English: Thank you for the response, and I'll try and respond briefly to each of the eight areas of questions that you've raised. And, of course, at the outset we agreed not to publish a new vision to replace 'Together for Health' because we're going to have a review. It would have been odd if I had said, 'Here is our view for the future of the health service, and then let's have the parliamentary review.' There's a trade-off in doing that. And at the outset I indicated there would be some things that we'd have to get on with and do before the review, and other things we'd need to wait for the review. I think it's that first point about when a programme for transformation will commence. Some things are already happening, but the review itself has recognised that it wants to see more of - . So, some of that transformation is in train. The challenge is perhaps the pace and the scale of that transformation. And as you'll know from having had a chance to read the report, they recommend having a transformation team in place for at least a year, to try and drive that change. In terms of when we'll review that, well I do expect to review the report, both during the construction of the long-term plan for health and care that I've said we expect to be able to publish at the end of spring. That's a pretty tight timescale, but I think we need to maintain the momentum, so it doesn't sit on a shelf within the Government, or other people's libraries. And we'll need to think, as we publish the plan, about what timescales we'll then look at to measure our progress. An obvious one will be in a year's time, and we'll think about other waypoints to check on our progress. That goes into your point about both recruiting people to deal with transformation, and having a strategic transformation team. We'll need to look at the current skills we have, both centrally, here within the civil service, and centrally, a leadership team in both the health service, but also the social care system as well. When you think of the people who we currently have, and how to drive that transformation, if we accept the recommendation about having a team, who are those people, where do we get them from, and where do the costs come from to actually pay those people to do the job, and their authority to properly engage with the service to drive improvement? Those are real issues for us to consider, as we deliver a plan, and then look to take that forward. I take seriously your point about the engagement of health and care staff, and their training. That's obviously something that we need to look at. Innovation and improvement - well, certainly, the improvement activity often comes from training, from recognising that best practice needs to be standard and common practice, and how we look to have a learning environment, and a rich learning environment. And that comes into one of the key recommendations in the report as well. On public engagement, I had a number of conversations with Lee Waters, and others, about whether the public would be genuinely engaged in the review. And they took that seriously: they had citizens panels and they took the opportunity to listen to and talk with the public. Part of our challenge is how we engage the public in a more regular conversation about health and care in any event, and in some of this, the social care sector is further ahead than the health service, and people are being more engaged in their choices. There's something about how the health service catches up with that, and equally how we have a more general debate about health and care, which doesn't rely on either a point of crisis or a point of real anxiety and controversy locally. Lots have been getting engaged in either their local service or a hospital service about something they disagree with or are concerned about. We need a broader and deeper engagement. To be fair, some of our health boards in Wales are better at doing that on a regular basis than others. So, again, that's a key point of learning and driving through, otherwise having the citizen be a more equal partner in making health and care choices is unlikely to happen, let alone the design of services. And I think I've tried to deal with your point about staff training and engagement. I want to come back to your final point about money. We agreed across parties, in the terms, not to address money in this review. Because, if we'd done that, we could have easily spent a whole year just looking at how to fund and what to fund. These are controversial choices, and we all have different views on how we shall fund within a reducing resource base, which is objectively the case. The Government has a reducing resource base in real terms. The percentage of health and care spend continues to rise, as in our vote on the budget later today that puts more money into the health service. Our challenge must be: what is the long-term funding settlement going to be, and the requirement to do that? There's a different debate to be had there, about what individuals do to contribute to social care, for example, the funding of social care, the work that Gerry Holtham was doing with Mark Drakeford, my department, Huw Irranca, in looking at the long-term funding for social care. So, those questions can't be parked. What we have to do is, to come up with a final point in the review and the quadruple aim: how do we nevertheless derive greater value from the Welsh public pound that we invest in these services? But, we'll continue to have to debate funding, what we expect to deliver from that, and what we're prepared to do in not spending that money in other parts of public services, if we choose to invest more of our funds in the health and social care system.
Welsh: Diolch ichi am yr ymateb; gwnaf geisio ymateb yn gryno i bob un o'r wyth maes cwestiynau yr ydych wedi'u codi. Ac, wrth gwrs, ar y dechrau gwnaethom gytuno i beidio â chyhoeddi gweledigaeth newydd i gymryd lle 'Law yn Llaw at Iechyd', oherwydd ein bod yn mynd i gael adolygiad. Byddai wedi bod yn rhyfedd pe bawn wedi dweud, 'Dyma ein barn am ddyfodol y gwasanaeth iechyd, ac yna dewch inni gael yr adolygiad seneddol.' Mae hynny'n golygu cyfaddawd. Ac ar y cychwyn, nodais y byddai'n rhaid inni fwrw ymlaen â rhai pethau cyn yr adolygiad, ac y byddai angen i bethau eraill aros am yr adolygiad. Rwy'n meddwl mai dyna'r pwynt cyntaf hwnnw ynghylch pryd fydd rhaglen trawsnewid yn dechrau. Mae rhai pethau eisoes yn digwydd, ond mae'r adolygiad ei hun wedi cydnabod yr hoffai weld mwy o - . Felly, mae rhywfaint o'r trawsnewid hwnnw wedi dechrau. Yr her yw efallai cyflymder a maint y trawsnewid hwnnw. Ac fel y byddwch yn ei wybod ar ôl cael cyfle i ddarllen yr adroddiad, maen nhw'n argymell sefydlu tîm trawsnewid am o leiaf flwyddyn, i geisio sbarduno'r newid hwnnw. O ran pryd y byddwn yn adolygu hynny, wel rwy'n disgwyl adolygu'r adroddiad, wrth adeiladu'r cynllun hirdymor ar gyfer iechyd a gofal yr wyf wedi dweud ein bod yn disgwyl gallu ei gyhoeddi ar ddiwedd y gwanwyn. Mae hynny'n amserlen eithaf tyn, ond rwy'n meddwl bod angen inni gadw'r momentwm, fel na fydd yn eistedd ar silff o fewn y Llywodraeth, neu yn llyfrgelloedd pobl eraill. A bydd angen inni feddwl, wrth inni gyhoeddi'r cynllun, ynghylch pa amserlenni y byddwn yn eu defnyddio wedyn i fesur ein cynnydd. Un amlwg fydd ymhen blwyddyn, a gwnawn feddwl am adegau eraill i archwilio ein cynnydd. Mae hynny'n mynd at eich pwynt am recriwtio pobl i ymdrin â thrawsnewid, ac am sefydlu tîm trawsnewid strategol. Bydd angen inni edrych ar y sgiliau sydd gennym ar hyn o bryd, yn ganolog, yma o fewn y gwasanaeth sifil, ac yn ganolog, tîm arweinyddiaeth yn y gwasanaeth iechyd, ond yn y system gofal cymdeithasol hefyd. Wrth feddwl am y bobl sydd gennym ar hyn o bryd, a sut i ysgogi'r trawsnewid hwnnw, os ydym yn derbyn yr argymhelliad ynghylch sefydlu tîm, pwy yw'r bobl hynny, o ble y byddan nhw'n dod, ac o ble y mae'r costau'n dod i dalu'r bobl hynny i wneud y gwaith, a'u hawdurdod i ymgysylltu'n briodol â'r gwasanaeth i ysgogi gwelliant? Mae'r rheini'n faterion go iawn inni eu hystyried, wrth inni gyflwyno cynllun, ac yna geisio bwrw ymlaen ag ef. Rwy'n cymryd o ddifrif eich pwynt am ymgysylltiad staff iechyd a gofal, ac am eu hyfforddiant. Mae hynny'n amlwg yn rhywbeth y mae angen inni edrych arno. Arloesi a gwella - wel, yn sicr, mae'r gweithgaredd gwella yn aml yn dod o hyfforddiant, o gydnabod bod angen i arfer gorau fod yn arfer safonol a chyffredin, a sut yr ydym yn ceisio creu amgylchedd dysgu, ac amgylchedd dysgu cyfoethog. Ac mae hynny'n dod i mewn i un o argymhellion allweddol yr adroddiad hefyd. O ran ymgysylltiad cyhoeddus, rwyf wedi cael nifer o sgyrsiau gyda Lee Waters, ac eraill, ynghylch p'un a fyddai'r cyhoedd wir yn cymryd rhan yn yr adolygiad. A gwnaethant gymryd hynny o ddifrif: roedd ganddynt baneli dinasyddion a gwnaethant achub ar y cyfle i wrando ar y cyhoedd a siarad â nhw. Rhan o'n her ni yw sut yr ydym yn ymgysylltu â'r cyhoedd mewn sgwrs fwy rheolaidd am iechyd a gofal yn gyffredinol, ac o ran rhai o'r pethau hyn, mae'r sector gofal cymdeithasol ar y blaen i'r gwasanaeth iechyd, ac mae pobl yn ymwneud mwy â'u dewisiadau. Mae rhywbeth ynglŷn â sut y mae'r gwasanaeth iechyd yn dal i fyny â hynny, a hefyd ynglŷn â sut y cawn drafodaeth fwy cyffredinol ynghylch iechyd a gofal, heb ddibynnu ar argyfwng nac ar bwynt o bryder a dadlau gwirioneddol yn lleol. Mae llawer wedi bod yn ymgysylltu naill ai â'u gwasanaeth lleol neu â gwasanaeth ysbyty ynghylch rhywbeth y maent yn anghytuno ag ef neu'n bryderus amdano. Mae angen inni ymgysylltu'n ehangach ac yn ddyfnach. I fod yn deg, mae rhai o'n byrddau iechyd yng Nghymru'n well am wneud hynny'n rheolaidd nag eraill. Felly, unwaith eto, mae hwnnw'n bwynt allweddol o ran dysgu ac ysgogi, neu mae'n annhebygol y bydd y dinesydd yn bartner mwy cyfartal o ran gwneud dewisiadau iechyd a gofal, heb sôn am gynllunio gwasanaethau. Ac rwy'n meddwl fy mod wedi ceisio rhoi sylw i'ch pwynt am hyfforddi staff ac ymgysylltu. Hoffwn ddod yn ôl at eich pwynt olaf am arian. Cytunwyd ar draws y pleidiau, yn y telerau, i beidio â chynnwys arian yn yr adolygiad hwn. Oherwydd, pe byddem wedi gwneud hynny, byddai wedi bod yn hawdd inni dreulio blwyddyn gyfan dim ond yn edrych ar sut i ariannu a beth i'w ariannu. Mae'r rhain yn ddewisiadau dadleuol, ac mae gennym i gyd safbwyntiau gwahanol ynghylch sut i ariannu pethau o fewn sylfaen adnoddau sy'n lleihau, sy'n wrthrychol wir. Mae sylfaen adnoddau'r Llywodraeth yn lleihau mewn termau real. Mae canran y gwariant ar iechyd a gofal yn parhau i godi, fel yn ein pleidlais ar y gyllideb yn ddiweddarach heddiw, sy'n rhoi mwy o arian i'r gwasanaeth iechyd. Dyma'r her y mae'n rhaid inni ei hateb: beth fydd y setliad ariannu hirdymor, a beth yw'r gofyniad i wneud hynny? Mae dadl wahanol i'w chael yno, ynghylch yr hyn y mae unigolion yn ei wneud i gyfrannu at ofal cymdeithasol, er enghraifft, ariannu gofal cymdeithasol, y gwaith yr oedd Gerry Holtham yn ei wneud gyda Mark Drakeford, fy adran i, Huw Irranca, wrth edrych ar y cyllid hirdymor ar gyfer gofal cymdeithasol. Felly, ni allaf ohirio'r cwestiynau hynny. Yr hyn y mae'n rhaid inni ei wneud yw dod o hyd i bwynt olaf yn yr adolygiad a'r nod pedwarplyg: sut y gallwn ni, serch hynny, gael mwy o werth am bunt gyhoeddus Cymru i'w fuddsoddi yn y gwasanaethau hyn? Ond, bydd yn rhaid inni ddal i ddadlau am ariannu, yr hyn yr ydym yn disgwyl ei gyflawni o hynny, a'r hyn yr ydym yn barod i'w wneud wrth beidio â gwario'r arian hwnnw mewn rhannau eraill o'r gwasanaethau cyhoeddus, os ydym ni'n dewis buddsoddi mwy o'n cronfeydd yn y system iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol.