English: Well, as far as we can see, the Government hasn't made any effort to ask the views of users of the Welsh language. As they say in the EM, they only asked the bodies, and I can't see how that is a balanced and open means of drawing up regulations that relate to such an important field. We're talking about 90 per cent of people's engagement with the NHS. You have to start from the beginning, in a way. The Government decided to exempt primary care from the standards, and then it was only through a written question, as I understand it, that we found the information regarding what in general the six duties would be, and that was in April of last year. We had to ask for a meeting with the Government to discuss those, and we succeeded in having a meeting in October last year about the issue. It was said in that meeting that they had already agreed on the regulations with professional bodies. So, there is a place to question whether there was a point in us trying to get a meeting to discuss it, because they'd already said that they'd agreed with the profession in relation to what the nature of these regulations would be. And now, we're in a situation where we have 21 days to try and respond to something like this. Clearly, that's not sufficient nor a fair way of treating users. So, in reality, I think the process has been disrespectful to you as a committee and the democracy of Wales, but has also been disrespectful to Welsh language users, because if you list in the EM that you've only consulted with bodies, how is that a way of treating people? Clearly, if they say in a meeting in October, 'We've agreed on these regulations', it's clear that they're available somewhere; they could have sent them to the committee. So, to say now that they're bringing these in and giving 21 days is a totally disrespectful way of treating democracy in Wales, let alone Welsh speakers.
Welsh: Wel, does dim - hyd y gwelwn ni, dyw'r Llywodraeth ddim wedi gwneud unrhyw ymdrech i holi am farn defnyddwyr y Gymraeg. Fel maen nhw'n ei ddweud yn y memorandwm esboniadol, maen nhw ond wedi holi'r cyrff, a dwi ddim yn gallu gweld sut mae honno'n ffordd gytbwys ac agored o lunio rheoliadau sydd yn ymwneud â maes mor bwysig. Rydyn ni'n sôn am 90 y cant o ymwneud pobl â'r gwasanaeth iechyd. Mae'n rhaid dechrau o'r cychwyn, mewn ffordd. Fe wnaeth y Llywodraeth benderfynu eithrio gofal sylfaenol o'r safonau iechyd, ac wedyn dim ond trwy gwestiwn ysgrifenedig, fel dwi'n ei deall hi, y gwnaethom ni ddod o hyd i wybodaeth ynglŷn â beth yn gyffredinol fyddai'r chwe dyletswydd yna, ac roedd hynny ym mis Ebrill y llynedd. Fe wnaethom ni orfod gofyn am gyfarfod gyda'r Llywodraeth i drafod y rheini, ac fe lwyddom ni i gael cyfarfod ym mis Hydref y llynedd am y mater. Dywedwyd yn y cyfarfod yna eu bod nhw eisoes wedi cytuno ar hyd a lled y rheoliadau gyda'r cyrff proffesiynol. Felly, mae yna le i gwestiynu a oedd yna bwynt i ni drio cael cyfarfod i drafod y peth, achos roedden nhw eisoes wedi dweud eu bod nhw wedi cytuno gyda'r proffesiwn ynglŷn â beth fyddai natur y rheoliadau hyn. A nawr, mae'n sefyllfa lle mae gennym ni 21 diwrnod i drio ymateb i rywbeth fel hyn. Yn amlwg, dyw e ddim yn ddigonol nac yn ffordd deg i drin defnyddwyr. Felly, a dweud y gwir, dwi'n meddwl bod y broses wedi bod yn hollol amharchus i chi fel pwyllgor ac i ddemocratiaeth Cymru, ond yn amlwg yn amharchus i ddefnyddwyr y Gymraeg, achos os ŷch chi'n rhestru mewn memorandwm esboniadol eich bod chi dim ond wedi ymgynghori gyda chyrff, sut mae hwnna'n ffordd o drin pobl? Yn amlwg, os ydyn nhw'n dweud mewn cyfarfod ym mis Hydref wrthym ni, 'Rydym ni wedi cytuno ar hyd a lled y rheoliadau', mae'n amlwg eu bod nhw ar gael yn rhywle; gallen nhw fod wedi eu hanfon nhw at y pwyllgor, siawns. So, mae dweud nawr eu bod nhw'n eu cyflwyno nhw a rhoi 21 diwrnod yn hollol amharchus fel ffordd o ymdrin â democratiaeth Cymru, heb sôn am ddefnyddwyr y Gymraeg, dwi'n meddwl.