English: The enforcement powers, in terms of the financial sums involved don't mean much, but I do think that there are steps that the commissioner's office - . Neither do I want to go down the route of shaming organisations. It's far better to get an organisation to change its practice. Now, I accept the point that you make - there may be an organisation that actually doesn't conform to a standard time and time again, and in that case, I would be more than happy to use all of the powers available, including bringing things into the public domain, I'm sure, to ensure that things change within that organisation. But I do think that that would be a final step. Are you more likely to persuade someone to change by helping them or rebuking them? We're back to the same point here, but the legislation is clear, the standards are there for a reason, and the regulatory powers are there for a reason. The commissioner has an advisory panel, and I would hope that that panel could advise as to at which point we use these powers if the position has deteriorated to such an extent. In circumstances where I have been involved with reviews of other organisations, I've always thought that the 'no surprises' approach is important, so you give the organisation an opportunity first to understand its own failings, but at the end of the day - . We've discussed a number of softer issues today, and I know that they are very important, but that doesn't mean that I don't believe in standards, and don't believe that they are crucially important, and that they have made a difference. My focus has been more on using those services.
Welsh: Mae'r pwerau gorfodi o ran y symiau ariannol - dŷn nhw ddim yn golygu llawer. Ond, dwi'n meddwl bod yna gamau y mae swyddfa'r comisiynydd - . Dwi ddim chwaith eisiau mynd i lawr y llwybr o gywilyddio sefydliadau o angenrheidrwydd. Mae e llawer yn well cael y sefydliad i newid ei arferion. Nawr, rwy'n derbyn y pwynt rŷch chi'n ei wneud - efallai y bydd yna sefydliad sydd dro ar ôl tro ar ôl tro yn torri'r safon yn fwriadol, ac yn yr achos hwnnw, buaswn i'n barod iawn i ddefnyddio'r holl bwerau, gan gynnwys cyhoeddusrwydd, mae'n siŵr, i sicrhau bod pethau'n newid o fewn y corff yna. Ond dwi'n meddwl bod hwnna'n gam olaf. Ydych chi'n fwy tebygol o berswadio rhywun i newid drwy eu helpu nhw neu'u geryddu? Rŷn ni'n dod yn ôl at yr un pwynt. Ond, mae'r Ddeddf yn un gref, mae'r safonau yna am reswm, ac mae'r pwerau gorfodi yna am reswm. Mae panel cynghori gan y comisiynydd, a buaswn i'n gobeithio y byddai fe'n cynghori ar ba pwynt y dywedwn ni, 'Reit, rydyn ni'n defnyddio'r pwerau yma nawr; mae'r sefyllfa wedi cyrraedd mor ddrwg'. Mewn sefyllfaoedd lle dwi wedi bod yn rhan o arolygon o gyrff eraill, dwi wastad wedi meddwl bod yr approach o 'dim syrpreises' yn bwysig. Felly, rŷch chi'n rhoi cyfle i'r corff yn gyntaf i sylweddoli ei wendidau ei hun, ond ar ddiwedd y dydd mae yna - . Rŷn ni wedi siarad llawer am bethau ychydig bach yn feddal heddiw, efallai, er eu bod nhw'n bwysig iawn iawn, ond ar ddiwedd y dydd, dyw hynny ddim yn golygu fy mod i ddim yn credu yn y safonau ac yn meddwl eu bod nhw'n hollbwysig, a'u bod nhw wedi arwain at wahaniaeth. Mae fy nhrafodaeth i wedi bod mwy o gwmpas defnyddio'r gwasanaethau yna, efallai. Dwi ddim yn siŵr os mae hynny'n bodloni -