English: Thank you very, very much for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. Apologies that I'm not Angela Burns for you today. Can I just associate myself with your remarks thanking the NHS staff for their work, particularly during this last week? I think we've all been surprised and delighted in some ways by the pictures of people stumbling through the snow in order to fulfil what they think are their duties to the population of Wales. I think one obvious way perhaps to recognise that commitment would be to fast track the staff in the NHS when they need the services of the NHS, not least so that they can get the quickest treatment or attention that they need for themselves, but because of the potential effect of that in making them able to come back into the workforce as soon as possible in order to offer their services, perhaps, in so doing, reducing the strain and stress on health boards when they're having to consider taking on agency staff. We know that 330,000 days were lost to stress-related conditions only last year, 2016-17, and, if those could have been acted on a little bit sooner, perhaps it would have been quicker or easier for those members of staff to come back into the workforce and continue offering the exemplary care to the people of Wales. I think agency staff cost £178.8 million last year. That's quite a big saving, if you can get people back into work as quickly as they would like. And, if you're worried at all that this sounds like preferential treatment, I'd ask you to consider the effect of behaving in this particular way, because it means that those NHS staff are back in work sooner and offering their services to the people who need them. We also talked about - . I appreciate that this is a statement on the NHS workforce here, but, following the parliamentary review, I think it's become a little bit less meaningful, if I can put it like that, to talk about the NHS workforce in isolation from the social care workforce. I certainly welcome the investment in the training places for the prevention and rehabilitation professions, and for those training in medical care, but if you're looking at a seamless service - you mentioned it in your statement - I think these kinds of statements need to start talking also now about the impact and career paths of those in non-medical care. So, I was wondering whether we might have a similar statement fairly soon on the social care workforce, not just the NHS workforce. I'm very, very pleased to hear about the growth in the NHS workforce, but could you give us an indication of where that growth has been concentrated geographically? Where are the staff in certain disciplines, and has reconfiguration and some of the noises off that we've heard fairly recently, not least with Hywel Dda, already been seen to have an effect on where people are interested in working, particularly in the hospital setting but not specifically? Yes, we certainly do need more staff in certain professions and specialities. The role of the deanery has come up several times in arguments on this in the past, and I'm wondering whether you can give us some indication of whether there's a specific issue - I'll call it that, as there's not necessarily a problem - with the deanery promoting those specialisms that we need at the moment. Just two more, if you'll bear with me, please, Llywydd. Obviously, I'm very pleased to see that more people are doing their GP training in Wales. Can you tell us how many of those people are actually from Wales and what we're doing to keep them once they've been trained here? Then, finally, paramedic training - I was very pleased to see that. Can you confirm whether the pay rise that paramedics have recently been proffered, if you like, is conditional in any way on the particular training that you've referred to? Is it a generic pay rise or is it specifically allied to this new training that you mentioned in your statement? Thank you.
Welsh: Diolch yn fawr iawn, iawn am eich datganiad, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. Ymddiheuriadau nad Angela Burns ydw i i chi heddiw. A gaf i ategu eich sylwadau yn diolch i staff y GIG am eu gwaith, yn enwedig yn ystod yr wythnos diwethaf? Rwy'n credu ein bod ni i gyd wedi synnu ac yn falch iawn mewn rhai ffyrdd gan y lluniau o bobl yn straffaglu drwy'r eira er mwyn cyflawni'r hyn y maent yn ystyried yw eu dyletswyddau i boblogaeth Cymru. Credaf mai un ffordd amlwg efallai i gydnabod yr ymrwymiad hwnnw fyddai blaenoriaethu staff yn y GIG pan fo angen gwasanaethau'r GIG arnyn nhw, nid lleiaf fel y gallan nhw gael y driniaeth neu'r sylw cyflymaf sydd ei angen arnyn nhw, ond oherwydd effaith bosib hynny yn gwneud iddyn nhw allu dod yn ôl i'r gweithlu cyn gynted â phosib er mwyn cynnig eu gwasanaethau, ac efallai, wrth wneud hynny, leihau straen a phwysau ar y byrddau iechyd pan fyddant yn gorfod ystyried defnyddio staff asiantaeth. Gwyddom fod 330,000 diwrnod wedi'u colli i anhwylderau sy'n gysylltiedig â straen y llynedd yn unig, 2016-17, a, pe gellid bod wedi gwneud rhywbeth ynghylch hynny ychydig yn gynt, efallai y byddai wedi bod yn gynt neu'n haws i'r aelodau hynny o staff ddod yn ôl i'r gweithlu a pharhau i gynnig y gofal rhagorol i bobl Cymru. Credaf fod staff asiantaeth wedi costio £178.8 miliwn y llynedd. Mae hynny'n arbediad eithaf mawr, os gallwch chi gael pobl yn ôl i'r gwaith mor gyflym ag y byddent yn hoffi. Ac, os ydych chi'n poeni o gwbl fod hyn yn swnio fel triniaeth ffafriol, gofynnaf i chi ystyried yr effaith o wneud hyn, oherwydd mae'n golygu bod staff y GIG yn ôl yn y gwaith yn gynt ac yn cynnig eu gwasanaethau i bobl sydd eu hangen. Fe wnaethom ni sôn hefyd am - . Rwy'n sylweddoli mai datganiad ynglŷn â gweithlu'r GIG yw hwn, ond, yn dilyn yr arolwg seneddol, rwy'n meddwl ei bod hi bellach ychydig yn llai ystyrlon, os caf ei fynegi yn y geiriau hynny, i siarad am weithlu'r GIG ar wahân i'r gweithlu gofal cymdeithasol. Rwy'n sicr yn croesawu'r buddsoddiad yn y lleoedd hyfforddi ar gyfer y proffesiynau atal ac adsefydlu, ac i'r sawl sy'n hyfforddi mewn gofal meddygol, ond os ydych chi'n bwriadu cynnig gwasanaeth di-dor - a grybwyllwyd gennych yn eich datganiad - credaf fod yn rhaid i'r mathau hyn o ddatganiadau ddechrau sôn yn awr am effaith a llwybrau gyrfa'r rheini mewn gofal anfeddygol. Felly, tybed a allem ni gael datganiad tebyg yn weddol fuan ynglŷn â'r gweithlu gofal cymdeithasol, nid dim ond gweithlu'r GIG. Rwy'n falch iawn o glywed am y twf yng ngweithlu'r GIG, ond a allwch chi roi syniad o ble mae'r twf hwnnw wedi ei ganolbwyntio yn ddaearyddol? Ble mae'r staff mewn rhai disgyblaethau, ac a yw ad-drefnu a pheth o'r anhrefn a welsom ni yn weddol ddiweddar, yn enwedig gyda Hywel Dda, eisoes yn ymddangos i gael effaith ar ble mae pobl yn ymddiddori mewn gweithio, yn enwedig mewn ysbytai ond nid yn benodol? Oes, yn sicr mae angen mwy o staff mewn proffesiynau ac arbenigeddau penodol. Mae swyddogaeth y ddeoniaeth wedi codi droeon mewn dadleuon ar hyn yn y gorffennol, ac rwy'n meddwl tybed a allwch roi inni ryw syniad a oes mater penodol - byddaf yn ei alw'n hynny, gan nad oes problem o reidrwydd - gyda'r ddeoniaeth yn hybu rhai o'r arbenigeddau hynny sydd eu hangen arnom ni ar hyn o bryd. Dim ond dau beth arall, os allwch chi fod yn amyneddgar â mi, os gwelwch yn dda, Llywydd. Yn amlwg, rwy'n falch iawn o weld bod mwy o bobl yn gwneud eu hyfforddiant meddygon teulu yng Nghymru. Allwch chi ddweud wrthym ni faint o'r bobl hynny sydd mewn gwirionedd o Gymru a beth ydym yn ei wneud i'w cadw ar ôl iddyn nhw gael eu hyfforddi yma? Yna, yn olaf, hyfforddiant parafeddygon - roeddwn yn falch iawn o weld hynny. A allwch chi gadarnhau a yw'r codiad cyflog a gynigiwyd i barafeddygon yn ddiweddar, os mynnwch chi, yn amodol mewn unrhyw ffordd ar yr hyfforddiant penodol yr ydych wedi cyfeirio ato? A yw'n godiad cyflog cyffredinol neu benodol yn gysylltiedig â'r hyfforddiant newydd hwn a grybwyllwyd gennych chi yn eich datganiad? Diolch.