Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru The National Assembly for Wales
Y Pwyllgor Cymunedau, Cydraddoldeb a Llywodraeth Leol The Communities, Equality and Local Government Committee
Dydd Mercher, 7 Mawrth 2012 Wednesday, 7 March 2012
Cynnwys Contents Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a Dirprwyon Introduction, Apologies and Substitutions Bil Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru (Ieithoedd Swyddogol): Sesiwn Dystiolaeth Cyfnod 1—Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Bill: Stage 1 Evidence Session—The Welsh Language Society Bil Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru (Ieithoedd Swyddogol): Sesiwn Dystiolaeth Cyfnod 1—Cymdeithas Cyfieithwyr Cymru National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Bill: Stage 1 Evidence Session—Association of Welsh Translators and Interpreters Cynnig Gweithdrefnol Procedural Motion
Cofnodir y trafodion hyn yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir cyfieithiad Saesneg o gyfraniadau yn y Gymraeg. These proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, an English translation of Welsh speeches is included.
Aelodau’r pwyllgor yn bresennol Committee members in attendance
Janet Finch-Saunders	Ceidwadwyr Cymreig Welsh Conservatives
Mike Hedges	Llafur Labour
Mark Isherwood	Ceidwadwyr Cymreig Welsh Conservatives
Bethan Jenkins	Plaid Cymru The Party of Wales
Alun Ffred Jones	Plaid Cymru (yn dirprwyo ar ran Rhodri Glyn Thomas) The Party of Wales (substitute for Rhodri Glyn Thomas)
Ann Jones	Llafur (Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor) Labour (Committee Chair)
Eluned Parrott	Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol Cymru (yn dirprwyo ar ran Peter Black) Welsh Liberal Democrats (substitute for Peter Black)
Gwyn R. Price	Llafur Labour
Kenneth Skates	Llafur Labour
Joyce Watson	Llafur Labour
Eraill yn bresennol Others in attendance
Berwyn Prys Jones	Cadeirydd, Cymdeithas Cyfieithwyr Cymru Chairman, the Association of Welsh Translators and Interpreters
Colin Nosworthy	Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg The Welsh Language Society
Geraint Wyn Parry	Prif Weithredwr, Cymdeithas Cyfieithwyr Cymru Chief Executive, the Association of Welsh Translators and Interpreters
Ceri Phillips	Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg The Welsh Language Society
Osian Rhys	Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg The Welsh Language Society
Swyddogion Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru yn bresennol National Assembly for Wales officials in attendance
Leanne Hatcher	Dirprwy Glerc Deputy Clerk
Joanest Jackson	Uwch-gynghorydd Cyfreithiol Senior Legal Adviser
Owain Roberts	Y Gwasanaeth Ymchwil Research Service
Gareth Williams	Clerc Clerk
Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 9.31 a.m. The meeting began at 9.31 a.m.
Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a Dirprwyon Introduction, Apologies and Substitutions
[1] Ann Jones: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Communities, Equality and Local Government Committee. I ask Members to ensure that their BlackBerrys, pagers and mobile phones are switched off, because they affect the translation and broadcasting equipment. We have had apologies from Rhodri Glyn Thomas, who is the Member in charge of the National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Bill, which we are looking at this morning. We have also had apologies from Peter Black, as he is a Commissioner and this is an Assembly Commission Bill. I welcome Alun Ffred Jones, who will be substituting for Rhodri Glyn Thomas, and Eluned Parrott, who will be substituting for Peter Black. I believe that they are here for items 2 and 3, and they are both very welcome.
[2] I remind Members that we do not need to touch the microphones, as we are in a public session and the microphones will be turned on automatically for us as we speak. We operate bilingually. Headsets are available for translation: channel 1 provides translation from Welsh to English, and channel 0 provides the floor language. We are not expecting a fire drill, so, if there is an alarm, we will take our instructions from the ushers.
9.32 a.m.
Bil Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru (Ieithoedd Swyddogol): Sesiwn Dystiolaeth Cyfnod 1—Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Bill: Stage 1 Evidence Session—The Welsh Language Society
[3] Ann Jones: We are going to take evidence this morning from the Welsh Language Society, and we welcome its representatives. I ask them to introduce themselves for the Record, and we will then move straight into questions.
[4] Ms Phillips: Ceri Phillips ydw i, a fi yw cadeirydd y grŵp hawl i’r Gymraeg. Colin Nosworthy yw swyddog cyfathrebu’r gymdeithas, ac mae Osian Rhys yn aelod o’r grŵp hawl i’r Gymraeg.		Ms Phillips: I am Ceri Phillips, chair of the Welsh language rights group. Colin Nosworthy is the communications officer for the society, and Osian Rhys is a member of the Welsh language rights group.
[5] Ann Jones: I will ask the first question. What are your thoughts on the Bill and draft scheme, as currently presented?
[6] Ms Phillips: Hoffwn groesawu’r newid i enw’r cynllun, sef y cynllun ieithoedd swyddogol. Credwn ei bod yn galonogol iawn bod y Cynulliad yn rhoi statws swyddogol i’r iaith o fewn y sefydliad. Mae’r gymdeithas hefyd yn croesawu adran 1(1B) y Bil, sy’n rhoi’r hawl i ddefnyddio’r iaith Gymraeg o fewn gweithrediad y Cynulliad. Mae hynny’n galonogol iawn.		Ms Phillips: I would like to welcome the change of the name of the scheme to the official languages scheme. We feel that it is encouraging that the Assembly is giving the Welsh language official status within the institution. The society also welcomes section 1(1B) of the Bill, which gives the right to use the Welsh language within Assembly proceedings. That is very encouraging.
[7] Er gwaethaf hyn, rydym yn pryderu bod adran 2(2)(6) y Bil yn aneglur. Mae cyffredinedd yn tanseilio’r hyn rydych yn ei ddweud yn adran 1(1B) a gweddill y Bil yn gyffredinol.		Despite this, we are concerned that section 2(2)(6) of the Bill is unclear. The generality undermines what you say in section 1(1B) and in the remainder of the Bill in general.
[8] Yn ogystal, rydym eisoes wedi cyflwyno ein pryderon ynghylch y dirywiad o ran defnydd y Gymraeg o fewn y Cynulliad, ac yn benodol y dirywiad o ran defnydd y Gymraeg yn nhrafodion y Cynulliad. Gwelwn ddirywiad dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf mewn perthynas â chwestiynau llafar sy’n cael eu gofyn yn y Siambr, er enghraifft, ac mewn cwestiynau ysgrifenedig.		In addition, we have already expressed our concerns about the deterioration in the use of Welsh within the Assembly, specifically the deterioration in the use of the language in the Assembly’s proceedings. There has been a deterioration over recent years in relation to oral questions asked in the Chamber, for example, and in written questions.
[9] Mae angen cydbwysedd yn y Bil hefyd. Mae angen rhestru pethau sylfaenol, fel cyfieithu Cofnod y Trafodion i’r Gymraeg ac i’r Saesneg, a bod hynny’n cael ei wneud ar amseroedd hafal. Mae angen dweud hefyd fod modd i bawb ymdrin â’r Cynulliad yn eu dewis iaith, er mwyn sicrhau bod yr iaith Gymraeg yn cael ei normaleiddio o fewn y sefydliad.		Balance is also needed in the Bill. Fundamental issues need to be listed, such as translating the Record of Proceedings into Welsh and English, and to do that simultaneously. There is also a need to say that people can deal with the Assembly in their language of choice, in order to ensure that the Welsh language is normalised within the institution.
[10] Mike Hedges: Rydych yn dweud yn eich ymateb ysgrifenedig fod y Bil yn:		Mike Hedges: You state in your written response that the Bill:
[11] ‘creates a situation where those who wish to use the Welsh language are discriminated against by the institution. Neither does the Bill provide a firm foundation for the Welsh language in the future.’
[12] Pam eich bod yn credu bod y Bil fel ag y mae wedi’i ddrafftio yn anffafrio siaradwyr Cymraeg, a sut y gellid goresgyn hyn?		Why do you believe that the Bill as drafted discriminates against Welsh speakers, and how could this be rectified?
[13] Mr Nosworthy: Y pwynt cyntaf yw ein bod yn teimlo bod adran 2(2)(6) yn golygu nad yw’r Bil yn ei gwneud yn ofynnol i gael unrhyw fath o ddarpariaeth Gymraeg yn y Cynulliad, fel y gwelwyd â hanes diweddar Cofnod y Trafodion, pan nad oedd y Cofnod ar gael yn llawn trwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg yn y Cynulliad am 17 mis. Rydym yn credu bod y  Bil yn caniatáu sefyllfa sy’n anffafrio siaradwyr Cymraeg. Amlygir hynny yn sefyllfa gyfredol y Cofnod—tra bo’r fersiwn Saesneg llawn ar gael o fewn 24 awr, mae’r fersiwn dwyieithog ar gael o fewn pum diwrnod gwaith.		Mr Nosworthy: The first point is that we feel that section 2(2)(6) means that the Bill does not require any provision through the medium of Welsh in the Assembly, as was seen with the recent history of the Record of Proceedings, when, for 17 months, there was no full Record available through the medium of Welsh. We believe that the Bill allows for a situation in which Welsh speakers could be discriminated against. That is highlighted by the current siutation with the Record—while the full English version is available within 24 hours, the bilingual version is available within five working days.
[14] Rydym hefyd yn credu bod angen trefn allanol i sicrhau bod y cynllun yn cael ei ddilyn a bod modd i bobl gyflwyno cwynion. Heb drefn allanol o’r fath, mae angen nodi mwy o ddyletswyddau ar wyneb y Bil, fel bod sail gadarn statudol i’r hyn a gyflawnir gan y Cynulliad.		We also believe that there needs to be an external system to ensure that the scheme is adhered to and that there is a means for people to make complaints. Without such an external system, more duties need to be on the face of the Bill, so that there is a firm statutory foundation to what is being achieved by the Assembly.
[15] Mike Hedges: Rydych yn dweud yn eich ymateb ysgrifenedig bod statws swyddogol y Gymraeg yn y Cynulliad wedi’i gyfyngu gan y cyfeiriad yn adrannau newydd 1(1A) ac 1(1B)  at drafodion y Cynulliad. Pam fod hyn yn cyfyngu ar yr effaith, yn eich barn chi?		Mike Hedges: You state in your written response that the official status of Welsh in the Assembly is restricted by the reference in new sections 1(1A) and 1(1B) to Assembly proceedings. Why does this restrict the effect, in your view?
[16] Mr Nosworthy: Rydym yn credu bod mwy i’r Cynulliad na dim ond y trafodion. Er enghraifft, mae digwyddiadau addysgol a chyflenwir gwasanaethau gan isgontractwyr nad ydynt, efallai, yn dod dan y diffiniad o ‘drafodion’; dyna’r pwynt. Nid y trafodion yn unig sy’n ffurfio gweithgareddau’r Cynulliad.		Mr Nosworthy: We believe that there is more to the Assembly than simply the proceedings. For example, there are educational events and services are provided by sub-contractors that do not, perhaps, fit into the definition of ‘proceedings’; that is the point. It is not only the proceedings that constitute the activities of the Assembly.
[17] Alun Ffred Jones: Rydych yn dweud bod tystiolaeth o lai o ddefnydd o’r Gymraeg yn y Cynulliad. Pa dystiolaeth sydd gennych?		Alun Ffred Jones: You state that there is evdience of less use of the Welsh language in the Assembly. What is your evidence base?
[18] Mr Nosworthy: Ffigurau a ddarparwyd gan Rhodri Glyn Thomas rai blynyddoedd yn ôl. Mae ystadegau sy’n dangos bod 2.4% o gwestiynau llafar wedi’u cyflwyno yn y Gymraeg yn 2008-09. Syrthiodd y ganran honno i tua 0.5% yn 2009-10. Dros gyfnod o dair blynedd, yn ôl y ffigurau a ddarparwyd gan Rhodri Glyn Thomas, bu gostyngiad o tua 2.54% ychydig flynyddoedd yn ôl i 0.5% yn 2009-10. Ar ben hynny, roedd mwy o ostyngiad o ran y cwestiynau ysgrifenedig a gyflwynwyd yn y Gymraeg. Fodd bynnag, gallwn ddarparu nodyn pellach ar hynny os byddai hynny’n ddefnyddiol. Credaf fod y ffigurau wedi’u hamlinellu yn y dystiolaeth wreiddiol i’r ymgynghoriad cyn y broses ddeddfu.		Mr Nosworthy: Figures provided by Rhodri Glyn Thomas a few years ago. There are statistics to demonstrate that, in 2008-09, 2.4% of oral questions were tabled in Welsh. That percentage fell to around 0.5% in 2009-10. Over a period of three years, according to the figures provided Rhodri Glyn Thomas, there was a decline from around 2.54% a few years ago to 0.5% in 2009-10. Furthermore, there was a greater reduction in terms of written questions tabled in Welsh. However, we can provide a further note on that if it would be useful. I think that the figures are outlined in the original evidence to the consultation prior to the legislative process.
[19] Alun Ffred Jones: Byddai’n ddefnyddiol cael y dystiolaeth honno.		Alun Ffred Jones: It would be useful to have that evidence.
[20] Bethan Jenkins: Yr oeddwn am ofyn am gyngor cyfreithiol—efallai eich bod wedi gofyn amdano eisoes—yng nghyd-destun y diffiniad o drafodion y Cynulliad. Yn eich barn chi, mae ‘trafodion’ yn gysylltiedig â’r hyn sy’n digwydd o fewn y pwyllgorau a’r Cyfarfodydd Llawn yn unig yn hytrach nag â’r digwyddiadau a gynhelir yn y Senedd.		Bethan Jenkins: I wanted to ask for legal advice—you may already have asked for it—about the context of the definition of Assembly proceedings. In your view, ‘proceedings’ relates solely to what happens in committees and Plenary rather than to the events that take place in the Senedd.
[21] Mr Nosworthy: Dyna yw ein teimlad ni. Mae posibilrwydd y gellid ei gyfyngu gan y diffiniad; efallai y gallai’r pwyllgor edrych ymhellach ar hynny.		Mr Nosworthy: That is our feeling. There is a possibility that it could be restricted by the definition; the committee could, perhaps, look further at that.
[22] Ann Jones: Joanest, would you like to give us the legal definition?
[23] Ms Jackson: I esbonio’r pwynt hwnnw, mae’r Bil yn diwygio Deddf Llywodraeth Cymru 2006. Mae diffiniad o drafodion y Cynulliad yn y Ddeddf honno. Felly, bydd yr un diffiniad yn berthnasol i’r cymal hwn.		Mr Jackson: To explain that point, the Bill amends the Government of Wales Act 2006. There is a definition of Assembly proceedings in that Act. Therefore, the same definition will apply to this clause.
[24] Gwyn R. Price: You state in your written response that the new section 2(2)(5) should be amended to provide a statutory list of the bilingual services that the Assembly Commission would have to provide. Could you explain why you have come to this view?
[25] Ms Phillips: Mae ein pwynt yn y fan hon yn ymwneud â’r defnydd mewnol o’r Gymraeg—nid gwasanaeth ydyw, ond darpariaeth. Felly, ein prif bwynt yw bod angen cynnig opsiwn gwell, sef rhestru rhai dyletswyddau sylfaenol y dylai’r Cynulliad eu darparu. Rydym yn rhoi enghreifftiau yn ein tystiolaeth o’r hyn y dylid ei roi fel lleiafswm, megis dogfennau dwyieithog—dylai popeth o fewn y Cynulliad fod yn ddwyieithog. Rydym hefyd yn gofyn am Gofnod dwyieithog mewn statud ar sail cydraddoldeb â’r Saesneg, a dylai hynny gael ei wneud mewn llai na phum diwrnod. Dylid bod cyfieithu ar y pryd o’r Gymraeg i’r Saesneg a gweithio i sicrhau cynnydd parhaus yn y defnydd mewnol o’r Gymraeg. Dylai bod modd i bawb ymdrin â’r Cynulliad yn eu dewis iaith—dyna yw gwir ddemocratiaeth.		Ms Phillips: Our point here deals with the internal use of Welsh—it is not a service but a provision. So, our main point is that a better option should be offered, listing some of the core duties that the Assembly should provide. We provide examples in our evidence of what should be provided as a minimum, such as bilingual documents—everything within the Assembly should be bilingual. We also ask for a bilingual Record in statute on the basis of equality with English, and that that should be provided in fewer than five days. There should be simultaneous translation from Welsh to English and work to ensure a continuous increase in the internal use of Welsh. It should be possible for everyone to deal with the Assembly in the language of their choice—that is true democracy.
[26] Gwyn R. Price: Do you believe that the provisions included in the new section 2(2)(6) are consistent with the duties included in sections 1(2) and 2(2) of the Bill, which relate to treating both English and Welsh on the basis of equality in the conduct of Assembly proceedings? What are your reasons for this view?
[27] Mr Nosworthy: Nid ydym yn credu bod llawer o ddiben rhoi statws swyddogol i’r Gymraeg a’r hawl i’w defnyddio os ydych wedyn yn tanseilio hynny’n llwyr drwy adran 2(2)(6). Hoffwn dynnu eich sylw at baragraff 12.8 y memorandwm esboniadol, sy’n sôn am enghraifft Iwerddon. Rydym yn credu bod hyn yn sarhaus. Pe baem yn dilyn trefn Iwerddon yn awr, ni fyddai cyfieithu o’r hyn rwyf yn ei ddweud wrthych yn awr. Felly, a ydym am ganiatáu sefyllfa lle mae’r Bil yn golygu ein bod yn yr un sefyllfa ag Iwerddon yn ein Senedd ni? Rydym yn credu bod adran 2(2)(6) yn tanseilio’r pwynt. Hynny yw, mae fel dweud y cewch statws swyddogol ond yna ei dynnu’n ôl yn y paragraff sy’n dilyn.		Mr Nosworthy: We do not believe that there is much purpose in giving official status to the Welsh language and the right to use it if that is then totally undermined by section 2(2)(6). I wish to draw your attention to paragraph 12.8 in the explanatory memorandum, which mentions the Irish example. We believe that that is insulting. If we were following the Irish example at this moment, what I am now saying would not be translated. So, do we want to allow a situation in which the Bill means that we are in the same position as Ireland in our Senedd? We believe that section 2(2)(6) undermines the point. That is, it is like allowing official status but then withdrawing it in the next paragraph.
[28] Alun Ffred Jones: A ydych felly’n credu bod cyfieithu pob dogfen fewnol yn hollbwysig ac yn greiddiol i’r syniad o statws cyfartal? A ydych yn credu mai dyna’r defnydd gorau o adnoddau—cyfieithu pob dogfen fewnol?		Alun Ffred Jones: Do you therefore believe that it is vital to translate every internal document, and that that is fundamental to the concept of equal status? Do you believe that that is the best use of resources—translating every internal document?
[29] Mr Nosworthy: Mae’r Cynulliad yn ei gynllun ei hun yn dweud ei fod am fod yn sefydliad gwirioneddol ddwyieithog. Dyna yw ystyr ‘sefydliad gwirioneddol ddwyieithog’.		Mr Nosworthy: The Assembly says in its own scheme that it wants to be a truly bilingual institution. That is the meaning of ‘truly bilingual institution’.
[30] Alun Ffred Jones: A fyddech yn dweud felly nad yw Cyngor Gwynedd yn sefydliad dwyieithog?		Alun Ffred Jones: Would you therefore say that Gwynedd Council is not a bilingual institution?
[31] Ms Phillips: Y pwynt yw mai’r Cynulliad yw’r sefydliad sy’n arwain. Yn ein barn ni, y Cynulliad ddylai osod esiampl i bawb arall.		Ms Phillips: The point is that it is the Assembly that is providing the lead. In our opinion, the Assembly should lead by example.
[32] Mr Rhys: Nid ydym yn gwybod llawer am Gyngor Gwynedd—mae’n siŵr eich bod yn gwybod mwy na ni amdano. Mae Cyngor Gwynedd yn sefydliad Cymraeg ei iaith i raddau helaeth, sy’n rhywbeth rydym yn ei groesawu, a byddai’n wych pe bai’r Cynulliad am fod yn sefydliad Cymraeg hefyd. Rydym yn teimlo’n gryf bod angen i ddwyieithrwydd ddigwydd nid yn unig fel rhywbeth allanol, sef bod y cyhoedd yn gweld pethau’n ddwyieithog, ond bod Aelodau Cynulliad a’u staff a staff y Comisiwn yn gallu gweithio’n Gymraeg. Dyna beth sy’n mynd i wneud y Cynulliad yn sefydliad gwirioneddol ddwyieithog, sef bod popeth yn gallu digwydd yn Gymraeg.		Mr Rhys: We do not know much about Gwynedd Council—I am sure that you know more than us about it. Gwynedd Council is, to a large extent, a Welsh-speaking institution, which we welcome, and it would be excellent if the Assembly were to follow suit. We strongly believe that bilingualism needs to happen not only as an external aspect, in that things are available bilingually for the public, but also that Assembly Members, their staff and Commission staff can work in Welsh. That is what will make the Assembly a truly bilingual institution, namely that everything can happen in Welsh.
[33] Mr Nosworthy: Nid oedd adran o’r fath yn Mesur y Gymraeg (Cymru) 2011 sy’n effeithio ar gyrff cyhoeddus eraill. Hynny yw, rhoddwyd statws swyddogol i’r Gymraeg yn y Mesur ond nid oedd paragraff wedyn yn dweud ‘Nid yw hyn yn golygu bod rhaid i ni gyfieithu dim byd’. Felly, byddwn yn dadlau bod y gwahaniaeth rhwng y Mesur a’r Bil hwn yn eithaf arwyddocaol.		Mr Nosworthy: There was no such section in the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011 that impacts upon other public bodies. That is, the Measure gave official status to the Welsh language but there was no subsequent paragraph saying ‘This does not mean that we have to translate anything’. So, I would argue that the difference between the Measure and this Bill is quite significant.
[34] Alun Ffred Jones: Hoffwn wneud cywiriad. Nid yw’r Bil yn dweud nad oes angen cyfieithu dim byd. Dweud y mae nad oes angen cyfieithu popeth.		Alun Ffred Jones: I would like to make a correction. The Bill does not say that nothing has to be translated. It says that not everything has to be translated.
[35] Mr Nosworthy: Mae’n caniatau’r sefyllfa.		Mr Nosworthy: It allows for that situation.
[36] Alun Ffred Jones: I ddod yn ôl at fy nghwestiwn: a ydych yn credu, felly, mai cyfieithu pob dogfen fewnol yw’r allwedd i sefydliad dwyieithog?		Alun Ffred Jones: To come back to my question, do you therefore believe that translating every internal document is the key to a bilingual institution?
9.45 a.m.
[37] Mr Rhys: Rydym yn dweud yn ein tystiolaeth ysgrifenedig i’r pwyllgor ein bod yn dymuno gweld sefyllfa lle mae’r rhan fwyaf o staff y Comisiwn yn ddwyieithog ac yn gallu gweithio’n ddwyieithog. Wedyn, ni fyddai angen anfon pethau i gael eu cyfieithu. Rydym eisiau gweld sefyllfa lle mae pobl yn gwneud pethau’n ddwyieithog eu hunain, yn hytrach na fod popeth yn cael ei ddrafftio yn Saesneg a’i anfon at uned gyfieithu ar wahân.		Mr Rhys: We state in our written evidence to the committee that we wish to see a situation in which the majority of Commission staff members are bilingual and can work bilingually. There would then be no need to send things to be translated. We would like to see a situation in which people are doing things bilingually themselves, rather than everything being drafted in English and sent to a separate translation unit.
[38] Gwyn R. Price: In giving evidence to this committee on 9 February, Rhodri Glyn Thomas stated that the fundamental principle of the Bill as stated in section 1
[39] ‘has been adequately safeguarded within the Bill and the scheme.’
[40] What are your views on his statement?
[41] Mr Rhys: Diolch i chi am y cwestiwn hwnnw. Mae’r egwyddor yn ymwneud â thrin y ddwy iaith yn gyfartal ac fel ieithoedd swyddogol. Os felly, a fydd Cofnod dwyieithog ar gael o fewn 24 awr, gan drin y ddwy iaith yn gyfartal? A oes sicrwydd y bydd y Cofnod ar gael yn ddwyieithog o gwbl? Nid ydym yn meddwl bod y Bil fel y mae ar hyn o bryd yn diogelu hynny. Rydym yn teimlo bod adran 2(2)(6) yn tanseilio egwyddorion y Bil fel ag y mae. Fel y dywedwyd ganddynt, mae angen rhoi dyletswyddau penodol yn y Bil. Nid oes digon o fanylder yn y Bil i ddechrau, gan ei fod yn gadael gormod i’r cynllun, ac nid oes digon o fanylder yn y cynllun chwaith. Felly, mae angen trosglwyddo peth o’r hyn mae’r Comisiwn am ei roi yn y cynllun i’r Bil ac wedyn rhoi mwy o fanylder yn y cynllun ei hun. Felly, nid ydym yn teimlo bod yr egwyddor yn cael ei diogelu ac, yn wyneb yr hyn sydd wedi digwydd gyda’r Cofnod, er enghraifft, yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf, nid ydym o’r farn na allai hanes ailadrodd ei hun gyda’r Bil hwn.		Mr Rhys: Thank you for that question. The principle pertains to treating both languages on the basis of equality and as official languages. If so, will a bilingual Record be available within 24 hours, putting both languages on an equal footing? Is there certainty that a bilingual Record will be available at all? We do not think that the Bill in its current form secures that. We feel that section 2(2)(6) undermines the principles of the Bill in its current form. As they have said, specific duties need to be placed on the face of the Bill. There is not enough detail in the Bill to begin with, as it leaves too much to the scheme, in which there is not enough detail either. So, some of what the Commission wants to include in the scheme needs to be transferred to the Bill, and then more details need to be included in the scheme itself. So, we do not feel that the principle has been safeguarded and, in light of what has happened with the Record, for example, over the past few years, we are not of the opinion that history could not repeat itself with this Bill.
[42] Kenneth Skates: Bore da. Rwy’n siarad tipyn bach o Gymraeg.		Kenneth Skates: Good morning. I speak a little bit of Welsh.
[43] However, my English is better and I am a bit more competent in it. You state in your written evidence that there should be simultaneous translation from Welsh into English, just as there is simultaneous translation from English into Welsh. Why do you believe that this is necessary?
[44] Ann Jones: You have got them the wrong way around.
[45] Mr Rhys: Mae’r gymdeithas wedi dadlau hyn ers y cyfnod cyn i’r Cynulliad gael ei sefydlu. Hynny yw, paratoesom ddogfen yn y 1990au yn galw am wahanol bethau, a gwireddwyd llawer o’r rheini, gan gynnwys cyfieithu ar y pryd i’r Saesneg. Roeddem hefyd yn gofyn am gyfieithu ar y pryd i’r Gymraeg. Rydym o’r farn fod gan bobl Cymru hawl i glywed trafodion y Cynulliad yn eu hiaith eu hun, boed hynny yn Saesneg neu yn Gymraeg. Byddai hyn yn caniatáu i hynny ddigwydd a byddai’n golygu, wrth i bethau symud at Senedd.tv ac ati, fod modd gwrando ar y trafodion i gyd yn Gymraeg neu i gyd yn Saesneg. Byddai hynny’n rhoi cydraddoldeb i’r ddwy iaith. Gallai hynny hyd yn oed helpu gyda pharatoi Cofnod Cymraeg, yn ein barn ni, achos byddai cyfieithiad ar y pryd newydd ddigwydd i’r Gymraeg o’r trafodaethau Saesneg. Byddai hefyd yn help i Aelodau Cynulliad fel chi sy’n dysgu Cymraeg. Gallech wrando ar hanner yn y Saesneg a hanner yn y Gymraeg drwy’r amser. Byddai hynny’n help i bawb, wrth gynyddu’r defnydd a wneir o’r Gymraeg ac yn normaleiddio’r iaith. Gan fod cynifer o Aelodau Cynulliad sy’n siarad Cymraeg yn defnyddio’r Saesneg, byddai’n ffordd o gynyddu faint o Gymraeg sy’n cael ei siarad yn y Cynulliad.		Mr Rhys: The society has argued for this since before the Assembly was established. That is, we prepared a document in the 1990s calling for various things, many of which were realised, including interpretation into English. We also asked for interpretation into Welsh. Our view is that the people of Wales have the right to hear the proceedings of the Assembly in their own language, whether that is English or Welsh. This would enable that to happen and it would mean, as things move to Senedd.tv and so on, that it would be possible to listen to all the proceedings either in Welsh or in English. That would put both languages on an equal footing. It could even help with the preparation of a Welsh-language Record, in our opinion, because all the English proceedings would have been interpreted into Welsh. It would also assist Assembly Members such as yourself who are learning Welsh. You could listen to half in English and to half in Welsh all the time. That would assist everyone, while increasing the use of the Welsh language and normalising it. With so many Assembly Members who are able to speak Welsh using the English language, it would be a way of increasing the amount of Welsh spoken in the Assembly.
[46] Mike Hedges: The way that I read this is that there is a basic assumption that everyone can speak and understand English, because they have a full vocabulary, and then that we translate some into Welsh. I am well aware of a number of, albeit elderly, ladies who know a substantially larger number of words in Welsh than they do in English and, quite often, in general conversation, will ask for words to be translated from English into Welsh. You are saying that those people are not being catered for, because it is assumed that everyone can speak English very well and that some people can speak Welsh.
[47] Mr Rhys: Rydych yn gwneud pwynt teg. Mae pobl hŷn a phlant nad ydynt yn rhugl yn y Saesneg. Ar fy rhan fy hun, ni fyddwn yn awyddus i roi tystiolaeth y bore yma yn Saesneg am na fyddwn yn teimlo’n ddigon abl i wneud hynny, felly rwy’n croesawu’r cyfieithu sydd ar gael yma. Fodd bynnag, mae’n ehangach na hynny. Ein barn yw bod gan bobl hawl i wrando ar y trafodion yn Gymraeg. Byddai hynny hefyd yn hwyluso pethau i bobl sy’n fwy rhugl yn y Gymraeg, ond hefyd pobl sydd yn llai rhugl ac sy’n dymuno gwella. Mae hynny’n rhywbeth pwysig y dylai’r Bil a’r cynllun hwn edrych arno.		Mr Rhys: You make a fair point. There are older people and children who are not fluent in English. For my own part, I would not be eager to give evidence in English this morning because I would not feel competent to do that, so I welcome the interpretation facilities available here. However, it goes beyond just that. Our opinion is that people have a right to listen to proceedings in Welsh. It would also improve things for people who are more fluent in Welsh, but also people who are less fluent and wish to improve. That is something important that this Bill and the scheme should look at.
[48] Kenneth Skates: Do you have any evidence to suggest that there is a demand for this, and do you feel that it is an appropriate use of the translation service’s resources?
[49] Mr Rhys: Nid ydym yn meddwl ei fod yn fater o alw. Faint o dystiolaeth oedd gennym yng nghanol y 1990au fod angen cyfieithu ar y pryd i’r Saesneg, ond credaf fod pawb yn derbyn bod hynny bellach yn rhywbeth buddiol? Mae’n fater o gynnig y ddarpariaeth a gweld os yw’n cael ei ddefnyddio. O ran defnydd teg o adnoddau cyfiethu, byddai hynny o leiaf yn sicrhau bod cyfieithwyr ar y pryd yn brysur achos mae pobl yn siarad Saesneg drwy’r dydd, bob dydd, yn y Cynulliad. Byddai’n golygu bod gwaith cyfieithu i’r Gymraeg yn digwydd; weithiau rydych yn gweld cyfieithwyr yn eistedd mewn cyfarfod lle mae pawb yn siarad Saesneg, er bod hanner y rheini yn y cyfarfod yn gallu siarad Cymraeg.		Mr Rhys: We do not think that it is an issue of demand. How much evidence was there in the mid 1990s that you needed simultaneous translation into English, but I think that everyone would now accept that that is a beneficial thing? It is a matter of putting the provision in place and seeing whether it is used. In terms of proper use of translation resources, it would at least mean that interpreters are busy because people speak English all day, every day, in the Assembly. It would mean that there would be work on interpretation into Welsh taking place; on occasion you see interpreters sitting on the side of a meeting where everyone is speaking English, even though half the attendees are able to speak Welsh.
[50] Bethan Jenkins: Rydych yn dweud mai’r Cofnod yw un o’r dogfennau pwysicaf er mwyn cryfhau statws y Gymraeg. Pam mae cael fersiwn gwbl ddwyieithog mor bwysig i statws y Gymraeg? Rwy’n credu fy mod yn gwybod yr ateb.		Bethan Jenkins: You say that the Record is one of the most important documents as regards strengthening the status of the Welsh language. Why is having a fully bilingual version of the Record so important to the status of the Welsh language? I believe that I know the answer.
[51] Ms Phillips: Y Cynulliad yw calon ein democratiaeth yma yng Nghymru. Mae’r Cofnod yn gofnod o benderfyniadau gwlad, sef penderfyniadau pwysig iawn. Fel cofnod o drafodaethau wythnosol, mae’n adeiladau corpws swyddogol ffurfiol i’r Gymraeg. Mae pobl wedi ei gymharu â’r Beibl o ran ei bwysigrwydd yn hynny o beth, ac rydym i gyd yn gwybod faint o effaith gafodd cyfieithu’r Beibl ar y Gymraeg. Mae Google Translate yn cael ei ddefnyddio yn awr i gyfieithu’r Cofnod; mae hynny’n golygu bod Google bellach yn rhan bwysig iawn o ddatblygiad y Gymraeg.		Ms Phillips: The Assembly is the heart of our democracy here in Wales. The Record is a record of the very important decisions taken for our nation. As a record of weekly proceedings, it builds a formal official corpus for the Welsh language. People have compared it to the Bible in terms of its importance in that regard, and we all know how much of an impact the translation of the Bible had on the Welsh language. You are now making use of Google Translate in the translation of the Record; that means that Google is now a very important part of the development of the Welsh language.
[52] Mae’n bwysig o ran y defnydd a wneir o’r Gymraeg yn nhrafodion y Cynulliad, wrth i Aelodau’r Cynulliad a’u staff baratoi cwestiynau a pharatoi i siarad yn nadleuon y Cynulliad. Mae’n gwbl deg bod pawb yn cael allwedd yn y Gymraeg ac yn y Saesneg, neu fel arall, buasai rhywun a oedd yn dymuno siarad Cymraeg yn y Cynulliad yn gorfod mynd yn ôl i edrych ar y Cofnod a’i gyfieithu, a fuasai’n golygu gwaith ychwanegol i rywun, ac nid yw hynny’n rhoi cydraddoldeb i’r iaith Gymraeg yn y sefydliad.		It is important in terms of the use of the Welsh language in Assembly proceedings, as Assembly Members and their staff prepare questions and prepare to contribute in Assembly debates. It is only fair that everyone should be given a key both in Welsh or in English, otherwise, those who wished to speak Welsh in the Assembly would have to go back to look at the record and then translate it, which would mean additional work for someone, and that does not treat the Welsh language on an equal basis within the institution.
[53] Mae cael gwared ar y Cofnod dwyieithog yn sathru ar statws y Gymraeg, ac mae’r ffaith fod yn rhaid inni ddisgwyl pum diwrnod bellach iddo gael ei gyfieithu, yn golygu nad yw’r iaith Gymraeg yn gydradd â’r iaith Saesneg yn y Cynulliad.		Eliminating a bilingual Record rides roughshod over the status of the Welsh language, and the fact that we now have to wait five days for a translation means that the Welsh language is not on an equal footing with the English language in the Assembly.
[54] Bethan Jenkins: Rwy’n siwr eich bod wedi gweld y dystiolaeth o’r wythnosau blaenorol, ond dywedodd cynghorydd cyfreithiol y Comisiwn y byddai rhoi’r Cofnod ar wyneb y Bil yn ei uwchraddio o’i gymharu â gwasanaethau eraill y Cynulliad, fel cyfieithu ar y pryd. Rwy’n deall y ddadl gan fod y Cofnod wedi bod yn destun trafod oherwydd y problemau diweddar, ond a yw hynny’n cyfiawnhau rhoi’r Cofnod ar wyneb y Bil pan na fydd pethau eraill ar wyneb y Bil?		Bethan Jenkins: I am sure that you will have seen the evidence from previous weeks, but the Commission’s legal adviser has stated that putting the Record on the face of the Bill would elevate it above the other services in the Assembly, such as simultaneous translation. I understand the argument, because the Record has been the subject of debate because of the recent problems, but does that justify putting the Record on the face of the Bill when other things will not be included?
[55] Mr Nosworthy: Rwy’n credu mai penderfyniad polisi yw hynny nid mater cyfreithiol, ond byddwn yn dadlau bod y Bil eisoes yn rhoi rhai pethau uwchben pethau eraill. Os edrychwch ar adran (2)(2)(5), gwelwch fod rhestr eisoes o bethau y mae’n rhaid i’r cynllun ymwneud â hwy, felly gellir dadlau ei fod eisoes yn uwchraddio rhai pethau. Fodd bynnag, mae’n rhaid cyfeirio at hanes y Cofnod. Hynny yw, rhaid cofio bod natur cyfieithu’r Cofnod wedi newid tair gwaith dros y 13 blynedd diwethaf, er nad yw cynllun iaith y Cynulliad wedi newid o gwbl. Rhaid cofio hefyd bod Bwrdd yr Iaith Gymraeg wedi dweud bod y Cynulliad wedi bod yn torri ei gynllun iaith am 17 mis. Felly, i ba raddau y gallwn ymddiried yng Nghomisiwn y Cynulliad i gadw at y cynllun os nad yw un o’r pethau elfennol ar wyneb y Bil? Rhaid cofio hefyd fod ymgyrch dorfol wedi digwydd i geisio newid yn ôl i’r sefyllfa gynt.		Mr Nosworthy: I think that that is a policy decision rather than a legal issue, but I would argue that the Bill already puts some things above others. If you look at section (2)(2)(5), you will see that there is already a list of things that the scheme has to do, so it could be argued that it already upgrades some things. However, we have to refer to the history of the Record. That is, we need to bear in mind that, over the past 13 years, the way in which the Record has been translated has changed three times, although the Assembly’s Welsh language scheme has not changed at all. We must also bear in mind that the Welsh Language Board has said that the Assembly has been in contravention of its language scheme for 17 months. Therefore, to what extent can we trust the Assembly Commission to stick to its scheme, unless one of the fundamental things is included on the face of the Bill? We must also bear in mind that there was a mass campaign to try to revert to the previous situation.
[56] Byddwn hefyd yn dadlau, yn y cyd-destun cyfreithiol, bod Mesur newydd y Gymraeg, sy’n effeithio ar weddill y cyrff a’r cwmnïau yng Nghymru, yn rhoi sail statudol. Mae safonau yn offerynnau statudol, sy’n golygu bod y gwasanaethau y mae’n rhaid i gyrff cyhoeddus eu darparu yn seiliedig ar offeryn statudol. Yn yr un modd, gellid dadlau y dylid rhoi’r Cofnod ar wyneb y Bil er mwyn iddo gael sail statudol cryfach.		I would also argue, in the legal context, that the new Welsh language Measure, which impacts upon all other bodies and companies in Wales, provides a statutory basis. Standards are statutory instruments, which means that the services that public bodies have to provide are based on a statutory instrument. In the same way, one could argue that the Record needs to be on the face of the Bill in order for it to have a stronger statutory basis.
[57] Bethan Jenkins: Felly, rydych yn dweud ei bod yn fwy o benderfyniad polisi gan y Comisiwn, yn hytrach nag yn rhywbeth cyfreithiol. Felly, ni fyddai dadl yn erbyn rhoi un peth yn y Bil yn hytrach na rhywbeth arall. Pam na ddylid cael popeth ar wyneb y Bil?		Bethan Jenkins: So, you are saying that it is more of a policy decision by the Commission, rather than a legal matter. Therefore, there would not be an argument for putting one thing on the face of the Bill instead of something else. Why not put everything on the face of the Bill?
[58] Mr Rhys: Yn sicr, dyna yw ein barn. Hynny yw, mae’n fater o bolisi a gall y Comisiwn roi mwy na hynny yn y Bil, a dyna’r hyn rydym yn dadlau drosto. Soniodd Bwrdd yr Iaith Gymraeg yn ei dystiolaeth wythnos diwethaf y gellid rhoi’r Cofnod yn unig ar wyneb y Bil. Rwyf yn credu mai dyna’r hyn y mae’r bwrdd yn gofyn amdano, ac y dylid nodi mewn is-adran nad yw hynny’n effeithio ar gyffredinedd y Bil ac ati. Byddai hynny’n bosibl. Rydym ni, fel y soniodd Colin, yn gofyn am roi mwy na hynny yn y Bil, heb danseilio’r prif bethau. Mae Ceri wedi nodi’r prif bethau y credwn y dylent fod ar wyneb y Bil. Wrth gwrs, mater i’r Comisiwn yw penderfynu beth yw’r prif bethau yn ei olwg. Yn sicr, nid ydym o’r farn nad yw hynny’n bosibl.		Mr Rhys: Certainly, that is what we think. It is a matter of policy and the Commission can put more than that in the Bill, and that is what we are arguing for. The Welsh Language Board, in its evidence last week, mentioned that the Record alone could be placed on the face of the Bill. I think that that is what the board is calling for, and that it should be noted in a subsection that it should not impact on the Bill’s generalities and so on. That is one possibility. We, as Colin said, are calling for more than that to be placed on the face of the Bill, without undermining the main issues. Ceri referred to the main things that we believe should be on the face of the Bill. Of course, it is up to the Commission to decide what those main issues are, in its view. Certainly, we are not of the opinion that that is not possible.
[59] Kenneth Skates: I am interested in the elevated role of Google Translate. I know that is has developed rapidly but that it is by no means perfect. However, we are talking a lot now about Google Translate being utilised for translation purposes. Given that, and that anybody can access Google Translate and use the service, could you envisage a situation where there is no translation of the Record of Proceedings, either from Welsh to English or English to Welsh, but that a simple link to Google Translate is provided for users, residents and voters to carry out the translation if they so wish?
[60] Mr Rhys: Nid wyf yn meddwl y gallwn ragweld sefyllfa lle bo dolen yn cael ei darparu. Rwyf yn meddwl bod Google Translate yn gwella o hyd ac mae’n offeryn y gall cyfieithwyr ei ddefnyddio i helpu a chyflymu’r gwaith. Nid wyf yn gwybod a fydd gennym fyth sefyllfa lle na fyddai angen llygaid dynol ar y gwaith oherwydd bod cymaint o wahanol ddehongliadau ar gael. Rwyf yn meddwl y gallem ni fod mewn sefyllfa lle mae’r Cofnod yn cael ei baratoi gan ddefnyddio meddalwedd adnabod llais, sef ei fod yn cael ei gofnodi yn beirianyddol ac wedyn yn cael ei gyfieithu’n beirianyddol. Er hynny, rwyf yn meddwl bod angen llygaid dynol i edrych arno, ond heb wneud hynny i’r un graddau efallai. Nid ydym yn dweud ein bod am roi cyfieithwyr allan o waith ond byddai’n golygu bod y cyfieithwyr sy’n gweithio i’r Cynulliad yn gallu cyfieithu llawer mwy o bethau.		Mr Rhys: I do not think that I could anticipate a situation in which a link would be provided. I think that Google Translate is improving all the time and it is a tool that translators can use to assist and speed up the work. I do not know whether we will ever reach a situation in which the work will not need to be checked by someone, because so many different interpretations could be made. I think that we could see a situation where the Record is produced through the use of voice-recognition software, which means that it would be transcribed by machine before being translated by machine. Despite that, I think that there is a need for it to be checked by someone, but perhaps not to the same degree. We are not saying that we want make translators redundant but it would mean that the translators working for the Assembly at present could translate many more things.
[61] Janet Finch-Saunders: In your written response, you state that it might be better to review the scheme towards the middle of an Assembly term, rather than at the beginning of a new Assembly, because it would be less political. In what way would conducting the reviewing process during an election year affect the scheme?
[62] Mr Rhys: Mae llawer o bethau yn digwydd yn ystod blwyddyn etholiad, fel yr ydych yn gwybod. Mae llawer o newid yn digwydd ar ôl etholiad. Nid ydym o’r farn y byddai’n afresymol i’r Comisiwn osod oes cynllun i gyd-fynd ag oes Cynulliad. Yn ein barn ni, byddai ei osod i gyd-fynd ag oes Cynulliad yn golygu bod angen cadw’n gaeth at amserlenni, nad sydd bob amser yn bosibl wrth gwrs. Rydym o’r farn fod diwygio yng nghanol tymor Cynulliad yn golygu mwy o amser i’w wneud yn iawn ac y byddai’r pwnc yn uchel ar restr y blaenoriaethau ar y pryd, gan fod llawer o bethau eraill yn digwydd yn ystod blwyddyn etholiad. Nid ydym yn teimlo’n gryf iawn am y peth; dim ond sylw ydoedd.		Mr Rhys: Many things happen during an election year, as you know. A great deal of change happens after an election. We are not of the opinion that it is unreasonable for the Commission to have a scheme that runs concurrently with the Assembly term. In our opinion, having it run concurrently with an Assembly term would mean that timetables would need to be observed closely, which is not always possible, of course. We think that amending in the middle of an Assembly term would mean more time to do it right and that it would then be high on the list of priorities, whereas a number of other things are on the agenda during an election year. We do not feel very strongly about it; it was only a comment.
[63] Janet Finch-Saunders: You state in your written evidence that the Bill should require the Assembly Commission to consult with the Welsh Language Commissioner in relation to the content of the draft scheme. Why do you think that this is necessary, particularly as the Assembly will not be accountable to the commissioner?
[64] Ms Phillips: Rydym yn deall nad yw’r Cynulliad yn atebol i’r comisiynydd, ond mae gan y comisiynydd brofiad helaeth o ymdrin â’r iaith. Rwyf yn credu byddai’r Cynulliad yn cael budd o ymgynghori â’r comisiynydd, o ran cael cymorth ac arweiniad i’r cyfeiriad cywir.		Ms Phillips: We understand that the Assembly is not accountable to the commissioner, but the commissioner has vast experience of dealing with the Welsh language. I believe that the Assembly would benefit from consulting with the commissioner in terms of assistance and guidance to lead it in the right direction.
10.00 a.m.
[65] Mr Rhys: I ychwanegu at yr hyn a ddywedodd Ceri, rydym yn tynnu sylw yn ein tystiolaeth ichi fel pwyllgor ein bod yn pryderu am y diffyg allanolrwydd, hynny yw, bod popeth yn digwydd yn fewnol. Yn amlwg, ni fydd gan y comisiynydd unrhyw awdurdod dros sut bydd y Comisiwn yn gweithredu, ond rydym yn meddwl mai gorau po fwyaf o farn allanol a chyngor arbenigol y gall y Comisiwn ei gasglu. Credwn mai’r comisiynydd sydd â’r arbenigedd hwnnw, oherwydd hi fydd yn delio gyda gweddill y sector cyhoeddus.		Mr Rhys: To add to what Ceri has just said, we draw attention in our evidence to you as a committee that we are concerned about the lack of externalisation, that is, that everything happens in-house. Obviously, the commissioner will not have any authority over how the Commission operates, but we believe that the more external opinions and independent advice that the Commission receives the better. We believe that it is the commissioner who has that expertise, because she will be dealing with the rest of the public sector.
[66] Bethan Jenkins: Rwy’n cydnabod hynny, ond fy mhroblem gyda hyn yw’r ffaith mai’r ombwdsmon gwasanaethau cyhoeddus fydd yn gyfrifol am unrhyw broblemau. Felly, oni fyddai’n syniad edrych ar arbenigedd presennol swyddfa’r ombwdsmon, gan mai’r swyddfa honno fydd yn delio ag unrhyw gwynion? Mae’n ddigon teg i ddweud y dylai’r comisiynydd iaith gael mewnbwn i’r polisïau a’r cynllun, ond, ar ddiwedd y dydd, os mai’r ombwdsmon fydd yn ymdrin ag unrhyw broblemau mewn realiti, onid yw hynny’n beth pwysicach i’w wneud?		Bethan Jenkins: I recognise that, but my problem with this is that it is the public services ombudsman who will be responsible for any problems. So, would it not be better to look at the present expertise of the ombudsman’s office, given that it will be dealing with any complaints? It is fair enough to say that the language commissioner should have an input into policies and the scheme, but, at the end of the day, if it is the ombudsman who is going to be dealing with any problems in reality, is that not a more important thing to do?
[67] Mr Rhys: Yn sicr mae’r hyn rwyt ti’n ei ddweud yn wir o ran yr elfen o sicrhau bod y Comisiwn yn cadw at yr hyn sydd yn y cynllun ieithoedd swyddogol. Rydym yn awgrymu’r comisiynydd fel rhywun ag arbenigedd oherwydd gofynnwyd y cwestiwn. Hynny yw, nid ydym yn rhagweld sefyllfa lle, os yw’r comisiynydd iaith yn dweud rhywbeth, buasai’n rhaid i’r Comisiwn wrando.		Mr Rhys: What you say is certainly true in terms of ensuring that the Commission adheres to what is contained in the official languages scheme. We suggest the commissioner as someone who has the expertise because the question was posed. That is, we do not anticipate a situation in which, if the language commissioner said something, the Commission had to listen.
[68] Deallwn natur ymgynghoriad, sef nad yw pob barn sy’n cael ei rhoi mewn ymgynghoriad yn cael ei derbyn, o bell ffordd. Felly, yn amlwg byddai gan yr ombwdsmon rôl o ran sicrhau bod y Comisiwn yn cadw at y cynllun, ond credwn mai’r comisiynydd iaith fydd â’r arbenigedd. Fodd bynnag, mater i chi yw penderfynu os ydych yn cytuno â hynny ai peidio.		We understand the nature of consultation, which is that not all representations made in a consultation are accepted, by a long chalk. So, the ombudsman would clearly have a role in ensuring that the Commission adheres to the scheme, but we believe that the language commissioner will have the expertise. However, it is a matter for you to decide whether you agree with that or not.
[69] Ann Jones: We are not yet halfway through our questions. Would it be possible for us to extend our session with you until about 10.30 a.m., so that we can try to get through as many questions as possible? Is that acceptable?
[70] Ms Phillips: Yes, that is fine.
[71] Ann Jones: I therefore ask for short questions and answers, please.
[72] Joyce Watson: You state in your written evidence that the Bill should be considered by the Assembly initially without an accompanying draft scheme. That would allow for an additional consultation on the draft scheme’s content, once the Bill has completed its legislative journey. Why would that approach be beneficial?
[73] Mr Rhys: Mae’r cynllun yn dod yn rhinwedd y Bil. Gallai’r Bil newid yn ystod y broses—ac rydym o’r farn y dylai newid—ac felly mae’n rhyfedd fod cynllun yn cael ei ddrafftio cyn bod y Bil, sy’n gorfodi bodolaeth y cynllun hwnnw, yn cael ei baratoi ar ffurf derfynol. Dylai’r Bil gael ei basio, yna dylai cynllun gael ei baratoi ar sail y Bil fel y’i cytunwyd gan Aelodau’r Cynulliad, ac wedyn dylid cael ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus llawn ar y cynllun ar ei ben ei hun.		Mr Rhys: The scheme comes about as a result of the Bill. The Bill could change during the process—and we are of the opinion that it should change—and therefore it is strange that the scheme should be drafted before the Bill that requires the existence of the scheme has been prepared in its final form. The Bill should first be passed, then a scheme should be prepared on the basis of the Bill as agreed by Assembly Members, and, finally, there should be a full public consultation on that scheme alone.
[74] Gwnaeth swyddogion Bwrdd yr Iaith Gymraeg yr wythnos diwethaf gyfeirio at y diffyg manylder sydd yn y cynllun fel ag y mae ar hyn o bryd. Rydym yn cytuno â hynny. Yn ôl swyddogion y bwrdd yr wythnos diwethaf, rhan o’r rheswm am hynny, o bosibl, yw bod pethau eraill ar ein meddwl ar hyn o bryd, fel egwyddorion y Bil ei hunan. Cytunwn â hynny hefyd. Byddai’n gwneud llawer mwy o synnwyr i’r cynllun gael ei baratoi pan mai hwnnw’n unig fydd o dan sylw ac felly’n flaenoriaeth. Mae’r ffaith bod y cynllun ieithoedd swyddogol fel y mae yn y memorandwm ar hyn o bryd yn dyfynnu o Ddeddf Llywodraeth Cymru 2006 yn peri dryswch, oherwydd bydd y Bil yn newid y Ddeddf honno, ac felly bydd y cynllun wedyn yn anghywir.		Last week, Welsh Language Board officials referred to the lack of detail in the scheme as it is currently drafted. We agree with that. According to the board’s officials last week, part of the reason for that may be that we have other things on our mind now, such as the principles of the Bill itself. We agree with that as well. It would make much more sense for the scheme to be prepared when only the scheme is under consideration and it is therefore a priority. The fact that the official languages scheme in its current form in the memorandum quotes from the Government of Wales Act 2006 is confusing, because the Bill will amend that Act, and therefore the scheme will thereby be incorrect.
[75] Joyce Watson: In your written response, you advocate the establishment of an independent panel that would be responsible for drafting the scheme initially and would subsequently monitor its effect on behalf of the Assembly. In what ways would establishing such a panel improve the provision of bilingual services in the Assembly?
[76] Mr Rhys: Fel yr oeddech yn ei ddweud, rydym yn credu bod angen elfen o allanolrwydd yn y gwaith o ddydd i ddydd. Rydym yn meddwl bod angen panel neu bwyllgor o ryw fath yn gweithredu ar ran y Comisiwn i fonitro sut mae pethau’n mynd. Rydym wedi awgrymu yn ein tystiolaeth ysgrifenedig y gellid ffurfio panel o bobl ar sail ddi-dâl i gwrdd o bosibl chwe gwaith y flwyddyn.		Mr Rhys: As you said, we believe that there needs to be an element of externality in the day-to-day work. We think that a panel or committee of some sort is needed to monitor how things are progressing on behalf of the Commission. We have suggested in our written evidence that you could establish a non-remunerated panel of people who could meet perhaps six times a year.
[77] Ein pryder gyda phopeth yn digwydd yn fewnol yw bod perygl na fyddwn yn gallu gweld ffaeleddau a’r cyfleoedd i wella pethau. Rydym yn meddwl y byddai golwg allanol yn helpu. Hynny yw, yn y bôn, gwaith panel o’r fath fyddai cynorthwyo’r Comisiwn i sicrhau bod y cynllun yn cael ei weithredu. Gyda phob dymuniad yn y byd, nid wyf yn meddwl bod Comisiwn y Cynulliad, gyda’r holl bethau eraill y mae angen iddo eu hystyried, mewn sefyllfa i roi blaenoriaeth bob amser i’r cynllun ieithoedd swyddogol. Unig waith y panel fyddai edrych ar y cynllun a’i fonitro a byddai hynny’n rhoi lle mwy dyladwy i’r cynllun.		Our concern with having everything happening internally is that we will be unable to see failings and opportunities for improvement. We think that an external view on this would assist in that sense. That is, in essence, a panel of this kind would assist the Commission in ensuring that the scheme is being implemented. With the best will in the world, I do not think that the Assembly Commission, with all the other things that it has to consider, is in a position always to give priority to the official languages scheme. The panel’s sole task would be to look at the scheme and monitor it and that would give the scheme more of a proper position.
[78] Mark Isherwood: Changes were made to the official languages scheme following the consultation between August and October last year. In your consideration, to what extent have those changes addressed the concerns that you expressed during the consultation?
[79] Mr Rhys: O ran y newidiadau i’r Bil, rydym yn croesawu’r ffaith ei fod yn sôn am hawl ac yn croesawu’r enw newydd ar y cynllun i adlewyrchu’r ffaith y bydd yn ehangach na gwasanaethau yn unig, sef yr hyn a oedd yn y drafft blaenorol. Un pryder mawr sydd gennym yw’r ffaith nad oes dyletswyddau penodol wedi’u gosod yn y Bil, fel yr ydym wedi sôn eisoes, yn enwedig o ran y Cofnod, ond o ran pethau sylfaenol eraill hefyd.		Mr Rhys: In terms of the amendments to the Bill, we welcome the fact that it mentions rights and we welcome the scheme’s new name to reflect the fact that it will be broader than just services, which was what it was in the previous draft. A great concern for us is the fact that there are no specific duties included in the Bill, as we have already mentioned, particularly with regard to the Record, but also with regard to other fundamental things.
[80] O ran y cynllun ei hun, mae’r geiriad yn dal yn wan mewn mannau, yn ein barn ni. Rydym yn croesawu’r newidiadau sydd wedi cael eu gwneud, ond mae amodi ar y ddarpariaeth Gymraeg yn barod. Clywsoch yn y cyfarfod diwethaf a’r un cyn hwnnw y gallai dogfennau sydd ag oes fer fod yn uniaith Saesneg. Mae’r ffaith mai’r unig enghraifft o ddogfen a fyddai’n gorfod bod yn uniaith Saesneg yw dogfen i nodi bod tân yn y Cynulliad yn dangos nad oes pwrpas i’r amod hwnnw. Pe bai tân yn y Cynulliad, byddai’r larwm tân yn canu—nid oes angen dogfen ar wefan i ddweud bod tân. Mae hynny’n enghraifft wan, ac mae’n adran sy’n israddio’r iaith. Rydym o’r farn nid oes mo’i angen o gwbl.		As for the scheme itself, the wording is still weak in places, in our view. We welcome the changes that have been made, but there are already conditions to the Welsh language provision. You heard at the last meeting and the one before it that documents that have a short lifespan could be prepared in English only. The fact that the only example of a document that would have to be in English only is a document noting that there was a fire in the Assembly shows that there is no point to that condition. If there were a fire in the Assembly, the fire alarm would sound—there is no need for a document on the website to say that there is a fire. That is a weak example, and it is a section that downgrades the language. We believe that it is completely unnecessary.
[81] Hefyd, mae angen cryfhau geiriad fel ‘ceisio gwneud’. Nid ydym yn credu bod lle i hynny mewn cynllun fel hwn. Mae angen ei osod yn glir i helpu staff y Comisiwn i weithredu’r hyn sydd i ddigwydd. Os yw’r geiriad yn wan, mae’n anodd ei weithredu. Dyna pam rydym hefyd yn galw am dargedau.		Also, the wording ‘try to’ needs to be strengthened. We do not believe that there is any place for that in a scheme such as this. It needs to be clearly stated to help Commission staff to implement what is to happen. If the wording is weak, it is difficult to implement. That is why we also call for targets.
[82] O ran newidiadau i’r cynllun, mae angen un newid o ran y ffaith bod Cofnod y Trafodion yn cael ei gyhoeddi o fewn 24 awr yn Saesneg a ninnau’n gorfod aros pum niwrnod gwaith iddo ddod yn ddwyieithog. Rydym o’r farn bod hynny’n gwbl annerbyniol. Yr arfer rhwng 1999 a 2009 oedd bod Cofnod dwyieithog cyflawn yn cael ei gyhoeddi o fewn 24 awr. Ein barn ni yw bod angen dychwelyd i hynny. Os oedd yn bosibl y pryd hynny, mae’n bosibl yn awr. Yn ymarferol, mae’n newid y modd y mae Aelodau’r Cynulliad yn gweithio. Rydych chi a’ch staff yn gwybod, rwy’n siŵr, yn y pum diwrnod rhwng cyfarfodydd, mae pethau eraill ar eich meddwl, felly nid yw’r arfer hwn yn caniatáu amser i baratoi ar gyfer trafodaethau’r wythnos ganlynol, ac mae’n effeithio ar bobl eraill, megis newyddiadurwyr ac aelodau’r cyhoedd. Yn syml, os oedd yn bosibl o’r blaen, dyma’r cyfle i’w roi yn ôl ar yr un sail. Gan ein bod yn cyfieithu’r Cofnod, dylid gwneud hynny’n amserol fel y bydd o ddefnydd i bobl.		In terms of changes to the scheme, one necessary change is with regard to the fact that the Record of Proceedings is published within 24 hours in English while we have to wait five working days to for it to come out bilingually. We consider that to be completely unacceptable. The practice between 1999 and 2009 was that a fully bilingual version of the Record was published within 24 hours. Our view is that we need to return to that. If it was possible at that time, it is possible now. In practice, it changes the way in which Assembly Members work. You and your staff know, I am sure, that in the five days between meetings, there are other things on your mind, so this practice does not allow time to prepare for discussions the following week, and it affects others, such as journalists and members of the public. Basically, if it was possible before, this is the opportunity to put it back on the same basis. Since we are translating the Record, it should be done in a timely manner so that it will be useful to people.
[83] Ann Jones: I am going to have to appeal for shorter answers. We understand your concerns about the Record of Proceedings, and we have noted them. We are on question 14 of 28, and we have about 20 minutes left. So, short questions and short answers, please, and then we will get to the end of the paper. Thank you.
[84] Mark Isherwood: You referred to targets. How would the inclusion of clear targets in the draft scheme improve and strengthen it?
[85] Mr Nosworthy: Byddai cynnwys targedau yn golygu y byddai gweithredu pendant yn digwydd. Er enghraifft, mae’r cynllun yn sôn bod traean y staff yn gallu siarad Cymraeg ar hyn o bryd, felly, oni fyddai’n rhesymol i gynnwys targed i gynyddu hynny i hanner y staff o fewn pedair blynedd? Byddai fframwaith amser a thargedau’n golygu y byddai’n bosibl i Aelodau’r Cynulliad graffu ar adroddiadau blynyddol i weld a oes cynnydd wedi digwydd ac os ydynt wedi cyrraedd y nod o ran targedau sydd wedi’u gosod. Dylai’r Cynulliad osod esiampl i gyrff eraill. Mae angen i’r Cynulliad fod yn flaenllaw. Dylai ddangos, trwy ei dargedau, ei fod yn gallu bod yn flaenllaw. Dyna pam roeddem yn credu bod y ffaith bod y Cynulliad wedi torri ei gynllun iaith ei hun yn anfaddeuol—ein ddeddfwrfa ein hunain oedd wedi torri’r cynllun a osododd i’w hun.		Mr Nosworthy: The inclusion of targets would mean that specific action would occur. For example, the scheme notes that a third of staff can speak Welsh at the moment, therefore, would it not be reasonable to include a target to increase that to half the staff within four years? Time frames and targets would make it possible for Assembly Members to scrutinise annual reports to see whether progress had been made and whether the goals set by the targets had been achieved. The Assembly should set an example for other organisations. The Assembly needs to be in the vanguard. It should demonstrate, through its targets, that it can be in the vanguard. That is why we believed that the fact that the Assembly had failed to adhere to its own Welsh language scheme was unforgiveable—our own legislature failed to adhere to the scheme that it had set for itself.
[86] Mark Isherwood: In the context of targets and goals, what is your response to Rhodri Glyn Thomas’s statement to the committee last month? The statement was:
[87] ‘It is because every service will have to prepare its strategy in response to the official languages scheme. The scheme in its entirety is accountable to all Assembly Members through the annual report. That will be the opportunity to scrutinise what has been happening during the year and to see whether we have achieved our aims on the principle of enabling Members to work through the medium of either Welsh or English.’
[88] Mr Rhys: Byddai gadael i wasanaethau greu eu cynlluniau eu hunain yn mynd yn groes i ysbryd y Bil. Mae angen arweiniad o’r canol ar sut y dylid gosod yr egwyddorion. Yn amlwg, bydd amrywiaeth o fewn meysydd gwasanaeth am eu bod yn darparu gwasanaethau gwahanol, ond dylai’r cynllun osod pethau yn eu lle a gwneud hynny’n eglur. Bydd disgwyl i Aelodau’r Cynulliad basio’r cynllun. Bydd yn cael sylw cyhoeddus a chynnwys y cynllun y byddwch yn dod yn gyfarwydd ag ef. Mae angen manylion yn y cynllun cyn bod Aelodau’r Cynulliad yn gallu ei basio.		Mr Rhys: Allowing services to create their own schemes would go against the spirit of the Bill. There needs to be leadership from the centre on how the principles should be put in place. Clearly, there will be diversity between service areas because they provide different services, but the scheme needs to set things in place and to do that clearly. Assembly Members will be expected to approve the scheme. It will get public coverage and it is the contents of the scheme that you will become familiar with. We need details in the scheme before it can be approved by Assembly Members.
[89] Bethan Jenkins: Rydych yn dweud yn eich tystiolaeth bod y cynllun drafft yn cynnwys diffiniad cul o’r term ‘cyhoedd’, sy’n deillio o Ddeddf yr Iaith Gymraeg 1993, a bod hynny’n gwbl ddianghenraid yn y Bil hwn. Pam eich bod yn credu hynny?		Bethan Jenkins: You state in your evidence that the draft scheme includes a narrow definition of the term ‘public’, which stems from the Welsh Language Act 1993, and that it is completely unnecessary in this Bill. Why do you believe that?
[90] Mr Rhys: Mae’n ymwneud â Deddf 1993. Roedd y Ddeddf honno yn ymwneud â darparu gwasanaethau i’r cyhoedd yng Nghymru. Mae’n gwneud synnwyr bod diffiniad o ‘cyhoedd’ mewn cynlluniau iaith o dan Ddeddf 1993. Nid ydym yn anghytuno mai dyna oedd diffiniad ‘cyhoedd’ yn Neddf 1993, ond nid yw’r cynllun ieithoedd hwn wedi ei baratoi o dan Ddeddf 1993. Nid darparu gwasanaethau ar gyfer y cyhoedd yw pwrpas y Bil. Mae’n gallu bod yn ehangach na hynny. Rydym eisoes wedi sôn am rai pethau yr hoffem i’r Bil gynnwys, er enghraifft, defnydd mewnol o’r Gymraeg. Nid yw’n ymwneud yn unig â darparu gwasanaethau i’r cyhoedd. Nid yw’r diffiniad o’r ‘cyhoedd’, er nad yw’n anghywir o dan Ddeddf 1993, yn fuddiol. Mae’n cael ei gynnwys yn y cynllun, ond rydym o’r farn y byddai pethau eraill yn llawer mwy buddiol.		Mr Rhys: It relates to the 1993 Act. That Act dealt with the provision of services to the public in Wales. It makes sense for there to be a definition of ‘public’ in Welsh language schemes under the 1993 Act. We do not disagree that that was the definition of ‘public’ in the 1993 Act, but this languages scheme has not been prepared under the 1993 Act. Provision of services to the public is not the purpose of the Bill. It can be broader than that. We have already mentioned certain things that we would like to see included in the Bill, for example, internal use of the Welsh language. It is not just about providing services to the public. The definition of ‘public’, although it is not incorrect under the 1993 Act, is not beneficial. It is included in the scheme but we are of the opinion that other things would be more beneficial.
[91] Bethan Jenkins: Sut fyddech yn ehangu ar y diffiniad hwnnw, os nad yw’n briodol i’r Bil?		Bethan Jenkins: How would you expand on that definition, if it is not appropriate to the Bill?
[92] Mr Rhys: Dywedodd y Comisiynydd sy’n gyfrifol am y Gymraeg yn ei dystiolaeth i’r pwyllgor fod y Bil i bawb, a bod ‘cyhoedd’ yn golygu ‘i bawb’. Yn ein barn ni, nid yw’r diffiniad yn y cynllun yn cynnwys pawb. Os mai bwriad y Comisiwn yw bod gwasanaethau ar gael i bawb, fel y dywedodd y Comisiynydd, nid yw’r diffiniad yn gywir. Dylai ddweud ‘i bawb’ yn y cynllun. Nid oes angen diffiniad o ‘cyhoedd’ yn y cynllun am nad yw’n ymwneud â darparu gwasanaethau i’r cyhoedd yn unig.		Mr Rhys: The Commissioner with responsibility for the Welsh language stated in his evidence to the committee that the Bill was for everyone, and that ‘public’ meant ‘for everyone’. In our view, the definition in the scheme does not include everyone. If the Commission intends services to be available for everyone, as the Commissioner stated, the definition is incorrect. It should say ‘for everyone’ in the scheme. There is no need for a definition of ‘public’ in the scheme because it is not only to do with providing services for the public.
[93] Bethan Jenkins: Felly, byddech yn newid y term ‘cyhoedd’ i ‘i bawb’ yn y Bil.		Bethan Jenkins: So, you would change the term ‘public’ to ‘for everyone’ in the Bill.
[94] Mr Rhys: Nid oes llawer o gyfeiriadau at y cyhoedd yn y cynllun. Mae diffiniad o ‘cyhoedd’, ond nid oes llawer o enghreifftiau lle mae’r gair ‘cyhoedd’ yn cael ei ddefnyddio. Byddwn yn hoffi gweld ‘i bawb’ am mai hynny yw dymuniad y Comisiwn.		Mr Rhys: There are not many references to the public in the scheme. There is a definition of ‘public’, but there are not many examples of the word ‘public’ being used. I would like to see ‘for everyone’ because that is the Commission’s wish.
10.15 a.m.
[95] Eluned Parrott: Rwy’n dysgu siarad Cymraeg, felly mae flin iawn gennyf os wyf yn manglo’r iaith heddiw. Yn eich ymateb, rydych yn dweud y dylai’r cynllun roi arweiniad drwy ddatgan bod y Cynulliad yn disgwyl i bob Aelod barchu’r egwyddor o ddwyieithrwydd wrth ymdrin â gohebiaeth. A allwch chi esbonio pam eich bod yn credu bod angen datganiad o’r fath?		Eluned Parrott: I am learning to speak Welsh, so I apologise if I mangle the language today. You state in your response that the scheme should show leadership by stating that the Assembly expects all Members to respect the principle of bilingualism when dealing with correspondence. Could you explain why you think that such a statement is necessary?
[96] Mr Rhys: Diolch ichi am y cwestiwn. Hoffwn ddechrau drwy ddiolch ichi—ac i eraill sydd wedi gwneud—am ofyn cwestiwn yn y Gymraeg. Rydym yn meddwl ei fod yn bwysig bod pobl yn cael cyfle i ymarfer ac nid yw’n hawdd siarad yn eich ail iaith. Felly, rydym yn croesawu hynny.		Mr Rhys: Thank you for the question. I would like to begin by thanking you—and others who have done so—for asking a question in Welsh. We think that it is important that people have an opportunity to practise and it is not easy to speak in your second language. Therefore, we welcome that.
[97] O ran eich cwestiwn penodol, mae rhai wedi cwyno nad yw Aelodau Cynulliad yn gohebu gyda’u hetholwyr yn ddwyieithog, neu ddim yn eu hiaith eu hunain. Rydym yn derbyn nad yw’r cynllun yn gallu rheoli ymddygiad Aelodau Cynulliad, ond rydym yn meddwl bod lle i roi arweiniad ar hynny a nodi, gan fod y ddwy iaith yn ieithoedd swyddogol, bod disgwyliad bod Aelodau Cynulliad yn dangos cwrteisi sylfaenol drwy ymateb i ohebiaeth yn yr iaith y derbyniwyd hi ynddi a gohebu yn gyffredinol yn ddwyieithog gyda phobl Cymru.		With regard to your specific question, some people have complained that Assembly Members do not correspond bilingually with their constituents, or do not do so in the person’s own language. We accept that the scheme cannot regulate Assembly Members’ behaviour, but we think that guidance could be provided on that and it could be noted that, as both languages are official languages, it is expected that Assembly Members show basic courtesy by responding to correspondence in the language in which it was received and that general correspondence with the people of Wales is issued in both languages.
[98] Eluned Parrott: Diolch. Rydych hefyd yn dweud yn eich ymateb y dylai Aelodau’r Cynulliad allu gwneud defnydd diamod a digyfyngiad o wasanaeth cyfieithu a phrawfddarllen. Beth fyddai manteision hynny yn eich barn chi?		Eluned Parrott: Thank you. You also state in your response that Assembly Members should have unlimited and unconditional access to a translation and checking service. What would be the benefits of that in your view?
[99] Ms Phillips: Yn syml, ni fyddai rhwystrau wedyn i Aelodau Cynulliad ddefnyddio gwasanaethau cyfieithu er mwyn iddynt allu gwasanaethu pobl Cymru yn y ddwy iaith swyddogol. Byddai’n normaleiddio’r iaith Gymraeg. Rydym yn cytuno gydag amcan y cynllun o leihau dibyniaeth ar gyfieithu. Hynny yw, wrth i sgiliau staff wella, wrth i’r cynllun godi ymwybyddiaeth o’r iaith Gymraeg ac wrth i staff dderbyn gwersi ychwanegol, bydd llai o waith gyfieithu yn y pen draw. Mae hynny’n golygu y byddai’r iaith yn cael ei normaleiddio yn y Cynulliad.		Ms Phillips: Simply put, there would then be no barriers to Assembly Members using translation services in order for them to serve the people of Wales in both official languages. It would normalise the Welsh language. We agree with the scheme’s objective of reducing the dependence on translation. That is, as the skills of staff improve, as the scheme raises awareness of the Welsh language, and as staff have additional lessons, there will be less translation work in the long term. That means that the language would be normalised in the Assembly.
[100] O ran y gost, byddai cost, wrth gwrs, ond, os yw’r Cynulliad am fod yn sefydliad ddwyieithog mewn gwirionedd, bydd cost ynghlwm wrth hynny. Mae hi’n fater o ddemocratiaeth, yn ein barn ni, bod popeth ar gael yn y Gymraeg.		With regard to the cost, there would be a cost, of course, but, if the Assembly wants to be a truly bilingual organisation, there will be a cost to that. It is a matter of democracy, in our view, for everything to be available in Welsh.
[101] Kenneth Skates: I will group my questions together, if that is okay. They relate to translation services for outside organisations. On 9 February 2012, the commissioner Rhodri Glyn Thomas stated:
[102] ‘we in the Commission are not in the business of translating on behalf of other organisations.’
[103] He goes on to talk about the cost and so forth, and said that if it were known that that was done, then it could present difficulties. However, you state in your evidence that the Assembly should provide translation services free of charge in cases where organisations are unable to provide translations of submissions themselves for financial reasons. Why should the Assembly provide this service in your view? What is your response to the commissioner’s point?
[104] Ms Phillips: Yn ein barn ni, dylai sefydliadau mawr a chyrff cyhoeddus ymateb i ymgynghoriadau yn ddwyieithog, a dylai’r Cynulliad fynnu hynny. Yn amlwg, mae gan gwmnïau mawr iawn gyllid i wneud hynny. Os nad yw’r Cynulliad yn eu gorfodi i fod yn ddwyieithog, mae’n rhoi hawl i gwmnïau dorri eu cynlluniau iaith eu hunain. Fodd bynnag, nid ydym o’r farn bod modd gofyn i unigolion, sefydliadau gwirfoddol ac elusennau i dalu. Cwmnïau bychain ydynt. Mae gennych ddarpariaeth cyfieithu yn y Cynulliad a dylech gynnig hynny am ddim iddynt er mwyn rhoi arweiniad iddynt.		Ms Phillips: In our opinion, large organisations and public bodies should respond to consultations in both languages, and the Assembly should demand that that is the case. Obviously, large companies have the means to do that. If the Assembly does not compel them to operate bilingually, it allows the companies to break their own language schemes. However, we do not believe that it is possible to ask individuals, voluntary organisations and charities to pay. They are small companies. There is translation provision in the Assembly and you should offer that free of charge in order to provide leadership in this area.
[105] Mr Rhys: Fel y bu i Ceri ddweud, dylai sefydliadau cyhoeddus yng Nghymru ymateb yn ddwyieithog, wrth gwrs, ond nid ydym yn meddwl y gallech ofyn i unigolion sy’n ymateb i ymgynghoriad wneud hynny yn ddwyieithog. Nid yw pawb yn ddwyieithog. Gwasanaeth i Aelodau Cynulliad yw cyfieithu ymatebion i ymgynghoriad sy’n dod i mewn i’r Cynulliad, fel bod Aelodau Cynulliad yn gallu darllen yr ymatebion yn eu hiaith eu hunain, yn Gymraeg neu yn Saesneg. Fel y bu ichi ddweud, gyda phethau fel Google Translate, byddai modd gwneud hynny llawer cynt, yn ein barn ni.		Mr Rhys: As Ceri said, public bodies in Wales should respond bilingually, of course, but we do not think that you can ask individuals who are replying to consultations to do so bilingually. Not everyone is bilingual. The translation of consultation responses that come into the Assembly is a service for Assembly Members, so that Assembly Members can read those responses in their own language, in Welsh or English. As you have said, with tools such as Google Translate, there is a way of doing this much more quickly, in our opinion.
[106] Mr Nosworthy: Nid ydym yn credu ei fod yn dderbyniol bod Llywodraeth Cymru yn cyflwyno rhai dogfennau yn uniaith Saesneg. Ni chredwn y byddai’n amhosibl gofyn i’r Llywodraeth ddarparu dogfennau dwyieithog ar y lleiaf. Dylai’r Llywodraeth wneud hynny’n naturiol fel rhan o’i gwaith bob dydd fel Llywodraeth.		Mr Nosworthy: We do not believe that it is acceptable that the Welsh Government publishes some documents in English only. We do not believe that it would be impossible to ask the Government to provide bilingual documents, at the least. The Government should do that naturally as a part of its daily activities as a Government.
[107] Ann Jones: I will now bring Mike Hedges in very briefly.
[108] Mike Hedges: I used Google Translate last night to translate from English to Welsh. It is great for words, but it can produce some absolute gobbledegook when you try to translate from English to Welsh, as it did when we tried to translate my daughter’s homework on Wikipedia.
[109] Mr Rhys: Wrth gwrs. Nid ydym yn awgrymu bod Aelodau’r Cynulliad ddefnyddio Google Translate eu hunain. Rydym yn dweud ei fod yn offeryn y dylai gael ei ddefnyddio gan unedau cyfieithu, fel y gall yr unedau droi’r gobbledegook a gynhyrchir weithiau yn iaith safonol. Mae Google Translate yn hwyluso gwaith cyfieithu, ond, yn sicr, offeryn y dylid ei ddefnyddio’n ofalus gan gyfieithwyr ydyw, yn hytrach na rhywbeth i Aelodau Cynulliad ei ddefnyddio.		Mr Rhys: Of course. We are not suggesting that Assembly Members use Google Translate themselves. We are saying that it is a tool that should be used by translation units, so that these units can turn the gobbledegook that is sometimes produced into proper language. Google Translate facilitates translation work, but it is certainly a tool that should be used carefully by translators, rather than something to be used by Assembly Members.
[110] Alun Ffred Jones: Mae gennyf ddau sylw i’w gwneud. Yn gyntaf, dylech roi terfyn ar gyfeirio at Google Translate fel yr unig ffordd o gyfieithu periannyddol. Mae dulliau gwell ar gael yn nes at adref. Yn ail, awgrymaf nad yw cymharu dylanwad y Cofnod â chyfieithiad yr Archesgob William Morgan o’r Beibl yn llawer o help i neb, ac yn berffaith anghywir.		Alun Ffred Jones: I have two comments to make. First, you should stop referring to Google Translate as the only means of machine translation. There are better methods available closer to home. Secondly, I suggest that comparing the Record with Archbishop William Morgan’s translation of the Bible is not much help to anyone, and is entirely erroneous.
[111] Symudaf ymlaen yn awr at gwestiwn. Rydych yn dweud yn eich tystiolaeth ysgrifenedig y dylai pob digwyddiad a gynhelir gan sefydliadau allanol ar ystâd y Cynulliad fod yn ddwyieithog. Beth yw ystyr ‘digwyddiad dwyieithog’ yn eich barn chi, a sut y gall hyn ddigwydd yn ymarferol?		I move on to a question now. You state in your written evidence that all events held by external organisations on the Assembly estate should be bilingual. What constitutes a ‘bilingual event’ in your view, and how could this aim be achieved in practice?
[112] Mr Nosworthy: I roi enghraifft i chi, mae Urdd myfyrwyr Aberystwyth eisoes wedi mabwysiadu polisi o’r fath. Ar hyn o bryd, mae’n bosibl i gwmnïau mawr gynnal digwyddiadau yma yn y Senedd heb fod gwasanaeth cyfieithu ar y pryd yn cael ei ddarparu. Credwn y dylai’r dogfennau a stondinau a marchnata ar gyfer y digwyddiadau hynny fod yn ddwyieithog, ac y dylid darparu gwasanaeth cyfieithu ar y pryd. Dylai darparu’r pethau hynny yn normal yn y Cynulliad.		Mr Nosworthy: To give you an example, the Urdd of Aberystwyth students has already adopted such a policy. At the moment, it is possible for large companies to hold events here in the Senedd without providing an interpretation service. We believe that the documents, stalls and marketing for these events should be bilingual, and an interpretation service should be provided. The provision of these things should be normal in the Assembly.
[113] Enghraifft arall o’r broblem gyda’r rheol bresennol yw’r grwpiau trawsbleidiol. Weithiau, nid oes cyfieithu ar y pryd ar gyfer y digwyddiadau hynny. Mae hynny’n cyfyngu’n amlwg ar hawl bobl i ymdrin â’r Cynulliad yn ddwyieithog. Felly, yr hyn rydym yn ceisio ei ddweud yw bod digwyddiadau lle nad yw cyfieithu yn cael ei ddarparu, sy’n atal pobl rhag ymdrin â’r Cynulliad yn ddwyieithog, ac y gellir newid y rheolau hyn er mwyn galluogi pobl i ddefnyddio’r Gymraeg.		Another example of the problem with the current rule is the cross-party groups. Sometimes, interpretation is not provided for those events. That obviously limits people’s right to deal with the Assembly bilingually. Therefore, what we are trying to say is that that there are events for which translation is not provided, which prevents people from dealing with the Assembly bilingually, and that these rules could be changed to allow people to use Welsh.
[114] Alun Ffred Jones: Felly, a ydych yn credu y dylai’r Comisiwn ei hun ddarparu cyfieithu ar gyfer pob cyfarfod allanol sy’n digwydd ar ystâd y Cynulliad?		Alun Ffred Jones: Therefore, do you think that the Commission itself should provide translation for every external meeting that takes place on the Assembly estate?
[115] Mr Nosworthy: Na. Mae hyn yn dilyn ymlaen o’r hyn y soniasom amdano eisoes mewn perthynas, er enghraifft, â Llywodraeth Cymru yn cyhoeddi dogfennau yn uniaith Saesneg. Mae modd i’r Cynulliad ddefnyddio ei bolisïau i sicrhau bod sefydliadau eraill yn darparu gwasanaethau, yn enwedig sefydliadau mawr iawn. Gallai’r Cynulliad, drwy ddefnyddio ei bolisïau, sicrhau bod y sefydliadau hyn yn darparu mwy o wasanaethau cyfrwng Cymraeg i’r cyhoedd.		Mr Nosworthy: No. This follows on from what we talked about in relation to, for example, the Welsh Government publishing documents in English only. It is possible for the Assembly to use its policies to ensure that other organisations provide services, particularly very large organisations. The Assembly, by means of its policies, could ensure that these organisations provide more Welsh-medium services to the public.
[116] Alun Ffred Jones: Rydych yn datgan yn eich ymateb y dylai’r cynllun drafft gynnwys adran a fyddai’n sicrhau bod deddfwriaeth y Cynulliad yn cyfrannu at yr egwyddor o gydraddoldeb rhwng y Gymraeg a’r Saesneg yn hytrach na thanseilio hynny. Sut y dylai’r cynllun roi sylw i hyn?		Alun Ffred Jones: You state in your response that the draft scheme should include a section that would ensure that the Assembly’s legislation contributes to, rather than undermines, the principle of equality between Welsh and English. How should this be covered by the scheme?
[117] Mr Rhys: Fel y gwyddoch, mae Mesur y Gymraeg (Cymru) 2011 yn cynnwys y gallu i osod safonau iaith ar gyrff cyhoeddus eraill. Credwn y dylai’r Comisiwn sicrhau darpariaeth debyg yn y cynllun ieithoedd a fydd yn golygu bod gofyn ystyried, mewn achosion o bolisi a deddfwriaeth, pa effaith y bydd y polisi neu’r ddeddfwriaeth honno’n ei chael ar y Gymraeg. Credwn fod y rhan fwyaf o benderfyniadau sy’n cael eu gwneud yn y Cynulliad yn cael rhyw effaith ar y Gymraeg, boed hynny’n negyddol neu gadarnhaol. Credwn y gallai’r cynllun osod trefn ar waith i asesu, ymhob achos, pa effaith y bydd yr elfennau hyn yn cael ar y Gymraeg, er mwyn i Aelodau etholedig wneud penderfyniadau—ymhob achos—sy’n seiliedig ar y canfyddiadau hynny. Mae’n rhywbeth i dynnu eich sylw er mwyn sicrhau bod cydraddoldeb i’r Gymraeg.		Mr Rhys: As you know, the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011 includes the ability to set language standards for other public bodies. We believe that the Commission should ensure similar provision in the languages scheme that would mean a requirement to consider, in matters of policy and legislation, what impact the policy or legislation will have on the Welsh language. We believe that the majority of decisions made in the Assembly have some kind of impact on the Welsh language, whether negative or positive. We feel that the scheme could put a system in motion to assess, in each case, what impact these elements have on the Welsh language, so that elected Members can make decisions—in each case—that are based on these findings. It is something to draw your attention in order to ensure that there is equality for the Welsh language.
[118] Alun Ffred Jones: Iawn, ond nid ydym wedi gweld y cynllun hwnnw eto, neu a ydych yn cyfeirio at—		Alun Ffred Jones: Fine, but we have not seen that scheme yet, or are you referring to—
[119] Mr Rhys: Rydym yn sôn am y cynllun ieithoedd swyddogol. O ran y cynllun ieithoedd swyddogol, byddai trefn yn cael ei gosod. Gallai hwnnw fod yn darged; nid oes rhaid iddo ddigwydd o’r cychwyn, ond gallai targed fod i asesu effaith unrhyw ddeddfwriaeth ar y Gymraeg o fewn blwyddyn i gychwyn y cynllun. Dyna’r math o beth a oedd gennym mewn golwg.		Mr Rhys: We are talking about the official languages scheme. In terms of the official languages scheme, a system would be established. That could be a target; it does not have to happen from the start, but there could be a target to start assessing the impact of any legislation on the Welsh language within a year of the start of the scheme. That is the sort of thing that we had in mind.
[120] Joyce Watson: You say in your response that the internal culture of the Assembly needs to change in order to create a truly bilingual institution. What has led you to that view and would you mind explaining it? What specific changes would you like to be made to the draft scheme that would help the Assembly to achieve that aim?
[121] Mr Nosworthy: O ran y newidiadau yr ydym yn credu sydd eu hangen, mae angen i ni symud o feddylfryd lle mae’r Gymraeg yn opsiynol i sefyllfa lle mae’r Gymraeg yn hanfodol. Byddech chi wedi gweld nifer o gyfeiriadau yn y cynllun at sefyllfaoedd lle na fydd pobl yn gallu derbyn gwasanaeth yn y Gymraeg. Mae angen shifft fawr yn y meddylfryd sy’n ystyried hynny’n dderbyniol i sefyllfa lle mae’r Gymraeg yr un un mor hanfodol â’r Saesneg.		Mr Nosworthy: Regarding the changes that we believe are required, we need to move from a mentality where Welsh is optional to a situation where Welsh is essential. You have seen a number of references in the scheme to situations where people will not be able to receive a service in Welsh. We need a major shift in the mindset that considers that to be acceptable and a shift to a situation where Welsh is as essential as English.
[122] Er enghraifft, wrth i dechnoleg newid ac wrth i fwy o bwyslais cael ei roi ar Senedd.tv, mae’r achos dros gyfieithu ar y pryd o’r Saesneg i’r Gymraeg yn cael ei chryfhau fel bod cofnod dwyieithog clywedol o’r hyn a ddywedir. Mae angen anelu at weinyddu drwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg a gwireddu hynny drwy ddilyn esiamplau sefydliadau eraill.		For example, as technology changes and more emphasis is placed on Senedd.tv, the case for interpretation from English into Welsh is strengthened so that there is a bilingual aural record of what is being said. We need to aim to administrating through the medium of Welsh and to realise that by following the examples of other organisations.
[123] Ar newidiadau penodol i’r cynllun, rydym wedi cynnwys llwyth o bwyntiau penodol yn ein hymateb ysgrifenedig, ond, fel yr ydym wedi dweud eisoes, rydym yn sôn am gael dargedau a fframwaith amser pendant yn y cynllun hwn yn hytrach nag ymrwymiadau cyffredinol. Rydym eisoes wedi sôn am banel allanol i graffu ar y cynllun ac rydym wedi dweud y dylech basio’r Bil yn gyntaf ac wedyn ystyried y cynllun ar ôl hynny, fel bod modd i’r cynllun adlewyrchu’r egwyddorion yn y Bil yn gywir.		On specific changes to the scheme, we have included many specific points in our written response, but, as we have already said, we are talking about having targets and definite timescales in the scheme rather than general commitments. We have already talked about an external panel to scrutinise the scheme and we have said that you should pass the Bill first and then consider the scheme afterwards so that the scheme can reflect the principles of the Bill correctly.
[124] Bethan Jenkins: Yr wyf yn poeni braidd am yr amserlen ar gyfer hynny. Rwyf yn tueddu i gytuno â chi ar y targedau ac ar aros nes bod y Bil wedi cael ei gymeradwyo yn gyntaf, ond oni fyddai time lag o ran gweithredu’r cynllun os oes mwy o ymgynghori? Nid wyf yn erbyn hynny, ond yr wyf eisiau clywed eich barn am y ffaith efallai na fydd pethau yn cael ei gweithredu yn y cyfamser.		Bethan Jenkins: I am rather concerned about the timetable for that. I tend to agree with you on the targets and about waiting until the Bill has been approved first, but would there not be a time lag in implemeting the scheme if there is more consultation? I am not against that, but I want to hear your views on the fact that things will not perhaps be done in the interim.
[125] Mr Rhys: Credaf eich bod yn gwneud pwynt teg. Mae amser Deddf 1993 yn dod i ben, ond ein barn ni yw ei fod yn werth cymryd ychydig o amser i’w gael yn iawn. Bydd y cynllun hwn yn para am bum mlynedd. Nid ydym yn credu bod y cynllun fel y mae yn y drafft presennol yn ddigon da, yn ddigon clir nag yn ddigon robust. Nid yw’n cynnwys unrhyw dargedau ac felly ni fyddai pasio hwn yn gyflym er mwyn cael rhywbeth drwodd yn helpu’r iaith Gymraeg gymaint ag y byddai aros ychydig o fisoedd mwy er mwyn gwneud job iawn ohono.		Mr Rhys: I think that you make a fair point. The time of the 1993 Act is coming to an end, but, in our view, it is worth taking a little time to get it right. This scheme will last for five years. We do not believe that the scheme as it stands in the current draft is good enough, clear enough or robust enough. It does not include any targets and therefore passing this quickly in order to get it through would not assist the Welsh language as much as waiting a few more months in order to make a proper job of it would.
[126] Bethan Jenkins: Onid yw hwn yn ymgynghoriad? Gallech ddadlau bod cael y drafodaeth hon a rhoi eich tystiolaeth i’r pwyllgor yn ymgynghoriad.		Bethan Jenkins: Is this not a consultation? You could argue that having this discussion and give your evidence to the committee is a consultation.
[127] Mr Rhys: Yn ein barn ni, mae angen ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus llawn ar y cynllun ar ôl i’r Bil gael ei basio.		Mr Rhys: In our view, we need a full public consultation on the scheme after the Bill is passed.
[128] Mr Nosworthy: Mae’n bosibl bod rhai pethau yn y cynllun presennol na fyddant yn gwneud synnwyr yng ngoleuni’r hyn fydd yn digwydd i’r Bil. Ar ben hynny, mae un targed sy’n cyfeirio at aelodau staff yn medru rhywfaint o Gymraeg erbyn mis Gorffennaf 2012, sef union yr un pryd ag y bydd y cynllun yn cael ei basio. Felly, efallai bod angen ailedrych ar rai targedau.		Mr Nosworthy: It is possible that there are some things in the current scheme that will not make sense in light of what happens to the Bill. Furthermore, there is one target in it that refers to staff members being able to speak some Welsh by July 2012, which is exactly the same time as the scheme will be passed. So, some targets perhaps need to be looked at again.
[129] Joyce Watson: Why do you think that speaking Welsh would be an essential requirement for the majority of posts in the Assembly?
[130] Mr Rhys: Fel y gwnaethom ddweud, rydym o’r farn, er mwyn i’r sefydliad fod yn un gwbl ddwyieithog, fod angen i ni anelu at sefyllfa lle mae’r rhan fwyaf o staff y Cynulliad yn weddol rhugl yn y Gymraeg.		Mr Rhys: As we have said, we are of the view that, in order for the institution to be fully bilingual, we need to aim for a situation in which the majority of Assembly staff are fairly fluent in Welsh.
10.30 a.m.
[131] Mae’r rhan fwyaf o staff y Cynulliad yn dod i gysylltiad â’r cyhoedd neu’n darparu gwasanaethau i Aelodau’r Cynulliad, ac rydym eisiau gweld sefyllfa lle mae hynny’n digwydd yn naturiol yn ddwyieithog, yn hytrach na bod popeth yn digwydd drwy gyfiethiad, neu bod un siaradwr Cymraeg ym mhob adran i ddelio gyda gwasanaethau Cymraeg. Mae hynny’n golygu buddsoddi mewn hyfforddiant i staff, sef rhywbeth nad ydym wedi siarad llawer amdano heddiw; mae angen ystyried o ddifrif sut mae hyfforddiant staff yn digwydd. Nid yw awr yr wythnos yn ddigon—mae angen bod yn deg â’r bobl ddi-Gymraeg sy’n gweithio i’r sefydliad hefyd a rhoi cyfle iddynt gael sgiliau llawn. Gydag awr neu ddwy o hyfforddiant y dydd, gallech ddod yn weddol rhugl mewn blwyddyn.		The majority of Assembly staff come into contact with the public, or provide services for Assembly Members, and we want to see a situation where that naturally happens bilingually, rather than having everything happening through translation, or having one token Welsh speaker in every department to deal with Welsh services. That does involve investment in staff training, which is not something that we have talked about very much today; serious consideration needs to be given to staff training. An hour a week is not enough—we must be fair to those staff members who do not speak Welsh and give them an opportunity to become fully skilled. With training of an hour or two a day, you could become quite fluent within a year.
[132] Nid ydym yn dweud y dylai pawb gael hyfforddiant o’r fath, gan ddechrau flwyddyn nesaf, ond gellid cychwyn gyda’r bobl sy’n awyddus i wneud hynny, fel ein bod yn adeiladu ar y traean o staff y Cynulliad—fel y darllenais yn y memorandwm—sy’n siarad Cymraeg. Mae hynny’n swnio’n eithaf da, ond yng nghyd-destun rhai sefydliadau cyhoeddus eraill, sydd wrthi’n gweithio ar gynyddu sgiliau iaith eu staff ymhellach, nid yw’r Cynulliad ar flaen y gad o bell ffordd. Gan fod y comisiwn wedi datgan ei fod am fod yn sefydliad dwyieithiog, mae angen staff dwyieithog, ac mae angen gweld hynny fel cyfle i staff ddatblygu eu sgiliau.		We are not saying that everyone should have such training, beginning next year, but a start could be made with those who were keen to do that, so that we build on the one-third of Assembly staff—as I read in the memorandum—who speak Welsh. That sounds quite good, but in the context of some other public organisations that are working on increasing the language skills of their staff, the Assembly is not in the vanguard by any means. As the commission has declared that it wants to be a truly bilingual institution, staff need to be bilingual, and that needs to be seen as an opportunity for staff to develop their skills.
[133] Ann Jones: I thank you for your evidence today. If we could have the note that you mentioned within a week, that would help us to formulate questions for the Minister. You will be sent a copy of the transcript to check for accuracy. Thank you.
Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 10.32a.m. a 10.41 a.m. The meeting adjourned between 10.32 a.m. and 10.41 a.m.
Bil Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru (Ieithoedd Swyddogol): Sesiwn Dystiolaeth Cyfnod 1—Cymdeithas Cyfieithwyr Cymru National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Bill: Stage 1 Evidence Session—Association of Welsh Translators and Interpreters
[134] Ann Jones: I now reconvene the Communities, Equality and Local Government Committee. I apologise for keeping our witnesses from the Association of Welsh Translators and Interpreters waiting, but we had some lengthy questions and answers that we needed to tease out during the previous section. So, I apologise for starting late. Could you please introduce yourselves, before we turn to the questions?
[135] Mr Parry: Geraint Wyn Parry wyf i, prif weithredwr Cymdeithas Cyfieithwyr Cymru.		Mr Parry: I am Geraint Wyn Parry, chief executive of the Association of Welsh Translators and Interpreters.
[136] Mr Jones: Berwyn Prys Jones wyf i, cadeirydd Cymdeithas Cyfieithwr Cymru.		Mr Jones: I am Berwyn Prys Jones, chairman of the Association of Welsh Translators and Interpreters.
[137] Ann Jones: I will start with the first question. What are your overall thoughts on the Bill and the draft scheme, as currently presented? Have the concerns that you raised at the consultation stage been addressed?
[138] Mr Parry: Rydym yn croesawu’r Bil, ac rydym o’r farn y bydd yn cyflawni ei nod. Credaf fod ein pryderon, ar y cyfan, wedi’u hateb yn y Bil sydd ger bron. Mae hynny’n sicr yn wir o safbwynt cyhoeddi Cofnod dwyieithog, er bod gennym rai pryderon o hyd ynghylch hynny.		Mr Parry: We welcome the Bill, and we are of the view that it will achieve its objective. I believe that, on the whole, our concerns have been resolved in the Bill before us. That is certainly true from the point of view of the publication of a bilingual Record of Proceedings, although we still have some concerns about that.
[139] Ann Jones: In your paper, you draw attention to the fact that paragraphs 58-60 of the draft scheme do not fulfil the aim of section 1(2) of the Bill, which states that both languages will be treated on the basis of equality. Can you expand on this? Should the Bill or the scheme be amended as such?
[140] Mr Parry: Y rheswm dros ddweud hynny yw’r ffaith nad ydym yn cael Cofnod dwyieithog yn y ddwy iaith yn syth. Mae’n bwysig bod Cofnod cwbl ddwyieithog ar gael, yn sicr o safbwynt cysondeb rhwng y ddwy iaith pan gaiff datganiadau eu gwneud. Mae angen edrych eto ar gyflymu’r broses o gael Cofnod cwbl ddwyieithog.		Mr Parry: We say that because of the fact that we do not have an immediate bilingual Record. It is important that a fully bilingual Record is available, certainly from the point of view of consistency in both languages when statements are made. Speeding-up the process of having a fully bilingual Record needs to be looked at again.
[141] Gwyn R. Price: What are your general views on new section 2(2)(6), which states that the Bill does not necessarily require the scheme to provide interpretation and translation from Welsh into English and English into Welsh in all situations?
[142] Mr Parry: Rhaid ymateb i wneuthuriad y pwyllgor. Yn sicr, os oes rhywun yn cyflwyno tystiolaeth yn y Gymraeg i bwyllgor, rhaid bod ganddynt yr hawl i gyflwyno’r dystiolaeth honno’n Gymraeg. Ni fyddem yn disgwyl i’r Saesneg gael ei chyfieithu i’r Gymraeg yn nhrafodion y pwyllgorau, yn unol â’r arferiad.		Mr Parry: There is a need to respond to the make-up of the committee. Certainly, when people give evidence through the medium of Welsh to committee, they must be able to give that evidence in Welsh. In line with current practice, we would not expect English to be translated into Welsh in committee proceedings.
[143] Alun Ffred Jones: Mae’n ddiddorol eich clywed yn dweud nad ydych yn disgwyl cyfieithiad, oherwydd roedd Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg yn glir yn ei barn, os wyf wedi deall yn iawn, y dylid cyfieithu o’r Saesneg i’r Gymraeg. Felly, fel corff, nid ydych yn credu bod hynny’n angenrheidiol. Beth yw’ch safbwynt ar hynny?		Alun Ffred Jones: It is interesting that you say that you do not expect such interpretation, because the Welsh Language Society, if I understood correctly, was clear in its view that there should be interpretation from English into Welsh. So, as an association, you do not believe that that is essential. What is your stance on that?
10.45 a.m.
[144] Mr Parry: Yr arfer yw bod cyfieithu ar y pryd yn cael ei ddarparu ar gyfer y rhai sy’n methu â deall y Gymraeg. Dyna’r egwyddor rydym yn glynu wrthi.		Mr Parry: The practice is that interpretation is provided for those who do not understand Welsh. That is the principle to which we adhere.
[145] Bethan Jenkins: Rydym eisoes wedi trafod y Cofnod yn fras, ond yn eich ymateb i’r pwyllgor rydych yn dweud ichi fynegi pryder ym mis Awst 2009 y byddai rhoi’r gorau i gyfieithu Cofnod y Trafodion yn gallu creu cynsail i sefydliadau eraill yn y sector cyhoeddus leihau nifer y dogfennau pwysig sy’n cael eu cyfieithu, yn enwedig mewn cyfnod o benderfyniadau economaidd anodd. A yw hynny dal yn wir, ynteu a yw’r newidiadau sydd wedi’u gwneud gan y Comisiwn, sef cyfieithu o fewn pum diwrnod, yn ddigonol?		Bethan Jenkins: We have already briefly discussed the Record, but in your response to the committee you say that you expressed concern in August 2009 that ceasing to translate the Record of Proceedings could set a precedent for other organisations in the public sector to reduce the number of important documents that are translated, especially in a time of difficult economic decisions. Is that still the case, or are the changes made by the Commission, to translate within five days, adequate?
[146] Mr Parry: Roedd hynny’n bryder adeg y penderfyniad gwreiddiol yn 2009. Bellach, mae trefn wedi’i sefydlu, felly nid yw’r pryder yr un mor wir. Nid oes gennym dystiolaeth nac enghreifftiau o unrhyw dorri yn ôl. Mae cryn dipyn o gydymdeimlad tuag at y Gymraeg beth bynnag. Gallai ffactorau eraill, megis y toriadau i wariant cyhoeddus a allai leihau ar bwyllgorau a phapurau sy’n cael eu hanfon allan, gael mwy o effaith.		Mr Parry: That was a concern at the time of the original decision in 2009. There is now a system in place, so the concern is not as relevant. We have no evidence or examples of any cutting back. There is considerable goodwill towards the Welsh language in any case. Other factors, such as cuts to public expenditure that could reduce the number of committees and papers sent out, could have a greater impact.
[147] Bethan Jenkins: Felly, mae gennych bryderon am adran 2(2)(6), ond rydych yn credu bod y system, fel ag y mae, yn ddigonol. Nid oes gennych bryderon y gallai’r system gael ei newid yn y dyfodol, a hynny am fod y Bil a’r cynllun yn ddigon cryf.		Bethan Jenkins: So, you have concerns about section 2(2)(6), but you think that the system, as it stands, is adequate. You have no concerns that the system could change in future, because the Bill and the scheme are strong enough.
[148] Mr Parry: O ran trefniadau cyfieithu’r Cofnod, roedd cost yn ffactor yn y penderfyniad. Mae gwaith wedi’i wneud ar drefn newydd sy’n defnyddio technoleg, ac rydym yn croesawu hynny. Mae lle pwysig i ddefnyddio technoleg wrth gyfieithu. Mae hynny’n golygu bod Cofnod dwyieithog ar gael o fewn rhai dyddiau iddo gael ei gyhoeddi. Wrth i’r drefn gael ei datblygu ac wrth inni weld sut mae’r gwaith yn mynd yn ei flaen, gobeithiwn y gellir cyflymu’r broses a chael Cofnod cwbl ddwyieithog mewn cyfnod byrrach.		Mr Parry: In terms of translation arrangements for the Record, cost was a factor in the decision. Work has been done on a new process that makes use of technology, and we welcome that. Technology in translation has an important role to play. It means that a bilingual Record can be made available within a few days of its publication. As the system develops and as we see how work progresses, we would hope that the process could be speeded up and that the fully bilingual Record could be available more quickly.
[149] Mr Jones: Rydym yn ystyried pum diwrnod fel uchafswm—pum diwrnod ar y mwyaf.		Mr Jones: We consider five days to be the maximum—five days at most.
[150] Eluned Parrott: In giving reasons as to why a reference to a fully bilingual Record of Proceedings should not be included on the face of the Bill, a legal adviser to the Assembly told the committee that it could raise the status of the Record to a level that is different to the other bilingual services currently provided by the Assembly, such as simultaneous translation and so on. What is your response to that?
[151] Mr Parry: Y Cofnod yw’r ddogfen bwysicaf sy’n cael ei chyhoeddi. Dylid cynnwys sicrwydd y bydd Cofnod cwbl ddwyieithog yn cael ei gyhoeddi. Rhaid osgoi’r sefyllfa a digwyddodd yn 2009, pan benderfynwyd peidio â chyhoeddi Cofnod dwyieithog. Ni fyddai cydnabod statws y Cofnod yn y Bil yn tanseilio gwasanaethau dwyieithog eraill. Byddai’n rhoi statws dyledus i’r Cofnod fel dogfen bwysicaf y Cynulliad.		Mr Parry: The Record is the most important document that is published. An assurance that a fully bilingual Record will be published should be included. We must avoid a situation like that which we saw in 2009, when it was decided not to publish a bilingual Record. Acknowledging the status of the Record in the Bill would not undermine other bilingual services. It would give the Record its due status as the Assembly’s most important document.
[152] Mr Jones: Rhaid cofio bod y Cofnod Cymraeg ar y blaen ymhlith ieithoedd lleiafrifol. Gallai’r statws sy’n cael ei roi i’r Cofnod gael ei adlewyrchu mewn seneddau eraill sy’n trafod mewn ieithoedd lleiafrifol. Mae hynny’n bwysig. Mae’r Cynulliad wedi arwain mewn sawl maes ac mae hwn yn faes arall lle mae’n arwain. Mae’n bwysig glynu at yr arweiniad hwnnw.		Mr Jones: We must bear in mind that the Welsh Record is in the vanguard among minority languages. The status given to the Record could be reflected in other parliaments that use minority languages. That is important. The Assembly has led in many areas and this is another area where it is taking the lead. It is important to continue in that vein.
10.50 a.m.
[153] Eluned Parrott: Is the Record symbolic of the status that we place on the Welsh language in this institution?
[154] Mr Jones: Nid ni yn unig ydyw, ond pobl ar hyd a lled Ewrop, ac efallai’r byd.		Mr Jones: It is not just us, but people all over Europe, and perhaps the world.
[155] Mike Hedges: Rhodri Glyn Thomas told the committee that you can base the cost of producing a bilingual Record on that of two senior translators or the number of words that need to be translated and the cost of editing that after everything has been fed into the electronic system. He said:
[156] ‘Fodd bynnag, £95,000 yw’r gost, ac nid ydym yn rhagweld y bydd yn mynd dros hynny.’		‘However, the cost is £95,000, and we do not anticipate that it will exceed that.’
[157] A yw hynny’n amcangyfrif realistig yn eich tyb chi?		Is this a realistic estimation of the costs in your opinion?
[158] Mr Jones: Pan fyddaf yn cynnig amcangyfrif am ddarn o waith, fel arfer, mae rhywbeth yn digwydd yn ystod y gwaith hwnnw i wneud i’r gwaith gynyddu neu, weithiau, leihau. Anaml iawn yr ydym yn mynd yn ôl i’r ffigur gwreiddiol.		Mr Jones: When I give an estimate for a piece of work, something usually happens during that work to make it increase or, sometimes, decrease. We seldom come back to the original figure.
[159] Mr Parry: Mae rhywun yn ffyddiog bod ymchwil trylwyr wedi cael ei wneud i gyrraedd y ffigur hwnnw er mwyn medru darparu’r gwasanaeth. Yn sicr, amcangyfrif ydyw, ac mae rhywun yn gobeithio y bydd y gwaith yn dod o fewn ffigur tebyg i hwnnw, ond fe all gynyddu, gan ddibynnu ar faint o gyfieithu sydd ei angen.		Mr Parry: One would trust that thorough research has been done in reaching that figure so that the service can be provided. Certainly, it is no more than an estimate, and one hopes the work will come in at a similar figure, but it may increase, depending on the amount of translation required.
[160] Alun Ffred Jones: Yn eich ymateb i’r ymgynghoriad gwreiddiol, fe ddywedasoch y byddech yn annog y Comisiwn i ailystyried ai defnyddio Google Translate i gyfieithu’r Cofnod oedd y llwybr technolegol mwyaf effeithiol i’w ddilyn. Beth yw’ch barn am y ffordd y mae’r Comisiwn wedi penderfynu bwrw ati i gyfieithu’r Cofnod yn awr?		Alun Ffred Jones: In your response to the original consultation, you said that you would encourage the Commission to reconsider whether using Google Translate to translate the Record was the most effective technological path to follow. What are your views on the way in which the Commission has now decided to approach the translation of the Record?
[161] Mr Parry: Roedd gennym bryderon mawr ynglŷn â Google Translate. Mae enghreifftiau mewn sawl iaith wedi dangos ei fod yn ddiffygiol, ac wrth gwrs, ni fydd peiriant ar ei ben ei hun yn rhoi cyfieithiad cywir. Fel y dywedwyd o’r blaen, rydym yn croesawu’n fawr y ffaith i drefn o gyfieithu peirianyddol sy’n defnyddio cof cyfieithu gael ei fabwysiadu gan y Cynulliad. Mae’n berffaith dderbyniol i ni ddefnyddio technoleg ym maes cyfieithu, fel ymhob maes arall. Yn sicr, bydd defnyddio cyfieithu peirianyddol gyda’r meddalwedd cof cyfieithu yn nwylo cyfieithwyr a golygyddion cymwys yn sicrhau cyfieithiad o safon a chysondeb yn y gwaith.		Mr Parry: We had major concerns about Google Translate. There are examples in several languages that have shown it to be defective, and of course, a machine will not by itself provide an accurate translation. As has been stated before, we very much welcome the fact that a system of machine translation using a translation memory has been adopted by the Assembly. It is perfectly acceptable to use technology in translation, as in every other area. Certainly, the use of machine translation with translation memory software in the hands of qualified translators and editors will ensure quality translation and consistency in the work.
[162] Mr Jones: Hoffwn sôn am un enghraifft o gyfieithu peirianyddol y daethom ar ei thraws ddoe, fel mae’n digwydd. Roedd y Saesneg yn dweud, ‘A project to study how lovers process languages’, a’r Gymraeg yn dweud, ‘How lovers do word processing’. Mae’n rhaid bod yn ofalus iawn.		Mr Jones: I will mention one example of machine translation that we encountered yesterday, as it happens. The English said ‘A project to study how lovers process languages’, and the Welsh has, ‘How lovers do word processing’. You have to be very careful.
[163] Alun Ffred Jones: Rwy’n derbyn bod i gyfieithu peirianyddol ei beryglon a bod angen felly gyfieithwyr proffesiynol i gadw golwg, ond a ydw i’n iawn i ddweud bod technolegau heblaw Google Translate yn cael eu defnyddio gan gyfieithwyr proffesiynol eisoes?		Alun Ffred Jones: I accept mechanical translation has its hazards and that professional translators are therefore needed to keep an eye on things, but am I right in saying that technologies other than Google Translate are being used by professional translators already?
[164] Mr Parry: Oes, mae technolegau, ac un pecyn yw’r Google Translator Toolkit, sydd wedi cael ei fabwysiadu gan y Cynulliad. Mae enghraifft ym Mhrifysgol Bangor, lle maent wedi datblygu eu cymhorthion eu hun, sy’n cynnwys pecyn meddalwedd cof cyfieithu y maent yn ei ddefnyddio yn y brifysgol, gan dynnu ynghyd nifer o’r cymhorthion technolegol ar gyfer yr iaith, megis Cysill a CysGair a geiriaduron ar-lein maent wedi datblygu yn yr uned technolegau iaith. Mae rhagor ar gael na dim ond Google Translator Toolkit.		Mr Parry: Yes, there are technologies, and one package is the Google Translator Toolkit, which has been adopted by the Assembly. There is an example at Bangor University, where they have developed their own tools, including a translation memory software package that they use in the university, drawing together a number of the technological language aids, such as Cysill and CysGair and online dictionaries that they have developed in the language technologies unit. There is more available than just the Google Translator Toolkit.
[165] Alun Ffred Jones: A ydych yn gwybod a yw’r Comisiwn wedi mabwysiadu Google Translate yn benodol, neu a yw’n agored i ddefnyddio yr hyn sy’n cael ei ddatblygu ym Mhrifysgol Bangor, er enghraifft?		Alun Ffred Jones: Do you know if the Commission has adopted Google Translate specifically, or whether it is open to using what is being developed at Bangor University, for instance?
[166] Mr Parry: Google Translator Toolkit sydd wedi cael ei fabwysiadu gan y Cynulliad, yn hytrach na Google Translate, sy’n becyn ychydig yn wahanol. Yn ôl yr hyn a ddeallaf, mae’r pecyn ym Mhrifysgol Bangor wedi cael ei ddatblygu at ddefnydd mewnol, ond rwyf yn meddwl bod dyheadau i’w ddatblygu fel y gellid ei werthu.		Mr Parry: The Assembly has adopted Google Translator Toolkit and not Google Translate, which is a slightly different package. From what I gather, the package at Bangor University has been developed for internal use, but I believe that there are aspirations surrounding its development so that it can be sold.
[167] Mark Isherwood: Given your experience of recent developments in electronic translation, how realistic and achievable is the Commission’s intention to share its electronic translations with bodies and organisations throughout Wales?
[168] Mr Parry: Mae gan uned gyfieithu y Llywodraeth ym mharc Cathays brosiect yn ei ail gyfnod i rannu gwasanaethau cyfieithu ar draws y sector cyhoeddus. Bydd y prosiect hwnnw’n edrych ar dair agwedd, ac mae technoleg gwybodaeth yn un o’r rheini. Felly, drwy’r prosiect hwnnw, rwyf yn gobeithio y  bydd modd i’r Cynulliad gyfrannu at y drafodaeth honno a thynnu sylw at yr arfer da sydd yn bodoli yma, fel bod awdurdodau lleol ar hyd a lled Cymru yn dod yn ymwybodol ohono. Mae pa un a fyddant yn ei fabwysiadu yn gwestiwn arall, oherwydd mae gan awdurdodau eu trefniadau presennol sydd yn gweithio’n ddigon boddhaol, felly ni fyddwn yn tybio y bydd pobl yn newid er mwyn newid. Fodd bynnag, rwyf yn gobeithio’n fawr y bydd cyfle i eraill y tu hwnt i’r Cynulliad gael y cyfle i rannu yn y profiadau.		Mr Parry: The Government’s translation unit in Cathays park has a project in its second phase to share translation services across the public sector. That project will look at three aspects, one of which will be information technology. So, through that project, I hope that the Assembly will be able to contribute to the discussion and to highlight the good practice in this area, so that local authorities across Wales become aware of it. Whether they adopt it is another matter, because authorities have their own arrangements, which work adequately enough, so I assume that people will not change for change’s sake. However, I very much hope that there will be an opportunity for others outside of the Assembly to have the opportunity to share their experiences.
[169] Joyce Watson: Good morning. We have a list in the explanatory memorandum of the cost of translation, which is broken down in several ways but seems to come to £95,000 overall. What are you views on the projected costs for the Commission of providing bilingual services under the scheme as outlined, assuming that you have seen it?
[170] Mr Parry: Unwaith eto, rwyf yn cymryd bod y gwaith hwn wedi ei seilio ar ymchwil trylwyr sy’n ystyried y gwahanol ffactorau, gan gynhyrchu ffigurau felly y gellid gweithio o’u mewn.		Mr Parry: Again, I assume that this work has been based on thorough research that takes the different factors into account, thereby producing figures that can be worked within.
[171] Joyce Watson: Following on from that, again, based on your experience of costs, will it be possible to for the Commission to fulfil the ambitions that it has set itself?
[172] Mr Parry: O ran darparu gwasanaethau dwyieithog, rwyf yn credu bod hynny yn bosibl. Bydd angen i rywun adolygu’r gwasanaethau’n barhaol, yn enwedig o ran cyfieithu, gan fod technoleg yn datblygu’n gyflym.		Mr Parry: In terms of providing bilingual services, I believe that it is possible. Someone will have to review the services continuously, especially in terms of translation, because technology develops quickly.
[173] Kenneth Skates: Based on your experiences of—
[174] Ann Jones: Sorry, Ken; Mike had indicated that he wanted to come in.
[175] Mike Hedges: There is an average of £400 per Member—
[176] Ann Jones: Hang on, that is Ken’s question.
[177] Mike Hedges: I want to ask a question following on from that.
[178] Ann Jones: Let Ken ask his question first, then we will talk about it afterwards. Sorry, Ken; I knew I was right the first time.
[179] Kenneth Skates: It is fine eagerness; it is because the time is passing by quickly, I think. Based on your experiences of translation costs and demand, do you think that £400 per Member per year is sufficient to cover translation costs?
[180] Mr Jones: Ai’r bwriad yw rhoi £400 i bob Aelod unigol, neu a oes cronfa fawr lle mae £400 wedi ei neilltuo at y diben? Byddai’n well gennyf weld cronfa fawr yn cynnwys £400 ar gyfer pob Aelod yn hytrach na £400 wedi ei neilltuo i bob Aelod unigol. Bydd rhai Aelodau yn cael cryn dipyn o ohebiaeth yn Gymraeg a bydd eraill yn cael dim, neu ychydig iawn.		Mr Jones: Is it the intention to allocate £400 to each individual Member, or is there a large fund where £400 has been allocated for that purpose? I would prefer to see a large fund including £400 for all Members rather than £400 being allocated to each individual Member. Some Members will have considerable correspondence in Welsh and others will have none, or very little.
11.00 a.m.
[181] Ann Jones: I think that it is £400 per Member, according to the explanatory memorandum, allocated to each party group on a pro rata basis. So, you would multiply the number of Members by £400 to reach the total. You are right: there will be Assembly Members who will have a lot more correspondence through the medium of Welsh. I have probably taken Mike’s question now.
[182] Mike Hedges: There will obviously be underspends in some party groups. Could those underspends, as projected or actual, be put in so that we actually get the £24,000 spent, so that those people who needed more could have it? If you have a £24,000 budget, just allocating it out on a pro-rata basis may not be the best way of using that £24,000. Some groups may have a massive underspend and others will have spent it all by the time they get to February.
[183] Mr Jones: Dyna’r pwynt roeddwn yn ei wneud; mae’n well cael un gronfa fawr na chronfa sydd wedi’i rhannu, hyd yn oed rhwng nifer fach o bleidiau.		Mr Jones: That is the point I was making; it would be better to have one large fund rather than a per-capita allocation, even if is shared between a small number of parties.
[184] Kenneth Skates: In his evidence given on 9 February, Rhodri Glyn Thomas stated:
[185] ‘If the evidence is submitted in Welsh only...we will ensure that the information included in that evidence is presented to Members so that they are aware of the content’.
[186] Based on you experience of the translation industry, do you think that it is sufficient to make Members aware of the content of a document or should it require complete translation?
[187] Mr Jones: Yn fy mhrofiad i, mae crynhoi dogfen yn cymryd gymaint o amser â chyfieithu’r ddogfen yn y lle cyntaf. Gwnaethom gyflwyno dogfen yn Gymraeg ac yn Saesneg; pe byddem wedi cyflwyno’r ddogfen yn Gymraeg a chithau wedi cael crynodeb, byddai hynny wedi bod yn sarhad arnom. Rydym wedi llunio’r ddogfen hon yn bwrpasol ar eich cyfer chi. Nid ydym wedi malu awyr; rydym wedi gwneud y prif bwyntiau. Ni fyddem am weld crynodeb o hynny’n cael ei ddosbarthu. Rwy’n deall pwynt Rhodri, ond byddai’n well gennyf weld cyfieithu cyflawn, wrth gwrs.		Mr. Jones: In my experience, summarising a document can take as long as it takes to translate the document in the first place. We submitted a document in both Welsh and English; if we had submitted the document in Welsh and you had been provided with a summary, that would have been insulting to us. We have drawn up this document for you. We have not wasted words; we have made the main points. We would not want to see a summary of that distributed to Members. I understand Rhodri’s point, but I would prefer to see a full translation provided, of course.
[188] Janet Finch-Saunders: The draft scheme says that:
[189] ‘In addition to encouraging our staff to learn or improve their Welsh language skills, we propose to place less reliance on our translation service over time. This is likely to mean that more of our bilingual staff will need to develop their Welsh drafting skills’.
[190] What is your view on this? Is it clear enough in the scheme how this will be achieved and with what resources?
[191] Mr Parry: Rydym yn croesawu’n fawr y bydd staff y Cynulliad sy’n gallu ysgrifennu’r Gymraeg yn cael eu hannog i wella’r sgiliau hynny. Mae hynny hefyd yn pwysleisio’r ffaith mai sgil yw’r Gymraeg yn y man gwaith. Byddwn yn annog bod yr arolwg o sgiliau Cymraeg y bwriedir ei gynnal yn nodi’n glir beth yw’r sgiliau llafar ac ysgrifenedig, fel y gellir neilltuo arian yn y gyllideb hyfforddiant, neu ba gyllideb bynnag, ar gyfer gwella sgiliau yn y Gymraeg. Felly, gallai llawer o’r gwaith drafftio memos ac adroddiadau byr gael ei wneud gan y rhai sy’n gallu eu hysgrifennu yn Gymraeg, fel bod y pethau mwy astrus yn cael eu gadael i’r cyfieithwyr.		Mr Parry: We very much welcome the fact that Assembly staff who are able to use written Welsh will be encouraged to improve those skills. That also emphasises the fact that Welsh is a skill in the workplace. We would encourage that the audit of Welsh language skills that is intended should identify the verbal and written skills, so that funding within the training budget, or whichever budget it may be, can be allocated in order to improve Welsh language skills. So, much of the work in drafting memos and brief reports could be done by those who are able to draft in Welsh, so that the more complex things are left to the translators.
[192] Mr Jones: Mae’n bwysig cofio hefyd fod gan y cyfieithwyr rôl i’w chwarae wrth wella sgiliau staff. Hynny yw, gall cyfieithydd fynd at rywun sy’n ansicr wrth lunio adroddiad a dweud, ‘Dyma sut mae gwneud hyn’. Mae cyfraniad i’w wneud yn hynny o beth. Felly, rydym yn croesawu lleihau faint o gyfieithu sy’n cael ei wneud, sydd, yn rhyfedd iawn, yn groes i’n proffesiwn.		Mr. Jones: It is also important to remember that the translators have a role to play in improving staff skills. That is, a translator could join someone who is uncertain in drafting a report and say, ‘This is how this done’. There is a contribution to be made there. Therefore, we welcome a reduction in the amount of translation undertaken, which, strangely enough, is contrary to our profession.
[193] Bethan Jenkins: Mae lot o fanylion yn y cynllun ynglŷn â sut i hyfforddi staff a thua 12 pwynt bwled ynglŷn â hyfforddiant a chael ethos o ddwyieithrwydd yn y gweithle. A ydych yn credu bod hyn yn ddigonol neu a ydych yn cefnogi’r hyn mae Cymdeithas yr Iaith yn gofyn amdano, sef targedau yn y cynllun fel bod mwy o eglurder, efallai, o ran beth fydd angen ei wneud ac erbyn pryd?		Bethan Jenkins: There is a great deal of detail in the scheme on staff training and about 12 bullet points on training and how to engender a bilingual ethos in the workplace. Do you believe that that is adequate or do you support what the Welsh Language Society is calling for, namely targets in the scheme to give greater clarity, perhaps, as regards what needs to be done, and by when?
[194] Mr Parry: Mae’r anghenion o ran galluoedd dwyieithog y staff yn gorfod ymateb i anghenion pob unigolyn ac, o fewn cyraeddiadau disgwyliedig, dylid gosod rhyw fath o darged fel bod gan yr aelod staff nod i ymgyrraedd ato.		Mr Parry: The requirements regarding the bilingual skills of staff need to respond to the needs of the individual and, within the expected outcomes, some sort of target should be set so that the staff member has a goal to reach for.
[195] Bethan Jenkins: A fyddech chi eisiau cael hynny yn y cynllun? O edrych yn fwy eang nag aelodau staff unigol yn unig, a fyddech chi eisiau gweld rhagor o dargedau o fewn y cynllun fel y gellir olrhain cynnydd, neu a ydych chi’n hapus â’r ffaith y byddant yn y strategaeth, fel mae’r Comisiwn yn ei gynnig?		Bethan Jenkins: Would you like to see that in the scheme? Looking more broadly than individual staff members alone, would you like to see more targets within the scheme to track progress, or are you happy with the fact that they will be included in the strategy, as the Commission is proposing?
[196] Mr Parry: Bydd cynllun gweithredu ac, o fewn cynllun gweithredu, byddwn yn tybio y bydd targedau a disgwyliad i gyrraedd y targedau hynny. Felly, byddem yn disgwyl eu gweld.		Mr Parry: There will be an implementation plan and, within that, I would expect there to be targets and an expectation that they would be achieved. Therefore, we would expect to see them.
[197] Janet Finch-Saunders: In your written response, you say that there should be emphasis on the need to improve the skills of National Assembly staff to write Welsh; the need to encourage National Assembly Members and staff to improve their Welsh; and the need to make the most effective use of interpretation services. Do you believe that the draft scheme addresses these issues sufficiently?
[198] Mr Parry: Rwy’n meddwl ei bod yn fater o roi cig ar yr asgwrn, sef bod lle teilwng yn cael ei roi i ddatblygu sgiliau ysgrifennu’r Gymraeg, ac, o ran sefyllfaoedd lle gellir defnyddio’r Gymraeg, bod cyfarfodydd yn annog pobl sy’n defnyddio’r Gymraeg i allu teimlo’n gartrefol a chyffyrddus i allu gwneud hynny. Yn sicr, mae lle pwysig i gyfieithu ar y pryd mewn cyfarfodydd o’r fath, fel bod pobl yn gallu defnyddio eu Cymraeg.		Mr Parry: I think it is a matter of putting flesh on the bones, so that enough attention is given to the development of written Welsh-language skills, and, regarding situations where Welsh can be used, meetings should encourage people who use Welsh to feel comfortable and at home in so doing. Certainly, there is an important role for interpretation in such meetings, so that people are able to use Welsh.
[199] Ann Jones: Does anybody have any other questions? Is there anything that either of you think that you wanted us to have asked you and that you were expecting to have issued answers to, or is there any further point that you wish to add?
[200] Mr Parry: Does dim o fy rhan i. Rydym wedi crynhoi’r prif bwyntiau ac, fel roeddwn i’n dweud, fel y gymdeithas broffesiynol ar gyfer y proffesiwn a’r diwydiant, byddem yn falch iawn o gynorthwyo’r Cynulliad wrth ichi ddatblygu, gwella a chryfhau gwasanaethau dwyieithog.		Mr Parry: Not from my point of view. We have summarised the main points and, as I was saying, as the professional association for the profession and the industry, we would be pleased to assist the Assembly as you develop, improve and enhance bilingual services.
[201] Ann Jones: Thank you. Bethan has another question.
[202] Bethan Jenkins: Nid ydym wedi gofyn y cwestiwn ichi ynglŷn â’r diffiniad o’r ‘cyhoedd’. Roedd Cymdeithas yr Iaith yn dweud ei bod am weld ehangu hynny i ‘i bawb’ yn hytrach nag i’r ‘cyhoedd’ o fewn y Bil achos ei fod yn rhy gyfyngedig a’i fod wedi’i seilio ar Ddeddf 1993. A oes gennych farn fel cyfieithwyr ynglŷn ag ehangu sgôp y Bil?		Bethan Jenkins: We have not asked you the question on the definition of the word ‘public’. The Welsh Language Society said that it wishes to see that expanded to ‘for everyone’ in the Bill rather than the ‘public’ because it is too restrictive and based on the 1993 Act. Do you have an opinion as translators regarding expanding the scope of the Bill?
[203] Mr Parry: Nid ydym wedi ystyried hynny, ond byddem yn gobeithio y byddai pawb, pwy bynnag ydynt, yn cael ymwneud â’r corff hwn gan mai hwn yw’r corff sy’n llywodraethu drosom. Dyma yw ein democratiaeth ni.		Mr Parry:  We have not considered that, but we would hope that everyone, whoever they are, could engage with this institution as this is the institution that governs us. This is our democracy.
[204] Bethan Jenkins: Diolch.
[205] Ann Jones: Thank you both for your evidence. A copy of the transcript will be sent to you to check for accuracy. Thank you for accommodating the delay, as well. We appreciate your evidence today.
[206] Before we move into private session, I need to pay tribute to the translators who turned the Welsh Language Society paper around very quickly. It arrived very late on Friday, so the staff have worked extremely hard to enable us to have an equal understanding of the evidence. Thank you to them on behalf of the committee; they are the ones who work in the background to keep us all going.
11.10 a.m.
Cynnig Gweithdrefnol Procedural Motion
[207] Ann Jones: I move that
the committee resolves to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with Standing Order No. 17.42(vi).
[208] I see that the committee is in agreement.
Derbyniwyd y cynnig. Motion agreed.
Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 11.10 a.m. The public part of the meeting ended at 11.10 a.m.