English: I thank the Minister for his answers. He clearly doesn't speak to the same families as I do. But I'll be absolutely clear that I'm not calling for him to resign today. I think he needs to reflect on the fact that, as I've already said, eight reports, surveys and visits had taken place and raised concerns before his officials did anything. And we've had the first quarterly report that told us that, even after intervention, the service still isn't safe. I think it may be that the public in Wales will have some concerns about his apparent complacency. If I can take him back to the report, where the report raises wider issues for the NHS in Wales, it says, and I quote, 'The Welsh Government will no doubt also want to reflect on the issues raised in this report and give consideration to how they will gain assurances on the robustness of quality governance arrangements across other NHS bodies.' Now, referring back to previous questions I've asked him in his other role around the capacity of the non-executives in Cwm Taf, prior to his intervention, his special adviser - and he may want to look back at the transcript of the committee - made it absolutely clear that there was a very poor level of scrutiny, and this report confirms that, is the Minister prepared to accept today that there is a real need to look at the way in which non-executives, particularly very well remunerated chairs and vice-chairs are appointed? Does he need to ask questions across the service about their capacity to scrutinise? And does he need to look at the way that the health boards are structured, where the non-executives and the executive directors sit around a table together and it's very easy to see how a culture develops where the board is one board and the non-executives lose their focus in scrutinising the performance of their executive directors?
Welsh: Diolchaf i'r Gweinidog am ei atebion. Mae'n amlwg nad yw'n siarad â'r un teuluoedd â mi. Ond hoffwn fod yn gwbl eglur nad wyf i'n galw arno i ymddiswyddo heddiw. Rwy'n credu bod angen iddo fyfyrio ar y ffaith, fel y dywedais eisoes, bod wyth adroddiad, arolwg ac ymweliad wedi digwydd ac wedi mynegi pryderon cyn i'w swyddogion ef wneud unrhyw beth. Ac rydym ni wedi cael yr adroddiad chwarterol cyntaf a ddywedodd wrthym, hyd yn oed ar ôl ymyrraeth, nad yw'r gwasanaeth yn ddiogel o hyd. Rwy'n credu efallai y bydd gan y cyhoedd yng Nghymru rai pryderon ynghylch ei hunanfodlonrwydd ymddangosiadol. Os caf fynd ag ef yn ôl at yr adroddiad, lle y mae'r adroddiad yn codi materion ehangach ar gyfer y GIG yng Nghymru, mae'n dweud, ac rwy'n dyfynnu, Mae'n sicr y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn dymuno myfyrio hefyd ar y materion a godir yn yr adroddiad hwn a rhoi ystyriaeth i sut y bydd yn cael sicrwydd ynghylch cadernid trefniadau llywodraethu ansawdd ar draws cyrff eraill y GIG. Nawr, gan gyfeirio yn ôl at gwestiynau blaenorol yr wyf i wedi eu gofyn iddo yn ei swyddogaeth arall o ran gallu'r swyddogion anweithredol yng Nghwm Taf, cyn iddo ymyrryd, fe'i gwnaed yn gwbl eglur gan ei gynghorydd arbennig - ac efallai yr hoffai edrych yn ôl ar drawsgrifiad y pwyllgor - bod lefel wael iawn o graffu, ac mae'r adroddiad hwn yn cadarnhau hynny, a yw'r Gweinidog yn barod i dderbyn heddiw bod gwir angen edrych ar y modd y penodir swyddogion anweithredol, yn enwedig cadeiryddion ac is-gadeiryddion sy'n cael eu talu'n dda iawn? A oes angen iddo ofyn cwestiynau ar draws y gwasanaeth am eu gallu i graffu? Ac a oes angen iddo edrych ar y ffordd y mae'r byrddau iechyd wedi'u strwythuro, lle mae'r swyddogion anweithredol a'r cyfarwyddwyr gweithredol yn eistedd wrth fwrdd gyda'i gilydd ac mae'n hawdd iawn gweld sut mae diwylliant yn datblygu lle mae'r bwrdd yn un bwrdd ac mae'r swyddogion anweithredol yn colli eu canolbwynt o ran craffu ar berfformiad eu cyfarwyddwyr gweithredol?