English: Well, thank you for the question. And you do raise a valid point, and that is: how will we engage, what will the synergy be, what will the principles be of that particular engagement? The problem with the document you refer to is it really is a number of headlines - there isn't anything you can take within there that actually gives you any indication of what the direction the UK Government might be. They may say, 'Well, maybe that isn't the purpose of the Bill', but I'll give you a 'for example'. It refers to EU law, and says how wonderful it is that we've taken back control and the supreme court is now the Supreme Court in the United Kingdom as a result of our leaving the EU. But then, at the same time, the UK Government wants to introduce legislation that actually debars the Supreme Court from actually dealing with the issues of judicial review, the rule of law and so on. So, on the one hand, it's about empowering the Supreme Court, on the other hand, 'Well, we'll only empower it insofar as it doesn't interfere with what we want to do and the way in which we choose to operate.' So, I think there are a number of principles and contradictions that exist within it. Certainly it would be relevant in terms of looking at how that interacts with the frameworks. Now, of course, the frameworks were massively intruded upon by the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, and, of course, there are still outstanding legal issues in respect of that. But all I can do is repeat to the Member again that, of course, we will seriously engage; we will engage as a responsible Government on the basis of the principles that have been agreed between us. I just hope that the meeting we had last Saturday was an aberration and not a reflection of the way in which the UK intends to proceed in the future in those discussions.
Welsh: Wel, diolch am y cwestiwn. Ac rydych yn codi pwynt dilys, sef: sut y byddwn yn ymgysylltu, beth fydd y synergedd, beth fydd egwyddorion yr ymgysylltiad hwnnw? Y broblem gyda'r ddogfen y cyfeiriwch ati yw mai nifer o benawdau ydyw mewn gwirionedd - nid oes unrhyw beth ynddi sy'n rhoi unrhyw syniad i chi i ba gyfeiriad y gallai Llywodraeth y DU fod yn mynd iddo. Efallai y byddant yn dweud, 'Wel, efallai nad dyna ddiben y Bil', ond rhoddaf enghraifft i chi. Mae'n cyfeirio at gyfraith yr UE, ac yn dweud pa mor wych yw hi ein bod wedi adfer rheolaeth, ac mai Goruchaf Lys y Deyrnas Unedig yw'r goruchaf lys bellach o ganlyniad i adael yr UE. Ond wedyn, ar yr un pryd, mae Llywodraeth y DU eisiau cyflwyno deddfwriaeth sy'n atal y Goruchaf Lys rhag ymdrin â materion adolygu barnwrol, rheolaeth y gyfraith ac yn y blaen. Felly, ar y naill law, mae'n ymwneud â grymuso'r Goruchaf Lys, ond ar y llaw arall, 'Wel, fe'i grymuswn i'r graddau nad yw'n ymyrryd â'r hyn rydym am ei wneud a'r ffordd rydym yn dewis gweithredu.' Felly, credaf fod nifer o egwyddorion a gwrthddywediadau ynddo. Yn sicr, byddai'n berthnasol ar gyfer edrych ar sut y mae hynny'n rhyngweithio â'r fframweithiau. Nawr, wrth gwrs, ymyrrodd Deddf Marchnad Fewnol y Deyrnas Unedig 2020 â'r fframweithiau yn aruthrol, ac wrth gwrs, mae materion cyfreithiol yn dal heb eu datrys mewn perthynas â hynny. Ond y cyfan y gallaf ei wneud yw ailadrodd wrth yr Aelod eto y byddwn yn ymgysylltu o ddifrif; byddwn yn ymgysylltu fel Llywodraeth gyfrifol ar sail yr egwyddorion a gytunwyd rhyngom. Rwy'n gobeithio bod y cyfarfod a gawsom ddydd Sadwrn diwethaf yn eithriad ac nid yn adlewyrchiad o'r ffordd y mae'r DU yn bwriadu bwrw ymlaen â'r trafodaethau hynny yn y dyfodol.