Dydd Gwyl Dewi Hapus/ Happy St David’s Day

Pwyllgor Iaith Gymraeg - Language Legislation

Mae atlas newydd UNESCO, corff addysg y Cenhedloedd Unedig, wedi nodi bod angen mwy o help ar y Gymraeg fel y gall oroesi yn y ganrif hon. Atlas digidol ieithoedd y byd mewn perygl, gafodd ei gyhoeddi'r wythnos hon, sydd wedi dweud bod yr iaith yn "anniogel". Mae’r Cynulliad yn symud yn y cyfeiriad iawn a mae hynny yn adlewyrchu ewyllys da pobol Cymraeg a di-Gymraeg. Mi ddylwn ni gallu trafod a llunio deddfwriaeth yn yr Cynulliad am y ffordd orau ymlaen yn aeddfed a rhesymol a dim i droi yr iaith yn dadl wleidyddol. Mae agwedd draws bleidiol ar y iaith, ers 1980’au, wedi bod hanfodol i thyfiant yr iaith.

Mae rhai yn honni fysa fwy o deddfu iaith yn atal busnes yng Nghymru. Edrychwch ar yr tystiolaeth ar hyd a lled Ewrop, edrychwch ar Sbaen a lle mae'r ardaloedd fwyaf llwyddiannus yn economaidd ymhlith cymunedau ieithoedd llai, sef Catalonia a gwlad y Basg. Be sy gan rheini? Deddfa iaith llym, llymach o lawer na yng Nghymru. Ond ydi nhw llwyddiannus oherwydd y deddfau yna? Nag ydyn, ond dy nhw ddim yn methu oherwydd y deddfau hynny.

Os mae rhai yn dweud fod fwy o deddfu yn eithrio rhai sydd ddim yn ddwyieithog, dyna pam bod plant i fyny tan 14 yn gorfod dysgu y ddwy iaith. Mae’r gofyn am addysg cyfrwng Cymraeg yn cynyddu o flwyddyn i flwyddyn, felly mae rhaid ehangu a gwella addysg dwyieithog go iawn felly bydd pob plentyn yn gadael ysgol yn rhugl yn y dwy iaith. Mae’r ffaith bod 40% o blant dan 16 yn rhugl yn yr dwy iaith yn dangos llwyddiant addysg gyfrwng Cymraeg.

Sôn ydan ni am hawliau pobol. A beth bynnag yw eich dewis chi, os ydych chi eisiau wneud y peth yn Saesneg a chroeso gewch chi wneud o'n Saesneg. Ond os mae rwy’n eisiau wneud rhywbeth tro gyfrwng y Gymraeg yn gorfod gofyn o hyd, neu mae rwy'n ansicr pwy i ofyn, felly be mae'r deddf yn trio sicrhau fod cyrff cenedlaethol ag ambell i rhan o'r rhan o'r sector preifat fod hwnnw ar gael i ni os ydyn ni dymuno cael yr gwasanaeth. Dwi ddim yn sôn am rhyw ffurflenni mawr a chymhleth, ond allwch chi fynd yno a holi a sgwrsio hefo rwy’n yn Gymraeg. Cwmnïau mawr sydd yn cynnig gwasanaeth i'r cyhoedd, a mae hynny wedi cael ei ddeffinio a'i dderbyn ers 1993. Neu derbyn arian sylweddol gan yr trethdalwyr yna mae yna ofyniad arnyn nhw i ddelio hefo'r cwsmeriaid yn ei dewis iaith.

Mae yna lot o bethau ymarferol hefyd all yw wneud fel cael rhifau ffon yr gwasanaethu iaith Gymraeg i fod yn glir ag yn hwylus i’w cael. Achos os mae o'n arawahan i'r rhif Saesneg fydd hi'n anodd i bobol gofio nhw. Hen dadl ydi peidiwch a gwario ar dim byd ar y diwylliant Cymraeg mae gen ni ysbyty i godi. Da ni wedi clywed am hynny degawdau yn ôl a da ni wedi dod dros hynny, da ni wlad fwy aeddfed erbyn nawr. Ddylai bachu ar hwn a gweld y peth fel rhywbeth cadarnhaol a blaengar unlle rhywbeth negyddol. Mae’r iaith Gymraeg a'i hadfywiad parhaol yn destun balchder i bawb yng Nghymru, dim ots os ydynt yn medru'r iaith ai peidio. Mae'r ffaith y bydd pwerau deddfu dros yr iaith yn dod i Gymru yn gam pwysig arall a charreg filltir arall yn adfywiad yr iaith. Rwy'n obeithiol y bydd y Gymraeg, fel iaith fyw a siaredir yn eang, yno i'w chofleidio'n falch gan genhedloedd o Gymry'r dyfodol o ganlyniad i'r deddfu hyn ac ymdrechion pobl Cymru.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

To sustain Welsh as a living language, it has to more than just a language of the home and classroom; it needs to be used in our communities. The Welsh language faces extinction by the end of the century unless it is given help to survive, the United Nations warned on the 19th February. UNESCO, the UN’s cultural and educational arm, classified Welsh as “unsafe” in its Atlas of World Languages in Danger. The Assembly government is moving in the right direction, and that is a reflection of the desire among the people of Wales to see the language flourish. We should debate and legislate in the Assembly on the way forward in a mature and reasonable way and not to use the language as a political football. Development of cross-party consensus on the language, dating back to the 1980s, has been invaluable for Welsh to grow.

Bilingualism is too costly or will deter business some claim, but look at the evidence across Europe . Look at Spain for example. It’s no accident that the two areas with the strongest requirements for private companies – Catalonia and Basque – are the most successful economically among the communities of lesser spoken languages. And Quebec in Canada is another example, Montreal is a powerhouse of the North American economic sector. They have far more stringent legislation with regard to language than Wales has. Are these areas successful because of language laws? No but they are not failing because of these laws.

If some say it excludes those who are not bilingual, it is for that very reason why children up to 14 are required to learn both languages. The demand for Welsh medium education is outstripping supply and it is crucial to increase proper bilingual education so that not child will be left behind and all children leave school able to communicate in both languages in future. If Welsh wasn’t making any impact then reservations on compulsion would arise but the fact that the 40% of children in Wales a between the ages of 3 to 16 compulsory school years are fluent in Welsh and that the language is taking off shows the success of Welsh medium education.

This is simply about people’s rights. If you want to conduct something in English of course you are entitled to do that. However if you would like to speak Welsh you always have to ask or people are unsure who to ask and other such problems. So new legislation would I hope ensure that national bodies and a small sector of the private sector have a Welsh language service is available if you wish to use it. We are not talking about long, complicated official forms, but to be able to converse one to one. We are not talking about small or medium businesses but those large national companies or companies that receive large sums of money from the taxpayers then they should deal with their customers in their chosen language. There are practical things that need to be done like making sure the Welsh language telephone service line is seen next to the main English language service line, because if the two are separate it will be difficult for people to remember it. The Welsh assembly government should use this opportunity and see it a something positive and progressive rather than something negative. The Welsh language and its continuing revival is something that everyone in Wales can be rightfully proud of, regardless of whether or not they can speak the language. The fact that legislative powers over the it will now be coming to Wales is another important step forward. I am optimistic that thanks to this and the efforts of the people of Wales , Welsh, as a vibrant and widely spoken language will be there for future generations of all the people of Wales to proudly embrace.

Cymru 23 Lloegr 15 a Wrecsam 3 Grays 2

Penwythnos da i fod yn Gymro!

Pam dysgu Cymraeg? - Why learn Welsh?

Darn bach diddorol yn rhaglen 'Today' ar yr radio BBC 4, yn sôn am y cynnydd flynyddol o blant sy'n dysgu Cymraeg a Gaeleg. Ag am unwaith yn stori bositif

There was a piece on radio BBC 4 'Today' programme, about the rise in children learning Welsh and Gaelic. And for a change it is a positive piece, talking about the strong evidence how learning two languages early on gives you all kinds of social, educational and economical benefits. Professor David Reynolds, professor of education at Plymouth University and former adviser to the Department of Education, discuss if a different language gives children the edge over pupils who're being taught solely in English.

Dyma'r linc i'r safle we i wrando ar y sgwrs -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7885000/7885424.stm

George Monbiot v Hazel Blears

Mae George Monbiot, yn papur newydd Guardian mewn darn difyr yn barnu glweidydd Uber Nulabour, Hazel Blears, ar ei record o byth pledleisio yn erbyn yr llywodraeth ers 1997.

George Monbiot writes in the Guardian newspaper an interesting article abut the bombastic and arrogant uber Nulabour, Hazel Blears, on her record of never voting against the government since 1997.

http://www.monbiot.com/

Just what exactly do you stand for, Hazel Blears - except election?
George Monbiot The Guardian, Tuesday 10 February 2009 An open letter to Hazel Blears MP, secretary of state for communities and local government.

Last week you used an article in the Guardian to attack my "cynical and corrosive commentary". You asserted your political courage, maintaining that "you don't get very far in politics without guts, and certainly not as far as the cabinet table". By contrast, you suggested, I contribute "to the very cynicism and disengagement from politics" that I make my living writing about. You accused me of making claims without supporting evidence and of "wielding great influence without accountability". "We need more people standing for office and serving their communities," you wrote, "more people debating, engaging and voting; not more people waving placards on the sidelines."

Quite so. But being the placard-waving sort, I have a cynical and corrosive tendency to mistrust the claims ministers make about themselves. Like you, I believe opinions should be based on evidence. So I have decided to test your statements against the record. Courage in politics is measured by the consistent application of principles. The website TheyWorkForYou.com records votes on key issues since 2001. It reveals that you voted "very strongly for the Iraq war", "very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war" and "very strongly for replacing Trident" ("very strongly" means an unbroken record). You have voted in favour of detaining terror suspects without charge for 42 days, in favour of identity cards and in favour of a long series of bills curtailing the freedom to protest. There's certainly consistency here, though it is not clear what principles you are defending.

Other threads are harder to follow. In 2003, for instance, you voted against a fully elected House of Lords and in favour of a chamber of appointed peers. In 2007, you voted for a fully elected House of Lords. You have served without public complaint in a government which has introduced the minimum wage but blocked employment rights for temporary and agency workers; which talked of fiscal prudence but deregulated the financial markets; which passed the Climate Change Act but approved the construction of a third runway at Heathrow; which spoke of an ethical foreign policy but launched an illegal war in which perhaps a million people have died. Either your principles, by some remarkable twists of fate, happen to have pre-empted every contradictory decision this government has taken, or you don't possess any.
You remained silent while the government endorsed the kidnap and the torture of innocent people; blocked a ceasefire in Lebanon and backed a dictator in Uzbekistan who boils his prisoners to death. You voiced no public concern while it instructed the Serious Fraud Office to drop the corruption case against BAE, announced a policy of pre-emptive nuclear war, signed a one-sided extradition treaty with the US and left our citizens to languish in Guantánamo. You remained loyal while it oversaw the stealthy privatisation of our public services and the collapse of Britain's social housing programme, closed hundreds of post offices and shifted taxation from the rich to the poor. What exactly do you stand for Hazel, except election?

The only consistent political principle I can deduce from these positions is slavish obedience to your masters. TheyWorkForYou sums up your political record thus: "Never rebels against their party in this parliament." Yours, Hazel, is the courage of the sycophant, the courage to say yes. Let me remind you just how far your political "guts" have carried you. You are temporarily protected by the fact that the United Kingdom, unlike other states, has not yet incorporated the Nuremberg principles into national law. If a future government does so, you and all those who remained in the cabinet on 20 March 2003 will be at risk of prosecution for what the Nuremberg tribunal called "the supreme international crime". This is defined as the "planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression". Robin Cook, a man of genuine political courage, put his conscience ahead of his career and resigned. What did you do?
It seems to me that someone of your principles would fit comfortably into almost any government. All regimes require people like you, who seem to be prepared to obey orders without question. Unwavering obedience guarantees success in any administration. It also guarantees collaboration in every atrocity in which a government might engage. The greatest thing we have to fear in politics is the cowardice of politicians. You demanded evidence that consultations and citizens' juries have been rigged. You've got it. In 2007, the high court ruled that the government's first consultation on nuclear power was "seriously flawed" and "unlawful". It also ruled that the government must commission an opinion poll. The poll the government launched was reviewed by the Market Research Standards Board. It found that "information was inaccurately or misleadingly presented, or was imbalanced, which gave rise to a material risk of respondents being led towards a particular answer".

As freedom of information requests made by Greenpeace reveal, the consultation over the third runway at Heathrow used faked noise and pollution figures. It was repeatedly pre-empted by ministers announcing that the runway would be built. Nor did the government leave anything to chance when it wanted to set up giant health centres, or polyclinics, run by GPs. As Dr Tony Stanton of the Londonwide Local Medical Committees has pointed out, "a week before a £1m consultation on polyclinics and hospitals by NHS London closed, London's 31 primary care trusts were issued with instructions on setting up polyclinic pilots and GP-led health centres". Consultations elsewhere claimed that there was no need to discuss whether or not new health centres were required, as the principle had already been established through "extensive national level consultation exercises". But no such exercises had taken place; just a handful of citizens' juries engaging a total of a thousand selected people and steered by government ministers. Those who weren't chosen had no say.

Fixes like this might give you some clues about why more people are not taking part in politics. I believe there is a vast public appetite for re-engagement, but your government, aware of the electoral consequences, has shut us out. It has reneged on its promise to hold a referendum on electoral reform. It has blocked a referendum on the European treaty, ditched the regional assemblies, used Scottish MPs to swing English votes, sustained an unelected House of Lords, eliminated almost all the differences between itself and the opposition. You create an impenetrable political monoculture, then moan that people don't engage in politics.
It is precisely because I can picture something better that I have become such a cynical old git. William Hazlitt remarked that: "Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps; for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are and what they ought to be." You, Hazel, have helped to reduce our political choices to a single question: whether to laugh through our tears or weep through our laughter.

Yr Alban 13-26 Cymru

Dechrau da iawn, rwan ymlaen i'r gem fawr.

Very good start, now for the big one.

Ymlaen i Gaeredin - Forward to Edinburgh

Pob lwc i Cymru yn erbyn yr Alban