Constitution, Justice and External Affairs Committee

Moving on to item 4, then, I propose in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(vi) and (ix) that the committee resolves to exclude the public from the meeting in order to discuss matters relating to the internal business of the committee. Are Members content? Members are content.

Croeso'n ôl. Welcome back to this public item. We'll be taking evidence as part of our inter-institutional relations agreement inquiry. Can I welcome to the meeting Dr Hedydd Phylip from Cardiff University and Dr Elin Royles from Aberystwyth University? I understand that this is the first time you've come to committee to give evidence on the IIRA, so diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you for joining us. Members do have a number of questions, so we're going to take it in two sections, if that's okay. We're going to look at the overall structure first, and then the external affairs aspect. We do have quite a few questions, so we'll get started straight away. I'm going to bring in Gwyn Williams MS first.

Diolch yn fawr. Thank you very much. My name is Gwyn Williams. I'm the MS for Gŵyr Abertawe. I just wanted to ask quickly, if that's okay, about your opinion on the balance between Government confidentiality and inter-parliamentary transparency, and how this should be struck in the new IIRA.

Who would like to start us off?

Dwi'n mynd i siarad yn Gymraeg. Dwi'n meddwl bod hwn yn fater heriol. Mae o'n fater lle mae angen inni fod yn ystyried yn ddwys o ran cysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol. Pan rydyn ni'n edrych yn ehangach, rydyn ni'n gwybod pa mor heriol ydy parodrwydd gwahanol Lywodraethau i ddarparu gwybodaeth i ddeddfwrfeydd, boed yn rhai rhanbarthol neu genedlaethol, am faterion rhynglywodraethol, yn enwedig pan maen nhw'n ymwneud â materion allanol. Dwi'n meddwl bod yna ryw fath o gyfaddawd eithaf effeithiol wedi cael ei gyrraedd yn y fan hyn yn y cytundeb yma. Mae'r ffocws ar rôl Gweinidogion a strwythurau rhynglywodraethol ffurfiol, ac mae yna gydnabyddiaeth benodol o gyfrinachedd.

Mae yna rai achosion dwi wedi dod ar eu traws yn fy ymchwil lle rydych chi'n meddwl, 'Byddai'r Senedd wedi hoffi gwybod mwy am hyn a byddai wedi bod yn beth positif i'r Senedd gael gwybod mwy'. At ei gilydd, dwi'n meddwl bod elfennau fel y modd y mae'r Senedd yn gallu galw Gweinidogion i graffu arnyn nhw mewn sesiynau llafar ac yn y blaen sy'n gallu pontio rhai o'r bylchau yna. Dwi'n meddwl bod y cyfaddawd yn anodd o ran beth sy'n gallu cael ei rannu'n ysgrifenedig a defnydd sesiynau fel Gweinidogion yn rhoi tystiolaeth. Ac wrth gwrs, mae yna rai achosion wedi bod yn y Senedd ddiwethaf lle'r oedd yna ychydig, efallai, o amharodrwydd i ymddangos o flaen pwyllgorau ynghylch rhai pynciau fel materion rhyngwladol. Felly, mae'n rhyw gyfuniad o beth sydd ar gael yn ysgrifenedig, ochr yn ochr â gallu'r Senedd i alw pobl i roi tystiolaeth ac i holi a chwestiynu'n fwy manwl wedyn am rai materion.

Diolch yn fawr. Sori—gwnaf drosglwyddo i'ch cymydog i gael ateb nawr.

Diolch. I completely agree with everything that Elin has just said, and also just reflect on the fact that I would argue that it's probably for the Government to defend its position on confidentiality and for the Senedd to encourage the Government to be as transparent as it can in its dealings and its communications with you. So, I would be strongly in favour of encouraging a wording that gets you the most bang for your buck, if you like. And then, if there are concerns on the side of the Government about a particular meeting where certain things can't be shared, that those are then made clear in the correspondence that you get, or assurances made that some details can't be shared at this point in time but that they would be forthcoming later.

I think transparency at the end of the day that can give you a full picture of what's happened is what we're aiming for, and so that might be something that can only be achieved towards the end of a process that has led to maybe a legislative consent motion or secondary legislation being put before you or a conclusion of inter-governmental discussions. But I think at that point we would want to see how those things developed over time. I think the onus really is on the Government to be able to defend that position of confidentiality and that wording within the agreement that encourages the most transparency possible is what we should be aiming for.

Diolch. I'm just going to bring Sarah in, before I bring Gwyn in on a second question.

Diolch. Some of it quite often uses the phrase 'not practicable'. Rather than that being used quite often, when we see that notice was really slow or information was minimal, is there something in the wording that we could have so that, where it's not practicable, that should be by exception?

I think that's an interesting concept. I would worry that, with 'by exception', we're going maybe a little bit too far in the other direction, so that maybe what we're looking for is confirmation of that practicability, even, in the correspondence. Maybe you've seen the examples of the information that we get—sometimes it's just a sentence saying that these three issues were discussed. And then it doesn't even say, 'At the moment we can't give you any more information because of concerns about confidentiality'. Even acknowledging those concerns in that documentation would assist, I think, in the scrutiny of those discussions. So, I think it's about thinking about what you receive out of the agreement and how we can encourage the fuller picture to be unravelled—if not then, over time.

Gwyn.

Cyn ein bod ni'n symud ymlaen i'r ail gwestiwn, jest i gael dweud pa mor hapus ydw i i glywed bod y ddwy ohonoch chi ar ochr rhyddid a'n bod ni'n cael deall beth sy'n digwydd yn hytrach na gormod o gyfrinachedd. So, dwi'n ddiolchgar iawn am hynny.

I'll move on to the second question. Considering some of the structures in the previous IIRA don't exist anymore, what inter-governmental structures should be within the scope of this IIRA?

It's true that this inter-institutional agreement was agreed before the new inter-governmental structures were established. However, it is quite heartening that, despite those changes, we have had correspondence in relation to the IIRA that has recognised those changes in the inter-governmental arrangements. Of course, I'd encourage an up-to-date wording in the IIRA that relates to the new inter-governmental structures, but I'm heartened by the fact that we've managed to find out about those meetings, despite the out-of-date wording. I would maybe encourage the committee to think more broadly, and instead of naming specific committees you want correspondence from, thinking more broadly about the nature of inter-governmental discussions and whether we want to name things—formal, informal, ad hoc, bilateral. So, think about things so that it encompasses more than just the new inter-governmental structures, but that we are able to get the totality of interaction and engagement between the Welsh Government and the UK Government.

Oes yna bryder, os mae'r diffiniad yn rhy eang, bod gormod o wahanol strwythurau yn dod tu fewn i'r IIRA, wedyn? A ddylem ni, efallai, fod yn diffinio rhai ohonyn nhw, neu ydy e'n ddigon da i ddweud ein bod ni'n derbyn y rhan fwyaf?

Gwnaf i ateb yn Gymraeg. Rwy'n sicr o'r farn bod angen enwi'r strwythurau newydd o fewn y strwythur rhynglywodraethol newydd. Ond fyddwn i ddim eisiau colli allan ar gyfarfodydd pwysig sydd yn digwydd, lle rŷn ni'n gweld y Llywodraethau yn dod i benderfyniad ar hyn a'r llall ag arall, ond oherwydd nodyn technegol o fewn y cytundeb yma, dŷn ni ddim yn cael gwybod amdanyn nhw. A dwi ddim yn credu mai gormod o wybodaeth yw'r peth y dylem ni boeni amdano; y peth dylem ni boeni amdano yw peidio â chael digon ohoni. Wedyn, mae'r onus arnoch chi, fel pwyllgor a'r Senedd yn ehangach, i ddefnyddio'r wybodaeth rŷch chi'n ei chael yn rhinwedd y cytundeb yma, er mwyn ei defnyddio hi yn eich craffu dydd i ddydd, fel bod y Llywodraeth yn deall bod yna werth mewn cyfathrebu gyda chi ar y materion yma, a bod yna oblygiadau i beidio hefyd.

Dwi'n meddwl mai un o gryfderau'r cytundeb cynt oedd y prif nodweddion gafodd eu sefydlu, sef y pwyslais ar strwythurau ffurfiol, er enghraifft, sydd wedi galluogi ymateb i'r newidiadau mewn cysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol, a beth sydd wedi cael ei weithredu ers yr adolygiad o gysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol. Ond beth rydyn ni'n ei weld ydy mai tuedd cysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol ym Mhrydain ydy peidio â defnyddio strwythurau ffurfiol. Felly, mae angen bod yn hyblyg i gynnwys o fewn y remit unrhyw bwyllgorau sy'n cael eu cynnal. Rydyn ni'n gweld Andy Burnham yn defnyddio'r National Economic Council i gynnull y Llywodraethau at ei gilydd yn lle'r prif strwythur IGR. Rydyn ni hefyd yn gweld y Council of the Nations and Regions yn cael ei gynnwys, a phethau fel y British-Irish Council, sydd yn barod wedi cael ei nodi.

Elfen arall roeddwn i eisiau ei godi efo chi fel pwyllgor oedd bod y ffocws wedi tueddu i fod ar yr elfen fertigol, y berthynas efo'r Llywodraeth ganolog, ond hefyd, wrth gwrs, beth rydyn ni'n ei weld mewn cysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol ydy'r elfen fwy llorweddol, a faint o sylw sy'n mynd i gael ei roi i unrhyw gyfarfodydd ffurfiol gyda Llywodraethau datganoledig sydd ddim yn mynd i gynnwys Llywodraeth San Steffan. Mae hynny'n debygrwydd llawer mwy amlwg yn y tymor yma. O fewn remit beth sy'n bodoli yn barod yn y cytundeb, gallech chi ragweld hwnnw'n dod o dan eich rôl chi mewn craffu a rôl Llywodraeth mewn gohebu gyda'r Senedd ynglŷn â chyfarfodydd, ac yn y blaen. Felly mae hwnna'n elfen arall newydd, efallai. Felly, at ei gilydd, dwi'n meddwl bod hynny'n bwysig.

Dwi'n meddwl un peth i godi ydy un o'r pethau cymhleth—. Dwi wedi ymwneud fwyaf ag edrych ar faterion Undeb Ewropeaidd, ac yn y maes yna, er enghraifft, mi oedd gan Weinidogion Cymru yr hawl i roi mewnbwn i'r Cyngor Partneriaeth UK-EU, ond roedden nhw ond yn arsylwyr. Yn ddigon dealladwy, mi wnaeth Lywodraeth Cymru, yn y tymor diwethaf, benderfynu stopio anfon Gweinidogion i'r Cyngor Partneriaeth, achos roedden nhw'n cael eistedd yna a dweud dim byd. Ond oherwydd hynny, mae wedi bod yn anoddach i'r Senedd graffu ar elfennau Undeb Ewropeaidd yn y remit yna, achos mae'n digwydd ar lefel y swyddogion. Felly, dwi'n meddwl bod yna gwestiwn i holi ynglŷn â ble mae pethau'n mynd o ran pan fydd y pwyslais ar ymwneud ar lefel swyddogion, achos mae'r ffocws yn gyfan gwbl ar hyn o bryd ar y meysydd lle mae Gweinidogion Cymru yn ymwneud mewn strwythurau ffurfiol, ond mae yna gymaint yn mynd ymlaen o dan hynny. Wrth gwrs, mae yna sgôp i'w drafod o, ond weithiau dydy'r elfen weinidogol ddim yn amlwg iawn o gwbl, ac mae hynna'n ei wneud o'n anoddach i chi fel Senedd i allu cael llawn ddealltwriaeth o beth sy'n digwydd.

Okay, diolch.

Diolch yn fawr. Rwy'n ddiolchgar i chi am yr ateb hwnnw, a'r ffaith bod hyblygrwydd yn bwysig i chi, mae'n hynod o bwysig i fi hefyd, a'n bod ni'n agored fel pwyllgor ac fel Senedd.

I will hand back to the Chair now, having completed my two questions. Thank you.

Diolch, Gwyn. Sarah.

Diolch. I'd like to come back to the wider terms of the current IIRA and have your view on how effective that is to enable scrutiny.

Dwi'n meddwl fy mod i wedi ateb eich cwestiwn chi'n barod dipyn bach. Dwi'n meddwl bod y termau ehangaf yn ddefnyddiol iawn. Dwi'n meddwl eu bod nhw wedi bod yn agile ar gyfer y cyfnod sydd wedi bod o ran y ffocws. Dwi wedi codi rhai cwestiynau rŵan ynghylch beth ydy goblygiadau peidio cael Gweinidogion yn rhan ohono fo. Wrth gwrs, mae'r pwyslais ffurfiol yn bwysig, ond mae yna lot yn digwydd o dan hynna. Hefyd, mae pethau fel y broses o adrodd wedi bod yn eithaf clir fel proses o'r hyn rydych chi wedi bod yn gofyn amdano fo.

Dwi wedi gweld llai o dystiolaeth o roi gwybod o flaen llaw i bwyllgorau fod cyfarfodydd rhynglywodraethol yn mynd i ddigwydd, a rhoi cyfle i ymgynghori. Beth rydyn ni wedi ei weld ydy cydymffurfio lot mwy efo'r elfennau eraill o adrodd yn ôl, ar ôl i bwyllgorau gael eu cynnal, a rhoi gwybodaeth. Dwi'n meddwl bod rhai elfennau yn y manylion, er enghraifft, mae Hedydd wedi cyfeirio at hwn yn barod. Efallai fod tuedd weithiau gan rai Gweinidogion jest i ddweud, 'Dyma'r tri pheth gafodd eu trafod', tra bod y cytundeb yn gofyn am fwy, yn gofyn am fwy o fanylder ynghylch beth oedd y pwyntiau a godwyd yn ymwneud â Chymru ac yn y blaen, a beth oedd y materion a godwyd. Beth rydyn ni'n ei weld ydy anghysonder ar draws yr adroddiadau ar bwyllgorau ynghylch materion fel yna.

Felly, mi oedd yna set o ohebiaeth wedi dod i'r Senedd cynt yn eithaf hwyr ym mis Mawrth 2026 ar nifer o'r fforymau rhyngweinidogol. Os ydych chi jest yn edrych ar gwpwl o'r rheini, rydych chi'n gweld y gwahaniaethau yma, enghreifftiau lle mae'n fater o jest dweud, 'Digwyddodd hyn', ac mi fydd yna communiqué yn dod gan Lywodraeth San Steffan sydd ddim efallai yn rhoi rhyw lawer i chi, ond wedyn enghreifftiau—. Er enghraifft, roedd yna un gan Mark Drakeford ar ôl bod mewn pwyllgor cyllid oedd yn hynod o fanwl. Dwi'n meddwl mai beth mae hynna'n ei ddangos i fi ydy o fewn remit eithaf clir sydd wedi cael ei osod, dydy'r lefel cydymffurfiaeth a beth mae hynny'n ei ddarparu i chi fel Senedd fel gwybodaeth ddim o reidrwydd yn gyson. At ei gilydd, fuaswn i ddim yn dweud bod angen gwella beth sydd yna, beth sydd angen, efallai, ar yr elfen yna ydy gwella'r cysondeb o ran lefel y wybodaeth sydd yn cael ei darparu.

I can only agree with what Elin has said in relation to the consistency point. There's a real variety in the breadth and the quality of the statements and the correspondence that the Senedd has received in relation to the variety of meetings that are held. Equally, the prior notice is either not forthcoming or with a couple of days. That does nothing if the committee has already met for that week, for example. That doesn't give anyone the chance to even send a letter. So, that is something that I think could be looked at.

But as Elin has said, sometimes it's not quick off the ground, but there is consistent correspondence after inter-ministerial meetings. But as I said earlier, there's a real lack of consistency as to the content of those letters and a lack of a complete picture being depicted in relation to what's discussed and what are the implications of those discussions for the Senedd for policy making, for law making. I'm more interested to work out how we get this information that allows Members and the general public to understand how decisions are made, why they are made, and how then we can hold people account for those decisions that are made. And thinking, therefore, about how those discussions feed into the other things that you do here, so, thinking about secondary legislation, thinking about primary legislation, thinking about legislative consent memoranda. There are very often inter-governmental discussions that are fed into those instruments in some way or another, and we only find out about that when those instruments are introduced, and it's not consistent that we find out how those instruments came about, to the extent that we know that they are the product of inter-governmental discussions, but we only know that, really, by piecing it together, piecing the jigsaw puzzle together, and making a few assumptions.

It would be really helpful to work out, when inter-governmental discussions are ongoing, what they are working towards. It's not just a policy area; is there guidance that they're working on? Is there secondary legislation that might be tabled in each of the legislatures to roll out this policy? Legislative consent is a really significant research area of mine. It's been a concern of your predecessor committee. We're seeing legislative consent memoranda coming thick and fast again this term. How are those discussions happening? Why are we getting these instruments through? I presume that there are inter-governmental decisions being made, but, again, we don't get told about that in those letters.

So, what I would like to see is thinking about this agreement, what we're asking for in the agreement, in the round, and how it assists scrutiny. Because it really necessitates you as Members, as committees, to pick up the baton, use the information that you get, and then chase that up, and then do the same thing when you get LCMs, do the same things when you get legislation coming through. How does this relate across the border? How does it relate to inter-governmental discussions? Are the decisions being made here restricted by agreements made inter-governmentally or not? These are all things that people deserve to know, because it gives us the full picture of how devolution works. So, yes, thinking about the thing in the round, where this agreement fits into that picture, I think is really crucial to the next steps.

Definitely. We had that experience on a committee yesterday of the difficulty in scrutinising an LCM when you don't have enough information to do so. So, I'd be interested in how you think that we could edit the terms of a new agreement to ensure that there is better consistency and a better standard of information provided.

Well, I would echo what I was saying about a reference to legislation, so thinking about outputs. So, are there discussions about secondary legislation? Are there discussions about common ways of working? Are there discussions about primary legislation? Is that primary legislation going to come through Westminster with an LCM to follow, or is that legislation going to come in each of the devolved places? I would really want a better link to be made between the outputs that we might be seeing and the content of those discussions, as a starting point.

Dwi'n meddwl bod nifer o'r problemau rwyt ti'n eu codi yn debygol iawn o fod yn codi oherwydd trafodaethau anffurfiol ar lefel gweision sifil sy'n mynd i fod yn trafod drafftio a goblygiadau LCMs. Felly, i fi, mae'r bwlch yn codi oherwydd bod y pwyslais fan hyn ar ymwneud gweinidogol lefel uchel ffurfiol, felly dydy'r meini prawf ar gyfer beth sy'n dod i chi ddim yn cynnwys yr elfennau anffurfiol hollbwysig yma. A dwi'n meddwl bod beth rwyt ti'n awgrymu o ran os oes yna oblygiadau deddfwriaethol i Gymru, neu oblygiadau i gymwyseddau Cymru, yn rili defnyddiol fel ffordd o ymestyn hyd a lled y math o wybodaeth ddylai fod yn cael ei rhannu er mwyn galluogi'r Senedd i fod yn fwy gwybodus ynglŷn â beth sy'n dod.

Just finally from me, coming to that point of scope, are there any, in your view, any key gaps and suggested further areas for inclusion?

Dwi'n meddwl eich bod chi eisiau siarad efo ni am gysylltiadau rhyngwladol a materion allanol, felly dwi'n meddwl bod hwnna'n dod â'r gwaith a wnaeth y pwyllgor allanol, neu'r pwyllgor a oedd efo'r remit allanol yn y Senedd ddiwethaf, i mewn i hyn hefyd. Dwi'n meddwl bod honno'n elfen berthnasol hefyd. Fel dwi wedi'i ddweud, dwi'n meddwl, o'r geiriad, fod yna sgôp yn barod i ystyried perthnasau ar draws Llywodraethau. Dwi'n meddwl bod yr elfen honno'n ddiddorol ac yn bwysig, a byddwch chi'n ei gweld hi, er enghraifft, mewn gwledydd eraill. Ond dwi ddim yn glir bod angen newid y remit i wneud hynny, achos mae'r pwyslais ar y rhynglywodraethol, ar y gweinidogol, yn mynd i ddal hynna beth bynnag. Mae jest yn ffordd o feddwl ychydig bach yn wahanol, ond efallai fy mod i'n anghywir. Ond, ie, dwi'n meddwl bod honno'n elfen a allai fod yn ddiddorol: beth sy'n digwydd rhwng y Llywodraethau datganoledig a beth ydy goblygiadau hynny ar gyfer deddfu yng Nghymru ac yn y blaen.

Yes, I would completely agree that matters arising under the trade and co-operation agreement, certain external affairs questions, which I'm sure we're going to get to in just a second, are something that we could think about. Also, I think reference to the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and common frameworks would be beneficially made somewhere on the face of the agreement, just because of the significance of those interactions with how the devolved project is able to go forward. And the nature of the discussions that occur between Governments on those issues could have a significant impact on the work that you do, so I think it would be beneficial to have greater information shared specifically on those issues.

Oh, sorry, Lynne.

Yes, I just wondered what you thought 'good' would look like, in that, obviously, there are the formal set piece inter-governmental meetings, but there are many, many meetings between Ministers that aren't within that sort of context, and some of them are very informal bilaterals. What would you think 'good' would look like in terms of having some sort of feedback to the Senedd on those? And obviously, from the Government's point of view, there are issues of confidentiality and things that wouldn't be shared between Ministers if they thought all the feedback was going to be given to the Senedd. I just wondered if you thought there was a good place to land on this.

Well, I think that there are a few things to consider, right? Maybe on those less formal things, it's less about, 'Can you tell us before you have a phone call and then after you've had a phone call?' Maybe it's more about a commitment to report every few months on the kind of engagement that's been had and on the topics discussed. So, it's less about wanting to have an eye on—. We wouldn't want to interfere with the way inter-governmental working was going, but equally I think it's completely acceptable to understand basically how devolution works—this is what we're talking about—and so how decisions are made. Because if those early discussions then lead to more concrete things, I think it's right for the Senedd to want to be able to understand the nature of those relationships, and for the general public and stakeholders and civil society.

Again, this is kind of what we're talking about with this agreement. This has an inherent benefit for Members in their scrutiny work, but also has a really important piece to play for transparency wider than that, for the general public and civil society as well. So, there might be something there about periodic reporting. It's difficult for us to give a name to it because we're not in those rooms, right? So, these informal discussions are things where you have to hope you get the name right, so that Ministers are able to understand when they need to tell us about it, kind of thing. It's tricky, the language, I agree, but I would then go back to my earlier point about needing to follow this stuff up in scrutiny sessions and in the scrutiny of the different instruments that you see, so that, over time, the idea is that you get a full picture of these discussions.

I think I would be perhaps a little more kind. I think I'm a little different to you on these points. I think the informal elements of inter-governmental relations are something that should be allowed to happen, at some level. I don't think we always need to know every time they have a phone call. And we need to consider whether what we need is more information on those issues when there are legal implications in terms of making legislation or implications in terms of the powers and competencies of Wales. And if we're trying to encapsulate all of those elements of inter-ministerial discussion and relations, there might be a lot there—. Well, I would hope there is a lot there. The risk is that there isn't enough dialogue, and what we want is more dialogue. And we don't want to hamper that dialogue either by having to report on it every time.

So, I do think that I respect some elements of the confidentiality of some of these meetings. Also, what I would ask you is, 'What does "good" look like?' I think we're starting from a very good place anyway. Of course, we're identifying issues here that need to be further developed, but we have a very firm foundation that's been set by this agreement, and I think that we're just refining it. And it's also an issue of responding to the nature of inter-governmental relations in the UK, which are quite informal, where the formal structures aren't used, and there's a great emphasis on informality. So, it's quite difficult to get this exactly right in terms of what you're looking for as a legislature, I think.

Diolch. We've got Josh next. I know we've picked up on some of this already, haven't we, Josh?

Yes, I think the formal and informal part has been dealt with, so moving on to—. Do you consider the current notice and summary requirements under the current IIRA are adequate for effective Senedd scrutiny? In particular, should advanced notices set out not simply the broad issues to be discussed, but the Welsh Government's objectives for the meeting? And should post-meeting summaries clearly state what outcomes were secured and what further action was agreed?

Os gwnaf i ddefnyddio'r enghraifft dwi'n gwybod mwy amdani, sef materion Ewropeaidd, dwi'n meddwl, mewn rhai o'r materion oedd yn wynebu'r Senedd ddiwethaf, nad oedd yna ddim strategaeth Ewropeaidd. Doedd yna ddim amlinelliad clir o beth oedd blaenoriaethau'r Llywodraeth, ac felly roedd hi'n anodd gwybod i ble yr oedd pethau'n mynd yn gyffredinol. Felly, dwi'n meddwl bod cael strategaeth neu syniad clir o beth ydy bwriadau'r Llywodraeth yn y man cyntaf yn lot o help i allu meddwl, 'Ocê, wel, beth ydy goblygiadau cysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol i elfennau o hyn?'

Beth wnaethon ni hefyd weld efo'r elfen Ewropeaidd oedd bod yna ddim llawer o ragrybudd yn cael ei roi i Lywodraeth Cymru beth bynnag ynglyn â chyfarfodydd. Ac felly, er bod y rheidrwydd yna—. Roedd hyn yn bennaf yn y cyfnod cynnar o gysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol, o dan y cytundeb a ddaeth i rym yn 2022. Roedden nhw'n cael cwpl o oriau, weithiau, cyn eu bod nhw'n gwybod bod cyfarfod yn mynd i gael ei gynnal. Felly, dwi'n poeni llai am gryfhau'r dyletswyddau i roi gwybod o flaen llaw. Beth dwi'n meddwl sy'n eithriadol o bwysig ydy'r dyletswyddau i adrodd, achos beth sy'n anodd deall efo rhai o'r pethau yma ydy: beth oedd blaenoriaethau Llywodraeth Cymru yn mynd i mewn i gyfarfod? I ba raddau wnaeth Llywodraeth San Steffan wrando, a beth sydd wedi digwydd wedyn? Mae'r broses yna'n rili anodd i'w gweld. Mae'n anodd i'w gweld mewn cyd-destun Ewropeaidd yn benodol, achos, wrth gwrs, mae o hefyd yn ymwneud efo Llywodraeth a chorff allanol ac yn y blaen—yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Ond dwi'n meddwl bod y broses yna o drio adnabod beth oedd graddau'r dylanwad, beth oedd y prif ofynion, y prif flaenoriaethau, i ba raddau wnaethon nhw lwyddo i gael llais a thrio dylanwadu ar safbwynt y Llywodraeth, a beth ddaeth o hynny—mae hwnna'n rili anodd. Ac felly dwi'n meddwl bod unrhyw fodd o gryfhau—a dŷn ni wedi cyfeirio'n barod at fanylder yr adroddiadau sy'n dod i law—yn eithriadol o bwysig.

Dwi wedi gwneud sylwadau yn fanna ar y broses yn gyffredinol, ond dwi'n meddwl bod yna elfennau penodol o ran yr ymwneud Ewropeaidd hefyd. Oherwydd bod perthnasau masnachu ac yn y blaen efo'r Undeb Ewropeaidd mor bwysig, mae yna lot o ddiddordeb gennym ni mewn deall yn iawn i ba raddau mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn gallu dylanwadu, ac mae hwnna'n eithriadol o anodd ar hyn o bryd. Mae rhai elfennau efallai yn gallu cryfhau yn y cyd-destun yma, ond mae'r cyd-destun ehangach o brosesau rhynglywodraethol yn ei wneud o'n eithaf anodd.

I completely agree. I really like that idea of thinking about what the Government policy is—do you already know about it? And if you already know about it, then you have a good inclination of what they might want to discuss in that meeting. So, what becomes more important are the outcomes and whether you get a good summary. And we've already discussed the kind of weaknesses and the summaries that we've had to date, or the lack of consistency, then, in the content of what we've already seen, and then, yes, the lack of Government policy, or lack of clarity in relation to what the Government might want in a certain policy area. That makes that warning, and the content of the warning, even more important then, doesn't it, because you want to have an idea of what they might discuss, and the significance of those meetings.

In relation to the kind of less formal interactions that exist outside of the proper structures, I think we could probably make a good best guess as to why they're there, why the Governments are in the room, in relation to the structures of the inter-governmental relations review, the inter-ministerial committees, because they are standing committees. It may be more useful to press for pre-warning of more ad hoc structures, because something would have triggered those engagements, something would have triggered the need for bilateral or inter-governmental meetings outside of those structures. And so I would argue that maybe notice of the intent, why are they meeting, in that respect is maybe more significant than the kind of clearer structures in the inter-governmental, inter-ministerial sphere.

I said earlier about the quality of the summaries. I would probably, here, say a word about how we make sure that we know what's been communicated. And so I think there is a job of work to think about what happens to the products of the inter-ministerial, inter-institutional agreement when you receive them. So, we know that they feature on the committee agendas. It would be for a policy-specific committee to take notice of the correspondence in relation to individual policy areas, and this committee has this wonderful oversight job of working out how things are working in the round.

This information, on the Senedd website, and elsewhere, is not always very clear. I would advocate thinking about being able to kind of thematically sort this information, making sure that information in relation to inter-ministerial meetings sits alongside other information that you receive, so that the good work of the agreement is then not lost in the quagmire of webpages. I'm a bit of a geek; I love spending a lot of time on the Senedd website, but others maybe don't. And so I think greater signposting of the information that you do have would also really assist in the scrutiny process, and in appreciating what you have, so that, again, going back to that cyclical way of looking at things, when you do have a Minister in front of you, when you have a policy in front of you, you also, as Members, know where to go to to find that information that you need to perform that better scrutiny.

Diolch. John.

Thank you. Could you please expand on the requirement for new inter-governmental agreements within the IIRA, please? Is there any requirement for new agreements within the IIRA?

I'm not quite sure exactly what you mean. Do you mean the update of it, to take into account the review of inter-governmental relations, or—?

I assume you've already covered part of this, but is there anything else you think should be covered by the IIRA?

Efallai ein bod ni wedi cyfro hyn yn barod, achos beth dŷn ni wedi dweud ydy fod yna rai prif nodweddion yn cael eu dweud ynglŷn â beth ydy’r fforymau sydd i fod ynddo fo. A beth dŷn ni wedi dweud ydy ein bod ni’n meddwl bod o’n ddigon hyblyg i gwmpasu unrhyw fforymau newydd.

Yn bersonol, dwi’n meddwl mai’r eglurder o ran remit yn gyffredinol sy’n bwysig, fel ein bod ni’n gallu ymateb i unrhyw newidiadau sy'n dod mewn cysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol wrth iddyn nhw ddigwydd, yn lle meddwl, 'Mae’n rhaid inni gael wedi'u rhestru yn union pob un.' Os dŷn ni’n penderfynu ar beth ydy hyd a lled beth dŷn ni eisiau—ai dim ond pethau sydd efo ffocws gweinidogol, neu ai dim ond strwythurau ffurfiol ac yn y blaen? Felly, hwnna sy'n bwysig, dwi'n meddwl, achos gallem ni gael rhestr hir iawn a siŵr o fod fe fyddai yna rywbeth arall yn codi.

Ar hyn o bryd, does yna ddim cysondeb da yn y ffordd mae'r prif strwythurau'n cael eu defnyddio, neu, yn aml ar hyn o bryd, beth dŷn ni'n gweld ydy prif gyfarfod y strwythur newydd yn cael ei ychwanegu at gyfarfod arall efo nodyn bach, yn hytrach na chryfhau, efallai, y strwythurau canolog. Dŷn ni ddim yn gallu rheoli sut mae cysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol yn cael eu gweithredu gan Lywodraeth ganolog, felly rhywbeth sy'n ddigon eang i gwmpasu beth sy'n digwydd sydd fwyaf pwysig, dwi'n meddwl.

Yes, I would agree with that. I would also say that at the start of the IIRA, there's a section that's not part of the IIRA, but it refers to the communication of information in relation to statutory instruments made by the UK Government in devolved areas with the consent of the Welsh Government. I think this is a really important facet, a really important element, and that an addendum at the start of the IIRA is, I think, weak. So, I would encourage Members to think about moving that to the body of the agreement as testament to the importance of that process, because the UK Government enacting any sort of legislation in devolved areas is something that we would want to have an eye on, because that allows us to have a better picture, as I said before, of how devolution works. So, a commitment, a real commitment, to that information should be on the face of the agreement, as opposed to in the addendum beforehand.

Having said that, I know that information has been trickling through quite well, so it's not necessarily a comment on the quality of the information that we have been getting under the agreement, but more of a reflection on the importance of that element, and that we wouldn't want to lose that in a future draft.

Okay. Thanks, John. Lynne.

I wanted to talk a bit more about record-keeping, not from the Senedd point of view, but from the Government point of view. There is a website, but I understand not all information is on the website, so it's just really to get your comments on how that could be improved.

Felly, mae ochr gwefan Llywodraeth Cymru yn cynnwys y cytundeb yma ac yn canolbwyntio ar yr adroddiadau blynyddol ar gysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol, a dwi'n meddwl eu bod nhw'n ddefnyddiol hefyd—dŷn ni ddim wedi cyfeirio atyn nhw—achos beth dŷn ni'n cael ganddyn nhw ydy'r gorolwg mawr yma o sut mae pethau'n mynd at ei gilydd, yn eu cyfanrwydd, yn y manylion. Dwi'n meddwl eu bod nhw'n chwarae rôl bwysig. Maen nhw'n rhoi cyfle i Lywodraeth y dydd roi blas i ni. Wrth gwrs, dŷn nhw ddim yn mynd i ddweud popeth yn uniongyrchol, ond dŷn ni yn cael teimlad eithaf da ohonyn nhw o ble mae'r tensiynau, ble mae'r anawsterau.

Ond y tu hwnt i'r adroddiadau blynyddol yna, mi fyddai yna sgôp i gynnwys y wybodaeth ynghylch yr holl bwyllgorau rhyngweinidogol maen nhw'n mynychu, a bod y datganiadau ysgrifenedig sy'n cael eu rhyddhau oherwydd y cytundeb yma yn cael eu cwmpasu yma. Fe wnes ti, Hedydd, awgrymu y gallai'r Senedd, efallai, eu rhoi nhw mewn un lle, ond mae'r un potensial yn bodoli i'r Llywodraeth. So, mae gan y Llywodraeth ganolog, er enghraifft, un gwefan ar inter-governmental relations, a beth sydd gennych chi yn fanna ydy pob un o bwyllgorau'r inter-ministerial groups ac yn y blaen, a'r strwythur yna, a dŷch chi'n gallu mynd i'r communiqués i bob un ohonyn nhw o fanna. Mae yna werth cael un gwefan ar ochr y Llywodraeth hefyd a fyddai'n cwmpasu mwy o'r pethau yma.

Efallai gwnawn ni ddod maes o law hefyd i faterion rhyngwladol, ond un o'r pethau y gwnaeth un o'r pwyllgorau cynt, wrth edrych ar yr elfen ryngwladol, oedd adnabod y bwlch o ran gwybodaeth am gytundebau allanol efo gwledydd eraill. Ac eto, mae yna le i ddod â'r elfennau yma ynghyd, pa un ai fel rhan o'r un wefan ar gysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol neu yn rhywle reit agos i hynny, fel bod yr elfennau y tu hwnt i Gymru yn gallu cael eu cwmpasu mewn un lle ac yn hygyrch ac yn weladwy.

I agree with that. Having this stuff accessible is half the battle because it's not transparent otherwise. So, it's completely fair to think about whether it's a conversation between the Senedd and the Government as to where this stuff is housed. I think there's a role for both websites, if I'm honest, because of the scrutiny element for the Senedd, but definitely for the Welsh Government. It's a bit surprising—it's not surprising in the context of how these things are usually done—but it is surprising given that this work is done to produce this information, and then it surely is a small thing to then make sure that it's uploaded and accessible on the website.

Okay. Thank you. You referred to the annual report and you said you think that that has some value. I just wondered if you could tell us a bit about how you think that could be built on and improved?

Dwi'n meddwl mai'r craffu o'u cwmpas nhw sy'n rili bwysig. Dwi'n meddwl bod yna lot o wybodaeth sylfaenol yn y math hwn o adroddiad. Rydyn ni wedi siarad am rai o'r materion manwl ynglŷn âg elfennau yn ymwneud â deddfwriaeth. Oes yna le i gryfhau yn fanna, ond bod yna sicrwydd bod yna ddull effeithiol o graffu ar yr adroddiadau yna? Beth rydyn ni wedi'i weld yn ymarferol, er enghraifft, ydy bod sesiynau craffu ar y Prif Weinidog wedi bod yn fforwm sydd wedi cael ei ddefnyddio'n effeithiol gan y Senedd ddiwethaf, er enghraifft, er mwyn craffu ar y materion yma. Ond mae angen y cysondeb yna, bod pob Gweinidog yn fodlon, neu pob Gweinidog a sesiynau craffu ar y Prif Weinidog, er enghraifft, yn fodlon trafod mewn manylder y materion yma.

Yes. I don't want to say I'm negative about the annual reports, but maybe I'm a little bit more pessimistic about them than Elin. I mean, they call them 'annual' reports, but we haven't always had them annually and 'annual' can mean up to a year later. So, that in itself, for me, is a little bit problematic, especially if we think that what the report is doing is, essentially, summarising the information they already have. I don't quite understand why it takes a whole year to summarise all that information and then put a paragraph at the start saying, 'How do we feel about inter-governmental relations right now?' I'm being a little bit flippant, but, again, it's about what we're asking. It's definitely about how we're scrutinising it and how we're following up with the Government about these things, but I would expect an annual report to be that—to be annual. And if it is a summary, then I would like, maybe, a better understanding, really, of how that whole picture is looking, because it refers generally just to the inter-governmental discussions. I talked a lot about outputs earlier in the session and I do really want to know how these things relate to legislation, how they relate to LCMs, how they relate to statutory instruments, so that we get the full picture and how effective those discussions are so that we are able to really understand how things work.

Thank you.

Okay. I'm going to move on to the external affairs element. I'm just mindful of time and we've got a couple of Members who haven't had a chance to contribute, so I'm going to change things around. I'll bring Darren in first, then Nick, and then Sarah if we've got time, if that’s okay? Darren.

Can I just ask you about the recent summit in Cardiff, which was an example of inter-governmental discussions? Obviously, the Senedd wasn't informed far in advance about those discussions or the nature of the discussions; a copy of the communiqué was only shared with Members of the Senedd afterwards. Do you have any views on whether that was in keeping with the spirit of the inter-institutional agreement that is currently available?

Well, it's difficult, isn't it, because the title is 'inter-institutional agreement', but what it's traditionally been about is inter-governmental relations between the UK Government and the Welsh Government. But we've talked a lot today about those other elements, those other relationships, and so maybe what we need is an inter-institutional—. We're kind of renaming the tin so that we have a broader concept of the things that we expect to know about and the reasons why we want to know about them. So, the reasons why we want to know about them is because they might affect policy-making decisions and the ability of this Senedd to scrutinise and to legislate. So, I want us to be really clear about the differences in the constitutional significance, if you like, of inter-governmental relations between the UK Government and Welsh Government, and also other sorts of inter-governmental discussions that have different sorts of implications. They are significant, but they are different constitutionally. And so, maybe an inter-institutional, an IIRA, that kind of has two chapters, if you like, would better reflect those two elements. I don't know if that's helpful.

Yes, I mean, you touched earlier on, and so did you, Dr Royles, about the importance of the EU relationship as well, going forward, and making sure that that's incorporated somehow into a future IIRA. But, obviously, there are bilateral agreements between, sometimes, regional Governments and the Welsh Government, or national Governments and the Welsh Government beyond the UK, but it took everybody by surprise the fact that a summit had been convened. It didn't just happen overnight; clearly, it had been planned for some time. And actually, alongside the summit, of course, there was published a co-operation agreement between the Scottish and Welsh Governments, which, again, was sprung upon everybody and has not been subject to any kind of scrutiny since. It just seems to me to be wanting in terms of the levels of scrutiny available to the Senedd because of the lack of discussion and courtesy, really, from the Government, to inform anybody in advance of those discussions or what was going to be on the agenda. So, do you agree with Dr Phylip about the need for an IIRA to encompass such meetings—ad hoc meetings I think you referred to earlier on, as well—about the need for those to be encompassed in any future agreement?

Ie, tri pheth, efallai, i drio bod yn gyflymach. Yn gyntaf, dwi'n meddwl bod yr elfen o adrodd ar bwyllgorau yn bwysicach na rhagwybod am y pwyllgorau. Mewn lot o wledydd ffederal, buasem ni ddim yn yr un mindset ag ydym ni rŵan. Rydyn ni'n meddwl am IGR jest fel hyn, tra bod IGR yn gweithio y ddwy ffordd. Felly, i fi, gallwn ni ddehongli, ac roeddwn i'n darllen hwn ac roeddwn i'n meddwl, 'Na, mae hwn yn cwmpasu y ddwy elfen. Mae hwn yn barod yn cwmpasu'r potensial yma'. Felly, dwi ddim o reidrwydd yn meddwl bod angen dau IIRA. Gallwch chi gael yr un peth yn yr un un. Y cwestiwn, i fi, o gwmpas y gynhadledd gafodd ei chynnal oedd: oedden nhw yna yn eu cyfrifoldeb gweinidogol a'i peidio, neu a oedd hi'n cael ei chynnal fel arweinwyr y pleidiau? Hwnna, efallai, sy'n dal corff fel chi allan ynglŷn â beth ydy'r lefel adrodd sy'n gorfod digwydd. Ond mae llwyr botensial i fod yn craffu ar y math yna o ddigwyddiad, os ydyn nhw yna yn eu cyfrifoldeb gweinidogol, a disgwyl cael adrodd ar beth ddigwyddodd. Felly, at ei gilydd, fy nealltwriaeth i ydy bod beth sydd gennym ni'n barod yn gallu cwmpasu hynna, er nad ydym ni wedi bod yn meddwl yn y termau yna achos rydyn ni'n meddwl jest am yr elfen yma drwy'r amser.

I mean, I accept that an attempted defence about the summit being convened was that it was between political party leaders, rather than Governments, but we do know that, alongside the summit, there was this other agreement that was also put on the table. And, obviously, there have been bilateral agreements with Ireland, Baden-Württemberg, Quebec, and all sorts of other places. My own personal view is that they should be encompassed within the agreement.

Can I ask you a little bit, as well, just about the UK emissions trading scheme, which is, obviously, quite a moot point at the moment, because of the pressure that industry has been facing from energy costs. That's not specifically referenced in the IIRA, but, clearly, the Welsh Government has a seat at the table within the UK emissions trading scheme authority and can influence the decisions that are taken by the UK as a whole, with the individual seats around that table, in terms of the direction of policy on that. Is that something that you think should be subject to the IIRA, with regular reports in advance about the issues specifically to be discussed? There are legislative implications—

Mae Hedydd wedi codi'r fframweithiau cyffredin yn barod, ac mae'r fframweithiau cyffredin yn rhan o'r strwythurau rhynglywodraethol. Felly, fy nealltwriaeth i ydy bod remit yr IIRA yma yn ddigon eang i fod yn cynnwys hynna, ac yn sicr y dylai fod yna ragwybodaeth yn cael ei rhoi, neu fod yna ohebu efo pwyllgorau ynglŷn â beth sy'n digwydd. Dyma le dwi'n meddwl y gallem ni fynd yn rili styc, a dweud, 'Ydyn ni eisiau rhestru bob un dim', neu, yn y pen draw, os ydy'r fframweithiau cyffredin yma mewn lle, ac yn y blaen, yna bydd y rhain yn rhan o beth ydy disgwyliadau'r Senedd a beth mae'r Llywodraeth yn adrodd yn ei gylch.

I think I mentioned earlier the common frameworks. If I'm remembering correctly, the emissions trading scheme does have a common framework element. So, in reference to what I said before, I think common frameworks are significant enough in terms of how they frame inter-governmental discussion to warrant explicit mention in a new revised IIRA, which would then encompass discussions like those that you just mentioned.

And one final thing, if I can come in with this: obviously, the current agreement places lots of obligations on the Government, but not a huge number of obligations on the Senedd itself, right? It's all about the Government sharing information with the Senedd. You've already referenced that it's difficult sometimes to navigate even the Senedd's website, and how it's scrutinising the outcome of the things that are published by the Government and the information that's been shared by the Government. So, two questions about this. Obviously, the Senedd itself has inter-parliamentary relationships with all sorts of different bodies. To what extent do you think that they ought to be also a vehicle for inter-governmental scrutiny or inter-parliamentary scrutiny of the Governments, if you like, that also interface with those inter-parliamentary bodies? And secondly, we were discussing earlier the status of the agreement and the fact that it's effectively an agreement that is negotiated between a Senedd committee and the Government, and that there's no seal of approval, if you like, from the Senedd as a whole to say that the Senedd subscribes to the agreement in full. Do you think that it's important that that should take place at some point in the future? So, the endorsement and then the inter-parliamentary relationships that we have, and how they can help the scrutiny process.

I'll take your second question first. As part of that scrutiny cycle thing that I was talking about earlier, I think it's really important to have buy-in not just from this committee but from all committees. There's a policy-specific aspect to all of this, and then there's that oversight thing. So, we would want to see good inter-committee relationships in relation to how the IIRA is working, going forward, and how committees are using that information in their scrutiny. We would want to see evidence of that rolling through and on the website, and so on and so forth. And there's nothing, I don't think, stopping you from introducing a motion as a committee or as a Member to approve the IIRA; that would, of course, strengthen it. But I can't imagine that Members would have an issue with the content of this: 'Oh no, don't give me any more information.' I don't think they'd have that reaction to it. So, I would wholeheartedly say 'why not?' to that question.

On inter-parliamentary relations, thank you for the question. It's something that I'm really, really passionate about, and I think it's imperative. This is the start of a new Senedd, an opportunity to get the inter-parliamentary forum back up and running. It didn't meet last year; it met in 2025 previously. It has been an informal ad hoc meeting between parliamentarians. It has slightly lacked direction. Inter-governmental working is one of the things that has been most discussed in the forum, but it lacks the capacity to do scrutiny, if you like, and that's normal because it's an ad hoc arrangement. I gave evidence to the Scottish committee this time last year and said the same thing. There is a job of work to be done for the Parliaments to get together to work out what they want to see out of inter-parliamentary working, what works for them in terms of the individual parliamentary traditions of each of the legislatures to get the most out of that forum, because everyone's short of time, it requires a little bit of travel and it requires some thinking as to how we make the most out of that. But I don't see a negative in inter-parliamentary working. The extent to which it can be actively used for active scrutiny, I think, is a moot point. And that just requires parliamentarians from each of the legislatures to get their heads together to work out what's possible, what the resourcing implications are, and so on and so forth. But I'd be really happy to come in and talk to you about inter-parliamentary relations to death at another point in time, if you want.

As well as that body, there's the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and all sorts of other engagements, aren't there?

Dwi'n meddwl y byddwn i'n gwahaniaethu yn y fan yna efallai rhwng ble mae'r fforymau lle mae modd i Seneddau'r Deyrnas Unedig ddod at ei gilydd ar gyfer pwrpasau deall oddi wrth ei gilydd ynglŷn â sut mae cysylltiadau rhynglywodraethol yn gweithio, y potensial ar gyfer cyd-graffu, a hefyd wedyn mae yna, os liciwch chi, gysylltiadau rhyngwladol Senedd Cymru. Mae hwnna'n fater ychydig bach yn wahanol—trwy'r CPA, ac yn y blaen—o ran yr ymwneud rhyngwladol. Felly, efallai bod angen rhywbeth ychydig yn wahanol ar gyfer y ddau. Ond dwi'n meddwl, er enghraifft, efo perthynas Prydain â'r Undeb Ewropeaidd, rydyn ni'n gweld bylchau yn nylanwad Senedd Cymru, ac mi fyddai'r berthynas yna efo Senedd San Steffan a chraffu rhwng deddfwrfeydd yn gallu bod yn ddefnyddiol iawn tuag at daclo hwnna. So, mae hwnna'n elfen arall yn y jig-so mawr yma.

Diolch yn fawr.

Diolch. I'm just mindful of time. I want to bring in Nick, and then maybe if I ask Sarah just to think about anything we haven't covered in her final questions.

Diolch yn fawr. It's been touched on previously, but one of the things I understand the last committee raised most frequently with the Government was being notified of international treaties. I just wondered whether you think that international milestones should be included within the scope of the IIRA, and perhaps are there ones that are more significant than others that should be included.

Dwi'n meddwl bod un o'r pwyllgorau yn y Senedd gynt, y pwyllgor oedd yn ymwneud â materion rhyngwladol, wedi gwneud lot o waith da a defnyddiol i chi yn y fan hyn, felly buaswn i'n ymwneud efo hwnna mwy, achos maen nhw'n rhoi pwyslais ar adrodd yn rheolaidd.

Mae dwy elfen, dwi'n meddwl: un ydy adrodd ar berthnasau rhyngwladol. Dwi'n meddwl, o gymryd persbectif hanesyddol ar hwn i gyd, doedd hwnna ddim yn arfer bod yn gymaint o broblem. Dwi'n meddwl mai problem sydd wedi ymddangos yn y blynyddoedd diwethaf yw hwn. Fe wnes i fynd trwy fy hen ffeils a ffeindio rhywbeth gan Carwyn Jones oedd yn gallu rhoi crynodeb eithaf clir o rai o'r prif gysylltiadau rhyngwladol a chysylltiadau oedd efo memorandum of understanding. Felly, dwi'n meddwl bod yna le ar gyfer hwnna, ond hefyd, wedyn, dwi'n meddwl bod y pwyllgor yna hefyd wedi codi cwestiynau ynghylch rhoi mwy o eglurder a disgwyliadau o ran craffu ar weithgarwch rhyngwladol—bod yna ffocws ar adrodd ac ar wireddu amcanion y strategaeth. So, mae hwnna'n un elfen: sut rydych chi'n gallu asesu yr elfen yna.

Roedd yna hefyd yr elfen craffu ariannol ar ymwneud rhyngwladol Llywodraeth Cymru—ydy hwnna'n rhywbeth sy'n werth ei gynnwys yn benodol mewn elfen o gytundeb fel hyn, fel eich bod chi yn cael adrodd clir ac yn teimlo eich bod chi'n gallu craffu'n ddigonol. Dwi'n meddwl, yn gyffredinol, mae wedi bod yn arfer dda pan mae yna adroddiadau cyson ar beth mae'r Gweinidogion efo remit rhyngwladol yn ei wneud yn rhyngwladol, fel bod yna ryw ffordd o gael sicrwydd y bydd yna adroddiadau cyson yn digwydd ar hynna.

So, mae yna dair elfen, dwi'n meddwl: adrodd yn ôl amcanion y strategaeth, beth ydy'r deilliannau sydd yn dod allan o'r strategaeth, yr elfen gyllidol yna, a hefyd bod gennych chi drosolwg da o beth maen nhw'n ei wneud—i ba raddau mae yna gytundebau newydd ar y gweill, i ba raddau mae yna ddatblygiad yn y perthnasau yna, neu oes yna risg bod rhai o'r memoranda yma jest yn ddarn o bapur a ddim yn datblygu o gwbl. Mae hynna'n fath o ystyriaeth hefyd. Felly, dwi'n meddwl bod yna sgôp i ffurfioli'r elfennau hyn oherwydd rhai o'r profiadau sydd wedi bod o Lywodraeth lai parod, neu rai Gweinidogion yn llai parod i adrodd a bod yn agored efo'r Senedd am hyn.

I think I'd refer to my previous comment about thinking about different chapters within the IIRA. The first element in relation to inter-governmental relations is one, and then there's the international element, which is, again, rooted in slightly different constitutional territory, if you like. Again, I wouldn't want us to put it all into the same pot; I would want to see different chapters, recognising the fact that when the UK Government comes to an international agreement that's legally binding, and then has to be implemented and will have real implications for the way devolved lawmaking can happen, it's different then to a bilateral agreement between Wales and the Basque Country, which is more of a commitment on—. It doesn't have the same legal implications, because of the constitutional realities. So, I would want to make sure that whatever we're asking for in the IIRA can recognise the different constitutional implications of whatever agreements. But of course, if agreements are being made that then have an implication for decisions that are made here, then it's right that the Senedd be notified of them.

Diolch.

Diolch, Nick. Sarah, anything to finish off?

Yes, just quickly. I love that point on chapters. I think that that's quite an interesting way to put it. And I understand that what you were pointing to earlier was not having an exhaustive list of points that could limit us. But I think I would be interested in your view of the specific inclusion of any international agreements entered into by the Welsh Government and whether that would be relevant.

Ie, yn sicr. So, ydy nhw'n femoranda efo gwledydd? Er enghraifft, mae'r berthynas efo UNESCO yn cael ei ffurfioli lot mwy yn ddiweddar. Wel, oes yna ryw fath o gytundeb yn gysylltiedig efo hwnna? Dwi'n gweithio mewn prifysgol. Mae'r brifysgol yn gorfod adrodd yn gyson ar beth ydy natur eu cytundebau nhw efo prifysgolion eraill. Mae'n gwneud synnwyr bod angen proses eithaf clir o wybod beth ydy cynnwys a statws cytundebau Llywodraeth Cymru efo unrhyw sefydliadau. Ac os ydyn ni eisiau dweud hynna, os oes gan y Senedd yma hefyd gytundeb neu femorandwm efo Senedd yn rhywle arall, gallai hefyd fod yn rhan o rywbeth sydd angen bod yn weladwy ac yn dryloyw o ran beth ydy'r termau ar gyfer hynny.

If there are agreements being made that influence how policy is being rolled out and limit or allow certain things, then it's right that the Senedd be informed of them. But I'd echo what I said about the different quality of those agreements. They're not international trade deals, because the Welsh Government doesn't have the capacity or the ability to do that constitutionally. So, I just again want to make sure that we know what we're asking for and that that is reflected in the IIRA.

Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, both. You've given us a lot of food for thought. I think there's a real challenge there for us in terms of Sarah's last point and getting that balance right between keeping things broad enough to be flexible but not being too limited by this. So, that's something that can shape the discussion for us going forward. So, diolch yn fawr, both. We'll make sure you get a transcript in terms of accuracy as well. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch.