English: Will the Cabinet Secretary confirm that this has been a real consultation, that she's listened to farmers and to their representative groups and that the policy has firmed up as this has developed? Some months ago, I was sceptical of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee doing an inquiry on this; I feared that people would have entrenched positions and that there wouldn't be much movement in response to quite a lot of evidence taken from witnesses. I found the absolute reverse, and it's been the same with the Cabinet Secretary and what she's done with this consultation. We have had press releases from the NFU and the FUW. The NFU welcome the positive measures to address bovine TB in wildlife and say it's a step forward to achieving a TB-free Wales. The FUW have, I think, re-released their press release, but, nonetheless, it has a statement in it that the programme continues to focus almost entirely on cattle controls without significant measures to tackle the disease in wildlife. Does she agree with me that that is not a fair assessment of the programme? Perhaps if you look at the volume of it and how much is written, I can see where they're coming from. But, on the delivery paper you've put out today, it says that 'where the Welsh Government views that badgers are contributing to the persistence of disease in chronic herd breakdowns, badgers will be trapped and tested on the breakdown farm and test positive badgers will be humanely killed. ' That is a real development, that it does address TB in the wildlife population, and is not an easy step for her to take and won't meet with universal approval within her party - but that she, like the committee, have looked at the evidence. I had a certain frustration with the way that some witnesses and others described the Krebs report and the randomised badger control trials almost as if they're tablets being handed down from on high, and, yes, an awful lot of money was spent on those trials, but there are actually some serious problems about how they were conducted, and they were stopped - when it seemed that there was a perturbation, in fact, they stopped actually measuring it, and there have been other trials and other evidence that has shown that that perturbation effect dies down. I think, as the committee looked at this more, we found that Christianne Glossop, your excellent chief vet, was sceptical of the degree of emphasis put on the perturbation out of the RBCT. In particular, three members of the committee that I then chaired, we went to the Republic of Ireland and found that, actually, for their approach, their assessment had been that perturbation was significantly less of a problem than the RBCT had said. So, will she confirm that we'll continue to find and develop evidence? And, actually, science is about looking at, and testing, and doing new things and assessing how you're doing that. A key part of the strategy is going to be in seeing, when badgers are removed in this way, what impact that has, checking that the perturbation effect isn't too great, and taking things forward in a decision by the Government that responds to evidence, responds to farmers, responds to the committee, and on which I'd like to congratulate the Cabinet Secretary.
Welsh: A wnaiff Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet gadarnhau bod hwn wedi bod yn ymgynghoriad gwirioneddol, ei bod hi wedi gwrando ar ffermwyr a'r grwpiau sy'n eu cynrychioli a bod y polisi wedi cryfhau wrth i hynny ddatblygu? Rai misoedd yn ôl, roeddwn yn amheus o ymholiad gan y Pwyllgor Newid yn yr Hinsawdd, Amgylchedd a Materion Gwledig ar hyn; roeddwn yn ofni y byddai pobl yn ddi-wyro yn eu safbwyntiau ac na fyddai llawer o symud wrth ymateb i gryn dipyn o dystiolaeth gan dystion. I'r gwrthwyneb yn llwyr y gwelais i, ac felly y bu gydag Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet a'r hyn y mae hi wedi'i wneud ynglŷn â'r ymgynghoriad hwn. Rydym wedi cael datganiadau i'r wasg gan Undeb Cenedlaethol yr Amaethwyr ac Undeb Amaethwyr Cymru. Mae Undeb Cenedlaethol yr Amaethwyr yn croesawu'r camau cadarnhaol i fynd i'r afael â TB mewn bywyd gwyllt ac yn dweud ei bod yn gam ymlaen at gael Cymru heb TB. Mae Undeb Amaethwyr Cymru wedi, rwy'n credu, ailgyhoeddi eu datganiad i'r wasg, ond, serch hynny, mae datganiad ynddo bod y rhaglen yn parhau i ganolbwyntio bron yn gyfan gwbl ar reoli gwartheg heb fesurau sylweddol i fynd i'r afael â'r clefyd mewn bywyd gwyllt. A yw hi'n cytuno â mi nad yw hynny'n asesiad teg o'r rhaglen? Efallai os ydych yn edrych ar ei maint a'r cyfan a ysgrifenwyd, 'rwy'n gallu deall eu safbwynt. Ond, ar y papur cyflenwi yr ydych wedi ei gyhoeddi heddiw, mae'n dweud lle mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn barnu bod moch daear yn cyfrannu at gyndynrwydd y clefyd mewn buchesi sydd wedi'u heintio'n gronig, bydd moch daear yn cael eu trapio a'u profi ar fferm y fuches honno a bydd moch daear sy'n profi'n bositif yn cael eu lladd yn ddi-boen. Mae hynny'n ddatblygiad gwirioneddol, ei fod yn mynd i'r afael â TB mewn bywyd gwyllt, ac nid yw'n gam hawdd iddi ei gymryd ac ni fydd yn destun cymeradwyaeth gyffredinol o fewn ei phlaid hi ei hun - ond ei bod hi, fel y gwnaeth y pwyllgor, wedi edrych ar y dystiolaeth. Roeddwn i'n teimlo rhywfaint o rwystredigaeth â'r ffordd y disgrifiodd rhai tystion ac eraill adroddiad Krebs a'r treialon rheoli moch daear ar hap, bron fel pe baent yn llechi wedi eu hanfon o'r nef, a, do, cafodd llawer iawn o arian ei wario ar y treialon hynny, ond mae rhai problemau difrifol mewn gwirionedd ynglŷn â'r modd y cawsant eu cynnal, ac fe gawson nhw eu stopio - pan oedd hi'n ymddangos bod yna aflonyddu a gwasgaru, mewn gwirionedd, fe roddon nhw'r gorau i'w fesur, ac mae treialon eraill wedi bod a thystiolaeth arall sydd wedi dangos bod effaith yr aflonyddu a gwasgaru yn gwanio. Rwy'n credu, fel yr edrychodd y pwyllgor yn fwy ar hyn, gwelsom fod Christianne Glossop, eich prif filfeddyg rhagorol, yn amheus o faint y pwyslais a roddwyd ar yr aflonyddu a gwasgaru yn yr RBCT. Yn arbennig, aeth tri aelod o'r pwyllgor yr oeddwn yn ei gadeirio ar y pryd, a minnau, i Weriniaeth Iwerddon a gwelsom, mewn gwirionedd, o ran eu hymagwedd, eu hasesiad nhw oedd bod aflonyddu a gwasgaru gryn dipyn yn llai o broblem nag yr oedd yr RBCT wedi'i ddweud. Felly, a wnaiff hi gadarnhau y byddwn ni'n parhau i ganfod a datblygu tystiolaeth? Ac, mewn gwirionedd, mae gwyddoniaeth yn ymwneud ag edrych, a phrofi, a gwneud pethau newydd ac asesu sut yr ydych chi'n gwneud hynny. Rhan allweddol o'r strategaeth fydd gweld, pan geir gwared ar foch daear yn y modd hwn, pa effaith a gaiff hynny, gan sicrhau nad yw effaith yr aflonyddu a gwasgaru yn rhy fawr, a symud pethau ymlaen drwy benderfyniad gan y Llywodraeth sy'n ymateb i dystiolaeth, yn ymateb i ffermwyr, yn ymateb i'r pwyllgor, ac ar hynny hoffwn longyfarch Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet.