English: On behalf of Steffan Lewis, who is a member of the committee, may I thank the Finance Committee Chair for his statement today and for discussing the important opportunity we have in terms of improving not only the transparency of ministerial appointments, but also the Assembly's ability to hold the Government to account? It's a very timely statement, if truth be told, given that the Assembly is fast maturing as a legislature. There is sufficient evidence of that - the ink is barely dry on the first piece of Welsh taxation legislation passed in this Chamber yesterday. In my view, introducing pre-appointment hearings would support that broader development and support the maturing of the institution, and, as the Chair said, it would move the National Assembly for Wales towards the same kind of regimes as those adopted in many other legislatures across the world. So, I welcome this proposal of drawing up formal guidelines or a protocol for pre-appointment hearings. I very much hope that the Government will agree to work with the relevant committees in this undertaking, which would develop the Assembly machinery for the benefit of democracy. I look forward to hearing the Government's views on this. I agree with the Chair's comments about ensuring that any arrangements for pre-appointment hearings must be far more than a box-ticking exercise. This is important because the potential of these hearings to enhance the Assembly's ability to scrutinise Government decisions is reliant on the appropriate committee having the relevant information so that the correct decisions can be made. So, I would like to endorse the Chair's call that committees should receive information about candidates, including an explanation from Government as to why they were chosen, in good time in order to enable more effective questioning. Of course, we must also ensure that the Government takes the committee's view on candidates in earnest. I acknowledge that the work is yet to start properly in this area, but has the committee received any proposals on the powers that will be required for committees to ensure that their views are given due attention by Government? To conclude, I understand that arrangements in Westminster provide a veto for certain committees on specific appointments, whilst, for other appointments, a report is prepared or a consultative vote is taken. Does the Chair believe that it's worth considering that kind of approach in drawing up guidelines for the Assembly and that we would perhaps need to vary the powers and influence of any committee according to the appointment in question?
Welsh: Ar ran Steffan Lewis, sy'n aelod o'r pwyllgor, a gaf fi ddiolch i Gadeirydd y Pwyllgor Cyllid am y datganiad heddiw ac am drafod y cyfle pwysig, rwy'n meddwl, sydd o'n blaenau ni i wella nid yn unig tryloywder y penodiadau gweinidogol, ond hefyd gallu'r Cynulliad i ddal y Llywodraeth i gyfrif? Mae'n ddatganiad amserol iawn mewn difrif, o ystyried bod y Cynulliad yn prysur aeddfedu fel deddfwrfa. Mae yna ddigon o dystiolaeth o hynny - prin bod yr inc yn sych ar y Ddeddf trethi Cymreig gyntaf a gafodd ei phasio yn y Siambr yma ddoe. Yn fy marn i, byddai cyflwyno gwrandawiadau cyn penodi yn cefnogi'r datblygiad ehangach yma o aeddfedu, ac, fel soniodd y Cadeirydd, mi fyddai'n symud Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru tuag at yr un drefn â llawer iawn o ddeddfwrfeydd eraill ar draws y byd. Felly, rwy'n croesawu'r cynnig yma i fwrw ymlaen efo'r gwaith o lunio canllawiau ffurfiol ar gyfer cynnal gwrandawiadau cyn penodi. Rwy'n gobeithio'n fawr y bydd y Llywodraeth yn cytuno i weithio efo'r pwyllgorau perthnasol yn y fenter yma - y fenter a fydd yn datblygu peirianwaith y Cynulliad, rwy'n meddwl, er budd ein democratiaeth, ac rwy'n edrych ymlaen at glywed safbwynt y Llywodraeth ar hyn. Rwy'n cytuno efo sylwadau'r Cadeirydd hefyd fod angen sicrhau i drefniadau ar gyfer gwrandawiadau cyn penodi fod yn llawer mwy na dim ond ymarfer ticio bocsys. Mae hyn yn bwysig oherwydd mae potensial y gwrandawiadau yma i wella gallu'r Cynulliad i graffu ar benderfyniadau'r Llywodraeth yn ddibynnol ar y pwyllgor perthnasol yn meddu ar y wybodaeth briodol er mwyn gwneud y penderfyniadau cywir. Felly, mi liciwn i ategu galwad y Cadeirydd bod pwyllgorau'n derbyn gwybodaeth am ymgeiswyr, gan gynnwys esboniad y Llywodraeth em eu dewis nhw mewn da bryd er mwyn galluogi cwestiynu mwy effeithiol. Wrth gwrs, mae'n rhaid hefyd sicrhau bod y Llywodraeth yn cymryd barn pwyllgor am ymgeiswyr o ddifrif. Rwy'n cydnabod bod y gwaith ar y trefniadau eto i'w ddechrau yn iawn, ond a ydy'r pwyllgor wedi derbyn unrhyw gynigion ar y pwerau y bydd eu hangen ar bwyllgorau i sicrhau bod eu barn nhw yn derbyn sylw dyledus gan y Llywodraeth? I gloi, rwy'n deall bod trefniadau San Steffan yn cynnig feto i rai pwyllgorau ar benodiadau penodol, tra, ar gyfer penodiadau eraill, mae yna adroddiad yn cael ei baratoi neu bleidlais ymgynghorol yn unig yn cael ei chynnal. A ydy'r Cadeirydd yn credu ei bod hi'n werth ystyried y math yma o ddull gweithredu wrth ddylunio canllawiau'r Cynulliad a bod angen, efallai, amrywio pŵer pwyllgor a dylanwad y pwyllgor yn ôl y penodiad sydd dan sylw?