English: Thank you, Llywydd. Members will be aware that these two sets of regulations amend the principal regulations on the coronavirus restrictions, and they're made, as has been indicated by the Minister, under the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984. Now, for context, I'd like to briefly outline the purpose of the principal regulations, which came into force on 26 March and were subsequently approved by the Senedd on 29 April. Those regulations put restrictions on the movement of individuals, setting out circumstances in which they may leave the place where they live, and prevent gatherings of groups of more than two people, except in certain circumstances, and again, as has already been commented on, require the closure of certain businesses and impose requirements on other businesses, as well as duties to close certain public footpaths and land. The No. 2 amending regulations came into force on 25 April, and the No. 3 amending regulations came into force on 11 May. Our reports on these regulations are provided with the agenda, so they are before Members. There are no technical reporting points that we wish to raise in either case, but I do want to make absolutely clear that we have paid very close attention to these regulations. We do all fully understand the reasoning behind these powers. The Minister himself has explained this reasoning as well, but, nevertheless, it is important to recognise that they are probably the greatest restriction on fundamental liberties and rights that have been put in place across the whole of the UK since the second world war. It is therefore fundamental that the implementation and operation of these extraordinary powers are kept under regular scrutiny by committee and by this Parliament, as we are the custodians of the liberties they restrict, and ensure that they are only in place for as long as public safety requires it and they are a proportionate restriction to the risk. Now, our human rights obligations are also fundamental, so it is important that these are highlighted, and what I'd like to do is to focus on the human right aspects of the amending regulations, which we highlight in the merits section of our report. So, we noted that the following articles are engaged in relation to the No. 2 regulations: article 8, which is the right to respect for private and family life; article 9, which is with regard to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; article 11, freedom of assembly and association; and article 1 of the first protocol, protection of property. Now, all of these are qualified rights, which, as the Minister has already indicated, can be interfered with provided the interference is justified. Now, the Welsh Government's explanatory memorandum originally did not identify the specific articles that it considers are engaged in respect of these regulations, so we noted that the Government set out a limited commentary on the justification for interfering with the exercise of human rights as a result of the regulations, mainly to prevent the spreading of infectious diseases and protect public health, and in a manner that is proportionate. However, it should make its justification by reference to the specific articles of the Human Rights Act 1998 that are engaged, and such an approach allows the Welsh Government to explain more clearly the balancing exercise it undertook as it required under human rights law when a private right collides with a public interest. I do not, of course, say that there has been any breach of human rights; I only emphasise that, even in times of emergency, human rights must not be forgotten. Furthermore, we must at all times resist the temptation to allow the restriction of liberties and rights to become in any way normalised. So, I therefore welcome the Welsh Government's response to our report. It identifies that, in addition to the articles referred to in our report, article 5, that is the right to liberty, and article 14, the prohibition of discrimination, are also engaged. It also provides a more detailed commentary justifying and explaining the interference with the exercise of human rights. Turning now to the No. 3 regulations, these regulations do a number of important things, again, as the Minister has outlined: permitting libraries, garden centres and plant nurseries to open subject to requirements to take all reasonable measures to ensure a distance of 2m is maintained by persons on the premises and persons waiting to enter the premises; specifying that leaving the place where you live to collect goods ordered from a shop operating on an order-and-collect basis constitutes a reasonable excuse for the purpose of regulation 8 (1) of the principal regulations; and removing the limitation on exercising no more than once a day. Now, as regards human rights, the explanatory memorandum explains that the regulations engage articles 8 and 11 as well as article 1 of the first protocol. Again, some commentary on justification for interference with these rights is provided. Of particular note, the regulations add the proportionality of requirements and restrictions as a consideration when the Welsh Ministers review the principal coronavirus regulations. In our report, we note that proportionality is a fundamental consideration when assessing the justification for interfering with certain individual rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and it goes to the root of the lawfulness of the decision to interfere with those rights. So, as such, we welcome this amendment because it recognises not only the Welsh Ministers' overarching duty of proportionality, as the Minister has confirmed, under the 1984 public health Act, but also their overarching responsibility to ensure compliance with the Human Rights Act, which we are satisfied there is. Diolch, Llywydd.
Welsh: Diolch, Lywydd. Bydd yr Aelodau'n ymwybodol fod y ddwy set o reoliadau'n diwygio'r prif reoliadau ar y cyfyngiadau coronafeirws, ac fe'u gwneir, fel y nodwyd gan y Gweinidog, o dan Ddeddf Iechyd y Cyhoedd (Rheoli Clefydau) 1984. Nawr, i roi cyd-destun, hoffwn amlinellu'n fras ddiben y prif reoliadau, a ddaeth i rym ar 26 Mawrth ac a gymeradwywyd wedyn gan y Senedd ar 29 Ebrill. Mae'r rheoliadau hynny'n gosod cyfyngiadau ar symudiad unigolion, gan nodi amgylchiadau lle gallant adael y fan lle maent yn byw, ac atal grwpiau o fwy na dau o bobl ac eithrio mewn rhai amgylchiadau, ac unwaith eto, fel y nodwyd eisoes, maent yn ei gwneud yn ofynnol i gau rhai busnesau a gosod gofynion ar fusnesau eraill, yn ogystal â dyletswyddau i gau rhai llwybrau cyhoeddus a thir. Daeth y rheoliadau diwygio Rhif 2 i rym ar 25 Ebrill, a daeth y rheoliadau diwygio Rhif 3 i rym ar 11 Mai. Darperir ein hadroddiadau ar y rheoliadau hyn gyda'r agenda, felly maent gerbron yr Aelodau. Nid oes unrhyw bwyntiau adrodd technegol yr hoffem eu codi yn y naill achos na'r llall, ond rwyf am ei gwneud yn gwbl glir ein bod wedi rhoi sylw manwl iawn i'r rheoliadau hyn. Rydym i gyd yn deall yn llawn y rhesymeg sy'n sail i'r pwerau. Mae'r Gweinidog ei hun wedi esbonio'r rhesymeg hefyd, ond serch hynny, mae'n bwysig cydnabod, mae'n debyg, mai dyma'r cyfyngiad mwyaf ar ryddid a hawliau sylfaenol a roddwyd ar waith ledled y DU ers yr ail ryfel byd. Felly, mae'n hanfodol fod y gwaith o gyflawni a gweithredu'r pwerau eithriadol hyn yn cael ei graffu'n rheolaidd gan bwyllgor a chan y Senedd hon, gan mai ni sy'n diogelu'r hawliau y maent yn eu cyfyngu, a sicrhau eu bod ond ar waith cyhyd ag y bo diogelwch y cyhoedd yn galw am wneud hynny a'u bod yn gyfyngiad sy'n gymesur â'r risg. Nawr, mae ein rhwymedigaethau hawliau dynol hefyd yn hanfodol, felly mae'n bwysig fod y rhain yn cael eu hamlygu, a'r hyn yr hoffwn ei wneud yw canolbwyntio ar yr agweddau hawliau dynol ar y rheoliadau diwygio, y tynnwn sylw atynt yn yr adran ar rinweddau yn ein hadroddiad. Felly, nodasom fod yr erthyglau canlynol yn berthnasol i'r rheoliadau Rhif 2: erthygl 8, sef yr hawl i barch at fywyd preifat a theuluol; erthygl 9, sy'n ymwneud â rhyddid meddwl, cydwybod a chrefydd; erthygl 11, rhyddid i ymgynnull a chymdeithasu; ac erthygl 1 o'r protocol cyntaf, gwarchod eiddo. Nawr, mae pob un o'r rhain yn hawliau cymwysedig, y gellir ymyrryd â hwy cyn belled â bod cyfiawnhad dros yr ymyrraeth honno, fel y mae'r Gweinidog eisoes wedi dynodi. Nawr, yn wreiddiol, nid oedd memorandwm esboniadol Llywodraeth Cymru yn nodi'r erthyglau penodol y mae'n ystyried eu bod yn berthnasol i'r rheoliadau hyn, felly nodasom fod y Llywodraeth wedi cyflwyno sylwebaeth gyfyngedig ar y cyfiawnhad dros ymyrryd ag arfer hawliau dynol o ganlyniad i'r rheoliadau, yn bennaf er mwyn atal clefydau heintus rhag lledaenu a diogelu iechyd y cyhoedd, ac mewn modd sy'n gymesur. Fodd bynnag, dylai wneud ei chyfiawnhad drwy gyfeirio at erthyglau penodol Deddf Hawliau Dynol 1998 sy'n berthnasol, ac mae dull o'r fath yn caniatáu i Lywodraeth Cymru esbonio'n gliriach yr ymarfer cydbwyso a gynhaliodd fel sy'n ofynnol dan gyfraith hawliau dynol pan fo hawl breifat yn gwrthdaro â budd cyhoeddus. Nid wyf yn dweud, wrth gwrs, fod hawliau dynol wedi'u torri; nid wyf ond yn pwysleisio, hyd yn oed ar adegau o argyfwng, na ddylid anghofio am hawliau dynol. At hynny, rhaid inni ymwrthod bob amser â'r demtasiwn i ganiatáu i gyfyngu ar ryddid a hawliau gael ei normaleiddio mewn unrhyw fodd. Felly, rwy'n croesawu ymateb Llywodraeth Cymru i'n hadroddiad. Yn ogystal â'r erthyglau y cyfeirir atynt yn ein hadroddiad, mae'n nodi bod erthygl 5, sef yr hawl i ryddid, ac erthygl 14, gwahardd gwahaniaethu, hefyd yn berthnasol. Mae hefyd yn darparu sylwebaeth fanylach sy'n cyfiawnhau ac yn esbonio'r ymyrraeth ar arfer hawliau dynol. Gan droi yn awr at y rheoliadau Rhif 3, mae'r rheoliadau hyn yn gwneud nifer o bethau pwysig unwaith eto, fel yr amlinellodd y Gweinidog: caniatáu i lyfrgelloedd, canolfannau garddio a meithrinfeydd planhigion agor yn amodol ar ofynion i roi pob mesur rhesymol ar waith i sicrhau bod pellter o 2m yn cael ei gadw gan unigolion ar y safle ac unigolion sy'n aros i fynd i mewn i safle; pennu bod gadael y man lle rydych yn byw i gasglu nwyddau a archebir o siop sy'n gweithredu ar sail archebu a chasglu yn esgus rhesymol at ddiben rheoliad 8 (1) o'r prif reoliadau; a chael gwared ar y cyfyngiad i ymarfer corff unwaith y dydd yn unig. Nawr, o ran hawliau dynol, mae'r memorandwm esboniadol yn egluro bod erthyglau 8 ac 11 yn ogystal ag erthygl 1 o'r protocol cyntaf yn berthnasol i'r rheoliadau. Unwaith eto, darperir peth sylwebaeth ar gyfiawnhad dros ymyrryd â'r hawliau hyn. Yn fwyaf penodol, mae'r rheoliadau'n ychwanegu cymesuredd gofynion a chyfyngiadau fel ystyriaeth pan fydd Gweinidogion Cymru yn adolygu'r prif reoliadau coronafeirws. Yn ein hadroddiad, nodwn fod cymesuredd yn ystyriaeth sylfaenol wrth asesu'r cyfiawnhad dros ymyrryd â rhai hawliau unigol o dan Ddeddf Hawliau Dynol 1998 ac mae'n mynd at wraidd cyfreithlondeb y penderfyniad i ymyrryd â'r hawliau hynny. Felly, fel y cyfryw, rydym yn croesawu'r gwelliant hwn oherwydd ei fod yn cydnabod dyletswydd drosfwaol Gweinidogion Cymru i fod yn gymesur, fel y mae'r Gweinidog wedi cadarnhau, o dan Ddeddf iechyd y cyhoedd 1984, a hefyd eu cyfrifoldeb trosfwaol i sicrhau cydymffurfiaeth â'r Ddeddf Hawliau Dynol, ac rydym yn fodlon ei fod yn gwneud hynny. Diolch, Lywydd.