https://insidehmcts.blog.gov.uk/the-final-countdown-reflecting-on-the-modernisation-journey-for-courts-and-tribunals-podcast-transcript/
The Final Countdown: Reflecting on the modernisation journey for courts and tribunals - podcast transcript
[English] - [Cymraeg]
Aaron Wilson:
Hello and welcome back to the Inside HMCTS podcast with me, Adam Wilson. We've got a bumper episode for you today focusing on our reform programme, which has been an ambitious programme that has been running since 2016 to modernise the justice system, to make it more straightforward, accessible, and efficient for everyone who needs it.
We're now at the formal end of the programme, and to talk a little bit more about the work that's gone on and what happens next, I'm delighted to say I'm joined by two very special guests, our CEO, Nick Goodwin: and our Operations Director, Daniel Flury:. Firstly, welcome to you both, and thank you for giving up your time in your diaries to come on and talk to us.
We've spent a long time talking about reform here. Agency. And I think it's something that many of us who work here deal with on a daily basis, but for those who aren't so familiar with the programme, what is reform and what was the aims of the programme?
And I'm going to come to you first, Nick, with this question.
Nick Goodwin:
It's very much about trying to improve access to justice, for everyone, that we that we serve in this country and we thought we could improve that by making the courts, much simpler to use and faster to use. And the main route to doing that was to really invest in digitalisation of our services technology and thereby allow people to, interact with the court and put their case across in a much, much more, simple way and in a way which isn't just about digitalisation, but means that the processes in the court are simpler to understand as well. So we wanted to bring simplification with digitalisation together. And we hoped and I think that has proved already to be the case that that makes justice much more accessible for people and much easier to understand.
Aaron Wilson:
Lovely. And, Daniel, I think this is your debut on the podcast because I know Nick appeared on our Westminster Knives Down, podcast, but for you, obviously you've had a couple of different roles throughout reform, what has reform meant to you and what was the reform programme aiming to solve?
Daniel Flury:
Well, can I say I'm delighted to be making my debut, on the HMCTS podcast. It's sometimes forgotten how unmodernized HMCTS was prior to 2016 and let me just sort of illustrate that a bit.
So firstly, you know, video hearings having a sort of conventional hearing other than a prison to court videolink was largely unthinkable. You know, there were we did odd telephone hearings, but there was so little video hearing capacity across the system, and especially on the civil, family and tribunals that, you know, it just wasn't thought possible. Whereas it's very much part and parcel of the, the court system nowadays.
But in terms of the sort of some of the process, you know, I think back to let's take the Social Security and Child Support Tribunal, what we call SSCS. Now, prior to reform, you'd fill out a paper form, that form would be sent to us, but then be sent over to the DWP, the Department for Work and Pensions, the DWP, this is all by second class post I should add. They would then send a huge bundle, a huge paper bundle, back to us, again by second class post, and what we would do, we would photocopy that bundle three times to put that in front of the of the panel, in front of the tribunal. Now, you could imagine how much post and how much paper is involved in all of that and how much back and forth is know all of that.
And fast forward to today. You submit your appeal online. You can track your appeal online. The bundle is sent to the DWP electronically. It's sent back electronically. It appears on the tribunal member's laptop and off we go. We have the hearing. Now you might think, okay, great. Well, you know, it's nice to have everything online, but let me just try and illustrate Nick's access to justice point, because we have that far slicker system, far easier system.
You know, it used to take approximately a week to get things back through the post, to log it into a system, to file it in the right place, to move it here, there and everywhere. We have these huge photocopying factories. You know, all of this online process removes days and days from the process. You’re no longer waiting for the post, it appears instantaneously.
And that is what we mean by access to justice. That's what I mean by improving a system, that's what we mean by modernisation. And it's sometimes given how part and parcel things are now it's sometimes easy to forget how far we have come over the last eight years. You know, I could cite lots of other jurisdictions, but, we've come a long, long way.
Nick Goodwin:
One of the things that when I think about that Daniel as well, what I think about is, yeah, the process that used to take weeks now take literally seconds. There's another really interesting stat we had the other day when we were rolling out one of our civil services, whereby I think an entire case went from start to finish in 26 minutes.
Now, I don't expect that to be the norm in the future, but that does show that if you cut out the kind of shoe leather costs of back and forth and boil things down to the issue at stake, you can potentially get a decision made, that quickly, which I think has to be the benefit of everyone, particularly if you think about small businesses who want to get on and do their job.
Daniel Flury:
And I think one really important part of it is, you know, we talk a lot about the sort of contact with HMCTS and customer service and so on. You know what a lot of reform is being able to do is to allow legal professionals, court users, to interact directly with our systems for the first time. So, you know, an immigration solicitor will sort of log onto MyHMCTS, see the progress of the appeal and be able to advise their sort of client accordingly.
You know, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service can access the Common Platform system, see the material, access material, prepare for the hearing really and doing so, that has allowed them to improve the service they provide to their users, to their clients and so on. And again, this is what we mean by access to justice. We see the central role the court has in the system and through the use of better, more accessible, flexible systems, we're able to enhance access to justice, as I say.
Aaron Wilson:
On sort of SJP and sort of the Common Platform and those sorts of systems. How, I mean, I think obviously a lot of different areas of justice have to align for justice to be delivered, but how is that helped with relationships across justice?
Daniel Flury:
It's massively helped, really. In some ways it sort of brought us all together. You know, so we've said the sort of the criminal justice system can only move as fast as its sort of slowest part, and having a sort of single platform sitting at the heart of it all through the court system. You know, it does bring parties together to develop a sort of shared objective, shared understanding, and to sort will provide a bit of structure around working against criminal procedure rules.
So, you know, you can see on the Common Platform when a certain task hasn't been done, when the sort of file hasn't been uploaded, or the police or the Crown Prosecution Service, the court, haven’t done their bit and in some ways the provision of a sort of joint system across it all, you know, it provides that discipline, provides that sort of structure around our process and that will ultimately help, I think, court outcomes really it's been it's been a difficult journey getting the Common Platform in place. You know, it's been difficult with our partners sometimes, but again, a hallmark of what we've done in HMCTS reform is really strive to understand the users and that includes, you know, such critical partners as the police and CPS and I'd like to think that we have worked very closely together through the eight years we've been undertaking reform and, you know, have overcome challenges together to provide a system that is, you know, not the finished article, but is in pretty good shape.
Aaron Wilson:
And you've actually brought me quite nicely on to my next question. I think obviously eight years is a long time to go through a programme, and obviously things have changed massively in that time, but if you’re sort of reflecting on the programme now, what have been your biggest learnings from it and is there anything you you would have done differently if you were to do it again?
Nick Goodwin:
Well, I’ll have a go at that. I mean, take the broad sweep of the last eight years or so, there's been so many lessons, and so many things that we've learned along the way. I think the bits I'd pick out back in 2016, when we kicked this off, there is a real value in having a kind of mission in saying what we want is to change the system.
And, you know, we’ll be judged as to whether we, we’ve achieved that or not. And I think we're certainly heading in that direction, but getting the key players, getting the judiciary, getting the government, all in the same room saying, we want, you know, swift, fair, more accessible justice was really powerful. It sounds simple and of course, all those players have always believed that.
But getting it signed up in those simple terms is really, really important. There's another thing we've learned along the way, which is to actually change the justice system is a real challenge. It's got so many players and along the way you have to do things that get you some momentum and get you some wins and get you doing things differently.
And there are phases in the reform programme. We had COVID in the middle of it, where establishing momentum was difficult, but we did manage to get that going. And I think that's a really commendable thing. I think from that, we then learn that it's great to have momentum. But you also have to listen, you have to understand what you're doing along the way and we spend a lot of time, learning that lesson, making sure that we really didn't just sort of seek feedback from people, but we understood what their feedback meant. And then we took the time to get things right as we went along. And that was a really, really important lesson, for this programme.
The other one really obvious, this was a modernisation digitalisation programme and you'll have heard this before, but you know, digitalisation transformation of this sort is not about computers. I mean, you need to get that right, but it's about people, justice is about people. And I think we've always known that as we've gone along, but we've learned really hard lessons as well, to make sure that, we always think about how people are interacting with systems, not the systems themselves necessarily.
The two final things for me, I think as we got on, we got better. We try to learn these lessons. I think having humility and really understanding lessons has been something I've been really proud of my team in terms of how they've internalised that. And I think we're now at a phase where we've got a kind of good rhythm of delivery, a good way of doing things that means all these aspects are integral to it. And then the final thing is the reform programme was always set up with the understanding that we have to have users’ needs at the heart, it's about access to justice, it’s about understanding what works for the user. And I think one of the things I'm really kind of proud about is actually we hardly talk about that at all.
And that's not because it's become less important. It's more because that has become part of the DNA about how we've tried and do change in HMCTS. So, I think that's a good thing. But all these lessons, kind of precious lessons, we've got to make sure that we don't lose sight of them is a kind of really big thing for me as we reach this end phase.
We haven't gone as far as we liked. But as we've gone through this, what we've also learned is if you set out a vision eight years ago and you look at where you are now, you see where you fell short, but you also see in absolute spades where you can go further. Where you built a foundation, that, really opens up new possibilities. So, yeah, I hope we can keep keep going in this direction.
Aaron Wilson:
Perfect. And how about you, Daniel? Is there anything that you would do differently in your involvement in reform?
Daniel Flury:
I think I could just begin by echoing my comments at the start about, you know, turn back the clock to 2014, 2015. We were starting from a very low base, and this is one of the reasons why reform has been so ambitious and so hard. You know, we had very limited call centre capability. We had very limited video capability.
Here we go is another anecdote for you, seven out of ten immigration appeals were received via fax, a fax machine. You know, it illustrates the distance we've had to come in reform. And when you combine that with, as Nick says, with a pandemic, with growing caseloads in the vast majority of jurisdictions, with an ever changing and increasingly complex criminal justice system.
You know, it has been difficult. It has been hard. And as Nick says, you know, the people are the critical factor in it. There's no such thing as a sort of technology transformation, it is always a business transformation and without business, it's people, it's culture, it's everything really.
What would I have done differently? You know, I think at the beginning we tried to do everything at once, we went at it headfirst. We had great drive, great energy, great ambition, and we tried to change lots and lots of things all at once. Whereas as Nick says, we got far, far better at doing it at the end. You know, I think perhaps at the beginning we should have we should have staggered ourselves a little bit and built up to that crescendo, rather than sort of getting to that crescendo right from the outset.
Nick Goodwin:
I think Daniel’s analogy sounds like a bit of a rock concert. I mean, it’s almost as if we kind of came out onto the stage absolutely blasting and we should, I mean, you do need a vision, you need a momentum. You need something that kind of sets out what the band is. But, you save some greatest hits for the end and you put them all the way through, and I think some of that sort of musical cadence I think is sort of relevant to doing things like this. You know, you need to kind of set out your stall, build the mood and then, hopefully, finish on a stadium rock anthem. There you go.
Aaron Wilson:
I've just wanted to sort of ask you both really what, I mean, obviously there's a lot of things to pick out from here, but if you had to pick a personal highlight from the the reform journey, if you like, what would that be? And what are you most proud of from across the eight years we've been doing this? And I'll come to you, Daniel first.
Daniel Flury:
I think the changes to the asylum and immigration system were, for me, really profound because not only did we introduce a new system, a new way of working in a move away from the dreaded fax machines, as I mentioned. But, you know, completely changed the way in which appeals are submitted, dealt with, considered, put before a judge, and concluded, you know, not only did we just add a digital front end to it, as it's called, but introduce concepts like the appeals skeleton arguments, introduce the role of the tribunal legal officer, expand the role of the tribunal legal officer and the reason why that was so exciting, because the beginning reform, we were very candid with our staff in saying that, you know, this will mean there are fewer people working in HMCTS in future. But the creation of the legal officer role meant we had higher skilled, better paid roles to offer our people. And, you know, we're now at the stage where we have almost 200 legal offices across HMCTS and, you know, it's been great to develop and offer this role to our people and to sort of make good our promise of, you know, this is what a digital future could look like. It doesn't always mean job cuts, greater pressure, it means higher paid, higher skilled roles working in a really interesting environment right alongside the judiciary. So I think that is one of the sort of high points from a sort of staffing perspective, well, from a whole system perspective, from the reform programme.
Aaron Wilson:
How about you, Nick?
Nick Goodwin:
I think across our reform services, we've got a series of what we call outsourced just assessments, whereby we can now look at the sort of service people experience and then work out how to improve access justice for those people and make sure elderly people or people who don't have English as their first language are not disadvantaged. And the kind of little vignettes, little stories you get about how individual people have benefited from that I think have been really, really powerful.
And then the final thing, the kind of sticks in my mind is when I go around the courts and talk to our staff. Firstly, we haven't lost the fact that behind every kind of case, there's a person that we retained something that always been important to our DNA in this organization, even though it's been digitalised and it's not, you know, the face behind the case. It's no longer the person behind the paper but on the case, we’ve still got that it's really important. But with that increasing as I go round and I talk to people, I’ll say, “oh, we just switched on a new service, with new functionality, how are you finding that?” And a few years ago, it would have been, “oh my God, it's terrible, I'm so confused.” And now we've got a workforce who largely say to me, “oh God, it's made my life a lot better.” And I think that's showed, that's been something really important for us as an organisation. And I think, for our professional users, it means that we've gone a little bit from an organisation that liked a bit of Dickensian stuff and didn't much like change to justice system and now it's embracing the future, and that's really healthy for kind of UK PLC, UK legal services, as well as actually the courts and tribunals. And yeah, again, it's nice to hear that, but a very personal perspective from, from people I talk to.
Aaron Wilson:
Just to, to come back onto the main programme obviously nearing an end or an official end as it is. I think probably what some people will be wondering is how do you measure success of the reform programme, of what we've delivered and what is to come I suppose, how do we measure success of the reform programme, and I’ll come to you first, Daniel actually here?
Daniel Flury:
One of the key metrics we use is the proportion of cases submitted digitally, electronically and, you know, wherever I look there are, well, there's still work to be done here in certain jurisdictions, but there are a large number of jurisdictions where everything is submitted electronically now, especially in the criminal jurisdiction. You know, that is where there is a bit more of a choice. You know, we're in well above 70, 80%. So, again, you turn the clock back eight years, where you are predominantly in a sort of paper and post system to something where 80%, 90% of appeals claims are submitted online is a great achievement.
We also look at, you know, being able to deal with people in a digital way allows them to give, you know, more considered instantaneous feedback and we look at things like satisfaction rates, user satisfaction rates, not only do we look at user satisfaction rates, we you look at them on the basis of protected characteristics, in terms of race, sex, ethnicity gives a far greater insight into what people are thinking and feeling about our services in a way that just didn't exist before.
You know, again, let's turn the clock back ten years. We have a sort of dusty suggestions bankers’box with a hole in the top sitting in the corner, and people would stick a bit of paper in there, whereas now it's far more comprehensive, far more detailed, far more insightful. So, you know, yes, there were savings to be made, yes it was modernisation to be undertaken. But, you know, looking at digital uptake, whether it's claims or appeal submitted or the number of video hearings alongside the user satisfaction, I think are the real hallmarks of of what reform is all about.
Nick Goodwin:
So for me, what it will come back down to is have we fulfilled the original mission statement? Have we improved access to justice? And that is measured by, you know, how easily people can interact with the justice system, how well they understand it, do they get a speedy and timely, outcome and I think actually the data there, we will keep looking at it for forever really, and we'll do a proper evaluation. We already doing some evaluations with a complete evaluation in the forthcoming years but that’ll be the heart of it. Can we stand up and say justice has been improved and I'm extremely confident the answer will be yes.
Aaron Wilson:
And sticking with you here Nick, obviously there's been a huge amount of people involved in the reform programme from sort of staff across HMCTS to justice partners, and obviously external stakeholders as well. What would you say to them, just sort of coming towards the end of reform?
Nick Goodwin:
I'd say two things.
Firstly, thank you because it has been quite hard. So thank you.
And then I'd say a second clause of thank you. You're a better team now than you were when we started this too. And I think that is because everyone has played their role and they have interacted with each other and they've learned a lot from each other. So yeah, thank you. But thank you as a team, whether you're in my team, whether you're a legal professional, whether you're a judge, whether you’re a user. Thank you for working well together.
Aaron Wilson:
And what about you, Daniel? Would you add anything to that?
Daniel Flury:
Possibly, yeah. I think, certainly say thank you. You know, reform in terms of its scale was, you know, genuinely once in a generation reform, you know, as I said, we were starting from such a low base, the scale of the change, the money involved was so significant but I think I'd say the whilst reform is coming to an end this doesn't mean that modernisation stops here. You know, there is so much more to go in terms of continuing to refine and enhance the system, to start incorporating things like the use of artificial intelligence and other technological advances. And yeah, there's still plenty of work to do out there to really improve, enhance and modernise our systems.
So whilst as I say, the once in a lifetime reform has come to an end, change will continue.
Aaron Wilson:
I think you must have a crystal ball at that end it actually brings me really nicely onto my next question sort of around what does come next? Because obviously from what I've understood is that just because the reform programme is sort of coming to a formal end it doesn't mean that the work to change and improve stops. So what what is next for HMCTS?
Nick Goodwin:
Blimey. I mean, there's a lot as you say, reform is going to end as a sort of formal programme. But there's some things that we're already committed to seeing through outside of the programme. So there's some things we won’t finish off by April, but we need to see them through, so that will continue definitely. And then I think, a particularly big deal, the civil cases where we want to get as much paper out as possible.
Beyond that, and also on some of the tribunals, what we now have really is quite a long list of opportunities that we've opened up. Our challenge now is less about constructing the next great big programme, it's about working out which improvements we can now see most benefit the people and then being able to prioritise those. And that's really the business we're we're going to be in. So it, I mean, I'm not going to pick one jurisdiction, or one great change. Though we now have so many tools at our disposal. Daniel mentioned AI, for example. But the way we should be doing it is saying, what will make the biggest difference in terms of improving access justice and going at that, in a measured way. And as I say, there's a very, very long list. And that's actually a healthy place to be, in my view.
Aaron Wilson:
Obviously, as I say, it's been a bit of a of a journey for reform over the last eight years. But if we are coming to the end, or the formal close of it as it is, and this is sort of the closing concert, what song would represent the end of reform Nick?
Nick Goodwin:
Oh my lord, I don't know. Daniel's got a better musical taste than me, so I'll let him go first. God, it's not Dolly Parton 9 till 5, let’s put it that way.
Aaron Wilson:
I’m hoping it’s not going to be ‘We Will Rock You’ either.
Nick Goodwin:
What have you got Daniel?
Daniel Flury:
I was thinking more of the Europe it’s the final countdown sort of thing. You know, we we started off playing lots of new material, but we did all the number ones at the end of it, really. And, you know, it was good to leave it that way.
Nick Goodwin:
Yeah, some of ABBA medley.
Daniel Flury:
A medley, yeah.
Aaron Wilson:
Well, I'm very sad to say that, unfortunately, we're out of time. And much like the reform programme, we are at the end of this podcast.
Thank you again, Nick and Daniel, both for joining me and to all of you listening to this as well, thank you for tuning in.
You may have already seen that we've been covering off plenty of work from across our programme, on our digital channels over the last week or so, and there's plenty more to come as we look at the transformation of the justice system in recent years.
More information is available on our blog pages and our GOV.UK website. Just search ‘Inside HMCTS’ for the blog and ‘HMCTS’ for our GOV.UK homepage.
We'll be back again soon with another episode, but in the meantime, from everyone here, take care.
[English] - [Cymraeg]
Diwedd y daith: myfyrio ar y daith i foderneiddio’r llysoedd a’r tribiwnlysoedd - trawsgrifiad podlediad
Aaron Wilson:
Helo a chroeso yn ôl i bodlediad Inside HMCTS gyda fi, Adam Wilson. Mae gennym bennod arbennig i chi heddiw yn canolbwyntio ar ein rhaglen ddiwygio, rhaglen uchelgeisiol sydd wedi bod yn rhedeg ers 2016 i foderneiddio’r system gyfiawnder, i’w gwneud yn fwy syml, hygyrch ac effeithlon i bawb sydd ei hangen.
Rydym bellach wedi cyrraedd diwedd ffurfiol y rhaglen, ac i siarad ychydig mwy am y gwaith sydd wedi’i wneud a’r hyn fydd yn digwydd nesaf, mae’n bleser gennyf ddweud bod dau westai arbennig iawn yn ymuno â mi, ein Prif Swyddog Gweithredol, Nick Goodwin a’n Cyfarwyddwr Gweithrediadau, Daniel Flury. Yn gyntaf, croeso i chi’ch dau, a diolch am roi o’ch amser i ddod i siarad â ni.
Rydym wedi treulio amser maith yn siarad am ddiwygio yma. Asiantaeth. A dwi’n meddwl ei fod yn rhywbeth y mae llawer ohonom sy’n gweithio yma yn ymdrin ag ef yn ddyddiol, ond i’r rhai nad ydynt mor gyfarwydd â’r rhaglen, beth yw diwygio a beth oedd nodau’r rhaglen?
A dwi’n mynd i ddod atoch chi yn gyntaf, Nick, gyda’r cwestiwn hwn.
Nick Goodwin:
Mae’n ymwneud yn fawr iawn â cheisio gwella mynediad at gyfiawnder, i bawb, yr ydym ni’n eu gwasanaethu yn y wlad hon ac roeddem yn meddwl y gallem wella hynny drwy wneud y llysoedd yn llawer symlach i’w defnyddio ac yn gyflymach i’w defnyddio. A’r prif lwybr i wneud hynny oedd buddsoddi o ddifrif mewn digideiddio technoleg ein gwasanaethau a thrwy hynny ganiatáu i bobl ryngweithio â’r llys a chyflwyno eu hachos mewn ffordd lawer, llawer mwy syml ac mewn ffordd sydd nid yn unig yn ymwneud â digideiddio, ond sy’n golygu bod y prosesau yn y llys yn symlach i’w deall hefyd. Felly roeddem am ddod â symleiddio a digideiddio at ei gilydd. Ac roeddem yn gobeithio, a dwi’n meddwl bod hynny wedi profi’n wir eisoes bod hynny’n gwneud cyfiawnder yn llawer mwy hygyrch i bobl ac yn llawer haws ei ddeall.
Aaron Wilson:
Diolch. A, Daniel, dwi’n meddwl mai dyma’ch ymddangosiad cyntaf ar y podlediad oherwydd dwi’n gwybod bod Nick wedi ymddangos ar ein podlediad Knives Down San Steffan, ond i chi, yn amlwg rydych chi wedi cael cwpl o rolau gwahanol trwy gydol y diwygio, beth mae diwygio wedi’i olygu i chi a beth oedd y rhaglen ddiwygio yn anelu at ei ddatrys?
Daniel Flury:
Wel, a gaf i ddweud fy mod yn falch iawn o gael gwneud fy ymddangosiad cyntaf, ar bodlediad Inside HMCTS. Rydym yn anghofio weithiau pa mor ddi-fodern oedd GLlTEF cyn 2016 a gadewch i mi ddangos ychydig o hynny.
Felly yn gyntaf, wyddoch chi, roedd cael gwrandawiadau fideo heblaw cyswllt fideo carchar i lys yn amhosib i’w ddychmygu i raddau helaeth. Wyddoch chi, fe wnaethom ni wrandawiadau dros y ffôn yma ac acw, ond roedd cyn lleied o gapasiti gwrandawiadau fideo ar draws y system, ac yn enwedig yn y llys sifil, llys teulu a thribiwnlysoedd fel nad oeddem, wyddoch chi, yn meddwl ei fod yn bosibl. Ac erbyn hyn mae’n rhan annatod o'r system llysoedd.
Ond o ran rhywfaint o’r broses, wyddoch chi, dwi’n meddwl gadewch i ni gymryd y Tribiwnlys Nawdd Cymdeithasol a Chynnal Plant, yr hyn a alwn yn SSCS. Nawr, cyn diwygio, byddech chi’n llenwi ffurflen bapur, byddai’r ffurflen honno’n cael ei hanfon atom, ond yna’n cael ei hanfon at yr Adran Gwaith a Phensiynau, mae hyn i gyd drwy’r post ail ddosbarth y dylwn ei ychwanegu. Bydden nhw wedyn yn anfon bwndel enfawr, bwndel papur enfawr, yn ôl atom, eto drwy bost ail ddosbarth, a’r hyn y byddem yn ei wneud, byddem yn llungopïo’r bwndel hwnnw deirgwaith i roi hwnnw o flaen y panel, o flaen y tribiwnlys. Nawr, fe allech chi ddychmygu faint o bost a faint o bapur sydd ynghlwm â hynny i gyd a sawl gwaith y mae rhaid mynd yn ôl ac ymlaen gyda hynny i gyd.
Ac o edrych ymlaen at heddiw. Rydych yn cyflwyno eich apêl ar-lein. Gallwch olrhain eich apêl ar-lein. Anfonir y bwndel i’r Adran Gwaith a Phensiynau yn electronig. Mae’n cael ei anfon yn ôl yn electronig. Mae’n ymddangos ar liniadur yr aelod tribiwnlys ac i ffwrdd â ni. Mae gennym y gwrandawiad. Nawr efallai eich bod chi'n meddwl, iawn, gwych. Wel, wyddoch chi, mae’n braf cael popeth ar-lein, ond gadewch i mi geisio creu darlun o bwynt Nick am fynediad i gyfiawnder, oherwydd mae gennym ni’r system llawer fwy didrafferth honno, system llawer haws.
Wyddoch chi, roedd yn arfer cymryd tua wythnos i gael pethau’n ôl drwy’r post, i’w cofnodi ar system, i’w ffeilio yn y lle iawn, i’w symud yma ac acw. Mae gennym y ffatrïoedd llungopïo enfawr hyn. Wyddoch chi, mae’r holl broses ar-lein hon yn dileu dyddiau a dyddiau o’r broses. Nid ydych chi’n aros am y post mwyach, mae’n ymddangos ar unwaith.
A dyna a olygwn wrth fynediad at gyfiawnder. Dyna beth yr wyf yn ei olygu wrth wella system, dyna beth yr ydym yn ei olygu wrth foderneiddio. Ac weithiau wrth feddwl pa mor annatod yw pethau nawr mae’n hawdd anghofio weithiau pa mor bell rydyn ni wedi dod dros yr wyth mlynedd diwethaf. Wyddoch chi, gallwn ddyfynnu llawer o awdurdodaethau eraill, ond, rydym wedi dod yn bell iawn.
Nick Goodwin:
Un o’r pethau pan fyddaf yn meddwl am hynny hefyd Daniel, yr hyn dwi'n meddwl amdano yw, ie, mae'r broses a oedd yn arfer cymryd wythnosau bellach yn cymryd eiliadau yn llythrennol. Mae yna ystadegyn arall hynod ddiddorol a gawsom y diwrnod o’r blaen pan oeddem yn cyflwyno un o’n gwasanaethau sifil, a chredaf fod achos cyfan wedi mynd rhagddo o’r dechrau i’r diwedd mewn 26 munud.
Nawr, nid wyf yn disgwyl i hynny fod yn norm yn y dyfodol, ond mae hynny’n dangos, os torrwch allan y math o gostau yn ôl ac ymlaen a dod a pethau’n agosach i’r mater dan sylw, mae’n bosibl y gallwch gael penderfyniad, mor gyflym â hynny, sydd, yn fy marn i, yn gorfod bod o fudd i bawb, yn enwedig os meddyliwch am fusnesau bach sydd am fwrw ymlaen a gwneud eu gwaith.
Daniel Flury:
A dwi’n meddwl mai un rhan bwysig iawn ohono yw, wyddoch chi, rydym yn siarad llawer am y math o gyswllt â GLlTEF a gwasanaeth cwsmeriaid ac ati. Rydych chi’n gwybod beth mae llawer o ddiwygio yn gallu ei wneud yw caniatáu i weithwyr proffesiynol ym maes y gyfraith, defnyddwyr llysoedd, ryngweithio’n uniongyrchol â’n systemau am y tro cyntaf. Felly, wyddoch chi, bydd cyfreithiwr mewnfudo yn mewngofnodi i MyHMCTS, yn gweld cynnydd yr apêl ac yn gallu cynghori ei gleient yn unol â hynny.
Wyddoch chi, gall yr heddlu, Gwasanaeth Erlyn y Goron gael mynediad i system y Platfform Cyffredin, gweld y deunydd, cyrchu deunydd, paratoi ar gyfer y gwrandawiad mewn gwirionedd a gwneud hynny, sydd wedi caniatáu iddynt wella’r gwasanaeth y maent yn ei ddarparu i’w defnyddwyr, i’w cleientiaid ac ati. Ac eto, dyma a olygwn wrth fynediad at gyfiawnder. Rydym yn gweld y rôl ganolog sydd gan y llys yn y system a thrwy ddefnyddio systemau gwell, mwy hygyrch a hyblyg, rydym yn gallu gwella mynediad at gyfiawnder, fel y dywedais.
Aaron Wilson:
Ar chyda’r Weithdrefn Un Ynad a’r Platfform Cyffredin a’r mathau hynny o systemau. Sut, dwi’n meddwl, yn amlwg, dwi’n meddwl bod yn rhaid i lawer o wahanol feysydd cyfiawnder alinio er mwyn sicrhau cyfiawnder, ond sut mae hynny’n cael ei helpu gyda pherthnasoedd ar draws cyfiawnder?
Daniel Flury:
Mae wedi helpu’n aruthrol, a dweud y gwir. Mewn rhai ffyrdd daeth â ni i gyd at ein gilydd. Wyddoch chi, felly rydym ni wedi dweud y gall y math o system gyfiawnder troseddol ond symud mor gyflym â'i rhan arafaf, a chael rhyw fath o blatfform sengl yn eistedd wrth wraidd y cyfan drwy'r system llysoedd. Wyddoch chi, mae’n dod â phartïon at ei gilydd i ddatblygu rhyw fath o amcan a rennir, cyd-ddealltwriaeth, a bydd yn darparu ychydig o strwythur o gwmpas gweithio yn erbyn rheolau trefniadaeth droseddol.
Felly, wyddoch chi, gallwch weld ar y Platfform Cyffredin pan nad yw tasg benodol wedi’i gwneud, pan nad yw’r math o ffeil wedi’i huwchlwytho, neu pan nad yw’r heddlu neu Wasanaeth Erlyn y Goron, y llys, wedi gwneud eu rhan ac mewn rhai ffyrdd mae darparu math o system ar y cyd ar draws y cyfan, wyddoch chi, mae’n darparu’r ddisgyblaeth honno, yn darparu’r math hwnnw o strwythur o amgylch ein proses a bydd hynny’n helpu yn y pen draw, dwi’n meddwl, canlyniadau llys mewn gwirionedd, bu’n daith anodd i gael y Platfform Cyffredin. Wyddoch chi, mae wedi bod yn anodd gyda’n partneriaid weithiau, ond unwaith eto, nodwedd o’r hyn rydym wedi’i wneud i ddiwygio GLlTEF yw ymdrechu’n wirioneddol i ddeall y defnyddwyr ac mae hynny’n cynnwys, wyddoch chi, partneriaid hanfodol fel yr heddlu a’r CPS a hoffwn feddwl ein bod wedi gweithio’n agos iawn gyda’n gilydd yn ystod yr wyth mlynedd rydym wedi bod yn ymgymryd â diwygio ac, wyddoch chi, wedi goresgyn heriau gyda’n gilydd i ddarparu system sydd, wyddoch chi, heb ei gorffen ond sy’n eithaf da.
Aaron Wilson:
Ac rydych chi mewn gwirionedd wedi dod â mi at fy nghwestiwn nesaf yn eithaf taclus. Dwi’n meddwl yn amlwg bod wyth mlynedd yn amser hir i fynd drwy raglen, ac yn amlwg mae pethau wedi newid yn aruthrol yn y cyfnod hwnnw, ond os ydych chi’n meddwl am y rhaglen yn awr, beth yw’r peth mwyaf rydych wedi dysgu ohoni ac a oes unrhyw beth y byddech wedi’i wneud yn wahanol pe baech yn ei wneud eto?
Nick Goodwin:
Wel, mi wnâi roi cynnig ar ateb hynny. Hynny yw, o gymryd ehangder yr wyth mlynedd diwethaf, mae cymaint o wersi wedi bod, a chymaint o bethau rydyn ni wedi’u dysgu ar hyd y ffordd. Dwi’n meddwl mai’r pethau y byddwn i’n eu dewis yn ôl yn 2016, pan wnaethon ni gychwyn hyn, mae gwerth gwirioneddol mewn cael math o genhadaeth wrth ddweud yr hyn rydyn ni ei eisiau yw newid y system.
Ac, wyddoch chi, byddwn yn cael ein barnu a ydym ni, a ydym wedi cyflawni hynny ai peidio. A dwi'n meddwl ein bod yn sicr yn mynd i'r cyfeiriad hwnnw, ond roedd cael y chwaraewyr allweddol, cael y farnwriaeth, cael y llywodraeth, i gyd yn yr un ystafell yn dweud, rydym eisiau, wyddoch chi, cyfiawnder cyflym, teg, mwy hygyrch yn bwerus iawn. Mae’n swnio’n syml ac wrth gwrs, mae’r holl chwaraewyr hynny bob amser wedi credu hynny.
Ond mae ei nodi yn y termau syml hynny yn wirioneddol bwysig. Mae yna beth arall rydyn ni wedi’i ddysgu ar hyd y ffordd, sef bod newid y system gyfiawnder yn her wirioneddol. Mae ganddo gymaint o chwaraewyr ac ar hyd y ffordd mae’n rhaid i chi wneud pethau sy’n rhoi rhywfaint o fomentwm i chi a chael rhai buddugoliaethau i chi a’ch cael chi i wneud pethau’n wahanol.
Ac mae cyfnodau yn y rhaglen ddiwygio. Roedd gennym ni COVID yn ei ganol, lle roedd sefydlu momentwm yn anodd, ond fe wnaethom lwyddo i roi hynny ar waith. A dwi’n meddwl bod hynny’n beth canmoladwy iawn. Dwi’n meddwl o hynny, rydym yn dysgu wedyn ei bod yn wych cael momentwm. Ond mae’n rhaid i chi wrando hefyd, mae’n rhaid i chi ddeall beth rydych chi’n ei wneud ar hyd y ffordd ac rydyn ni’n treulio llawer o amser, yn dysgu’r wers honno, yn gwneud yn siŵr nad oeddem ni ond yn ceisio adborth gan bobl, ond ein bod ni’n deall beth oedd eu hadborth yn ei olygu. Ac yna fe wnaethon ni gymryd yr amser i gael pethau’n iawn wrth i ni fynd ymlaen. Ac roedd honno'n wers bwysig iawn, iawn, ar gyfer y rhaglen hon.
Yr un arall yn amlwg iawn, rhaglen ddigideiddio moderneiddio oedd hon a byddwch wedi clywed hyn o’r blaen, ond wyddoch chi, nid yw trawsnewid digideiddio o’r math hwn yn ymwneud â chyfrifiaduron. Hynny yw, mae angen i chi gael hynny’n iawn, ond mae’n ymwneud â phobl, mae cyfiawnder yn ymwneud â phobl. A dwi’n credu ein bod ni bob amser wedi gwybod hynny fel rydyn ni wedi mynd ymlaen, ond rydyn ni wedi dysgu gwersi anodd iawn hefyd, i sicrhau ein bod ni bob amser yn meddwl sut mae pobl yn rhyngweithio â systemau, nid y systemau eu hunain o reidrwydd.
Y ddau beth olaf i mi, dwi’n meddwl wrth i ni fynd ymlaen, fe wnaethon ni wella. Rydyn ni’n ceisio dysgu’r gwersi hyn. Dwi’n credu bod cael gostyngeiddrwydd a deall gwersi yn wirioneddol wedi bod yn rhywbeth rydw i wedi bod yn wirioneddol falch o fy nhîm o ran sut maen nhw wedi mewnoli hynny. A dwi’n credu ein bod ni nawr mewn cyfnod lle mae gennym ni fath o rythm cyflawni da, ffordd dda o wneud pethau sy’n golygu bod yr holl agweddau hyn yn rhan annatod ohono. Ac yna’r peth olaf yw bod y rhaglen ddiwygio bob amser wedi’i sefydlu gyda’r ddealltwriaeth bod yn rhaid i ni gael anghenion defnyddwyr wrth ei wraidd, mae’n ymwneud â mynediad at gyfiawnder, mae’n ymwneud â deall beth sy’n gweithio i’r defnyddiwr. A dwi’n meddwl mai un o’r pethau dwi’n falch iawn ohono yw’r ffaith mai prin ein bod yn siarad am hynny o gwbl.
Ac nid yw hynny oherwydd ei fod wedi dod yn llai pwysig. Mae’n fwy oherwydd bod hynny wedi dod yn rhan o’r DNA ynghylch sut rydym wedi ceisio newid ac yn gwneud newid yn GLlTEF. Felly, dwi’n meddwl bod hynny’n beth da. Ond mae’r holl wersi hyn, math o wersi gwerthfawr, mae’n rhaid i ni wneud yn siŵr nad ydyn ni’n colli golwg arnyn nhw ac mae hynny’n beth mawr iawn i mi wrth i ni gyrraedd y cyfnod olaf hwn.
Nid ydym wedi mynd mor bell ag yr hoffem wneud. Ond wrth inni fynd drwy hyn, yr hyn yr ydym wedi’i ddysgu hefyd yw pe byddech wedi gosod gweledigaeth wyth mlynedd yn ôl ac yn edrych ar ble’r ydych chi ar hyn o bryd, byddech yn gweld lle rydych wedi methu, ond hefyd yn gweld sawl enghraifft o lle gallwch fynd ymhellach. Lle wnaethoch chi adeiladu sylfaen, mae hynny’n agor posibiliadau newydd mewn gwirionedd. Felly, ie, gobeithio y gallwn ni ddal ati yn y cyfeiriad hwn.
Aaron Wilson:
Perffaith. A beth amdanoch chi, Daniel? A oes unrhyw beth y byddech yn ei wneud yn wahanol yn y ffordd yr ydych wedi ymwneud â diwygio?
Daniel Flury:
Dwi’n meddwl y gallwn i ddechrau trwy adleisio fy sylwadau ar y dechrau am, wyddoch chi, droi’r cloc yn ôl i 2014, 2015. Roeddem yn dechrau o sylfaen isel iawn, a dyma un o’r rhesymau pam mae diwygio wedi bod mor uchelgeisiol ac mor anodd. Wyddoch chi, roedd gennym ni allu cyfyngedig iawn yn y ganolfan alwadau. Roedd gennym allu fideo cyfyngedig iawn.
Dyma stori arall i chi, roedd saith o bob deg apêl mewnfudo yn cael eu derbyn trwy ffacs, sef peiriant ffacs. Wyddoch chi, mae’n dangos pa mor bell y bu’n rhaid i ni ddod wrth ddiwygio. A phan fyddwch yn cyfuno hynny â, fel y dywed Nick, â phandemig, â llwythi achosion cynyddol yn y mwyafrif helaeth o awdurdodaethau, â system cyfiawnder troseddol sy’n newid yn barhaus ac yn gynyddol gymhleth.
Wyddoch chi, mae wedi bod yn anodd. Mae wedi bod yn galed. Ac fel y dywedodd Nick, wyddoch chi, y bobl yw’r ffactor hollbwysig ynddo. Nid oes y fath beth â math o drawsnewid technoleg, mae bob amser yn drawsnewid busnes a heb fusnes, mae’n bobl, mae’n ddiwylliant, mae’n bopeth mewn gwirionedd.
Beth fyddwn i wedi ei wneud yn wahanol? Wyddoch chi, dwi’n meddwl ar y dechrau ein bod ni wedi ceisio gwneud popeth ar unwaith, fe aethon ni ati wysg ein pennau. Roedd gennym egni gwych, uchelgais wych, ac fe wnaethon ni geisio newid llawer o bethau i gyd ar unwaith. Tra fel y dywed Nick, daethom yn llawer, llawer gwell wrth wneud hynny ar y diwedd. Wyddoch chi, dwi’n meddwl efallai y dylem fod ar y dechrau wedi darwahanu ychydig ac adeiladu ar y crescendo hwnnw, yn hytrach na rhyw fath o gyrraedd y crescendo hwnnw o’r cychwyn cyntaf.
Nick Goodwin:
Dw i’n meddwl bod cyfatebiaeth Daniel yn swnio fel tipyn o gyngerdd roc. Hynny yw, mae bron fel ein bod ni’n dod allan ar y llwyfan mewn ffordd hollol ffrwydrol ac mae angen gweledigaeth arnoch chi, mae angen momentwm arnoch chi. Rydych chi angen rhywbeth sy’n gosod allan beth yw’r band. Ond, rydych chi’n arbed rhai o’r ‘hits’ mwyaf ar gyfer y diwedd ac rydych chi’n eu rhoi nhw yr holl ffordd drwodd, ac rydw i’n meddwl bod rhywfaint o’r math yna o ddiweddeb gerddorol yn fy marn i yn berthnasol i wneud pethau fel hyn. Wyddoch chi, mae angen i chi osod eich stondin, adeiladu’r naws ac yna, gobeithio, gorffen ar anthem roc stadiwm. Dyna chi.
Aaron Wilson:
Dwi wedi bod eisiau gofyn i chi’ch dau beth mewn gwirionedd, dwi’n meddwl, yn amlwg mae yna lawer o bethau i’w dewis o’r fan hon, ond pe bai’n rhaid ichi ddewis uchafbwynt personol o’r daith ddiwygio, os hoffech chi, beth fyddai hynny? A beth ydych chi fwyaf balch ohono ar draws yr wyth mlynedd rydym wedi bod yn gwneud hyn? Ac mi wnâi ddod atoch chi, Daniel yn gyntaf.
Daniel Flury:
Dwi’n meddwl bod y newidiadau i’r system lloches a mewnfudo, i mi, yn ddwys iawn oherwydd nid yn unig y gwnaethom gyflwyno system newydd, ffordd newydd o weithio i symud oddi wrth y peiriannau ffacs ofnadwy, fel y soniais. Ond, wyddoch chi, rydym wedi newid yn llwyr y ffordd y mae apeliadau’n cael eu cyflwyno, eu trin, eu hystyried, eu rhoi gerbron barnwr, ac yn dod i benderfyniad, wyddoch chi, nid yn unig y gwnaethom ychwanegu pen blaen digidol iddo, fel y’i gelwir, ond fe wnaethom gyflwyno cysyniadau fel y dadleuon fframwaith apeliadau, cyflwyno rôl swyddog cyfreithiol y tribiwnlys, ehangu rôl swyddog cyfreithiol y tribiwnlys, a’r rheswm pam yr oedd hynny mor gyffrous, oherwydd y diwygiad cychwynnol, roeddem yn onest iawn gyda’n staff yn dweud, wyddoch chi, y bydd hyn yn golygu bod llai o bobl yn gweithio yn GLlTEF yn y dyfodol. Ond roedd creu rôl swyddog cyfreithiol yn golygu bod gennym ni rolau sgiliau uwch, â chyflogau gwell, i’w cynnig i’n pobl. Ac, wyddoch chi, rydym bellach ar y cam lle mae gennym bron i 200 o swyddfeydd cyfreithiol ar draws GLlTEF a, wyddoch chi, mae wedi bod yn wych datblygu a chynnig y rôl hon i’n pobl a gwireddu ein haddewid o, wyddoch chi, dyma sut y gallai dyfodol digidol edrych. Nid yw bob amser yn golygu toriadau swyddi, mwy o bwysau, mae’n golygu rolau cyflog uwch, sgiliau uwch yn gweithio mewn amgylchedd hynod ddiddorol ochr yn ochr â’r farnwriaeth. Felly dwi’n meddwl bod hwnnw’n un o’r math o uchafbwyntiau o safbwynt staffio, wel, o safbwynt system gyfan, o’r rhaglen ddiwygio.
Aaron Wilson:
Beth amdanoch chi, Nick?
Nick Goodwin:
Dwi'n meddwl, ar draws ein gwasanaethau diwygio, fod gennym ni gyfres o'r hyn rydyn ni'n ei alw'n asesiadau ar gontract allanol yn unig, lle gallwn ni nawr edrych ar y math o wasanaeth y mae pobl yn ei brofi ac yna gweithio allan sut i wella mynediad at gyfiawnder i'r bobl hynny a gwneud yn siŵr nad yw pobl oedrannus neu bobl nad yw Saesneg yn iaith gyntaf iddyn nhw o dan anfantais. A’r math o straeon bach rydych chi’n eu cael am sut mae pobl unigol wedi elwa o hynny rydw i’n meddwl sydd wedi bod yn bwerus iawn, iawn.
Ac yna’r peth olaf, sydd wedi aros yn fy meddwl yw pan fyddaf yn mynd o gwmpas y llysoedd ac yn siarad â’n staff. Yn gyntaf, nid ydym wedi colli’r ffaith, y tu ôl i bob math o achos, fod yna berson, a’n bod wedi cadw rhywbeth a oedd bob amser wedi bod yn bwysig i’n DNA yn y sefydliad hwn, er ei fod wedi’i ddigideiddio sef y wyneb y tu ôl i’r achos, wyddoch chi. Nid dyma’r person y tu ôl i’r papur bellach ond y person tu ôl i’r achos, mae gennym ni hynny o hyd, sy’n bwysig iawn. Ond gyda hynny’n cynyddu wrth i mi fynd o gwmpas a siarad â phobl, fe ddywedaf, “o, rydyn ni newydd roi gwasanaeth newydd ymlaen, gyda swyddogaethau newydd, sut ydych chi’n teimlo am hynny?” Ac ychydig flynyddoedd yn ôl, byddai wedi bod, “O mam bach, mae’n ofnadwy, rydw i wedi drysu gymaint.” A nawr mae gennym ni weithlu sy’n dweud i raddau helaeth wrthyf, “O mam bach, mae wedi gwneud fy mywyd yn llawer gwell.” A dwi'n meddwl bod hynny wedi dangos, mae hynny wedi bod yn rhywbeth pwysig iawn i ni fel sefydliad. A dwi’n meddwl, i’n defnyddwyr proffesiynol, ei fod yn golygu ein bod wedi symud ychydig bach oddi wrth fod yn sefydliad a oedd yn hoffi ychydig o bethau Dickensaidd ac nad oedd yn hoffi newid i’r system gyfiawnder yn fawr, a bellach mae’n ymwneud â chroesawu’r dyfodol, ac mae hynny’n wirioneddol iach ar gyfer math PLC y DU, gwasanaethau cyfreithiol y DU, yn ogystal â’r llysoedd a’r tribiwnlysoedd mewn gwirionedd. Ac ie, unwaith eto, mae’n braf clywed hynny, ond persbectif personol iawn gan bobl dwi’n siarad â nhw.
Aaron Wilson:
Jest i, i ddod yn ôl at y brif raglen yn amlwg mae’n agosáu at ddod i ben neu ddod i ben yn swyddogol fel ag y mae. Dwi’n meddwl mae’n debyg mai’r hyn y bydd rhai pobl yn ei feddwl yw sut ydych chi’n mesur llwyddiant y rhaglen ddiwygio, yr hyn yr ydym wedi’i gyflawni a’r hyn sydd i ddod, amwn i, sut mae mesur llwyddiant y rhaglen ddiwygio yma mewn gwirionedd? Ac mi wnâi ddod atoch chi’n gyntaf, Daniel.
Daniel Flury:
Un o'r metrigau allweddol a ddefnyddiwn yw cyfran yr achosion a gyflwynir yn ddigidol, yn electronig a, wyddoch chi, ble bynnag yr wyf yn edrych, wel, mae gwaith i'w wneud o hyd yma mewn awdurdodaethau penodol, ond mae nifer fawr o awdurdodaethau lle mae popeth yn cael ei gyflwyno'n electronig nawr, yn enwedig yn yr awdurdodaeth droseddol. Wyddoch chi, dyna lle mae ychydig mwy o ddewis. Wyddoch chi, rydym yn llawer uwch na 70, 80%. Felly, unwaith eto, rydych chi’n troi’r cloc yn ôl wyth mlynedd, lle rydych chi’n bennaf mewn rhyw fath o system bapur a phost, mae cyrraedd rhywbeth lle mae 80%, 90% o hawliadau apeliadau yn cael eu cyflwyno ar-lein yn gyflawniad gwych.
Rydym hefyd yn edrych, wyddoch chi, mae gallu ymdrin â phobl mewn ffordd ddigidol yn caniatáu iddynt roi adborth mwy ystyriol ar unwaith, wyddoch chi, ac rydym yn edrych ar bethau fel cyfraddau boddhad, cyfraddau boddhad defnyddwyr, nid yn unig rydym yn edrych ar gyfraddau boddhad defnyddwyr, rydym yn edrych arnynt ar sail nodweddion gwarchodedig, o ran hil, rhyw, ethnigrwydd, sy’n rhoi cipolwg llawer mwy ar yr hyn y mae pobl yn ei feddwl ac yn ei deimlo am ein gwasanaethau mewn ffordd nad oedd yn bodoli o’r blaen.
Wyddoch chi, unwaith eto, gadewch i ni droi’r cloc yn ôl ddeng mlynedd. Mae gennym ni fath o focs awgrymiadau llychlyd gyda thwll yn y top yn eistedd yn y gornel, a byddai pobl yn rhoi darn o bapur i mewn yno, ond nawr mae’n llawer mwy cynhwysfawr, llawer mwy manwl, llawer mwy craff. Felly, wyddoch chi, oedd, roedd arbedion i’w gwneud, oedd roedd angen moderneiddio. Ond, wyddoch chi, o edrych ar y defnydd digidol, boed yn hawliadau neu’n apeliadau a gyflwynwyd neu nifer y gwrandawiadau fideo ochr yn ochr â boddhad defnyddwyr, dwi’n meddwl mai dyna yw gwir nodweddion yr hyn y mae diwygio yn ei olygu.
Nick Goodwin:
Felly i mi, yr hyn y daw’n ôl iddo yw a ydym wedi cyflawni’r datganiad o fwriad gwreiddiol? Ydym ni wedi gwella mynediad at gyfiawnder? Ac mae hynny’n cael ei fesur yn ôl, wyddoch chi, pa mor hawdd y gall pobl ryngweithio â’r system gyfiawnder, pa mor dda y maen nhw’n ei deall, a ydyn nhw’n cael canlyniad cyflym ac amserol a dwi’n meddwl mewn gwirionedd y data sydd yno, y byddwn yn parhau i edrych arno am byth mewn gwirionedd, a byddwn yn gwneud gwerthusiad pwrpasol. Rydym eisoes yn cynnal rhai gwerthusiadau gyda gwerthusiad cyflawn yn y blynyddoedd i ddod ond dyna fydd wrth wraidd hynny. A allwn sefyll i fyny a dweud bod cyfiawnder wedi’i wella? Dwi’n hynod hyderus mai’r ateb fydd gallwn.
Aaron Wilson:
Ac wrth aros gyda chi yma Nick, yn amlwg mae llawer iawn o bobl wedi bod yn rhan o’r rhaglen ddiwygio, o staff ar draws GLlTEF i bartneriaid cyfiawnder, ac yn amlwg rhanddeiliaid allanol hefyd. Beth fyddech chi’n ei ddweud wrthyn nhw, wrth ddod at ddiwedd y cyfnod diwygio?
Nick Goodwin:
Byddwn i’n dweud dau beth.
Yn gyntaf, diolch oherwydd mae wedi bod yn eithaf anodd. Felly diolch.
Ac wedyn byddwn i’n cynnwys ail gymal o ddiolch. Rydych chi’n dîm gwell nawr nag oeddech chi pan ddechreuon ni hyn hefyd. A dwi’n meddwl bod hynny oherwydd bod pawb wedi chwarae eu rôl ac maen nhw wedi rhyngweithio â’i gilydd ac maen nhw wedi dysgu llawer oddi wrth ei gilydd. Felly ie, diolch. Ond diolch i chi fel tîm, p’un a ydych chi yn fy nhîm i, p’un a ydych chi’n weithiwr cyfreithiol proffesiynol, p’un a ydych chi’n farnwr, p’un a ydych chi’n ddefnyddiwr. Diolch am gydweithio’n dda.
Aaron Wilson:
A beth amdanoch chi, Daniel? A fyddech chi'n ychwanegu unrhyw beth at hynny?
Daniel Flury:
O bosib, ie. Dwi’n meddwl, yn sicr dweud diolch. Wyddoch chi, roedd diwygio o ran ei raddfa, wyddoch chi, yn wirioneddol ddiwygio unwaith mewn cenhedlaeth, wyddoch chi, fel y dywedais, ein bod ni’n dechrau o sylfaen mor isel, roedd maint y newid, roedd yr arian dan sylw mor sylweddol ond dwi’n meddwl y byddwn i’n dweud tra bod diwygio’n dod i ben nid yw hyn yn golygu bod moderneiddio yn dod i ben yma. Wyddoch chi, mae cymaint mwy i’w wneud o ran parhau i fireinio a gwella’r system, i ddechrau ymgorffori pethau fel y defnydd o ddeallusrwydd artiffisial a datblygiadau technolegol eraill. Ac ie, mae digon o waith i’w wneud o hyd i wella, gwella a moderneiddio ein systemau.
Felly, er bod y diwygio unwaith mewn oes wedi dod i ben, fel y dywedais, bydd newid yn parhau.
Aaron Wilson:
Dwi’n meddwl bod gennych chi bêl grisial, oherwydd mae hynny’n dod â mi’n daclus iawn at fy nghwestiwn nesaf, ynghylch beth sy’n dod nesaf? Oherwydd yn amlwg o'r hyn yr wyf wedi'i ddeall, er bod y rhaglen ddiwygio yn rhyw fath o ddod i ben ffurfiol, nid yw'n golygu bod y gwaith i newid a gwella yn dod i ben. Felly beth sydd nesaf ar gyfer GLlTEF?
Nick Goodwin:
Iesgob. Hynny yw, mae llawer fel y dywedwch, mae diwygio yn mynd i ddod i ben fel rhyw fath o raglen ffurfiol. Ond mae rhai pethau yr ydym eisoes wedi ymrwymo i’w cyflawni y tu allan i’r rhaglen. Felly mae rhai pethau na fyddwn yn gorffen erbyn mis Ebrill, ond mae angen i ni eu cyflawni, felly bydd hynny’n parhau yn bendant. Ac yna dwi’n meddwl, yn rhywbeth pwysig iawn, yr achosion sifil lle rydym am gael gwared ar cyn gymaint o bapur â phosibl.
Y tu hwnt i hynny, a hefyd ar rai o’r tribiwnlysoedd, yr hyn sydd gennym yn awr mewn gwirionedd yw rhestr eithaf hir o gyfleoedd yr ydym wedi’u hagor. Mae ein her nawr yn ymwneud llai â llunio’r rhaglen fawr wych nesaf, mae’n ymwneud â gweithio allan pa welliannau y gallwn eu gweld yn awr sy’n rhoi’r budd mwyaf i’r bobl ac yna gallu blaenoriaethu’r rheini. A dyna’r busnes yr ydym yn mynd i fod ynddo mewn gwirionedd. Felly, nid wyf yn mynd i ddewis un awdurdodaeth, nac un newid mawr. Er bod gennym yn awr gymaint o adnoddau ar gael inni. Soniodd Daniel am ddeallusrwydd artiffisial (AI), er enghraifft. Ond y ffordd y dylem fod yn ei wneud yw dweud, beth fydd yn gwneud y gwahaniaeth mwyaf o ran gwella mynediad i gyfiawnder a mynd ar drywydd hynny, mewn ffordd bwyllog. Ac fel dwi’n dweud, mae yna restr hir iawn, iawn. Ac mae hynny mewn gwirionedd yn lle iach i fod, yn fy marn i.
Aaron Wilson:
Yn amlwg, fel y dywedaf, mae wedi bod yn dipyn o daith ar gyfer diwygio dros yr wyth mlynedd diwethaf. Ond os ydym yn dod i’r diwedd, neu’r diwedd ffurfiol fel ag y mae, a dyma’r math o gyngerdd cloi, pa gân fyddai’n cynrychioli diwedd diwygio Nick?
Nick Goodwin:
O mam bach, dwi ddim yn gwybod. Mae gan Daniel well blas cerddorol na fi, felly fe adawaf iddo fynd yn gyntaf. Iesgob, nid Dolly Parton - ‘9 till 5’ mohoni, gadewch i ni ei roi felly.
Aaron Wilson:
Dwi’n gobeithio na fydd yn ‘We Will Rock You’ chwaith.
Nick Goodwin:
Beth sydd gen ti Daniel?
Daniel Flury:
Roeddwn i’n meddwl mwy am Europe - ‘It’s the Final Countdown’ math o beth. Wyddoch chi, fe ddechreuon ni chwarae llawer o ddeunydd newydd, ond fe wnaethon ni orffen gyda’r ‘number ones’ ar y diwedd, a dweud y gwir. Ac, wyddoch chi, roedd yn dda ei adael felly.
Nick Goodwin:
Ie, medli o ganeuon ABBA.
Daniel Flury:
Medli, ie.
Aaron Wilson:
Wel, dwi’n drist iawn i ddweud, yn anffodus, ein bod ni allan o amser. Ac yn debyg iawn i’r rhaglen ddiwygio, rydym wedi cyrraedd diwedd y podlediad hwn.
Diolch eto, Nick a Daniel, am ymuno â mi ac i bob un ohonoch sy’n gwrando ar hyn hefyd, diolch i chi am diwnio i mewn.
Efallai eich bod eisoes wedi gweld ein bod wedi bod yn rhoi sylw i dipyn o waith ar draws ein rhaglen, ar ein sianeli digidol dros yr wythnos neu ddwy ddiwethaf, ac mae llawer mwy i ddod wrth inni edrych ar y gwaith o drawsnewid y system gyfiawnder yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf.
Mae rhagor o wybodaeth ar gael ar ein tudalennau blog ac ar ein gwefan GOV.UK. Chwiliwch am ‘Inside HMCTS’ am y blog a ‘HMCTS’ am ein hafan GOV.UK.
Byddwn yn ôl eto yn fuan gyda phennod arall, ond yn y cyfamser, oddi wrth pawb yma, cymerwch ofal.
