Speeches recovered from the Conservative party’s online archive More…

Bourne: One Wales programme lacks vision, costings and timetable

Speech to the National Assembly for Wales.

"In opening the debate, the First Minister gave away his approach to politics—making it clear why Eluned Morgan said what she did and why she is right. In the recent Assembly elections, Labour received its worst share of the vote for 100 years, which was 31 per cent.

I find it extraordinary that he would seek to characterise that as a great success and as a divine mandate to carry on. When the First Minister spoke, it was clear that the prime motivation for wanting to carry on was to deny the Welsh Conservatives a part in Government—there was no great overarching vision that he wanted to do the following; he gave the game away, and it is the same old class warfare, into the trenches.

It is this class against that class. However, life in the twenty-first century is very different, as surely even the First Minister must have noticed.

I am grateful that the Government has given way on this debate and I thank the Leader of the House for doing so, because it is right that we have a chance to debate 'One Wales'.

I have various criticisms of 'One Wales'. First of all, I find the document to be totally uncosted. I can understand that in respect of some of the initial ambitions, but by this stage we would expect the partnership Government between the two largest parties in the Assembly to have come up with firm proposals as to when the programme will be implemented and what it costs.

I have asked repeatedly about the funding gap in education—which is not in the document—about the policy in relation to carers and the help for pensioners with council tax, and when we can expect some figures, but I have been told that that is not forthcoming. So, there is an issue about deliverability.

It is not just the Welsh Conservatives saying that—it was also an issue raised early on by Dafydd Wigley in terms of the difficulties with deliverability within what is admittedly a tight settlement.

The First Minister did not refer to that, but it is the worst settlement that we have had since devolution began. How will you deliver this programme within those constraints? What is to become of the help for first-time buyers and the help for pensioners in relation to council tax? T

These issues deserve to be addressed, but they were not touched upon in the First Minister's remarks, the first half of which was really an anti-Conservative rant and included nothing about his vision to lead our nation. That is what this debate should be about, and it is the way in which I wish to address it.

There are issues about deliverability and they are not limited to the budget. If we look at its record, we can see that Labour has failed to deliver improvements in the health service, the ambulance service and the education system.

The Welsh economy still drags behind the rest of the United Kingdom. Those are not my words; they are probably recognised by Ieuan Wyn Jones, because they were his comments during the election campaign. I agree with that, and I do not see that there will be any difference in the new term, because I do not see anything in the document to address the real concerns that he expressed with great fluency during the election campaign.

The First Minister talked about economic success, and 'One Wales' refers to 80 per cent employment as 'a long term goal'.

I ask the First Minister—or, indeed, the Deputy First Minister—when that target is deemed to be achievable? There it is in 'One Wales', and it is quite true that it does not have a date on it, but the fact that it is part of 'One Wales' for this term leads one to suppose that it is an 80 per cent target that will be achieved in the next four years.

I can see the Deputy First Minister shaking his head; that not being the case, what is the 'long term' to which we are referring? It must have been included for some purpose, unless it is just to hoodwink people into believing that we will reach that target.

I invite people to make a judgment on that—why is the figure there if it is not attainable within four years? 'One Wales' is a document for delivery within the life of this Assembly. Presumably these parties do not see themselves carrying on in this marriage of convenience beyond the next four years—or perhaps they do? Is that target deliverable in the longer term, and if so, when? It is a legitimate question.

I believe that 'The All-Wales Accord'—and the First Minister seemed to acknowledge this when he spoke—would have been a fresh start for Wales, and an opportunity to move us away from Labour domination, which we have had in this country for far too long. We have also had it for far too long in this Assembly, with Labour governing on its own, or with a junior partner.

That is what has held our nation back. I have great ambitions for our nation; they were referred to in 'The All-Wales Accord', and that is why we did not see the need to set out, individually, all the different things that we would have done—I agree with the First Minister on this point—because they were contained in that document. That is the opportunity that was missed.

However, I will address myself to three important issues that were dealt with in 'The All-Wales Accord', but not in 'One Wales'. The first is this turning of the back on the private sector, particularly in health. The idea that the public sector is good, and the private sector is bad, once again does not fit with life as we know it.

The public sector delivers fantastic public services, but the idea that it can somehow do so in complete isolation from the private sector just does not bear scrutiny. We are now told that the Minister for Health and Social Services is having to cancel plans to build doctors' surgeries with the use of private finance. If that is the case, I think that it is frankly scandalous.

I am saying that it is sometimes right. I would have thought that that was fairly clear. If I am saying that it is not always right, and not always wrong, then it must sometimes be right. That is why ruling it out completely makes no sense at all.

If it is a possibility, it seems to me that that is just exactly what you want; to be able to say that, in a certain set of circumstances, the private sector is the right way to go. In another set of circumstances, it might not be the right way. However, to rule it out completely does not do anybody any good. That is the first area where I think that this document, and this approach, is wrong-headed.

The second is in relation to culture and the Welsh language. The approach of 'One Wales' is faint-hearted; it does not go nearly far enough. It does not say that you will ensure that there is a St David's Day bank holiday, or that you will seek the relevant powers to do that. I find that extremely disappointing. That is not our approach.

'One Wales' does not say that you will seek the archive from Kew, with the money to follow, to bring it back to Wales. I find that disappointing. It does not say that you are committed to a national gallery; I find that, too, disappointing, and I am surprised that what used to be called the Party of Wales—though I think that it has forfeited that right, these days—is not ensuring that that is printed in large block capitals in this agreement.

The third area where there is particular disappointment on our side—I could go into many other areas, but within the time constraints, I will just touch on this—is on the environment. I know, because we had long discussions on this in negotiating 'The All-Wales Accord', that the three former opposition parties regarded this as extremely important, and there was not much that divided us on the importance of flagging that up.

The Labour Party in those days was totally against any target at all. There is now a target, but it is diluted—the Government is not required to do anything in relation to non-devolved issues, even to try to impress upon their counterparts at Westminster that we need to act in that regard. That is disappointing.

We should not just say that we can make a difference here in relation to devolved issues; we can impress upon Westminster, and talk to our counterparts at Westminster, as this party certainly does—we do not always succeed, and nor do they—but the fact that you have not included that in 'One Wales' is, frankly, extremely disappointing. Therefore, those three areas are disappointing in relation to 'One Wales', and that is why we urge support for the amendments."

"Wrth agor y ddadl, datgelodd y Prif Weinidog ei agwedd tuag at wleidyddiaeth—gan ei gwneud yn amlwg pam ddywedodd Eluned Morgan yr hyn a ddywedodd a pham ei bod yn iawn. Yn etholiadau diweddar y Cynulliad, derbyniodd Llafur ei chyfran waethaf o'r bleidlais ers 100 mlynedd, sef 31 y cant.

Rhyfeddaf y byddai'n ceisio nodweddu hynny fel llwyddiant ysgubol ac fel mandad dwyfol i fwrw ymlaen. Yr oedd yn glir yng ngeiriau'r Prif Weinidog mai'r prif gymhelliad dros fod eisiau bwrw ymlaen oedd gwadu rhan i Geidwadwyr Cymru mewn Llywodraeth—nid oedd gweledigaeth trosfwaol fawr ei fod eisiau gwneud y canlynol; gollyngodd y gath o'r cwd, ac yr un hen ryfel dosbarth sydd gennym, i'r ffosydd.

Y dosbarth hwn yn erbyn y dosbarth acw. Fodd bynnag, mae bywyd yn yr unfed ganrif ar hugain yn wahanol iawn, fel y mae hyd yn oed y Prif Weinidog wedi sylwi siawns.

Mae gennyf sawl beirniadaeth ynghylch 'Cymru'n Un'. Yn gyntaf oll, nid yw'r ddogfen wedi'i chostio o gwbl. Gallaf ddeall hynny yng nghyswllt rhai o'r dyheadau cychwynnol, ond erbyn hyn byddem yn disgwyl i'r Llywodraeth bartneriaeth rhwng y ddwy blaid fwyaf yn y Cynulliad fod wedi llunio cynigion cadarn ynghylch pryd y caiff y rhaglen ei rhoi ar waith a'i chost.

Yr wyf wedi gofyn dro ar ôl tro am y bwlch cyllido mewn addysg—nad yw yn y ddogfen—am y polisi yng nghyswllt gofalwyr a'r cymorth i bensiynwyr â'r dreth gyngor, a phryd y gallem ddisgwyl gweld rhai ffigurau, ond dywedwyd wrthyf nad yw hynny ar ddod. Felly, mae'r gallu i ddarparu dan sylw.

Nid dim ond Ceidwadwyr Cymru sydd yn dweud hynny—yr oedd hefyd yn fater a godwyd yn gynnar gan Dafydd Wigley o ran yr anawsterau i ddarparu mewn setliad sydd yn ddiau yn dynn. Ni chyfeiriodd y Prif Weinidog at hynny, ond dyma'r setliad gwaethaf yr ydym wedi ei gael ers dechrau datganoli. Sut y byddwch yn darparu'r rhaglen hon o fewn y cyfyngiadau hynny?

Beth a ddaw o'r cymorth i'r rheini sy'n prynu cartref am y tro cyntaf a'r cymorth i bensiynwyr yng nghyswllt y dreth gyngor? Mae'r materion hyn yn haeddu sylw, ond ni chawsant eu crybwyll yn sylwadau'r Prif Weinidog. Mewn gwirionedd yr oedd hanner cyntaf ei sylwadau'n rhefru yn erbyn y Ceidwadwyr ac yn sôn dim am ei weledigaeth i arwain ein cenedl. Dyna ddylai fod wrth galon y ddadl hon, a dyna'r ffordd y carwn roi sylw iddi.

Ceir materion yn ymwneud â darparu ond nid yw'r rhain wedi'u cyfyngu i'r gyllideb. Os edrychwn ar record Llafur, gallwn weld iddi fethu â darparu gwelliannau yn y gwasanaeth iechyd, y gwasanaeth ambiwlans na'r system addysg.

Mae economi Cymru'n dal i lusgo y tu ôl i weddill y Deyrnas Unedig. Nid fy ngeiriau i mo'r rheini; mae'n debygol bod Ieuan Wyn Jones yn eu hadnabod oherwydd mai ei sylwadau ef oeddent yn ystod ymgyrch yr etholiad. Cytunaf â hynny, ac ni welaf y bydd unrhyw wahaniaeth yn y tymor newydd, oherwydd ni welaf ddim yn y ddogfen newydd sy'n rhoi sylw i'r pryderon go iawn a fynegodd yn huawdl yn ystod ymgyrch yr etholiad.

Siaradodd y Prif Weinidog am lwyddiant economaidd, ac mae 'Cymru'n Un' yn cyfeirio at 80 y cant mewn cyflogaeth fel 'nod tymor hir'. Gofynnaf i'r Prif Weinidog—neu, yn wir, y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog—pryd y credir y bydd y targed hwnnw o fewn cyrraedd? Dyna ef yn 'Cymru'n Un', ac mae'n ddigon gwir nad oes dyddiad ar ei gyfer, ond mae'r ffaith ei fod yn rhan o 'Cymru'n Un' ar gyfer y tymor hwn yn arwain rhywun i gredu ei fod yn darged 80 y cant a gyrhaeddir yn ystod y pedair blynedd nesaf.

Gallaf weld y Dirprwy Brif Weinidog yn ysgwyd ei ben; os nad hynny yw'r achos, beth yw'r 'tymor hir' a gyfeiriwn ato? Mae'n rhaid ei fod wedi cael ei gynnwys at ryw ddiben, oni bai ei fod yno i dwyllo pobl i gredu y byddwn yn cyrraedd y targed hwnnw. Gofynnaf i'r bobl benderfynu ar hynny—pam fod y ffigur yno os nad oes modd ei gyflawni o fewn pedair blynedd?

Mae 'Cymru'n Un' yn ddogfen sydd i'w chyflawni yn ystod oes y Cynulliad hwn. Tybir nad yw'r pleidiau hyn yn gweld eu hunain yn parhau â'r briodas gyfleus hon y tu hwnt i'r pedair blynedd nesaf—neu efallai eu bod? A oes modd cyrraedd y targed hwnnw yn y tymor hwy, ac os felly, pryd? Mae'n gwestiwn dilys.

Credaf y byddai 'Cytundeb Cymru Gyfan'—ac yr oedd yn ymddangos bod y Prif Weinidog yn cydnabod hyn pan siaradodd—wedi bod yn ddechrau newydd i Gymru, ac yn gyfle inni symud i ffwrdd o dra-arglwyddiaeth Llafur, a fu gennym yn y wlad hon am rhy hir o lawer. Bu Llafur gennym hefyd yn y Cynulliad hwn am rhy hir o lawer, wrth iddi lywodraethu ar ei phen ei hun, neu gyda phartner iau. Dyna sydd wedi dal ein gwlad yn ôl.

Mae gennyf ddyheadau mawr i'n cenedl; cyfeiriwyd atynt yng 'Nghytundeb Cymru Gyfan', a dyna pam na welsom yr angen i nodi, fesul un, yr holl bethau gwahanol y byddem wedi'u gwneud—cytunaf â'r Prif Weinidog ar y pwynt hwn—oherwydd eu bod wedi'u cynnwys yn y ddogfen honno. Dyna'r cyfle a gollwyd.

Fodd bynnag, cyfeiriaf at dri mater o bwys y rhoddwyd sylw iddynt yng 'Nghytundeb Cymru Gyfan', ond na chawsant sylw yn 'Cymru'n Un'. Y cyntaf yw troi cefn ar y sector preifat, yn enwedig ym maes iechyd. Nid yw'r syniad bod y sector cyhoeddus yn dda a'r sector preifat yn ddrwg yn cydweddu â bywyd fel yr ydym yn ei adnabod.

Mae'r sector cyhoeddus yn darparu gwasanaethau cyhoeddus gwych, ond nid yw'r ddadl yn dal dwr y gall rywsut wneud hynny'n gwbl annibynnol ar y sector preifat. Dywedir wrthym yn awr bod yn rhaid i'r Gweinidog dros Iechyd a Gwasanaethau Cymdeithasol ganslo cynlluniau i ddefnyddio cyllid preifat i adeiladu meddygfeydd. Os yw hynny'n wir, credaf ei fod yn warthus.

Yr wyf yn dweud ei fod yn iawn weithiau. Byddwn wedi meddwl bod hynny'n weddol amlwg. Os wyf yn dweud nad yw'n iawn bob tro, ac nad yw'n anghywir bob tro, mae'n rhaid ei fod yn iawn weithiau. Dyna pam nad yw ei ddiystyru'n llwyr yn gwneud dim synnwyr o gwbl.

Os yw'n bosibilrwydd, mae'n ymddangos imi mai dyna'n union sydd ei eisiau arnoch; gallu dweud, dan rai amgylchiadau, mai'r sector preifat yw'r trywydd iawn i'w ddilyn. Dan amgylchiadau eraill, efallai nad hwnnw fyddai'r trywydd iawn i'w ddilyn. Fodd bynnag, nid yw ei ddiystyru'n llwyr yn gwneud dim daioni i neb. Dyna'r maes cyntaf lle mae'r ddogfen hon, a'r agwedd hon, yn mynd o chwith.

Mae'r ail yn ymwneud â diwylliant a'r iaith Gymraeg. Mae agwedd 'Cymru'n Un' yn wangalon; nid yw'n mynd yn ddigon pell o gwbl. Nid yw'n dweud y byddwch yn sicrhau y ceir gwyl y banc Dydd Gwyl Dewi, nac y byddwch yn ceisio'r pwerau perthnasol i wneud hynny.

Mae hynny'n fy siomi'n fawr. Nid dyna ein hagwedd ni. Nid yw 'Cymru'n Un' yn dweud y byddwch yn ceisio'r archif o Kew, gyda'r arian i ddilyn, i ddod ag ef yn ôl i Gymru. Mae hynny'n fy siomi. Nid yw'n dweud eich bod wedi ymrwymo i oriel genedlaethol; mae hynny hefyd yn fy siomi, ac yr wyf wedi fy synnu nad yw'r blaid a arferai alw ei hun yn Blaid Cymru—er fy mod yn meddwl iddi fforffedu'r hawl honno'r dyddiau hyn—yn sicrhau bod hynny wedi'i argraffu mewn llythrennau breision yn y cytundeb hwn.

Y trydydd maes sy'n achosi cryn siom inni—a gallwn drafod sawl maes arall, ond ac ystyried yr amser sydd ar gael, crybwyllaf hwn yn unig—yw'r amgylchedd. Gwn fod y tair cyn wrthblaid yn ystyried bod hyn yn bwysig dros ben ac nid oedd llawer yn ein gwahanu ar bwysigrwydd tynnu sylw at hynny.

Yr wyf yn gwybod hyn oherwydd inni gael trafodaethau hir amdano wrth negodi 'Cytundeb Cymru Gyfan'. Yn ystod y dyddiau hynny yr oedd y Blaid Lafur yn llwyr yn erbyn unrhyw darged o gwbl. Ceir targed yn awr, ond mae'n wannach—nid oes yn rhaid i'r Llywodraeth wneud dim yng nghyswllt materion nas datganolwyd, hyd yn oed ceisio dwyn perswâd ar eu cydweithwyr yn San Steffan bod angen inni weithredu i'r perwyl hwnnw.

Mae hynny'n siomedig. Ni ddylem ddweud mai mewn materion datganoledig yn unig y gallwn wneud gwahaniaeth; gallwn ddwyn perswâd ar San Steffan a siarad â'n cydweithwyr yn San Steffan, fel y gwna'r blaid hon yn ddiau—nid ydym yn llwyddo bob tro, nac hwythau chwaith—ond mae'r ffaith nad ydych wedi cynnwys hynny yn 'Cymru'n Un' yn siomedig dros ben.

Felly mae'r tri maes hynny'n siomedig yng nghyswllt 'Cymru'n Un', ac oherwydd hynny yr ydym yn eich annog i gefnogi'r gwelliannau."

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech