English: Thank you for the comments. I'll start with the last points that you were mentioning on clinical exceptionality and/or need. The reality is that we already have a system providing evidence on what should be provided. Need is very much a part of it - whether it's something that is clinically effective - but you can't get away from the reality of resource as well. The NHS has a budget to work to in every part of the argument and every healthcare system. If we simply say that it doesn't matter what the price is - . We regularly have negotiations with pharmaceutical companies about patient access schemes, and, in fact, within Wales, since it was introduced in 2012, by delivering a patient access scheme where the pharmaceutical company agree to change their price to get access, that's meant that 36 new medicines have been available in Wales as a result of that. So, we've always got to be able to balance that properly, and if we're going to have an honest debate about the future of high-cost medicines, we do need to set out - . But there are times you do have to talk to pharmaceutical companies about the price for which a medicine is provided. It was part of the reason why the cancer drugs fund failed because there was no control over pricing, as well as the lack of control over the clinical evidence that a treatment was actually going to be effective. The reason why exceptionality is in is because we're reviewing where we are and making recommendations for the future. We've been completely clear in the terms of reference that if the review group believe that exceptionality is not the appropriate criteria and there is a better formulation of that, then we want to hear from them, because I want the recommendations that I make to be really practical for us as well. And, indeed, if they say that, for all of the challenges about exceptionality, it is the right criteria, we need to understand how we deal with that more effectively. That goes back to your first point, really, and that's about the relationship between the consultant and the patient, because we've been really clear again in the terms of reference - we've got to understand that with that interface, when someone wants to understand what the treatment options are and what's available, there's got to be a way for both the treating consultant and the patient to understand what is available and why, and if you're going to go through an individual funding request, what that really means too as well. So, we've got to equip our clinicians to have those difficult conversations in the most consistent manner possible, so that people don't come out and think that it's either the health board area they live in or the consultant they see that actually governs what their access to effective treatment is. So, that is a really important and a very difficult challenge for us to get over. Just finally - I'll finish on this point, Deputy Presiding Officer - I had a very constructive meeting yesterday with the Wales Cancer Alliance, and they were interested in my statement today. I indicated that I wouldn't be giving them an advance copy of what I was going to say or the membership of the panel of the IPFR review, but they're interested in what we're doing and they, too, still want to see more consistency. They want it to be an evidence-led process, but there also wasn't support for a process that advantaged their group of conditions over others. So, having that genuine equity across the piece and having a genuine evidence base to govern what we're doing was really important to them too. So, there's a whole range of actors in the field who are looking at what we're going to do and why, and I look forward to hearing from the review panel in the relatively near future.
Welsh: Diolch am y sylwadau. Byddaf yn dechrau gyda'r pwyntiau diwethaf yr oeddech yn eu gwneud am eithriadoldeb clinigol a / neu angen. Y gwir amdani yw bod gennym system eisoes sy'n darparu tystiolaeth ar yr hyn y dylid ei ddarparu. Mae angen yn sicr yn rhan ohoni - a yw'n rhywbeth sy'n glinigol effeithiol - ond ni allwch ddianc rhag realiti adnoddau hefyd. Mae gan y GIG gyllideb i weithio iddi ym mhob rhan o'r ddadl a phob system gofal iechyd. Os ydym yn syml yn dweud nad oes ots beth yw'r pris - . Rydym yn rheolaidd yn cael trafodaethau gyda chwmnïau fferyllol am gynlluniau mynediad i gleifion, ac, mewn gwirionedd, o fewn Cymru, ers iddo gael ei gyflwyno yn 2012, trwy gyflwyno cynllun mynediad i gleifion lle mae'r cwmni fferyllol yn cytuno i newid eu pris i gael mynediad. Mae hyn yn golygu bod 36 meddyginiaeth newydd ar gael yng Nghymru o ganlyniad i hynny. Felly, mae'n rhaid i ni bob amser allu cydbwyso hynny yn iawn, ac os ydym yn mynd i gael dadl onest am ddyfodol meddyginiaethau cost uchel, mae angen i ni nodi - . Ond mae adegau pan mae'n rhaid i chi siarad â chwmnïau fferyllol am bris darparu meddyginiaeth. Roedd hyn yn rhan o'r rheswm pam y methodd y gronfa cyffuriau canser oherwydd nad oedd unrhyw reolaeth dros brisio, yn ogystal â diffyg rheolaeth dros y dystiolaeth glinigol bod triniaeth yn mynd i fod yn effeithiol mewn gwirionedd. Y rheswm pam mae eithriadoldeb yn dal yno yw ein bod yn adolygu ein sefyllfa ac yn gwneud argymhellion ar gyfer y dyfodol. Rydym wedi bod yn gwbl glir yn y cylch gorchwyl, os bydd y grŵp adolygu yn credu nad eithriadoldeb yw'r maen prawf priodol a bod ffurfio gwell ar hynny, yna rydym am glywed ganddynt. Rwyf eisiau i'r argymhellion a wnaf fod yn wirioneddol ymarferol i ni hefyd. Ac, yn wir, os ydynt yn dweud ei fod yn faen prawf cywir, ar gyfer pob un o'r heriau ynghylch eithriadoldeb, mae angen i ni ddeall sut i ymdrin â hynny yn fwy effeithiol. Mae hynny'n mynd yn ôl at eich pwynt cyntaf, mewn gwirionedd, ac mae hynny'n ymwneud â'r berthynas rhwng yr ymgynghorydd a'r claf. Rydym wedi bod yn hynod glir eto yn y cylch gorchwyl - mae'n rhaid i ni ddeall hynny gyda'r rhyngwyneb hwnnw, pan fydd rhywun eisiau deall beth yw'r opsiynau triniaeth a beth sydd ar gael, mae'n rhaid cael ffordd y gall yr ymgynghorydd sy'n trin y claf a'r claf ei hunan ddeall beth sydd ar gael a pham. Ac os ydych yn mynd i fynd drwy gais ariannu unigol, mae angen deall beth mae hynny'n ei olygu hefyd. Felly, mae'n rhaid i ni arfogi ein clinigwyr i gael y sgyrsiau anodd hynny yn y modd mwyaf cyson ag y bo modd, fel nad yw pobl yn meddwl mai naill ai ardal y bwrdd iechyd lle maent yn byw neu'r ymgynghorydd y maent yn ei weld sydd mewn gwirionedd yn rheoli'r hyn yw eu mynediad at driniaeth effeithiol. Felly, mae hynny'n bwysig iawn ac yn her anodd iawn i ni. Yn olaf - rwy'n gorffen gyda'r pwynt hwn, Ddirprwy Lywydd - cefais gyfarfod adeiladol iawn ddoe â Chynghrair Canser Cymru, ac roedd ganddynt ddiddordeb yn fy natganiad heddiw. Nodais na fyddwn yn rhoi copi ymlaen llaw iddyn nhw o'r hyn yr oeddwn yn mynd i'w ddweud nag o aelodaeth o banel yr adolygiad IPFR, ond mae ganddyn nhw ddiddordeb yn yr hyn yr ydym yn ei wneud ac maent, hefyd, yn dal yn awyddus i weld mwy o gysondeb. Maent eisiau iddi fod yn broses a arweinir gan dystiolaeth, ond ni chafwyd cefnogaeth chwaith i broses a oedd yn rhoi mantais i'w grŵp nhw o gyflyrau dros eraill. Felly, roedd cael y tegwch gwirioneddol hwnnw ar draws y darn a chael sylfaen dystiolaeth wirioneddol i reoli'r hyn yr ydym yn ei wneud yn wirioneddol bwysig iddynt hefyd. Felly, mae amrywiaeth eang o actorion yn y maes sydd yn edrych ar yr hyn yr ydym yn mynd i'w wneud a pham, ac edrychaf ymlaen at glywed gan y panel adolygu yn y dyfodol cymharol agos.