English: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the debate. There's nothing surprising about this motion by the Brexit Party. It's a party that has had all sorts of deniers in the past: the impact of humans on environmental change; even the impact of smoking on cancer. I'm sure this isn't their intention, but there is a risk that they are seen here as though they are denying the very real risks still arising from this particular virus. Now, I'll start with where I agree with them - I am quite confident that everyone would agree, truth be told - which is that we do want to move out of the current restrictions. That's the direction of travel that we all want to see. And I myself have called on the Government to push and to test their own evidence continuously to ensure that there aren't things that we could be doing safely to provide people with more freedoms and to allow economic activity that isn't currently permissible - but it's that word 'safety' that is crucial there. And what is entirely missing from this motion is any reference to public safety and public health. As I said, we in Plaid Cymru do want to relax the restrictions. We do understand how much of an impact this is having on people's well-being, and how much of an economic strain it's proving to be, and the restrictions shouldn't remain in place a second longer than they have to. But any request for haste in this without reference to safety is entirely irresponsible. I would say that we need to move as quickly as possible, as long as that is safe. What I certainly think is required from the Welsh Government is far more forward planning, far more transparency in terms of its vision and the road map. But we are following a three-weekly pattern, and I don't think that that's sufficient. I do think the Government should have provided a more phased approach, as the Republic of Ireland Government has done, noting what the Government would hope to be able to do in terms of relaxing restrictions and allowing the resumption of economic activity over a period of months, with the major caveat, of course, that things could change. I'm speaking to businesses in my constituency continually, and it's the uncertainty that's been most difficult for them in many ways. To give you an example: the Scottish Government has announced today that pubs and restaurants will be allowed to open - outdoors first of all - on 3 July, if my memory serves me correctly, and then they'll be open as indoor operations some 10 days later. I would be delighted if the Welsh Government would consider a similar timetable, and announce that as soon as possible. But the difference between my view and the Brexit Party view is that I only want it to happen if the Government can be convinced that it is safe, and also to explain why, if they think it isn't safe, they couldn't take that step, and also to put an alternative timetable in place as soon as possible, because that kind of clarity is crucial. Now, as we, hopefully, move to relaxing restrictions, there are a number of things that have to be put in place. Once again, I think the Brexit Party is irresponsible in not referring to these. The most crucial is to have a proper and robust test and trace system to protect the public and to lay the foundations for raising the restrictions. I am concerned that we are in the early days of test and trace. This should have been a central part of the strategy in the battle against COVID-19 throughout this period, in accordance with WHO recommendations. I want to conclude by referring to a comparison drawn by David Rowlands in opening this debate. We take a risk by driving a car, he says, but we don't stop people from driving. No, we don't, but you do seek to make cars as safe as possible, you place restrictions on speed, you have a highway code in place, and you have to pass a test before you can get behind the wheel. And, at the moment, we are all still in a learning process. And I think that kind of attitude by the Brexit Party summarises just how heedless they are with this motion. I'm critical of the Government in many ways - for a lack of clarity and for moving too slowly in certain areas, including being too slow in going into lockdown in the very first instance. But I'm also very critical of the English Government for overseeing a disaster in terms of death rates, and how Brexit Party Members and the Conservatives would want to say that the priority is to be the same as England - well, I simply can't understand that approach, and it appears to me that unionist ideology is more important to them than public health.
Welsh: Diolch am y cyfle i ymateb i'r ddadl. Does yna ddim byd yn fy synnu, dwi ddim yn meddwl, am y cynnig yma gan y Brexit Party. Mae'n blaid sydd wedi bod ag Aelodau yn gwadu pob math o bethau yn y gorffennol: effaith dyn ar newid amgylcheddol; effaith ysmygu ar ganser, hyd yn oed. Felly, er dwi'n siŵr nad dyma'u bwriad, mae yna beryg iddyn nhw gael eu gweld yn fan hyn fel petaent yn gwadu'r peryg gwirioneddol sydd yna o hyd yn deillio o'r feirws yma. Mi ddechreuaf efo lle dwi yn cytuno efo nhw - dwi yn reit hyderus bod pawb yn cytuno mewn gwirionedd - sef ein bod ni eisiau symud allan o'r cyfyngiadau presennol. Dyna le rydyn ni gyd yn dymuno mynd. Ac, yn wir, dwi fy hun wedi galw ar y Llywodraeth i wthio a herio eu tystiolaeth eu hunain drwy'r amser i wneud yn siŵr nad oes yna ddim pethau y gallem ni fod yn eu gwneud yn ddiogel i roi rhyddid yn ôl i bobl, caniatáu gweithgaredd economaidd sydd ddim yn cael eu caniatáu ar hyn o bryd - ond y gair 'diogel' ydy'r un allweddol yn y fan yna. A beth sy'n gyfan gwbl ar goll o'r cynnig yma ydy unrhyw gyfeiriad at ddiogelwch ac iechyd y cyhoedd. Fel dywedais i, rydyn ni ym Mhlaid Cymru eisiau codi cyfyngiadau hefyd. Rydyn ni'n sylweddoli faint o straen ar lesiant pobl mae hyn wedi bod ac yn parhau i fod, faint o straen economaidd, a ddylai cyfyngiadau ddim aros yn hirach na sy'n rhaid iddyn nhw. Ond mae galw am gyflymu heb gyfeirio at y cwestiwn o, 'A ydy hynny'n ddiogel?' yn hollol anghyfrifol. Beth fuaswn i'n ei ddweud ydy bod eisiau symud mor gyflym ag sy'n bosib, cyn belled â bod hynny yn ddiogel. Beth dwi'n sicr yn meddwl sydd ei angen gan Lywodraeth Cymru ydy llawer mwy o gynllunio ymlaen a llawer mwy o dryloywder ynglŷn â beth ydy eu gweledigaeth nhw a'r map o'n blaenau ni. Rydym ni'n dilyn patrwm tair wythnos, a dwi ddim yn credu bod hynny'n ddigon. Dwi'n meddwl dylai y Llywodraeth fod wedi cynnig rhaglen mwy phased, fel mae Llywodraeth Gweriniaeth Iwerddon wedi'i wneud, er enghraifft, yn nodi beth fyddai'r Llywodraeth yn gobeithio gallu ei wneud o ran codi cyfyngiadau a chaniatáu ailgydio mewn gweithgarwch economaidd dros gyfnod o fisoedd, efo cafeat mawr y gallai pethau newid. Dwi'n siarad efo busnesau yn fy etholaeth i drwy'r amser, a'r ansicrwydd sydd efallai wedi bod fwyaf anodd iddyn nhw mewn llawer ffordd. Enghraifft i chi o heddiw: mae Llywodraeth yr Alban wedi cyhoeddi heddiw y bydd tafarndai a bwytai yn cael agor - y tu allan yn gyntaf - ar 3 Orffennaf, os dwi'n cofio'n iawn, ac yna i agor o dan do rhyw 10 diwrnod wedyn. Mi fuaswn i wrth fy modd pe bai Llywodraeth Cymru yn ystyried amserlen debyg hefyd, a chyhoeddi hynny cyn gynted â phosib. Ond y gwahaniaeth rhwng fy safbwynt i a safbwynt y Brexit Party ydy dwi dim ond eisiau iddo fo ddigwydd os ydy'r Llywodraeth yn gallu cael ei hargyhoeddi bod o'n ddiogel, a hefyd i egluro os dydyn nhw ddim yn credu ei bod nhw'n gallu cymryd y cam hwnnw, ac i osod amserlen amgen cyn gynted â phosib. Mae eglurder o'r math yna yn allweddol. Wrth i ni, gobeithio, symud at godi cyfyngiadau, mae yna nifer o bethau sy'n rhaid eu rhoi mewn lle. Eto, dwi'n meddwl bod y Brexit Party yn anghyfrifol wrth beidio â chyfeirio atyn nhw. Y mesur mwyaf allweddol ydy cael cyfundrefn profi ac olrhain cadarn er mwyn gwarchod y cyhoedd a gosod seiliau ar gyfer codi cyfyngiadau. Dwi'n bryderus mai yn nyddiau cynnar y profi ac olrhain ydym ni. Mi ddylai hyn wedi bod yn rhan ganolog o'r strategaeth i frwydo yn erbyn COVID-19 drwy gydol yr amser, yn unol ag argymhellion Sefydliad Iechyd y Byd. Dwi am orffen drwy gyfeirio at y gymhariaeth wnaeth David Rowlands wrth agor y ddadl yma. Rydym ni'n cymryd risg wrth yrru car, meddai fo, ond dydym ni ddim yn stopio pobl rhag gyrru. Nac ydym, ond mi ydych chi'n trio gwneud ceir yn fwy diogel, rydych chi'n gosod cyfyngiadau ar gyflymder, rydych chi'n gosod rheolau ffordd fawr, ac rydych chi'n gorfod pasio'ch prawf cyn gallu mynd tu ôl i'r llyw. Ac, ar hyn o bryd, rydym ni i gyd yn dal i ddysgu. Dwi'n meddwl bod y math yna o agwedd gan y Blaid Brexit yn crynhoi mor ffwrdd-â-hi ydyn nhw efo'r cynnig yma. Dwi'n feirniadol o'r Llywodraeth mewn sawl ffordd - am ddiffyg eglurder ac am symud yn rhy araf mewn rhai meysydd, yn cynnwys bod yn rhy araf yn mynd i mewn i lockdown yn y lle cyntaf. Ond dwi hefyd yn feirniadol ryfeddol o Lywodraeth Lloegr am deyrnasu dros drychineb o ran cyfraddau marwolaethau uchel, a sut y buasai Aelodau o'r Brexit Party a'r Ceidwadwyr eisiau dweud mai'r flaenoriaeth rywsut ydy i fod yr un fath â Lloegr - dwi'n methu cweit â deall hynny, ac mae'n awgrymu i fi bod ideoleg unoliaethol, o bosib, yn bwysicach nag iechyd y cyhoedd iddyn nhw.