English: May I also thank the Minister for her statement? I will keep this quite brief because I don't want to rehearse many of the things that Sam Kurtz has already said that I happen to agree with. Let me start by saying that bovine TB continues to have a destructive impact on agriculture in Wales, not only in terms of its economic impact, but also the emotional and mental health impact that the disease has, as we've already heard. So, clearly, we need a number of different approaches in dealing with this issue, based on local needs and disease status. We must manage the disease in wildlife too, as well as placing restrictions on the movement of animals and testing cattle. I welcome the consultation, of course, and it's an opportunity for people to contribute on the basis of their expertise in this complex issue. I welcome the fact that there's been a reduction in the number of cases, but one also must realise that that is just one indicator alone. You and the First Minister have said on a number of occasions that badger culling is not an option for you, so we have to concentrate on a different approach in working as effectively as possible, whilst reducing any inconvenience to farmers. Now, what I would have liked to have seen in this statement is some kind of solution where you acknowledge that there has been an increase in TB cases in certain areas, referring specifically to north Wales, but we're familiar, over a period of 20 years, of areas where there have been spikes from time to time in terms of bovine TB. In moving forward, I don't understand why there isn't a greater commitment here to vaccinate badgers in those areas that are problematic to us, and why not have a more systematic approach to testing badgers on farms where cases are consistently arising, and linking that to a local vaccination programme. That would have been welcomed, in my view. You referred to a vaccination programme in the Gower area; I would have liked to have heard more about the outcomes of that particular project. You mention a 'toolkit of measures in hotspot areas' - well, once again, more detail as to what exactly that toolkit includes would be useful. In terms of compensation, again, I agree entirely with the comments made by Sam Kurtz: cases of TB on farms impact every aspect of farming life - buying and selling livestock and so on. And in our view, the compensation arrangements do have to reflect the individual value of every animal, and only through having individual assessments can we achieve this. So, does the Minister accept that if an animal is not priced according to its own characteristics, then there is a risk of overcompensation or, on the other hand, undercompensation, something that would be very unfair for taxpayers and farmers alike? But what is central to the statement is that if you are determined to press ahead with the current strategy, it's inevitable that we will see tens of thousands of cattle continue to be slaughtered over the next years, just as we have seen over 30,000 cattle slaughtered over the past three years, yes, 30,000, and the economic and emotional impact of that on farms and farmers. And in returning to compensation, this inevitably will mean an increase in costs and there's a suggestion that you see this as being unsustainable. Whilst leaving the European Union and losing funds as a result of that could exacerbate the situation, does the Minister accept that it's the responsibility of the Government to balance the books in this area and that we shouldn't expect farmers to pay the bill for having a fair price for those cattle that do have to be slaughtered?
Welsh: Gaf i hefyd ddiolch i'r Gweinidog am y datganiad? Dwi'n mynd i gadw hwn yn weddol fyr achos dwi ddim eisiau ailadrodd llawer o'r pethau mae Sam Kurtz wedi'u dweud; dwi'n digwydd cytuno â nhw. Gadewch imi ddechrau drwy ddweud bod TB mewn gwartheg yn parhau i gael effaith ddinistriol iawn ar ffermio yng Nghymru, nid yn unig o ran yr effaith economaidd, ond hefyd yr effaith emosiynol a'r effaith ar iechyd meddwl, fel rŷn ni wedi'i glywed yn barod. Felly, mae'n amlwg bod angen amryw o ddulliau gwahanol i ddelio gyda hyn, yn seiliedig ar angen lleol a statws clefydau. Mae'n rhaid rheoli'r clefyd, wrth gwrs, mewn bywyd gwyllt, yn ogystal â chyfyngiadau ar symud anifeiliaid a phrofion anifeiliaid. Dwi'n croesawu'r ymgynghoriad, wrth gwrs, ac mae e'n gyfle i bobl sydd yn gallu cyfrannu ar sail eu harbenigedd ar y mater cymhleth hwn. Rwy'n croesawu'r ffaith bod yna leihad wedi bod yn y nifer o achosion, ond mae rhywun hefyd yn sylweddoli mai jest un mesur yn unig yw hwn. Rydych chi wedi'i ddweud, a'r Prif Weinidog, sawl gwaith, fod difa moch daear ddim yn opsiwn i chi, felly mae'n rhaid inni ganolbwyntio ar ffordd wahanol o weithio mor effeithiol â phosibl, gan leihau unrhyw anhwylustod i ffermwyr. Nawr, beth fyddwn i wedi hoffi ei weld yn y datganiad hwn yw rhyw fath o ddatrysiad, mewn gwirionedd, lle rydych chi'n cydnabod bod yna gynnydd wedi bod mewn achosion TB mewn rhai ardaloedd, gan gyfeirio'n benodol at ogledd Cymru, ond rŷn ni'n gyfarwydd, dros gyfnod o 20 mlynedd, o ardaloedd lle mae yna sbeicio wedi digwydd o ran y diciâu. O ran symud ymlaen, dwi ddim yn deall pam nad oes yna fwy o ymrwymiad yma i frechu moch daear yn yr ardaloedd yna sydd yn ardaloedd problematig i ni, a pham dim rhaglen fwy systematig, felly, o brofi moch daear ar ffermydd lle mae achosion cyson yn codi, a chysylltu hyn gyda rhaglen frechu leol. Felly, byddai hynny wedi cael ei groesawu, yn fy marn i. Rydych chi'n cyfeirio at raglen frechu yn ardal Gŵyr; mi fydden i wedi hoffi clywed mwy am ddeilliannau hyn - canlyniadau y prosiect arbennig yna. Rydych chi'n cyfeirio at ' toolkit of measures in hotspot areas ' - wel, unwaith yn rhagor, byddai mwy o fanylion ynglŷn â'n union beth ydy'r mesurau yna a beth maen nhw'n ei olygu yn ddefnyddiol. O ran iawndal, eto, dwi'n cytuno'n llwyr gyda'r sylwadau wnaeth Sam Kurtz: mae achosion o TB ar ffermydd yn effeithio ar bob agwedd ddyddiol ar fywyd ffermio - prynu a gwerthu ac yn y blaen. Ac yn ein barn ni, mae'n rhaid i drefniadau iawndal adlewyrchu gwerth unigol pob anifail, a dim ond trwy brisiad unigol y gellir cyflawni hyn. Felly, ydy'r Gweinidog yn derbyn, os nad yw anifail yn cael ei brisio ar sail ei nodweddion unigol, fod perygl o orddigolledu ddigwydd, neu ar y llaw arall, tanddigolledu ddigwydd, rhywbeth a fyddai'n annheg iawn ar drethdalwyr a ffermwyr fel ei gilydd? Ond yr hyn sydd yn gwbl ganolog i'r datganiad yw os ŷch chi'n benderfynol o gynnal y strategaeth bresennol, mae'n anochel y gwelwn ni ddegau o filoedd o wartheg yn parhau i gael eu lladd eto dros y blynyddoedd nesaf yn yr un modd ag ŷn ni wedi gweld dros 30,000 o wartheg yn cael eu lladd dros y tair blynedd ddiwethaf, ie, 30,000 o wartheg, ac effaith economaidd ac emosiynol hynny ar ffermydd. I arwain at yr iawndal, mae hyn yn anochel, wrth gwrs, yn mynd i olygu cynnydd mewn costau, ac mae awgrym eich bod chi'n ystyried hyn yn anghynaladwy. Nawr, tra gallai gadael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd a cholli arian o ganlyniad i hyn fod yn gwaethygu'r sefyllfa, ydy'r Gweinidog yn derbyn mai cyfrifoldeb y Llywodraeth yw balanso'r llyfrau ar y mater hwn ac na ddylid disgwyl i ffermwyr dalu'r bil am gael pris teg am y gwartheg sy'n gorfod cael eu difa?