English: Just in the interest of transparency - although it's not a registrable interest - I should explain that I'm a member of the Conservative Workers and Trade Unionists group. There's been a lot of political passion in this today, but I just want to get to the heart, Cabinet Secretary, of why, out of the whole of the trade union Act - I know we've talked a lot about the thresholds today - you've chosen to amend section 172A and section 116B. Because in the case of the amendment to section 172A, I don't think there's any restrictions in that original section; it's merely a reporting requirement, which, from my perspective, seems to be about ensuring the efficient use of public money and that, of course, should be of interest to you as Cabinet Secretary, as well as employers and employees. They're constantly reviewing the cost-effectiveness of their activities and procedures paid for from the public purse. I'm not quite sure why trade union reps, often in the very same building, are excused that. Very similarly, where the employer bears the entire cost of administering subs, surely the other question, in this day of Pingit apps and so forth, is whether this presumption of it being the employer's role to do this is still current. So, my questions are: what consideration have you given to the usefulness of the information that could be collected under section 172A to help manage public finances? What consideration has been given to the cost-effectiveness of other forms of collecting subs and whether it's reasonable for wealthy trade unions - not the individual members, but the trade unions themselves - to contribute to the cost of their activities when these costs are currently being met entirely by the employer - activities covered by those two sections? Bearing in mind your written statement and the work that you're doing on agency work, can you confirm that, effectively, the Bill as laid now, is a Trojan horse Bill and that you're planning to introduce a number of amendments to cover work that you've not been able to do in time for tabling this Bill when you have, and that you have tabled this Bill as a result of the Lords split vote fairly recently? This is an important matter for this Assembly because, from what I can see from your explanatory memorandum, your consultation has been restricted to the workforce council, which does not cover the whole of Wales, and it was on the UK Bill rather than the specifics of this Bill. Furthermore, it's completely unclear which legislative process is subject to Assembly scrutiny with regards to this Bill being commenced, and bearing in mind that you're proposing to commence this Bill by regulations, I really would be grateful if you could give some clarity on that.
Welsh: Er tryloywder - ac er nad yw'n fuddiant cofrestradwy - dylwn egluro fy mod yn aelod o'r Conservative Workers and Trade Unionists. Mae llawer o angerdd gwleidyddol wedi bod ynghlwm wrth hyn heddiw, ond rwy'n awyddus i wybod pam, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, o bob rhan o Ddeddf yr undebau llafur - gwn ein bod wedi trafod llawer ar y trothwyon heddiw - eich bod wedi dewis diwygio adran 172A ac adran 116B. Oherwydd ni chredaf, o ran y diwygiad i adran 172A, fod unrhyw gyfyngiadau yn yr adran wreiddiol honno; gofyniad o ran adrodd yn unig ydyw, sy'n ymwneud, hyd y gwelaf, â sicrhau'r defnydd effeithlon o arian cyhoeddus, ac wrth gwrs, dylai hynny fod o ddiddordeb i chi fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, yn ogystal â chyflogwyr a gweithwyr. Maent yn adolygu costeffeithiolrwydd eu gweithgareddau a'u gweithdrefnau a ariennir gan bwrs y wlad yn gyson. Nid wyf yn hollol siŵr pam fod cynrychiolwyr yr undebau llafur, sy'n aml wedi'u lleoli yn yr un adeiladau, yn cael eu hesgusodi rhag hynny. Yn yr un modd, pan fo'r cyflogwr yn talu holl gostau gweinyddu'r tanysgrifiadau, 'does bosibl nad y cwestiwn arall, gydag aps fel Pingit ac yn y blaen, yw pa mor gyfredol bellach yw'r rhagdybiaeth mai rôl y cyflogwr yw gwneud hyn. Felly, fy nghwestiynau yw: pa ystyriaeth rydych wedi'i rhoi i ba mor ddefnyddiol yw'r wybodaeth y gellid ei chasglu o dan adran 172A o ran helpu i reoli cyllid cyhoeddus? Pa ystyriaeth a roddwyd i gosteffeithiolrwydd dulliau eraill o gasglu tanysgrifiadau a pha un a yw'n rhesymol i undebau llafur cyfoethog - nid yr aelodau unigol, ond yr undebau llafur eu hunain - gyfrannu at gost eu gweithgareddau pan fo'r costau yn cael eu hysgwyddo'n gyfan gwbl ar hyn o bryd gan y cyflogwr - gweithgareddau y mae'r ddwy adran honno'n ymdrin â hwy? O gofio eich datganiad ysgrifenedig a'r gwaith rydych yn ei wneud ar waith asiantaeth, a allwch gadarnhau bod y Bil hwn fel y mae, i bob pwrpas yn Fil ceffyl pren Troea, a'ch bod yn bwriadu cyflwyno nifer o ddiwygiadau i gwmpasu gwaith nad ydych wedi gallu ei gyflawni mewn pryd er mwyn cyflwyno'r Bil hwn pan wnaethoch hynny, a'ch bod wedi cyflwyno'r Bil yn sgil pleidlais ranedig yr Arglwyddi yn ddiweddar? Mae hwn yn fater pwysig i'r Cynulliad oherwydd, o'r hyn a welaf yn eich memorandwm esboniadol, mae eich ymgynghoriad wedi'i gyfyngu i gyngor y gweithlu, nad yw'n cwmpasu Cymru gyfan, ac fe'i cynhaliwyd ar Fil y DU yn hytrach na manylion penodol y Bil hwn. Yn ychwanegol at hynny, mae'n gwbl aneglur ar ba broses ddeddfwriaethol y bydd y Cynulliad yn craffu mewn perthynas â chychwyn y Bil hwn, ac o ystyried eich bod yn bwriadu cychwyn y Bil drwy reoliadau, buaswn yn ddiolchgar iawn pe gallech roi rhywfaint o eglurder ar hynny.