'r goblygiadau posibl fod i Gymru, mae'r cytundeb ar yr Ardal Economaidd Ewropeaidd yn un o'r cytundebau UE sydd wedi ei wau i wead ein setliad cyfansoddiadol gan Ddeddf Llywodraeth Cymru 2006, felly, pan fyddwn yn gwybod yn union beth sydd wedi digwydd, pan fyddwn yn gwybod beth yn union yw ymateb Llywodraeth y DU i hynny, a phan fyddwn wedi gweld canlyniad yr achos erthygl 50, os bydd unrhyw faterion penodol sy'n berthnasol yn uniongyrchol i Gymru a buddiant Cymru, yna byddwn yn eu hystyried yn briodol a byddaf yn eich hysbysu yn unol â hynny.
English: You mentioned the think tank British Influence, and they said there's no provision in the European Economic Area agreement for UK membership to lapse if the UK withdraws from the EU, and therefore the UK will have to extract itself from the European Economic Area separately to its departure from the EU itself. However, professor of European law at the University of Cambridge, Kenneth Armstrong, has pointed out that the UK neither signed nor ratified the agreement because it wasn't within its power and competencies - it was within the EU power and competencies - and therefore, once the UK was outside the EU, the agreement would only be enforceable for very limited purposes. On what legal grounds, therefore, would you challenge the UK Government position, which has been stated, which is that the UK is party to the EEA agreement only in its capacity as an EU member state, and once the UK leaves the EU it will automatically cease, therefore, to be a member of the EEA?
Welsh: Soniasoch am y felin drafod British Influence, ac maen nhw'n dweud nad oes darpariaeth yn y cytundeb Ardal Economaidd Ewropeaidd i aelodaeth y DU ddod i ben os yw'r DU yn tynnu allan o'r UE, felly bydd yn rhaid i'r DU dynnu ei hun allan o'r Ardal Economaidd Ewropeaidd mewn proses ar wahân i adael yr UE ei hun. Fodd bynnag, mae Kenneth Armstrong, athro cyfraith Ewropeaidd ym Mhrifysgol Caergrawntwedi tynnu sylw at y ffaith nad yw'r DU wedi llofnodi na chadarnhau'r cytundeb oherwydd nad oedd ganddo'r pŵer na'r cymhwysedd i wneud hynny - pŵer a chymhwysedd yr UE oedd hynny - felly, pan fyddai'r DU y tu allan i'r UE, byddai modd gorfodi'r cytundeb ar gyfer dibenion cyfyngedig iawn yn unig. Ar ba sail gyfreithiol, felly, y byddech chi'n herio safbwynt Llywodraeth y DU, sydd wedi ei ddatgan, sef bod y DU yn rhan o'r cytundeb AEE dim ond yn rhinwedd y ffaith ei bod yn aelod wladwriaeth o'r UE ac y bydd yr aelodaeth o'r AEE yn dod i ben yn awtomatig, ar ôl i'r DU adael yr UE?
English: Well, thank you very much for that. You've raised the valid counterpart of the argument that has been put as the reason why a judicial review pre-action protocol letter has actually been sent to the UK Government. So, the first thing we need to know is what the actual UK Government's response is to that. As I understand the chronology of events, we left EFTA in 1973, when we joined the European Union. The European economic area agreement was agreed in 1992 and came into effect in 1994. It has the unusual provision in that not only does it of course include the signing of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway - the EFTA states - but it also includes the European Union as a signatory as well as every individual state. Whether that is a legal anomaly or whether it raises constitutional issues I think will depend on a number of matters, one part of which may be determined as a result of the article 50 Supreme Court hearing in respect of the constitutional issue in respect of process. But the issues that are raised we will give consideration to when we know clearly what the UK Government's position is.
Welsh: Wel, diolch yn fawr iawn am hynna. Rydych chi wedi codi'r elfen gyfatebol ddilys i'r ddadl a nodwyd fel y rheswm pam yr anfonwyd llythyr protocol cyn-gweithredu ar gyfer adolygiad barnwrol i Lywodraeth y DU mewn gwirionedd. Felly, yn gyntaf mae angen i ni wybod beth yw ymateb gwirioneddol Llywodraeth y DU i hynny. Yn ôl fy nealltwriaeth i o gronoleg y digwyddiadau, gadawsom Cymdeithas Masnach Rydd Ewrop ym 1973, pan wnaethom ymuno â'r Undeb Ewropeaidd. Cytunwyd ar y cytundeb ardal economaidd Ewrop ym 1992, a daeth i rym ym 1994. Mae'n cynnwys y ddarpariaeth anarferol o ran nad yw wrth gwrs ddim ond yn cynnwys llofnod Gwlad yr Iâ, Liechtenstein a Norwy - y gwladwriaethau EFTA - ond mae hefyd yn cynnwys yr Undeb Ewropeaidd fel llofnodwr yn ogystal â phob gwladwriaeth unigol. Rwy'n credu y bydd penderfynu pa un ai anghysondeb cyfreithiol yw hynny neu a yw'n codi materion cyfansoddiadol yn dibynnu ar nifer o faterion, a gellid cael penderfyniad ar un ohonynt o ganlyniad i wrandawiad y Goruchaf Lys ar erthygl 50 o ran y mater cyfansoddiadol o ran y broses. Ond byddwn yn rhoi ystyriaeth i'r materion sy'n cael eu codi, pan fyddwn yn gwybod yn glir beth yw safbwynt Llywodraeth y DU.
English: Isn't it about time the remoaners stopped trying to frustrate the freely expressed wishes of the British people in June? The question was plain and simple: do we want to remain in the EU or leave the EU? There was no if or but. There was no qualification or condition. There was nothing about whether it should be a soft Brexit or a hard Brexit. The decision taken by the British people under the terms of the referendum Act that was passed to facilitate this was: do you want to stay or to leave? And the British people voted to leave. The Conservative party, in its manifesto before the last general election, included a paragraph that said: 'We believe in letting the people decide: so we will hold an in-out referendum on our membership of the EU before the end of 2017.' The Government has a mandate to implement its manifesto pledge, and all this wriggling by the very inaptly named British Influence, which is a front organisation for European influence, should be ignored, and we should move as quickly as possible to trigger article 50 and, if necessary, article 127 and leave the EU, consequent upon the freely expressed wish, unconditionally, by the British people.
Welsh: Onid yw'n hen bryd i'r rhai sy'n cwyno am adael yr UE roi'r gorau i geisio rhwystro'r dymuniadau a fynegwyd yn rhydd gan bobl Prydain ym mis Mehefin? Roedd y cwestiwn yn ddigon syml: a ydym ni eisiau aros yn yr UE neu adael yr UE? Nid oedd dim os nac oni bai. Nid oedd unrhyw gyfyngiadau nac amodau. Nid oedd unrhyw sôn am ba un a ddylai fod yn Brexit meddal neu galed. Y penderfyniad a gymerwyd gan bobl Prydain o dan amodau Deddf y refferendwm a basiwyd i hwyluso hyn oedd: a ydych chi eisiau aros neu adael? A phleidleisiodd pobl Prydain i adael. Cynhwysodd y blaid Geidwadol, yn ei maniffesto cyn yr etholiad cyffredinol diwethaf, baragraff a oedd yn dweud: Rydym yn credu mewn caniatáu i'r bobl benderfynu: felly byddwn yn cynnal refferendwm mewn-allan ar ein haelodaeth o'r UE cyn diwedd 2017. Mae gan y Llywodraeth fandad i weithredu ar ei haddewid maniffesto, a dylid anwybyddu'r holl wingo hyn gan y British Influence, sydd wedi'i gamenwi'n llwyr, ac sydd yn sefydliad ffrynt ar gyfer dylanwad Ewropeaidd, a dylem symud mor gyflym â phosibl i gychwyn erthygl 50 ac, os oes angen, erthygl 127 a gadael yr UE, yn unol â'r dymuniad a fynegwyd yn rhydd, ac yn ddiamod, gan bobl Prydain.
English: Well, unlike the Member, I'm not in a position to show complete contempt for our constitution and for the rule of law. It seems to me that we have a legal system that has well-established principles. Some of these are before the highest court of the land at the moment, and we should actually give due recognition to the fact that that court will be exercising its jurisdiction and giving a decision as an independent judiciary. I seem to recall that, last week, I asked the Member to repudiate and dissociate himself from the attempts by the then leader of his party to have a sort of torchlight march upon the Supreme Court to intimidate the judges. I never heard him repudiate that. My job, as Counsel General, is to stand up for the constitution and to stand up for the rule of law and, unlike him, I will actually carry out that duty.
Welsh: Wel, yn wahanol i'r Aelod, nid wyf mewn sefyllfa i ddangos dirmyg llwyr i'n cyfansoddiad a rheolaeth y gyfraith. Ymddengys i mi fod gennym system gyfreithiol ag iddi egwyddorion sefydledig. Mae rhai o'r rhain gerbron llys uchaf y wlad ar hyn o bryd, a dylem ni mewn gwirionedd roi cydnabyddiaeth ddyledus i'r ffaith y bydd y llys hwnnw yn arfer ei awdurdodaeth ac yn rhoi penderfyniad fel barnwriaeth annibynnol. Mae gennyf ryw gof fy mod, yr wythnos diwethaf, wedi gofyn i'r Aelod wrthod a datgysylltu ei hun o ymdrechion arweinydd ei blaid ar y pryd i gynnal rhyw fath o orymdaith â ffaglau i'r Goruchaf Lys i godi ofn ar y barnwyr. Ni chlywais ef yn gwrthod hynny. Fy swydd i, fel Cwnsler Cyffredinol, yw amddiffyn y cyfansoddiad ac amddiffyn rheolaeth y gyfraith ac, yn wahanol iddo ef, byddaf mewn gwirionedd yn cyflawni'r ddyletswydd honno.
English: What is a point - [Interruption.] Just hold on a minute. I will decide on what is a point of order; I do not need advice on that from Ministers. Carry on, Neil McEvoy.
Welsh: Beth yw pwynt - [Torri ar draws.] Arhoswch am funud. Fi fydd yn penderfynu ar yr hyn sy'n bwynt o drefn; nid wyf angen cyngor ar hynny gan Weinidogion. Ewch ymlaen, Neil McEvoy.
English: Thank you. Diolch. I've fought racism all my life. I do not think it's acceptable for the First Minister of Wales to use such irresponsible language. Under 13.9 (iv): it was discourteous; 13.9 (v): it was offensive to somebody, especially with my background, and it has detracted from the dignity of this Assembly.
Welsh: Diolch i chi. Diolch. Rwyf i wedi ymladd yn erbyn hiliaeth ar hyd fy oes. Nid wyf yn credu ei bod yn dderbyniol i'r Prif Weinidog ddefnyddio iaith mor anghyfrifol. O dan 13.9 (iv): roedd yn anghwrtais; 13.9 (v): roedd yn sarhaus i rywun, yn enwedig rhywun o'm cefndir i, ac y mae wedi dilorni urddas y Cynulliad hwn.
English: Thank you for the point of order. I did not hear anything out of order in the First Minister's comments today, but I will review the Record.
Welsh: Diolch am y pwynt o drefn. Ni chlywais unrhyw beth annerbyniol yn sylwadau'r Prif Weinidog heddiw, ond byddaf yn adolygu'r Cofnod.
English: The next item on our agenda is the business statement and announcement, and I call on Jane Hutt.
Welsh: Yr eitem nesaf ar yr agenda yw'r datganiad a chyhoeddiad busnes, ac rwy'n galw ar Jane Hutt.
English: Llywydd, the only change I have to this week's business is to reduce the time allocated to the Counsel General for questions tomorrow. Business for the next three weeks is as shown on the business statement and announcement found among the meeting papers available to Members electronically.
Welsh: Lywydd, yr unig newid sydd gennyf i fusnes yr wythnos hon yw lleihau'r amser a ddyrennir i'r Cwnsler Cyffredinol ar gyfer cwestiynau yfory. Mae'r busnes ar gyfer y tair wythnos nesaf fel y dangosir ar y datganiad a chyhoeddiad busnes ymhlith papurau'r cyfarfod sydd ar gael i'r Aelodau yn electronig.
English: Last week, the cross-party group on haemophilia and contaminated blood held a meeting to hear about the experiences of those people that had been infected during the 1970s and 1980s, and their families - the dreadful experiences they'd had - and to discuss the payments that are being consulted on at the moment by the Welsh Government. That consultation is going ahead, but the other issue that was raised was the lack of a full public inquiry into how these dreadful things happened in the 1970s and the 1980s. One of the things that the cross-party group would like to do is to make sure that the Westminster Government is aware of our feelings. We'd like the opportunity to debate this in some way or other in this Chamber, so could the business Minister suggest any way forward?
Welsh: Yr wythnos diwethaf, cynhaliodd y grŵp trawsbleidiol ar hemoffilia a gwaed halogedig gyfarfod i glywed am brofiadau'r bobl hynny sydd wedi'u heintio yn ystod y 1970au a'r 1980au, a'u teuluoedd - y profiadau ofnadwy a gawson nhw - ac i drafod y taliadau y cynhelir ymgynghoriad yn eu cylch ar hyn o bryd gan Lywodraeth Cymru. Mae'r ymgynghoriad hwnnw'n mynd yn ei flaen, ond y mater arall a godwyd oedd y diffyg o ran ymchwiliad cyhoeddus llawn i sut y digwyddodd y pethau ofnadwy hyn yn y 1970au a'r 1980au. Un o'r pethau yr hoffai'r grŵp trawsbleidiol ei wneud yw gwneud yn siŵr bod Llywodraeth San Steffan yn ymwybodol o'n teimladau. Hoffem gael y cyfle i drafod hyn mewn rhyw ffordd neu'i gilydd yn y Siambr hon, felly a allai'r Gweinidog busnes awgrymu unrhyw ffordd ymlaen?