Diolch, Lywydd. A gaf i ddiolch i bawb sydd wedi cyfrannu i’r ddadl ei hunan ac a gaf ddweud ar y dechrau ein bod ni’n cefnogi, ar y meinciau hyn, gynnig Plaid Cymru ac yn gwrthod gwelliant y Torïaid?

A gaf i ddechrau gan ddelio â rhai o’r pwyntiau y gwnaeth Steffan Lewis eu codi ynglŷn â phlismona? Wel, rŷm ni o blaid datganoli plismona. Mae’n wir i ddweud, yn San Steffan yr wythnos hon, fod y Blaid Lafur wedi ymatal, ond dim ond o achos y ffaith ein bod ni’n credu bod hwn yn rhywbeth a ddylai gael ei ddelio ag e o dan Fesur Cymru, ac nid o dan Fesur arall. Pam na ddylai pobl Cymru gael yr un hawliau â phobl yr Alban, Gogledd Iwerddon, a hyd yn oed pobl Llundain? Nid wyf erioed wedi clywed unrhyw ddadl sydd yn cefnogi pam dylai hynny digwydd.

Wrth gwrs, ynglŷn ag awdurdodaeth, mae sawl siaradwr wedi siarad am hynny, a’r ffaith bod awdurdodaeth yn rhywbeth sydd â ‘mystique’, fel y dywedodd Mick Antoniw, ond mae’n rhywbeth sydd yn hollol arferol: lle mae gyda chi gorff sydd yn pasio deddfwriaeth, mae awdurdodaeth yn tueddu i ddilyn yn awtomatig. Nid felly mae wedi bod yng Nghymru, ond felly mae wedi bod ym mhob rhan arall o’r byd, ac nid wyf yn deall pam ddylai Cymru fod yn wahanol, felly.

In terms of the Bill itself, well, it’s an improvement on the previous Bill. It was a low bar that the previous Bill had set. Let’s remind ourselves—the issue with the single jurisdiction came into focus because the obsession with preserving the jurisdiction was so strong under the previous Bill that it actually reversed the devolution process back before 1999 in some instances. Now we have before us a Bill that has potential but needs a lot of work. There’s a great deal of detail in the Bill that needs to be examined. We are already in the process of doing that, although I’m concerned about the timetable that’s been allocated for the Bill within the House of Commons—apparently two days in committee is going to be allocated. That causes us great concern. This can’t be rushed because this is a fundamental change in the devolution structure that needs proper scrutiny and should not be rushed, then, through the House of Commons.

There are some areas where there appear to be anomalies. For example, most of the criminal law will be devolved, the law on public order will be devolved, and yet alcohol licensing will not be devolved. One of the reasons given to me why licensing couldn’t be devolved was because of public order. Public order will be devolved. Teachers’ pay and conditions—there is already an agreement in principle to devolve that, yet it appears on the face of the Bill as something that would be reserved. If it stays there, then in order to devolve those powers, as agreed to this institution, there would need to be an Act amending the Bill in its current form.

Then, of course, we have the justice impact test and the justice impact assessments, which appear to serve no purpose at all other than to provide an exercise for Government to assess what a particular Bill means for the justice system. And then nothing happens—it simply runs into the sand. I am not clear what possible reason those justice impact assessments are there for, nor what purpose they serve, because they don’t appear elsewhere in other devolution settlements.

When it comes to income tax, I’m not content that income tax devolution can occur without the consent of this Assembly. There would need to be, for example—and the Scots have done this—at least an agreement on the fiscal framework before that devolution takes place. I think that it’s important that there’s the consent of this elected Parliament, as it soon will be, I hope, on behalf of the people of Wales.

Can I turn to what Mark Isherwood said? [Interruption.]