English: Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your response and I've listened to all of the responses here today. My first reaction would be to say to you that, if you accept the recommendations by the group that you've commissioned, why have you not ruled out a merger? I'm finding it difficult to understand, if you are accepting those recommendations, why you need to commission more research within your Government as to the future outlook of Cadw. Surely, if you accept those recommendations, you can now carry forward those recommendations as they stand? Because we all understand here that there were civil servants on that particular working group. So, I'm trying to understand why the experts seem to be less heard, potentially, than civil servants within your Government. If they're going to come up with these constructive recommendations, I don't feel, from what you're saying today, that that's truly reflected in your response. My second point would be, I've heard from numerous questions that Dai Lloyd and others have asked in the past that you'd said that you'd be having a public consultation on this. I haven't heard anything today on that basis, so I'm wondering what you can tell us about, when you make a decision finally, how that consultation will take place. People are muttering things here - I haven't heard you say when the consultation will take place. I think that's important for us to hear here today. The other question is, I know that the national library are welcoming the review that they are having, but I would be personally curious to hear your opinions about how other institutions would be reviewed, if you're minded to carry forth any merger or any changes, as well. Because, while you and others have mentioned the successes of Cadw lately, they have been historically underperforming as compared to the other national institutions. It's quite difficult to get all the detail on income and expenditure. My colleague Dai Lloyd has put forward freedom of information requests and has struggled to get all of that information. So, if we could have a review of Cadw and also a review of other bodies, then I think that would be fair with regard to this process. My other point would be, I'm struggling also - I'm struggling a lot today - to understand, if you are supportive or looking into a merger, how that would not mean that their independence would be undermined. Because, if you're going to be taking commercial functions away from them and there's going to be this body that will be making those decisions, what interventions will they have or what voice would they have within that process? I think that's obviously one of the key concerns. But in practical terms, if that independence is to be realised - you say you support it - then what does that mean in practical terms for them to carry forward with being able to take those everyday decisions so that they can put on various exhibitions? Not that I'd want to see the same types of exhibitions as David Melding, but I'd want to see exhibitions that have been run by them internally as national institutions. So, I hear what people are saying and I don't think anybody's against change, but I don't understand why the merger is still on the table and how you will carry forth these discussions if they feel, potentially, that you haven't listened to them as you could have done. Thank you.
Welsh: Diolch i chi, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, am eich ymateb ac rwyf wedi gwrando ar yr holl ymatebion yma heddiw. Fy ymateb cyntaf fyddai dweud wrthych chi, os ydych yn derbyn argymhellion y grŵp yr ydych wedi ei gomisiynu, pam nad ydych chi wedi diystyru uno? Rydw i'n ei chael hi'n anodd deall, os ydych chi'n derbyn yr argymhellion hynny, pam y mae angen i chi gomisiynu mwy o ymchwil o fewn eich Llywodraeth ynghylch rhagolygon Cadw yn y dyfodol. Does bosib, os ydych yn derbyn yr argymhellion hynny, na allwch yn awr gario'r argymhellion hynny ymlaen fel y maent yn sefyll? Oherwydd ein bod ni i gyd yn deall yma bod gweision sifil ar y gweithgor penodol. Felly, rwy'n ceisio deall pam yr ymddengys bod yr arbenigwyr yn cael llai o lais, o bosibl, na gweision sifil o fewn eich Llywodraeth. Os ydynt yn mynd i gynnig yr argymhellion adeiladol hyn, nid wyf yn teimlo, o'r hyn yr ydych yn ei ddweud heddiw, bod hynny wedi ei gwir adlewyrchu yn eich ymateb. Fy ail bwynt fyddai, yr wyf wedi clywed o gwestiynau niferus y mae Dai Lloyd ac eraill wedi'u gofyn yn y gorffennol y byddech yn dweud y byddai yna ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus ar hyn. Nid wyf wedi clywed unrhyw beth heddiw ar y sail honno, felly rwy'n gofyn beth y gallwch ei ddweud wrthym, pan fyddwch yn gwneud penderfyniad o'r diwedd, am sut y bydd yr ymgynghoriad yn cael ei gynnal. Mae pobl yn mwmian pethau yma - nid wyf wedi eich clywed yn dweud pa bryd y bydd yr ymgynghoriad yn cael ei gynnal. Rwy'n credu bod hynny'n bwysig i ni ei glywed yma heddiw. Y cwestiwn arall yw, gwn fod y llyfrgell genedlaethol yn croesawu'r adolygiad y maent yn ei gael, ond byddwn yn bersonol yn chwilfrydig i glywed eich barn chi am sut y mae sefydliadau eraill yn cael eu hadolygu, os ydych yn bwriadu cynnal unrhyw uno neu unrhyw newidiadau, hefyd. Oherwydd, er eich bod chi ac eraill wedi crybwyll llwyddiannau Cadw yn ddiweddar, maent wedi bod yn tanberfformio'n hanesyddol o gymharu â sefydliadau cenedlaethol eraill. Mae'n eithaf anodd i gael yr holl fanylion am incwm a gwariant. Mae fy nghydweithiwr Dai Lloyd wedi cyflwyno ceisiadau rhyddid gwybodaeth, ac mae wedi ei chael yn anodd cael yr holl wybodaeth honno. Felly, pe gallem gael adolygiad o Cadw a hefyd adolygiad o gyrff eraill, yna rwy'n meddwl y byddai hynny'n deg mewn cysylltiad â'r broses hon. Fy mhwynt arall fyddai, rwy'n ei chael hi'n anodd hefyd - rwy'n ei chael hi'n anodd iawn heddiw - i ddeall, os ydych chi'n cefnogi neu'n edrych ar y posibilrwydd o uno, sut y byddai hynny'n peidio â golygu y byddai eu hannibyniaeth yn cael ei danseilio. Oherwydd, os ydych yn mynd i fod yn cymryd swyddogaethau masnachol oddi arnynt ac os bydd yna ryw gorff yn gwneud y penderfyniadau hynny, pa ymyriadau a fyddai ganddynt, neu ba lais fyddai ganddynt yn y broses honno? Rwy'n credu bod hynny'n amlwg yn un o'r pryderon allweddol. Ond yn ymarferol, os yw'r annibyniaeth honno i gael ei gwireddu - rydych yn dweud eich bod yn ei chefnogi - yna beth mae hynny'n ei olygu mewn termau ymarferol iddynt fwrw ymlaen â gallu gwneud y penderfyniadau bob dydd hynny fel y gallant gynnal arddangosfeydd amrywiol? Nid y byddwn i'n dymuno gweld yr un mathau o arddangosfeydd â David Melding, ond byddwn i'n awyddus i weld arddangosfeydd sydd wedi eu cynnal ganddynt yn fewnol fel sefydliadau cenedlaethol. Felly, rwy'n clywed beth y mae pobl yn ei ddweud ac nid wyf yn credu bod neb yn erbyn newid, ond nid wyf yn deall pam fod uno yn dal i fod ar y bwrdd a sut y byddwch yn cynnal y trafodaethau hyn os ydynt yn teimlo, o bosibl, nad ydych chi wedi gwrando arnynt gystal ag y gallech fod wedi gwneud. Diolch.