techiaith/cofnodycynulliad_en-cy huggingface dataset:
English: Llywydd, the new subsidy regime is already in force; it came into force on 5 January. I'm obviously not aware of the details of the individual case that Joel James mentions, but I would not be surprised to find that the new complexities of the subsidy regime are playing their part in any delays because, for the very first time, the system, by introducing intra-UK subsidies within the focus of the law, introduced new legal risks into the subsidy process. Two rival companies on the same high street can, for the first time, ask for a judicial review of every single subsidy that their neighbours may have negotiated. Inevitably, that makes those organisations responsible for providing subsidies more cautious in making those decisions, because the legal risks involved in making any award have been increased by the new subsidy control regime. So, if that does lie near the heart of the delay that Joel James mentioned, it doesn't surprise me, and it is inevitable that those members of staff in public authorities responsible for making those decisions will be having to become familiar with the new regime and, in the early days, are likely to take longer in making those decisions. But, in the longer run, there are new risks in the subsidy control arrangements, and they will be risks that will particularly fall hard on us here in Wales.
Welsh: Llywydd, mae'r drefn cymorthdaliadau newydd eisoes yn weithredol; daeth i rym ar 5 Ionawr. Yn amlwg, nid wyf i'n ymwybodol o fanylion yr achos unigol y mae Joel James yn ei grybwyll, ond ni fyddwn yn synnu o ddarganfod bod cymhlethdodau newydd y drefn cymorthdaliadau yn chwarae eu rhan mewn unrhyw oedi oherwydd, am y tro cyntaf erioed, cyflwynodd y system, trwy gyflwyno cymorthdaliadau o fewn y DU o fewn canolbwynt y gyfraith, risgiau cyfreithiol newydd i'r broses cymorthdaliadau. Gall dau gwmni sy'n cystadlu ar yr un stryd fawr, am y tro cyntaf, ofyn am adolygiad barnwrol o bob un cymhorthdal y gallai eu cymdogion fod wedi ei sicrhau. Yn anochel, mae hynny'n gwneud y sefydliadau hynny sy'n gyfrifol am ddarparu cymorthdaliadau yn fwy gofalus wrth wneud y penderfyniadau hynny, gan fod y risgiau cyfreithiol sy'n gysylltiedig â gwneud unrhyw ddyfarniad wedi cynyddu gan y drefn rheoli cymorthdaliadau newydd. Felly, os yw hynny yn agos at wraidd yr oedi y soniodd Joel James amdano, nid yw'n fy synnu, ac mae'n anochel y bydd yr aelodau hynny o staff mewn awdurdodau cyhoeddus sy'n gyfrifol am wneud y penderfyniadau hynny yn gorfod dod yn gyfarwydd â'r drefn newydd ac, yn y dyddiau cynnar, yn debygol o gymryd mwy o amser yn gwneud y penderfyniadau hynny. Ond, yn y tymor hwy, ceir risgiau newydd yn y trefniadau rheoli cymorthdaliadau, a byddan nhw'n risgiau a fydd yn ein taro ni'n arbennig o galed yma yng Nghymru.
English: That's no surprise, is it, First Minister, that something created by this UK Government will adversely affect Wales? The Scots have learnt this week about the UK Government's disregard for democracy. What we have understood is that we have a chaotic subsidy control regime introduced post Brexit, when the reality of taking back control was not to give control to the people of Wales, to the communities of Wales, to enable the businesses of Wales to flourish, but to take back control to a few Ministers in London, their cronies in the House of Lords and all their party donors. That's the reality of 'take back control', and the people of Wales and Joel's constituents are suffering as a consequence of it.
Welsh: Nid yw hynny'n ddim syndod, onid yw, Prif Weinidog, y bydd rhywbeth a grëwyd gan Lywodraeth y DU hon yn cael effaith niweidiol ar Gymru? Mae'r Albanwyr wedi dysgu'r wythnos hon am ddiystyriaeth Llywodraeth y DU o ddemocratiaeth. Yr hyn yr ydym ni wedi ei ddeall yw bod gennym ni drefn rheoli cymorthdaliadau anhrefnus a gyflwynwyd ar ôl Brexit, pan nid realiti cymryd rheolaeth yn ôl oedd rhoi rheolaeth i bobl Cymru, i gymunedau Cymru, i alluogi busnesau Cymru i ffynnu, ond i gymryd rheolaeth yn ôl i ychydig o Weinidogion yn Llundain, eu ffrindiau yn Nhŷ'r Arglwyddi a'r holl roddwyr i'w plaid. Dyna realiti 'cymryd rheolaeth yn ôl', ac mae pobl Cymru ac etholwyr Joel yn dioddef o'i herwydd.
English: Questions now from party leaders. Leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies
Welsh: Cwestiynau nawr gan arweinwyr y pleidiau. Arweinydd y Ceidwadwyr Cymreig, Andrew R.T. Davies.
English: Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, last week, regrettably, Wizz Air chose to leave Cardiff Airport. To date, the Welsh Government have invested or made available to the airport £225 million - nearly £0.25 billion. You are the owners of the airport, albeit you have set up an arm's-length company to operate the airport. Do you believe that £225 million is money well spent?
Welsh: Diolch, Llywydd. Prif Weinidog, yr wythnos diwethaf, yn anffodus, dewisodd Wizz Air adael Maes Awyr Caerdydd. Hyd yma, mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi buddsoddi neu sicrhau bod £225 miliwn ar gael i'r maes awyr - bron i £0.25 biliwn. Chi yw perchnogion y maes awyr, er eich bod chi wedi sefydlu cwmni hyd braich i weithredu'r maes awyr. A ydych chi'n credu bod £225 miliwn yn arian a wariwyd yn dda?
English: Llywydd, I have always believed that a regional airport is an essential part of the economic infrastructure of any part of the United Kingdom that seeks to support the modern conditions under which the economy must operate. The private sector was unable to do that. It was right that the public purse stepped in. It's an investment in the future of the Welsh economy, and one that this Government was pleased to make.
Welsh: Llywydd, rwyf i wedi credu erioed bod maes awyr rhanbarthol yn rhan hanfodol o seilwaith economaidd unrhyw ran o'r Deyrnas Unedig sy'n ceisio cefnogi'r amodau modern y mae'n rhaid i'r economi weithredu oddi ynddyn nhw. Nid oedd y sector preifat yn gallu gwneud hynny. Roedd hi'n iawn i bwrs y wlad gamu i'r adwy. Mae'n fuddsoddiad yn nyfodol economi Cymru, ac yn un yr oedd y Llywodraeth hon yn falch o'i wneud.
English: First Minister, after £0.25 billion, the airport sadly has fewer passengers now than it has had for a very long time. Yes, COVID intervened to obviously affect all airports, but if you take Bristol Airport, it has seen a 22 per cent decline in its passenger numbers but still handles close to 7 million passengers. If you take Birmingham Airport, another competitor, they have seen a 33 per cent decline, and still handle 8.5 million passengers. It is a fact that no airport that I can find has had such a generosity of Government money made available to it - £0.25 billion - and had such poor outcomes achieved. What are the new plans available to make sure that that £225 million is protected, and that, ultimately, you can resurrect the airport, because I think the taxpayer, in fairness, deserves to know is this a bad investment that is going to continue to go wrong, or do you have a long-term plan that can resurrect Cardiff Airport, which, obviously, you acquired back in 2013?
Welsh: Prif Weinidog, ar ôl £0.25 biliwn, yn anffodus mae gan y maes awyr lai o deithwyr nawr nag y bu ganddo ers amser maith. Do, ymyrrodd COVID i effeithio ar bob maes awyr, yn amlwg, ond os cymerwch chi Faes Awyr Bryste, cafwyd gostyngiad o 22 y cant yn nifer ei deithwyr ond mae'n dal i ymdrin ag yn agos at 7 miliwn o deithwyr. Os cymerwch chi Faes Awyr Birmingham, cystadleuydd arall, cafwyd gostyngiad o 33 y cant yno, ac mae'n dal i ymdrin ag 8.5 miliwn o deithwyr. Mae'n ffaith nad oes unrhyw faes awyr y gallaf ddod o hyd iddo wedi cael y fath haelioni sef bod arian Llywodraeth ar gael iddo - £0.25 biliwn - ac wedi cael canlyniadau mor wael. Beth yw'r cynlluniau newydd sydd ar gael i wneud yn siŵr bod £225 miliwn yn cael ei ddiogelu, ac y gallwch chi atgyfodi'r maes awyr yn y pen draw, oherwydd rwy'n meddwl bod y trethdalwr, er tegwch, yn haeddu gwybod a yw hwn yn fuddsoddiad gwael sy'n mynd i barhau i fynd o'i le, neu a oes gennych chi gynllun hirdymor a all atgyfodi Maes Awyr Caerdydd, a gaffaelwyd gennych, yn amlwg, yn ôl yn 2013?
English: Well, you'll see the accounts in March, when they are always published. They will be published in March 2023. They are published every - . The fact that the Member isn't able to find them is not my problem. [ Laughter.] He needs to employ people to do his research for him in that case. I just tell the Chamber this, Llywydd: the airport publishes accounts every year. They will be published in March of this year, and the Member, if he's able to, will be able to locate them as a result. I said in my second answer, Llywydd, that there is a rescue and recovery plan in place. It's published, it's available for Members to see. I'll just end with this point to the Member, that, when this Senedd sought the devolution of air passenger duty, something that is available - [ Interruption.] You supported it, but your Government didn't support it, did it? Your Government refused that request because of its wish to protect Bristol Airport. If there was a level playing field at the UK Government, then we would see different results.
Welsh: Wel, byddwch chi'n gweld y cyfrifon ym mis Mawrth, pan fyddan nhw bob amser yn cael eu cyhoeddi. Byddan nhw'n cael eu cyhoeddi ym mis Mawrth 2023. Maen nhw'n cael eu cyhoeddi bob - . Nid fy mhroblem i yw'r ffaith nad yw'r Aelod yn gallu dod o hyd iddyn nhw. [ Chwerthin.] Mae angen iddo gyflogi pobl i wneud ei waith ymchwil iddo felly. Dywedaf hyn wrth y Siambr, Llywydd: mae'r maes awyr yn cyhoeddi cyfrifon bob blwyddyn. Byddan nhw'n cael eu cyhoeddi ym mis Mawrth eleni, a bydd yr Aelod, os yw'n gallu, yn gallu dod o hyd iddyn nhw o ganlyniad. Dywedais yn fy ail ateb, Llywydd, bod cynllun achub ac adfer ar waith. Mae wedi'i gyhoeddi, mae ar gael i Aelodau ei weld. Fe wnaf orffen gyda'r pwynt hwn i'r Aelod, pan geisiodd y Senedd hon ddatganoli'r doll teithwyr awyr, rhywbeth sydd ar gael - [ Torri ar draws. ] Fe wnaethoch chi ei gefnogi, ond ni wnaeth eich Llywodraeth ei gefnogi, naddo? Gwrthododd eich Llywodraeth y cais hwnnw oherwydd ei dymuniad i amddiffyn Maes Awyr Bryste. Pe bai chwarae teg yn Llywodraeth y DU, yna byddem ni'n gweld canlyniadau gwahanol.
English: The leader of Plaid Cymru next to ask questions. Adam Price.
Welsh: Arweinydd Plaid Cymru nesaf i ofyn cwestiynau. Adam Price.
English: Diolch, Llywydd. With the news of the teachers' strike on 1 February and the failure of the talks with the health unions last week, public sector strikes in Wales are widening and deepening. What's the strategy of the Government, First Minister, to prevent this winter of discontent continuing on into spring and into summer? Is it your policy that you're going to offer the one-off payment that you referred to in the case of the NHS workforce to the teaching workforce, for example? But, even if you are, then would you not accept that that doesn't get to grips with the central point about this public pay dispute, that as far as the public service unions are concerned, it comes after a decade of erosion of real-terms pay? And are you prepared to acknowledge, in the case of both the health and the teaching unions, that the recommendations of the pay review body relate to evidence taken in late 2021, early 2022, before the Russian-Ukraine war when inflation was about 4 per cent? By the time you accepted the recommendations, the cost of living was already nearing 10 per cent, so is there not a case, First Minister, for asking the pay bodies to revisit their work, and for you as a Government to agree to abide by any higher award if they were to do so on that basis?
Welsh: Diolch, Llywydd. Gyda'r newyddion am streic yr athrawon ar 1 Chwefror a methiant y trafodaethau gyda'r undebau iechyd yr wythnos diwethaf, mae streiciau'r sector cyhoeddus yng Nghymru yn lledu ac yn dyfnhau. Beth yw strategaeth y Llywodraeth, Prif Weinidog, i atal y gaeaf hwn o anfodlonrwydd rhag parhau i'r gwanwyn ac i'r haf? Ai eich polisi yw eich bod chi'n mynd i gynnig y taliad untro y gwnaethoch chi gyfeirio ato yn achos gweithlu'r GIG i'r gweithlu addysgu, er enghraifft? Ond, hyd yn oed os ydych chi, yna oni fyddech chi'n derbyn nad yw hynny'n mynd i'r afael â'r pwynt canolog am yr anghydfod cyflog cyhoeddus hwn, sef cyn belled ag y bo undebau'r gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yn y cwestiwn, ei fod yn dod ar ôl degawd o erydu tâl mewn termau real? Ac ydych chi'n barod i gydnabod, yn achos yr undebau iechyd ac athrawon, bod argymhellion y corff adolygu cyflogau yn ymwneud â thystiolaeth a dderbyniwyd ddiwedd 2021, dechrau 2022, cyn rhyfel Rwsia-Wcráin pan oedd chwyddiant tua 4 y cant? Erbyn i chi dderbyn yr argymhellion, roedd costau byw eisoes yn agosáu at 10 y cant, felly onid oes dadl, Prif Weinidog, dros ofyn i'r cyrff cyflogau ailystyried eu gwaith, ac i chi fel Llywodraeth gytuno i gyd-fynd ag unrhyw ddyfarniad uwch pe baen nhw'n gwneud hynny ar y sail honno?
English: Llywydd, first of all, on this, we absolutely recognise the impact that a decade of austerity has had on the pay packets of public sector workers. They are paid less in real terms today than they were 10 years ago, and the impact of inflation has amplified that impact in the lives of families in many parts of Wales. So, of course we understand why people who have never been on strike before feel compelled to take that action. In the discussions that we had with our trade union colleagues in the health field - and by the way, I don't accept the leader of Plaid Cymru's characterisation of those talks as having failed - but in those talks, we put three different aspects on the table for discussion. One of those was how we could act together to re-inject confidence in the pay review process. Now, amongst the ideas that we would be prepared to put on the table would be to see how, in future, trigger points could be built in to the pay review process, so that, if events happened beyond the determination that need to reopen the determination, there would be an agreed path that everybody would understand to make that happen. Whether it is possible to do that retrospectively to the pay review body's operation for the last financial year, I'm not so sure, but putting new life and new confidence into the process I think is a very important point, and I think the leader of Plaid Cymru's right to make it.
Welsh: Llywydd, yn gyntaf oll, ar hyn, rydym ni'n llwyr gydnabod yr effaith y mae degawd o gyni cyllidol wedi ei chael ar becynnau cyflog gweithwyr yn y sector cyhoeddus. Maen nhw'n cael llai o dâl mewn termau real heddiw nag yr oedden nhw 10 mlynedd yn ôl, ac mae effaith chwyddiant wedi cynyddu'r effaith honno ym mywydau teuluoedd mewn sawl rhan o Gymru. Felly, wrth gwrs rydyn ni'n deall pam mae pobl sydd erioed wedi bod ar streic o'r blaen yn teimlo rheidrwydd i gymryd y cam hwnnw. Yn y trafodaethau a gawsom gyda'n cydweithwyr yn yr undebau llafur ym maes iechyd - a gyda llaw, nid wyf i'n derbyn portread arweinydd Plaid Cymru o'r trafodaethau hynny fel rhai sydd wedi methu - ond yn y trafodaethau hynny, fe wnaethon ni roi tair gwahanol agwedd ar y bwrdd i'w trafod. Un o'r rheini oedd sut y gallem weithredu gyda'n gilydd i ailgyflwyno hyder yn y broses adolygu cyflogau. Nawr, ymhlith y syniadau y bydden ni'n barod i'w rhoi ar y bwrdd fyddai gweld sut, yn y dyfodol, y gellid ymgorffori sbardunau yn y broses adolygu cyflogau, fel pe bai digwyddiadau'n digwydd y tu hwnt i'r penderfyniad sy'n golygu bod angen ailagor y penderfyniad, y byddai llwybr cytûn y byddai pawb yn ei ddeall i wneud i hynny ddigwydd. Pa un a yw'n bosibl gwneud hynny'n ôl-weithredol i weithrediad y corff adolygu cyflogau ar gyfer y flwyddyn ariannol ddiwethaf, nid wyf i mor siŵr, ond rwy'n credu bod rhoi bywyd newydd a hyder newydd i'r broses yn bwynt pwysig iawn, ac rwy'n credu bod arweinydd Plaid Cymru yn iawn i'w wneud ef.
English: I would urge him to look at that possibility for this financial year as well. One of the other issues that you did bring to the table, which was welcome, was the role of agency staff. Now, we saw the figures from the Royal College of Physicians that show that the total bill in the last financial year was £260 million. Do you accept the logic of the unions that, offering a significantly higher pay rise would reduce that agency bill? It's an investment that would pay dividends, whereas at the moment, it's a perniciously false economy. At the very least, should we not be creating a publicly owned staff agency for the NHS so that we can strip out profit and the exorbitant costs of private sector agencies? The last Labour Government in Westminster did this through the creation of NHS Professionals, a publicly owned national staff bank owned by the Department of Health, which reinvests surpluses back in the NHS. Couldn't we combine that with the judicious use of milestones for capping and reducing the use of private agencies over time as part of a national workforce plan, which gets to grip with the longer term crisis of retention and recruitment that I referred to?
Welsh: Byddwn yn ei annog i edrych ar y posibilrwydd hwnnw ar gyfer y flwyddyn ariannol hon hefyd. Un o'r materion eraill y gwnaethoch chi eu rhoi ar y bwrdd, a oedd i'w groesawu, oedd swyddogaeth staff asiantaeth. Nawr, gwelsom y ffigurau gan Goleg Brenhinol y Meddygon sy'n dangos mai £260 miliwn oedd cyfanswm y bil yn y flwyddyn ariannol ddiwethaf. A ydych chi'n derbyn rhesymeg yr undebau y byddai cynnig codiad cyflog sylweddol uwch yn lleihau'r bil asiantaeth hwnnw? Mae'n fuddsoddiad a fyddai'n talu ar ei ganfed, ond ar hyn o bryd, mae'n arbediad di-sail niweidiol. Oni ddylem, o leiaf, fod yn creu asiantaeth staff sy'n eiddo cyhoeddus ar gyfer y GIG fel y gallwn ni gael gwared ar elw a chostau afresymol asiantaethau sector preifat? Gwnaeth y Llywodraeth Lafur ddiwethaf yn San Steffan hyn drwy greu NHS Professionals, cronfa staff genedlaethol sy'n eiddo i'r cyhoedd o dan yr Adran Iechyd, sy'n ailfuddsoddi arian dros ben yn ôl yn y GIG. Oni allem ni gyfuno hwnnw gyda'r defnydd doeth o gerrig milltir ar gyfer capio a lleihau'r defnydd o asiantaethau preifat dros amser yn rhan o gynllun gweithlu cenedlaethol, sy'n mynd i'r afael â'r argyfwng tymor hwy o gadw a recriwtio y cyfeiriais ato?
English: Llywydd, the first thing I want to do is to pay tribute to the work of agency staff. I'm worried about the tone of some of this debate that suggests that, somehow, agency staff are the problem in the NHS. The NHS absolutely depends upon agency staff. So, I'm not saying that the leader of Plaid Cymru did it, but I do hear in the wider debate some sort of sense that agency staff are somehow to blame, and actually, we depend on agency staff all the time. We wish to depend on fewer agency staff in the future - that is common ground. We put that on the table in the discussions with our health union colleagues last week. It is not as simple as saying that there is £260 million to be saved; a great deal of that would be paid for people who would be in work on a non-agency basis. There is some increment that you can squeeze out of that sum, and that is an important thing for us to try to do. The bank system is a publicly provided way in which people can work on shifts where they would not normally be employed, and there may be, in the discussions we'll have with our trade unions colleagues, more that we can do in that area. There will always be a role for agency workers to cover short-term absences, when we know that, sometimes, people will be away for training and other things, and if we didn't have them - if we didn't have them - the system would be under an even greater pressure than it is today.
Welsh: Llywydd, y peth cyntaf yr wyf i eisiau ei wneud yw talu teyrnged i waith staff asiantaeth. Rwy'n poeni am gywair rhywfaint o'r drafodaeth hon sy'n awgrymu, rywsut, mai staff asiantaeth yw'r broblem yn y GIG. Mae'r GIG yn dibynnu'n llwyr ar staff asiantaeth. Felly, nid wyf i'n dweud bod arweinydd Plaid Cymru wedi ei wneud, ond rwy'n clywed yn y drafodaeth ehangach rhyw fath o synnwyr fod staff asiantaeth rywsut ar fai, ac mewn gwirionedd, rydyn ni'n dibynnu ar staff asiantaeth drwy'r amser. Rydyn ni'n dymuno dibynnu ar lai o staff asiantaeth yn y dyfodol - mae hwnnw'n dir cyffredin. Fe wnaethom roi hynny ar y bwrdd yn y trafodaethau gyda'n cydweithwyr yn yr undebau iechyd yr wythnos diwethaf. Nid yw mor syml â dweud bod £260 miliwn i'w arbed; byddai llawer iawn o hynny yn cael ei dalu am bobl a fyddai mewn gwaith heb fod drwy asiantaeth. Ceir rhywfaint o gynyddran y gallwch chi ei wasgu allan o'r swm hwnnw, ac mae hynny'n beth pwysig i ni geisio ei wneud. Mae'r system gronfa yn ffordd a ddarperir yn gyhoeddus lle gall pobl weithio ar shifftiau pryd na fydden nhw'n cael eu cyflogi fel rheol, ac efallai, yn y trafodaethau y byddwn ni'n eu cael gyda'n cydweithwyr yn yr undebau llafur, y bydd mwy y gallwn ni ei wneud yn y maes hwnnw. Bydd swyddogaeth bob amser i weithwyr asiantaeth weithio yn ystod absenoldebau byrdymor, pan fyddwn ni'n gwybod, weithiau, y bydd pobl i ffwrdd ar gyfer hyfforddiant a phethau eraill, a phe na bai gennym ni nhw - pe na bai gennym ni nhw - byddai'r system o dan fwy fyth o bwysau nag y mae heddiw.
English: But the point is, First Minister, that that agency doesn't have to be within the private sector, does it, it could be within the public sector. Now, could I turn to another matter that has already been referred to, the UK Government's veto over the gender recognition reform Bill in Scotland? Do you agree with me that this sets a very dangerous precedent, not only in terms of your own Government's aspirations, which we share, to bring forward similar legislation here, but also in terms of devolution more generally and the use of, in our case, section 114, I believe, in the Government of Wales Act 2006? If you do share that view, will you be urging Welsh Labour MPs to vote against the Secretary for State for Scotland's Order when it's debated on the floor of the House of Commons? If that parliamentary procedure is unsuccessful, are you prepared to consider, at least, the Welsh Government intervening in the legal action that the Scottish Government has indicated that they intend bringing at the Supreme Court, because of this wider principle, not just in terms of the rights of the trans community, but also in terms of our democracy here? And, as a matter of principle, given that Sir Keir Starmer has said he disagrees with the application of the new rules to 16 and 17-year-olds - against the views, it has to be said, of the Labour Party in Scotland - can you set out what is the position of the Labour Party here in Wales in relation to that matter?
Welsh: Ond y pwynt yw, Prif Weinidog, nad oes rhaid i'r asiantaeth honno fod yn y sector preifat, nac oes, gallai fod yn y sector cyhoeddus. Nawr, a gaf i droi at fater arall y cyfeiriwyd ato eisoes, sef feto Llywodraeth y DU ar Fil diwygio cydnabod rhywedd yn yr Alban? A ydych chi'n cytuno â mi bod hyn yn creu cynsail peryglus iawn, nid yn unig o ran dyheadau eich Llywodraeth chi, yr ydym ni'n eu rhannu, i gyflwyno deddfwriaeth debyg yma, ond hefyd o ran datganoli yn fwy cyffredinol a'r defnydd o adran 114, yn ein hachos ni, rwy'n credu, yn Neddf Llywodraeth Cymru 2006? Os ydych chi'n rhannu'r farn honno, a fyddwch chi'n annog ASau Llafur Cymru i bleidleisio yn erbyn Gorchymyn Ysgrifennydd Gwladol yr Alban pan fydd yn cael ei drafod ar lawr Tŷ'r Cyffredin? Os bydd y weithdrefn seneddol honno'n aflwyddiannus, a ydych chi'n barod i ystyried, o leiaf, Llywodraeth Cymru yn ymyrryd yn y camau cyfreithiol y mae Llywodraeth yr Alban wedi nodi y mae'n bwriadu eu cymryd yn y Goruchaf Lys, oherwydd yr egwyddor ehangach hon, nid yn unig o ran hawliau'r gymuned draws, ond hefyd o ran ein democratiaeth yma? Ac, fel mater o egwyddor, o gofio bod Syr Keir Starmer wedi dweud ei fod yn anghytuno â gwneud y rheolau newydd yn berthnasol i bobl ifanc 16 ac 17 oed - yn groes, mae'n rhaid dweud, i farn y Blaid Lafur yn yr Alban - a allwch chi nodi beth yw safbwynt y Blaid Lafur yma yng Nghymru o ran y mater hwnnw?