English: Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm very pleased to reply to the debate and I'd like to thank everyone who has taken part in it. I think that one of the weaknesses of the Assembly, one of the criticisms we've had, is that we tend to be very inward looking and not prepared to learn from outside. I think this is an example of where we are looking at what's happened, what's gone wrong, outside and learning the lessons from it, and I think that really is important, because, if we don't learn the lessons from what happens not just over the border, but throughout Europe as well, in some of these things, then we can end up repeating the mistakes. Lee Waters - I'm very pleased that he brought the reports of the House of Commons on Carillion and Capita to the attention of the Assembly. I doubt if many people would have read them if he hadn't brought them to the attention of the Assembly, and I think that, in itself, is very helpful. And we need to learn lessons. We've seen two very large companies having problems, but why? Carillion seemed to engage in this 'dash for cash', as it was described by Lee Waters, and it was unsustainable. It had to be unsustainable when you were chasing capital from the next contract to pay for the current one. Capita - well, I'll come to what Dai Lloyd said earlier, but I think Lee Waters summed it up with 'a lack of understanding', 'botched delivery'. We have to learn lessons from the report. Procurement is not just about putting out a contract, getting the lowest price coming in and then letting them have it and hoping it works. Because, a lot of the time, it doesn't and I think, with very large contracts, you end up being sucked into paying more and more money as the contract goes on, because you can't get out of it, because it's so important. Dai Lloyd explained Capita and GP practices and the rest of primary care far better than I could, but I think that one thing he did explain is how amazingly complex it was, and people without experience of the complexity were bidding for contracts, winning contracts, and then saying, 'Oh dear'. Dai Lloyd knows because he was on the council, I think at the same time as me, or had just left it to come here - we had Capgemini coming in, who couldn't even produce a payroll system, as other Members here who lived in Swansea or worked for the council at the time can lay out. It couldn't produce a payroll system for our council, despite bidding for it. We have outsources that are a predictable failure. These things go wrong with a level of regularity that you might think people might have learnt lessons from. NHS England and Capita - they misjudged the risk. Sometimes, people are bidding for things that they don't quite understand. I remember once seeing, in a computer book, that it said that somebody wanted a swing, and, after it had gone through all the different changes of the design process, it ended up with a swing that wouldn't swing, which was fixed and was unable to be sat on, but it had just gone through all the different design procedures. A lot of this seems to happen with the outsourced contracts. Jenny Rathbone went through Capita and its role in assessing attendance allowances. Well, I'm sure that there's not a person in here who couldn't go through the problems they've had with Capita and the attendance allowances. But she went on, more importantly, to auditors and auditing. And there is a problem. There are three major companies for which auditing is only one part of their income; they do lots of best-value work and other benefits to the company. When it becomes that important to you as a company, because of the amount of money you're getting from the additional work you're doing, how keen are you on making sure that you pick up all the warts in the auditing system, when, if you get sacked as an auditor, then you're in serious problems? The same independent auditor for 19 years - I mean, that is ridiculous. Anybody who has been involved with charitable and voluntary organisations has been told, after having the same auditor, many of them local people they know, for three or five years, 'You need to change your auditor'. If that's what you tell small organisations dealing with relatively small sums of money, why a public company can have the same auditor for 19 years - . You've got to develop a cosy relationship. I think Neil Hamilton came out with the failure of the Westminster Government, the failure of the regulator, leads - it's basically a systemic failure. It takes me back to thinking of PFI. The people who proved PFI was value for money - it took a genius to do that, because you were borrowing money at a higher and a higher level, you were paying out money for almost the rest of time, you had contracts that had payments for everything from £30 to change a lightbulb right the way through. But somebody would do a calculation, and, if it didn't come out with the right answer, you were sent back to try again. I think that, too often, we answer first and then we work back to what the question should be. And a lot of that has happened here. Again, Carillion funding via debt - when the biggest part on your sheet is goodwill, which is twice as much as you've got in cash - . One of the things I did bring in, when I was working for the council - for some small organisations that were council run, I asked them, 'Can we have the cash flow?' In which case, I was told that it wasn't really helpful. 'You don't really want to see that; you want to see the accounts. The accounts give you a true and accurate record. You don't want to see cash flow, because that gives you an inaccurate - it varies.' Well, I said, 'Can I have it for every month for 12 months? Because it's bound to go up and down. It's bound to be right some of the time, and, after 12 months, it can't be that much out.' Because people put things into stock, and they value stock. There are all these little tricks that accountants know in order to make sure that money is not lost. Failure of privatisation - Mick Antoniw was absolutely right. Should we be promoting social partnership? It's too much about competition between you trying to get the best deal, and them trying. How about working together? I think Mark Drakeford talked about learning lessons from elsewhere. Beware of a pursuit of something that is both unrealistic and unachievable in terms of savings, but somebody tells you they can do it. Capita is a cautionary tale. It was not equipped to achieve what it meant to. Carillion, aggressive at chasing contracts - I was very pleased with the 10 lessons Mark Drakeford put out. I would have thought they would be a very good Government statement, at some time, of the lessons that we need, or rules we need, or procurement rules or lessons we need to - . Because I think it is important that we get it right, we learn from what's gone wrong. We don't want to repeat it.
Welsh: Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Rwy'n falch iawn o ymateb i'r ddadl, a hoffwn ddiolch i bawb sydd wedi cymryd rhan ynddi. Credaf mai un o wendidau'r Cynulliad, un o'r beirniadaethau rydym wedi'u cael, yw ein bod yn tueddu i fod yn fewnblyg iawn ac yn amharod i ddysgu o'r tu allan. Credaf fod hon yn enghraifft o lle rydym yn edrych ar beth sydd wedi digwydd, beth sydd wedi mynd o'i le, y tu allan a dysgu gwersi o hynny, a chredaf fod hynny'n wirionedd bwysig, oherwydd os na ddysgwn y gwersi o'r hyn sy'n digwydd nid yn unig dros y ffin, ond ledled Ewrop yn ogystal, yn rhai o'r pethau hyn, gallem ailadrodd y camgymeriadau. Lee Waters - rwy'n falch iawn ei fod wedi dwyn adroddiadau Tŷ'r Cyffredin ar Carillion a Capita i sylw'r Cynulliad. Rwy'n amau a fyddai llawer o bobl wedi eu darllen pe na bai wedi dod â hwy i sylw'r Cynulliad, ac rwy'n credu bod hynny, ynddo'i hun, yn ddefnyddiol iawn. Ac mae angen inni ddysgu gwersi. Rydym wedi gweld dau gwmni mawr iawn yn cael problemau, ond pam? Ymddengys bod Carillion ag ysfa ddi-baid i wneud arian, fel y'i disgrifiwyd gan Lee Waters, ac roedd hynny'n anghynaliadwy. Roedd yn rhaid ei fod yn anghynaliadwy pan fyddech yn mynd ar drywydd cyfalaf o'r contract nesaf i dalu am yr un presennol. Capita - wel, fe ddof at yr hyn a ddywedodd Dai Lloyd yn gynharach, ond credaf fod Lee Waters wedi ei grynhoi fel 'diffyg dealltwriaeth', 'darpariaeth garbwl'. Rhaid inni ddysgu gwersi o'r adroddiad. Mae caffael yn ymwneud â mwy na gosod contract, cael y pris lleiaf a gadael iddynt ei gael a gobeithio ei fod yn gweithio. Oherwydd yn aml iawn, ni fydd yn gweithio ac rwy'n credu, gyda chontractau mawr iawn, eich bod yn cael eich sugno i mewn i dalu mwy a mwy o arian wrth i'r contract fynd rhagddo, oherwydd na allwch ddod allan ohono, oherwydd ei fod mor bwysig. Eglurodd Dai Lloyd arferion Capita a phractisau meddygon teulu a gweddill gofal sylfaenol yn llawer gwell nag y gallwn i, ond credaf mai un peth a eglurodd oedd pa mor anhygoel o gymhleth oedd y cyfan, a bod pobl heb brofiad o'r cymhlethdod yn cynnig am gontractau, yn ennill contractau, ac yna'n dweud, 'O diar'. Mae Dai Lloyd yn gwybod oherwydd roedd ar y cyngor yr un pryd â minnau, rwy'n credu, neu roedd newydd ei adael i ddod yma - roedd gennym Capgemini yn dod i mewn, cwmni na allai gynhyrchu system gyflogres hyd yn oed, fel y gall Aelodau eraill yma a oedd yn byw yn Abertawe neu'n gweithio i'r cyngor ei ddisgrifio. Ni allai gynhyrchu system gyflogres ar gyfer ein cyngor, er iddo wneud cais am y gwaith hwnnw. Mae gennym gwmnïau allanol y mae modd rhagweld eu methiant. Mae'r pethau hyn yn mynd o chwith mor rheolaidd fel y gallech gredu y byddai pobl wedi dysgu gwersi ohonynt. Y GIG yn Lloegr a Capita - fe wnaethant gamfarnu'r risg. Weithiau, mae pobl yn gwneud cais am bethau nad ydynt yn eu deall yn iawn. Cofiaf weld unwaith, mewn llyfr cyfrifiadurol, ei fod yn dweud bod rhywun eisiau siglen, ac ar ôl iddo fynd drwy'r holl newidiadau gwahanol yn y broses ddylunio, yn y pen draw fe lunodd siglen nad oedd yn siglo, un a oedd yn llonydd ac ni allech eistedd arni, ond roedd wedi mynd drwy'r holl weithdrefnau dylunio gwahanol. Ymddengys bod llawer o hyn yn digwydd gyda chontractau allanol. Aeth Jenny Rathbone drwy Capita a'i rôl yn asesu lwfansau mynychu. Wel, rwy'n siŵr nad oes unrhyw un yma na allai fynd drwy'r problemau a gawsant gyda Capita a'i rôl yn asesu lwfansau mynychu. Ond aeth ymlaen, yn fwy pwysig, at archwilwyr ac archwilio. Ac mae yna broblem. Ceir tri chwmni mawr lle nad yw archwilio ond yn un rhan o'u hincwm; maent yn gwneud llawer o waith gwerth gorau a buddion eraill i'r cwmni. Pan ddaw mor bwysig â hynny i chi fel cwmni, oherwydd y swm o arian a gewch o'r gwaith ychwanegol a wnewch, pa mor awyddus ydych chi i wneud yn siŵr na fyddwch yn sylwi ar yr holl ddiffygion yn y system archwilio, os byddwch yn wynebu problemau difrifol os cewch eich diswyddo fel archwilydd? Yr un archwilydd annibynnol am 19 mlynedd - hynny yw, mae hynny'n hurt. Mae unrhyw un sydd wedi bod yn gysylltiedig â sefydliadau elusennol a gwirfoddol, ar ôl cael yr un archwilydd am dair neu bum mlynedd a llawer ohonynt yn bobl leol y maent yn eu hadnabod, yn cael gwybod bod angen iddynt newid eu harchwilydd. Os mai dyna beth a ddywedwch wrth sefydliadau bach sy'n ymdrin â symiau cymharol fach o arian, pam y gall cwmni cyhoeddus gael yr un archwilydd am 19 mlynedd - . Rhaid eich bod yn datblygu perthynas gysurus. Credaf fod Neil Hamilton wedi siarad am fethiant Llywodraeth San Steffan, methiant y rheoleiddiwr, arweinwyr - yn y bôn mae'n fethiant systemig. Mae'n mynd â mi yn ôl i feddwl am y fenter cyllid preifat. Roedd y bobl a brofodd fod PFI yn werth am arian - cymerai athrylith i wneud hynny, oherwydd byddech yn benthyca arian ar lefel uwch ac uwch, roeddech yn talu arian allan dros weddill yr amser bron i gyd, roedd gennych gontractau a oedd yn cynnwys taliadau ar gyfer popeth o £30 am newid bylb golau yr holl ffordd drwodd. Ond byddai rhywun yn gwneud cyfrifiad, ac os na châi'r ateb cywir, caech eich gyrru'n ôl i roi cynnig arall arni. Yn rhy aml, credaf ein bod yn ateb yn gyntaf ac yna'n gweithio'n ôl i beth ddylai'r cwestiwn fod. Ac mae llawer o hynny wedi digwydd yma. Unwaith eto, Carillion yn cyllido drwy ddyled - pan fo'r rhan fwyaf o'ch taflen yn ewyllys da, sy'n ddwywaith cymaint ag sydd gennych o arian - . Un o'r pethau a gyflwynais, pan oeddwn yn gweithio i'r cyngor - ar gyfer sefydliadau bach a gâi eu rhedeg gan y cyngor, byddwn yn gofyn iddynt, 'A gawn ni'r llif arian?' Beth bynnag, dywedwyd wrthyf nad oedd yn ddefnyddiol iawn. 'Nid ydych am weld hwnnw; y cyfrifon sydd angen i chi eu gweld. Mae'r cyfrifon yn rhoi cofnod gwir a chywir i chi. Nid ydych am weld y llif arian, oherwydd mae'n rhoi darlun anghywir - mae'n amrywio.' Wel, dywedais, 'A allaf ei gael ar gyfer pob mis am 12 mis? Oherwydd mae'n siŵr o fynd i fyny ac i lawr. Mae'n sicr o fod yn iawn o bryd i'w gilydd, ac ar ôl 12 mis, ni all fod lawer allan ohoni.' Oherwydd bydd pobl yn rhoi pethau mewn stoc, ac maent yn prisio stoc. Ceir llu o driciau bach y mae cyfrifwyr yn gwybod amdanynt er mwyn gwneud yn siŵr nad oes arian yn cael ei golli. Methiant preifateiddio - roedd Mick Antoniw yn llygad ei le. A ddylem fod yn hyrwyddo partneriaeth gymdeithasol? Mae gormod o gystadleuaeth rhyngoch chi'n ceisio cael y fargen orau, a hwy'n ceisio cael y fargen orau. Beth am weithio gyda'n gilydd? Credaf fod Mark Drakeford wedi siarad am ddysgu gwersi o fannau eraill. Gochelwch rhag mynd ar drywydd rhywbeth sy'n afrealistig ac yn anghyraeddadwy o ran arbedion, ond mae rhywun yn dweud wrthych y gallant ei wneud. Mae stori Capita yn rhybudd. Nid oedd wedi'i gyfarparu i gyflawni'r hyn roedd i fod i'w gyflawni. Carillion, ymosodol wrth fynd ar drywydd contractau - roeddwn yn hapus iawn â'r 10 gwers a roddodd Mark Drakeford. Buaswn wedi meddwl y byddent yn gwneud datganiad Llywodraeth da iawn ar ryw adeg, o'r gwersi sydd eu hangen arnom, neu'r rheolau sydd eu hangen arnom, neu'r rheolau caffael neu'r gwersi y mae angen i ni - . Oherwydd credaf ei bod yn bwysig inni ei gael yn iawn, ein bod yn dysgu o'r hyn sydd wedi mynd o'i le. Nid ydym am ei ailadrodd.