English: The past months have been a testament to the sheer grit and tenacity of the people of Wales and, in particular, to the many who've been prepared to put themselves in harm's way for the greater good, and I would like to send my heartfelt thanks to each and every one of them. This is the first truly global pandemic for over a century, since Spanish flu hit the world as the first world war was drawing to a close, and although our globally connected world is very different, a deep desire to be with family and friends, to operate a social network, remains a driver of humankind. The advent of technology has been a significant help, but we are also a less-constrained people who are not used to such Government restrictions on our liberties. Tough decisions have been made, but we must assess and learn from those decisions. We must share best practice and conduct a full and honest analysis of where things went wrong, what was done well and how things may change the next time this happens. And this is why we must have a truly independent judge-led inquiry. Our legacy will be to put in place the protections for our children and our children's children. The first question that should be addressed by an inquiry is whether the lockdown was imposed at the right time. Many of the decisions had to be dictated by the Westminster Government as our border is so porous and this virus swept through the United Kingdom. However, some decisions were within the Welsh Government powers. The review should look at whether the Stereophonics concert at the Millennium Stadium should have gone ahead. This event brought tens of thousands of people into the city centre. Whilst the Wales versus Scotland six nations game was postponed, it was only done at the last minute after, again, many fans had travelled from other parts of Wales and from Scotland. But more generally, what lessons can be learned from lockdown? Should we look at different localised lockdown? Is the 2m social distancing rule the most appropriate? How have those that are shielding found the process? Did our food chain hold up? If not, why not? And how, oh how, did care homes get so overlooked in the rush to protect our NHS? The inquiry will need to look at whether there was adequate provision and use of PPE throughout the crisis. We'd want the inquiry to look at whether there was enough supply across the board, to all health boards, local authorities, private, public and mixed-residency care homes. The inquiry should assess if the best use was made of the PPE and whether there was adequate training provided to both purchasing organisations and front-line staff, and indeed the inquiry needs to review the definition of 'front-line staff'. Who can deny that pharmacies have been on the front line? Yet their PPE provision was a mess: unco-ordinated, poorly thought out, difficult to access. As time progresses, we appear to be in a better position on PPE, but there were clear deficiencies. Some organisations only had 24 hours' stock left. We need to review stocks, manufacturing options and access to PPE, and whether we have enough to support any further pandemics or further peaks. One of our other major areas of concern has been the testing situation here in Wales, and this is a key area for any inquiry. The World Health Organization said at the very outset that the key message is 'test, test and test'. And this is a message that I and my colleagues in the Welsh Conservatives have always supported. Testing is one of the most important elements in both stemming the spread of coronavirus and helping countries ease out of lockdown. What is the virus? Where is it? Where did it originate from? How did it leap boundaries? What effect is it having on different people? Does it mutate? What can kill it? What can protect us from it? Why? Why? Why? They're questions we've not yet thought to ask let alone answer. A comprehensive testing regime will provide data to enable us to answer some of these questions, but testing in Wales has been catastrophically bad. Targets were set, denied and dropped. The health Minister and Public Health Wales had different ambitions and goals. I have called from outset of the crisis for the Welsh Government to have a dedicated and accountable testing team, led by an individual with significant logistics experience. The inquiry needs to look at the scale of the challenge and the capabilities of Public Health Wales to deliver. The inquiry should look at what exactly happened with the missing 5,000 tests per day. Did Roche have an agreement with PHW or were they just at a preliminary discussion stage? We need clarity as to whether the Welsh Government did ever have a formal deal or whether the claims of the First Minister were completely accurate. The inquiry must focus on why the head of Public Health Wales, before an Assembly committee no less, repeatedly denied knowledge of the 9,000 test target before writing to the committee later to clarify her comments. The inquiry should review why the 15 per day testing limit for local authorities was imposed and lifted only after the Welsh Government's rapid review on 18 April found it may have depressed demand. Was this the right course of action? What was the thinking behind the limit? Should routine testing have started before 18 March? Were international factors a contributory factor, as claimed by Welsh Government? Were logistical experts from the military deployed early enough? Should testing centres have been closed on bank holidays? I welcome the Welsh Government's u-turn on 2 May, but too little, too late. Why were care homes ignored despite the warnings? Why were staff and residents not routinely tested? Did we have enough laboratory capacity? Why didn't Welsh Government utilise available labs faster? Why did it take days for tests from north and west Wales to be processed? How should the notification process be streamlined? The list goes on, but we need to look at testing seriously. And the inquiry needs to also look at data collection because, under pressure -
Welsh: Mae'r misoedd diwethaf wedi bod yn dyst i benderfyniad a dycnwch pobl Cymru ac, yn arbennig, i'r nifer fawr sydd wedi bod yn barod i roi eu hunain mewn perygl er gwell, a hoffwn i ddiolch o galon i bob un ohonyn nhw. Dyma'r pandemig cyntaf gwirioneddol fyd-eang mewn mwy na chanrif, ers i ffliw Sbaen daro'r byd wrth i'r rhyfel byd cyntaf dynnu at ei derfyn, ac er bod ein byd ni sydd wedi'i gysylltu'n fyd-eang, yn wahanol iawn, mae'r awydd dwfn i fod gyda theulu a ffrindiau, i weithredu rhwydwaith cymdeithasol, yn parhau i ysgogi'r ddynoliaeth. Mae dyfodiad technoleg wedi bod yn gymorth sylweddol, ond rydym hefyd yn bobl sydd wedi ein cyfyngu'n llai, ac nid ydym yn gyfarwydd â chyfyngiadau o'r fath gan y Llywodraeth ar ein hawliau. Mae penderfyniadau anodd wedi'u gwneud, ond rhaid inni asesu'r penderfyniadau hynny a dysgu oddi wrthynt. Rhaid rhannu arferion gorau a chynnal dadansoddiad llawn a gonest o ble'r aeth pethau o chwith, beth a gafodd ei wneud yn dda a sut y gallai pethau newid y tro nesaf y bydd hyn yn digwydd. A dyna pam mae'n rhaid inni gael ymchwiliad gwirioneddol annibynnol wedi'i arwain gan farnwr. Ein hetifeddiaeth fydd rhoi'r mesurau diogelu ar waith i'n plant ac i blant ein plant. Y cwestiwn cyntaf y dylid ei ofyn mewn ymchwiliad yw a gafodd y cyfyngiadau symud eu gorfodi ar yr adeg iawn. Roedd yn rhaid i lawer o'r penderfyniadau gael eu pennu gan Lywodraeth San Steffan gan fod ein ffin mor dreiddadwy a bod y feirws hwn wedi llifo drwy'r Deyrnas Unedig. Fodd bynnag, roedd rhai penderfyniadau o fewn pwerau Llywodraeth Cymru. Dylai'r adolygiad ystyried a ddylid bod wedi caniatáu i gyngerdd y Stereophonics yn Stadiwm y Mileniwm gael ei gynnal. Daeth degau o filoedd o bobl i ganol y ddinas yn sgil y digwyddiad hwn. Er bod gêm y chwe gwlad, Cymru yn erbyn yr Alban, wedi'i gohirio, dim ond ar y funud olaf oedd hynny, unwaith eto, ar ôl i lawer o gefnogwyr deithio o rannau eraill o Gymru ac o'r Alban. Ond yn fwy cyffredinol, pa wersi y gallwn ni eu dysgu o'r cyfyngiadau symud? A ddylem ni edrych ar gyfyngiadau symud lleol gwahanol? Ai'r rheol cadw pellter cymdeithasol o 2m yw'r un fwyaf priodol? Beth yw profiad y rhai sydd wedi bod yn gwarchod eu hunain? A wnaeth ein cadwyn fwyd ni ymdopi? Os na, pam? A sut, o sut, y cafodd cartrefi gofal eu hanwybyddu yn y brys i ddiogelu ein GIG? Bydd angen i'r ymchwiliad ystyried a oedd digon o ddarpariaeth a defnydd o gyfarpar diogelu personol drwy gydol yr argyfwng. Byddem ni eisiau i'r ymchwiliad ystyried a oedd digon o gyflenwad yn gyffredinol, ar gyfer pob bwrdd iechyd, awdurdod lleol, cartref gofal preifat, cyhoeddus a gofal preswyl cymysg. Dylai'r ymchwiliad asesu a oedd y defnydd gorau wedi ei wneud o'r cyfarpar diogelu personol ac a oedd hyfforddiant digonol wedi'i ddarparu i sefydliadau prynu a staff rheng flaen, ac yn wir mae angen i'r ymchwiliad adolygu diffiniad 'staff rheng flaen'. Pwy all wadu bod fferyllfeydd wedi bod ar y rheng flaen? Ac eto, roedd eu darpariaeth cyfarpar diogelu personol yn llanast: dim cydlyniant, dim llawer o feddwl y tu ôl iddi, ac yn anodd ei chyrchu. Wrth i amser fynd yn ei flaen, mae'n ymddangos ein bod mewn gwell sefyllfa o ran cyfarpar diogelu personol, ond roedd diffygion amlwg. Dim ond 24 awr o stoc oedd gan rai sefydliadau ar ôl. Mae angen inni adolygu stociau, opsiynau gweithgynhyrchu a mynediad at gyfarpar diogelu personol, ac a oes gennym ddigon i gynnal unrhyw bandemig pellach neu gyfnodau pellach o gynnydd. Un o'n prif feysydd eraill sy'n peri pryder yw'r sefyllfa o ran profi yma yng Nghymru, ac mae hwn yn faes allweddol ar gyfer unrhyw ymchwiliad. Dywedodd Sefydliad Iechyd y Byd ar y cychwyn cyntaf mai'r neges allweddol yw 'profi, profi a phrofi '. Ac mae hon yn neges yr wyf i a fy nghyd-Aelodau yn y Ceidwadwyr Cymreig wedi'i chefnogi erioed. Mae profi yn un o'r elfennau pwysicaf o ran mynd i'r afael ag ymlediad coronafeirws a helpu gwledydd i lacio'r cyfyngiadau symud. Beth yw'r feirws? Ble mae e? O ble y tarddodd? Sut y neidiodd ef ffiniau? Pa effaith y mae'n ei gael ar wahanol bobl? Ydy e'n newid ac yn datblygu? Beth all ei ladd? Beth all ein diogelu rhagddo? Pam? Pam? Pam? Dyna gwestiynau nad ydym ni wedi ystyried eu gofyn eto heb sôn am eu hateb. Bydd system brofi gynhwysfawr yn darparu data i'n galluogi ni i ateb rhai o'r cwestiynau hyn, ond mae profi yng Nghymru wedi bod yn warthus. Cafodd targedau eu gosod, eu gwadu a'u gollwng. Roedd gan y Gweinidog iechyd ac Iechyd Cyhoeddus Cymru uchelgeisiau a nodau gwahanol. Ers dechrau'r argyfwng rwyf wedi galw ar Lywodraeth Cymru i gael tîm profi pwrpasol ac atebol, dan arweiniad unigolyn sydd â phrofiad sylweddol o logisteg. Mae angen i'r ymchwiliad edrych ar faint yr her a gallu Iechyd Cyhoeddus Cymru i gyflawni. Dylai'r ymchwiliad edrych ar beth yn union ddigwyddodd gyda'r 5,000 o brofion coll bob dydd. A oedd gan Roche gytundeb ag Iechyd Cyhoeddus Cymru neu a oedden nhw ond mewn cyfnod o drafod rhagarweiniol? Mae angen eglurder ynghylch a oedd gan Lywodraeth Cymru fargen ffurfiol erioed ynteu a oedd honiadau'r Prif Weinidog yn gwbl gywir. Rhaid i'r ymchwiliad ganolbwyntio ar y rheswm pam, gerbron un o bwyllgorau'r Cynulliad, y gwadodd Pennaeth Iechyd Cyhoeddus Cymru yn gyson unrhyw wybodaeth am y targed prawf 9,000 cyn ysgrifennu at y pwyllgor yn ddiweddarach i egluro ei sylwadau. Dylai'r ymchwiliad adolygu pam y gorfodwyd y cyfyngiad o 15 prawf y diwrnod ar awdurdodau ac yna ei godi dim ond ar ôl i adolygiad cyflym Llywodraeth Cymru ar 18 Ebrill nodi y gallai fod wedi lleihau'r galw. Ai hwn oedd y cam cywir? Beth oedd y syniad y tu ôl i'r terfyn? A ddylai profion fod wedi'u dechrau yn rheolaidd cyn 18 Mawrth? A oedd ffactorau rhyngwladol yn ffactor cyfrannol, fel yr oedd Lywodraeth Cymru wedi'i honni? A gafodd arbenigwyr logistaidd o'r fyddin eu defnyddio yn ddigon cynnar? A ddylai canolfannau profi fod wedi cau ar wyliau banc? Rwy'n croesawu tro pedol Llywodraeth Cymru ar 2 Mai, ond roedd yn fater o beidio gwneud digon mewn pryd. Pam y cafodd cartrefi gofal eu hanwybyddu er gwaethaf y rhybuddion? Pam na chafodd staff a phreswylwyr eu profi'n rheolaidd? A oedd gennym ddigon o gapasiti labordai? Pam na wnaeth Llywodraeth Cymru ddefnyddio'r labordai a oedd ar gael yn gynt? Pam y cymerodd ddiwrnodau i brosesu profion o'r Gogledd a'r Gorllewin? Sut y dylai'r broses hysbysu gael ei symleiddio? Mae'r rhestr yn ddiddiwedd, ond mae angen i ni ystyried profi o ddifrif. Ac mae angen i'r ymchwiliad edrych hefyd ar gasglu data oherwydd, dan bwysau -