techiaith/cofnodycynulliad_en-cy huggingface dataset:
English: Okay. Moving on now to issues that are even more technical, even, than those that we have been considering hitherto, under the delegated powers. Now, naturally, you'll be aware, of course, that the Bill contains eight powers for the Welsh Ministers to make different regulations and guidance and so on, and to go into the detail of that, can I ask, first of all, in your opinion, whether the Bill strikes the appropriate balance between the provisions on the face the Bill and what is then left to regulations? And if you do believe that the balance struck is the right one, how did you come to that decision?
Welsh: Ocê. I symud ymlaen at faterion hyd yn oed yn fwy technegol na rydym ni wedi bod yn eu cysidro mor belled, o dan bwerau wedi'u dirprwyo, yn naturiol, fe fyddwch chi'n ymwybodol bod y Bil yn cynnwys wyth pŵer i Weinidogion wneud gwahanol reoliadau a chanllawiau ac ati, ac i fynd i mewn i'r manylion hyn, a allaf i ofyn, yn y lle cyntaf, yn eich tyb chi, a ydy'r Bil yn taro'r cydbwysedd cywir rhwng darpariaethau ar wyneb y Bil a'r hyn a adewir i reoliadau? Ac os ydych chi yn credu bod y cydbwysedd yn iawn, sut wnaethoch chi ddod i'r penderfyniad yna?
English: Okay. When do you anticipate the regulations will be laid, and will any of the regulations be available in draft version before Stage 1 consideration of the Bill ends? And if they are available in draft form before Stage 1 of the Bill comes to an end, why can't those provisions be put on the face of the Bill?
Welsh: Ocê. Pryd ydych chi'n rhagweld y bydd rheoliadau yn cael eu gosod, ac a fydd unrhyw un o'r rheoliadau ar gael ar ffurf drafft cyn i Gyfnod 1 y Bil ddod i ben? Ac os bydd un o'r rheini ar gael ar ffurf drafft cyn i Gyfnod 1 y Bil ddod i ben, pam na ellir rhoi'r darpariaethau hynny ar wyneb y Bil?
English: Thank you for that. Moving on to other sections - an old friend of this committee, of course, are the Henry VII powers. We always like talking about different Tudor kings in this committee, so, under sections 7 and 13 of the Bill, included are regulations to make powers to amend primary legislation, namely these Henry VIII powers, and they're then subject to the affirmative procedure. Section 7 provides powers to amend the definition of what a 'permitted payment' is, and section 13, as you'll be aware, can amend the level of fixed penalty in respect of an offence under the Bill. Now, given that these are so important, as they can change what a landlord or letting agent can do, and also control directly the level of deterrent, did you consider applying the superaffirmative procedure?
Welsh: Diolch am hynny. I symud ymlaen i adrannau eraill - hen ffrind i'r pwyllgor yma, wrth gwrs, ydy pwerau Harri VII. Rydym ni'n wastad yn licio sôn am frenhinoedd o'r oes Duduraidd yn y pwyllgor yma, ac felly, o dan adrannau 7 ac 13 o'r Bil, wedi'u cynnwys mae pwerau i wneud rheoliadau i ddiwygio deddfwriaeth sylfaenol, hynny yw pwerau Harri VIII, ac maent yn ddarostyngedig i'r weithdrefn gadarnhaol. Mae adran 7 yn cynnwys pwerau i ddiwygio diffiniad 'taliad a ganiateir' ac mae adran 13, fel rydych chi'n gwybod, yn golygu y gellir diwygio lefel y gosb benodedig mewn cysylltiad efo trosedd o dan y Bil. Nawr, o ystyried bod y rhain mor bwysig, gan y gallant newid yr hyn y gall landlord neu asiant osod ei wneud, ynghyd â rheoli'n uniongyrchol lefel y rhwystrau, a wnaethoch chi ystyried defnyddio'r weithdrefn uwchgadarnhaol?
English: Okay. Well, the affirmative - this committee also likes the superaffirmative procedure historically, in this committee, because of that additional level of scrutiny that can happen when you look at even more evidence from the bodies that are affected out there. But to move on, another section now - section 18 (1): this provides a power to Welsh Ministers to amend the Consumer Protection Act 2015 in relation to the duties of letting agents to publicise fees when advertising on any online provider. Now, the power includes the ability to apply multiple penalties for the same breach. Given the potential serious financial penalties that could be applied to letting agents, why are these regulations not subject to the affirmative procedure as well?
Welsh: Ocê. Wel, mae'r cadarnhaol - hefyd, ar y pwyllgor yma, rydym ni'n licio'r weithdrefn uwchgadarnhaol hefyd yn draddodiadol ac yn hanesyddol, yn y pwyllgor yma, achos y lefel ychwanegol o graffu a all ddigwydd wrth inni fynd ar ôl hyd yn oed rhagor o dystiolaeth o'r cyrff sy'n cael eu heffeithio allan yn fanna. Ond i symud ymlaen, adran arall rŵan - adran 18 (1): mae hwnnw'n cynnwys pŵer i Weinidogion Cymru ddiwygio Deddf Diogelu Defnyddwyr 2015 mewn perthynas efo'r dyletswyddau a'r asiantau gosod i gyhoeddi ffioedd wrth hysbysebu ar unrhyw lwyfan ar-lein. Nawr, mae'r pŵer yn cynnwys y gallu i osod sawl cosb am yr un achos o dorri dyletswydd. O ystyried y cosbau ariannol difrifol y byddai'n bosib eu rhoi ar asiantau gosod, pam nad yw'r rheoliadau hyn yn ddarostyngedig i'r weithdrefn gadarnhaol hefyd?
English: Don't worry: this committee can scrutinise every detail. But moving on to another section: section 19 (1) provides Welsh Ministers with the power to apply the Bill to assured tenancies should the relevant parts of the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 dealing with standard occupation contracts not come into force in time - we've just had that conversation. Given that you've indicated, on giving evidence to the Equalities, Local Government and Communities Committee, that you believe that the relevant parts will come into force in March 2019, is this power needed?
Welsh: Na phoener: mae'r pwyllgor hwn yn wastad yn gallu craffu ar unrhyw fanylyn. Ond i symud ymlaen at adran arall: mae adran 19 (1) yn rhoi pŵer i Weinidogion Cymru gymhwyso'r Bil i denantiaethau diogel os na fydd y rhannau perthnasol o Ddeddf Rhentu Cartrefi (Cymru) 2016 sy'n ymwneud â chontractau meddiannaeth safonol yn dod i rym mewn pryd - rydym ni newydd gael y sgwrs yna. O ystyried i chi nodi, wrth roi tystiolaeth i'r Pwyllgor Cydraddoldeb, Llywodraeth Leol a Chymunedau, eich bod yn credu y bydd y rhannau perthnasol yn dod i rym ym mis Mawrth 2019, a oes angen y pŵer yma?
English: Okay. Thank you for that, Minister. Moving on now to another technical matter, but an extremely important one because it relates to finance, paragraph 2 (4) of Schedule 1 provides Welsh Ministers with the power to prescribe a limit of the security deposit that a contract holder is requested to pay. Given that this can directly affect a person's financial capability of renting a property, why isn't this power subject to the affirmative procedure?
Welsh: Ocê. Diolch am hynny, Gweinidog. I symud ymlaen at fater technegol arall ond hynod bwysig, achos mae'n golygu arian, mae paragraff 2 (4) o Atodlen 1 yn rhoi pŵer i Weinidogion Cymru ragnodi cyfyngiad ar y blaendal sicrwydd y gellid gofyn i ddeiliaid contract ei dalu. O ystyried y gall hyn effeithio'n uniongyrchol ar allu ariannol person i rentu eiddo, pam nad yw'r pŵer yma'n ddarostyngedig i'r weithdrefn gadarnhaol?
English: Okay. And the final question for now: Schedule 1 paragraph 6 provides Welsh Ministers with powers to change the meaning of - and I quote - 'permitted variations' in paragraph 1 of Schedule 1. Your statement of policy intent says that regulations may be needed if there are changes to Welsh Government policy in the future. If this is the case, why isn't this power subject to the affirmative procedure?
Welsh: Ocê. Yr un olaf wrthyf fi am y tro ydy: mae paragraff 6 o Atodlen 1 yn rhoi pwerau i Weinidogion Cymru newid diffiniad - ac rydw i'n dyfynnu - 'amrywiad a ganiateir' ym mharagraff 1 o Atodlen 1. Mae eich datganiad ar fwriad y polisi yn nodi ei bod yn bosibl y bydd angen creu rheoliadau os ceir newidiadau i bolisi Llywodraeth Cymru yn y dyfodol. Os dyna'r achos, pam nad yw'r pŵer yma hefyd yn ddarostyngedig i'r weithdrefn gadarnhaol?
English: Yes, because on the back of that, it's also been a historical issue for this committee to always fall out with the Government on what exactly is the definition of something that's technical. For this committee, for something technical, we're talking about details, about small issues, not something, which the Chair has suggested, that could be quite a fundamental change. So, we're not quite ready to say that something is technical without there being solid evidence behind it from your side of things. That's where we're coming from with this question.
Welsh: Ie, achos ar gefn hynny, mae wedi bod yn fater hanesyddol i'r pwyllgor yma wastad cwympo mas efo'r Llywodraeth ynglŷn â beth yn union ydy diffiniad rhywbeth technegol. I'r pwyllgor yma, gyda rhywbeth technegol, manion rydym ni'n sôn amdanyn nhw, nid rhywbeth, fel y mae'r Cadeirydd wedi awgrymu, a allai fod yn newid eithaf sylfaenol. Felly, nid ydym yn barod iawn i ddweud bod rhywbeth yn dechnegol heb fod yna dystiolaeth swmpus y tu ôl i'r gred yna o'ch ochr chi. Wedyn, dyna o lle rydym ni'n dod efo'r cwestiwn yma.
English: Thank you, Chair. Before we move on, just to confirm something that I asked you in the health committee the other day - one of the gaps that we have at present, when we talk about collaboration between local authorities and health boards, is the fact that professional workers in the health service can't redirect patients with a diagnosis of autism to a department of local government, such as education or social services, for that treatment. As general practitioners, we can refer patients to see someone in the hospital, but when I write to an education director or a social services director, nothing happens, because they don't have to accept that referral. Can you foresee, within your particular Bill, that we can address that?
Welsh: Diolch, Gadeirydd. Cyn inni symud ymlaen, jest i gadarnhau rhywbeth y gwnes i ei ofyn i chi yn y pwyllgor iechyd y diwrnod o'r blaen - un gagendor sydd ar hyn o bryd, pan rydych chi'n sôn am gydweithio rhwng awdurdodau lleol a byrddau iechyd, ydy'r ffaith nad yw gweithwyr proffesiynol yn y gwasanaeth iechyd yn gallu arallgyfeirio cleifion efo diagnosis o awtistiaeth i adran o lywodraeth leol, megis addysg neu wasanaethau cymdeithasol, am y driniaeth. Fel meddygon teulu, rydym ni'n gallu arallgyfeirio ein cleifion i weld rhywun yn yr ysbyty, ond pan rydw i'n ysgrifennu at gyfarwyddwr addysg neu at gyfarwyddwr gwasanaethau cymdeithasol, nid oes dim byd yn digwydd, achos nid oes rheidrwydd arnyn nhw i dderbyn y referral yna. A wyt ti'n gallu rhagweld, o fewn dy Fil di, ein bod ni'n gallu unioni'r cam yna?
English: Okay. Thank you for that confirmation. I have - do you want to respond to that?
Welsh: Ocê. Diolch am y cadarnhad yna. Mae gen i - ydych chi eisiau ymateb?
English: Great. Thank you very much for that confirmation. I have brief questions now, on the issue of definitions. Again, under section 9 (1) - the definition of autism spectrum disorder. You've partially referred to this already, in terms of the definition used in this Bill, by referring to the definition used by the World Health Organization. Why was there a power to extend the definition for the purposes of this Bill beyond that international definition? Why do you want it to be wider than the WHO definition? I understand your personal motivation, perhaps - [ Laughter.] - but what was the opinion shared by those with whom you consulted, that you were going to expand this definition?
Welsh: Grêt. Diolch yn fawr am y cadarnhad yna. Mae gen i gwestiynau byr rŵan, a jest mater o ddiffiniadau. Eto, o dan adran 9 (1) - diffiniad o anhwylder sbectrwm awtistiaeth. Rwyt ti wedi rhannol gyfeirio at hyn eisoes, yn nhermau y diffiniad at ddibenion y Bil yma, drwy gyfeirio at y diffiniad a ddefnyddir gan Sefydliad Iechyd y Byd. Pam mae pŵer i ymestyn y diffiniad at ddibenion y Bil yma y tu hwnt i'r diffiniad rhyngwladol hwnnw? Pam wyt ti eisiau bod yn fwy na'r WHO? Rwy'n deall y cymhelliad personol, efallai - [ Chwerthin.] - ond beth oedd barn y sawl roeddet ti wedi ymgynghori â nhw, dy fod ti'n mynd i ehangu'r diffiniad?
English: I think you've answered most of the technical questions that were to follow. Just to confirm, therefore, you're clear that this is an autism Bill, but you are also open to that idea of other neurodevelopmental disorders being included. And you've confirmed why you haven't placed other neurodevelopmental disorders in the long title and so on, but that doesn't close the door on any ensuing development, if there is a need for it. And in the same regard, your explanatory memorandum for the Bill contains a lot of information about autism. Did you not feel the necessity or temptation to include information about other neurodevelopmental disorders in that place? To assist people - Suzy's argument here, and people have been asking, 'Well, what about the other disorders?', or even - . I take it that you're saying now that this is going to be subject to the affirmative procedure; have you thought about the superaffirmative procedure should you wish to extend this or to make it clear to people that other disorders are going to come under this compass as well, should the need arise?
Welsh: Rwy'n credu dy fod di wedi ateb y rhan fwyaf o'r cwestiynau technegol a oedd yn dod. Jest i gadarnhau, felly, rwyt ti'n ddigon clir taw Bil ar awtistiaeth ydy hwn, ond rwyt ti'n ddigon agored i'r syniad o anhwylderau niwroddatblygiadol eraill. A hefyd rwyt ti wedi cadarnhau pam nad wyt ti wedi gosod anhwylderau niwroddatblygiadol eraill yn gyffredinol yn y teitl hir ac ati, ond hefyd nid ydy hynny ddim yn cau'r drws ar unrhyw ddatblygiad maes o law, os bydd angen. Ac yn yr un peth, mae eich memorandwm esboniadol i'r Bil yn cynnwys llawer iawn o wybodaeth am awtistiaeth. Onid oeddet ti'n teimlo rheidrwydd neu'r demtasiwn i gynnwys gwybodaeth am yr anhwylderau niwroddatblygiadol eraill yma yn y fan yna? I helpu pobl - dadl Suzy yn fan hyn, ac mae pobl wedi bod yn dweud, 'Wel, beth am yr holl anhwylderau eraill?', neu efallai hyd yn oed - . Rwy'n cymryd dy fod di'n dweud rŵan fod pethau yn mynd i basio gan bŵer cadarnhaol; a wyt ti wedi meddwl am bŵer uwchgadarnhaol hyd yn oed, os wyt ti eisiau ymhelaethu neu ledu efallai, neu ei gwneud yn glir i bobl fod anhwylderau eraill yn mynd i gwympo o dan hwn os bydd rhaid?
English: Just to confirm, going back to Suzy's questions, we've heard all of the arguments, and I'm very much in favour of this Bill - I want it to succeed - but to other people out there who are arguing, 'Well, they are going to pass and Act for autism, so what about and Act for MS, and what about an Act for stroke, and so on?', within all of this, one could argue that the improvements in services likely to stem from this particular Bill are going to be of benefit to everyone else who has any kind of neurodevelopmental disorder. That is, what we want is to guarantee a service, which means, as a rule, ensuring more therapists in whatever field, and more physiotherapists, and that would be of benefit to whichever disorder you may have. It will just happen to be driven by your autism Bill.
Welsh: Ac felly, jest i gadarnhau wedi hynny, yn ôl i gwestiwn Suzy, hynny yw, rydym ni wedi clywed y dadleuon, ac rwy'n gryf o blaid y Bil yma - rydw i eisiau iddo fo fod yn llwyddiant - ond i'r sawl sydd allan yn fan yna sydd yn dadlau, 'Wel, os ydym ni'n mynd i basio Deddf gogyfer awtistiaeth, wel beth am Ddeddf gogyfer MS, a beth am Ddeddf gogyfer strôc, a hyn i gyd?', o fewn hyn i gyd mi allem ni ddadlau bod gwelliant yn y gwasanaethau sy'n mynd i ddeillio o hyn yn mynd i fod o fudd i bob un arall sydd ag unrhyw fath o anhwylder niwroddatblygiadol. Hynny yw, beth ydym ni ei eisiau ydy gwarantu gwasanaeth, ac mae hynny'n golygu, fel rheol, rhagor o therapyddion ym mha faes bynnag, rhagor o ffisiotherapyddion, a bydd hynny o fudd i ba anhwylder bynnag sydd gyda chi, ond yn digwydd bod yn cael ei yrru trwodd gan eich mesur neu eich Bil awtistiaeth.
English: Good afternoon, Members. Can we all come to order, please?
Welsh: Prynhawn da, Aelodau. A gawn ni i gyd ddod i drefn, os gwelwch yn dda?
English: The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the First Minister. Question 1, Russell George.
Welsh: Yr eitem gyntaf ar ein hagenda y prynhawn yma yw cwestiynau i'r Prif Weinidog. Cwestiwn 1, Russell George.
English: The Welsh ambulance service continues to exceed the national target to respond to immediately life-threatening or red calls within eight minutes. In August, 74.4 per cent of red calls received a response within eight minutes, with a median response time of just over five minutes.
Welsh: Mae gwasanaeth ambiwlans Cymru yn parhau i ragori ar y targed cenedlaethol i ymateb i alwadau lle ceir bygythiad uniongyrchol i fywyd neu alwadau coch o fewn wyth munud. Ym mis Awst, cafodd 74.4 y cant o alwadau coch ymateb o fewn wyth munud, gydag amser ymateb canolrif o ychydig dros bum munud.
English: Thank you for your answer, First Minister. Back in March, I questioned the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services on ambulance response times in Powys, following delays in the time it takes for an ambulance to arrive following a 999 call. This has been partly attributed to ambulances waiting outside hospitals to transfer patients into the care of hospital staff. In a letter to me on 24 July, the chief executive of the Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust confirmed that the average ambulance handover times for January to June of this year was nine minutes for Telford, 26 minutes for Shrewsbury, and a shocking one hour and two minutes for Wrexham Maelor. I would be grateful if you could provide details about what you're doing to improve the handover time at Wrexham Maelor, which, of course, is under the direct control of Welsh Government, to prevent further delays to ambulance response times for the residents of Montgomeryshire.
Welsh: Diolch am eich ateb, Prif Weinidog. Holais Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Iechyd a Gwasanaethau Cymdeithasol ym mis Mawrth am amseroedd ymateb ambiwlansys ym Mhowys, yn dilyn oediadau o ran yr amser y mae'n ei gymryd i ambiwlans gyrraedd yn dilyn galwad 999. Priodolwyd hyn yn rhannol i ambiwlansys yn disgwyl y tu allan i ysbytai i drosglwyddo cleifion i ofal staff yr ysbyty. Mewn llythyr ataf i ar 24 Gorffennaf, cadarnhaodd prif weithredwr Ymddiriedolaeth GIG Gwasanaethau Ambiwlans Cymru bod amseroedd trosglwyddo cyfartalog ambiwlansys o fis Ionawr i fis Mehefin eleni yn naw munud yn Telford, 26 munud yn Amwythig, ac amser brawychus o awr a dau funud yn ysbyty Maelor Wrecsam. Byddwn yn ddiolchgar pe gallech chi ddarparu manylion yr hyn yr ydych chi'n ei wneud i wella'r amser trosglwyddo yn ysbyty Maelor Wrecsam, sydd, wrth gwrs, o dan reolaeth uniongyrchol Llywodraeth Cymru, i osgoi oediadau pellach i amseroedd ymateb ambiwlansys i drigolion Sir Drefaldwyn.
English: Well, there are obviously issues in the English hospitals as well, and there will be times when demand is particularly acute. What I can tell him, though, is that, in terms of Powys, in August, 71.2 per cent of red calls received the response within eight minutes - that's above the national target of 65 per cent for the fourth consecutive month. The typical response time for that type of call was around four minutes and eight seconds - the fastest typical response time in Wales that month. And, finally, whilst no formal time target is in place for amber calls, the typical response for an amber call in Powys was 20 minutes and 17 seconds, in January, again, better than the national average of 24 minutes and 19 seconds.
Welsh: Wel, yn amlwg mae problemau yn ysbytai Lloegr hefyd, a bydd adegau pan fydd y galw yn arbennig o ddwys. Yr hyn y gallaf ei ddweud wrtho, fodd bynnag, yw, o ran Powys, ym mis Awst, yr ymatebwyd i 71.2 y cant o alwadau coch o fewn wyth munud - mae hynny'n uwch na'r targed cenedlaethol o 65 y cant am y pedwerydd mis yn olynol. Tua pedwar munud ac wyth eiliad oedd yr amser ymateb nodweddiadol ar gyfer y math hwnnw o alwad - yr amser ymateb nodweddiadol cyflymaf yng Nghymru y mis hwnnw. Ac, yn olaf, er nad oes targed amser ffurfiol ar waith ar gyfer galwadau ambr, 20 munud ac 17 eiliad oedd yr ymateb nodweddiadol ar gyfer galwad ambr ym Mhowys ym mis Ionawr, sydd unwaith eto yn well na'r cyfartaledd cenedlaethol o 24 munud ac 19 eiliad.
English: We usually talk about ambulance responses to people who have physical ailments, but there are people who have mental health issues too, and we don't have specific teams that respond to mental health calls. Now, in Sweden - in Stockholm, particularly - because of the high number of suicides, there is a special team that has been established, which is a psychiatric emergency response team. Given the need for emergency response to people with acute mental health problems or those at risk of suicide, would you as First Minister agree that the ambulance service in Wales should be looking at the possibility of creating an emergency or rapid mental health team in Wales?
Welsh: Rydym ni'n sôn fel arfer am ymateb ambiwlans i bobl sydd â salwch corfforol. Ond, wrth gwrs, mae yna bobl sydd ag anghenion salwch meddyliol hefyd, ac nid oes gennym ni dimau penodol sy'n ymateb i alwadau iechyd meddwl. Rŵan, yn Sweden - yn Stockholm, yn benodol - oherwydd y nifer uchel o hunanladdiadau, mae yna dîm arbennig wedi cael ei sefydlu, sef tîm ymateb brys seiciatryddol. Rŵan, o ystyried yr angen sydd yna am ymateb brys i bobl sydd ag anhwylder acíwt meddwl neu i'r rheini sydd mewn peryg o hunanladdiad, a ydych chi fel Prif Weinidog yn cytuno y dylai'r gwasanaeth ambiwlans yng Nghymru fod yn edrych ar y posibilrwydd o greu tîm brys iechyd meddwl, neu dimau brys iechyd meddwl, hefyd yng Nghymru?
English: First Minister, there has been a massive increase in demand for ambulances - up around 128 per cent over the last two decades. But the new clinical response model is supposed to ensure that those in the most need get the fastest response - be that a fully crewed ambulance or a rapid-response paramedic. However, last year, 16 per cent of red calls took longer than 10 minutes and 68 people waited more than half an hour for an emergency response. So, First Minister, do you agree that this is unacceptable, and will you outline the actions your Government will take to reduce the number of red calls taking more than 10 minutes and eliminate the number of calls taking over half an hour to respond? Thank you.
Welsh: Prif Weinidog, bu cynnydd aruthrol i'r galw am ambiwlansys - cynnydd o tua 128 y cant dros y ddau ddegawd diwethaf. Ond mae'r model ymateb clinigol newydd i fod i sicrhau bod y rhai hynny sydd â'r mwyaf o angen yn cael yr ymateb cyflymaf - boed hynny'n ambiwlans â chriw llawn neu barafeddyg ymateb cyflym. Fodd bynnag, y llynedd, cymerodd 16 y cant o alwadau coch fwy na 10 munud ac arhosodd 68 o bobl mwy na hanner awr am ymateb brys. Felly, Prif Weinidog, a ydych chi'n cytuno bod hyn yn annerbyniol, ac a wnewch chi amlinellu'r camau y bydd eich Llywodraeth yn eu cymryd i leihau nifer y galwadau coch sy'n cymryd mwy na 10 munud a dileu nifer y galwadau sy'n cymryd dros hanner awr i ymateb iddynt? Diolch.