Pwyllgor Diwylliant, Cyfathrebu, y Gymraeg, Chwaraeon, a Chysylltiadau Rhyngwladol
Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport, and International Relations Committee
11/01/2024Aelodau'r Pwyllgor a oedd yn bresennol
Committee Members in Attendance
| Alun Davies | |
| Carolyn Thomas | |
| Delyth Jewell | Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor |
| Committee Chair | |
| Hefin David | |
| Llyr Gruffydd | |
| Tom Giffard | |
Y rhai eraill a oedd yn bresennol
Others in Attendance
| Bethan Webb | Llywodraeth Cymru |
| Welsh Government | |
| Chris Jones | S4C |
| S4C | |
| Jeremy Miles | Gweinidog y Gymraeg ac Addysg |
| Minister for Education and the Welsh Language | |
| Owain Lloyd | Llywodraeth Cymru |
| Welsh Government | |
| Rhodri Williams | S4C |
| S4C |
Swyddogion y Senedd a oedd yn bresennol
Senedd Officials in Attendance
| Haidee James | Ail Glerc |
| Second Clerk | |
| Lleu Williams | Clerc |
| Clerk | |
| Osian Bowyer | Ymchwilydd |
| Researcher | |
| Rhea James | Dirprwy Glerc |
| Deputy Clerk | |
| Robin Wilkinson | Ymchwilydd |
| Researcher |
Cynnwys
Contents
Cofnodir y trafodion yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir trawsgrifiad o’r cyfieithu ar y pryd. Lle mae cyfranwyr wedi darparu cywiriadau i’w tystiolaeth, nodir y rheini yn y trawsgrifiad.
The proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous interpretation is included. Where contributors have supplied corrections to their evidence, these are noted in the transcript.
Cyfarfu’r pwyllgor yn y Senedd a thrwy gynhadledd fideo.
Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 09:30.
The committee met in the Senedd and by video-conference.
The meeting began at 09:30.
Bore da. A gaf fi estyn croeso i chi i gyd i'r cyfarfod cyntaf o'r flwyddyn newydd o'r Pwyllgor Diwylliant, Cyfathrebu, y Gymraeg, Chwaraeon a Chysylltiadau Rhyngwladol? Mi wnaf i ddymuno blwyddyn newydd dda i'n Haelodau a hefyd i'n gwylwyr ni ac i'n tystion. A oes gan unrhyw Aelodau fuddiannau i'w datgan? Dwi ddim yn gweld bod, felly fe wnawn ni symud yn syth ymlaen at eitem 2.
Good morning. May I welcome you all to this first meeting of the new year of the Culture, Communications, Welsh language, Sport and International Relations Committee. I'll wish our Members a happy new year and also to our viewers and our witnesses. Do any Members have any declarations of interest? No, I don't see there are, so we'll move straight on to item 2.
Dŷn ni'n edrych ar gyllideb ddrafft Llywodraeth Cymru ar gyfer 2024-25 ac mae'n sesiwn dystiolaeth gyntaf gyda Gweinidog y Gymraeg ac Addysg. Mi wnaf i ofyn i'r Gweinidog gyflwyno'i hunan a hefyd y tystion eraill ar gyfer y record.
We're looking at the Welsh Government's draft budget for 2024-25 and the first evidence session is with the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language. I'll ask the Minister to introduce himself and the other witnesses for the record.
Jeremy Miles, Gweinidog y Gymraeg ac Addysg. Owain Lloyd, cyfarwyddwr yr adran. Bethan Webb, is-gyfarwyddwr yr adran.
Jeremy Miles, Minister for Education and the Welsh Language. Owain Lloyd, director of the department. Bethan Webb, deputy director of the department.
Croeso mawr i chi. Diolch yn fawr iawn am fod gyda ni. Fe wnawn ni symud yn syth at ein cwestiynau, os yw hynny'n iawn ac fe wnawn ni ddechrau gyda Tom Giffard.
A warm welcome to you all. We'll move straight to our questions, if that's okay, and we'll start with Tom Giffard.
Diolch yn fawr. Bore da.
Thank you very much. Good morning.
Bore da.
Good morning.
Pa dystiolaeth sydd ar gael i ddweud bod targed 'Cymraeg 2050' dal yn realistig?
What evidence is there to say that the target for 'Cymraeg 2050' is still realistic?
Wel, mae e dal yn realistig, dwi'n credu. Mae gyda ni her ariannol ar hyn o bryd, wrth gwrs, felly os edrychwch chi dros y tair blynedd ers inni osod y gyllideb yn 2022, mae'r cynnydd roedden ni'n darogan yn y gyllideb yn sylweddol—felly 15 y cant yn y flwyddyn gyntaf, jest dan 7 y cant yn yr ail flwyddyn a jest dros 7 y cant yn y drydedd flwyddyn. A beth ŷn ni wedi ceisio'i wneud wrth fynd i'r afael gyda'r heriau ariannol sydd yn ein hwynebu ni, er mwyn ein bod ni'n gallu cefnogi'r gwasanaeth iechyd a chynghorau lleol o ran cyllideb y Llywodraeth yn gyffredinol—rwyf wedi gorfod dod o hyd i dros £100 miliwn yn fy nghyllideb i, ac mae cyfraniad y gyllideb hon tua'r nod honno yn £3.5 miliwn. Felly, dwi ddim eisiau gwneud unrhyw doriad, wrth gwrs, ond rŷn ni wedi ceisio rhoi diogelwch cymharol, o leiaf, i'r gyllideb hon.
Mae hynny wedi dod mewn dwy ffordd: cyllideb y Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol a chyllideb y Ganolfan Dysgu Cymraeg Genedlaethol ar un llaw, ac wedyn rhyw elfen o doriad i Gomisiynydd y Gymraeg. Ond beth ŷn ni'n ei wneud ar hyn o bryd yw edrych ar y taflwybr tuag at y nod—fel roeddech chi'n dweud, beth yw'r darlun o ran ydy'r nod yn realistig. Ac rŷn ni wrthi yn adolygu'r taflwybr yng nghyd-destun canlyniadau'r cyfrifiad. Felly, mae'r gwaith hynny'n digwydd ar hyn o bryd.
Ac mae ambell beth yn bwydo mewn i hynny, felly: y gwaith sy'n digwydd ar y cyd gyda'r swyddfa ystadegau cenedlaethol i geisio cysoni'r cyfrifiad ar yr un llaw gyda data adolygiad y llafurlu ar y llaw arall; ond hefyd rŷn ni wedi comisiynu darn o waith ar newidiadau yn nefnydd y Gymraeg—gwaith socioeconomaidd, a dweud y gwir—i ddeall beth yw'r darlun ar lawr gwlad. Ac wedyn, wrth gwrs, fel ŷch chi'n gwybod, bydd y Comisiwn Cymunedau Cymraeg yn rhoi adroddiad i ni yn yr haf ar eu hargymhellion nhw hefyd. Felly, mae'r gwaith hynny i gyd yn bwydo mewn i ble ŷn ni ar y siwrnai 2050.
Well, it is still realistic, I believe. We do face a financial challenge at the moment, of course, so if you look over the three years since we set the budget in 2022, the increase that we'd anticipated in the budget is substantial—15 per cent in the first year, just under 7 per cent in the second year and just over 7 per cent in the third. And what we've tried to do in tackling the fiscal challenges that we face, so that we can support the health services and local authorities and the Government budget more generally—I have had to find over a £100 million in my budget, and the contribution of this budget to that aim is around £3.5 million. I don't want to make any cuts, of course, but we have tried to give some protection, at least, to this budget.
That has come in two ways: the budget for the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol and the National Centre for Learning Welsh on the one hand, and then there's been some element of a cut to the Welsh Language Commissioner's budget. But what we're doing now is looking at the bigger picture in achieving our aims, and whether our aim is realistic, as you said. And we're looking at achieving our aims in light of the census results. So, that work is ongoing at the moment.
And there are a few things feeding into that: there's the work that's happening with the Office for National Statistics to try and reconcile the census on the one hand with the data from the workforce review on the other; but we've also commissioned a piece of work on changes in the use of the Welsh language—that's socioeconomic work, if truth be told—to understand what the picture is on the ground. And then, of course, as you will know, the Commission for Welsh-speaking Communities will provide us with their recommendations in the summer. So all of that work feeds into where we are on the journey towards 2050.
Diolch. Rŷch chi wedi sôn am y gyllideb ddrafft yn eich ateb chi. Pa effaith mae hynny'n mynd i'w gael? Rŷch chi wedi sôn am y toriadau sydd wedi digwydd, felly pa fath o wahaniaeth rhwng y ddarpariaeth—. A fydd yna ryw fath o scale-back, os hoffwch chi, yn eich darpariaeth chi?
Thank you. You've mentioned the draft budget in your answer. What effect is that going to have? You've talked about cuts that have happened, therefore what sort of difference will there be in the provision—? Will there be some sort of scale-back, if you like, in your provision?
Ocê. Wel, fel roeddwn i'n dweud, mae dau brif gategori, felly: y toriad sydd yn effeithio ar Gomisiynydd y Gymraeg, ac mae'r toriad hwnnw'n gyson gyda'r toriadau mae pob un o'r comisiynwyr yn derbyn eleni, sef rhyw 5 y cant. Mae'r comisiynydd yn darogan bod hynny'n mynd i gael effaith ar staffio, fel y byddech chi'n disgwyl. Ond fel rwy'n deall, y bwriad yw sicrhau bod hynny'n digwydd drwy beidio â llenwi swyddi gwag a pheidio â recriwtio mwy o bobl, yn hytrach na diswyddo pobl sydd yn gweithio yn y swyddfa ar hyn o bryd.
O ran gwaith craidd y comisiynydd—rheoleiddio—rŷn ni'n sicr bod hynny yn bosib o fewn y gyllideb fel mae hi ar hyn o bryd. O ran gwaith y comisiwn a'r ganolfan ddysgu, bydd y cynlluniau sydd ar gael i ddarparu gwersi am ddim i bobl ifanc a'r gweithlu addysg—mae rheini'n gallu parhau. O ran gwaith y coleg, rŷn ni'n gwybod y byddan nhw'n gallu parhau i weithio gyda cholegau a phrifysgolion. Yn union beth yw impact hynny ar lawr gwlad, bydd rhaid inni weld, i fod yn gwbl onest. Ond yr hyn ŷn ni wedi gallu ei wneud yw sicrhau bod y gyllideb yn cael ei chynnal, os hoffwch chi, felly mae'r cynlluniau sydd ar waith yn barod yn gallu parhau, ond dydyn ni ddim yn cynyddu'r gyllideb o £3.5 miliwn, felly byddwn ni'n ailbroffilio hwnnw. Dŷn ni ddim yn gwybod eto beth yn union fydd impact hwnnw o ran y berthynas â cholegau ac ysgolion.
Okay. As I said there are two main categories: the cut that impacts the Welsh Language Commissioner, so that cut is consistent with cuts that all of the commissioners will experience this year, which is around 5 per cent. The commissioner predicts that that will have an impact on staffing, as you might expect. But as I understand it, the intention is to ensure that that happens by not filling vacant posts and not recruiting more people, rather than dismissing people who are currently working in the office.
In terms of the core work of the commissioner—regulation—we are confident that that is possible within the budget as it currently stands. In terms of the work of the commission and the centre for learning Welsh, the plans in place to provide free lessons for young people and the education workforce will continue. In terms of the work of the coleg Cymraeg, we know that they will continue to be able to work with colleges and universities. Exactly what the impact of that on the ground is, we'll have to wait and see, if I'm entirely honest. But what we have been able to do is to ensure that the budget is maintained, if you like, so the plans in place already can continue, but we're not increasing the budget by £3.5 million, so we will have to reprofile that. We don't know exactly what the impact of that will be in terms of the relationship with colleges and schools.
Ydych chi'n mynd i newid unrhyw fesur neu ganlyniadau oherwydd newid yn y gyllideb?
Are you going to change any measures or outcomes as a result of that change in the budget?
Wel, ddim o ran y cynllun gwersi Cymraeg. O ran gwaith y coleg, dŷn ni ddim yn ariannu'r coleg ar sail y rhifau o ddysgwyr sydd yn mynychu addysg ôl-16, er enghraifft, felly mae'n gyllideb fwy agored na hynny, oherwydd mae llawer ohono fe i'w wneud â hyrwyddo a chreu capasiti. Felly, dŷn ni ddim yn rhagweld newid hwnnw, ond dwi'n credu bod angen trafodaeth barhaus rhwng swyddogion yn fy adran i a'r coleg Cymraeg i weld beth yw impact hynny ar lawr gwlad.
Well, not in terms of Welsh language lessons. In terms of the work of the coleg, we don't fund the coleg Cymraeg on the basis of the number of learners in post-16 education, for example, so it's a more open budget than that, because much of it relates to promotion and the creation of capacity. So, we don't anticipate a change there, but I do think we need an ongoing discussion between officials in my department and the coleg Cymraeg to see what the impact of that is on the ground.
Ocê, diolch.
Okay, thank you.
Dwi'n meddwl bod Hefin eisiau dod mewn. Alun, oeddech chi eisiau dod mewn? Na; mi wnaf i ddod at Hefin.
I think Hefin wants to come in. Alun, did you want to come in? No; I'll come to Hefin.
Mi wnês i gwrdd â dysgwyr, darlithwyr a staff y Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol yng Ngholeg y Cymoedd, ac roedden nhw'n dweud na fydden nhw wedi gwneud y cynnydd hwn heb y cyllid a'r gefnogaeth gan y coleg Cymraeg. Mae'r data diweddaraf yn dangos bod y cynnydd hwn yn digwydd ar draws Cymru ers i'r coleg fod yn gyfrifol am y sector ôl-16 yn 2018. Mae'n fy mhoeni i, felly, na fydd y coleg yn derbyn yr arian ychwanegol yn ystod blwyddyn 3 y cytundeb cydweithio, sy'n swm o £840,000. A ydych chi'n gallu rhoi sicrwydd i ni na fydd unrhyw doriadau pellach i gyllideb y coleg Cymraeg yn 2024-25 ac y byddan nhw'n derbyn cyllideb fflat—hynny yw, yr un swm a gawson nhw yn 2023-24?
I met learners, lecturers and staff of the coleg Cymraeg at Coleg y Cymoedd, and they said that they wouldn't have made this progress without the funding and the support from the coleg Cymraeg. Recent data show that this progress is happening across Wales since the coleg became responsible for the post-16 sector in 2018. It concerns me, therefore, that the coleg won't receive the additional funding during the third year of the co-operation agreement, which is a sum of £840,000. Can you provide assurances to us that there will be no further cuts to the budget of the coleg Cymraeg in 2024-25 and that they will receive flat funding—i.e. the same sum that they received in 2023-24?
Wel, y cynllun rŷn ni wedi cynnig yn y gyllideb ddrafft yw ein bod ni yn cynnal yr arian sydd yn y flwyddyn ariannol ddiwethaf a'n bod ni'n ailbroffilio, os hoffech chi. Rŷn ni wedi cytuno hyn ar y cyd â Phlaid Cymru fel rhan o'r cytundeb cydweithio—ein bod ni'n ailbroffilio'r swm yr oeddem ni'n bwriadu cynyddu. Beth fyddwn ni yn ei ddweud yw bod y cysylltiad rhwng—. Am y rhesymau yr oeddwn i'n dweud wrth Tom Giffard, a dweud y gwir, dydy'r cysylltiad rhwng yr union gyllideb a'r cynnydd mewn myfyrwyr sy'n astudio ddim yn un sydd yn eglur iawn, a dweud y gwir; dyna pam mae cadw'r drafodaeth yn un byw yn bwysig, dwi'n credu.
Well, what we've proposed in the draft budget is that we do maintain the funding that was available in the last financial year and that we reprofile that, if you like. We've agreed this jointly with Plaid Cymru as part of the co-operation agreement—that we should reprofile the amount that we were intending to increase. What we would say is that there's a relationshiop between—. Now, as I was telling Tom Giffard, the relationship between the exact budget and the increase in the number of students isn't particularly clear; that's why keeping that discussion alive is important, I think.
That is the reassurance, though.
Wel, yr hyn yr oeddech chi'n gofyn oedd: a ydyn ni'n cynnal y gyllideb ar yr un lefel ag oedd hi y llynedd, a'r ateb i hynny yw 'ydyn'.
Well, what you were asking was whether we're maintaining the budget at the same level as last year, and the answer to that is 'yes'.
Ocê, diolch.
Okay, thank you.
Ocê, diolch. Tom, oeddech chi wedi gorffen?
Okay, thank you. Tom, had you finished?
Na, un arall. Pa dystiolaeth sydd gyda chi i ddweud bod 'Cymraeg 2050', a bod yr iaith Gymraeg, yn rhywbeth sydd yn digwydd ar draws portffolio ac ar draws Gweinidogion yn Llywodraeth Cymru?
No, I've got one additional question. What evidence do you have to show that 'Cymraeg 2050', and the Welsh language, is something that is embedded across ministerial portfolios in the Welsh Government?
Ocê, wel, beth rŷn ni wedi ceisio gwneud, ac rŷn ni wedi sôn yn y pwyllgor o'r blaen am hyn, yw prif-ffrydio'r polisi drwy waith y Llywodraeth yn gyffredinol. Felly, mae fy nghyllideb i yn gyfraniad sylweddol at hynny, ond, wrth gwrs, mae cyllidebau Gweinidogion eraill yn cyfrannu at hynny hefyd. O fewn y gyllideb addysg, er enghraifft, os edrychwch chi ar y cyfraniad hwnnw, mae'r gyllideb sydd yn ariannu adeiladu ysgolion, wrth gwrs, yn cyfrannu at y nod, ond hefyd y gyllideb sydd ar gael i hyfforddi athrawon a'r gweithlu addysg—mae hynny hefyd yn cyfrannu at y nod.
Ond y tu hwnt i fy mhortffolio i, os edrychwch chi ar gynllun Arfor, er enghraifft, mae hwnnw'n cyfrannu tuag at y nod. Mae cyllideb Julie Morgan—y blynyddoedd cynnar—yn cyfrannu'n sylweddol iawn tuag at agor cylchoedd ac, wrth gwrs, hyfforddi'r gweithlu. Felly, mae hyn yn digwydd ar draws y Llywodraeth. Mae cyllideb Julie James, y Gweinidog Newid Hinsawdd, yn cyfrannu tuag y polisi ail gartrefi, sydd mor bwysig i sicrhau ein bod ni'n cyrraedd y nod, oherwydd mae'r cadarnleoedd Cymraeg dal yn bwysig iawn o ran cynyddu'r rhifau. Felly, rŷch chi'n gweld hwnna'n digwydd ar draws y Llywodraeth. Nid jest cwestiwn ariannol yw hyn, mae'n fater mwy, mae angen integreiddio'n fwy sylweddol na hynny, felly un o'n pethau rŷn ni'n ceisio'i wneud yw symud o'r syniad yma mai rhywbeth o ran compliance yw polisi'r Gymraeg, hynny yw beth yw'r impact—ydy hwn yn cyd-fynd â pholisïau’r Llywodraeth, fel bod dealltwriaeth fwy soffistigedig, os hoffwch chi, o'r impact positif neu negyddol ar y Gymraeg o unrhyw ddatblygiad polisi.
Okay, well, what we've tried to do, and we've told the committee about this before, is to mainstream policy throughout the work of Government. So, my budget is a substantial contribution to that, but, of course, the budgets of other Ministers also contribute to it. In terms of the education budget, for example, if you look at that contribution, the budget funding school buildings contributes to our targets, but also the budget available to train the education workforce and teachers—that contributes to the aim as well.
But beyond our portfolio, if you look at the Arfor scheme, that makes a contribution. If you look at Julie Morgan's budget, in terms of early years, it makes a very significant contribution towards opening cylchoedd meithrin and training the workforce. So, this is happening across Government. Julie James's budget, as Minister for Climate Change, contributes to the second homes policy, which is so important in ensuring that we reach our goals, because the Welsh-speaking heartlands are still very important in terms of increasing numbers. So, you see that happening across Government. Now, it's not just a financial question, we do need more substantial integration than that, so one of the things that we're seeking to do is to move away from this idea that Welsh language policy is related only to compliance, that is the impact—I mean, does this correspond to Government's wider policy, so that there is a more sophisticated understanding of the positive or negative impact on the Welsh language of any policy development.
Rŷch chi bron wedi ateb y cwestiwn arall roeddwn i'n mynd i ofyn, ond rŷch chi wedi sôn am bolisïau lle mae'r effaith ar yr iaith yn glir, a dwi'n cytuno gyda chi: mae'r effaith yn glir. Ond pa dystiolaeth sydd gyda chi, neu ba asesiad sydd gennych chi, fod hynny'n digwydd o ddydd i ddydd gan Weinidogion sydd, efallai, ddim yn siarad Cymraeg i'r un safon â chi, neu ei fod yn digwydd fel rhywbeth normal sy'n digwydd yn y Llywodraeth?
You've nearly answered the other question I was going to ask, but you've mentioned policies where the impact on the language is clear, and I agree with you: the impact is clear. But what evidence do you have, or what assessment do you have, that this is happening on a day-to-day basis with Ministers who, perhaps, don't speak Welsh to the same standard as yourself, and that this is happening as something that's quite normal in Government?
Dwi ddim yn credu ein bod ni mewn lle i gael asesiad o ran data a'i werthuso fe o safbwynt hynny. Dau arwydd, efallai, os gallaf i ei ddodi fel yna, yw'r gwaith sydd wedi bod yn digwydd gyda'r Cabinet. Felly, mae trafodaeth eang gyda Gweinidogion, un i un ac fel Cabinet, yn digwydd o leiaf unwaith y tymor i wir fynd i'r afael gydag impact polisïau ar y Gymraeg. Rŷn ni, fel Gweinidogion, wedi cael cyfle i gael sesiynau un wrth un gyda chorff allanol sydd yn ein helpu ni i ystyried beth yw'n safbwyntiau personol ni am y Gymraeg a sut mae'r persbectifau hynny'n effeithio ar beth rŷn ni'n gweld yw'r potensial yn ein portffolios ni. Felly, mae'r gwaith yna'n waith creadigol, rwy'n credu, ac mae hefyd wedi amlygu pwysigrwydd y Gymraeg yng ngwaith y Llywodraeth yn gyffredinol ymysg Gweinidogion, ac mae hynny'n bositif.
Ond un o'r pethau rŷn ni wedi trafod o'r blaen yw beth yw ymateb y gwasanaeth sifil i hyn, ynghyd ag ymateb Gweinidogion, ac rŷn ni yn gweld cynnydd sylweddol yn y rhifau o weision sifil sy'n dysgu'r Gymraeg nawr. Rwy'n credu, rhyw dair blynedd yn ôl, roedd e'n rhywbeth fel 60 neu 70 o bobl a oedd ar gyrsiau i ddysgu'r Gymraeg ac rŷn ni nawr ar tua 600, felly mae'r ffigurau wedi symud yn sylweddol mewn cyfnod byr. Ac rwy'n credu bod rhyw 33 y cant yn dweud eu bod yn defnyddio'r Gymraeg mewn rhyw ffordd bob dydd fel rhan o'u gwaith. Felly, mae hynny'n bwysig o ran creu'r diwylliant yn y Llywodraeth a'r syniad ei fod e'n rhywbeth sydd yn gwbl integrated, os hoffwch chi.
I don't think we're in a position to have a data-based assessment in that way. I think two signals, if I could put it that way, is the work that has been happening with the Cabinet. There's been broad-ranging discussion with Ministers, one-to-one and as a Cabinet, and that happens at least once a term, to truly tackle the impact of policies on the Welsh language. As Ministers, we have had the opportunity to have one-to-one sessions with an external body, which helps us to consider our personal views on the Welsh language and how those perspectives impact on the potential that we see in our portfolios. So, that work is creative, I think, and it has also highlighted the importance of the Welsh language in the work of the Government more generally among Ministers, and I think that is positive.
But one of the things that we've discussed previously is what the response of the civil service is to this, along with the response of Ministers, and we do see significant progress in terms of the numbers of civil servants who are learning Welsh now. I think, some three years ago, it was around 60 or 70 people who were on courses to learn Welsh and we're now at around 600, so the figures have shifted significantly in a short period of time. And I think some 33 per cent say that they use the Welsh language in some way every day as part of their work. So, that's important in terms of creating that culture within Government and the idea that it is something that's entirely integrated.
Un cwestiwn arall, os yw hwnna'n iawn—un bach.
And one other question, if that's okay—a short one.
Iawn, siŵr.
Yes, sure.
Mae'n swnio i fi fel eich bod chi'n dweud, 'Wel, mae lot wedi digwydd ac mae lot yn fwy dal i'w wneud.' Felly, beth yw'r cam mwyaf, yn eich barn chi, y gallai'r Llywodraeth ei gymryd nawr i sicrhau bod hwn yn datblygu'n fwy?
It sounds to me as if you're saying that a lot has happened and there's more to do as well. So, what do you think is the biggest step that Welsh Government could take now to ensure that this develops more?
Wel, mae'r gwaith rŷn ni'n ei wneud ar hyn o bryd rwy'n credu yn waith positif. Mae yn sicr wedi newid, byddwn i'n dweud, y pace y mae'r Llywodraeth yn ceisio gwneud hyn. Beth rwy'n credu yw'r nod—mae'n anodd, efallai, gwerthuso hyn—yw bod pob adran yn gweld ystyriaethau'r Gymraeg fel rhan gynhenid o ddatblygu unrhyw bolisi. Rŷn ni wedi bod ar yr un llwybr gyda'r ddeddfwriaeth cenedlaethau'r dyfodol, dywedwch—symud o sefyllfa lle rŷn ni'n ateb nod y Ddeddf, fel y man cychwyn, yntefe, ac yn sicr rhaid gwneud hynny, a sut ŷn ni wedyn yn sicrhau bod hynny jest yn rhan o bob ystyriaeth a thrafodaeth. Ac rŷn ni ar y llwybr hwnnw hefyd. Felly, mae jest yn rhan o broses datblygu polisi'r Llywodraeth, rwy'n credu.
Well, the work that we're doing at the moment is positive. It has certainly changed the pace at which Government is seeking to deliver this. I think the aim—it is difficult to evaluate this, perhaps—is that every department should see Welsh language considerations as an integral part of the development of any policy. We've been on the same pathway with the future generations legislation—shifting from a position where we meet the requirements of the Act, as the starting point, and we certainly have to do that, and, then, how we ensure that that is an integral part of any consideration and any discussion. And we're also on that pathway. So, it's just part of the Government's policy development process.
Diolch. Mae gen i Alun a Llyr, sydd eisiau dod i mewn gyda chwestiynau atodol. Gwnaf i fynd at Alun yn gyntaf.
Thank you. I have Alun and Llyr, who want to come in with supplementary questions. I'll go to Alun first.
Diolch, a diolch i chi, Weinidog. Dwi ddim cweit yn siŵr, gyda phob parch, eich bod chi wedi ateb cwestiwn Tom yn llawn. Mae hwn yn sgrwtineiddio'r gyllideb. Nawr, dwi'n cytuno gyda'r dadansoddiad dŷch chi wedi amlinellu'r bore yma bod yn rhaid i bob un adran flaenoriaethu'r Gymraeg a bod yn rhaid i bolisi'r Gymraeg dod yn rhan annatod ymhob un o'n hadrannau ni—dwi'n cytuno gyda'r dadansoddiad yna. Ond rŷn ni'n sôn amboutu'r gyllideb fan hyn, so sut ydych chi'n sicrhau bod Gweinidogion ymhob un rhan o'r Llywodraeth yn blaenoriaethu'r Gymraeg? A sut y buasem ni'n gwybod a oes yna doriadau i gyllideb y Gymraeg yn yr adrannau dŷch chi wedi'u henwi'r bore yma, fel un Julie James neu Julie Morgan?
Thank you, and thank you to you, Minister. I'm not quite sure, with all due respect, that you have answered Tom's question fully. This is to scrutinise the budget. Now, I agree with the analysis that you've outlined this morning that every department has to prioritise the Welsh language and that the Welsh language policy has to be an integral part in every department—I agree with that analysis. But we're talking about the budget here, so how do you ensure that Ministers in every part of the Government prioritise the Welsh language? And how would we know if there are cuts to the Welsh language budget in the departments that you've named this morning, such as Julie James's or Julie Morgan's departments?
Wel, dwi ddim yn credu bod mecanwaith gyda ni i gyflwyno i'r pwyllgor hwn beth yw'r toriadau sydd yn digwydd yng nghyllidebau Gweinidogion eraill sydd yn cael effaith ar y Gymraeg, ond mae'r her yn un deg. Petaswn i yn eich safle chi fel pwyllgor, byddwn i eisiau deall hynny yn ehangach ar draws y Llywodraeth, felly rwy'n derbyn hynny. Y penderfyniad dwi wedi ei wneud yn y gyllideb hon eleni yw, wrth ein bod ni'n gorfod gwneud y toriad roeddem ni'n gorfod ei wneud, ble mae hwnnw'n syrthio, os hoffwch chi, beth allwn ni ei wneud i sicrhau ein bod ni'n cyfyngu ar yr impact negyddol sydd yn dod yn sgil hynny. Y penderfyniad dwi wedi ei wneud yw, yn hytrach na rhannu'r toriad ar draws yr amryw fudiadau ŷn ni'n eu cyllido, â llawer yn rhai bach ac yn dibynnu'n sylweddol ar hyn, ein bod ni'n cyfuno fe.
Well, I don't think we have a mechanism that we can present to this committee what the cuts are in other Ministers' budgets that have an impact on the Welsh language, but the challenge is fair. If I was a member of this committee, I'd also want to understand that more widely across Government, so I accept that. But the decision that I've made in this budget this year is that, as we are having to make the cuts that we're making, where does that fall, if you like, what can we do to ensure that we limit the negative impact that that has. The decision that I've taken is that, rather than spreading the cuts across many of the organisations that we fund, many of them small organisations that are very reliant on this, we combine it.
Does gen i ddim anghytundeb â hynny. A fuasai modd, wedyn, i chi, Gweinidog, ysgrifennu atom ni gyda'r dadansoddiad sydd gennych chi o impact unrhyw doriadau mewn adrannau eraill ar bolisïau’r Gymraeg? Dŷn ni wedi enwi dwy adran, ond mae pob adran yr un peth. Achos er mwyn i fi fod yn sicr ein bod ni yn gallu cyrraedd y targed o'r filiwn yn 2050, mae'n rhaid inni fod yn sicr bod gwariant yn digwydd ar draws y Llywodraeth, ac mae'n rhaid inni ddeall fel pwyllgor os oes neu os nag oes yr un gwariant ym mhob un adran, os yw hynny'n gwneud sens. Dwi yn meddwl mai trwy lythyr fyddai'r ffordd orau i chi wneud hynny.
I don't disagree with that. Would there be a way, therefore, for you, Minister, to write to us with the analysis that you have of the impact of any cuts in other departments on Welsh language policies? We've named two departments, but every department is the same. Because for me to be certain that we can reach the target of 1 million Welsh speakers in 2050, we have to be sure that expenditure is happening across Government, and we have to understand as a committee if there's the same expenditure in every department, if that makes sense. I do think that a letter would be the best way of doing that.
Byddwn i'n hapus iawn i wneud hynny. Beth fyddwn i'n ei ddweud, jest fel un nodyn ar hynny, yw, wrth gwrs, fel byddwch chi'n gwybod, mae lot o bolisïau’n cael eu datblygu mewn ffordd sydd yn gyson yn y Gymraeg a'r Saesneg beth bynnag. Ond gan dderbyn hynny, byddwn i'n hapus i ymateb yn y ffordd ŷch chi'n gofyn.
I'd be very happy to do that. What I would say, as just a note on that, is that, as you will know, many policies are developed in a consistent way in English and Welsh in any case. But accepting that, I would be happy to respond to your request.
Diolch am hwnna. Llyr.
Thank you for that. Llyr.
Ie, ac efallai bod yna her, hynny yw, nid dim ond ar draws y Llywodraeth, ond ar draws y Senedd. Efallai bod yna her i bwyllgorau eraill hefyd, yn ogystal â Gweinidogion eraill, i ofyn cwestiynau ynglŷn â hyn. Roeddech chi'n sôn am y pace cadarnhaol roeddech chi'n sôn amdano o safbwynt datblygiad o ran meddwl am y Gymraeg ar draws Gweinidogion a'r gwaith sydd wedi cael ei wneud i flaenori, i'w gwneud hi'n flaenoriaeth o fewn eu—nid yn flaenoriaeth, ond eu bod nhw'n ymwybodol iawn o'u dyletswyddau ar draws eu portffolios. Yn amlwg, wrth i gyllidebau grebachu, mae adrannau, Gweinidogion, gweision sifil yn mynd i ffocysu fwyfwy ar y stwff craidd ac mae yna risg ychwanegol, dwi'n meddwl wedyn, fod y pethau efallai sydd â'r canfyddiad o'r pethau ychwanegol yma maen nhw'n gorfod eu gwneud yn cwympo oddi ar y radar tamaid bach. Sut ŷch chi'n gwarchod yn erbyn hynny yn yr hinsawdd sydd ohoni?
Yes, and perhaps there's a challenge, not just across Government, but across the Senedd. Perhaps there's a challenge for other committees, as well as other Ministers, to ask questions about this. You mentioned the positive pace that you were talking about in terms of the development of thinking about the Welsh language across Ministers and the work that's been undertaken to prioritise within their—not to prioritise, but that they're very aware of their duties across their portfolios. Clearly, as budgets are contracting, departments, Ministers, civil servants are going to focus increasingly on the core work, and there is an additional risk, I think, that things that have the perception of being the additional things that they have to do will fall off the radar. How do you ensure that that doesn't happen in the current climate?
Mae hynny'n rhan o'r ateb i Alun, dwi'n credu, onid yw e, ein bod ni'n sicrhau ein bod ni'n dryloyw am ble mae hynny'n digwydd, a dwi'n gobeithio bydd yr ymateb i'r pwyllgor yn rhoi rhywfaint o gysur i chi yn sgil hynny. Beth fyddwn i'n ei ddweud yw, fy marn i yw bod beth bynnag yw'r term Cymraeg am step change wedi digwydd o ran y ffordd mae'r Llywodraeth yn meddwl am hyn ar draws y Llywodraeth. Os edrychwch chi ar y polisi ail gartrefi, er enghraifft, dwi'n credu ein bod ni wedi dod pellter mewn cyfnod byr. Rwy'n gwybod bod trafodaeth am faint yn bellach allwn ni fynd, ond rwy'n credu ei fod e'n deg i ddweud ein bod ni wedi symud yn bell ac rwy'n credu bod y broses o wneud hynny wedi amlygu ar draws y Llywodraeth, fel roeddwn i'n ei ddweud wrth ateb cwestiwn Tom, beth mae'n golygu go iawn, beth mae'n golygu i feddwl am y Gymraeg ym mhob ystyriaeth. Ac rydym ni wedi cael cyfle i wneud hynny drwy'r maes polisi hwnnw mewn ffordd wir ymarferol, ac rwy'n credu wedi dangos cynnydd. Felly, dyna jest enghraifft i chi.
That relates to my answer to Alun, I think, doesn't it? It's about being transparent as to where that happens, and I hope that my response to the committee will give you some comfort in that regard. What I would say and my view is that a step change has happened in terms of the way Government is considering this across Government. If you look at the second homes policy, for example, I think that we've come a long way in a brief period of time. Of course, there's discussion as to how much further we can go, but I do think that it's fair to say that we've made great progress and I think that the process of doing that has highlighted across Government what it means, as I said in response to Tom's question, what it really means to think about the Welsh language in all considerations. And we've had an opportunity to do that in that policy area in a truly practical and meaningful way, and I think that that has shown progress. So, that's just an example for you.
Ocê. Diolch.
Okay. Thank you.
Diolch. Gwnawn ni symud ymlaen at Carolyn Thomas.
Thank you. We'll move on to Carolyn Thomas.
Bore da. Dwi'n dysgu Cymraeg, a dwi'n mynd i siarad yn Saesneg.
Good morning. I'm learning Welsh. I'm going to speak in English.
I'm trying.
Lyfli i'ch clywed chi'n siarad Cymraeg. Lyfli i glywed.
It's lovely to hear you speak Welsh.
What evidence has been used to make the decision to reduce the Welsh in education budget expenditure line, what data?
Mae'r toriad, y £3.5 miliwn, wrth gwrs, yn perthyn i'r Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol a'r Ganolfan Dysgu Cymraeg Genedlaethol, ond dyw e ddim yn doriad o gymharu â 2023-24, felly cynnal y gyllideb ŷn ni wedi ei wneud yn erbyn y flwyddyn honno. Mae hynny wedi caniatáu i ni allu ariannu elfennau eraill o'r Llywodraeth sydd o dan bwysau sylweddol. Fel roeddwn i'n ei ddweud, mae'r impact uniongyrchol efallai'n anodd i grisialu mewn ffigurau heddiw, felly dyna'r prif newid sydd wedi bod. Mae newidiadau eraill wedi bod sydd yn fwy technegol, os hoffwch chi. Felly, mae'r BEL yn ymddangos yn wahanol oherwydd ein bod ni wedi gwneud newidiadau technegol, symud un elfen o'r BEL, o'r gyllideb i ran arall o’r gyllideb, ond dyw hynny ddim wedi newid—. Mae cyfuno’r grantiau, er enghraifft, wedi cael effaith ar beth sy’n ymddangos yn y llinellau BEL hyn, ond dyw’r symiau ar y cyfan ddim wedi newid; jest newidiadau technegol yw’r rheini wedi bod.
The cut of £3.5 million, of course, relates to the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol and the National Centre for Learning Welsh, but it isn't a cut as compared to 2023-24, so we have maintained the budget in comparison to that year. That has allowed us to fund other elements of Government that are under significant pressure. As I said, the direct impact is difficult to encapsulate in figures today, but that's the main change there's been. There have been other changes that are more technical in nature, if you like. So, the BEL appears to be different because we have made some technical changes and shifted one element of the budget to another part of the budget, but that hasn't changed—. Combining the grants, for example, has had an impact on what appears in these BELs, but the outright figures haven't changed; these are just technical changes.
Okay, thank you. Could you clarify the total amount of funding allocated to Adnodd in 2024-25, and outline whether the amount allocated will actually stay the same the following year, 2025-26? Have you thought about that?
So, mae dau ffigwr gyda ni: ffigwr 2024-25, sydd jest dros £2.07 miliwn, ac mae’r ffigwr hwnnw—. Mae’r ffigwr hwnnw yn cadarnhau’r ffigwr hwnnw. Rŷn ni’n glir bod hynny’n ddigonol i’r cwmni wneud y gwaith maen nhw’n darogan y byddan nhw’n ei wneud yn ystod y flwyddyn ariannol. O ran y flwyddyn ar ôl hynny, mae’r ffigwr o £4 miliwn yn un indicative, oherwydd does dim cyllideb o gwbl gennym ni ar gyfer y cyfnod nesaf, felly allwn ni ddim cadarnhau’r ffigwr hwnnw, ond mae’r cyfarwyddwr newydd, Emyr George, newydd ddod mewn i’w swydd yr wythnos hon, ac rwy’n sicr y bydd yn llwyddo yn ei waith. Rwy’n credu bod cyfle gennym ni i drafod gyda fe nawr, gan ei fod e yn ei swydd, beth yn union yw’r proffil ariannol fydd ei angen ar Adnodd dros y cyfnod nesaf. Ond mae ei bwyslais e wedi bod ar sut allwn ni fod yn greadigol i edrych am werth am arian, sut allwn ni ddefnyddio atebion digidol, efallai, i rai o’r anghenion sydd gennym ni, felly rwy’n ffyddiog y bydd trafodaeth greadigol yn gallu digwydd gydag Emyr am hynny.
So, we have two figures: the 2024-25 figure, which is just over £2.07 million, and that figure—. That figure confirms that figure. We're clear that that is sufficient for the company to undertake the work that they forecast they're going to do in the financial year. The year following that, the £4 million figure is indicative, because we don't have a budget for the next period, so we can't confirm that figure, but the new director, Emyr George, has just come into post this week, and I'm sure that he will succeed in his work. I think we have an opportunity to discuss with him now, because he's in post, what exactly is the financial profile required for Adnodd over the next period. But his emphasis has been on how we can be creative to look at value for money, how we can use digital solutions, perhaps, for some of the requirements that we have, so I'm confident that there will be a creative discussion happening with Emyr with regard to that.
Okay. Do you know what percentage of Adnodd's funding will be divided between resource and grant in aid, and will this be delivered in the Welsh in education BEL? And what impact do you think this will have on the Welsh in education budget for future years?
Ocê, so bydd yr arian yn aros yn y BEL Cymraeg mewn addysg. Achos ein bod ni mewn cyfnod cynnar o sefydlu Adnodd, am y flwyddyn hon, does dim gwahaniaeth rhwng y grant in aid a’r resource budget. Fel y byddwch chi’n gwybod, efallai, y gwahaniaeth fel arfer yw grant in aid yw’r gronfa o arian rŷn ni’n ei rhoi, ac wedyn y resource budget, mae elfennau technegol sydd yn dod yn sgil hynny, felly mae’r ffigurau am y cyfnod yma yn gyson â’i gilydd.
Okay, so the funding will remain in the Welsh in education BEL. Because we're in the early period of establishing Adnodd, for this year, there is no difference between the grant in aid and the resource budget. As you will know, perhaps, the difference usually is that grant in aid is the fund of money that we provide, and then the resource budget, there are technical elements that arise as a result of that, so the figures for this period are consistent with each other.
Thank you.
Ocê, diolch. Ac i symud at Mudiad Meithrin, pa effaith dŷch chi’n rhagweld y bydd—? Wel, fel mae’r cyllid wedi newid, pa effaith fydd hwnna’n ei gael ar y cynlluniau ar gyfer 'Cymraeg 2050'? A hefyd, sut dŷch chi’n meddwl bod chwyddiant wedi effeithio ar faint o leoliadau sydd wedi gallu cael eu hagor trwy’r Mudiad?
Okay, thank you. And if we could move on to Mudiad Meithrin, what impact do you expect that—? Well, as the budget has changed, what impact do you expect that that will have on plans for 'Cymraeg 2050'? And how do you think inflation has impacted the number of settings that Mudiad has been able to establish?
Mae’r cwrs, dwi’n credu, o agor cylchoedd, y darpariaethau, yn un positif, felly mae’r cynnydd fel ŷn ni’n disgwyl ei weld, felly mae hynny’n gadarnhaol. Dros y ddwy flynedd diwethaf, ŷn ni wedi dyrannu rhyw £0.5 miliwn ychwanegol i’r Mudiad, fel eu bod nhw’n gallu cynyddu’r cyflymder maen nhw’n agor Sefydlu a Symud, er enghraifft, felly mae hynny, dwi’n credu, wedi bod yn bositif. Dros y ddwy flynedd diwethaf, mae rhyw 30 i 32 o leoliadau newydd naill ai wedi cael eu hagor neu eu hymestyn. Efallai, ambell waith, ymestyn lleoliad presennol yw’r ffordd o greu capasiti ychwanegol, felly mae hynny wedi digwydd dros y ddwy flynedd diwethaf.
Roeddech chi’n gofyn am impact chwyddiant: wrth gwrs, mae impact wedi bod yn sgil costau byw yn gyffredinol. Rŷn ni wedi dyrannu llynedd, dwi’n credu, rhyw swm oedd yn gyfystyr â 4 y cant o’u cyllideb nhw i'w cynorthwyo nhw gyda hynny, ond ŷn ni’n cadw i ffeindio ffyrdd i'w cefnogi nhw os ydy hynny’n dod yn her dros y flwyddyn nesaf hefyd.
I think that the progress that is being made in terms of opening settings and new cylchoedd is positive and is what we were hoping to see, so that's positive. Over the last two years, we've allocated about an additional £0.5 million to Mudiad, so that they can increase the pace at which they're opening Set Up and Succeed, for example, so that, I think, has been positive. Over the last two years, about 30 to 32 new settings have either been opened or expanded. Sometimes, expanding a current setting is a way of creating additional capacity, and that therefore has happened over the last two years.
You were asking with regard to the impact of inflation: of course, there has been an impact as a result of the cost of living generally. We allocated, I think, last year, a sum that corresponded to about 4 per cent of their budget to support them with that, but we are continuing to find ways of supporting them if that is a challenge over the following year as well.
Ocê, diolch. Ond cyn belled â beth maen nhw wedi dweud wrthych chi, oes ganddyn nhw bryder syfrdanol am y ffordd y bydd y newidiadau yma yn effeithio ar eu cynlluniau nhw?
Okay, thank you. But in terms of what they've told you, do they have serious concerns about how these changes will impact their plans?
Rydyn ni’n cadw mewn cyswllt parhaus efo’r Mudiad. Mae o’n dirlun anodd, yn amlwg. Maen nhw’n fudiad sy’n cael eu rhedeg yn dda, felly mae ganddyn nhw arian wrth gefn, ac mae ganddyn nhw fwrdd sydd yn cefnogi eu penderfyniadau nhw. Maen nhw’n rhedeg rhyw naw lleoliad. Mae ganddyn nhw dri lleoliad preifat, ac maen nhw’n rhedeg chwe chylch eu hunain, felly maen nhw’n ymwybodol iawn o’r heriau sydd gan y cylchoedd eraill, sef cannoedd o gylchoedd dros Gymru. Dwi'n meddwl mai'r pryder mwyaf sydd gan y Mudiad ar hyn o bryd ydy'r arian hyfforddiant i'r gweithlu achos dyw'r arian yna ddim yn dod o'r gyllideb hon, mae'n dod o'r gyllideb gofal plant. Felly, mae'r rhaglen Cam wrth Gam, rydyn ni wedi ailgynnau'r tân ar y rhaglen yna ers dwy flynedd, fel rydych chi'n gwybod. Felly, mae yna lwyddiant o 150, dwi'n meddwl, o bobl fydd wedi cael eu hyfforddi dros ddwy flynedd, sydd yn galonogol iawn o feddwl lle'r oeddem ni ddwy flynedd yn ôl.
Felly, o ran trafodaethau, dwi'n meddwl mai dyna fuasai'n peri mwyaf o bryder i’r Mudiad. Dwi'n meddwl bod y sector gofal plant yn sector heriol iawn beth bynnag o ran lefelau y cyflogau ac yn y blaen, felly mae yna heriau recriwtio anorfod. Ond dwi’n meddwl beth sy’n arbennig am fodel y Mudiad ydy bod yna wirfoddolwyr, y rhieni, yn rhan o greu, felly, mae’r cynnal yn rhywbeth organig iawn ac mae'n creu rhwydwaith gref wedyn mewn cymunedau. Felly, mae o'n fodel unigryw, dwi'n meddwl, i gynnal hynny, ond mae ganddyn nhw heriau, fel nifer fawr o gyrff eraill.
We are in constant contact with Mudiad. It is a difficult climate, obviously. It is an organisation that is run well, so they have reserves and they have a board that supports their decisions. They run about nine settings. They have three private settings, and they run six cylchoedd themselves, so they're very aware of the challenges that the other cylchoedd have, namely hundreds of cylchoedd across Wales. I think that Mudiad's greatest concern at the moment is funding to train the workforce because that money doesn't come from this budget, it comes from the childcare budget. So, the Cam wrth Gam programme, we have reignited that in the last couple of years, as you know. So, that has been a success, with about 150 people, I think, being trained over two years, which is very heartening considering where we were two years ago.
So, in terms of discussions, I think that's what Mudiad's greatest concern would be. I think the childcare sector is a very challenging one anyway in terms of the levels of salaries and so on, so there are recruitment challenges that are inevitable. But I think what is special about the Mudiad model is that there are volunteers, the parents, involved in the creation, so the support is something that is very organic, which then creates a strong network in communities. So, it is a unique model, I think, to maintain that, but they do have challenges, like a number of other organisations.
So, rŷn ni wedi gallu cynnal eu harian craidd nhw eleni, ond mae hon yn enghraifft dda o beth roeddwn i'n sôn amdano gydag Alun a Tom yn gynharach, o ran sut y mae cyllideb un adran yn gallu cael effaith ar y nod mewn adran arall. Felly, bydd yn bwysig edrych ar y cyfanrwydd, rwy'n credu, pan gewch chi'r llythyr wrthym ni.
We've been able to maintain their core funding this year, but this is a good example of what I mentioned to Alun and Tom earlier, in terms of how a budget from one department can have an impact on the aim of another. So, it'll be important to look at the bigger picture when you do receive that letter from me.
Yn sicr. Diolch am hwnna. Roedd Hefin wedi sôn yn gynharach am y coleg Cymraeg. A allaf i jest siecio yn sgil beth roeddech chi wedi dweud wrtho fe o ran y ffaith na fydd y cyllid disgwyliedig ychwanegol yna ar gael ar gyfer y coleg, pa oblygiadau ydych chi'n eu rhagweld ar gyfer prentisiaethau a dysgwyr?
Certainly. Thank you for that. Hefin mentioned the coleg Cymraeg earlier. Can I just check, given what you told him in terms of the fact that the additional expected funding won't be there for the coleg, what implications do you foresee for apprenticeships and learners?
Wel, fel roeddwn i'n dweud wrth Tom, dŷn ni ddim yn talu fesul uned o ran faint o ddysgwyr sy’n dod i mewn i’r system ôl-16 Cymraeg. Nid dyna’r mecanwaith sydd gennym ni i ariannu’r coleg. Mae’r gwaith maen nhw'n ei wneud o greu capasiti a hyrwyddo wrth gwrs yn arwain at fwy o gyfleoedd i bobl, felly dŷn ni ddim yn gwybod eto yr impact uniongyrchol ar hynny. Rŷn ni'n gwybod eu bod nhw wedi trafod gyda darparwyr addysg bellach a phrentisiaethau, a dweud eu bod nhw'n gorfod edrych ar hynny eto, ond does dim tystiolaeth gennym ni heddiw fod hynny’n mynd i arwain at lai o ddarpariaeth.
Well, as I told Tom, we don't pay per unit in terms of the number of learners coming into the post-16 sector. That's not the mechanism that we have in funding the coleg Cymraeg. The work that they do in creating capacity and promotion does of course lead to greater opportunities for people, so we don't yet know what the direct impact on that will be. We know that they have had discussions with further education providers and apprenticeship providers, and told them that they will have to review that, but we don't have any evidence today that that is going to lead to a reduction in provision.
Llyr.
Llyr.
Pa ddisgwyliad ydych chi wedi'i roi i'r coleg Cymraeg o ran cyflawni yn y flwyddyn ariannol nesaf?
And what do you hope the Coleg Cymraeg will achieve in the next financial year?
Cynnal y cynlluniau sydd gyda nhw ar waith ar hyn o bryd.
Maintaining what they are doing at the moment.
Ac o ran y niferoedd sy'n—. Hynny yw, roeddech chi'n cwestiynu efallai a oedd yna read-across uniongyrchol, ond rŷch chi'n gobeithio gweld y trajectory yna'n cynyddu, neu a fyddech chi'n goddef, o dan yr amgylchiadau ariannu, efallai i bethau 'flatline-io' tamaid bach?
And in terms of the numbers—. You questioned whether there was a direct read-across in terms of numbers, but you do hope to see that trajectory increase, or, under these financial circumstances, would you be content if things flatlined a little?
Mae'n rhaid inni fod yn realistig bod hynny, wrth gwrs, yn risg. Mae hwnna'n rhan o'r impact ariannol a'r cyni rŷn ni'n eu hwynebu. Mae’r berthynas rhwng ein swyddfa ni a’r coleg yn un positif iawn, felly'r dasg, rwy’n credu, yw cydweithio i sicrhau ein bod ni'n ceisio lleihau'r impact. Ond gallaf i ddim dweud wrthych chi—. Mae fy nhystiolaeth i'n dweud, rwy'n credu, fod risg o hynny'n digwydd, y bydd llai o ddysgwyr. Mae eisiau bod yn dryloyw am hynny, rwy'n credu.
We have to be realistic that that is a risk. That's part of the financial impact and the austerity that we're facing. The relationship between our office and the coleg is a very positive one, therefore, the task, I think, is to collaborate to try and minimise the impact. But I can't tell you—. My evidence says, I think, that there could be a risk of that happening, that there may be fewer learners. We need to be transparent about that, I think.
Ie, ie. Diolch.
Yes. Thank you.
Diolch. Ac yn yr un modd, gyda'r Ganolfan Dysgu Cymraeg Genedlaethol, pa effaith ŷch chi'n meddwl bydd yna, yn enwedig o ran darparu gwersi ar gyfer pobl ifanc rhwng 16 a 25, o ganlyniad i'r newidiadau?
Thank you. And in the same way, with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, what impact do you think there will be, especially in terms of providing lessons for young people between 16 and 25, as a result of those changes?
Rŷn ni'n disgwyl i’r cynlluniau presennol i barhau, i'r capasiti presennol i barhau i’r flwyddyn nesaf.
We're expecting the current plans to continue, the current capacity to continue into the next year.
Ocê, diolch am hwnna. Ac yn olaf gen i, dŷch chi wedi dweud y bydd ailflaenoriaethu’r £3.5 miliwn o gyllid yn—eich geiriau chi—
'ein galluogi i ddiogelu gwasanaethau craidd sy'n cefnogi ein huchelgeisiau ar gyfer Cymraeg 2050'.
Ond rŷch chi hefyd wedi dweud bydd y gostyngiad yn
'arwain at leihad yn y niferoedd sy'n dysgu Cymraeg'.
Sut byddwch chi'n gallu cysoni'r ddau?
Thank you for that. And finally from me, you've said that reprioritising the £3.5 million of funding will—your words—
'allow us to protect core services that support our ambitions for Cymraeg 2050'.
But you've also said that the reduction
'may also result in a reduction in the numbers learning Welsh.'
How can you reconcile both?
Wel, fel roeddwn i'n dweud wrth Llyr nawr, jest bod yn dryloyw bod risg bod hynny'n digwydd. Os ydych chi'n torri cyllideb corff, wel mae'r risg y bydd llai o ddarpariaeth ac felly llai o ddysgwyr yn risg amlwg yn sgil hynny. Ond does dim metrics posib ar hyn o bryd i ddweud yn union beth rŷn ni'n ei ddarogan fydd yn digwydd.
Well, as I told Llyr, we just need to be transparent that there's a risk that that could happen. If you cut an organisation's budget, the risk that there will be reduced provision and therefore fewer learners is a clear risk in that scenario. But there are no metrics available currently for us to say exactly what we expect to happen.
Ocê, diolch am hwnna. Fe wnawn ni symud at Llyr.
Okay, thank you for that. We'll move on to Llyr.
Diolch yn fawr. Mae peth o gyllideb neu gyllid y Ganolfan Dysgu Cymraeg Genedlaethol wedi symud o'r llinell wariant Cymraeg mewn addysg i linell wariant y Gymraeg, rwy'n credu, ac mae gwahanol resymau am hynny wrth gwrs, ond ydy'r swm yna wedi cael ei 'ring-fence-io' oddi mewn i'r gyllideb? Hynny yw, mae yna wastad peryg, pan fydd Gweinidogion yn symud cyllidebau, efallai dyw'r un symiau ddim yn symud neu'n cyrraedd y pen draw?
Thank you. Some of the budget or the funding for the National Centre for Learning Welsh has moved from the Welsh in education budget expenditure line into the Welsh language BEL, I think, and there are different reasons for that, of course, but has that sum been ring-fenced within the budget? Because there's always a risk, when Ministers move budgets, that perhaps the same amounts don't move as well?
Mae hwn yn rhywbeth technegol, ac mae'r symiau basically yn aros yr un peth.
That is something technical, but the figures have remained basically the same.
Ocê. Wel, hwnna yw'r neges bwysicaf.
Okay. Well, that's the most important message.
Ocê. Gallaf i esbonio'r ffordd mae wedi gweithio, ond—
Okay. I can explain how it's worked, but—
Wel, na, er gymaint o pedant ydw i weithiau am fanylion, gwnawn ni gymryd eich gair chi ar hwnna. Ocê. Ond dyna'r sicrwydd roeddwn i eisiau yn ei hanfod, beth bynnag.
Mae'r Eisteddfod Genedlaethol, wrth gwrs, yn elfen bwysig iawn i'r ariannu yma. Yn y papur a gyflwynwyd gyda'r gyllideb ddrafft llynedd, sef 2023-24, y gyllideb bresennol, roedd yn sôn am gynnydd arfaethedig o £1 miliwn, neu i £1 miliwn dylwn i'i ddweud, yn y flwyddyn bresennol. Ond, yn y papur ar gyfer y gyllideb ddrafft rydyn ni'n ei thrafod nawr, rydych chi'n dweud hefyd y bydd grant yr Eisteddfod yn cynyddu i £1 miliwn y flwyddyn yn y dyfodol. Felly, oedd hi'n £1 miliwn llynedd? Dwi jest wedi drysu tipyn bach.
Well, no, despite how much of a pedant I am for the detail sometimes, I will take your word for that. Okay. But that's the assurance that I was seeking, essentially.
In terms of the National Eisteddfod, of course, it's a very important element of this funding. Now, in the paper presented with last year's draft budget, which was 2023-24, which is the budget we're currently working to, it mentioned an expected increase of £1 million, or rather to £1 million, in the current financial year. But, in the paper for the draft budget that we're currently discussing, you also say that the Eisteddfod grant will increase to £1 million per annum, moving forward. So, was it £1 million last year? I'm a little confused.
Ie, bydd e wedi bod yn £1 miliwn y flwyddyn hon, a bydd yn £1 miliwn y flwyddyn nesaf. Felly, y swm o £1 miliwn yw'r swm cyson.
It will have been £1 million this year, and it will be £1 million next year. So, the £1 million sum is the consistent sum.
Ie, so fydd e ddim yn cynyddu i £1 miliwn eleni.
So, it won't increase to £1 million this year.
Na.
No.
Mae'n £1 miliwn yn barod ac mae'n aros yn £1 miliwn.
It is £1 million and will stay as £1 million.
Bydd e wedi—. Dyma'r flwyddyn gyntaf mae'n cynyddu i £1 miliwn, dwi'n credu. Felly, yn y flwyddyn hon rydyn ni ynddi ar hyn o bryd bydd hi'n £1 miliwn, ac, yn y flwyddyn ariannol nesaf, sef beth rydyn ni'n ei thrafod ar hyn o bryd, bydd hi'n £1 miliwn yn y flwyddyn honno hefyd.
It will have—. This is the first year that it's increasing to £1 million, I think. So, in this financial year that we're in at the moment it'll be £1 million, and, in the next financial year, which is what we're discussing at the moment, it will be £1 million that year as well.
Ie, dyna fe. Sori, dwi probably yn ei wneud e'n fwy cymhleth nag sydd yn rhaid iddo fe fod. [Chwerthin.]
Yes, okay. Sorry, I'm probably making it a little more complex than it needs to be. [Laughter.]
Y gair 'cynnydd' sydd efallai ychydig yn—
I think the word 'increase' might be—
Ie. Roedd e jest yn dweud ddwywaith ei fod yn mynd i gyrraedd £1 miliwn, ond yr awgrym oedd am y tro cyntaf ddwywaith, doedd ddim yn gwneud sens.
Yes. It just said twice that it was going to reach £1 million, so the suggestion was that that was for the first time twice, which didn't make sense.
Na. Ymddiheuriadau am hynny.
No. Apologies for that.
Na, yn iawn. Ond wedyn, wrth gwrs, gyda golwg ar yr Eisteddfod ym Mhontypridd, efallai—. Wel, nid 'efallai'; mae yn digwydd eleni. Eleni—mae lot o bobl yn cael braw pan ydw i'n dweud 'eleni', mae'n siŵr. Mae yna drafod wedi bod, neu mae yna sôn wedi bod, ynglŷn â'r posibilrwydd o gynnig cymorth i'r Eisteddfod i sicrhau mynediad am ddim ac yn y blaen i'r maes. Ydy hwnna'n rhywbeth sydd yn dal ar y radar yng nghyd-destun yr hinsawdd gyllidol bresennol?
No, it's fine. But then, of course, with a view to the Eisteddfod in Pontypridd—. It is happening this year. A lot of people are shocked when I say 'this year', but it is happening this year. There has been some discussion on the possibility of providing support for the Eisteddfod to allow free access to the Eisteddfod field. Is that something that's still on the radar, given the current fiscal climate?
Wel, dyw'r syniad o roi mynediad am ddim i bobl yn gyffredinol ddim yn bosib yn yr hinsawdd sydd ohoni, ond rydyn ni'n sicr yn trafod gyda'r Eisteddfod beth y gallwn ni ei wneud i sicrhau bod yr Eisteddfod yn hygyrch i bobl efallai fyddai ddim fel arall yn gallu fforddio dod. Felly, mae'r trafodaethau hynny'n digwydd ar hyn o bryd. Dwi'n ffyddiog y byddwn ni'n gallu gwneud rhywbeth, ond fyddwn ni ddim yn y territory o roi mynediad am ddim.
The idea of providing free entry to all is not possible in the current climate, but certainly we are discussing with the Eisteddfod what we can do to ensure that the Eisteddfod is accessible to people who perhaps wouldn't be able to afford to go usually. So, discussions are ongoing. We're confident that we'll be able to do something, but we wouldn't be in the territory of being able to provide free access.
Felly, fydd e ddim yn efelychu beth ddigwyddodd ym Mae Caerdydd rhai blynyddoedd yn ôl.
So, it wouldn't reflect what happened in Cardiff Bay some years ago.
Dim yn yr hinsawdd hon; dyw e jest ddim yn bosib. Ond beth rydyn ni yn gweld yn barod, dwi'n credu—a byddwch chi'n gwybod hyn—yw sut mae proses mae'r Eisteddfod ei hunan a'r cymunedau yn ei gwneud o godi arian hefyd yn troi i mewn i gyfleoedd i ddefnyddio a dathlu'r Gymraeg. Mae pethau gwych wedi bod yn digwydd—bingo Cymraeg mewn clybiau cymunedol ac ati. Felly, mae'r broses o wneud hynny ei hunan yn catalyst i ddefnydd o'r Gymraeg, ac mae hynny'n wych.
Not in the current climate, no. But what we are seeing already—and you will be aware of this—is how the process of the Eisteddfod itself and the communities raising funds turns into an opportunity itself to use and celebrate the Welsh language. Wonderful things have been happening—Welsh language bingo in community clubs and so on. So, the process of doing that is a catalyst for the use of the Welsh language, and that's positive.
Wrth gwrs, wrth gwrs, wrth gwrs, wrth gwrs. Mae yna adolygiad wedi bod o'r cynllun grant ar gyfer mudiadau sy'n hyrwyddo ac annog defnydd o'r Gymraeg hefyd. Ydy hwnna wedi cael unrhyw ddylanwad ar y gyllideb rydyn ni'n ei thrafod heddiw, neu ydy hwnna'n rhywbeth sydd yn dal yn mynd i fod yn dod i'r amlwg, efallai, o safbwynt sut rydych chi'n dyrannu yn y dyfodol?
Of course, of course. There's been a review of the grant scheme for organisations that promote the use of the language. Has that had any impact on the budget that we're discussing today, or is that something that's still going to be becoming clear, perhaps, in terms of how you allocate in the future?
Ie. Dyw e ddim wedi cael effaith ar y dyraniad yma. Mae'r adroddiad wedi dod i law, a diolch i bawb sydd wedi bod yn chwarae rhan. Mae'r drafodaeth wedi bod yn un gadarnhaol. Rydyn ni'n gweithio trwy beth mae'r adolygiad yn ei ddweud wrthym ni ar hyn o bryd, felly dyw'r data a'r dadansoddiad hwnnw ddim wedi cael effaith ar y gyllideb hon, ond mi fydd yn y dyfodol, wrth gwrs.
Yes. It hasn't had an impact on this allocation. The report has been received, and I'd like to thank everyone who has participated in that. The discussion has been very positive. We are working through the review's conclusions at the moment, so that data and that analysis hasn't had an impact on this budget, but it will in future, of course.
Achos, yn amlwg, fel rŷn ni'n gwybod, efallai i rai o'r cyrff a mudiadau, petai yna newid yn digwydd, mae'n mynd i arwain at, efallai, llawer iawn o ofid a phroblemau. Felly, chwilio am ryw ymrwymiad ydw i byddwch chi mewn llawn ymgynghoriad gyda'r holl fudiadau yna wrth edrych, felly, os ydych chi'n diwygio'r broses neu'n edrych i newid ffocws ac yn y blaen, fod y rhanddeiliaid yna'n rhan ganolog o'r broses.
Because, clearly, as we know, perhaps for some of the organisations and bodies, if there was a change, it could lead perhaps to a lot of concern and problems. So, I'm looking for some commitment that you will be in full consultation with all those organisations, so, if you are looking to reform the process or looking to change focus, those stakeholders are a central part of the process.
Wel, maen nhw wedi bod yn rhan ganolog o'r broses yn barod, felly grêt am hynny, a diolch iddyn nhw am ei wneud e. Ac mae'n anodd, wrth gwrs, pan ŷch chi'n sôn am newid pethau; dwi'n deall hynny'n llwyr. Felly, er dyw'r dadansoddiad hwnnw ddim wedi siapio'r gyllideb ddrafft, mae'r penderfyniad i geisio cyfyngu'r toriad i un neu ddau gorff yn seiliedig ar y syniad hwnnw; yr opsiwn arall yw dyrannu toriadau ar draws y sector yn ehangach, ac, fel rydych chi jest wedi'i ddweud, mae llawer o'r cyrff hynny yn eithaf dibynnol ar rai o'r elfennau grant. Felly, mae'r syniad yn gyffredinol wedi cael effaith, ond dyw'r dadansoddiad manwl ddim wedi effeithio ar benderfyniadau.
Well, they have been a central part of that process, and that's great and I'm grateful to them for that. But it is difficult when you're talking about change, and I understand that that's difficult. But, although that analysis hasn't shaped this draft budget, the decision to try and limit the cuts to one or two organisations is based on that concept, because the other option is to spread cuts across the sector more broadly, and, as you've just said, many of those organisations are very reliant on their grant. So, the general concept has had an impact, but the detailed analysis hasn't impacted decisions.
Felly, rydych chi'n rhagweld yn y flwyddyn ariannol ar ôl nesaf efallai y bydd rhai o'r penderfyniadau yma'n dod yn fwy—hynny yw, bydd y broses y byddwch chi'n ei defnyddio yn adlewyrchu efallai—
So, you foresee that in the financial year after the next some of these decisions will occur—that is, the process that you use will perhaps reflect—
Byddwn ni'n dechrau cyn hynny. Pan fydd y dadansoddiad gyda ni, byddwn ni'n cael y drafodaeth yn ystod y flwyddyn honno.
It will start before then. When we do have that analysis, we will have that discussion during this year.
Ie. Grêt. Mae hynny'n bwysig. Ocê. Diolch.
Yes. Great. That's important. Okay. Thank you.
Ocê, diolch. Fe wnawn ni fynd yn ôl at Hefin.
Okay, thank you. We'll go back to Hefin.
Diolch, Cadeirydd. Pa effaith a gaiff y gostyngiad mewn cyllid i Gomisiynydd y Gymraeg ar ei swyddogaethau a'i hadnodd staff ac a yw colli swyddi yn anochel?
Thank you, Chair. What impact will the reduction in funding for the Welsh Language Commissioner have on her functions and staff resource and are job losses are inevitable?
Wel, rwy'n gwybod, oherwydd siâp cyllideb y comisiynydd, does dim llawer o opsiynau gan unrhyw gomisiynydd i ddelio gyda thoriad i'r gyllideb, felly, jest er tegwch, mae eisiau ddweud hynny. Ac felly, pwysau ar y cyllideb staffio yw hyn yn ymarferol, ond, fel gwnes i sôn yn gynharach yn fras, fy nealltwriaeth i yw mai bwriad swyddfa'r comisiynydd yw sicrhau bod hyn yn gallu cael ei rheoli drwy beidio â llenwi swyddi gwag a pheidio â recriwtio’n ychwanegol yn hytrach na cholli swydd pobl sydd yn gyflogedig ar hyn o bryd. Felly, mae wrth gwrs yn effeithio ar gapasiti, ond dyw hi ddim, fel rwy'n ei ddeall ar hyn o bryd o leiaf, yn rhagweld toriadau i swyddi presennol, fel petai.
Well, I know, because of the nature of the commissioner's budget, any commissioner doesn't have many options in terms of dealing with any budgetary cuts, so, in fairness, I need to make that point. And therefore, this will cause pressure on staffing budgets in practical terms, but, as I mentioned briefly earlier, my understanding is that the intention of the commissioner's office is to ensure that this can be managed by not filling vacant posts and not recruiting rather than seeing job losses among people who are currently employed. Of course, it will impact capacity, but, as I understand it at the moment at least, they don't anticipate any cuts in current jobs, as it were.
Ac i ba raddau fydd gan y comisiynydd fynediad at gronfeydd wrth gefn, os gofynnir amdanynt, i'w galluogi i gynnal ei swyddogaethau rheoleiddio ac ymateb i heriau cyfreithlon?
And to what extent will the commissioner have access to reserves, if requested, to enable her to maintain the regulatory functions and respond to legal challenges?
Wel, mae'r gyllideb graidd sydd gan y comisiynydd yn ddigonol i allu diwallu cyfrifoldebau rheoleiddio'r comisiynydd o dan drefn y safonau, ond cwestiwn ychwanegol, felly, yw: beth yw'r sefyllfa pan fo angen mynd i'r llys neu'r tribiwnlys, neu pan fo angen cymryd camau cyfreithlon yn y ffordd honno? Does dim unrhyw gomisiynydd yn gallu cario mwy na chyfran o'r gyllideb fel arian wrth gefn, ac felly, yng nghyd-destun Comisiynydd y Gymraeg, gan fod cyfrifoldebau statudol, rheoleiddiol, gyda'r swyddfa, beth sydd wedi digwydd yw bod y comisiynydd yn dod at y Llywodraeth a gofyn am gefnogaeth pan fo angen cymryd camau yn y tribiwnlys, er enghraifft. Ac rwy'n derbyn nad yw'r gronfa sydd gan y comisiynydd eleni yn ddigonol i wneud hynny'n gyffredinol, ond, fel sydd yn digwydd o bryd i'w gilydd, mae'r comisiynydd yn gallu dod atom ni ac rŷn ni'n gallu ystyried wedyn y gofyniad am gyllideb ychwanegol er mwyn diwallu'r cyfrifoldebau statudol hynny, a dyna beth fydd yn digwydd yn y dyfodol.
Well, the core budget available to the commissioner is adequate to meet the regulatory requirements of the commissioner under the standards regime, but the additional question there is: what is the position when one has to go to a tribunal or to court or where legal steps have to be taken in that way? Now, no commissioner can carry more than a percentage of their budget as reserves, so, in the context of the Welsh Language Commissioner, as she does have statutory and regulatory responsibilities, what's happened is that the commissioner comes to Government and requests support when steps need to be taken in the tribunal, for example. And I do accept that the funding available to the commissioner this year isn't adequate to do that in general terms, but, as happens from time to time, the commissioner can approach us and we can then consider any requests for additional budget to meet those statutory requirements, and that's what will happen in the future.
Diolch i'r Gweinidog am ei amynedd gyda fy Nghymraeg.
Thank you to the Minister for his patience with my Welsh.
Ddim o gwbl. Mae'n grêt.
Not at all. It's great.
Diolch am hynna. Dwi'n cymryd mewn i ystyriaeth beth oeddech chi newydd ei ddweud yn ymateb i Hefin gyda hynny; o ran y penderfyniad i rhoi'r un toriad o 5 y cant i bob un o'r comisiynwyr gwahanol, i ba raddau oeddech chi wedi cymryd mewn i ystyriaeth y ffaith bod gan Comisiynydd y Gymraeg swyddogaethau o ran rheoliadau, fel monitro'r cyrff, pethau fel yna? Achos mae'r swyddogaethau yn wahanol yn y ffordd yna. Felly, ydy e'n adlewyrchu hynna'n deg, fod yr un toriad wedi bod yn fflat dros y comisiynwyr i gyd?
Thanks for that. I'm taking into consideration about what you've just said in terms of your response to Hefin on that; in terms of the decision to give the same cut of 5 per cent to all commissioners, to what extent did you consider the fact that the Welsh Language Commissioner has functions in terms of regulations, such as monitoring bodies and so forth? Because the functions are different in that way. Does it reflect that fairly, that the same cut has been flat across all commissioners?
Rwy'n credu ei fod e'n deg o ran bod y gyllideb graidd yn gallu ateb yr anghenion o ran cyfrifoldebau rheoleiddiol, ond, fel rwy newydd ddweud, mae sefyllfa Comisiynydd y Gymraeg ychydig yn wahanol oherwydd yr elfen gyfreithiol yn y tribiwnlys ac ati. Felly, mae gyda ni fecanwaith sydd yn caniatáu i hynny gael ei gymryd i mewn i ystyriaeth pan fo'r angen yn codi, felly dyna'r cydbwysedd rŷn ni wedi ceisio ei daro.
I think it's fair in terms of ensuring that the core budget can meet the regulatory requirements, but, as I've just said, the position of the Welsh Language Commissioner is a little different because of the legal element around the tribunal and so on. We do have a mechanism that allows that to be taken into account when the need arises, so that's the balance that we've tried to strike.
Diolch am hynna. Ocê, fe wnawn ni symud at Alun Davies.
Thank you for that. We'll move on to Alun Davies.
Diolch. Liciwn i ddychwelyd i 'Cymraeg 2050', os yw'n bosibl. Mi ydych chi, os dwi'n deall yn iawn, yn dod â rhai grantiau at ei gilydd i local authority education grantiau, a phwrpas hwn yw i leihau'r byrdwn o weinyddiaeth ar grantiau gwahanol, ie?
Thank you. I'd like to return to 'Cymraeg 2050', if I may. You said, if I understood it correctly, that you're putting grants together for local authority education grants, and that the purpose of this is to reduce the administrative burden of different grants, yes?
Wel, mae mwy nag un pwrpas, ond mae hynny'n effaith, yn sicr, sy'n dod yn ei sgîl e.
There is more than one purpose, but that is an impact, certainly.
Ocê. Wel, efallai byddai'n rhwyddach, yn lle fy mod i'n gofyn y cwestiwn, i chi ateb y cwestiwn.
Okay. Perhaps it would be easier, rather than for me to ask the question, for you to answer the question.
Ocê. [Chwerthin.] Felly, beth sydd yn digwydd, yn gyffredinol, nid jest yng nghyllideb y Gymraeg, yw ein bod ni'n cyfuno rhyw 25 grant unigol yn yr adran addysg yn gyffredinol, sy'n mynd i gonsortia neu gynghorau lleol, i mewn i bedwar grant. Un o'r grantiau hynny yw grant 'Cymraeg 2050'. Mae hynny'n mynd i gynnwys y grant Cymraeg mewn addysg, dysgu proffesiynol, trochi hwyr, a siarter yr iaith hefyd. Pwrpas gwneud hynny, y peth cyntaf, yw rhoi mwy o hyblygrwydd i gynghorau allu gweithredu'r amcanion mewn ffordd fwy creadigol ac integredig. Felly, bydd deilliannau clir i'r grantiau yn dweud beth yw'r outputs rŷm ni'n mynnu, ond bydd hyblygrwydd sut i fynd i'r afael â diwallu hynny. Dyna'r prif bwrpas. Mae e hefyd, wrth gwrs, yn cael yr effaith, fel roeddech chi'n dweud, o ran biwrocratiaeth a gweinyddiaeth.
Okay. [Laughter.] Therefore, what's happening, generally, not just in the Welsh language budget, is that we are bringing together some 25 individual grants in the education department more generally, provided to the consortia or the local authorities, into four grants. One of those grants is the 'Cymraeg 2050' grant. That will include the Welsh in education, professional learning, late immersion and the language charter grant too. The purpose of that, first of all, is to provide greater flexibility for councils to deliver the objectives in a more creative way, in a more integrated way. So, there will be clear outcomes for the grants, saying what the outputs that we will insist on are, but there will be flexibility in terms of how they deliver that. That's the main purpose. It's also having the impact, as you said, in terms of administration and bureaucracy.
Ie. Mae gen i ddiddordeb yn hyn oherwydd mae yna ysgol Gymraeg newydd, wrth gwrs, yn nhref fy hun, yn Nhredegar, a dwi wedi bod yn edrych ar y broses o wneud penderfyniad gweinyddu, y broses, a wedyn y broses o greu ysgol. Beth dwi'n ei glywed gan y cyngor yw bod y broses o'u galluogi nhw i sefydlu'r ysgol yn broses dda, ac mae gwaith y Llywodraeth yn gweithio'n dda, a bod y cyllid sydd gan y cyngor o'r Llywodraeth yn eu galluogi nhw i wneud hynny, so maen nhw'n fodlon iawn gyda'r broses nes bod yr ysgol wedi'i sefydlu, wedi'i adeiladu ac yn rhan o awyrgylch addysgol y gymuned. Wedyn, maen nhw'n dweud bod yna byrdwn ychwanegol, wrth gwrs, achos mae hwn yn ysgol newydd, ac yn ysgol ychwanegol yn y dref. Felly, sut ydych chi'n gweld bod y Llywodraeth yn gallu cydweithio ag awdurdodau i sicrhau bod y broses o gynyddu addysg Gymraeg yn un sy'n bosibl tu fewn y cyfyngiadau ariannol presennol?
Yes. I am interested in this because, of course, there is a new Welsh-medium school in my own town, in Tredegar, and I've been looking at the process of making decisions and then administering the process, and then the process of creating a school. What I'm hearing from the council is that the process of enabling them to establish the school is a good process, and that the Government's work is working well, and that the funding that the council receives from the Government enables them to do that, so they're very satisfied with the process until the school has been established and has been built and is part of the education atmosphere of the community. Then they say there's an additional burden, of course, because this is a new school, an additional school, in the town. Therefore, how do you see that the Government can work with authorities to ensure that the process of expanding Welsh-medium education is one that's possible within the current financial restrictions?
Wel, dydyn ni ddim fel arfer yn siarad am addysgu mwy o blant, felly—
Well, we're not usually talking about educating more children, so—
Ie, ond mwy o ysgolion.
Yes, but it is more schools.
Wel, ie, wrth gwrs, ond mae'r impact refeniw—. Dyw e ddim yn gwbl ychwanegol, yw'r pwynt dwi'n ei wneud, oherwydd dyw'r niferoedd o blant ddim ar y cyfan yn wahanol.
Well, yes, of course, but the revenue impact—. It isn't entirely additional, that's the point I'm making, because the numbers of pupils don't on the whole increase.
Ie, dwi'n deall hwnna.
Yes, I understand that.
Felly, beth rŷm ni'n ceisio ei wneud a beth rŷm ni yn ei wneud fel Llywodraeth yw darparu'r cyfalaf, fel rŷch chi'n ei gydnabod, a wedyn, ynghyd â hynny, elfennau eraill o'r grantiau sydd yn helpu'r cyngor gyda gweithlu, gyda hyfforddi ac ati. Felly, dyna'r ffordd rŷm ni'n gallu cefnogi o ran yr elfen refeniw. Dyw e ddim yn talu am redeg ysgol yn gyfan gwbl, ond dyw e byth yn mynd i wneud hynny.
So, what we're trying to do and what we are doing as a Government is providing the capital, as you've just recognised, and then, along with that, other grant elements that will help the council with the workforce and with training and so on. So, that's the way we can support from a revenue perspective. It doesn't pay for the whole cost of running a school, but it will never do that.
Rwy'n deall hynny, a dyna pam rwy'n gofyn y cwestiwn, achos pan fo awdurdodau o dan faich ariannol difrifol, fel rŷm ni i gyd yn cydnabod eu bod nhw ar hyn o bryd, a wedyn rŷm ni'n gofyn i gynghorau ehangu darpariaeth, ac mae hynny'n cynnwys, ond ddim yn unig, ysgolion newydd, mae hynny yn fyrdwn ychwanegol, onid ydy?
I understand that, and that's why I'm asking the question, because, when authorities are under a great financial burden, as we all acknowledge they are currently, and then we ask councils to expand provision, and that doesn't just include new schools, that's an additional burden, isn't it?
Ond dyna beth yw'r broses yn y CSGAau. Wrth gwrs mae pethau yn newid dros y blynyddoedd, wrth gwrs, ond mae'r cyngor yn edrych ar y CSGA ac yn dweud beth yw'r ddarpariaeth rŷm ni'n gallu fforddio ei wneud, ac er mwyn cyrraedd yn y nod, 'Mae'r cyfraniad yma wrth y Llywodraeth a dyma'r cyfraniad wrthym ni.' Felly, mae hynny'n rhan o'r broses o gytuno'r nod a wedyn cytuno beth mae hynny'n ei olygu.
But that's the process in the WESPs. Of course things change over a period of years, but the council will look at the WESP and will determine what provision we can afford, and in order to achieve that, 'Here is a contribution from Government and a contribution from ourselves.' So, that's part of the process of agreeing on the aim and then what that will mean.
Ocê. So, sut ydych chi'n gweld y grant newydd yma, neu ffordd o ariannu'r grantiau, yn cynnig cefnogaeth i'r Bil rydych chi'n mynd i'w gyflwyno, dwi'n credu, yn ystod y flwyddyn yma?
Okay. So, how do you see this new grant, or this new way of funding the grants, providing support to the Bill that you're going to present in this year, I think?
Ie, wel, achos rwy'n credu ei fod e'n rhoi mwy o autonomy, os hoffwch chi, i'r cyngor, i allu gweinyddu'r ffynonellau ariannol yma mewn ffordd fwy hyblyg. Rwy'n credu bod hynny yn bwysig. Rwy'n credu hefyd ei fod e'n caniatáu elfen efallai mwy arloesol—sut rydych chi'n gallu cyfuno'r elfen o ran trochi hwyr gyda'r elfen o hyfforddiant proffesiynol, er enghraifft. Ar hyn o bryd, mae'r ddau beth mewn dau grant ar wahân. Mae rhaid ateb am eu gwariant nhw mewn ffordd annibynnol. Oes rhywbeth mwy creadigol gall cyngor ei wneud? Ond mae'n bwysig cofio bod deilliannau yn mynd i fod. Dyw e ddim yn free for all. Bydd gofynion bod y nod polisi yn cael ei ateb, os hoffwch chi. Ond y syniad yna o'r arloesi a'r creadigrwydd, rwy'n credu, yw'r prif beth o'm safbwynt i. Mae e hefyd yn golygu, wrth gwrs, os oes tanwariant fan hyn, rwyt ti'n gallu gwario fe—. Mae elfen o hyblygrwydd ariannol rhwng yr elfennau hefyd.
Yes, well, because I think it provides more autonomy for councils to administer these financial resources in a more flexible way. I think that's important. I also think that it allows a more innovative element, in terms of how you can combine late immersion with professional training, for example. At the moment they're both in different grants. You have to actually account for the expenditure in independent ways. Is there something more creative a council could do? But it's important to bear in mind that there will be outcomes. It won't be a free-for-all. There will be expectations that the policy aims are delivered. But, in terms of that idea of innovation and creativity, that's the main thing from my perspective. It also means, of course, that if there is an underspend here, then you can spend it elsewhere. There's an element of financial flexibility there too.
Dwi'n mynd i ofyn y cwestiwn sydd yn anodd iawn imi ei ofyn, mewn ffordd. Dwi'n cytuno gyda chi pan fo'n dod i hyblygrwydd. Mae hynny yn bwysig, ac mae awdurdodau wedi bod yn dweud hynny ers i mi fod yn Aelod yma; maen nhw eisiau mwy o hyblygrwydd ac maen nhw eisiau llai o fiwrocratiaeth, ac mae hynny'n ddigon naturiol. Ac rwy'n cymryd buasai'r Llywodraeth eisiau gweld yr un peth. Ond gyda hyblygrwydd, wrth gwrs, mae diffyg rheolaeth, ac wedyn, dwi'n dod nôl at y casgliad: dŷn ni i gyd yn cytuno â hyblygrwydd, ac wedyn, rwyf innau ac aelodau eraill o'r pwyllgor yn dweud, 'Reit, Gweinidog, sut ydych chi'n gallu sicrhau eich bod chi yn mynd i gyrraedd eich targedau?'
I'm going to ask the question that's very difficult for me to ask, in a way. I agree with you when it comes to flexibility. That is important, and authorities have been saying that since I was a Member here; they want more flexibility, they want less bureaucracy, and that is natural enough. And I take it that the Government would want to see that as well. But with flexibility, of course, there is a lack of control, and then I come back to the conclusion: we all agree with flexibility, but then, I and other members of the committee say, 'Okay, Minister, how can you ensure that you're going to reach your targets?'
Pwynt digon teg. Ar hyn o bryd—. Wel, ddim, actually, ar hyn o bryd, ond tan yn ddiweddar, roedd rhan o'r ffynhonnell yn mynd trwy'r consortia, er enghraifft; doedd e ddim yn mynd yn uniongyrchol i'r cyngor. Felly, roedd gyda chi gyfrifoldeb statudol i ddelifro, fel rŷn ni'n sôn nawr, ar yr amcanion mewn un man, a'r gallu i wneud hynny yn ddibynnol ar wariant mewn corff arall. Felly, actually, rhan o'r broses yw tynnu hwnnw i gyd at ei gilydd, fel bod y polisi, y cyfrifoldeb a'r arian yn cael eu halinio, os hoffwch chi.
Mae'r pwynt rŷch chi'n ei wneud yn bwynt cysyniadol deg, onid yw e—beth yw'r lifers sydd gyda fi fel Gweinidog i yrru hyn? Beth rwy'n dweud wrthych chi yw, rwy'n credu, drwy gael syniad o bartneriaeth gyda chynghorau, a'r creadigrwydd hwnnw, bydd hynny'n llwyddo'n well. Ond bydd cyfle i chi herio hynny os nad yw hynny'n digwydd. Ac mae hwn yn broses o esblygu, onid yw e? Bydd y deilliannau yn cael eu gosod y flwyddyn hon. Byddwn ni'n gweld, yn sgil profiad y flwyddyn hon, beth yw'r angen ar gyfer deilliannau'r flwyddyn nesaf.
Felly, mae'r tensiwn hwnnw jest yn rhan gynhenid, rili, yn y drafodaeth, ond y syniad sydd gyda fi yw bod hyn yn rhoi syniad ystyrlon o bartneriaeth gyda chynghorau, a dyna rŷn ni wedi gweld sydd wedi gwneud y gwahaniaeth, rwy'n credu, ym maes y Gymraeg. Mae cydweithio dros y CSCAau, fel rŷn ni wedi sôn droeon, wedi bod yn rhywbeth calonogol, cadarnhaol, creadigol, a dyna, rwy'n credu, y ffordd rŷn ni'n gwneud cynnydd yn y maes yma'n gyffredinol.
That's a fair point. At the moment—. Well, not at the moment, but until recently, part of the funding went through the consortia; it didn't go directly to the local authorities. So, you had a statutory responsibility to deliver on the objectives in one place, and the ability to do that was reliant on expenditure within another organisation. So, actually, part of the process is to draw all of that together, so that the policy, the responsibility and the funding are aligned, if you like.
The point that you make is conceptually fair—what levers do we have as Ministers to drive this? And what I'm telling you is that I believe that, through that partnership with councils, and having that creativity, that will be more effective. But there will be an opportunity for you to challenge that if that's not the case. And this is a process of evolution. The outcomes will be put in place this year. We will see from experience during this year what the needs in terms of outcomes are for the next year.
So, that tension is just an integral part of the discussion, but the idea that I have is that this gives us meaningful partnerships with councils, and that's what we've seen has made the difference in terms of the Welsh language. Collaboration with the WESPs, as we've talked about many times, has been very positive and very encouraging, and creative too, and I think that's the way we can make progress in this area more generally.
Dwi'n fodlon gyda hynny.
I'm satisfied with that.
Diolch. Oes gan unrhyw Aelodau eraill unrhyw gwestiynau pellach mae nhw eisiau gofyn i'r Gweinidog? Dwi ddim yn gweld bod. Carolyn.
Thank you. Do other Members have any further questions they'd like to ask the Minister? No, I don't see there are any. Carolyn.
I was just thinking back to the evidence session with the Welsh Language Commissioner. To make the savings, she was looking at the rationalisation of her offices, which, to me, seems really sensible as well. I remember there was some concern amongst Members about sharing the Welsh Government's offices. It was just something I remembered from that session, and I just thought I'd ask you for your thoughts on that, really, regarding the independence with sharing offices.
Rwy'n cefnogi hynny. Rwy'n credu ei fod e'n ddefnydd synhwyrol o'r ystâd gyhoeddus. Mae gyda ni adnoddau yng nghanol y brifddinas; mae hyn yn ffordd bositif o'u defnyddio nhw. Rwy'n deall y pwynt rŷch chi'n ei wneud am y syniad o annibyniaeth. Dwi ddim yn credu bod unrhyw un yn herio annibyniaeth y comisiynydd, i fod yn deg. Mae swyddogaeth rheoleiddiol gyda'r swyddfa. Ond rwy'n credu bod hwn yn rhan anorfod i unrhyw gorff i edrych ar sut rŷch chi'n rhedeg eich ystâd mewn byd sydd yn wahanol iawn i cyn COVID, oherwydd bod pobl yn gweithio gartref. Felly, dyw'r penderfyniadau mae'r comisiynydd yn eu gwneud yn hynny o beth ddim ynghlwm yn uniongyrchol â'r gyllideb hon; mae hyn wedi bod yn rhan o'u hystyriaeth nhw ers sbel, rwy'n credu.
I support that. I think it's a sensible use of the public estate. We have resources in the middle of the capital city and this is a positive way of making use of them. I understand the point that you make on the concept of independence. I don't think this is a challenge to the independence of the commissioner. The office has regulatory functions. But I do think that this is an inevitable part for any organisation in looking at how they run their estate in a world that's very different to the pre-COVID times, because people are working from home more. So, the decisions taken by the commissioner in that regard aren't directly related to this budget; this has been part of their considerations for some time.
Diolch. Oedd unrhyw beth pellach roeddech chi wedi gobeithio codi y bore yma sydd ddim wedi dod lan?
Thank you. Was there anything further that you wished to raise this morning that hasn't been covered?
Na. Diolch am y cwestiynau.
No. Thank you for your questions.
Diolch yn fawr iawn. Bydd transgript o beth sydd wedi cael ei ddweud yn cael ei ddanfon atoch chi i chi wirio ei fod e'n gofnod teg. Ond diolch yn fawr iawn am eich amser y bore yma.
Thank you. A transcript of what's been said will be sent to you so you can check that it's a fair record. But thank you for your time this morning.
Diolch.
Cynnig:
bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y cyfarfod yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 17.42(ix).
Motion:
that the committee resolves to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix).
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
Aelodau, gwnawn ni symud yn syth at eitem 3. Ydy'r Aelodau yn hapus i ni ofyn ac i benderfynu ein bod ni'n gwahardd y cyhoedd o eitemau 4, 5, 6, 7 a 10 o'n cyfarfod heddiw? Rwy'n cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42 i benderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o'r eitemau hynny. Ydy'r Aelodau'n fodlon inni wneud hynny? Ydyn. Ocê, gwnawn ni aros i glywed ein bod ni'n breifat.
Members, we'll move immediately to item 3. Are Members content that we propose that we exclude the public from items 4, 5, 6, 7 and 10 of today's meeting? Members are content. So, I propose, under Standing Order 17.42, to resolve to exclude the public from those items. Are Members content to do so? Yes. We will wait to hear that we are in private session.
Derbyniwyd y cynnig.
Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 10:19.
Motion agreed.
The public part of the meeting ended at 10:19.
Ailymgynullodd y pwyllgor yn gyhoeddus am 12:59.
The committee reconvened in public at 12:59.
Prynhawn da. Hoffwn i groesawu'r Aelodau'n ôl i'r cyfarfod hwn o'r Pwyllgor Diwylliant, Cyfathrebu, y Gymraeg, Chwaraeon a Chysylltiadau Rhyngwladol. Bydda i nawr yn symud ymlaen at sesiwn dystiolaeth gydag S4C ynglŷn ag honiadau am fwlio yn y sianel. Mi wna i ofyn i'n tystion i gyflwyno eu hunain ar gyfer y record.
Good afternoon. I'd like to welcome Members back to this meeting of the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport and International Relations Committee. We'll now move to an evidence session with S4C regarding allegations concerning bullying at the channel. I'll ask our witnesses to introduce themselves for the record.
Rhodri Williams ydw i, cadeirydd S4C.
I'm Rhodri Williams, chair of S4C.
Chris Jones, aelod anweithredol o fwrdd S4C.
Chris Jones, non-executive member of the S4C board.
Diolch. Mi wnaf i ofyn os oes gan unrhyw Aelodau fuddiannau i'w datgan.
Thank you. I'll ask whether any Members have any declarations of interest.
Gaf i jest roi ar y record—? Dyw e ddim yn fuddiant or ran y rheolau, ond dwi'n credu y dylwn i nodi ar y record cyhoeddus roeddwn i arfer bod yn aelod o dîm rheoli S4C a dwi'n nabod y ddau dyst o'n blaenau ni y prynhawn yma.
Could I just put on record—? It's not an interest in terms of Standing Orders, but I do think I should place on the public record that I used to be a member of the management team at S4C and I know both witnesses before us this afternoon.
Diolch, Alun. Mae'r sesiwn yma wedi ei aildrefnu ers 14 Rhagfyr y llynedd yn dilyn salwch annisgwyl ac anffodus y cyn brif weithredwr, Sian Doyle. Dŷn ni oll yn dymuno gwellhad buan iddi, wrth gwrs.
Cyn inni ddechrau heddiw hoffwn i roi ar gofnod pa mor bryderus mae'r digwyddiadau diweddar wedi bod. Tra ei fod e’n fater wedi'i neilltuo i Lywodraeth y Deyrnas Gyfunol, mae S4C yn sefydliad unigryw. Mae gan bob un ohonon ni ddiddordeb personol yn llwyddiant y sianel. Mae gwaith y sianel dros y pedair degawd ddiwethaf o ran cynnwys Cymraeg yn rhywbeth y gallwn ni i gyd fod yn falch iawn ohono. Mae gan S4C hefyd rôl bwysig i'w chwarae yn helpu i sicrhau’r nod o gyrraedd miliwn o siaradwyr Cymraeg erbyn 2050. Fodd bynnag, fel y byddwch chi’n ymwybodol, mae difrifoldeb y sefyllfa ddiweddar wedi tanseilio enw da y sianel. Mae hynny'n destun pryder i ni i gyd.
Mi fydd ein sesiwn heddiw yn ffocysu ar yr ymateb sefydliadol yn dilyn yr adroddiad i mewn i'r amgylchedd gwaith a'r awyrgylch yn S4C, yn ogystal â chwestiynau am drefniadau llywodraethu S4C. Does dim rhaid i fi ddweud pa mor bwysig yw hi eich bod chi yn adennill hyder y rheini sydd yn gweithio yn S4C, yn ogystal â gydag S4C, ynghyd â phobl Cymru sydd yn ddibynnol ar gynnwys S4C. Dylai hyn fod yn sianel sy'n darparu darlledu gwasanaeth cyhoeddus o ansawdd uchel, unigryw ac annibynnol i bobl Cymru. Mae gennych chi gyfrifoldeb i adfer y niwed sydd wedi digwydd yn ddiweddar. Ein gobaith ni yw y gallwn ni ddod at wraidd rhai o'r materion yma yn ein sesiwn heddiw a dechrau’r broses o adfer ein darlledwr cenedlaethol. Hoffwn i nodi i'r rheini sydd yn gwylio heddiw y gallai trafodaethau’r sesiwn yma gynnwys themâu a allai beri gofid i rai.
Felly, mi wnawn ni fynd, os ydych chi’n hapus, yn syth i mewn i gwestiynau. Beth ydych chi’n meddwl mae S4C wedi'i wneud i adfer sefydlogrwydd eich sefydliad ers cyhoeddi adroddiad Capital Law? Beth ydy'r camau nesaf y byddwch chi’n eu cymryd?
Thank you, Alun. This session has been rearranged from 14 December last year following the unexpected and unfortunate illness of the former chief executive, Sian Doyle. We all wish her a speedy recovery, of course.
Before we start today, I'd like to put on record how concerning recent events have been. While S4C is a matter reserved to the UK Government, it is a unique organisation. Every one of us has a personal interest in the channel's success. The channel's work over the last four decades in providing Welsh language content is something that we can all be proud of. S4C also has an important role to play in assisting to deliver the aim of ensuring a million Welsh speakers by 2050. However, as you will be aware, the seriousness of the recent situation has undermined the channel's reputation. This is a cause for concern for us all.
Our session today will focus on the organisational response following the report on the working environment and atmosphere at S4C, as well as questions on S4C's governance arrangements. I don't need to say how important it is that you restore the confidence of those who work in S4C, as well as with S4C, and the people of Wales who rely on S4C content. S4C should be a channel that provides high-quality, unique and independent public broadcasting to the people of Wales. You have a responsibility to repair the recent damage caused. Our hope is that we can get to the root of some of these issues in our session today and start the process of rebuilding our national broadcaster. I'd like to warn viewers watching today that this session's proceedings could include themes that could cause distress for some people.
So, if you're happy, we'll go straight into questions. What do you think S4C has done to restore stability in your organisation since the Capital Law report was published? And what are the next steps you'll be taking?
Y peth cyntaf sydd wedi digwydd, o ran darparu sefydlogrwydd, yw rhoi trefniadau dros dro mewn lle, lle mae dyletswyddau'r prif weithredwr a'r prif swyddog cynnwys yn cael eu rhannu gan Elin Morris, prif swyddog gweithredol, a Geraint Evans, cyfarwyddwr strategaeth cynnwys a chyhoeddi. Mae hynny wedi llwyddo i greu sefydlogrwydd ac mae e wedi llwyddo i wneud ein staff—. Ac i fi, a liciwn i bwysleisio hyn ar y cychwyn, y flaenoriaeth fan hyn, yr hyn sydd yn ganolog i'r holl gwestiwn yma, yw lles a diogelwch ein staff ni, ac maen nhw wedi ymateb yn bositif i'r trefniadau newydd hynny. Maen nhw'n deall, wrth gwrs, mai trefniadau dros dro ydyn nhw. Maes o law, mi fydd angen penodi prif weithredwr parhaol, llawnamser, ac efallai mater i'r prif weithredwr, mewn ymgynghoriad gyda'r bwrdd, fydd penderfynu ar siâp y tîm rheoli. Dyw e ddim o angenrheidrwydd yn golygu llenwi y swyddi oedd yn y patrwm blaenorol.
Roeddwn i'n falch iawn, fel y gallwch chi ddychmygu, i weld ymhlith papurau’r pwyllgor ar gyfer heddiw eich bod chi wedi cael ymateb gan BECTU sydd yn cadarnhau yr hyn dwi'n ei ddweud, mai nid fy adlewyrchiad i yw e ar y ffaith bod staff bellach yn hapus—mae BECTU yn cadarnhau hynny. Maen nhw wedi cael, os dwi'n deall yn iawn, dau gyfarfod gydag aelodau staff o fewn S4C, un ym mis Rhagfyr ac un dydd Gwener wythnos diwethaf, ac mae'r ymateb yn bositif. Felly, dyna’r cam cyntaf, os liciwch chi. Y cam nesaf, ac efallai y down ni at hwn maes o law, yw i edrych ar yr hyn nawr sydd eisiau—. Byddwn i'n cytuno 100 y cant gyda’ch sylwadau chi, Gadeirydd, bod angen ailennyn hyder yn y sefydliad, oherwydd o'r foment derbynion ni'r llythyr cyntaf hwnnw, fel aelodau anweithredol y bwrdd, ar 28 Ebrill y llynedd, yn codi'r pryderon yma—a nid yn eu codi nhw gydag S4C am y tro cyntaf ond yn eu codi nhw gyda ni fel aelodau anweithredol am y tro cyntaf—dwi'n credu cafodd llawer o niwed ei wneud i enw da'r sefydliad, i hyder y sefydliad, i hunan-barch llawer o bobl. Mae e wedi bod y cyfnod anoddaf, byddwn i'n meddwl, yn hanes S4C.
Felly, fel rhan o'r broses honno—ac eto, liciwn i gyfeirio at lythyr BECTU, lle maen nhw'n gwneud awgrymiadau—rŷn ni'n awyddus i weithio gyda nhw, gyda'n staff, i wneud yr hyn sydd ei angen i ailennill yr hyder hwnnw. Byddwn i'n ei roi e o dan bedwar penawd, sef arweinyddiaeth—ac mae hwn yn ymwneud, yn amlwg, â phenodi prif weithredwr newydd; diwylliant—creu diwylliant lle mae pobl yn gallu bod yn ddiogel yn eu gwaith a ddim yn byw mewn ofn; bod y polisïau presennol mewn lle, a bod y polisïau yn addas ar gyfer diogelu staff ac yn cynnig ffordd i bobl ddelio â phryderon sy'n codi; ac yn olaf, gyda llywodraethiant: oes yna faterion ynghylch y model llywodraethiant presennol sydd angen edrych arnyn nhw o'r newydd? Bydd angen mynd ati i wneud y cyfan yna yn ystod y misoedd sydd i ddod.
The first thing that's happened, in terms of providing stability, is that we've put interim arrangements in place where the duties and responsibilities of the chief executive and chief content officer are shared by Elin Morris, the chief operating officer, and Geraint Evans, the director of content and publication strategy. That has given us some stability and it has succeeded in making our staff—. And for me, and I'd like to emphasise this point at the very outset, the priority here, and what is central to this whole question, is the well-being and safety of our staff, and they have responded positively to those new arrangements. They understand, of course, that they are interim arrangements. In due course, we will need to appoint a permanent, full-time chief executive, and then, perhaps, it will be a matter for the chief executive, in consultation with the board, to decide on the shape of the management team. It doesn't necessarily mean that we will fill those roles that existed in the previous regime.
I was very pleased, as you can imagine, to see among the committee's papers for today that you had received a response from BECTU that confirms what I am saying. It's not my reflection on the fact that staff are now happier—BECTU confirm that. As I understand it, they've had two meetings with staff members within S4C, one in December and one Friday of last week, and the response has been positive. So, that's the first step, if you like. The next step, and perhaps we will come to this in due course, is to look at what needs to be—. I would agree 100 per cent with your comments, Chair, that we do need to rebuild confidence in the organisation, because from the moment we received that first letter, as non-executive members of the board, on 28 April of last year, raising these concerns—not raising them with S4C for the first time but raising them with us as non-executive members for the first time—I do think that a great deal of damage was done to the reputation of the organisation, to the confidence of the organisation and to the self-respect of many people. It has been the most difficult period in the history of S4C, I would think.
So, as part of that process—and again, I'd like to refer to the BECTU letter, where they make suggestions—we are eager to work with them and with our staff in order to do what is necessary to restore that confidence. I would place it into four headings, and those are leadership—and that relates clearly to the appointment of a new chief executive; culture—the creation of a culture where people can feel safe at work and where they do not live in fear; that the current policies are in place and that those policies are fit to safeguard staff and do provide ways and means of dealing with concerns that arise; and finally in terms of governance: are there issues around the model of governance currently in place that need to be reviewed or looked at anew? We will need to do all of that during the coming months.
Diolch am hwnna. Gwnawn ni symud at Carolyn Thomas.
Thank you for that. We'll move on to Carolyn Thomas.
Prynhawn da. Dwi'n mynd i siarad Saesneg.
Good afternoon. I will be asking my questions in English.
On 24 November, S4C said it would publish the next steps that you would be taking to ensure that S4C provides a positive and thriving workforce environment and explain the decisions made in due course. You've discussed some of the next steps going forward, but I'd just like to know when will this happen.
Os ydy e'n iawn, gwnaf i barhau i ateb yn Gymraeg. Mae'r bwrdd yn cyfarfod nesaf bythefnos i heddiw, fel mae'n digwydd, ac yn y cyfarfod hwnnw mi fyddwn ni'n trafod pecyn o fesurau o dan y penawdau hynny. Mae peth o'r gwaith, fel byddech chi'n disgwyl, eisoes wedi dechrau. Mi fydd swyddogion wedi bod yn edrych ar rai o'r materion dwi newydd gyfeirio atyn nhw ac yn dod ag argymhellion gerbron, a byddwn ni'n rhoi prosesau mewn lle ar gyfer yr adolygu hynny sydd angen digwydd, a thrafodaeth ehangach. Oherwydd, wrth gwrs, o ran polisïau, er enghraifft rhai sydd yn ymwneud â chwythu'r chwiban, parch yn y gweithle, disgyblaeth, cwynion, mae gyda ni bolisïau ar y rheini yn barod. Byddwn ni am eu hadolygu nhw. Ond, wrth gwrs, beth mae adroddiad Capital Law yn ei ddweud wrthym ni yw nid problem gyda'r polisïau oedd yn achosi'r anawsterau y tu mewn i S4C a'r pryder a'r gofid i aelodau staff; diwylliant ac arweinyddiaeth S4C oedd yn creu'r problemau hynny. Mae'r adroddiad yn glir iawn ar hynny. Dwi ddim eisiau sôn yn ormodol am gwestiynau ddelion ni gyda nhw ddoe, ond mae yna berygl, dwi'n credu, fod pobl yn rhyw fath o ofn derbyn y gwir ynglŷn â'r hyn sydd wedi digwydd fan hyn, a bod yr hyn sydd yn yr adroddiad, a lles y staff a'n dyletswydd ni o ofal tuag at ein staff, rhywsut yn cael ei anwybyddu'n llwyr.
Byddwn i am bwysleisio fanna fod y dystiolaeth cawsom ni yn adroddiad Capital Law yn dangos yn glir iawn bod yn rhaid cael diwylliant lle mae pobl yn gallu bod yn ddiogel, lle'u bod nhw'n gallu mynegi amheuaeth a beirniadaeth heb ofni canlyniadau hynny. Mae'r broses yna o newid diwylliannol yn gwbl allweddol i'n llwyddiant ni fel sefydliad yn y dyfodol. Wrth gwrs, mae e'n ein cynnwys ni fel bwrdd—fyddwn i ddim am ddiystyru ein rôl ni yn gosod yr esiampl yn hynny o beth. Mae e hefyd yn cynnwys yr arweinyddiaeth a'r staff. Ond dwi yn credu, i'w wneud e'n llwyddiannus, byddwn i'n rhagweld y bydd eisiau cymorth allanol arnom ni. Fe soniais i am drefniadau llywodraethiant a'n rheolau sefydlog, sydd yn gosod allan sut mae'r corff yn gweithio, a dwi'n credu, gyda hwnna hefyd, byddwn i am glywed barn pob eraill ynglŷn â'n rheolau sefydlog ni, nid ein bod ni yn mynd ati i benderfynu, 'O, mae eisiau newid hwn, dyma beth rydyn ni'n mynd i'w wneud', a dyna'i diwedd hi. Dwi'n credu y byddwn ni am ymgynghori'n ehangach ac edrych ar arfer da mewn llefydd eraill, os oes yna wersi y gallwn ni eu dysgu o lefydd eraill.
If it's okay, I'll continue to answer in Welsh. The board is meeting next a fortnight today, as it happens, and in that meeting we will be discussing a package of measures under those headings. Some of the work, as you would expect, has already begun. By then, officials will have been looking at some of the issues that I've already referred to and will be bringing recommendations to that meeting, and we will put processes in place for that reviewing that needs to be done, and a wider discussion. Because in terms of having policies such as those relating to whistleblowing, respect in the workplace, discipline, complaints, we have policies on those issues already. We will need to review those. But what Capital Law's report tells us is that it wasn't a problem with our policies that was causing the difficulties within S4C and the concerns among members of staff; the culture and the leadership of S4C was creating those problems. The report is very clear on that. I don't want to speak too much about questions that we dealt with yesterday, but there is a danger, I think, that people aren't willing to accept the truth about what's happened here, and that what is in the report on the welfare of staff and our duty of care towards staff is somewhat ignored completely.
I would want to emphasise there that the evidence we received in the Capital Law report shows clearly that there is a need for a culture where people can be safe, where they can express doubts and criticism without fear of consequences. That process of changing culture is key to our success as an organisation in the future. Of course, that includes us as a board—I wouldn't want to disregard our role in providing that example in that context. It also includes the leadership and staff. But I do believe that, for that to be successful, I would foresee that there's a need for external support. I mentioned governance arrangements and our standing orders, which set out how the body works, and I think that, with that also, we would want to hear other people's views regarding our standing orders, not that we decide, 'Oh, this needs to be changed, this is what we're going to do', and that's the end of it. I think we would want to consult widely and look at good practice in other places, and to see if there are lessons that we can learn from other places.
Diolch. Carolyn, cyn i ni ddod nôl, mae Llyr jest eisiau gofyn cwestiwn.
Thank you. Carolyn, before we come back, Llyr just wants to ask a question.
I was just going to ask about how, on that point, the union will be involved—BECTU—in the future in improving working relations. Will you be embedding that as well?
Yn sicr. Rydyn ni wedi siarad gyda BECTU—gyda'u cynrychiolydd llawnamser nhw yng Nghaerdydd, yn ogystal â'u cynrychiolydd nhw o fewn gweithlu S4C—ac maen nhw wedi bod yn hapus iawn i gydweithio â ni. Un o'r pethau cyntaf wnaethom ni pan gychwynnodd y broses yma—roedd Chris a finnau'n rhan o'r cyfarfod, gydag un aelod anweithredol arall o'r bwrdd—oedd siarad gyda BECTU ynglŷn â beth oedd angen ei wneud ar y cychwyn. Ac wrth gwrs, yn y drafodaeth yna gyda BECTU, dyna lle y cytunom ni mai'r unig ffordd roedd y broses hon yn gallu gweithio'n effeithiol yw os oedd gyda ni mewn lle fecanwaith a oedd yn caniatáu i aelodau staff siarad heb fod yna ofn eu bod nhw'n mynd i ddioddef yn sgil y sylwadau y bydden nhw'n eu gwneud. Felly, rydyn ni wedi cydweithredu â BECTU yn y gorffennol. Mae Carwyn Donovan, fel sy'n glir yn ei lythyr e atoch chi, Gadeirydd, yn ei gwneud hi'n amlwg bod yna awgrymiadau gan BECTU i'w gwneud ynglŷn â sut y gallwn ni gydweithio i sicrhau nad ydyn ni'n gweld y math hyn o broblemau'n codi eto. Ac fe fyddwn ni'n bendant yn gwneud hynny wrth fynd ymlaen.
Certainly. We have spoken to BECTU—with their full-time representative in Cardiff, as well as their representative within the S4C workforce—and they have been very happy to collaborate with us. One of the first things we did when this process started—Chris and myself were involved in the meeting, with one other non-executive member of the board—was to speak to BECTU regarding what needed to be done at the outset. And of course, in that discussion with BECTU, that's where we agreed that the only way in which this process could work effectively was if we had in place a mechanism that allowed staff members to speak openly without fear of consequences as a result of the comments that they would make. So, we have co-operated with BECTU in the past. Carwyn Donovan, as is clear in his letter to you, Chair, makes it clear that BECTU have suggestions to make as to how we can work together to ensure that we don't see these kinds of problems arising again. And we will most certainly be doing that in moving to the future.
Could I just add something very briefly? And apologies, I'll answer in English, if I may, just to make sure that I—
We do have simultaneous translation.
I'm doing all right so far, but I will use it if necessary. But I think it's better if I just answer quickly in English. To your point on timetable, I think from what Rhodri said, that's why it's been difficult to put a precise timetable on this, precisely because it's not a sort of top-down change programme—this has to be something that involves all our colleagues, involves new staff fora, involves key outside stakeholders like BECTU in this process. We need to make sure that everybody buys into this process of change and that it meets everybody's requirements.
I was going to ask another question on the timeline and process for filling the senior positions, including the chief exec. Have you got that in place yet? Are you thinking about that?
Dydy hi ddim mewn lle eto. Fel dwi'n dweud, bydd y bwrdd yn cyfarfod ymhen pythefnos, a'r bwriad bryd hynny fydd rhoi'r trefniadau perthnasol yn eu lle.
It's not in place as of yet. As I say, the board will meet in a fortnight's time, and the intention at that time would be to put those arrangements in place.
Diolch. Llyr.
Thank you. Llyr.
Diolch. Mae hi wedi bod yn ddefnyddiol iawn eich bod chi wedi sgopio mas y pedwar maes, os liciwch chi, neu'r themâu ble dŷch chi'n mynd i fod yn ffocysu arnyn nhw—arweinyddiaeth, diwylliant, polisïau a llywodraethiant. Wrth gwrs, wrth gyflwyno'r elfennau yna, pan roeddech chi'n sôn am arweinyddiaeth, fe wnaethoch chi gyfeirio at brif weithredwr ac efallai y cyfarwyddwyr gweithredol. Ond wrth gwrs, mae gyda chi gyfrifoldeb arweinyddol hefyd yn y cyd-destun yna. Felly, pan roeddech chi'n dweud bod yna drafodaeth yn mynd i fod yn y bwrdd ar yr agweddau yma, ydych chi'n disgwyl fydd yna drafodaeth ynglŷn â'ch rôl chi fel cadeirydd?
Thank you. It's been very useful that you have scoped out those four areas, if you like, or the themes that you'll be focusing on—leadership, culture, policies and governance. Of course, in presenting those elements, when you were talking about leadership, you referred to a chief executive and perhaps the executive directors. But of course, you have a leadership responsibility too in that context. So, when you said there was a discussion going to be in the board on these issues, do you expect there'll be a discussion on your role as chair?
Byddwn i'n disgwyl ein bod ni'n trafod ein rolau ni i gyd. Mae'n amlwg fod gan gadeirydd, fod gan fwrdd rôl bwysig mewn gosod safonau, mewn sicrhau fod safonau yn cael eu cadw atyn nhw, ac mewn arddangos y gwerthoedd a'r safonau rŷm ni am eu gweld o fewn y sefydliad yn y ffordd rŷm ni'n hunain yn gweithredu, ac i roi pwyslais ar y math o werthoedd rŷm ni'n disgwyl i'r corff weithredu yn gyson â nhw.
I would expect us to discuss all of our roles. Clearly, a chair and a board have an important role in setting standards and ensuring that standards are adhered to, and in demonstrating those values and standards that we want to see within the organisation in the way that we ourselves conduct ourselves, and to place an emphasis on the kinds of values that we expect the organisation to act in accordance with.
Achos yn y ffordd wnaethoch chi gyflwyno'r cyd-destun yna gynnau, roeddwn i jest yn teimlo bod yna awgrym, ac efallai roedd e i'w glywed ychydig ddoe yn y dystiolaeth hefyd, mai cyfrifoldeb eraill weithiau yw hyn ac mai pobl eraill sy'n gorfod delio efo'r pethau yma. Nawr, mae hynny yn wir i raddau—wrth gwrs ei fod e—ond ar ddiwedd y dydd, chi yw'r cadeirydd, ac atoch chi—dyna fyddai canfyddiad pobl, boed yn deg neu beidio—the buck stops there, yntefe? Felly, sut fyddech chi'n disgrifio'ch perfformiad chi dros y cyfnod diwethaf yma?
Because in the way that you presented that context earlier, I just felt that there was a suggestion, and perhaps it could be heard yesterday in the evidence, that this responsibility is for others and other people have to deal with this. Now, that is true to some extent—of course it is—but at the end of the day, you are the chair, and people's perception would be, fair or not, that the buck stops there with you. How would you describe your performance over this last period?
Gaf i ddweud gair i ddechrau ynglŷn â ble mae'r cyfrifoldeb? Wrth gwrs, ar ddiwedd y dydd, mae'r cyfrifoldeb yn gorffen gyda'r cadeirydd. Gaf i ddweud yn glir fan hyn mod i'n derbyn yn llwyr y cyfrifoldeb am y penderfyniadau sydd wedi cael eu gwneud gan y bwrdd, a'u bod nhw'n benderfyniadau unfrydol gan y bwrdd? Byddwn i ddim am awgrymu am eiliad fy mod i am redeg i ffwrdd. Rwy'n gwbl dawel fy meddwl ein bod ni fel bwrdd wedi gwneud y penderfyniadau iawn ar yr adeg iawn. Yn fwy pwysig—y peth allweddol bwysig i fi—dwi'n gwbwl hyderus ein bod ni wedi gwneud y peth iawn i'r unigolion hynny o fewn S4C, a rhai ohonyn nhw y tu allan, sydd wedi dioddef o dan yr arweinyddiaeth flaenorol.
O ran wedyn sut mae'r cyfrifoldeb ffurfiol hwnnw yn rhannu, rŷm ni yna i osod y disgwyliadau. Mewn perthynas â pholisïau, y bwrdd sydd yn gyfrifol am y strategaeth, y weithrediaeth sydd yn gyfrifol am ei weithredu hi. Mae cytundeb y prif weithredwr yn dweud mai cyfrifoldeb y prif weithredwr yw sicrhau bod gan S4C amgylchedd gwaith lle mae pawb yn trin ei gilydd â pharch, a lle mae urddas a thegwch yn greiddiol i holl weithgareddau'r cwmni. Os rhowch chi'r paragraff yna ochr yn ochr ag adroddiad Capital Law, mae e'n glir nad oedd hynny yn digwydd.
If I could say a few words first of all on where responsibility lies. Of course, at the end of the day, the buck stops with the chair. May I say quite clearly here that I fully accept responsibility for the decisions that have been made by the board, and that they were unanimous decisions by the board? I wouldn't want to suggest for a second that I would turn my back on those responsibilities. I am quite convinced that we as a board had made the right decisions at the right time. More importantly—the crucial thing for me—I am entirely confident that we did the right thing for those individuals within S4C, and some outside S4C, who have suffered under the previous leadership.
In terms of how that formal responsibility is divided, we are there to set expectations. In relation to policies, the board is responsible for strategy, the executive is responsible for executing that strategy. The contract of the chief executive says that it's the responsibility of the chief executive to ensure that S4C has a working environment where everyone treats each other with respect, and where dignity and fairness are at the core of all of the company's activities. If you place that paragraph alongside the Capital Law report, then it is clear that that was not happening.
Ond a ydych chi'n siomedig eich bod chi ddim wedi pigo lan ar hynny ynghynt—dwi'n siŵr eich bod chi—ac yn cydnabod bod hynny efallai yn fethiant?
But are you disappointed that you hadn't picked up on that earlier—I'm sure you are—and do you acknowledge that that perhaps is a failure?
Yn sicr, dwi'n flin ein bod ni ddim wedi pigo lan arno fe'n gynt, ond dwi ddim yn credu fod yna fai ar bobl am beidio â sylweddoli hynny. Oherwydd ysgrifennodd BECTU at y prif weithredwr yn gyntaf ar 2 Rhagfyr 2022, ac fe gynigiodd BECTU—yn yr un ffordd â maen nhw'n cynnig helpu yn y broses o wella pethau nawr—i'r prif weithredwr bryd hynny i gydweithio er mwyn delio gyda'r problemau. Fe dderbynion ni fel bwrdd adroddiadau gan y prif weithredwr ynglŷn â'r broses honno. Fe dderbynion ni'r rheini drwy'r pwyllgor pobl a thaliadau sydd yn gyfrifol am faterion adnoddau dynol, ac fe dderbynion ni nhw yn uniongyrchol fel aelodau'r bwrdd. Yr hyn oedd yn cael ei ddweud wrthym ni oedd fod yna gamau yn cael eu rhoi mewn lle, ymarfer gwrando â'r staff, a fod popeth yn symud i'r cyfeiriad iawn.
Felly, ydw, dwi'n rhwystredig ein bod ni ddim wedi deall yn gynt beth oedd dyfnder y problemau a'r pryder oedd gan aelodau staff, ond ar y llaw arall, doedd yna ddim tystiolaeth. Cawsom ni rywfaint o dystiolaeth pan roeddem ni'n cyfarfod yng Nghaernarfon ym mis Ionawr 2023 bod yna anesmwythyd, fel byddwn i'n ei ddisgrifio fe. Ond fy nehongliad i o hwnna oedd bod staff S4C yng Nghaernarfon yn arbennig yn teimlo eu bod nhw yn cael eu diystyrru braidd, eu bod nhw allan ohoni, nid y math o gyhuddiadau difrifol a oedd yn cael eu codi gan BECTU maes o law.
Certainly, I'm sorry that we didn't pick up on it earlier, but I don't think that you can place blame on people for not realising that. Because BECTU wrote to the chief executive first of all on 2 December 2022, and BECTU—just as they have offered to help in the process of making improvements now—did offer the chief executive at that time that they would work with her to deal with the problems. We as a board received reports from the chief executive on that process. We received those through the people and remuneration committee, which is responsible for HR issues, and we received them directly as members of the board. What we were told was that steps were being put in place, that there was a listening exercise with staff, and that everything was moving in the right direction.
So, yes, I am frustrated that we hadn't understood the gravity of the problems earlier and the concerns that staff members had, but on the other hand, there was no evidence. We received some evidence when we met in Caernarfon in January 2023 that there was some disquiet, as I would describe it. But my interpretation of that was that S4C staff in Caernarfon particularly felt that they were being forgotten, that they were out of the picture, not the kind of serious allegations that were raised by BECTU later on.
Alun.
Dwi eisiau mynd nôl at hynny, os caf i, Rhodri. Rhodri a Chris, mae'r ddau ohonoch chi wedi bod yn glir yn eich tystiolaeth y prynhawn yma mai'r tro cyntaf i chi glywed am y profiadau staff a'r problemau yn y sefydliad oedd ym mis Ebrill y llynedd. Dwi'n credu fy mod i'n cofio adroddiadau bod Gwyn Williams wedi trafod hyn gyda chi ym mis Mehefin 2022, a bod yna adroddiadau wedi bod i chi fel aelodau'r bwrdd bryd hynny. Rydych chi'n gwenu, so ydw i wedi camddeall, efallai?
I want to go back to that, if I may, Rhodri. Rhodri and Chris, both of you have been clear in your evidence this afternoon that the first time you heard about the staff experiences and the problems within the organisation was in April of last year. I think that I remember reports that Gwyn Williams had discussed this with you in June 2022, and that there had been reports to you as members of the board at that time. You're smiling, so have I misunderstood, perhaps?
Dwi'n trio gweithio mas yn fy mhen sut i ddelio â'r pwynt rŷch chi'n codi yn y ffordd briodol. Os dywedaf i fod yna broses yn ymwneud ag adnoddau dynol yn digwydd ar yr adeg honno, ac fe gyflwynwyd apêl ynglŷn â'r broses honno a gafodd ei glywed gan gadeirydd y pwyllgor pobl a thaliadau. Gwrthodwyd yr apêl hwnnw. Dyna oedd yr unig ymwneud rwy'n ymwybodol ohono fe o'r adeg honno. Does gen i ddim cofnod—a does gan neb arall ohonom ni gofnod—o gwynion yn cael eu codi bryd hynny ynglŷn â'r diwylliant mewnol ac ymddygiad uwch-swyddogion.
I am trying to work out in my head how to deal with the point that you've raised in an appropriate manner. If I say that there was a process related to HR that was happening at that time, and an appeal was made in relation to that process, and it was heard by the chair of the people and remuneration committee. That appeal was rejected. That was the only involvement that I am aware of from that time. I don't have any record—none of us have a record—of any complaints being raised at that point in relation to the internal culture and the behaviour of senior officials.
Could I just add something very briefly? I think it would be fair to say it was December 2022 when we first became aware of the complaints and the concerns within the organisation from the first BECTU letter on 2 December. It was April 2023 when they wrote to the board, the non-executive members of the board, and asked us to take action. So that, for me, is the timetable. I think a key point, really, both for this question and the previous one, is that, as Rhodri has said, after the first letter from BECTU, which was to the chief executive, asking for the chief executive and team to engage with them and to work to make things better, we were getting reports back on how that was going, but we didn't have, as it were, independent sources of information to draw on in that period. So I think it's really important from this, as well as understanding what happened, to see what are the important lessons and ways we can improve going forward. One of those is to make sure that, actually, we set in place—I think it was going to happen anyway—a staff survey, which was going to happen in the spring of 2023, and that would give us a clear objective point of evidence, then, as to whether things had improved or not. But obviously that was a few months down the track, and was actually overtaken by the BECTU second letter. So I think where we can make improvements as a board—because the board holds the responsibility here—is to make sure that we have, for example, what are generally called pulse surveys—so, more frequently, we're going out to colleagues, possibly to external parties as well, and getting objective, anonymised feedback so that we've got a more regular way of judging whether things are as they are believed to be.
And do you know, Chris, I agree with that way of working—I've got no issue with any of that. But I find it really curious to say the least that—it's not a big board, it's not a large organisation—no non-exec had any inkling of the depth of the problems facing you. Reading the report from Capital Law is absolutely heartbreaking, listening to people saying that they were in tears in work, afraid to go to work. You will have had reports, I assume, from HR about the staff turnover, so you would have known that there was quite a large number of people leaving the organisation, which is unusual—an increased churn, which I would have found curious—and yet there wasn't any wish to investigate or to ask further questions. Rhodri, you seem to have dismissed the reports that we've seen from June 2020, and that's your right, of course, if you wish to do that, but there are a number of indicators here that I would've thought would have raised alarm bells with non-execs about the running of the organisation.
It is about learning lessons from this, isn't it? I mean, during that period, we were aware, because we asked for regular information from the executive team, that they were active and they were doing lots of things and that their view was that this was improving the situation. So, we had that source of information coming to us. We had actually, I think, very recently created a specific pobl a thaliadau, a people and remuneration committee, to focus exactly on these issues, which wasn't there before. So, that was being set up, had had its first meetings and started receiving data on things like staff turnover and reasons for leaving and so on. And at that time, that data, in the way that it was presented, didn't suggest that there was a big spike, or whatever, because that was something we particularly looked at.
You will remember the context as well that, across many organisations, there was quite an increase in churn post COVID and so on, and a bit of pent up change and so on happened. So, we were looking for those sources, but it wasn't suggesting or setting off alarm bells. We were getting reassurances and we knew there was a staff survey coming that would give us an independent data point. Now, as I say, that was overtaken by the second BECTU letter, and a key learning for me, for any board, is that the board has to be able to judge the temperature of the organisation and get feedback from it, and, clearly, that didn't work as well as it should have.
And it can be difficult for non-execs, I accept that, because you're not there on a daily basis; you walk in, and behaviours tend to be different when non-execs are around. I accept and understand that. However, I come back to the point that there were warning signs. The meeting that you had in Caernarfon, I understand, was one where you met members of staff who were, from reports I've read, deeply upset at what was happening in your organisation. Rhodri, you said yesterday and you've said today, briefly, that you felt it was limited to Caernarfon—an issue of Caernarfon feeling left out of the organisational stuff. But wouldn't the issues that were being raised there, alongside the BECTU letter, have indicated that there was perhaps a greater, deeper, more profound problem with the organisation?
Dwi ddim yn credu cawson ni dystiolaeth o hynny tan i BECTU ysgrifennu aton ni. Yr agosaf ddaethon ni oedd, buaswn i'n dweud, o fewn yr wythnos neu efallai 10 diwrnod cyn i lythyr BECTU gyrraedd, fe wnes i'n sicr glywed gan nifer o unigolion sy'n gweithio o fewn y sector fod yna broblem, bod yna anesmwythyd, ond doedd dim o hwnna wedi'i adrodd i ni. Efallai, o dan drefn gwbl wahanol lle byddai pobl yn gweithio yn y swyddfa am bum diwrnod yr wythnos a lle byddai cyfarfodydd pwyllgorau, yn ogystal â chyfarfodydd y bwrdd, yn digwydd yn un o swyddfeydd S4C—efallai byddai yna fwy o gyfle am ryw sgyrsiau. Yn sicr, roedd e'n rhywbeth roeddwn i'n gyfarwydd ag ef pan oeddwn i'n gweithio i Ofcom flynyddoedd yn ôl, lle byddem ni'n mynd i Lundain i'r pencadlys i weithio a byddem ni'n cwrdd â'r cadeirydd, prif weithredwr ac aelodau eraill y bwrdd, a bydden nhw'n siarad, 'Sut mae pethau'n mynd yng Nghymru'r dyddiau yma?' Byddech chi'n cael cyfle i wneud hwnna. Mae'r cyfleoedd i wneud hynny llawer iawn yn llai, ac efallai taw un o'r pethau sydd eisiau inni edrych arno ar gyfer y dyfodol yw a oes angen addasu'n trefniadau ni, fel ein bod ni'n creu mwy o gyfleoedd i rywun i ddod aton ni dros goffi a dweud, 'O, allaf i gael gair tawel ynglŷn â hyn?' Ond digwyddodd ddim o hynny tan inni—. Ac os edrychwch chi ar lythyr BECTU, mae Carwyn Donovan yn defnyddio'r geiriau 'out of the blue', felly doedd e, yn sicr, ddim yn disgwyl ein bod ni'n ymwybodol o'r problemau hynny.
I don't believe that we had evidence of that until BECTU wrote to us. The closest we came was, I would say, within the week or 10 days prior to BECTU's letter arriving, I certainly heard from a number of individuals working within the sector that there was a problem and that there was disquiet among staff, but none of that had been reported to us. Now, perhaps, under a different system where people would be working in the office five days a week and where committee meetings, as well as board meetings, would be happening within one of S4C's offices, there may be more opportunity for chats off the record. It was certainly something that I was familiar with when I worked for Ofcom many years ago, where we would go to the headquarters in London to work and we would meet the chair, the chief executive and other members of the board, and we'd have chats. They'd ask, 'How are things going in Wales?', and you'd have the opportunity to do that. But the opportunities to do those things are much reduced now, and one of the things that we need to look at for the future, perhaps, is whether we need to adapt our arrangements, so that we create more opportunities for somebody to come to us over a cup of coffee and say, 'Can I have a quiet word about this?' But that didn't happen until we—. And if you look at the BECTU letter, Carwyn Donovan uses the words 'out of the blue', so he certainly didn't expect us to be aware of these problems.
Y broblem sydd gen i gyda hynny yw bod adroddiad Capital Law yn awgrymu ac yn dweud rhywbeth tra gwahanol. Gwnaf i ddarllen un rhan ohono fe i chi:
The problem I have with that is that Capital Law's report suggests and says something quite different. I'll read one part of it to you:
'During our meetings, 10 of the participants broke down crying, mostly while discussing their experiences in the S4C workplace.'
It goes on:
'I left because I didn't feel for any reason that I had a choice but to leave the cause of the situation. The Chief Executive had put me in a very nasty position, many other staff too, I was aware of that. But my friends and my family worried a lot about my mental health at the time. I had become very tearful. I couldn't sleep. And the atmosphere at work during the last few months of employment at S4C were very difficult and I didn't feel like I had a choice but to leave.'
Dyna'r gweithlu oeddet ti yn gyfrifol amdano. A doeddech chi ddim yn gwybod dim amdano fe.
That's the workforce you were responsible for, and you didn't know anything about it.
Nac oeddwn, a—
No, and—
A dwi'n ffeindio hynny yn anghredadwy, dyna'r peth, achos dŷch chi'n rheolwr profiadol.
I find that quite incredible, because you are an experienced manager.
Ond ddim yn gweithredu yn y cyd-destun yma fel rheolwr. Hynny yw, byddwn i'n mynd i swyddfa—
But not operating in this context as a manager. In other words, I'd go to an office—
Mae gennyt ti ddegawdau, Rhodri, o brofiad yn y maes yma. Degawdau o brofiad. Dŷch chi'n gadeirydd profiadol, a doeddech chi ddim yn gwybod, nes eich bod chi'n cael llythyr gan yr undeb, beth oedd yn digwydd yn y sefydliad lle roeddech chi yn gadeirydd. Wir?
You have decades of experience in this area, Rhodri. Decades of experience. You are an experienced chairperson, and you didn't know until you received a letter from the union what was happening within the organisation where you were chair.
Nac oeddwn. Doedd neb—
No. None of—
Wir?
Really?
—ymhlith y staff wedi dod ataf i tan hynny. Ac mae rheswm am hynny, Alun. Hynny yw, dwi'n credu ei fod e'n glir yn llythyr BECTU pam nad oedd hynny wedi digwydd. Y rheswm oedd e ddim wedi digwydd, bod neb wedi teimlo eu bod nhw'n gallu dod ataf i neu at aelod arall o'r bwrdd, oedd eu bod nhw ofn y prif weithredwr. Roedd ymddygiad y prif weithredwr, ac, eto, mae e'n cael ei ddisgrifio’n glir iawn yn adroddiad Capital Law, onid yw e? Roedd ymddygiad y prif weithredwr yn wrthdrawiadol, yn ddifrïol ac yn anystyriol. Roedd pobl ofn—
—the staff had approached me until that time. And there's a reason for that, Alun. I think it's clear in the BECTU letter why that hadn't happened. The reason it hadn't happened was that nobody had felt that they could approach me or another member of the board because of fear of the chief executive. The behaviour of the chief executive and the conduct of the chief executive, and, again, it's described very clearly in the Capital Law report, isn't it? The conduct and behaviour of the chief executive was full of conflict, abusive and didn't take account of people's needs. People were scared—
Diolch. Byddwn i jest eisiau atgoffa pobl fod yna bobl, os dŷn ni yn eu trafod nhw, sydd ddim yma i ateb, felly buaswn i eisiau inni fod yn ffocysu ar lywodraethiant ac nid ar unigolion.
Thank you. I'd just like to remind people that if we are discussing certain people, they're not here to respond, so we'd like to focus on governance and not individuals.
Ond y cwestiwn yw, Rhodri, chi oedd yn gyfrifol amdani hi a'i hymddygiad a'i gwaith hi. Chi oedd yn gyfrifol amdano fe.
But the question, Rhodri, is that you were responsible for her and her behaviour and her work. You were responsible for it.
Ond os nad yw rhywun yn ymwybodol—hynny yw, eto, yr hyn a ddywedwn i i hynny, Alun, yw unwaith y ffeindion ni mas ddifrifoldeb y cwynion yma, cynhaliwyd cyfarfod o'r bwrdd y diwrnod hwnnw. Cytunwyd y diwrnod hwnnw y byddem ni yn sefydlu ymchwiliad allanol fel bod modd i bobl siarad—hynny yw, oherwydd bod y llythyr yn dweud mai'r rheswm doedd yna ddim cwynion wedi ymddangos oedd ofn, cytunwyd bod yn rhaid creu'r mecanwaith yma, gofod diogel, lle gallai pobl ddweud eu pryderon heb orfod poeni am agweddau pobl eraill. Fe weithredon ni'n gyflym iawn, wedyn, i roi'r broses honno yn ei lle. Roedd e'n ddydd Gwener arnon ni'n derbyn y llythyr, roedd dydd Llun yn ŵyl y banc, erbyn dydd Mawrth, roedd Capital Law wedi ei benodi.
But if one isn't aware—that is, again, what I would say to that, Alun, is that once we learnt of the gravity of these complaints, a meeting of the board was held on that same day. We agreed that day that we would establish an external inquiry so that people could talk—that is, because the letter said that the reason that no complaints had been received was because of fear, we decided that we needed to create this mechanism, this safe space, where people could express their concerns without having to worry about other people's attitudes. We took action very swiftly after that to put that process in place. It was Friday when we received the letter, the Monday was a bank holiday, by the Tuesday, Capital Law had been appointed.
Diolch am hwnna. Mae Tom eisiau dod i mewn, ac wedyn gwnawn ni fynd nôl at Llyr.
Thank you for that. Tom wants to come in, then we'll go back to Llyr.
If I can go back to the response to the letter you received in December 2022, where you mentioned, obviously, it was addressed to the chief executive, but your understanding was, from management, that things were improving. Now, I appreciate the references you've made to the steps that have been taken since then to ensure that that doesn't happen again, but I am curious how S4C and its board put itself in a position where it was reliant on one source to assess progress. You employ a number of journalists who wouldn't report a story with one source; they would look for a second. So, why is it that S4C wasn't looking for other sources of information to assess progress?
Wel, mae yna brosesau yn eu lle. Mae gan y bwrdd, fel ŷn ni'n disgrifio, bwyllgor sydd yn gyfrifol am y materion yma. Mae gyda ni swyddogion sydd yn rhan o dîm rheoli sydd yn adrodd yn gyson. Felly, er enghraifft, ar 22 Rhagfyr, fe dderbyniais i e-bost gan y prif weithredwr yn dweud bod yna gyfarfod wedi bod gyda BECTU, ei fod e wedi bod yn un llwyddiannus. Dechreuodd y cyfarfod wrth i Carwyn Donovan ddweud ei fod e'n reassured oherwydd cyflymder ein hymateb, a chytunwyd i weithio'n agosach gyda BECTU. Hynny yw, dwi'n credu ei fod yn rhesymol inni fod yn credu yr hyn oedd yn cael ei ddweud. Nawr, mae'n bosibl bod yr asesiad hwnnw ddim cystal ag oedd e, ond o'r wybodaeth a oedd ar gael inni fel aelodau o'r bwrdd, dwi'n credu roedden ni'n wirioneddol feddwl bod yna gamau wedi cael eu rhoi mewn lle—roedd yr ymarfer gwrando yma wedi digwydd—a bod y problemau a oedd wedi cael eu hamlinellu ac wedi cael eu trafod gyda BECTU yn gwella.
Doedd yna ddim rheswm inni feddwl nad oedd hynny’n wir, a dwi ddim yn siŵr pa ffynonellau eraill y gallem ni fynd—. Yn sicr, byddai aelodau staff wedi cael cyfle i siarad gyda fi, cael cyfle i siarad gydag aelodau eraill y bwrdd, ond os nad oedden nhw'n teimlo’n gyfforddus, os nad oedden nhw'n teimlo’n ddiogel yn codi’r problemau hynny, yna doedd e ddim yn bosibl, ac mae hynny'n dristwch mawr, oherwydd dwi'n credu, y pwynt sydd wedi cael ei wneud gan Alun, fod y staff wedi dioddef yn sylweddol yn ystod y misoedd hynny, ac mae hynny’n ofid mawr i fi yn bersonol ac fel cadeirydd y bwrdd.
Well, there are processes in place. The board, as we've been describing, has a committee that's responsible for these matters. We have officials who are part of a management team that report regularly. So, for example, on 22 December, I received an e-mail from the chief executive saying that a meeting had been held with BECTU, that it had been a successful one. The meeting had begun with Carwyn Donovan saying he was reassured because of the speed of our response, and it was agreed to work closer with BECTU. So, I think it is reasonable for us to believe what was being said. Now, it's possible that that assessment was not as good as it was, but from the information available to us as members of the board, I think we did really think that steps had been put in place—this listening exercise had happened—and that the problems that had been outlined and discussed with BECTU were improving.
There was no reason for us to think that that wasn't true, and I'm not sure what other sources we could have had—. Certainly, staff members would have had an opportunity to speak with me, to speak with other members of the board, but if they didn't feel comfortable, if they didn't feel safe in raising those issues, then it wasn't possible, and that is the great sadness, because I think, the point that has been made by Alun, the staff had suffered significantly during those months, and that is of great concern to me personally and as chair of the board.
Could I just add as well, briefly, to that? I think it is very important to recognise that there are lessons to learn from this. This is a very, very difficult and very unfortunate situation that has not worked out as any of us would have wanted—we absolutely have to recognise that. So, one of the things we have to look into in this forward programme of work—with the help of our colleagues, with the help of other bodies like BECTU and so on—is to make sure that we do understand the policies and the culture that would be necessary to make sure that concerns of that nature would be shared, would be discussed more openly, so that they can be nipped in the bud much earlier, which would have prevented a lot of the very unfortunate things that have happened since. So, it is very much something that we have to look at going forward. Processes are important, but also it's that culture around processes that people will use, and making sure that we put in place routes for our colleagues to be able to raise information through staff forums, through pulse surveys or whatever it is, to make sure that we have learned that lesson.
But it sounds to me as though those processes were not in place between when that letter was received in December 2022 and April 2023, when you received the further letter. It sounds to me like you, as a board, failed to put those processes in place so that staff could come forward to you and, therefore, there's no wonder that they didn't.
I think, on the word 'processes', I would say that there were processes in place, the trouble was that people didn't feel that they could use them and that's why culture and process have to go hand in hand and we need to focus on that lesson going forward.
A gaf i jest ddweud un peth? O gymryd eich sylwadau chi i ystyriaeth, Cadeirydd, hynny yw, gaf i eich annog chi i edrych eto ar adroddiad Capital Law? Mae hwnna'n ei wneud yn glir pam nad oedd neb wedi siarad—roedden nhw ofn siarad. Roedd yna ddiwylliant o greu ofn. Mae e'n dweud yn yr adroddiad fod hwnna wedi cael ei fynegi fel polisi bwriadol o greu ofn oherwydd taw dyna oedd ei angen er mwyn sicrhau newid diwylliannol.
Could I just say one other thing? In taking your comments into account, Chair, may I encourage you to look again at the Capital Law report? That makes it clear why people hadn't spoken out—they feared speaking out. There was a culture of fear. It says in the report that that had been expressed as a deliberate policy of creating fear because that's what was needed to secure culture change.
Okay, but there is a responsibility on you to put in place the processes that are independent of any other roles, such as a chief executive, and that staff have confidence that they can use them. I think that's the point I'm trying to get to.
Ie, ond allwn ni ddim creu yr hyder hwnnw os ydyn nhw'n byw mewn awyrgylch o ofn ac o fygythiad, sef beth oedden nhw. Hynny yw, roedd polisi chwythu'r chwiban—dwi ddim yn credu, efallai, taw dyna fyddai'r polisi y dylid fod wedi cael ei ddefnyddio. Mae yna bolisi parch yn y gweithle—gallai rhywun fod wedi codi cwestiynau ynglŷn â hynny, ei fod e ddim yn cael ei weithredu'n effeithiol—polisi disgyblaeth, polisi cwynion. Peidiwch â meddwl fy mod i'n meddwl ei fod e i gyd yn berffaith—dwi ddim yn awgrymu hynny o gwbl—ond roedd y cyfleoedd hynny yn bod. Ond yr hyn mae adroddiad Capital Law—yr hyn mae'r staff eu hunain yn ei ddweud yw eu bod nhw'n byw mewn ofn, a dyna pam—
Yes, but we can't create that confidence if they live in a culture of fear and threat, which was the case. I mean, there was a whistle-blowing policy—I don't think that that's necessarily the policy that should have been used. There's a dignity at work policy—someone could have raised questions on that, that it wasn't being implemented effectively. There's a discipline policy, a complaints procedure. Don't think that I think everything's perfect—I'm not suggesting that for one moment—but those opportunities did exist. But what the Capital Law report says—what the staff themselves say—is that they lived in fear, and that's why—
Dwi'n mynd i ddod at Alun am gwestiwn atodol yn gyflym, ond dwi'n ymwybodol mai dim ond 20 munud sydd ar ôl gennym ni. A fyddai amser gyda chi, ar ôl 2 o'r gloch, i aros gyda ni am ryw chwarter awr ychwanegol, os oes angen?
I'm going go over to Alun for a supplementary question, but I'm aware that we only have 20 minutes left from the time allocated. Would you have time, after 2 o'clock, to stay with us for about an extra quarter of an hour, if required?
Byddai, wrth gwrs.
Yes, of course.
Diolch am hwnna. Ond, dwi dal yn ymwybodol o'r amser, felly, Alun, os allwch chi fod yn fyr.
Thank you for that. But I'm still aware of time, so, Alun, if you could be brief.
A dyna beth sy'n achosi pryder i fi. Rydych chi wedi disgrifio—. A does neb, dwi ddim yn credu, yn gwadu eich tystiolaeth chi y prynhawn yma, Rhodri, amboutu'r awyrgylch yn S4C. Chi oedd y cadeirydd a doeddech chi ddim yn gwybod dim amdano fe. Ac mae'n rhaid i ni ofyn y cwestiwn wedyn: ble oeddech chi? Ble oeddech chi pan oedd aelodau staff S4C yn teimlo'n rhy ofnus i siarad amboutu eu profiad nhw yn y gwaith a doedd y cadeirydd ddim yno?
And that's what causes concern for me. You've described—. And I don't think anyone denies your evidence this afternoon, Rhodri, about the atmosphere in S4C. You were the chair and you didn't know anything about it. And we have to ask the question then: where were you? Where were you when staff members at S4C felt too frightened to speak about their experiences in work and the chair wasn't there?
Wel, dyw e ddim yn fater fy mod i ddim yno—
Well, it's not a matter of my not being there—
Wel, ble oeddech chi? Pam nad oeddech chi'n sylweddoli? Os oedd y sefyllfa mor wael â beth rydych chi wedi ei ddisgrifio i ni y prynhawn yma, pam doeddech chi ddim yn sylweddoli beth oedd yn digwydd yna? Dyna beth dwi ddim yn deall.
Well, where were you? Why didn't you realise? If the situation was as bad as you've described to us this afternoon, why didn't you realise what was happening? That's what I don't understand.
Wel, achos byddai'n rhaid i rywun ddweud. Nawr, dwi wedi—
Well, because somebody would have to tell us. Now, I've—
Ond mae'n rhaid eich bod chi'n gwybod sut mae—. Come on.
Surely you would have known how—. Come on.
Dwi wedi treulio digon o amser yn ein lleoliadau ni yn Sgwâr Canolog, yn yr Egin, llai, mae'n rhaid dweud, yn swyddfa Caernarfon, ac yn ystod y cyfnod yna roedd yna gyfleoedd. Hynny yw, dwi'n adnabod llawer iawn o'r aelodau staff yn ddigon da ac wedi siarad â nhw yn anffurfiol y tu allan i gyfarfodydd, ond mynegodd neb—. Dim ond ar ôl i lythyr BECTU gyrraedd gwnaeth y llifddorau agor. Ar ôl hynny, fe dderbyniais i negeseuon testun, fe dderbyniais i alwadau ffôn, fe ges i gyfarfodydd wyneb yn wyneb gydag aelodau o staff. Ond dim ond—. Hynny yw, roedd y cyfle'n bodoli, roeddwn i yno cyn hynny, ond dim ond ar ôl i'r llythyr yna gyrraedd fe ges i'r adroddiadau hynny gan aelodau staff.
I've spent long enough in our offices in the Egin and in Central Square, less, I have to say, in the Caernarfon office, and during that time there were opportunities. I know many of the staff well enough and have spoken to them informally, outside of meetings, but nobody expressed these concerns. It was only after the BECTU letter arrived that the floodgates opened. After that point, I received text messages, I received phone calls, I had face-to-face meetings with members of staff. But it was only then—. The opportunities existed, I was there before then, but it was only after that letter was received that I received those reports from members of staff.
Ac fe gest ti'r adroddiadau gan aelodau staff yn uniongyrchol.
And you had reports from staff directly.
Do.
Yes.
Wyneb yn wyneb.
Face to face.
Do.
Yes.
Ocê.
Okay.
Ocê. Gwnawn ni symud ymlaen at Llyr.
Okay. We'll move on to Llyr.
Diolch. Sut wnaethoch chi fel cadeirydd, a sut wnaeth y bwrdd, efallai, ystyried effaith cyhoeddi'r adroddiad ar yr unigolion oedd yn cael eu henwi yn adroddiad Capital Law?
Thank you. How did you, as chair, and how did the board, perhaps, consider the impact of publishing the report on the individuals named in Capital Law's report?
Wel, fel dywedais i ar y dechrau, y bobl sydd wedi cael eu heffeithio fwyaf gan yr holl broses yma yw staff S4C.
Well, as I said at the outset, the people who have been impacted most by this process are S4C staff.
Dwi ddim yn gwadu hynny, ond nid dyna gwnes i ofyn.
I don't deny that, but that wasn't my question.
Na, na, ond nhw oedd yn ganolog i'r holl broses. Hynny yw, y cwestiwn yma o greu gofod diogel, o sicrhau bod—
No, no, but it was they who were central to the whole process. This question of creating a safe space, of ensuring that—
Ie, dwi'n deall hynny i gyd.
Yes, I understand all of that.
—y sgyrsiau i gyd o gwmpas y staff. Fe ddywedon ni wrth y staff na fyddai pobl eraill yn cael gafael ar yr adroddiad cyn nhw. Dwi ddim yn credu ei bod hi'n rhesymol nac yn deg bod unrhyw un, beth bynnag yw'r cyfeiriad atyn nhw yn yr adroddiad, yn cael mynediad ato fe cyn bod y staff eu hunain yn ei weld e. Ac o ystyried yr hyn oedd yn digwydd, yr ymgyrch oedd yn digwydd yn y wasg yn fy erbyn i, yn erbyn y bwrdd, yn erbyn S4C, yn erbyn DCMS, yn erbyn yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol, a fyddai'n gyfrifol i ni i roi'r adroddiad ymlaen llaw i bobl a fyddai â'r cyfle i wneud drwg ac i geisio ymhellach—roedd digon o ymdrech wedi cael ei wneud yn barod, ond i geisio ymhellach i danseilio cynnwys yr adroddiad? Hynny yw, mae hwnna wedi digwydd ers hynny. Mae'n cael ei wadu fod dim o hwn wedi digwydd. Er gwaethaf pwysau'r dystiolaeth rydyn ni wedi ei derbyn, mae'n cael ei awgrymu nad oes yna ddim gwirionedd yn hwn. Wel, mae'r adroddiad yn dangos yn glir i ni fod y pryderon a fynegwyd gan BECTU wedi cael eu cynnal. Hynny yw, roedd disgrifiad BECTU o'r diwylliant o ofn yn un cywir iawn. Felly, does gen i ddim rheswm i feddwl ein bod ni wedi bod yn annheg i neb. I ddweud y gwir, byddai fe wedi bod yn gwbl annheg i'r staff pe bai nhw'n clywed bod pobol oedd bellach ddim yn gweithio i S4C wedi cael gweld yr adroddiad cyn nhw.
—all conversations centred on the staff. Now, we told the staff that others would not see the report before they did. I don't think it would have been reasonable or fair for anyone, whatever reference is made to them in the report, to have access to that report before the staff themselves saw it. And, given what was happening and the campaign that was going on in the press against me, against the board, against S4C, against DCMS, against the Secretary of State, would it have been responsible for us to provide that report beforehand to people who would have an opportunity to misuse it and to further—plenty of efforts had been made already, but to further attempt to undermine the content of the report? That has happened since then. It's being denied that any of this happened. Despite the weight of evidence that we have received, it's suggested that there is no truth in it at all. Well, the report demonstrates clearly to us that the concerns expressed by BECTU have been borne out. That is, BECTU's description of the culture of fear was very accurate indeed. And therefore I have no reason to believe that we have treated anybody unfairly. To be honest, it would have been entirely unfair for the staff if they'd heard that people who were no longer employed by S4C had seen the report before they had.
Ond mae yna broses o hysbysu pobl ei fod e ar gael ei gyhoeddi, ddim o'r rheidrwydd rhannu copi. Ydych chi'n meddwl ar lefel ddynol neu ar lefel foesol, neu o safbwynt cwrteisi, y dylai pobl gael rhyw fath o raghysbysiad bod rhywbeth yn cael ei gyhoeddi?
But there is a process of informing people that it's about to be published, not necessarily sharing a copy. Do you think on a human level or on a moral level, or from a courtesy perspective, that people should have some sort of notice that it was about to be published?
Ein ffocws ni oedd ar sicrhau bod y staff yn derbyn y wybodaeth cyn neb arall—
Our focus was on ensuring that the staff received the information before anybody else—
Wel, ie, derbyn y wybodaeth, wrth gwrs.
Well, yes, of course, receiving the information.
—a dyna mae'n ffocws ni wedi bod trwy'r—. Ac oherwydd natur yr adroddiad, doedd e ddim yn hysbys. Doedden ni ddim yn dweud ymlaen llaw, 'Mae hwn yn mynd i gael ei gyhoeddi ymhen wythnos neu fel arall'. Roedd e'n dynn iawn rhwng yr amser roedden ni'n barod i gyhoeddi a'r broses yna o rannu'r adroddiad gyda'r staff ac esbonio iddyn nhw, a rhoi cyfle iddyn nhw holi cwestiynau i ni ynglŷn â beth fyddai'n digwydd nesaf. A does gen i ddim problemau ynglŷn â pheidio bod wedi'i rannu e gyda neb arall.
—and that's what our focus has been throughout—. And because of the nature of the report, it wasn't known. We didn't say beforehand, 'This will be published in seven days' time or whatever'. It was very tight in terms of timescale between the time that we were ready to publish and that process of sharing the report with staff and explaining to them, and giving them an opportunity to ask us questions on the next steps. And I have no concerns about not having shared it with anybody else.
Na, ond o ran hysbysu pobl fod adroddiad yn cael ei gyhoeddi, fyddech chi'n disgwyl bod rhywun sy'n cael ei enwi o leiaf yn cael cyfle 24 awr, neu ychydig oriau hyd yn oed, jest i baratoi'u hunain fod rhywbeth yn cael ei gyhoeddi sydd yn sôn amdanyn nhw. Hynny yw, dwi jest yn derbyn eich bod chi'n rhyw ddi-hid ac yn galon-galed iawn yn hynny o beth. Dwi ddim yn sôn am rannu copi o'r adroddiad na dim byd, ond ar lefel cyfrifoldeb moesol i unigolion, dŷch chi ddim yn teimlo unrhyw fath o gyfrifoldeb yn hynny o beth?
No, but in terms of informing people that a report was about to be published, you would expect that somebody who's named would at least have an opportunity, 24 hours or a few hours, just to prepare themselves that something was being published that talks about them. I'm just getting that you're being somewhat rash and very hard-hearted in that regard. I'm not talking about sharing a copy of the report, but in terms of a moral responsibility to individuals, don't you feel any sort of responsibility in that regard?
Dwi'n teimlo'r cyfrifoldeb moesol tuag at y staff.
I feel a moral responsibility towards the staff.
Felly, unwaith mae rhywun yn gadael S4C, dyna fe wedyn, ie? Os ydyn nhw'n gyn-staff, chi ddim yn rhan o—?
So, once somebody leaves S4C, that's it, is it? If they're former staff, you're not part of—?
Na, ni'n sôn fan hyn am bobl, am ddau unigolyn oedd wedi cael eu diswyddo, ac a oedd, fel dwi'n ei ddweud, yn cynnal ymgyrch cyhoeddus iawn, gan ddefnyddio—
No, we're talking here about people, about two individuals who had been dismissed, and, as I've said, were waging a very public campaign, using—
Wel, os ŷch chi eisiau ei fframio fe mewn modd o un garfan yn erbyn y llall, ond ŷch chi'n ddigon siarp i wybod byddai efallai peidio hysbysu rhywun o flaen llaw yn rhoi arf iddyn nhw ei dwlu yn ôl atoch chi, os dyna'r gêm ŷch chi'n ei chwarae.
Well, if you want to frame it as one group against another, but you're sharp enough to know that perhaps not informing somebody beforehand would give them something to throw back at you, if that's the game you're playing.
Wel, fe allaf i weld hynny, ond yn y trafodaethau rhyngom ni a'n tîm cyfreithiol, penderfynwyd peidio.
Well, I can understand that point, but in the discussions between ourselves and our legal team, the decision was taken not to do that.
Diolch.
Thank you.
Iawn. Fe wnawn ni fynd at Alun.
Okay. We'll go on to Alun Davies now.
Can I talk to you, Chris? You're one of the most experienced and respected non-executives I've come across in my time, and I'm interested in the answers you gave to earlier questions about the non-execs not understanding and not appreciating the place and the role and what was happening, and you said in answer to an earlier question that there were lessons to be learned. I was just hoping that you could outline what some of those lessons were and why you think the organisation has found itself in this position.
Well, I think—. A couple of things to say: I think this was an extremely difficult situation, genuinely. It's probably one of the most difficult and unpleasant situations I've had to deal with through a very long career in business. And I, you know, am very aware of the impact that has had on individuals, has had on the community of people and the community of stakeholders and so on, so this was a tough situation to deal with. I think in terms of the lessons to learn from this, I think we really do need to look at how processes and procedures, which work well in other sectors, in other places and so on, why they perhaps did not work here so well. Are there particular cultural reasons for that? Are there particular—? I think in the recent BECTU letter to the committee, that makes reference to the fact that it is a sector with extreme power imbalances, and that is, I think, something that has been looked at by this committee and so on elsewhere. So, that is why I think—
But that's not new, is it, and it's not unique to S4C?
It isn't, but this has brought into sharp relief the fact that that could create or may have contributed to this extremely difficult and distressing situation for so many people, both individuals and collectively. So, that's why I personally feel, obviously, a sense of responsibility—a huge sense of responsibility—for the way that the company, for what has happened in the company over the last year, which is not what any of us would have wanted, and I will give whatever input and support I can to try to look forward, understanding why, given the particular nature of the company, and the sector and so on, that it works in, and how we can best ensure that doesn't happen again. And I think the way to do that is by involving as many different perspectives as possible in that process, as well as looking at good practice from outside, and getting expert input into that. But to come back to your question, for me, it is very difficult to say, because a lot was in place that you would have hoped would have prevented this from happening, but it didn't prevent it from happening, and that's the lesson we've got to learn.
Can I pursue that, please? I want to ask some questions that are quite difficult. You had a responsibility for managing the relationship between the chair and the chief executive, and that was, I thought, well aired yesterday in the select committee meeting. And one of the issues we found in the Capital Law report, of course, was an issue between the chair and I think it was the chief content officer, wasn't it, where a complaint was upheld against the chair. Did non-executive directors, at any time, discuss confidence in the chair, the role—the continuing role—of the chair, in terms of the happenings that were going on at this time?
Yes. The particular issue you're referring to there was that a particular grievance was raised—
Yes.
—under the S4C grievance policy concerning the chair. That was on 16 June, and it referred to a specific event at a meeting that had happened the previous day. So, that grievance wasn't raised with the non-executive directors; it was raised under the policy with the head of HR, who shared that with the company secretary, and they put in place, with appropriate advice from outside, a procedure to hear that grievance on its own merits, and as a specific occurrence. And that was in line with the principles of the internal grievance policy. So, that required two independent people to hear the grievance, one of whom was actually a non-exec director, but one who hadn't been involved in the events the previous day, and therefore was completely separate from that, and one was an experienced external HR professional, who was brought in to provide a further independent view of that.
They heard the grievance from both parties. It was a confidential process. They then reached their conclusion and shared that conclusion with the parties, and there is a confidential report that summarises their findings. Now, because that's a confidential process, the non-executives were not involved in that, but my understanding is that their finding was that, yes, the behaviour of the chair the previous day had been inappropriate on that occasion, it shouldn't have happened, and that a sincere apology should be made, but that that was the appropriate outcome for that specific incident. And that is, as I understand it, what happened.
So, at that point, that dealt with that grievance under what appeared to be a sensible and appropriate policy. So, there wasn't really a question at that stage of, 'Well, does that mean we don't have confidence in the chair?'—
Yes, that's fair enough.
—but it is fair to say that when the Capital Law report was received, which was in, I think, early November, no, early October—apologies—no, early November; I'm confused. At that stage, given various things that were raised in the Capital Law report concerning the chair, it was appropriate for the non-executive directors to meet independently, and to review what had been raised in the Capital Law report, and also any other issues concerning the chair, and take a view as to whether we did have confidence in the chair to continue in that role, to deal with what should be the steps following from the Capital Law report, and what we should do as a board as a consequence.
So, that was a meeting of the non-executive directors not involving the chair; it was advised by suitable independent external legal advice, and we reviewed the issues that had been raised in the Capital Law report concerning the chair, and also including the particular grievance that you've referred to. We also looked at other issues during the process where—. I think it is worth saying that, in a board of directors, what you want is a diversity of view and you want challenge and you want robust debate.
Of course you do.
So, during this whole process, there have been issues in which non-executive directors have challenged decisions that might have been, or suggestions made by the chair; we have debated those, and that is absolutely what you want a board to do. So, we had a full discussion of those issues and decided that, actually, there wasn't anything in the issues raised in the Capital Law report concerning the chair that made it inappropriate for the chair to carry on overseeing, leading, the next stage of the response to the Capital Law report. So, that was a decision that we took collectively as non-executive directors, but did put in place particular mechanisms that would have enabled any point that raised concern—for the chair to have been recused at that point, and for that to have been debated. So, I think we did handle what, again, was a very difficult situation in a sensible way.
I'm grateful to you for your candour there; that's very useful for the committee. Did you—? One of the shocking things that I heard yesterday at the select committee was Rhodri's comment, or answer to a question, that he hadn't met with the Secretary of State in four years. I find it extraordinary that a Secretary of State has not met a chair of a national broadcaster in four years.
Wel, gaf i ddweud un gair pellach ynglŷn â hwnna? Pan gododd—. Rŷn ni wedi trafod y materion hyn gyda swyddogion DCMS ers derbyn llythyr cyntaf BECTU—gwnes i eu gwneud nhw'n ymwybodol o hynny, ac rŷn ni'n siarad yn gyson.
If I could just say one other thing on that issue. When—. We have discussed these issues with DCMS officials since the receipt of the first BECTU letter, and made them aware of that, and we do speak regularly.
Ie, yn amlwg.
Yes, clearly.
Ar fwy nag un achlysur yn ystod y cyfnod yma, dwi wedi gofyn i'r swyddog rŷn ni'n delio gyda fe a fyddai fe'n fuddiol i drefnu cyfarfod wyneb yn wyneb, neu yn rhithiol os ydy e'n dod i hynny, gyda'r Ysgrifennydd Gwladol, a'r ateb a gefais oedd nad oedd angen gwneud hynny, felly.
On more than one occasion during this period, I have asked the official that we deal with whether it would be beneficial to arrange a face-to-face meeting, or a virtual meeting if it came to that, with the Secretary of State, and the response I was given was that that was not necessary.
Dwi'n ffeindio hynny'n hollol shocking—shocking. I rywun sydd actually yn credu dylai darlledu ddim cael ei ddatganoli, dyw hynny ddim yn rhywbeth buaswn i wedi eisiau ei glywed. Mae'n adlewyrchu problemau mawr gan y DCMS, dwi'n meddwl. Ond roeddwn i'n mynd i ofyn cwestiwn arall i Chris, os caf i. Yn ystod y trafodaethau dŷch chi wedi bod yn eu cael fel bwrdd ac fel non-execs yn ystod y cyfnod yma, a wnaethoch chi ofyn am gymorth neu gefnogaeth gan y DCMS, gan y BBC, neu gan Lywodraeth Cymru, o unrhyw un o'r cyrff llywodraethol, fel petai?
I find that completely shocking—shocking. For someone who actually thinks that broadcasting shouldn't be devolved, that isn't something I would have wanted to hear. It reflects great problems with the DCMS, I think. But I was going to ask another question to Chris, if I may. During the discussions that you've been having as a board and as non-execs during this period, did you ask for support from the DCMS, the BBC, or Welsh Government, from any one of those governmental organisations?
Did we—
Did you seek support or advice as non-execs?
Efallai ei fod e'n haws i fi ateb hwnna, ydy e, Chris?
Perhaps it would be easier for me to answer that, Chris.
Well, I will think whilst you answer.
Hynny yw, fe drafodon ni gyda'r DCMS a gyda Llywodraeth Cymru i sicrhau eu bod nhw'n ymwybodol o'r materion proses, a liciwn i bwysleisio hynny: doedd yna ddim cwestiwn o rannu gyda nhw unrhyw ganfyddiadau neu beth fyddai'n dod allan o'r adroddiad, a fyddai hynny ddim wedi bod yn bosibl achos doeddem ni ddim yn gwybod tan fod y tîm o fewn Capital Law yn cyflwyno eu hadroddiad nhw i ni. Ac, ar bob achlysur, yr ymateb—ac yn fwy pendant gan DCMS na gan neb arall—yr ateb oedd mai mater gweithredol i fwrdd S4C oedd hwn, ac nad eu lle nhw oedd cynghori.
Well, we did have discussions with the DCMS and Welsh Government to ensure that they were aware of the procedural issues, and I'd like to emphasise that: there was no question of sharing any findings or the results of the report, and that wouldn't have been possible because we didn't know until the team within Capital Law presented their report to us. And, on all occasions, the response—and more specifically from DCMS than anywhere else—was that this was an operational issue for the S4C board, and it wasn't their place to advise.
Ie, ie. Ond cwestiwn jest tipyn yn wahanol gyda phwyslais gwahanol oedd gen i i Chris: a oeddech chi wedi gofyn am gefnogaeth tra roeddech chi'n ystyried—achos dwi'n cymryd, fel non-execs, roeddech chi'n trafod ymhlith eich gilydd beth oedd yn digwydd, ac roedd yna adroddiadau yn y cyfryngau; mi fuasai fe'n od petaech chi ddim yn siarad gyda'ch gilydd—wedi gofyn am gefnogaeth allanol i'ch helpu chi ddelio gyda'r peth, y materion yma?
Yes, yes. But I had a slightly different question, with a different emphasis, to Chris: had you asked for support while you were considering—because I take it, as non-execs, you were discussing amongst yourselves what was happening, and there were reports in the media; it would have been odd if you weren't talking to each other—had you asked for external support to help you deal with these issues?
I think the most helpful thing I can say is that, yes, as a group of non-executive directors including the chair, company secretary, in terms of processes to follow et cetera, yes, as Rhodri's explained, for example, DCMS would have been in the loop on that. For us as a group of non-executive directors excluding the chair, then we looked to expert advice from our legal advisers on those points, and that was provided. So, for example, in response to the issues raised in the Capital Law report, we had specific legal advice on those issues of conflict, and that was very helpful to us. But I don't remember any other circumstance in which the non-execs on their own—. I certainly don't remember where they needed to look to other wider bodies for input.
Ocê. Diolch am hynny. Rhodri, os caf fi jest bennu gyda hwn: mi fuasech chi wedi gweld adroddiadau gan y pwyllgor dethol ar ôl eich ymddangosiad ddoe. Maen nhw wedi dweud bod angen arweinyddiaeth newydd ar S4C. Pan ofynnodd, dwi'n credu, Steve Crabb, ichi os oeddech chi'n mynd i wneud cais am eich ailbenodi ym mis Ebrill, roeddech chi wedi rhoi ateb braidd yn od, i fy nghlustiau i, eich bod chi'n fodlon derbyn eich ailbenodi. Doeddech chi ddim yn dweud eich bod chi'n mynd i wneud cais am hynny; roeddech chi'n dweud eich bod chi'n derbyn eich ailbenodi. Roeddwn i'n clywed hynny braidd yn od, y ffordd o eirio pethau. Ond ydych chi wedi ystyried, dros nos, eich sefyllfa a ble dŷch chi'n sefyll heddiw ar ôl clywed barn y pwyllgor dethol?
Okay. Thank you for that. Rhodri, if I could just end on this: you will have seen reports from the select committee after your appearance yesterday. They have said there's a need for new leadership at S4C. When, I think, Steve Crabb, asked you whether you were going to seek reappointment in April, you gave quite an odd answer, in my opinion, that you would be happy to accept reappointment. You didn't say that you were going to apply for that; you said that you would be happy to accept a reappointment. I thought that was an odd way of wording things. Have you considered, overnight, your position and where you stand today after hearing the views of the select committee?
Ydw, wrth gwrs dwi wedi, ac wedi trafod gydag eraill yr hyn ddigwyddodd ddoe. Yr hyn oedd yn fy synnu i ynglŷn â'n trafodaeth ni ddoe doedd ddim yr elfen dyw'r pwyllgor ddim yn awyddus i fi gael fy ailbenodi, ond y pwyslais i gyd ynglŷn â materion proses ac ynglŷn â diwedd y broses yma. Doedd yna ddim ffocws o gwbl ddoe ar yr hyn mae aelodau staff S4C wedi'i ddioddef. Doedd yna ddim unrhyw bryder yn cael ei fynegi ynglŷn â'r hyn maen nhw wedi gorfod ei ddioddef dros gyfnod hir o fisoedd. Fy mhryder i yw bod peth o—. Mae llawer o bobl wedi gwneud sylwadau ynglŷn â beth ddylai ddigwydd. Dwi ddim yn amau eu cymhelliad nhw o gwbl, ond dyw unrhyw beth sydd yn creu ansefydlogrwydd pellach i'n staff ni ddim yn help i'r staff a dyw e ddim yn help i'r sefydliad yn ei gyfanrwydd. A dyna pam, pe bai'r Ysgrifennydd Gwladol yn gofyn—. A dyna'r broses—hynny yw, does dim cwestiwn o wneud cais. Does dim proses ymgeisio; mater i'r Ysgrifennydd Gwladol yw ailbenodi cadeirydd neu aelodau cyrff, ac mae e'n glir iawn hefyd yn y rheolau. Ac fel roeddet ti'n ddigon caredig i gyfeirio ato'n gynt, dwi wedi bod o gwmpas digon hir i wybod na ddylid cymryd yn ganiataol byth, y bydd yna ailbenodiad yn digwydd, a dyna pam roeddwn i wedi defnyddio'r ffurf o eiriau fe wnes i.
Yes, of course, and I have discussed with others what happened yesterday. What surprised me in our discussion yesterday wasn't this element that the committee wasn't eager to see me reappointed, but the emphasis being solely on process and the end of this process. There was no focus whatsoever yesterday on what staff members in S4C have suffered. There was no concern expressed about what they have had to go through over a long period of months. My concern is that—. Many people have commented on what should happen. I don't doubt their motivation at all, but anything that creates further instability for our staff is not going to help the staff and it's not going to help the organisation as a whole either. That's why, if the Secretary of State were to ask me—. And that is the process—there's no question of making an application. There is no application process, as such; it's a matter for the Secretary of State to reappoint a chair or members of bodies, and it is very clear too in the rules and regulations. And as you kindly referred to earlier, I've been around long enough to know that one should never take it for granted that there will be a reappointment, and that's why I had used the wording that I did.
Dwi'n deall hynny. Rhodri, gest ti dy arestio yn ymgyrchu dros S4C, do?
I understand that. Rhodri, you were arrested in campaigning for S4C, weren't you?
Sawl gwaith.
A number of times.
Sawl gwaith; dwi'n cofio. Ac mae dy ymrwymiad di i S4C wedi bod trwy dy fywyd di. Dwi'n deall hynny a dwi ddim yn cwestiynu hynny o gwbl. Mae'r issues dŷn ni wedi'u gweld dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf wedi bod yn anodd iawn, a dwi'n deall hynny. Ond yr hyn sydd gen i yw, pan ŷch chi'n sôn am ddioddefaint aelodau staff S4C, ti oedd yn rhan o'r arweinyddiaeth wnaeth achosi hynny, ac mae'n rhaid, wedi hynny—. Roeddech chi'n dweud yn gynt 'the buck stops'. Nad ydych chi'n teimlo fel bod gyda chi gyfrifoldeb i ystyried pethau'n bellach?
A number of times. Your commitment to S4C has been lifelong. I understand that and I don't question that. But the issues we've seen over the last few years have been very difficult, and I understand that. But what I'm saying is, when you're talking about the suffering of staff members at S4C, you were part of the leadership that caused that. And you said earlier that 'the buck stops'. Don't you feel that you have a responsibility to consider things further?
Mae yna wastad cyfrifoldeb ar gadeirydd neu aelod anweithredol o unrhyw gorff, wrth gwrs bod, ac mae hwnna yn barhaol o'r diwrnod cyntaf rŷch chi'n cael eich apwyntio hyd at ddiwedd eich cyfnod chi. Fel dywedais i ar y cychwyn, mae mhwyslais i a fy niddordeb i trwy'r holl broses yma a heddiw o hyd ar les y staff. Does yna ddim gair wedi dod ataf i fod unrhyw aelod o staff presennol S4C yn meddwl y byddai fe o les i S4C pe bawn i yn ymddiswyddo heddiw. Does dim un o'r cwmnïau cynhyrchu dwi wedi ymwneud â nhw neu wedi trafod gyda nhw yn ystod y cyfnod yma yn awgrymu y byddai fe'n llesol. I ddweud y gwir, mae'r neges yn glir iawn mai'r hyn maen nhw'n dymuno ei weld yn digwydd yw cyfnod o sefydlogi, a gadael i'r broses o wella sydd ar waith yn barod, fel gwnes i'n glir—. O fewn S4C, mae'r awyrgylch gwaith wedi gwella'n sylweddol ers ymadawiad dau o'r prif swyddogion, a'r hyn sydd ei angen yw sefydlogrwydd i adael i'r broses hynny barhau i weithio.
There is always a responsibility on a chair or a non-executive member of any body, of course that's the case, and that is ongoing from the day of appointment up until the end of your period of service. As I said at the outset, my emphasis and my interest through this whole process was and remains today on the well-being of the staff. Not a word has been expressed to me that any member of the current S4C staff believes that it would be beneficial for S4C if I were to resign today. Not one of the production companies that I've been involved with or have had discussions with during this period have suggested that it would be beneficial. To be honest, the message is quite clear that what they want to see happening is a period of stability, allowing the process of improvement, which is already in play, as I made clear earlier—. Within S4C, the working environment has improved significantly since the departure of two senior officials, and what we need now is stability to allow that process to continue to work.
Ocê, diolch am hynna. Fe wnawn ni symud, yn olaf, at Tom. Ocê, fe wnawn ni fynd at Hefin a wedyn mynd at Tom. Hefin.
Okay, thank you for that. We'll move finally to Tom. Okay, we'll go to Hefin and then Tom. Hefin.
Yes, just to observe that the conclusion the WRU took in these circumstances with regard to the chief executive and chair was exactly the opposite. Can you see that that might be something that you would wish to consider?
Yr hyn ddywedwn i yw bod anawsterau o'r math yma mewn cynifer o sefydliadau a chyrff yng Nghymru wedi bod yn llawer rhy gyffredin yn ystod y cyfnod diweddar yma. Mae undeb rygbi ond yn un o'r cyrff sydd wedi delio gyda phroblemau gwahanol. Yr hyn ddywedwn i yw bod yr amgylchiadau ym mhob achos yn wahanol, a bod yr ymatebion bob amser yn wahanol. Dydw i ddim yn gwybod digon am sefyllfa yr undeb rygbi i wybod digon amdano fe i allu mynegi barn. Mae'r hyn dwi wedi ei ddweud yn barod yn gosod allan fy marn i ynglŷn â S4C ac ynglŷn â'r hyn ddylai ddigwydd yn S4C, ac fy nghasgliad i ar hwnna yw fyddai i fi ymddiswyddo heddiw, neu ar unrhyw adeg arall cyn diwedd fy nhymor, ddim yn gwneud unrhyw les i S4C.
Gallaf ddychmygu y byddai fe'n gwneud i bobl eraill deimlo'n hapus ac yn hunanfodlon, ond, os siaradwch chi gyda'n staff ni neu gyda'n cyflenwyr, ein partneriaid ni, mae'r ymateb yn wahanol, ac mae rhai ohonyn nhw wedi mynegi hynny. Roeddwn i'n gweld—. Mae yna lythyr gan un o'r cwmnïau cynhyrchu wedi dod at y pwyllgor yn mynegi'r farn yna. Roedd cadeirydd cwmni annibynnol mwyaf llwyddiannus Cymru ar y radio bore yma yn mynegi'r un farn. Felly, o dan yr amgylchiadau hynny, dwi'n gwbl dawel fy meddwl fy mod i yn gwneud y peth iawn.
What I would say is that difficulties of this kind in so many organisations and bodies in Wales have been too common during this recent period. The rugby union is only one body that has dealt with different problems. What I would say is that the circumstances in every case are different, and that the responses have always been different. I don't know enough about the situation in the rugby union to know enough about it to be able to provide a view. What I've said already sets out my views with regards to S4C and what should happen in S4C, and my conclusion in that regard would be that for me to resign today, or at any other time before the end of my term, would not be of any benefit to S4C.
I can imagine that it would make other people feel happy and self-satisfied, but, if you speak to our staff or with our providers, our partners, the response is different, and some of them have expressed that. I see that—. There's a letter from a production company that has been sent to the committee expressing that view. The chair of one of the most successful independent television companies in Wales in a radio interview this morning expressed the same view. Under those circumstances, I am completely at peace that I am doing the right thing.
Ocê. Fe wnawn ni symud at Tom.
Okay. We'll move on to Tom.
Can I ask you what assessment you've made of staff absence and sickness levels during the tenure of the last chief executive?
Fel roedd Chris yn awgrymu yn gynt, doedd y wybodaeth oedd yn dod atom ni ddim yn ddigon cyson a manwl i'n galluogi ni i weld fod yna anhawster fan hyn. Rŷm ni wedi newid y drefn honno yn ystod cyfnod gwaith Capital Law, fel bod y dashfwrdd sydd nawr yn dod yn gyson—pedair gwaith y flwyddyn—at y pwyllgor pobl a thaliadau yn dangos hynny. A beth mae e'n dangos yw, yn ystod y flwyddyn 2023, fe wnaeth bron i ddwywaith gymaint o bobl adael S4C ag oedd wedi gwneud yn y ddwy flynedd cyn hynny. Felly, mae yna gamau wedi'u cymryd yn barod. Fe fyddwn i'n derbyn yn llwyr fod angen gwella'r prosesau hynny. Yn yr yn ffordd ag y mae dashfwrdd gyda ni sydd yn dangos faint o bobl sydd yn defnyddio Clic, a faint sydd yn defnyddio iPlayer, dylem ni hefyd fod yn derbyn hwnnw.
As Chris suggested earlier, the information provided to us wasn't sufficiently consistent and detailed to allow us to identify any difficulties here. We have changed that system during the period in which Capital Law undertook their work, so that the dashboard that is now provided regularly—four times a year—to the people and remuneration committee does identify those patterns. And what it shows is that, during the year 2023, almost twice as many people left S4C than had done in the two years previous to that. So, steps have been taken already. I would accept fully that we need to improve those processes. Just as we have a dashboard that demonstrates how many people are using Clic, and how many people are using iPlayer, we should also be receiving that information.
During this period of time, was that information available to you routinely?
Wel, ddim routinely. Fe ddaeth e i'r golwg. Oherwydd bod y broses yma wedi cymryd cyfnod hir o amser rhwng diwedd mis Ebrill a mis Tachwedd, mi oedd yna drafodaeth fewnol ynglŷn â'r materion yma yn digwydd, ac fe benderfynwyd bod angen gwella arno fe, a hefyd, wrth gwrs, fe gynhaliwyd arolwg staff yn ystod y cyfnod hwnnw, ac roedd yr arolwg staff yn dweud wrthym ni'r hyn a oedd yn mynd i ymddangos maes o law yn adroddiad Capital Law—sef bod yna lefel uchel iawn o anfodlonrwydd gyda'r arweinyddiaeth.
Well, not routinely, no. It did emerge and because this process had taken a long period of time between the end of April and November, there was internal discussion on these issues that was ongoing, and a decision was taken that we needed to improve processes, and, of course, there was a staff survey conducted during that period, and that staff survey told us what would emerge in due time in the Capital Law report—that there was a high level of dissatisfaction with the leadership.
So, just to help my understanding, there was no information that you were privy to that caused you any concern about staff sickness or staff absence prior to receipt of the letter in April 2023.
Nac oedd. Dim cyn derbyn llythyr BECTU. Ar ôl llythyr BECTU—
No, not until we received BECTU's letter. Following BECTU's letter—
Okay. But before the letter, I understand that the staff sickness and absence levels were higher than normal.
Mae'n amrywio dros gyfnod o amser. O ran absenoldeb o'r gwaith, fe oedd yna gynnydd yn ystod y cyfnod yma. Hynny yw, gallaf i ddim, off top fy mhen, ddweud a oedd hwnna wedi dechrau yn 2023 cyn Ebrill, neu oedd e o Ebrill ymlaen. A dyna pam oedd rhaid gwneud yn siŵr bod gwell data gyda ni, a'i fod e'n dod aton ni yn fwy cyson. Mae'n rhywbeth sydd wedi bod yn destun trafodaeth yn y bwrdd, i sicrhau bod y matrix yna o fesuriadau o'r math yna ar gael, a'u bod nhw'n ar gael yn gyson. Dwi'n credu taw dyna yw'r pwynt—mae'n rhaid eu cael nhw yn ddigon cyson i weld ydy'r newidiadau yn arwyddocaol. Ond, eto, doedd yna ddim byd cyn i lythyr BECTU gyrraedd a oedd yn gwneud inni feddwl bod yna rywbeth o'i le.
It varies over a period of time. In terms of absences from work, there was an increase during this period. I can't, off the top of my head, say whether that had started in 2023, before April, or whether it was from April onwards. And that's why we had to make sure we had better data, and that we received it more regularly. It's something that's been a topic of discussion in the board, to ensure that that matrix of measurements is available, and that they are available regularly. I think that is the point—you have to have them regularly enough to see whether the changes are significant. But, again, there was nothing before BECTU's letter arrived that made us feel that there was something wrong.
Because I think it goes back to the point Alun was making, that even if that information wasn't regularly coming across your desk and you didn't see it, if you had a good temperature gauge, if you like, of the atmosphere in S4C during that period, that might have been something you might have proactively sought out. But I think the fact that that didn't happen suggests that you probably didn't have a good feel of what the temperature was like during that period of time.
Wel, doedd e ddim yn un digon da, yn sicr, achos pe bai e, fe fyddem ni wedi bod yn ymwybodol, 'Mae yna rywbeth o'i le fan hyn.' Ond doedd e ddim, a dyna pam fe'i newidiwyd e. Mae yna drefn newydd yn ei le nawr sydd yn rhoi'r wybodaeth honno.
Well, it wasn't good enough, certainly, because if it was, we would have been aware that there was something wrong here. But it wasn't, and that's why it has been changed. That's why there is a new process in place now that does provide that information.
What I'm finding difficult to understand is we've got a report that is shocking, that says there was a toxic culture in the organisation for this period of time. You had staff absence levels that were going up, you had an initial letter from BECTU on which you were satisfied there was progress being made based on only one source. And my understanding was as well, as we've talked about earlier, that the churn of staff, if you like, the number of staff leaving during this period, was higher than average as well. But none of this prompted you to take any action up until that letter was received in April 2023. You're telling us that staff welfare was at the heart of all the decisions you've made, but that doesn't seem to apply to the period before the receipt of the second letter in April 2023.
Yr un peth y byddwn i yn ei ddweud yw nad dim ond gan un ffynhonnell roedden ni'n clywed bod yna welliannau ar waith, neu fod y cwynion a oedd wedi cael eu cyflwyno gan BECTU yn cael eu delio â nhw, a bod pethau yn gwella. Nid dim ond y prif weithredwr a oedd yn dweud hynny; mae yna gyfarwyddwr adnoddau dynol, mae yna aelodau eraill o'r tîm rheoli. Felly, nid dim ond o un ffynhonnell oedd e'n dod. Ond fel dwi'n dweud, hynny yw, byddwn i wedi bod wrth fy modd pe baem ni wedi cael rhyw fath o early warning system a fyddai'n caniatáu inni ddweud, 'Mae eisiau i ni wneud mwy', ond doedd yna ddim.
The one thing that I would say is that we weren't hearing from one source only that improvements were happening, or that the complaints that had been presented by BECTU were being dealt with, and that things were improving. It wasn't just the chief executive that was saying that, but there's an human resources director, and there are other members of the management team. So, it wasn't just coming from one source. But as I say, I would have been delighted if we'd had some early warning system that would allow us to say, 'We need to do more', but there wasn't one.
Well, to build on that, staff, as we already mentioned, were leaving the organisation at an irregular level during this period of time. Were staff surveys being undertaken? Were there exit interviews happening when staff left the organisation?
Na, dwi ddim yn credu oedd gan—. Roedd yna nifer o wendidau, dwi'n credu, a ddaeth allan yn ystod ein trafodaethau, a ddaeth i'r golwg. Un oedd lefel isel iawn o asesu perfformiad staff. Yn ystod y flwyddyn ddiwethaf, gwnaeth perfformiad aelodau'r tîm rheoli ddim cael ei asesu. Gwnaeth dim un ohonyn nhw gael eu hasesu am dros flwyddyn.
No, I don't think—. There were a number of weaknesses, I think, that came out during our discussions. One was a very low level of performance assessment with staff. During the last year, the performance of the management team wasn't assessed. None of them was assessed for over a year.
What I'm trying to—. You mentioned, 'I would have liked an early warning system', but it seems that one clear way that organisations get that warning system is by having those exit interviews, so that people—people in your position—when individuals leave an organisation, understand what the problems are. But that didn't seem to be happening at S4C. Why wasn't that happening at S4C?
Wel, nid gyda chadeirydd nac aelod o'r bwrdd fyddai cyfweliadau yn digwydd wrth i bobl adael.
Well, those interviews wouldn't happen with the chair or members of the board as people leave.
No, I appreciate that. But if there is a problem, you would be aware of it, if the exit interviews are happening. Because if the culture of fear was that current staff felt unable to come forward, then staff on their way out would probably have less qualms about doing it.
Na, dyw hwnna ddim yn wir, fel mae'n digwydd.
Well, no. That's not the case, as it happens.
I'm not saying that happens all the time, but it's far more likely that staff—
Wel, digwyddodd e ddim yn yr achos yma, ac, eto, dwi'n adnabod yn bersonol rai aelodau o'r staff oedd wedi gadael yn ystod y cyfnod. Fe wnaethon nhw roi tystiolaeth i dîm Capital Law, ond gwnaethon nhw ddim mynegi'r amheuon hynny wrth iddyn nhw adael. Ac, wrth gwrs, un o'r pethau—. Ac eto, a gaf i eich cyfeirio chi yn ôl at yr adroddiad, fe welwch chi sylwadau gan y prif weithredwr am faint o bobl oedd hi'n dymuno gweld yn gadael y corff. Dwi'n credu bod e'n cael ei ddweud bod yna hanner cant o staff y byddem ni yn well off yn eu colli nhw. Felly, roedd yna ymdrech fwriadol, fan hyn, yn cael ei wneud i gael gwared ar aelodau staff. Nawr, doedd hynny ddim yn rhywbeth ddaeth i'm sylw i tan yr adroddiad ei hunan.
Ac a gaf i ddweud hefyd, wrth gwrs, mae cyfnod o newid—pan ŷch chi'n newid beth mae'r corff yn ei wneud, sut mae e'n gweithredu, mae e'n naturiol i newid staff, i ddod â gwaed newydd i mewn ac i weld rhai pobl yn gadael. Mae hwnna—. Does dim byd o'i le gyda hynny mewn egwyddor. Ond mae yna ffordd, a dyna beth mae hwn i gyd o gwmpas, dwi'n credu—y ffordd o wneud pethau. Digwydd bod, dwi'n eistedd ar fwrdd y Cyngor y Defnyddwyr Dŵr—yn ystod y tair blynedd diwethaf mae e wedi cael prif weithredwr newydd, sydd wedi arwain proses o newid mewnol, ond wedi gwneud hynny drwy fynd â'r staff gyda hi, drwy sicrhau bod perfformiad staff y Cyngor Defnyddwyr Dŵr, yn eu harolygon staff nhw, bron yn afresymol o uchel, oherwydd bod y ffocws wedi bod ar les, iechyd ac ar fod yn ofalus o staff. Nid dyna ddigwyddodd gyda ni.
Well, it didn't happen in this case, and, again, I know personally some of the staff members who did leave during that period. They did provide evidence to the Capital Law team, but they did not express those concerns when leaving. And, of course, and, again, may I refer you back to the report, you will see comments from the chief executive on the number of people she wished to see leave the organisation. I think it said that there were 50 staff that we'd be better off without. So, there was a deliberate attempt here made to see staff leave and that wasn't something that came to my attention until the report itself was received.
And may I also say that, of course, any period of change—when you change how an organisation operates, then it's natural that there will be some churn in staff, that new blood will come in and that some staff will leave. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. But there is a way of doing that, and that's what all this is about, I think. It's the way of doing things. As it happens, I sit on the board of the Consumer Council for Water, and during the past three years, they've had a new chief executive, and they have led a process of internal change, but they've done so by taking the staff with them, by ensuring that the performance of the staff of the water consumer council, in their staff surveys, are almost irrationally high, because the focus has been entirely on the health, well-being and care of staff. But that's not what happened with us.
Can I build on one point in terms of understanding the process around the termination and employment of staff. I understand you were responsible for the termination of the employment of the chief content officer, when that took place, and not the chief executive. Listening to your answers yesterday to the Welsh Affairs Committee, you mentioned that the appointment of a new chief content officer would be made by the new chief executive. So, can you help me understand why the termination of the employment would be handled by the chair but the appointment would be handled by a chief executive?
Reit, oherwydd, yn syml iawn, yr amgylchiadau wnaeth arwain at ddiswyddo'r prif swyddog cynnwys, oedd ar ddydd Sadwrn yn Nantes, yn dilyn gêm rygbi. Roedd y prif weithredwr yn bresennol yn yr un cyfarfodydd—nid cyfarfodydd yw'r gair iawn—yn yr un lleoliadau lle ddigwyddodd y digwyddiadau a arweiniodd at y penderfyniad. Felly, roedd gan y prif weithredwr ddiddordeb yn y mater. Doedd hi ddim wedi rhannu hynny gyda neb o fewn S4C, er bod y diwydiant yng Nghymru i gyd yn gwybod beth oedd wedi cael ei ddweud, wrth bwy yr oedd e wedi cael ei ddweud. Roedd e'n cael ei adrodd yn y wasg bron cyn i ni glywed amdano. Felly, o dan yr amgylchiadau hynny, ac ar ôl derbyn cyngor ar broses a chyngor ar ddeddfwriaeth gyflogaeth a'r camau priodol i gymryd, fe gymerais i'r penderfyniad bod yn rhaid gweithredu'n syth er mwyn diogelu enw da S4C.
Fel y cafodd ei gyfeirio ato'n gynt, dwi wedi bod yn y busnes yma am flynyddoedd lawer ac erioed wedi dod ar draws achos o uchel-swyddog yn ymddwyn yn y ffordd yna. Pan fyddai'n dod, pe bai prif weithredwr newydd yn penderfynu bod angen—. Hynny yw, byddan nhw'n penodi rhywun, oni fyddan nhw, pe bai'n prif swyddog cynnwys fyddai fe neu gyfarwyddwr cynnwys, cyfarwyddwr rhaglenni—mae yna deitlau gwahanol. Pan fydd prif weithredwr newydd yn penodi, byddwn i'n disgwyl, fel mae'n digwydd, y byddai'r cadeirydd, pwy bynnag fyddai hwnna, yn cael ei wahodd i'r broses honno hefyd. Roeddwn i'n rhan o benodi Llinos Griffin-Williams i S4C, gan fod y swydd yn un o'r swyddi hynny sydd yn cario'r dyletswyddau ychwanegol o fod yn gyfarwyddwr gweithredol o'r bwrdd unedol cysgodol.
Because, quite simply, the circumstances that led to the dismissal of the chief content officer occurred on a Saturday in Nantes, following a rugby match. The chief executive had attended the same meetings—well, they weren't meetings—but the chief executive was present at the same locations where these events took place, which led to that decision. So, the chief executive had an interest in that issue. She hadn't shared that with anyone within S4C, although the wider industry in Wales all knew what had been said and to whom. It was being reported in the press almost before we'd heard about these events. So, under those circumstances, and having receiving advice on procedure and on employment law and the appropriate steps to be taken, I took the decision that action had to be taken immediately in order to safeguard the reputation of S4C.
As was mentioned earlier, I have been in this business for many years and have never come across a case of a senior official behaving in that way. If the new chief executive were to decide—. Of course, they will appoint somebody, whether that person will be a chief content officer or a director of content or a director of programming—there are all sorts of possible titles. When a new chief executive appoints, I would expect, as it happens, that the chair, whoever he or she may be, would be invited into that process. I was involved in the process of appointing Llinos Griffin-Williams to S4C, because the post was one of those posts that carries the additional duties of being an executive director of the shadow unitary board.
Could I just add on that point very briefly, Chair?
Very briefly, yes.
I think the key point, as Rhodri has described, is the fact that this was an extremely unusual situation and there was a perceived need to act extremely quickly, which is why the chair, with external legal advice, set in place a process for those unique circumstances. So, it would not be the normal way that that would be handled. Indeed, I referred earlier to the fact that there was robust debate amongst directors, but that the non-executive directors were not able to be involved in that process because of the timescale. That was also something that was then discussed after the event, because that was very unusual. Had there been a way to have had a wider process, then that would clearly have been beneficial, but the view taken by the chair, with external specialist advice, was that the circumstances and the need to act so quickly justified taking that unusual process. But you're right, that's not how you would normally go about it.
Just very finally from me on the appointment of a new chief executive, you've mentioned that there's no real time frame on that appointment yet. Is it your intention that that will happen in the remainder of your term?
I think the board will be discussing that—
Sori, pam dwi wedi troi i'r Saesneg, dwi ddim yn gwybod. Bydd y bwrdd yn trafod hynny pythefnos i heddiw. O ran pa mor bell y gallem ni fynd, fyddwn i ddim yn meddwl y byddai apwyntiad yn cael ei wneud, a bod yn berffaith onest, yn ystod gweddill fy nghyfnod i; fyddwn i ddim yn disgwyl y gallai ddigwydd o fewn y cyfnod hwnnw, ta beth.
Sorry, I don't know why I turned to English there. The board will discuss that a fortnight today. In terms of how far we could go, I wouldn't think that an appointment would be made, if I'm perfectly honest, during the remainder of my term of office; I wouldn't expect it to happen within that period.
Diolch. Dŷn ni'n ymwybodol iawn o faint o amser ychwanegol dŷch chi wedi aros gyda ni—diolch yn fawr iawn. Jest dau gwestiwn cryno iawn gen i, ar y diwedd. Roeddech chi wedi sôn wrth Alun, ac roedd e wedi'i godi ddoe, am y ffaith eich bod chi wedi gofyn am sawl cyfarfod gyda DCMS a bod hynny ddim wedi digwydd. A ydych chi'n meddwl ei fod e'n briodol, felly, taw'r Secretary of State sydd â'r pwerau yn y sefyllfa yma, os nad ydy'r Secretary of State yn dangos y diddordeb i eisiau cael cyfarfod?
Thank you. We're very aware of how long you've stayed with us—thank you very much. I have two very brief questions, at the end. You mentioned to Alun, and this was raised yesterday, that you'd asked for many meetings with DCMS and that that hadn't happened. Do you think it's appropriate, therefore, that it's the Secretary of State who has the powers in this situation if the Secretary of State doesn't show an interest in having a meeting?
Dwi'n credu bod hwnna y tu hwnt i fy nyletswyddau i i fynegi barn ar bwy ddylai—. Hynny yw, dyna'r fframwaith rŷn ni'n gweithio ynddo fe—
I think that's beyond my responsibilities in terms of expressing a view on who should—. In other words, that's the framework that we're working within—
Ond dydy'r fframwaith ddim, efallai, yn gweithio'n dda ar hyn o bryd, fel y mae.
But perhaps the framework isn't working as well as it should at the moment.
Fel y dywedais i, rŷn ni wedi cwrdd yn achlysurol â rhai Gweinidogion o'r adran, ond fel y dywedais i, pan gynigiais i ein bod ni'n cyfarfod â'r Ysgrifennydd Gwladol i drafod y mater penodol yma, fel mae'n digwydd, gafodd y cynnig ddim ei dderbyn. Mae'n ymddangos i fi pan roedd y broses yn mynd yn ei blaen, doedd dim llawer o ddiddordeb, ond oherwydd y ffordd mae pethau wedi digwydd—a dyw'r ffordd hwnnw ddim y ffordd y byddwn i wedi dychmygu y byddai pethau wedi digwydd pan ddechreuodd y broses—mae gan bawb, bellach, ddiddordeb mewn pob un agwedd ar hwn. Mae hynny i'w ddisgwyl, onid yw e?
As I said, we have occasionally met with some Ministers from the department, but as I said, when I proposed that we should meet the Secretary of State to discuss this specific issue, as it happens, that offer was not accepted. It appears to me that when this process was ongoing, there wasn't a great deal of interest shown in it, but because of the way things have panned out—and that isn't how I would have imagined things developing when this whole process started—everyone, now, is taking an interest in all aspects of this. That's to be expected, isn't it?
Diolch. Jest y cwestiwn olaf: oes yna unrhyw beth dŷch chi'n difaru am yr holl sefyllfa?
Thank you. Just the final question: is there anything that you regret about the whole situation?
Oes. Dwi'n difaru y pwynt yma rŷn ni wedi bod yn ei drafod nad oedden ni fel bwrdd yn ymwybodol o'r pryderon yn gynt. Dwi yn difaru wrth edrych nôl fod y cylch gorchwyl wnaethon ni ei gytuno gyda Capital Law yn un oedd yn caniatáu i'r broses gymryd yn hir iawn. Roedd yna resymau da. Oherwydd y ffactor ofn yma dwi wedi cyfeirio ato fe, roedd hwnna'n rhan bwysig iawn o lunio'r cylch gorchwyl mewn termau eang iawn, oedd yn caniatáu, wrth gwrs, i bawb gyfrannu ato fe. Felly, mewn ffordd, fe greon ni broblem i ni'n hunain.
Doedd cwyn BECTU ddim yn ymwneud â'r bwrdd, doedd e ddim yn ymwneud â llywodraethiant; roedd e'n ymwneud â'r tîm rheoli, fel roedd e wedi cael ei gyfeirio ato fe, er nad pob aelod o'r tîm rheoli oedd dan sylw, ond oherwydd bod dim modd bod yn benodol ynglŷn â chwynion, byddai fe ddim wedi bod yn briodol i enwi unigolion. Roedd BECTU wedi bod yn ofalus iawn yn hynny. Ond, wrth gwrs, fe wnaeth hynny olygu bod y broses yn un hirach a bod y broses yn caniatáu i bobl oedd, mewn gwirionedd, yn wrthrychau'r cwynion i fod yn cyfrannu ati hi.
Dwi'n credu y byddai fe wedi bod yn fwy llesol, efallai, i'n staff ni ac iechyd meddwl ein staff ni trwy'r cyfnod yma, pe baem ni wedi cytuno ar gylch gorchwyl a oedd yn ffocysu, efallai, ar yr hyn oedd BECTU yn cwyno amdano fe, yn hytrach na dweud, 'Dewch aton ni i siarad am unrhyw beth ŷch chi'n moyn.' Ond gyda'r wybodaeth oedd gyda ni ar y pryd, roeddwn i'n ddigon hapus ar y pryd bod rhaid rhoi proses mewn lle oedd yn un agored iawn, er mwyn sicrhau bod gan bobl yr hyder i gyfrannu ati hi. Ond ydw i'n difaru hynny? Ydw.
Yes. I regret this point that we've been discussing that we as a board weren't aware of these concerns at an earlier stage. I do regret, with hindsight, that the remit that we agreed with Capital Law was one that allowed the process to take a long period of time. There were reasons for that. Because of this fear factor that I have referred to, that was a very important part of drawing up the remit in very broad terms that, of course, then allowed everyone to contribute to this process. So, in a way, we created a problem for ourselves.
The BECTU complaint didn't refer to the board or to governance; it related to the management team, as it was referred to, although not every member of that management team was involved, but they couldn't be specific about complaints, and it wouldn't have been appropriate to name individuals in that scenario. BECTU had been very careful in that regard. But, of course, that did mean that the process was lengthier and that the process did allow people who were the subjects of complaints to be contributing to it.
I do believe that it would have been more beneficial, perhaps, for our staff and for the mental health of our staff throughout this period, if we had agreed a remit that focused more on what BECTU were complaining about, rather than saying, 'Come to us to talk about anything that's on your mind.' But, with the information that we had at the time, I was quite content that we needed to put a process in place that was very open, in order to ensure that people had the confidence to contribute to it. But do I regret that now? Yes.
Diolch ichi. Rwy'n ddiolchgar iawn, dŷn ni i gyd yn ddiolchgar iawn, am yr amser ychwanegol dŷch chi wedi ei roi i ni y prynhawn yma. Bydd transgript o'r hyn sydd wedi cael ei ddweud yn cael ei ddanfon atoch chi i chi nodi ei fod e yn gofnod teg o beth sydd wedi cael ei ddweud, ac efallai bydd ychydig o gwestiynau technegol doedden ni ddim wedi cael cyfle i fynd i mewn iddyn nhw y byddwn ni eisiau ysgrifennu atoch chi yn eu cylch. Ond diolch yn fawr iawn ichi am fod gyda ni y prynhawn yma.
Thank you. We're very grateful for the additional time you've provided this afternoon. There will be a transcript of the meeting sent to you to ensure that it's a fair reflection of what's been said, and perhaps there will be some technical questions that we haven't been able to ask, and we'll want to write to you about those. But thank you very much for being with us this afternoon.
Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi i gyd am eich amser a'r ffordd ŷch chi wedi mynd ati i'n holi ni. Dwi wedi dweud yn y pwyllgor yma o'r blaen ein bod ni yn gwerthfawrogi a bob amser yn barod i gael ein dal i gyfrif gennych chi fel Aelodau etholedig. Er gwaethaf y ffaith bod yr amgylchiadau yn rhai amhleserus dros ben, dwi yn ddiolchgar iawn am y modd ŷch chi wedi holi'r cwestiynau yna i ni ac ymdrin â ni heddiw. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Thank you all very much for your time and for the way in which you have questioned us this afternoon. I have said in this committee previously that do we appreciate and are always willing to be held to account by you as elected Members. Despite the fact that the circumstances are unpleasant, I am grateful for the way in which you have asked your questions and have dealt with us today. Thank you very much.
Diolch yn fawr.
Thank you very much.
Aelodau, dŷn ni'n symud yn syth ymlaen at bapurau i'w nodi. Mae gyda ni sawl papur i'w nodi yn eich pecynnau, o bapur 9.1 hyda at 9.17. Ydych chi'n fodlon i ni nodi'r papurau hynny? Iawn.
Felly, rwy'n cynnig, fel oedden ni wedi nodi'n gynharach, ein bod ni'n mynd i barhau yn breifat, a gwnawn ni aros i glywed ein bod ni'n breifat cyn ein bod ni'n cario ymlaen. Gwnawn ni aros tan bod y galeri wedi'i glirio.
Members, we'll move straight on to papers to note. We have a number of papers to note in your packs, from paper 9.1 through to 9.17. Are you content for us to note those papers? Okay.
So, I propose, as we noted earlier, that we're going to continue in private, and we'll wait to hear that we are in private session before we continue. We'll wait until the gallery is cleared.
Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 14:29.
The public part of the meeting ended at 14:29.