English: Thank you for your answer, Minister. In many ways, it demonstrates how much time and resource the Government has spent on looking at alternative routes already, which is the basis, really, of my question. Turning to the public inquiry itself, obviously, Members and I have had time to digest the public inquiry report. In his statement, the First Minister said that he would not have gone ahead with the Government's own proposals, even if he felt they were affordable, on the grounds of impact on the environment. So, if I can just explore that for a moment: the Welsh Government's own evidence, provided by Natural Resources Wales and advocated by your own Welsh Government barristers said that the scheme would be carbon neutral over time and compatible with the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. The inspector agreed with your, the Welsh Government's, own opinion and said it was sound and also agreed that the proposed extensive mitigation for the impact on the Gwent levels, developed alongside NRW, could certainly be considered as taking reasonable steps to comply with the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Now, the point I would make here, Minister, is that if you now disagree with your own Welsh Government proposals, do you believe that the legislation contained within the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 and the well-being of future generations Act is sufficient? And how does this decision throw into doubt other transport schemes in Wales, such as the Deeside corridor scheme and, of course, other areas where there needs to be much improvement, along the A40, the A55 and the A470? Does this decision by the First Minister represent a fundamental change to Welsh Government transport policy on environmental grounds?
Welsh: Diolch ichi am eich ateb, Weinidog. Mewn sawl ffordd, mae'n dangos faint o amser ac adnoddau y mae'r Llywodraeth wedi'u rhoi i edrych ar lwybrau amgen eisoes, sef sail fy nghwestiwn mewn gwirionedd. I droi at yr ymchwiliad cyhoeddus ei hun, yn amlwg, mae'r Aelodau a minnau wedi cael amser i ystyried adroddiad yr ymchwiliad cyhoeddus. Yn ei ddatganiad, dywedodd y Prif Weinidog na fyddai wedi bwrw ymlaen â chynigion y Llywodraeth ei hun, hyd yn oed pe bai'n teimlo eu bod yn fforddiadwy, ar sail yr effaith ar yr amgylchedd. Felly, os caf edrych ar hynny am eiliad: dywedai tystiolaeth Llywodraeth Cymru ei hun, a ddarparwyd gan Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru ac a gefnogwyd gan fargyfreithwyr Llywodraeth Cymru, y byddai'r cynllun yn garbon niwtral dros amser ac yn gydnaws â Deddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol (Cymru) 2015. Cytunai'r arolygydd â'ch barn chi fel Llywodraeth Cymru a dywedodd fod y farn honno'n gadarn a chytunai hefyd y gellid ystyried bod y mesurau lliniaru helaeth arfaethedig ar gyfer yr effaith ar wastadeddau Gwent, a ddatblygwyd ar y cyd â Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru, yn rhoi camau rhesymol ar waith i gydymffurfio â Deddf Bywyd Gwyllt a Chefn Gwlad 1981. Nawr, y pwynt yr hoffwn ei wneud yma, Weinidog, yw os ydych chi fel Llywodraeth Cymru yn anghytuno â'ch cynigion eich hun erbyn hyn, a ydych yn credu bod y ddeddfwriaeth a geir yn Neddf yr Amgylchedd (Cymru) 2016 a Deddf llesiant cenedlaethau'r dyfodol yn ddigonol? A sut y mae'r penderfyniad hwn yn bwrw amheuaeth ar gynlluniau trafnidiaeth eraill yng Nghymru, megis cynllun coridor Glannau Dyfrdwy ac ardaloedd eraill lle mae angen llawer o welliant wrth gwrs, ar hyd yr A40, yr A55 a'r A470? A yw'r penderfyniad hwn gan y Prif Weinidog yn arwydd o newid sylfaenol i bolisi trafnidiaeth Llywodraeth Cymru ar sail amgylcheddol?