English: The first thing to say is that there is increasing mood music in this Chamber and outside that if there is no deal and, therefore, a disaster, it'll be the fault of the remainers and not the fault of those who gave a pie-in-the-sky analysis two years ago of what the referendum would mean. We were told it'd be the easiest negotiation ever. It hasn't been. We were told that the EU would fold in the face of the UK's demands. It hasn't done. We were told that German car manufacturers would ride to the rescue - or drive to the rescue - and would force the German Government to accept a deal in favour of the UK. They haven't done it. The reality is that the UK is more divided than the EU has been at all in the course of this process. Now, he asked my view on it. First of all, to put this in context, I've heard his party argue strongly against a second referendum, and yet he was a member of a party who, for eight years, argued strongly for a second referendum after 1997, because they didn't like the result, and went into the 2005 general election on a manifesto of having a second referendum on the existence of the Assembly. So, there's a certain level of double standards there that has to be recognised. Now, what do I think should happen? Firstly, if there is no agreement on a deal - in other words, that means 'no deal' or no agreement on a proposed deal - in not just Westminster but this place and Edinburgh as well, I don't see any alternative other than a general election, and, in that general election, Brexit would be the only topic, I suspect, of discussion. In that general election, it is right to say that the issue could be given a proper airing and the people could decide. If, however, the result of that general election was inconclusive, well, how else do you then resolve the issue, other than by going back to the very people who made the decision in the first place but who now would be in a position to see exactly what Brexit would mean? Now, to me, that is the point where a second referendum becomes something that would need to be looked at, because how else do you resolve the situation? At this moment in time, I think we have to wait and see what happens in October and November and then take decisions from there.
Welsh: Y peth cyntaf i'w ddweud yw bod teimlad cynyddol yn y Siambr hon a'r tu allan os nad oes cytundeb ac, felly, trychineb, mai bai'r rheini a oedd o blaid aros fydd hyn ac nid bai'r rheini a roddodd ddadansoddiad breuddwyd gwrach ddwy flynedd yn ôl o'r hyn y byddai'r refferendwm yn ei olygu. Dywedwyd wrthym mai'r rhain fyddai'r trafodaethau hawddaf erioed. Nid yw hynny wedi bod yn wir. Dywedwyd wrthym y byddai'r UE yn ildio yn wyneb gofynion y DU. Nid yw wedi gwneud hynny. Dywedwyd wrthym y byddai cynhyrchwyr ceir yr Almaen yn ein hachub ac yn gorfodi Llywodraeth yr Almaen i dderbyn cytundeb o blaid y DU. Nid ydynt wedi gwneud hynny. Y gwir amdani yw bod y DU yn fwy rhanedig nag y mae'r UE wedi bod o gwbl yn ystod y broses hon. Nawr, gofynnodd fy marn ar hynny. Yn gyntaf oll, i roi hyn mewn cyd-destun, rwyf i wedi clywed ei blaid ef yn dadlau'n gryf yn erbyn ail refferendwm, ac eto roedd yn aelod o blaid a wnaeth, am wyth mlynedd, ddadlau'n gryf am ail refferendwm ar ôl 1997, gan nad oedden nhw'n hoffi'r canlyniad, ac aeth i mewn i etholiad 2005 ar sail maniffesto o gynnal ail refferendwm ar fodolaeth y Cynulliad. Felly, ceir lefel benodol o safonau dwbl yn y fan yna y mae'n rhaid ei chydnabod. Nawr, beth ydw i'n feddwl ddylai ddigwydd? Yn gyntaf, os na chytunir ar gytundeb - mewn geiriau eraill, mae hynny'n golygu 'dim cytundeb' neu ddim cytundeb ar fargen arfaethedig - nid yn San Steffan yn unig ond yn y lle hwn ac yng Nghaeredin hefyd, nid wyf i'n gweld unrhyw ddewis arall ond etholiad cyffredinol, ac, yn yr etholiad cyffredinol hwnnw, Brexit fyddai'r unig bwnc trafod, rwy'n amau. Yn yr etholiad cyffredinol hwnnw, mae'n iawn i ddweud y gellid trafod y mater yn drylwyr ac y gallai pobl benderfynu. Fodd bynnag, pe byddai canlyniad yr etholiad cyffredinol hwnnw yn amhendant, wel, sut arall ydych chi'n datrys y mater wedyn, ac eithrio trwy fynd yn ôl at yr union bobl a wnaeth y penderfyniad yn y lle cyntaf ond a fyddai mewn sefyllfa erbyn hyn i weld yn union yr hyn y byddai Brexit yn ei olygu? Nawr, i mi, dyna'r adeg pan fydd ail refferendwm yn dod yn rhywbeth y byddai angen ei ystyried, oherwydd sut arall ydych chi'n datrys y sefyllfa? Ar hyn o bryd, rwy'n credu bod yn rhaid i ni aros i weld beth fydd yn digwydd ym mis Hydref a mis Tachwedd ac yna gwneud penderfyniadau o'r fan honno.