English: Absolutely, and I very much agree with the Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr, and that's why this inquiry should go ahead by the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister. Now, let me remind Members that a key part of this inquiry is the First Minister's response to a written Assembly question from an opposition Member. The First Minister made it abundantly clear in November 2014, in a response to my colleague Darren Millar, that no allegations had been made, and yet, in response to an oral Assembly question, the First Minister has indicated any issues that were brought to his attention at that time were dealt with. Indeed, the committee inquiry would not just consider the First Minister's conduct and that of his office, but also the First Minister's response and attitude to Assembly business. If Ministers can change their answers to Assembly scrutiny, then what does that say about our institution? Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that the First Minister faces questions from an Assembly committee and, of course, the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister is the most suitable committee. Let me also remind the Welsh Government that their own business manager made it crystal clear in the Business Committee meeting last week that she was happy to see this inquiry brought before the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister as soon as possible. Therefore, it's deeply disappointing that the Welsh Government has chosen to renege on its initial position, and this sends yet another statement to the people of Wales that the Welsh Government only answers questions when it feels like it, on its own terms. It's my view that the to-ing and fro-ing on this issue has not helped the Assembly's reputation at all, and it's now time for this matter to be dealt with effectively through our own robust scrutiny channels. If the name 'Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister' tells the people of Wales anything, it's that it convenes to scrutinise the First Minister. The remit of the committee, as stated on the Assembly's website, and I quote, is 'to scrutinise the First Minister on any matter relevant to the exercise of the functions of the Welsh Government.' Unquote. Therefore, this inquiry could not meet the criteria of the remit more adequately. Now, if the Welsh Government amends this motion today by bypassing this scrutiny avenue, then it effectively tells the people of Wales that the committee only scrutinises the First Minister when the First Minister wants it to. And the view - . And the view of an unnamed Labour Assembly Member, in media reports last week, that this process would lead to a 'political bunfight' is absolutely absurd. It shows no respect for the Assembly Members sitting on that committee, which is, frankly, alarming, as every one of those Members is a committee Chair that was democratically elected to their role by this Assembly. The Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister is formed by not only some of our most experienced Assembly Members, but by those who are the front faces of Welsh Government scrutiny. And I can hear mutterings from the Labour benches. If somebody wants to intervene on that point, then I'm quite willing to give way. No. Now, it's my view that, as part of the inquiry, the committee should take evidence from a range of witnesses. Those witnesses must include not just the First Minister, but also his staff and office at the time, as well as former Members and former special advisers, so that the committee can be confident that the range of evidence received is balanced and comprehensive. I also believe that the committee should prepare a report of its findings to the Assembly by February half term 2018. It's important that a focus and direction is given to the inquiry from the outset. The remit of the committee's inquiry should also consider the points raised in today's motion. It's absolutely crucial that the allegations are thoroughly examined, as well as any action taken, as a result of bullying complaints. And, as I mentioned earlier, the validity of the answers given by the First Minister to the National Assembly for Wales in relation to such allegations is a vital reason why the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister should undertake this inquiry in the first place. And so, therefore, the First Minister's response to Assembly questions must be given significant attention as part of this inquiry. At the very least, this needs to be clarified so that the people of Wales can have full confidence in the Welsh Government's operations. The Welsh Government's amendment to this motion simply shows the First Minister's attempt to set his own scrutiny by self appointing an independent adviser to investigate his actions in the last two weeks. There's also no confirmation that that there will be any public scrutiny by the First Minister's adviser, and there is certainly no confirmation in the amendment that the First Minister's own inquiry will consider his responses to questions in recent years. In fact, it merely states that it will consider allegations made in the past two weeks. Therefore, in closing, Llywydd, there has been talk in recent weeks of delivering natural justice, and an inquiry that is set on the Government's own terms behind closed doors does not set that agenda. A public, transparent forum is one of the vehicles to deliver that, and so it's entirely appropriate that this motion is allowed to pass. Indeed, the Assembly has always prided itself on being an open and transparent forum, and it's crucial that we continue to operate in this manner. No Member should deny this process from happening. Therefore, I urge Members to support this motion and send a message to the people of Wales that the National Assembly for Wales is free to scrutinise the First Minister when the opportunity calls for it.
Welsh: Yn hollol, ac rwy'n cytuno'n gryf gyda'r Aelod dros Ddwyrain Caerfyrddin a Dinefwr, a dyna pam y dylai'r ymchwiliad hwn fynd yn ei flaen gan y Pwyllgor Craffu ar Waith y Prif Weinidog. Nawr, gadewch i mi atgoffa'r Aelodau mai rhan allweddol o'r ymchwiliad hwn yw ymateb y Prif Weinidog i gwestiwn Cynulliad ysgrifenedig gan Aelod o'r wrthblaid. Gwnaeth y Prif Weinidog hi'n gwbl glir ym mis Tachwedd 2014, mewn ymateb i fy nghyd-Aelod, Darren Millar, nad oedd unrhyw honiadau wedi'u gwneud, ac eto, mewn ymateb i gwestiwn llafar yn y Cynulliad, mae'r Prif Weinidog wedi nodi bod unrhyw faterion a ddaeth i'w sylw ar y pryd wedi cael eu trin. Yn wir, byddai ymchwiliad y pwyllgor nid yn unig yn ystyried ymddygiad y Prif Weinidog a'i swyddfa, ond hefyd ymateb y Prif Weinidog a'i agwedd tuag at fusnes y Cynulliad. Os gall Gweinidogion newid eu hatebion ar gyfer eu craffu gan y Cynulliad, beth y mae hynny'n ei ddweud am ein sefydliad? Felly, mae'n gwbl briodol fod y Prif Weinidog yn wynebu cwestiynau gan un o bwyllgorau'r Cynulliad ac wrth gwrs, y Pwyllgor Craffu ar Waith y Prif Weinidog yw'r pwyllgor mwyaf addas. Hefyd hoffwn atgoffa Llywodraeth Cymru fod eu rheolwr busnes eu hunain wedi dweud yn gwbl glir yng nghyfarfod y Pwyllgor Busnes yr wythnos diwethaf ei bod yn hapus i weld yr ymchwiliad hwn yn cael ei ddwyn gerbron y Pwyllgor Craffu ar Waith y Prif Weinidog mor fuan â phosibl. Felly, mae'n siomedig iawn fod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi dewis cefnu ar ei safbwynt cychwynnol, ac mae hyn yn anfon neges arall eto i bobl Cymru nad yw Llywodraeth Cymru ond yn ateb cwestiynau pan fo'n teimlo fel gwneud hynny, ar ei thelerau ei hun. Yn fy marn nid yw'r pendilio ar y mater hwn wedi helpu enw da y Cynulliad o gwbl, ac mae'n bryd bellach i'r mater hwn gael ei drin yn effeithiol drwy ein sianeli craffu cadarn ein hunain. Os yw'r enw 'Pwyllgor Craffu ar Waith y Prif Weinidog' yn dweud unrhyw beth wrth bobl Cymru, mae'n dangos ei fod yn cyfarfod i graffu ar waith y Prif Weinidog. Cylch gwaith y pwyllgor, fel y nodir ar wefan y Cynulliad, ac rwy'n dyfynnu, yw craffu ar y Prif Weinidog mewn perthynas ag unrhyw fater sy'n berthnasol i arfer swyddogaethau Llywodraeth Cymru. Cau'r dyfyniad. Felly, ni allai'r ymchwiliad hwn fodloni meini prawf y cylch gorchwyl yn fwy digonol. Nawr, os yw Llywodraeth Cymru yn diwygio'r cynnig hwn heddiw drwy osgoi'r llwybr craffu hwn, yna mae'n dweud wrth bobl Cymru, i bob pwrpas, nad yw'r pwyllgor ond yn craffu ar waith y Prif Weinidog pan fo'r Prif Weinidog yn dymuno iddo wneud hynny. Ac mae safbwynt - . Ac mae safbwynt Aelod Cynulliad Llafur dienw, mewn adroddiadau yn y cyfryngau yr wythnos diwethaf, y buasai'r broses hon yn arwain at 'ffrae wleidyddol' yn gwbl hurt. Nid yw'n dangos unrhyw barch at Aelodau'r Cynulliad sy'n aelodau o'r pwyllgor hwnnw, ac mae hynny'n frawychus a dweud y gwir, gan fod pob un o'r Aelodau hynny yn Gadeirydd pwyllgor a etholwyd yn ddemocrataidd i'w swydd gan y Cynulliad hwn. Ffurfiwyd y Pwyllgor Craffu ar Waith y Prif Weinidog, nid yn unig gan rai o'n Haelodau Cynulliad mwyaf profiadol, ond gan y rhai sy'n wynebau blaen y broses o graffu ar Lywodraeth Cymru. A gallaf glywed mwmian o'r meinciau Llafur. Os oes rhywun am ymyrryd ar y pwynt hwnnw, rwy'n eithaf parod i ildio. Nac oes. Nawr, yn fy marn i, fel rhan o'r ymchwiliad, dylai'r pwyllgor gymryd tystiolaeth gan amrywiaeth o dystion. Rhaid i'r tystion hynny gynnwys nid yn unig y Prif Weinidog, ond hefyd ei staff a'i swyddfa ar y pryd, yn ogystal â chyn-Aelodau a chyn-gynghorwyr arbennig, fel y gall y pwyllgor fod yn hyderus fod yr ystod o dystiolaeth a gafwyd yn gytbwys ac yn gynhwysfawr. Credaf hefyd y dylai'r pwyllgor baratoi adroddiad ar ei ganfyddiadau i'r Cynulliad erbyn hanner tymor mis Chwefror 2018. Mae'n bwysig fod ffocws a chyfeiriad yn cael eu rhoi i'r ymchwiliad o'r cychwyn cyntaf. Dylai cylch gorchwyl ymchwiliad y pwyllgor ystyried y pwyntiau a godwyd yn y cynnig heddiw hefyd. Mae'n gwbl hanfodol fod yr honiadau'n cael eu harchwilio'n drylwyr, a chamau'n cael eu rhoi ar waith o ganlyniad i gwynion am fwlio. Ac fel y soniais yn gynharach, mae dilysrwydd yr atebion a roddir gan y Prif Weinidog i Gynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru mewn perthynas â honiadau o'r fath yn rheswm allweddol pam y dylai'r Pwyllgor Craffu ar Waith y Prif Weinidog gynnal yr ymchwiliad hwn yn y lle cyntaf. Ac felly, rhaid i ymateb y Prif Weinidog i gwestiynau'r Cynulliad gael sylw sylweddol fel rhan o'r ymchwiliad hwn. Fan lleiaf, mae angen egluro hyn fel y gall pobl Cymru fod â hyder llawn yng ngwaith Llywodraeth Cymru. Nid yw gwelliant y Llywodraeth i'r cynnig hwn ond yn dangos ymgais y Prif Weinidog i bennu ei broses graffu ei hun drwy fynd ati ei hun i benodi cynghorydd annibynnol i ymchwilio i'w weithredoedd yn y pythefnos diwethaf. Nid oes unrhyw gadarnhad ychwaith na fydd unrhyw graffu cyhoeddus gan gynghorydd y Prif Weinidog, ac yn sicr ni cheir cadarnhad yn y gwelliant y bydd ymchwiliad y Prif Weinidog ei hun yn ystyried ei ymatebion i gwestiynau yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf. Mewn gwirionedd, nid yw ond yn dweud y bydd yn ystyried honiadau a wnaed yn ystod y bythefnos diwethaf. Felly, i gloi, Lywydd, bu sôn yn yr wythnosau diwethaf am sicrhau cyfiawnder naturiol, ac nid yw ymchwiliad a osodwyd ar delerau'r Llywodraeth ei hun y tu ôl i ddrysau caeedig yn gosod yr agenda honno. Fforwm cyhoeddus a thryloyw yw un o'r cyfryngau ar gyfer cyflawni hynny, ac felly mae'n gwbl briodol fod y cynnig hwn yn cael ei ganiatáu i basio. Yn wir, mae'r Cynulliad bob amser wedi ymfalchïo yn y ffaith ei bod yn fforwm agored a thryloyw, ac mae'n hollbwysig ein bod yn parhau i weithredu yn y modd hwn. Ni ddylai unrhyw Aelod rwystro'r broses hon rhag digwydd. Felly, anogaf yr Aelodau i gefnogi'r cynnig hwn ac anfon neges i bobl Cymru fod Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru yn rhydd i graffu ar waith y Prif Weinidog pan fo cyfle'n galw am wneud hynny.