English: The purpose of my amendment 11 is to remove the ability of the national health service to ignore a ruling of the Education Tribunal for Wales when that ruling relates to something that the NHS must provide to support a learner with additional learning needs. At present, the Bill as it's written does not require the NHS to be subject to the rulings of the education tribunal, and NHS bodies cannot be compelled to implement a recommendation from the tribunal. Now, during Stages 1 and 2, the then Minister suggested that the existing NHS redress measures were sufficient to ensure that any concerns relating to the engagement of the NHS in the additional learning needs process for failing to provide specified services and support were appropriate. But I'm afraid we all know from our own experiences with those wrestling with the existing special educational needs system, and the voices of countless other witnesses that came and gave evidence to the committee, that the evidence suggests otherwise. We heard overwhelming evidence from stakeholders, all of whom agreed, with the exception of the then Minister, that the tribunal should have the power to direct the NHS in relation to the provision of support for learners with additional learning needs. The Children's Commissioner for Wales said that she believed that the powers provided to the tribunal on the face of the Bill as it stands did not go far enough to ensure that all of its orders were fulfilled by duty bearers. The current Special Education Needs Tribunal for Wales, SENTW, told the committee that they would often request local health boards to deliver additional support, and, when they refused to meet the needs of the child, because the existing tribunal had no additional powers to compel health boards, those needs simply went unmet. They said that that is one of the fundamental weaknesses of the current system that necessitates change. The Third Sector Additional Learning Needs Alliance, the alliance that came together of different third sector organisations to give evidence to the Children, Young People and Education Committee during Stage 1, said that there needed to be a single redress system for all of the support that might be required for a learner, so that all parts of an individual development plan should enjoy the same legal robustness. UCAC also stated their belief that ensuring that some form of redress mechanism for individuals to challenge health bodies that fail to address health needs is one of the key areas that has remained unaddressed. Even health boards themselves told the committee that they were very comfortable and relaxed with the Education Tribunal for Wales being able to direct NHS bodies as long as health professionals could give and be involved - could give evidence to the tribunal's decision making. Now, the former Minister did seek to address some of these issues, particularly in terms of the lack of engagement, sometimes, by the national health service by making some amendments to the Bill that required the national health service to report back on what they'd done as a result of the decision and order that had been made by a tribunal. But those amendments that were made at Stage 2 fell short of requiring health boards to implement their decisions, and that means that we have a system that has two redress systems: one for the national health service, one for the local education authority and others. I don't think that that's satisfactory at all. We all know from our own experience that, unfortunately, there are problems with the NHS redress system. It's far from perfect. The Welsh Government acknowledged that it was far from perfect when they commissioned a piece of work on the NHS redress system. 'Using the Gift of Complaints' was a report that this Assembly considered, and we've not heard anything of it in terms of any follow-up work. We've not seen any changes to the redress system as a result of that, even though it identified some significant flaws, and that there was not sufficient learning from the NHS about complaints. I don't want a complicated system to be something that we give to children and young people, and parents across Wales, as a result of this piece of legislation. I don't want two redress systems. If they've got an issue with redress, I want them to be able to go through one channel to get that resolved, and that channel, quite rightly, should be the Education Tribunal for Wales, and its rulings should stand. So, I very much hope that the Cabinet Secretary will accept the amendments that I have tabled - 19 and 20. Just very briefly on amendment 21, this amendment is slightly different in its nature. It doesn't relate to the NHS. It simply requires that the educational tribunal, which will be established as a result of this new system, must produce an annual report on its work and lay that report before the National Assembly for Wales. So, at the moment, the existing special educational needs tribunal produces an annual report on its website, but it's a pretty dry document. It's basically a summary of its activity, a summary of its expenditure over the year. The tribunal is not currently required to put those reports in an accessible format to make them more widely accessible to the public, or to report on recurrent issues and themes that crop up in the cases that it hears in the way that, for example, our Welsh commissioners or our public services ombudsman is required to. I think that requiring the new tribunal to produce an annual report that is laid before the National Assembly and placing a requirement in the Bill that the report must be in a format that is requested by the National Assembly is one way of addressing some of those shortcomings in the current system. We can ensure that future annual reports are useful, that they are accessible by all stakeholders with an interest in additional learning needs, and so I very much hope that that is an amendment that also Members will see fit to support.
Welsh: Diben gwelliant 11 yw diddymu gallu'r gwasanaeth iechyd gwladol i anwybyddu dyfarniad Tribiwnlys Addysg Cymru pan fo'r dyfarniad hwnnw yn ymwneud â rhywbeth y mae'n rhaid i'r GIG ei ddarparu i gefnogi dysgwr sydd ag anghenion dysgu ychwanegol. Ar hyn o bryd, nid yw'r Bil, fel yr ysgrifennwyd, yn ei gwneud yn ofynnol i'r GIG fod yn atebol i ddyfarniadau'r tribiwnlys addysg, ac ni ellir gorfodi cyrff y GIG i roi argymhelliad gan y tribiwnlys ar waith. Nawr, yn ystod Cyfnodau 1 a 2, awgrymodd y Gweinidog ar y pryd hwnnw fod y mesurau a oedd mewn bodolaeth i gywiro camarfer y GIG yn ddigonol i sicrhau bod unrhyw bryderon sy'n ymwneud ag ymgysylltiad y GIG yn y broses anghenion dysgu ychwanegol am fethu â darparu gwasanaethau a chymorth penodol yn fesurau priodol. Ond mae arnaf ofn ein bod i gyd yn gwybod o'n profiadau ni ein hunain gyda'r rhai sy'n ymgodymu â'r system anghenion addysgol arbennig sy'n bodoli, a lleisiau di-ri eraill a roddodd dystiolaeth i'r pwyllgor, fod y dystiolaeth yn awgrymu fel arall. Rydym wedi clywed tystiolaeth ysgubol gan randdeiliaid, bob un ohonyn nhw'n cytuno, ac eithrio'r Gweinidog bryd hynny, y dylai fod gan y tribiwnlys y gallu i gyfarwyddo'r GIG i ddarparu cymorth ar gyfer dysgwyr ag anghenion dysgu ychwanegol. Dywedodd Comisiynydd Plant Cymru ei bod yn credu nad oedd y pwerau a roddir i'r tribiwnlys ar wyneb y Bil fel y mae'n sefyll yn mynd yn ddigon pell i sicrhau bod ei gorchmynion i gyd cael eu cyflawni gan y rhai sydd â dyletswydd i wneud hynny. Dywedodd y Tribiwnlys Anghenion Addysgol Arbennig cyfredol ar gyfer Cymru, TAAAC, wrth y pwyllgor y bydden nhw'n aml yn gofyn i fyrddau iechyd lleol roi'r gefnogaeth ychwanegol, a phan oedden nhw'n gwrthod diwallu anghenion y plentyn, gan nad oedd gan y tribiwnlys presennol ychwanegol bwerau i orfodi byrddau iechyd, yn syml, ni chafodd yr anghenion hynny eu diwallu. Roedden nhw'n dweud mai dyna un o wendidau sylfaenol y system bresennol sy'n gwneud newid yn angenrheidiol. Dywedodd Cynghrair Anghenion Dysgu Ychwanegol y Trydydd Sector, y gynghrair a ddaeth ynghyd o wahanol sefydliadau yn y trydydd sector i roi tystiolaeth gerbron y Pwyllgor Plant, Pobl Ifanc ac Addysg yn ystod Cyfnod 1, fod angen cael un system unioni ar gyfer yr holl gymorth a allasai fod ei angen ar ddysgwr, fel y gallai pob rhan o gynllun datblygiad unigol feddu ar yr un cadernid cyfreithiol. Dywedodd UCAC hefyd eu bod o'r farn y byddai sicrhau rhyw fath o fecanwaith unioni ar gyfer unigolion i herio cyrff iechyd sy'n methu ag ymdrin ag anghenion iechyd yn un o'r meysydd allweddol sydd yn dal heb ei ddatrys. Dywedodd hyd yn oed y byrddau iechyd eu hunain wrth y pwyllgor eu bod yn teimlo'n gyfforddus iawn o ran gallu Tribiwnlys Addysg Cymru i gyfarwyddo cyrff y GIG cyn belled â bod gweithwyr iechyd proffesiynol yn gallu cymryd rhan - ac yn gallu rhoi tystiolaeth wrth i'r tribiwnlys wneud ei benderfyniadau. Nawr, fe geisiodd y cyn-Weinidog fynd i'r afael â rhai o'r materion hyn, yn enwedig o ran y diffyg ymgysylltu, o bryd i'w gilydd, gan y gwasanaeth iechyd gwladol drwy wneud rhai diwygiadau i'r Bil a oedd yn ei gwneud yn ofynnol i'r gwasanaeth iechyd gwladol adrodd yn ôl ar yr hyn yr oedden nhw wedi'i wneud o ganlyniad i benderfyniad a gorchymyn a wnaed gan dribiwnlys. Ond roedd y gwelliannau hynny a wnaed yng Nghyfnod 2 wedi methu â gorfodi'r byrddau iechyd i weithredu eu penderfyniadau, ac mae hynny'n golygu bod gennym system sydd â dwy system unioni: un ar gyfer y gwasanaeth iechyd gwladol, ac un ar gyfer yr awdurdod addysg lleol ac eraill. Nid wyf i o'r farn fod hynny'n foddhaol o gwbl. Rydym ni i gyd yn gwybod o'n profiad ni ein hunain, yn anffodus, fod problemau gyda'r system i unioni camweddau'r GIG. Mae'n bell o fod yn berffaith. Roedd Llywodraeth Cymru yn cydnabod ei bod ymhell o fod yn berffaith pan gafodd darn o waith ei gomisiynu ar system unioni camweddau'r GIG. Adroddiad oedd 'Defnyddio cwynion yn rhodd' a ystyriwyd gan y Cynulliad hwn, ac nid ydym wedi clywed dim o ran unrhyw waith yn ei ddilyn. Nid ydym wedi gweld unrhyw newidiadau i'r system unioni o ganlyniad i hynny, er y nodwyd rhai diffygion sylweddol, ac nid oedd y GIG yn dysgu digon am gwynion. Nid wyf yn awyddus i weld system gymhleth yn cael ei rhoi i blant a phobl ifanc, ac i rieni ledled Cymru, o ganlyniad i'r darn hwn o ddeddfwriaeth. Nid wyf yn awyddus i gael dwy system unioni. Os oes ganddyn nhw broblem o ran unioni, rwy'n awyddus iddyn nhw allu mynd drwy un sianel i ddatrys hynny, a'r sianel honno, yn gwbl briodol, ddylai fod Tribiwnlys Addysg Cymru, a dylai ei ddyfarniadau sefyll. Felly, rwy'n gobeithio'n fawr y bydd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn derbyn y gwelliannau a gyflwynais i - 19 a 20. Ac ond yn fyr iawn ar welliant 21, mae'r gwelliant hwn ychydig yn wahanol o ran ei natur. Nid yw'n ymwneud â'r GIG. Mae'n gofyn yn syml fod yn rhaid i'r tribiwnlys addysgol, a gaiff ei sefydlu o ganlyniad i'r system newydd hon, gynhyrchu adroddiad blynyddol ar ei waith a rhoi'r adroddiad hwnnw gerbron Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru. Felly, ar hyn o bryd, mae'r tribiwnlys anghenion addysgol arbennig sy'n bodoli eisoes yn cynhyrchu adroddiad blynyddol ar ei wefan, ond dogfen eithaf sych yw honno. Yn y bôn, crynodeb ydyw o'i weithgaredd, crynodeb o'i wariant yn ystod y flwyddyn. Nid yw'n ofynnol ar hyn o bryd fod y tribiwnlys yn cyflwyno'r adroddiadau hynny ar fformat sy'n fwy hygyrch i'r cyhoedd. Nid yw ychwaith yn ofynnol iddo adrodd ar y materion a'r pynciau sy'n codi dro ar ôl tro yn yr achosion sy'n dod gerbron yn y ffordd y mae'n ofynnol i gomisiynwyr Cymru neu ombwdsmon ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus ei wneud. Rwyf i o'r farn fod ei gwneud yn ofynnol i'r tribiwnlys newydd gynhyrchu adroddiad blynyddol a osodir gerbron y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol a gosod gofyniad yn y Bil fod yn rhaid i'r adroddiad fod ar fformat y gofynnir amdano gan y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol yn un ffordd o fynd i'r afael â rhai o'r diffygion hynny sydd yn y system bresennol. Gallwn sicrhau bod adroddiadau blynyddol yn y dyfodol yn ddefnyddiol, eu bod yn ddealladwy i'r holl randdeiliaid sydd â diddordeb mewn anghenion dysgu ychwanegol, ac felly rwy'n mawr obeithio ei fod hefyd yn welliant y bydd yr Aelodau yn gweld yn dda i'w gefnogi.