English: Trefnydd, I'd like a statement, please, about how decisions on NHS treatments are made in Wales. Over the weekend, a constituent of mine, Maria Wallpott, won her case in the High Court after the NHS in Wales had refused to fund a specialised treatment for her cancer that is available in Scotland and England. Now, I realise fully that the Government won't be able to comment on individual cases; it's the more general issues that have been highlighted that I'd like to see the Government reflect on, please. Decisions like this are currently made by the Welsh Health Specialised Services Committee, and I'm concerned that the guidelines they follow may be too rigid. In Ms Wallpott's case, her oncologist at Velindre had confirmed that she had a very rare cancer; the oncologist had only seen one instance of it in five years, and the oncologist believed that Ms Wallpott's case would meet the exceptional threshold in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance, but the Wales individual patient funding requests panel, on behalf of this other committee that I've mentioned, they decided against providing the treatment. I know the family has raised concerns about whether the committee is under pressure to refuse people potentially life-saving treatments because of cost. Again, I realise that the Government can't become involved in or comment on individual cases, but I think that having a statement setting out the processes that are followed by the specialised services committee and the principles they follow in making decisions would be useful for transparency. The long titles of the various panels and committees I've mentioned, they are confusing, but the main concern I have is that the processes mean that some treatments are being denied to patients in Wales that would be available in other parts of the UK.
Welsh: Trefnydd, hoffwn i gael datganiad, os gwelwch yn dda, ar sut y mae penderfyniadau ar driniaethau'r GIG yn cael eu gwneud yng Nghymru. Dros y penwythnos, enillodd un o fy etholwyr i, Maria Wallpott, ei hachos yn yr Uchel Lys ar ôl i'r GIG yng Nghymru wrthod ariannu triniaeth arbenigol ar gyfer ei chanser sydd ar gael yn yr Alban a Lloegr. Nawr, rwy'n sylweddoli'n iawn na fydd y Llywodraeth yn gallu gwneud sylwadau ar achosion unigol; ond ar y materion mwy cyffredinol sydd wedi eu hamlygu yr hoffwn i weld y Llywodraeth yn myfyrio, os gwelwch yn dda. Mae penderfyniadau fel hyn yn cael eu gwneud gan Bwyllgor Gwasanaethau Iechyd Arbenigol Cymru ar hyn o bryd, ac rwy'n pryderu y gallai'r canllawiau y maen nhw'n yn eu dilyn fod yn rhy anhyblyg. Yn achos Ms Wallpott, roedd ei oncolegydd yn Felindre wedi cadarnhau bod ganddi ganser prin iawn; dim ond un enghraifft mewn pum mlynedd yr oedd yr oncolegydd wedi ei gweld, ac roedd yr oncolegydd yn credu y byddai achos Ms Wallpott yn bodloni'r trothwy achosion eithriadol yng nghanllawiau'r Sefydliad Cenedlaethol dros Ragoriaeth mewn Iechyd a Gofal, ond penderfynodd panel ceisiadau cyllid cleifion unigol Cymru, ar ran y pwyllgor arall hwn yr wyf i wedi sôn amdano, yn erbyn darparu'r driniaeth. Rwy'n gwybod bod y teulu wedi codi pryderon ynghylch a yw'r pwyllgor dan bwysau i wrthod triniaethau a allai achub bywydau oherwydd y gost. Unwaith eto, rwy'n sylweddoli na all y Llywodraeth gymryd rhan mewn achosion unigol na rhoi sylwadau arnyn nhw, ond rwy'n credu y byddai cael datganiad yn nodi'r prosesau a gaiff eu dilyn gan y pwyllgor gwasanaethau arbenigol a'r egwyddorion y maen nhw'n eu dilyn wrth wneud penderfyniadau yn ddefnyddiol ar gyfer tryloywder. Mae teitlau hir y gwahanol baneli a phwyllgorau yr wyf i wedi eu crybwyll, maen nhw'n ddryslyd, ond y prif bryder sydd gen i yw bod y prosesau'n golygu bod rhai triniaethau'n cael eu gwrthod i gleifion yng Nghymru a fyddai ar gael mewn rhannau eraill o'r DU.