English: However, the question is: how can Wales be protected from having to suffer the consequences of such trade deals? It's one that must be addressed, but I do not believe it's addressed by establishing a veto, though I'm sure Plaid Cymru would love to be able to use such a rejection as another reason for independence. Currently, there's no formal mechanism to ensure that Welsh Government or the Assembly would have any say in negotiation and confirmation of these agreements, even in circumstances where they engage devolved competence. There's been talk of a joint ministerial council on international trade - that's not yet happened, and, if it does, will it have the same teeth as the other JMCs have, particularly the robustness and impact of JMCs, which have been heavily criticised by many in this Chamber? So, it's not really a mechanism we would support, in one sense. The issue of a veto could be seen as an attractive one by many who wish to show that Wales cannot be forced to act against the policies of a Welsh Government that it has been elected on. However, there are clear concerns as to the timing of such a decision. A veto occurs at the end of a negotiating process. What we want to actually do to ensure the best interests of Wales is get involved at the start of the process. That's the critical element. It's about setting the direction of the negotiations and being included in establishing the mandate for negotiations. It's getting involved early, being in the room where negotiations are discussed, and particularly when they're on devolved competencies, and they're there when matters that impact on devolved competencies - . This is often the case across European neighbours and elsewhere in the world. It happens. Research by the Wales Centre for Public Policy highlights that the only example in Europe, which has been mentioned before, is Belgium, where an individual sub-state elected legislature can prevent ratification of an agreement, and it was Wallonia in the CETA agreement, but it wasn't Flanders and it wasn't Brussels, it was Wallonia, so it's one, which held that nation up and which then held the 28, at that time, other nations also up on their application. So, that's the only example in Europe. In other states, subnational Governments actually are involved in the development of policies, and this is done through a constitution and exclusive powers given to them through Government - written constitutions. That's what we haven't got - we haven't got a written constitution, so it makes it more difficult for us. Germany is a good example, where the Länder are influencing and able to influence international agreements that could negatively impact upon their powers. It's by giving them a formal role in the discussions and negotiations when devolved issues are involved. They're also able to act through a second Parliament, the Bundesrat, as well. So, there are examples of where legislatures can work in agreements without the veto and influence the agreements in the best interests of their citizens. That's a possible solution we should be looking at. Now, the Welsh Government has looked at the agenda, moving forward, and has brought forward its own papers, recently on 'Reforming our Union, Shared Governance in the UK'. In there, it talks about the inter-governmental machinery that's needed to look at these policy agendas, and we need to address that. We need to look at how do the agendas go. I am aware of the time, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I want to conclude, therefore, by reflecting upon the Conservative amendment. To be honest, I looked at that and I thought, 'They're denying that there are valid concerns about the current trade negotiation stance of this UK Government. They are trying to block them out of people's minds, trying to hide them from the public.' The amendment states we should have no involvement in trade negotiations, as it is a reserved matter. They think Westminster can do better for us, without our involvement and our input. I think that they should be ashamed of such a consideration - they are representing Welsh people and yet they think that Westminster can do better for the Welsh people. They should be ashamed of that denial. Now, future trade agreements will be important, once we leave the protection of agreements we have benefited from as being a member of the EU, where there's a need to respect devolved nations in those agreements. And, as such, they must be negotiated and agreed with the full involvement of the devolved Governments and devolved legislatures.
Welsh: Fodd bynnag, y cwestiwn yw hwn: sut y gellir diogelu Cymru rhag gorfod dioddef canlyniadau cytundebau masnach o'r fath? Mae'n gwestiwn sy'n rhaid ei ateb, ond nid wyf yn credu y caiff ei ateb drwy sefydlu feto, er fy mod yn siŵr y byddai Plaid Cymru wrth eu bodd yn gallu defnyddio'r fath wrthodiad fel rheswm arall dros annibyniaeth. Ar hyn o bryd, nid oes unrhyw fecanwaith ffurfiol i sicrhau y byddai gan Lywodraeth Cymru na'r Cynulliad unrhyw lais yn negodi a chadarnhau'r cytundebau hyn, hyd yn oed mewn amgylchiadau lle maent yn ymwneud â chymhwysedd datganoledig. Mae sôn wedi bod am gyd-gyngor gweinidogion ar fasnach ryngwladol - nid yw hynny wedi digwydd eto, ac os yw'n digwydd, a fydd ganddo'r un dannedd â'r cyd-gynghorau gweinidogion eraill, yn enwedig cadernid ac effaith cyd-gynghorau gweinidogion, sydd wedi cael eu beirniadu'n hallt gan lawer yn y Siambr hon? Felly, ar un ystyr, nid yw'n fecanwaith y byddem yn ei gefnogi mewn gwirionedd. Gellid ystyried bod feto yn gynnig deniadol i lawer sy'n dymuno dangos na all Cymru gael ei gorfodi i weithredu yn erbyn y polisïau yr etholwyd Llywodraeth Cymru arnynt. Fodd bynnag, mae pryderon amlwg yn codi ynghylch amseriad penderfyniad o'r fath. Mae feto'n digwydd ar ddiwedd proses negodi. Yr hyn rydym am ei wneud yw sicrhau bod buddiannau Cymru'n cael eu cynnwys ar ddechrau'r broses. Dyna'r elfen hollbwysig. Mae'n ymwneud â gosod cyfeiriad y negodiadau a chael ei chynnwys wrth sefydlu'r mandad ar gyfer negodiadau. Mae'n golygu bod yn rhan o bethau'n gynnar, bod yn yr ystafell lle mae negodiadau'n cael eu trafod, ac yn enwedig pan fyddant ar gymwyseddau datganoledig, a bod yno pan fydd materion sy'n effeithio ar gymwyseddau datganoledig - . Mae hyn yn aml yn wir ar draws ein cymdogion Ewropeaidd ac mewn mannau eraill yn y byd. Mae'n digwydd. Mae ymchwil gan Ganolfan Polisi Cyhoeddus Cymru yn tynnu sylw at y ffaith mai'r unig enghraifft yn Ewrop, y soniwyd amdani o'r blaen, yw Gwlad Belg, lle gall deddfwrfa is-wladwriaethol unigol a etholwyd atal cytundeb rhag cael ei gadarnhau, a digwyddodd hynny yn achos Walonia yng nghytundeb CETA, nid Fflandrys ac nid Brwsel, ond Walonia, felly dyna un, a arweiniodd at oedi yn y wlad honno gan arwain at oedi gyda chais y 28 gwlad arall ar y pryd. Felly, dyna'r unig enghraifft yn Ewrop. Mewn gwladwriaethau eraill, mae llywodraethau is-genedlaethol yn rhan o'r broses o ddatblygu polisïau, a gwneir hyn trwy gyfansoddiad a phwerau cyfyngedig a roddir iddynt drwy'r Llywodraeth - cyfansoddiadau ysgrifenedig. Nid oes gennym un o'r rheini - nid oes gennym gyfansoddiad ysgrifenedig, felly mae'n ei gwneud yn anos i ni. Mae'r Almaen yn enghraifft dda, lle mae'r Länder yn dylanwadu ac yn gallu dylanwadu ar gytundebau rhyngwladol a allai effeithio'n negyddol ar eu pwerau. Gwneir hynny drwy roi rôl ffurfiol iddynt yn y trafodaethau a'r negodiadau pan fydd materion wedi'u datganoli. Maent hefyd yn gallu gweithredu drwy ail Senedd, y Bundesrat, yn ogystal. Felly, ceir enghreifftiau lle gall deddfwrfeydd weithio mewn cytundebau heb y feto a dylanwadu ar y cytundebau er lles pennaf eu dinasyddion. Mae hwnnw'n ateb posibl y dylem edrych arno. Nawr, mae Llywodraeth Cymru wedi edrych ar yr agenda wrth symud ymlaen ac wedi cyflwyno ei phapurau ei hun yn ddiweddar, 'Diwygio ein hundeb: cydlywodraethu yn y DU'. Yn y ddogfen, mae'n sôn am y peirianwaith rhynglywodraethol sydd ei angen i edrych ar yr agendâu polisi hyn, ac mae angen inni fynd i'r afael â hynny. Mae angen inni edrych ar gynnydd yr agendâu. Rwy'n ymwybodol o'r amser, Ddirprwy Lywydd, ac felly rwyf am gloi drwy edrych ar welliant y Ceidwadwyr. A dweud y gwir, edrychais arno a meddwl, 'Maent yn gwadu bod pryderon dilys ynglŷn â safbwynt negodi masnach presennol y Llywodraeth hon. Maent yn ceisio'u cau o feddyliau pobl, gan geisio'u cuddio rhag y cyhoedd.' Mae'r gwelliant yn datgan na ddylai fod gennym ran o gwbl mewn negodiadau masnach, am ei fod yn fater a gadwyd yn ôl. Maent yn meddwl y gall San Steffan wneud yn well ar ein rhan, heb ein cyfranogiad na'n mewnbwn. Credaf y dylent fod â chywilydd o feddwl felly - maent yn cynrychioli pobl Cymru ac eto credant y gall San Steffan wneud yn well ar ran pobl Cymru. Dylai fod arnynt gywilydd o'r gwadu hwnnw. Nawr, bydd cytundebau masnach yn y dyfodol yn bwysig, ar ôl i ni adael diogelwch y cytundebau rydym wedi elwa arnynt fel aelodau o'r UE, lle mae angen parchu gwledydd datganoledig yn y cytundebau hynny. Ac o'r herwydd, mae'n rhaid eu negodi a chytuno arnynt gan gynnwys y Llywodraethau datganoledig a'r deddfwrfeydd datganoledig yn llawn.