English: Diolch, Llywydd. When historians come to write the history of the last decade from the perspective of disabled people and how they've been treated by successive governments, I believe that we will be judged harshly. The consequences of the series of changes to social security that were first started by Lord Freud under the Tony Blair Government - yes, let's not forget that it was a Labour Government who created Atos - those changes were accelerated then under the coalition Government and they have been so devastating that they amount to one of the biggest violations of human rights in British history. Now, in this Senedd and elsewhere, there have been enough of us calling out the UK Government on their behaviour, even if we've had limited influence as a result. So, it's doubly disappointing to see patterns of behaviour at Westminster creeping into the Welsh Government as the story of the independent living fund will tell us. Yesterday's announced changes to the way assessments are carried out are of course welcome, and no doubt the Minister will be responding to this debate by outlining those changes. I'd like to place on record our gratitude and congratulations to the campaigner Nathan Davies, whose campaign on this has been absolutely tireless. But the behaviour of this Government as a whole up until now has been one that demonstrates similarity to the approach that we've seen from the Tories in London. When responsibility for managing the independent living fund was devolved to Wales, there were two main options that the then Welsh Government faced. On the one hand they could copy England and devolve the independent living fund to local authorities, and ask them to take responsibility for the care and support provided. Or, on the other hand, they could keep the fund and administer it, just as they did in Scotland and the north of Ireland. Now, my colleagues will elaborate further on the flawed decision-making process that has occurred here, but there is just one rhetorical question that summarises this whole debate: if you adopt a similar approach to the Tories, why would you expect a completely different result? And it's those predictable results that led to yesterday's announced changes. From the Minister's own statement: 'Considerable local variation is evident, with the percentage of former ILF recipients within a local authority whose hours of care have reduced ranging from 0% to 42%.' What, of course, can't be measured is the level of anxiety and stress of having to go through constant reassessments, where your quality of life is on the line. Disabled people talk to each other. They know what happened with the introduction of the work capability assessment, and they know what happened when DLA was replaced with PIP. They know what happened in England to those people who were receiving the ILF. So, they knew that they faced assessments from staff working in an institutionally ableist public sector, assessments from organisations under massive financial pressure, and assessments with little protection against poor judgment. Yet, your Government still forced over 1,000 people to go through this and spent years resisting those campaigners and your own party activists, until the new Minister effectively overruled previous decisions. Now, if the changes announced yesterday are implemented properly, we should, thankfully, see no disabled people at all lose out. But we will still have ended up with a system that has greater administrative costs and bureaucracy and imposed unnecessary stress and anxiety on some of the most vulnerable people in this country, and I believe you should apologise for that.
Welsh: Diolch, Lywydd. Pan ddaw haneswyr i ysgrifennu hanes y degawd diwethaf o safbwynt pobl anabl a sut y cawsant eu trin gan lywodraethau olynol, credaf y bydd yn ein beirniadu'n hallt. Canlyniadau cyfres o newidiadau i nawdd cymdeithasol a gychwynnwyd yn gyntaf gan yr Arglwydd Freud o dan Lywodraeth Tony Blair - ie, gadewch inni beidio ag anghofio mai Llywodraeth Lafur a greodd Atos - cafodd y newidiadau hynny eu cyflymu wedyn o dan y Llywodraeth glymblaid ac maent wedi bod mor ddinistriol fel y gellir eu hystyried yn un o'r ymyriadau mwyaf â hawliau dynol yn hanes Prydain. Nawr, yn y Senedd hon ac mewn mannau eraill, mae digon ohonom wedi beirniadu Llywodraeth y DU am eu hymddygiad, er mai dylanwad cyfyngedig a fu gennym o ganlyniad i hynny. Felly, mae'n fwy siomedig byth gweld patrymau ymddygiad San Steffan yn treiddio i mewn i Lywodraeth Cymru fel y bydd stori'r gronfa byw'n annibynnol yn dweud wrthym. Wrth gwrs mae'r newidiadau a gyhoeddwyd ddoe i'r ffordd y cynhelir asesiadau i'w croesawu, ac nid oes amheuaeth y bydd y Gweinidog yn ymateb i'r ddadl hon drwy amlinellu'r newidiadau hynny. Hoffwn gofnodi ein diolch a'n llongyfarchiadau i'r ymgyrchydd Nathan Davies, a fu'n ymgyrchu'n gwbl ddiflino ar hyn. Ond mae ymddygiad y Llywodraeth hon at ei gilydd hyd yma wedi bod yn un sy'n dangos tebygrwydd i'r ymagwedd a welsom gan y Torïaid yn Llundain. Pan ddatganolwyd y cyfrifoldeb am reoli'r gronfa byw'n annibynnol i Gymru, roedd Llywodraeth Cymru ar y pryd yn wynebu dau opsiwn. Ar y naill law gallent efelychu Lloegr a datganoli'r gronfa byw'n annibynnol i awdurdodau lleol, a gofyn iddynt ysgwyddo cyfrifoldeb am y gofal a'r cymorth a ddarperir. Neu ar y llaw arall, gallent gadw'r gronfa a'i gweinyddu, fel a ddigwyddodd yn yr Alban a gogledd Iwerddon. Nawr, bydd fy nghyd-Aelodau'n ymhelaethu ymhellach ar y broses benderfynu ddiffygiol sydd wedi digwydd yma, ond mae un cwestiwn rhethregol yn crynhoi'r holl ddadl hon: os ydych yn mabwysiadu dull o weithredu tebyg i'r Torïaid, pam y byddech yn disgwyl canlyniad hollol wahanol? A'r canlyniadau rhagweladwy hynny a arweiniodd at y newidiadau a gyhoeddwyd ddoe. O ddatganiad y Gweinidog ei hun: 'Mae amrywiad sylweddol i'w weld yn lleol, gyda chanran y rhai arferai dderbyn taliadau o'r Gronfa sydd â'u horiau gofal wedi gostwng yn amrywio rhwng 0% a 42% mewn gwahanol awdurdodau lleol.' Yr hyn na ellir ei fesur, wrth gwrs, yw lefel y pryder a'r straen o orfod mynd drwy ailasesiadau cyson, lle mae ansawdd eich bywyd yn y fantol. Mae pobl anabl yn siarad gyda'i gilydd. Maent yn gwybod beth ddigwyddodd gyda chyflwyno'r asesiad gallu i weithio, ac maent yn gwybod beth ddigwyddodd pan gafwyd y taliad annibyniaeth personol yn lle'r lwfans byw i'r anabl. Maent yn gwybod beth ddigwyddodd yn Lloegr i'r bobl a oedd yn cael y gronfa byw'n annibynnol. Felly, gwyddent eu bod yn wynebu asesiadau gan staff a weithiai mewn sector cyhoeddus sy'n rhagfarnu o blaid pobl heb anableddau, asesiadau gan sefydliadau o dan bwysau ariannol enfawr, ac asesiadau heb fawr o amddiffyniad yn erbyn dyfarniadau gwael. Eto, gorfododd eich Llywodraeth dros 1,000 o bobl i fynd drwy hyn a threuliodd flynyddoedd yn gwrthsefyll yr ymgyrchwyr hynny ac ymgyrchwyr eich plaid eich hun, nes y penderfynodd y Gweinidog newydd fynd yn erbyn penderfyniadau blaenorol i bob pwrpas. Nawr, os gweithredir y newidiadau a gyhoeddwyd ddoe yn briodol, ni ddylem weld unrhyw bobl anabl o gwbl ar eu colled, diolch byth. Ond byddwn yn dal i fod wedi cael system lle mae mwy o gostau gweinyddol a biwrocratiaeth a straen a phryder diangen wedi'i orfodi ar rai o'r bobl fwyaf agored i niwed yn y wlad hon, a chredaf y dylech ymddiheuro am hynny.