English: Thank you very much for that. It's a little odd that an issue that is fundamentally about equality is in another portfolio, but I will write to you on that. I will continue to ask questions on blue badges because it's becoming more and more apparent that over the past decade the attitudes of governments towards disabled people have veered towards placing criteria that are much harsher and processes that are far more bureaucratic, where they are required to prove their disability in order to access their rights. Unless that proof is provided, they are seen as being misleading. You're very familiar with the personal independence payments, namely that a high number of decisions go against disabled people and that these decisions are often overturned at appeal. Indeed, there are a number of Members in this Chamber who have fought against the Westminster Government on these policies. But blue badges are within your control as a Government and our casework highlights that the exact same thing that is happening with PIP is also happening with the blue badges. I have constituents who have been rejected without face-to-face assessment, people with respiratory problems who have been refused blue badges because they don't use walking aids for the few steps that they can take before they're out of breath, and a number of others facing a very harsh interpretation of the rules until they get through a successful appeal. So, is your Government at risk of falling into the same trap as has happened with PIP payments, namely making people who apply for blue badges feel that the system is against them?
Welsh: Iawn, diolch yn fawr. Mae dipyn bach yn od bod mater sydd yn sylfaenol yn un ynglŷn â chydraddoldeb mewn portffolio arall, ond mi wnaf ysgrifennu efo hynny. Rwyf yn mynd i barhau i holi ynglŷn â bathodynnau glas achos mae wedi dod yn fwyfwy clir dros y ddegawd ddiwethaf fod agweddau llywodraethau tuag at bobl anabl wedi gogwyddo tuag at osod meini prawf sy'n fwyfwy llym a phrosesau sy'n fwyfwy biwrocrataidd, lle mae gofyn iddyn nhw brofi eu hanabledd a'u hawliau ac maen nhw'n dwyllwyr hyd nes ceir prawf i'r gwrthwyneb. Rydych yn gyfarwydd iawn â chanlyniad y profion taliad annibyniaeth personol - y PIP newydd - sef bod nifer uchel o benderfyniadau yn mynd yn erbyn pobl anabl a bod y penderfyniadau yma'n cael eu gwrthdroi yn aml iawn mewn apêl. Yn wir, mae yna nifer o Aelodau yn y Siambr yma wedi brwydro yn erbyn Llywodraeth San Steffan ynglŷn â'r polisïau yma. Ond mae'r bathodynnau glas o fewn eich rheolaeth chi fel Llywodraeth ac mae ein gwaith achos ni yn amlygu bod yr union beth sy'n digwydd efo PIP yn digwydd efo'r bathodynnau glas. Mae gen i etholwyr sydd wedi eu gwrthod heb asesiadau wyneb yn wyneb, pobl â phroblemau anadlu'n sydd wedi cael gwrthod bathodynnau glas am nad ydyn nhw'n defnyddio cymorthyddion cerdded am yr ychydig gamau y gallan nhw eu cymryd cyn mynd allan o wynt, a nifer o rai eraill sy'n wynebu dehongliad llym o'r rheolau nes cael apêl llwyddiannus. A ydy eich Llywodraeth chi felly mewn perygl o ddisgyn i'r un trap â'r hyn sy'n digwydd efo PIP, sef gwneud i bobl sy'n ceisio am fathodynnau glas deimlo fod y system yn eu herbyn nhw?