English: Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I want to say from the outset that anyone here who knows me knows that, as a Labour Member, I have never, ever shied away from scrutinising my own side. There cannot be a Minister in any Welsh Government, past or present, who I haven't asked difficult questions of, and that includes the First Minister, both in his current role and when he was a portfolio holder. I would fight to the end for the right of Labour backbenchers to come here and do what is right in the interests of their constituents and in keeping with their own values and principles. That is the way I have always worked, and this debate today is no exception. I also believe it is right that the allegations that have been made are properly scrutinised, and I welcome the First Minister's decision to ask James Hamilton to independently investigate them. But I certainly do not believe that the motion the Welsh Conservatives have tabled, calling for the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister to look at these allegations, is the right thing to do, for a number of reasons. Simon Thomas has said that using the committee would be unwieldy, and I agree with that, but I also think that a body used to scrutinising policy decisions is not the appropriate body to undertake work of this kind. Are we really expecting AMs, in a public committee, to try and drill down into the detail of what happened three years ago on the fifth floor, and to look at the detail of who said what, when and to whom? I am also concerned that some witnesses, including civil servants, may feel very uncomfortable about feeding into such a public forum, but may be willing to talk on a one-to-one basis to James Hamilton. [ Interruption.] I'll give way to Rhun.
Welsh: Diolch am y cyfle i gyfrannu at y ddadl. Hoffwn ddweud o'r cychwyn cyntaf fod unrhyw un yma sy'n fy adnabod yn gwybod, fel Aelod Llafur, nad wyf erioed wedi cilio rhag craffu ar fy ochr fy hun. Ni all fod unrhyw Weinidog mewn unrhyw Lywodraeth Cymru, yn y gorffennol neu'r presennol, nad wyf wedi gofyn cwestiynau anodd iddynt, ac mae hynny'n cynnwys y Prif Weinidog, yn ei rôl bresennol a phan oedd yn ddeiliad portffolio. Buaswn yn brwydro i'r pen dros hawl Aelodau meinciau cefn Llafur i ddod yma a gwneud yr hyn sy'n iawn er lles eu hetholwyr ac yn unol â'u gwerthoedd a'u hegwyddorion eu hunain. Dyna'r ffordd yr wyf bob amser wedi gweithio, ac nid yw'r ddadl hon heddiw yn eithriad. Credaf hefyd ei bod yn iawn fod yr honiadau a wnaed yn cael eu craffu'n briodol, ac rwy'n croesawu penderfyniad y Prif Weinidog i ofyn i James Hamilton ymchwilio iddynt yn annibynnol. Ond yn sicr nid wyf yn credu mai'r cynnig y mae'r Ceidwadwyr Cymreig wedi'i gyflwyno, yn galw ar Bwyllgor Craffu ar Waith y Prif Weinidog i edrych ar yr honiadau hyn, yw'r peth cywir i'w wneud, am nifer o resymau. Mae Simon Thomas wedi dweud y buasai defnyddio pwyllgor yn afrosgo, ac rwy'n cytuno â hynny, ond credaf hefyd nad corff a ddefnyddir i graffu ar benderfyniadau polisi yw'r corff priodol i ymgymryd â gwaith o'r math hwn. A ydym mewn gwirionedd yn disgwyl i Aelodau'r Cynulliad, mewn pwyllgor cyhoeddus geisio edrych yn fanylach ar fanylion yr hyn a ddigwyddodd dair blynedd yn ôl ar y pumed llawr, ac i edrych ar fanylion pwy a ddywedodd beth, pryd ac wrth bwy? Rwyf hefyd yn pryderu y gallai rhai tystion, gan gynnwys gweision sifil, deimlo'n anesmwyth iawn ynglŷn â bwydo i mewn i fforwm cyhoeddus o'r fath, ond efallai y byddant yn barod i siarad ar sail un i un â James Hamilton. [ Torri ar draws.] Fe ildiaf i Rhun.