English: Thank you for all those comments and questions. I'll start with your first one about how people can be supported to give evidence. The Wales infected blood scheme wasn't particularly set up to support people to give evidence to an inquiry, but I do think we need to consider the needs of people who will need to give evidence and where that evidence can be given. What I'd like to see is that the inquiry operates on a basis where it will take evidence across different United Kingdom nations to make it easier for people to attend. To be fair, I indicated earlier I've had a response from Mr Justice Langstaff to my earlier letter and I think that it's constructive. I think there's an indication there that they will consider how they meet not just the language requirements of people from Wales, but, in particular, ensure how they hear from people in devolved nations, thinking about how they do that whilst going about considering the terms of reference. So, it is - . The letter certainly doesn't close the door in saying, 'No, everyone must travel to a central point,' and I think we need to continue to pursue that. He's also indicated that he would wish to meet the cross-party group in this place, which I think is a very helpful and constructive offer from the chair as well. I hope that the chair of the cross-party group would - I expect - welcome that too. So, we need to consider with individuals, but also with Haemophilia Wales, as the largest support group, how best we can work together to support individuals. So, I don't want to cut anything off, but, equally, I don't want to give an open-ended commitment that I may not be able to meet. And, actually, I think the best thing is to make sure that we get the inquiry to move around the country to make it easier for people to attend in the first place. You referred to the letter that had cross-party sign-off that previously went to Jeremy Hunt. I think that was helpful in reiterating that this is a genuine cross-party attempt to get at the truth. In that, we indicated that NHS Wales co-operated, and that position remains unchanged. I expect NHS Wales to co-operate. If there is any particular issue about information being made available, then I'll certainly consider the ability of the Government to direct information to be made available, but I do not anticipate there being any organisational barriers to documentary evidence being made available. Indeed, that would include documents that the Government held. I think, previously, for example, journalists have been given access to documents that exist that the Government holds and they didn't find anything of particular interest, but the access is there and it is available. And that goes into some of the points about the terms of reference and what is a reasonable timescale. As far as compelling witnesses is concerned, my understanding is that the judge that has been set up under the inquiry does have the ability to compel witnesses. But the terms of reference and the timescale are linked, because the conversation about what the terms will cover will help to determine what is likely to be a reasonable timescale. And there'll be differences of views. Some people would rather see a short and sharp inquiry that focuses on a couple of issues to get to the truth quickly. After all, this has been going on for a long time and some people may not wish to have a long time of going over history that is painful and difficult. Some people may wish to see an inquiry that concludes within their lifetime. And others will say 'You have to have the fullest inquiry possible, and if that takes a longer period of time, then so be it.' That's why the consultation on the terms really do matter, and in setting out those questions - . You may not have had an opportunity to look at the website, but I think it's very helpfully set out to focus people's minds on what to ask for and why, and it gives people a steer that if it's a more focused inquiry, it can be shorter, but if it's broader, then it will necessarily be longer. So, people need to think about what matters to them most in responding to that consultation, and in helping to draw up the terms of reference. But I think the fact that the inquiry chair starts off with that open-minded approach and asks people what they think is a good marker of the way we should expect the inquiry to be conducted.
Welsh: Diolch am eich holl sylwadau a chwestiynau. Rwy'n mynd i ddechrau â'ch un cyntaf ynghylch sut y gellir cefnogi pobl i roi tystiolaeth. Ni chafodd cynllun gwaed heintiedig Cymru ei sefydlu'n benodol i gynorthwyo pobl i roi tystiolaeth i ymchwiliad, ond rwy'n meddwl bod angen inni ystyried anghenion pobl y bydd angen iddynt roi tystiolaeth a ble y gallant roi'r dystiolaeth honno. Yr hyn yr hoffwn ei weld yw bod yr ymchwiliad yn gweithredu ar sail lle bydd yn cymryd tystiolaeth ledled gwahanol wledydd y Deyrnas Unedig i'w gwneud yn haws i bobl gymryd rhan. I fod yn deg, nodais yn gynharach fy mod wedi cael ymateb gan Mr Ustus Langstaff i fy llythyr cynharach ac rwy'n meddwl ei fod yn adeiladol. Rwy'n meddwl ei fod yn awgrymu y byddant yn ystyried sut i ddiwallu nid dim ond gofynion iaith pobl o Gymru, ond, yn benodol, yn sicrhau sut y byddant yn clywed gan bobl yn y gwledydd datganoledig, ac yn meddwl am sut i wneud hynny tra'n ystyried y cylch gorchwyl. Felly, mae'n - . Yn sicr, dydy'r llythyr ddim yn cau'r drws drwy ddweud, 'Na, rhaid i bawb deithio i fan canolog,' ac rwy'n meddwl bod angen inni barhau i fynd ar drywydd hynny. Mae hefyd wedi nodi yr hoffai gyfarfod â'r grŵp trawsbleidiol yn y lle hwn, ac rwy'n meddwl bod hwnnw'n gynnig defnyddiol ac adeiladol iawn gan y Cadeirydd yn ogystal. Rwy'n gobeithio y byddai cadeirydd y grŵp trawsbleidiol - rwy'n disgwyl - yn croesawu hynny hefyd. Felly, mae angen inni ystyried gydag unigolion, ond hefyd gyda Hemoffilia Cymru, y grŵp cymorth mwyaf, beth yw'r ffordd orau inni gydweithio i gefnogi unigolion. Felly, nid wyf am ddiystyru dim byd, ond, yn yr un modd, nid wyf am roi ymrwymiad penagored na fyddaf efallai'n gallu ei gyflawni. Ac, a dweud y gwir, rwy'n meddwl mai'r peth gorau yw gwneud yn siŵr bod yr ymchwiliad yn symud o gwmpas y wlad i'w gwneud yn haws i bobl fod yn bresennol yn y lle cyntaf. Cyfeiriasoch at y llythyr â chymeradwyaeth drawsbleidiol a aeth o'r blaen i Jeremy Hunt. Rwy'n meddwl bod hwnnw'n ddefnyddiol i ailadrodd bod hon yn ymgais drawsbleidiol ddiffuant i gael y gwir. Yn hynny o beth, rydym wedi nodi bod GIG Cymru wedi cydweithredu, ac nid yw'r sefyllfa honno wedi newid. Rwy'n disgwyl i GIG Cymru gydweithredu. Os oes unrhyw fater penodol am wybodaeth yn cael ei ddarparu, byddaf yn sicr yn ystyried gallu'r Llywodraeth i gyfeirio gwybodaeth i'w darparu, ond nid wyf yn rhagweld dim rhwystrau sefydliadol i ddarparu tystiolaeth ddogfennol. Yn wir, byddai hynny'n cynnwys dogfennau a gadwyd gan y Llywodraeth. Rwy'n meddwl, yn y gorffennol, er enghraifft, bod newyddiadurwyr wedi cael gweld dogfennau sy'n bodoli ac sy'n cael eu cadw gan y Llywodraeth ac na wnaethant ddod o hyd i ddim byd o ddiddordeb arbennig, ond mae'r mynediad yno ac mae ar gael. Ac mae hynny'n cyfrannu at rai o'r pwyntiau am y cylch gorchwyl a beth sy'n amserlen resymol. O ran gorfodi tystion, rwyf ar ddeall bod gan y barnwr sydd wedi'i benodi o dan yr ymchwiliad y gallu i orfodi tystion. Ond mae cysylltiad rhwng y cylch gorchwyl a'r amserlen, oherwydd bydd y sgwrs am yr hyn y bydd y termau'n ei gwmpasu'n helpu i benderfynu beth sy'n debygol o fod yn gyfnod rhesymol. A bydd gwahaniaethau barn. Byddai'n well gan rai pobl weld ymchwiliad byr a miniog sy'n canolbwyntio ar un neu ddau o faterion i gael y gwir yn gyflym. Wedi'r cyfan, mae hyn wedi bod yn digwydd ers amser maith ac efallai na fydd rhai pobl eisiau amser hir o fynd dros hanes sy'n boenus ac yn anodd. Efallai yr hoffai rhai pobl weld ymchwiliad yn ffurfio casgliad yn ystod eu bywydau. A bydd eraill yn dweud 'Rhaid ichi gynnal yr ymchwiliad llawnaf posibl, ac os yw hynny'n cymryd mwy o amser, wel dyna ni.' Dyna pam mae'r ymgynghoriad am y cylch gorchwyl yn wirioneddol bwysig, ac wrth ofyn y cwestiynau hynny - . Efallai nad ydych wedi cael cyfle i edrych ar y wefan, ond rwy'n meddwl mai un peth sy'n gymorth mawr yw mai ei bwriad yw canolbwyntio meddyliau pobl ar beth i'w ofyn a pham, ac mae'n rhoi'r syniad i bobl y bydd ymchwiliad â mwy o bwyslais yn gallu bod yn fyrrach, ond y bydd ymchwiliad ehangach yn gorfod bod yn hirach. Felly, mae angen i bobl feddwl am yr hyn sydd bwysicaf iddynt wrth ymateb i'r ymgynghoriad hwnnw, ac wrth helpu i lunio'r cylch gorchwyl. Ond rwy'n meddwl bod y ffaith bod cadeirydd yr ymchwiliad yn dechrau â'r meddwl agored hwnnw ac yn gofyn i bobl beth yw eu barn yn arwydd da o'r ffordd y dylem ddisgwyl i'r ymchwiliad gael ei gynnal.