English: The Cabinet Secretary opened this debate by saying we were voting before the House of Commons, that he wanted to influence MPs, that Welsh Government believes the House of Commons should vote down the withdrawal agreement, and he concluded by saying he hopes this National Assembly will send a clear message that the withdrawal agreement is unacceptable and should be rejected. Inspiring words, but they aren't reflected in his motion, and Steffan Lewis drew attention to this, and I must admit I'm equally perplexed. I just don't understand what you, Cabinet Secretary, or your team of Welsh Ministers or - aside from sort of venting their fury with the electorate for not agreeing with them - what backbenchers on the Labour side want to achieve through this motion today. It merely takes note of the withdrawal agreement. It notes a couple of particular, less controversial parts of it; it then notes that we'll have a further opportunity to debate the withdrawal agreement, apparently, when we're to give legislative consent to the withdrawal agreement Bill, yet the Cabinet Secretary then goes on to say that it's inevitable that the House of Commons is going to vote down the withdrawal agreement, and I think we all know in this debate, which makes it slightly surreal, that the House of Commons is going to vote down this withdrawal agreement and is going to do so by a very substantial majority. So, what next? It seems that, for the Labour Party, and I think for Welsh Government, there is a sort of gamble that, by voting against the withdrawal agreement - at least in the House of Commons, while we merely take note of it here - that will somehow lead to a general election or to a so-called people's vote, notwithstanding that we've had a people's vote that they don't want to implement. What I don't see is how that's going to happen. John McDonnell says that there's not going to be a general election and that isn't going to work, and then how are they going to get this so-called people's vote? You need legislation for a referendum, and legislation needs (a) Government time and (b) a money motion, which only the Government can put down. So, how, given that they're not going to get this general election, are they then going to get this so-called people's vote? And I don't know the answer to that. It may be that Jeremy Corbyn is happy to take that gamble, because he is content to leave the European Union without a deal. That may well be.
Welsh: Agorodd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet y ddadl hon drwy ddweud ein bod ni'n pleidleisio cyn Tŷ'r Cyffredin, ei fod eisiau dylanwadu ar ASau, bod Llywodraeth Cymru yn credu y dylai Tŷ'r Cyffredin bleidleisio yn erbyn y cytundeb ymadael, a gorffennodd drwy ddweud ei fod yn gobeithio y bydd y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol hwn yn anfon neges glir bod y cytundeb ymadael yn annerbyniol ac y dylid ei wrthod. Geiriau sy'n ysbrydoli, ond nid ydyn nhw'n cael eu hadlewyrchu yn ei gynnig, ac fe dynnodd Steffan Lewis sylw at hyn, ac mae'n rhaid imi gyfaddef fy mod innau yn yr un benbleth hefyd. Nid wyf yn deall o gwbl beth, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ydych chi, na eich tîm o Weinidogion Cymru na - heblaw bwrw eu llid at yr etholwyr am beidio â chytuno â nhw - y mae Aelodau meinciau cefn ar ochr Llafur eisiau ei gyflawni drwy'r cynnig hwn heddiw. Mae'n nodi'r cytundeb ymadael a dyna'i gyd. Mae'n nodi un neu ddwy ran benodol, llai dadleuol ohono; yna mae'n nodi y bydd gennym ni gyfle pellach i drafod y cytundeb ymadael, mae'n debyg, pan fyddwn ni'n rhoi cydsyniad deddfwriaethol i'r Bil cytundeb ymadael, ac eto mae'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn mynd ymlaen i ddweud ei bod hi'n anochel y bydd Tŷ'r Cyffredin yn pleidleisio yn erbyn y cytundeb ymadael, ac rwy'n credu y gŵyr pob un ohonom ni yn y ddadl hon, sy'n ei gwneud hi'n swrrealaidd braidd, bod Tŷ'r Cyffredin yn mynd i bleidleisio yn erbyn y cytundeb ymadael hwn ac yn mynd i wneud hynny gyda mwyafrif sylweddol iawn. Felly, beth nesaf? Mae'n ymddangos, o ran y Blaid Lafur, ac rwy'n credu, o ran Llywodraeth Cymru, bod elfen o gambl yma, oherwydd drwy bleidleisio yn erbyn y cytundeb ymadael - o leiaf yn Nhŷ'r Cyffredin, tra byddwn ni ddim ond yn ei nodi yma - y bydd hynny, rywsut yn arwain at etholiad cyffredinol neu at bleidlais y bobl, fel y'i gelwir, er gwaethaf y ffaith ein bod ni wedi cael pleidlais y bobl nad ydyn nhw eisiau ei gweithredu. Yr hyn na allaf i ei weld yw sut y mae hynny'n mynd i ddigwydd. Dywed John McDonnell na fydd etholiad cyffredinol ac nid yw hynny'n mynd i weithio, ac yna sut maen nhw'n mynd i gael y bleidlais y bobl hon fel y'i gelwir? Mae angen deddfwriaeth ar gyfer refferendwm, ac mae ar y ddeddfwriaeth angen a) amser y Llywodraeth a (b) cynnig arian, y mae'n rhaid i'r Llywodraeth a neb arall ei gynnig. Felly, sut, o gofio nad ydyn nhw'n mynd i gael yr etholiad cyffredinol hwn, y byddan nhw wedyn yn cael y bleidlais y bobl hon fel y'i gelwir? Ac nid wyf i'n gwybod yr ateb i hynny. Mae'n bosibl bod Jeremy Corbyn yn hapus i gymryd y gambl honno, oherwydd ei fod ef yn fodlon gadael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd heb gytundeb. Efallai fod hynny'n wir.