English: I'm pleased to contribute to this afternoon's debate, and I've got to say, just listening to that last contribution from Rhianon Passmore, I do find it a bit rich when the Welsh Labour Government have constantly called on the UK Government to provide more funding to this place and more funding for public services in Wales at the very time that they just received an extra £4 billion to support public services and the Welsh economy. We get contributions that then say that the Conservative Party is economically incompetent. You can't have it both ways, Rhianon Passmore. You can't on the one hand call for greater borrowing and greater support and then, when that is provided, turn on the hand that has given you that money. So, I, for one, and the Welsh Conservatives on this side of the Chamber, are more than happy that the UK Government is borrowing money at the moment. It is supporting the UK economy, and it is supporting the Welsh economy and people in Wales, and I think, in next year's Senedd election, the people of Wales will see that that support has been offered. Point 1 of the motion goes to the heart of what this motion is all about: the successful management of taxpayers' money depends on clear objectives, agreed outcomes and rigorous scrutiny. How often in this Chamber and virtually over the last few months have we spoken about the importance of building back better after the pandemic, and developing a more sustainable economy and transport infrastructure? Well, that process of building back better must involve eliminating waste, increasing efficiency and delivering value for money for the taxpayer. And let me be clear what I mean by 'value for money', because that doesn't mean always going for the cheapest option and settling for less than best. But it does mean embedding and developing an anti-waste culture at the heart of Government, ensuring that there is always a watchful eye over Government spending across departments, and one which flags up Government waste at the earliest opportunity. I certainly don't see our proposals for a new department as working in conflict with existing mechanisms for scrutiny - far from it. I see them as complementing those existing mechanisms, including the Senedd's own Public Accounts Committee, which was referred to by Angela Burns, Audit Wales and the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales. In June 2020, Audit Wales produced a report on the Welsh Government's rural development grant scheme, finding that £53 million of grants were made without ensuring value for money or effective competition. The Auditor General for Wales found that key aspects of the design, operation and oversight of the Welsh Government controls over the programme were not effective enough to secure value for money. The failures listed included inviting funding applications from certain organisations without documenting why, giving additional funds to existing projects without first checking their success, and exercising insufficient project oversight. There were, of course, earlier examples of lack of efficiency which have been referred to by other Members - Communities First, for instance. Communities First's strengths, including a strong brand and trusted employees, were a good thing, but, unfortunately, they were overshadowed by a lack of co-ordination and duplication of delivery work. There was a lack of an anchor to that project, and there have been similar programmes since. Quite simply, it wasn't value for money and it wasn't picked up quickly enough. The problem doesn't just include the Welsh Government itself; it does extend to Welsh public sector bodies too, as Angela Burns mentioned. Audit Wales reported that Natural Resources Wales would have its accounts qualified as a result of its handling of timber contracts, again referred to earlier, which auditors Grant Thornton stated heightened exposure to the risk of fraud. And in January 2020, the auditor general qualified the organisation's accounts for the fourth year in a row due to doubts as to whether NRW acted in accordance with its statutory duties and public law principles. We need to build greater resilience into the system, and that doesn't just mean financial resilience; it means resilience in data handling too. Flaws were only recently exposed in the Welsh Government's handling of personal data with the three significant data breaches culminating in the details of 18,000 individuals being posted on Public Health Wales's website for 24 hours. This included, as we know, details of nearly 2,000 care home residents. So, it's not just a question of financial resilience; it's a question of resilience across the Welsh Government, and across the public sector, which is why we are proposing some of the changes that we've put forward. This is a motion that is basically about giving the people of Wales confidence - confidence that, when they vote, whichever party or parties form the Welsh Government, resilience and value for money will be built into that process and into that system from the start, not added as an afterthought. We need to build resilience, ensure value for money for the taxpayer, and promote, all-importantly, a new culture of efficiency. That is what this is about: increasing scrutiny and casting a light on some of the darker corners of Government, as we start on the long journey of building back better. And in conclusion, Llywydd, Neil McEvoy said - and I agree with him - we need to reconstruct; I think you said we need to change the culture of Government, by removing the darkness - . I've got your quote quite wrong there, actually, by the way, Neil McEvoy; I should never try to quote you - you do it far more eloquently yourself. But you said that things can't go on as they were before, and we need to make sure, I believe, that we do not remove the very democracy that provides the opportunity for change that we are trying to seek.
Welsh: Rwy'n falch o gyfrannu at y ddadl y prynhawn yma, ac mae'n rhaid i mi ddweud,wrth wrando ar y cyfraniad olaf gan Rhianon Passmore, rwy'n synnu at y ffordd y mae Llywodraeth Lafur Cymru wedi galw'n gyson ar Lywodraeth y DU i ddarparu mwy o arian i'r lle hwn a mwy o gyllid ar gyfer gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yng Nghymru ar yr union adeg y cawsant £4 biliwn ychwanegol i gefnogi gwasanaethau cyhoeddus ac economi Cymru. Cawn gyfraniadau sy'n dweud wedyn bod y Blaid Geidwadol yn anfedrus yn economaidd. Ni allwch chi ei chael hi'r ddwy ffordd, Rhianon Passmore. Ni allwch alw ar y naill law am fwy o fenthyca a mwy o gymorth a beirniadu'r llaw sydd wedi rhoi'r arian hwnnw i chi pan gaiff ei ddarparu. Felly, yn bersonol, rwyf i a'r Ceidwadwyr Cymreig ar yr ochr hon i'r Siambr, yn fwy na bodlon fod Llywodraeth y DU yn benthyca arian ar hyn o bryd. Mae'n cefnogi economi'r DU, ac mae'n cefnogi economi Cymru a phobl yng Nghymru, ac yn etholiad y Senedd y flwyddyn nesaf, credaf y bydd pobl Cymru'n gweld bod y cymorth hwnnw wedi'i gynnig. Mae pwynt 1 y cynnig yn mynd at ddiben canolog y cynnig hwn: mae rheoli arian trethdalwyr yn llwyddiannus yn dibynnu ar amcanion clir, canlyniadau cytûn a chraffu trwyadl. Pa mor aml yn y Siambr hon a dros y misoedd diwethaf bron yn llwyr y buom yn sôn am bwysigrwydd adeiladu'n ôl yn well ar ôl y pandemig, a datblygu economi a seilwaith trafnidiaeth mwy cynaliadwy? Wel, rhaid i'r broses honno o adeiladu'n ôl yn well olygu cael gwared ar wastraff, cynyddu effeithlonrwydd a sicrhau gwerth am arian i'r trethdalwr. A gadewch i mi fod yn glir beth rwy'n ei olygu wrth 'werth am arian', oherwydd nid yw hynny'n golygu mynd am yr opsiwn rhataf bob amser a bodloni ar lai na'r gorau. Ond mae'n golygu ymgorffori a datblygu diwylliant gwrth-wastraff wrth wraidd y Llywodraeth, gan sicrhau bod trosolwg bob amser ar wariant y Llywodraeth ar draws adrannau, ac un sy'n tynnu sylw at wastraff y Llywodraeth cyn gynted â phosibl. Yn sicr, nid wyf yn gweld ein cynigion ar gyfer adran newydd fel rhywbeth sy'n gwrthdaro yn erbyn y mecanweithiau craffu presennol - ymhell o fod. Credaf eu bod yn ategu'r mecanweithiau sydd gennym yn barod, gan gynnwys Pwyllgor Cyfrifon Cyhoeddus y Senedd ei hun y cyfeiriodd Angela Burns ato, Archwilio Cymru a Chomisiynydd Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol Cymru. Ym mis Mehefin 2020, cynhyrchodd Archwilio Cymru adroddiad ar gynllun grant datblygu gwledig Llywodraeth Cymru, a chanfu fod £53 miliwn o grantiau wedi'u gwneud heb sicrhau gwerth am arian na chystadleuaeth effeithiol. Canfu Archwilydd Cyffredinol Cymru nad oedd agweddau allweddol ar gynllun, gweithrediad a throsolwg ar fesurau rheoli Llywodraeth Cymru dros y rhaglen yn ddigon effeithiol i sicrhau gwerth am arian. Roedd y methiannau a restrwyd yn cynnwys gwahodd ceisiadau am gyllid gan sefydliadau penodol heb ddogfennu pam, rhoi arian ychwanegol i brosiectau presennol heb wirio eu llwyddiant yn gyntaf, a dim digon o drosolwg ar brosiectau. Wrth gwrs, cafwyd enghreifftiau cynharach o ddiffyg effeithlonrwydd y cyfeiriodd Aelodau eraill atynt - Cymunedau yn Gyntaf, er enghraifft. Roedd cryfderau Cymunedau yn Gyntaf, gan gynnwys brand cryf a gweithwyr dibynadwy, yn beth da, ond yn anffodus, cawsant eu bwrw i'r cysgod gan ddiffyg cydgysylltiad a dyblygu gwaith. Nid oedd angor digonol i'r prosiect, a chafwyd rhaglenni tebyg ers hynny. Yn syml iawn, nid oedd yn rhoi gwerth am arian ac ni sylwyd ar hynny'n ddigon cyflym. Nid problem i Lywodraeth Cymru'n unig yw hi; mae'n ymestyn i gynnwys cyrff sector cyhoeddus yng Nghymru hefyd, fel y soniodd Angela Burns. Adroddodd Archwilio Cymru mai barn amodol a roddwyd ar gyfrifon Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru o ganlyniad i'w ffordd o drin contractau pren, fel y nodwyd yn gynharach unwaith eto, a dywedodd yr archwilwyr Grant Thornton fod hynny wedi eu gwneud yn fwy agored i'r risg o dwyll. Ac ym mis Ionawr 2020, rhoddodd yr archwilydd cyffredinol farn amodol ar gyfrifon y sefydliad am y bedwaredd flwyddyn yn olynol oherwydd amheuon ynglŷn ag a weithredodd Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru yn unol â'u dyletswyddau statudol a'u hegwyddorion cyfraith gyhoeddus. Mae angen inni feithrin mwy o gadernid yn y system, ac nid yw hynny'n golygu cadernid ariannol yn unig; mae'n golygu cadernid wrth ymdrin â data hefyd. Yn ddiweddar daeth diffygion i'r amlwg yn y modd y mae Llywodraeth Cymru'n ymdrin â data personol gyda'r tri digwyddiad mawr o dorri cyfrinachedd data yn arwain at osod manylion 18,000 o unigolion ar wefan Iechyd Cyhoeddus Cymru am 24 awr. Fel y gwyddom, roedd hyn yn cynnwys manylion bron i 2,000 o breswylwyr cartrefi gofal. Felly, nid cwestiwn o gadernid ariannol yn unig ydyw; mae'n fater o gadernid ar draws Llywodraeth Cymru, ac ar draws y sector cyhoeddus, a dyna pam ein bod yn cynnig rhai o'r newidiadau a gyflwynwyd gennym. Mae hwn yn gynnig sy'n ymwneud yn y bôn â rhoi hyder i bobl Cymru - hyder, pan fyddant yn pleidleisio, pa blaid neu bleidiau bynnag sy'n ffurfio Llywodraeth Cymru y bydd cadernid a gwerth am arian yn cael eu hadeiladu'n rhan o'r broses honno a'r system honno o'r dechrau, ac na chânt eu hychwanegu fel ôl-ystyriaeth. Mae angen inni feithrin cadernid, sicrhau gwerth am arian i'r trethdalwr, ac yn hollbwysig, hyrwyddo diwylliant newydd o effeithlonrwydd. Ymwneud â hynny y mae'r cynnig hwn: cynyddu gwaith craffu a bwrw goleuni ar rai o gorneli tywyllach y Llywodraeth, wrth inni ddechrau ar y daith hir o adeiladu'n ôl yn well. Ac i gloi, Lywydd, dywedodd Neil McEvoy - ac rwy'n cytuno ag ef - fod angen inni ailadeiladu; rwy'n credu i chi ddweud bod angen inni newid diwylliant y Llywodraeth, drwy gael gwared ar y tywyllwch - . Rwy'n eich dyfynnu'n hollol anghywir yno, mewn gwirionedd, gyda llaw, Neil McEvoy; ni ddylwn byth geisio eich dyfynnu - rydych yn ei wneud yn llawer mwy huawdl eich hun. Ond fe ddywedoch chi na all pethau barhau fel roeddent o'r blaen, ac yn fy marn i, mae angen inni sicrhau nad ydym yn dileu'r union ddemocratiaeth sy'n rhoi'r cyfle i newid rydym yn ei geisio.