Cynyddu maint testun

Golwg360

Mae angen Swyddfa Cymru

Cyhoeddwyd Mawrth 10, 2011 gan Ifan Morgan Jones. Dim sylw.

Tagiau: cheryl gillan, peter hain


Peter Hain, cyn Ysgrifennydd Cymru
Rydw i’n deall pam fod Dafydd Elis-Thomas ac Ieuan Wyn Jones yn dadlau o blaid diddymu Swyddfa Cymru, neu ei uno â swyddfeydd yr Alban ac Iwerddon. Eu dyletswydd nhw yw ceisio torri’r llinyn bogail sy’n cysylltu Cymru a Lloegr – llinyn sydd bellach yn grebachlyd a gweddol ddibwrpas yn dilyn y refferendwm ar ragor o bwerau i’r Cynulliad.

Mae’n amlwg pam bod Ysgrifennydd Cymru, Cheryl Gillan, ac Ysgrifennydd Cymru’r wrthblaid, Peter Hain, eisiau cadw’r swyddfa, hefyd. Mae un yn gweithio yno a’r llall eisiau mynd yn ôl i weithio yno. A pe bai’r swyddfeydd yn cael eu huno mae’n debygol na fyddai’r un o’r ddau yn ddewis cyntaf i lenwi’r swydd newydd. Democrat Rhyddfrydol o’r Alban fyddai’n ei chael hi mae’n siŵr.

Ond o feddwl am beth fyddai orau i Gymru, yn hytrach na cheisio sgorio pwyntiau gwleidyddol, dw i ddim yn meddwl y byddai colli cynrychiolydd yn y Cabinet yn gam ymlaen. Mae gan y Cynulliad lond dwrn o bwerau ond y gwir plaen yw bod y rhan fwyaf o’r grym yn dal i breswylio yn San Steffan.  Swyddogaeth yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol yw dadlau achos Cymru. Prin y byddai’r Cabinet yn cofio bod ein gwlad fach ni’n bodoli o gwbl,  heb geg fach Gymreig wrth glust y Prif Weinidog. Does gan rhanbarthau Lloegr ddim ysgrifennydd yn y cabinet ac mai hynny’n fantais i ni ar adeg o argyfwng ariannol pan mae pob mantais yn bwysig. Mae’n annhebygol, dybiwn i, y byddai Llywodraeth San Steffan wedi cydsynio i drydaneiddio’r rheilffordd o Lundain i Gaerdydd pe na bai Cheryl Gillan wedi cael amser caled gan wleidyddion Cymru.

Efallai eu bod nhw eisiau eu diddymu nawr i ddangos pa mor bell ydyn ni wedi mynd, ond mae yna rywbeth yn dweud wrtha’ i y byddai Ieuan Wyn Jones a Dafydd Elis-Thomas yn cwyno pe na bai swydd Ysgrifennydd Cymru yn bodoli yn y lle cyntaf…

Freud

Cyhoeddwyd Ionawr 5, 2011 gan Rhiannon Michael. Dim sylw.

Tagiau: Carwyn Jones, Llafur, peter hain, Refferendwm AV

“There will be two important polls this year…” meddai Carwyn Jones yng nghynhadledd Llafur i’r wasg bore ma i ddatgelu aelod newydd y blaid Lafur o Gastell Nedd.

Dau etholiad pwysig Mr Jones?! Ahem!!! Beth am y refferendwm ar y bleidlais amgen? Roedd rhaid holi. Wwwwps. “There will be three important polls….” cywirodd y Prif Weinidog ei hun braidd yn lletchwith. Ac na, doedd y slip Freud-aidd ddim yn arwydd bod y blaid Lafur Gymreig am anwybyddu’r refferendwm AV – mynnodd Peter Hain  gael dweud ei fod e’n llwyr gefnogol o bleidlais ie fel y mae Ed Miliband -ond y flaenoriaeth yw’r refferendwm pwerau deddfu’r Cynulliad ac ennill mwyafrif i Lafur ym mis Mai.

Digon teg, ond mae’r camgymeriad yn dangos y talcen caled sy’n wynebu cefnogwyr newid y drefn etholiadol i system fwy cyfrannol. Os nad yw’r gwleidyddion sydd ynghanol y pethau yma’n cofio amdano, sut mae modd ysbrydoli’r cyhoedd?

DIWEDDARIAD: Dyw hyd yn oed y Comisiwn Etholiadolyng Nghymru ddim yn gallu cyffroi am refferendwm y bleidlais amgen. Yr awgrym o’u gwefan cymraeg a chymreig nhw yw mai dau etholiad sydd yng Nghymru eleni hefyd. Mae hyn am fod y refferendwm yn fater “Prydain gyfan” medden nhw ar ôl i fi wneud ymholiadau. Felly maen nhw’n cyfeirio ato fe fan hyn.

Canu fel Cana'r Aderyn

Stop Press! Datganiad i’r wasg gan Eleanor Burnham. Fe fydd rent-a-soprano’r Cynulliad yn canu gyda Rhys Meirion mewn cyngerdd arbennig nos Wener i godi arian i Ysgol Bro Cernyw. Mae unig AS rhanbarth y gogledd y Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol fel pe bai’n cynyddu ei datganiadau i’r wasg ar hyn o bryd (a’i thrydar hefyd o ran hynny). Mae siwr o fod fel rhagflas o’r hyn ddaw weddill y tymor wrth i’r gwleidyddion ymlwybro nôl i Fae Caerdydd ddydd Llun -ail dim ond i Blaid Cymru mae’r Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol am eu datganiadau niferus.

Os nad ail-ddechrau’r tymor sy tu ôl i hyn, efallai ei bod hi’n codi ei phroffeil hyd yn oed yn uwch yn lleol gan fod cystadleuaeth ganddi yn y ras i fod ar frig rhestr y Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol yn y gogledd ar gyfer etholiad Cynulliad 2011. Mae arweinydd cyngor Wrecsam, y cynghorydd Aled Roberts wedi gosod ei enw gerbron ar gyfer y rhestr hefyd. Fel cyd-siaradwr Cymraeg a dyn uchel ei barch yn ei blaid fe fydd yn wrthwynebydd cryf i Eleanor Burnham. Ond mae hi’n ymgyrchydd heb ei hail felly bydd yn ornest ddifyr i’w gwylio.

Mae Eleanor wedi hen leisio’i barn ar sefyllfa S4C ond un newydd sydd wedi ymuno yn rhengoedd côr gwarcheidwaid y sianel Gymraeg yw’r cyn ysgrifenydd gwladol, Peter Hain. Fel Rhodri Glyn o’i flaen (fel y mae Plaid Cymru ar dasg i bwysleisio) mae AS Castell Nedd wedi cael cyngor cyfreithiol dweud na ddylai S4C dalu ceiniog yn ôl o’i chyllideb eleni rhag torri’r gyfraith. Mae’r stori yma. I chi gael y cefndir i gyd, dyma’r llythyr gan Peter Hain a chyngor ei fargyfreithiwr, Clive Lewis Q.C. ar y sefyllfa:

Llythyr Peter Hain:

Dear Cheryl, 

I enclose a copy of Counsel’s opinion which says that any cuts to S4C budget, either voluntary or otherwise, are illegal.

It is very clear from Counsel’s opinion that should your Government wish to impose any cuts on the S4C budget you would have to introduce primary legislation to do so.

I therefore request that your Government postpone any plans for immediate cuts to the S4C budget, and not accept any voluntary repayments, to avoid being in breach of the law.

If you proceed regardless, I will give my full support for a judicial review.

The S4C budget should always be scrutinised, and we would welcome a debate about the future of S4C and Welsh language broadcasting in general. But we will not support these sudden and illegal cuts, especially as Wales is already suffering more than anywhere else because of the actions of your Government.

I will be writing in similar terms to the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, but would urge you to take a personal interest in this issue.

Yours sincerely,

RT HON PETER HAIN MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Wales

Cyngor Clive Lewis:

SUMMARY

1. I am asked to advise S4C on one question concerning the power of S4C to make

a voluntary payment to the Department of Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport

(“the Department”) of money paid to S4C pursuant to section 61 of the

Broadcasting Act 1990 (“the Act”).

2. For the reasons given below, S4C has no legal power to make voluntary payments

to the Department of money received pursuant to section 61 of the Act and such

voluntary payments would be unlawful.

BACKGROUND

3 As part of the United Kingdom government’s efforts to reduce public spending in

the current financial year, the Department wishes to see a reduction of

approximately 3 to 5% in the funding made available by the Department to S4C.

The Department has indicated that it accepts that it has to provide a certain level

of funding under section 61 of the Act but has asked whether S4C would agree to

reduce its funding on a voluntary basis. The mechanism for effecting this

voluntary reduction would be that the Department would pay the money due

under section 61 of the Act but S4C would then make a voluntary repayment of

part of the monies received.

LEGAL FRAMEWORK

4. Section 56 of the Act keeps in existence the Welsh Fourth Channel Authority,

referred to in the Act as the Welsh Authority. That Authority is to be known as

S4C. That is a body corporate comprised of a chairman and appointed members.

A number of its functions are delegated to a Board of Directors.

5. Funding, in part, is dealt with by section 61 of the Act. The Secretary of State

must in each year, pay the prescribed amount to S4C as increased by the

appropriate percentage. The prescribed amount is the amount actually received in

1997 or an amount being greater than the 1997 amount (the amount being

prescribed by the Secretary of State by order). There is no power to prescribe an

amount less than the amount paid in 1997. The prescribed amount is to be

increased by the appropriate percentage (defined in section 61(6) of the Act as,

effectively the percentage increase between the retail price index for November

1996 and the November for the year preceding the year of payment).

6. Section 61A(2) of the Act, as amended, provides that:

“(2) All amounts received by the Welsh Authority under section 61 shall

be kept by the Authority in a separate fund (in this section referred to as

“the public service fund”) which may be applied only for the purposes of

their functions in relation to the provisions of the services that are public

services of the Authority within the meaning of section 207 of the

Communications Act 2003.”

7. Those public services are defined as S4C, S4C Digital and services authorised by

or under section 205 of the Communications Act 2003 (“the 2003 Act).

ANALYSIS

8. The Secretary of State is obliged each year to pay the prescribed amount,

increased by the appropriate percentage, to S4C under section 61 of the 1990 Act.

9. Monies received under section 61 of the Act “may be applied only for the

purpose” of S4C’s functions in relation to the provision of S4C’s public services.

S4C has no power to make payments of monies for other purposes. In my opinion,

therefore, S4C has no power to make voluntary payments of money received

under section 61 of the Act to the Department (whether for the purposes of

assisting with the government’s policy or otherwise). Parliament has imposed a

duty as to how monies received under section 61 of the Act are to be used. Those

monies are to be applied only for the purpose of S4C’s functions in relation to the

provision of public services, i.e. the provision of S4C, S4C Digital and services

authorised under section 205 of the 2003 Act. There is no provision for S4C to

make voluntary payments to the Department for other purposes.

10. Separately and in addition, the proposal whereby the Secretary of State would

seek to effect a cut in the amount provided to S4C by making payment of the

prescribed amount and then arranging for part of that to be repaid voluntarily

would not, in my opinion, be consistent with the statutory framework set out in

section 61 and 61A of the Act. Parliament has prescribed a funding mechanism

which involves payment of the prescribed amount (the amount received in 1997

or a greater amount) increased by the appropriate percentage. S4C must keep that

money in a separate fund and apply that money only for the purposes of the

provision of public services. It would not be consistent with that framework for

the Department or S4C to enter into arrangements intended to ensure that less

than the money contemplated by Parliament as being necessary for the provision

of S4C’s public services would be provided.

CONCLUSIONS

11. In summary, therefore, S4C has no power to make voluntary payments of money

to the Department from monies provided by the Department to S4C. Monies

received under section 61 of the Act may only be used for the provision of public

services as defined in the 2003 Act and not for making voluntary payments to the

Department.

Hear ye! Hear ye!

Cyhoeddwyd Mehefin 16, 2010 gan Rhiannon Michael. Dim sylw.

Tagiau: cheryl gillan, Llafur, peter hain, refferendwm

Does dim amheuaeth ar ol bore ma. Mae Llafur wrth eu boddau i fod mewn gwrth-blaid yn San Steffan. Nid bod y rhai oedd yn dychan y Ceidwadwyr ar risiau’r Senedd yn y Bae bore ma mewn gwrth-blaid -nhw yw prif blaid y Llywodraeth yng Nghymru wrth gwrs -ond fyddai neb yn eich beio chi am feddwl eu bod nhw.

Rhys Williams*, cyn ddarpar ymgeisydd y blaid yn Nwyrain Caerfyrddin a Dinefwr oedd wyneb yr ymgais ddiweddaraf i ddifrio’r Ysgrifenydd Gwladol Cheryl Gillan sydd yn annerch y siambr am y tro cyntaf heddiw yn ei rol newydd. “Clywch Clywch, mae’r Llywodraethwr Gillan wedi dod i Gymru i roi gwerth i’n bywydau bach di-nod ni!” oedd bloedd Rhys.

Bydd aelodau Llafur, Alun Davies yn eu mysg, yn cymeryd y cyfle’r prynhawn ma i gollfarnu Cheryl Gillan am ohirio’r refferendwm tan flwyddyn nesaf ac am bob mathau o ffaeleddau eraill. Ddylai neb amau am eiliad y byddai Llafur wedi delifro ar beth wmbreth o bethau pe baen nhw wedi aros mewn llywodraeth. Refferendwm yn yr hydref? Dim problem!

Howld on…. dim ond Gorffennaf llynedd dywedodd Peter Hain wrtha i “Dw i ddim yn credu bod [refferendwm] yn mynd i ddigwydd o fewn 18-20 mis. Allwch chi ddim ennill refferendwm bryd hynny.” Felly ydyn ni wir fod credu, 11 mis yn hwyrach, y byddai wedi newid ei feddwl?

*chi’n ei gofio fe -fe ddywedodd yn Barn ei fod e’n casau’r Cymry Cymraeg