English: Of course, one recommendation you can't respond to, but which must lay on file for the moment, is the wider recommendation on ministerial responsibility, taking decisions that are important to a Minister's constituents and constituency, but not actually based in the constituency. The Public Accounts Committee says that the perception of a conflict of interest is just as important as an actual conflict of interest. On this occasion, I suggest that the First Minister took his eye off the ball and didn't realise what procedures should be followed, and another Minister should have taken this decision. Can I also ask the Cabinet Secretary and tell him that I wrote to his predecessor, Edwina Hart, on 1 August 2014 - several weeks before the company went into administration - raising with her several serious concerns expressed to me by workers at the company who are resident in my region, in Llanelli, because workers from this company are spread over quite an area? They were particularly concerned at the lease that had been taken out by the then Welsh Assembly Government, which I was told was worth £1.25 million and ran for five years without a break clause within those five years. Can I understand, therefore, are you still subject to that lease and what is the ongoing cost of that lease to the Welsh Government? Because that would seem to be in addition to the costs we've seen so far in the Public Accounts Committee report and I'd like confirmation of that. The second element that gave great concern to the workers at the plant was the fact that several directors, at the time they were laying off workers, were employing themselves for a period of time at a cost of up to £7,000 per month, as self-employed consultants or otherwise employed full-time with Kancoat. This was a time when the company was seen to be struggling publicly, and I raised this directly with your predecessor. The answer I got from her was simply one to say that all full and thorough due diligence had been undertaken. We now know that that doesn't seem to have been the case. What do you say now, two years down the line, to the workers there who were raising these concerns, and are you completely assured that the directors of this company did not take any money for themselves, personally, out of the unfortunate situation that the company found itself in?
Welsh: Wrth gwrs, un argymhelliad nad ydych yn gallu ymateb iddo, ond mae'n rhaid ei roi o'r neilltu ar hyn o bryd, yw'r argymhelliad ehangach ar gyfrifoldeb gweinidogion, wrth wneud penderfyniadau sy'n bwysig i etholwyr ac etholaeth Gweinidog, ond nid mewn gwirionedd wedi eu lleoli yn yr etholaeth. Mae'r Pwyllgor Cyfrifon Cyhoeddus yn dweud bod y modd y mae gwrthdaro buddiannau yn cael ei ddirnad yn llawn mor bwysig â gwrthdaro buddiannau gwirioneddol. Y tro hwn, rwyf yn awgrymu na wnaeth y Prif Weinidog ymarfer sylw priodol ac nad oedd yn sylweddoli pa weithdrefnau y dylid eu dilyn, ac y dylai Gweinidog arall fod wedi gwneud y penderfyniad hwn. A gaf i hefyd ofyn i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet a dweud wrtho fy mod i wedi ysgrifennu at ei ragflaenydd, Edwina Hart, ar 1 Awst 2014 - rai wythnosau cyn i'r cwmni fynd i ddwylo'r gweinyddwyr - a chodi nifer o bryderon difrifol gyda hi a fynegwyd wrthyf gan weithwyr y cwmni sy'n byw yn fy rhanbarth i, yn Llanelli, oherwydd bod gweithwyr yn y cwmni hwn wedi eu gwasgaru dros ardal eithaf eang? Roedden nhw yn pryderu yn arbennig am y brydles a oedd wedi ei chytuno gan Lywodraeth Cynulliad Cymru ar y pryd hwnnw, y dywedwyd wrthyf ei bod werth £1.25 miliwn a'i bod yn weithredol am bum mlynedd heb gymal toriad yn ystod y pum mlynedd hynny. A gaf i ddeall, felly, a ydych chi'n dal i fod wedi eich ymrwymo i'r brydles honno a beth yw cost gyfredol y brydles honno i Lywodraeth Cymru? Oherwydd byddai'n ymddangos bod hynny'n ychwanegol i'r costau yr ydym wedi eu gweld hyd yma yn adroddiad y Pwyllgor Cyfrifon Cyhoeddus a hoffwn gael cadarnhad o hynny. Yr ail elfen a oedd yn achos pryder mawr i'r gweithwyr yn y ffatri oedd y ffaith bod nifer o gyfarwyddwyr, ar yr adeg yr oedden nhw'n diswyddo gweithwyr, yn cyflogi eu hunain am gyfnod o amser ar gost o hyd at £7,000 y mis, fel ymgynghorwyr hunangyflogedig neu fel arall wedi eu cyflogi yn llawn amser gan Kancoat. Roedd hyn mewn cyfnod pan yr oedd hi'n ymddangos bod y cwmni mewn trafferthion a bod hynny'n gyhoeddus, a chodais hyn yn uniongyrchol gyda'ch rhagflaenydd. Yr ateb a gefais ganddi oedd dim ond dweud bod diwydrwydd dyladwy llawn a thrylwyr wedi ei gynnal. Rydym yn gwybod erbyn hyn nad yw'n ymddangos bod hynny'n wir. Beth ddywedwch chi nawr, ddwy flynedd yn ddiweddarach, wrth y gweithwyr yno a oedd yn codi'r pryderon hyn, ac a ydych chi'n hollol dawel eich meddwl na chymerodd cyfarwyddwyr y cwmni hwn unrhyw arian eu hunain yn bersonol, yn sgil y sefyllfa anffodus y canfu'r cwmni ei hun ynddi?