Diolch. Dim ond pwynt o eglurhad oedd gennyf mewn gwirionedd, oherwydd gallaf dderbyn, mewn ffordd, eich sylwadau eich bod yn dweud nad ydych am roi sylwadau ar y cynlluniau manwl hyn oherwydd gallai fod yn rhaid ichi wneud penderfyniad terfynol ar ryw bwynt. Mae hynny ar yr un llaw. Ar y llaw arall, fodd bynnag, ni fydd y bwrdd iechyd yn gallu bwrw ymlaen â'u hysbyty newydd gwerth miliynau o bunnoedd - dywedodd Rhun £350 miliwn, maent wedi dweud £500 miliwn wrthyf fi - heb gael arian ychwanegol, a bydd yn rhaid iddo ddod gan y Llywodraeth. Felly, sut y gallwch chi gysoni'r ddau beth os oes yn rhaid i chi gadw'n annibynnol, a phenderfynu wedyn mewn gwirionedd a ydych yn ymrwymo i'r cynllun hwnnw ai peidio?

Thank you. It was actually just a point of clarification, because I can accept, in a way, your commentary that you say that you don't want to comment on these detailed plans because you might have to make a final decision at some point in time. That's on the one hand. On the other hand, though, the health board will not be able to proceed with their multimillion pound - Rhun said £350 million, they've told me £500 million - new hospital without having additional funding, which will have to come from the Government. So, how can you square those two if you've got to keep independent, but actually then decide whether or not to commit to that plan?

Grêt. Dwi ddim gweld bod unrhyw un arall yn dweud eu bod nhw eisiau dod i mewn ar y pwnc.

Great. I can't see that anyone else wants to come in on this subject.

I'm cyd-Aelodau, rydym ni'n symud ymlaen i eitem 5. A gyda phapurau i'w nodi, mi fyddwch chi wedi darllen fy llythyr i at y Gweinidog iechyd ynglŷn â COVID hir. Mi fyddwch chi wedi gweld y llythyr hefyd gan y Gweinidog ynglŷn â COVID hir. Hapus i nodi'r rheini? Dwi'n gweld eich bod chi.

So, fellow Members, we move on to item 5, papers to note. You will have read my letter to the Minister for Health and Social Services on long COVID. You will also have seen a message from the Minister on long COVID. Are you content to note? I see that you are.

Nid wyf yn siŵr a yw'r Aelod yn ymwybodol, o ran cyfraddau ymateb i'r arolwg hwnnw, mai dim ond llai na 13 y cant o'r aelodau awdurdodau lleol a arolygwyd a ymatebodd o gwbl. Byddai rhywun yn disgwyl, o dan yr amgylchiadau hynny, y bydden nhw'n aelodau a oedd yn gwrthwynebu. Rwy'n credu bod yn rhaid i ni fod yn eithaf gofalus ynglŷn â sut yr ydym ni'n defnyddio'r ffigurau hynny, ac rwyf eisoes wedi gwneud y pwynt ynghylch arolwg Seland Newydd, sef yr union beth hwnnw - roedd yn bôl piniwn a gomisiynwyd gan y sefydliad a oedd wedi gwrthwynebu'r gwaharddiad yn y lle cyntaf.

I'm not sure if the Member is aware that, in terms of response rates to that survey, it was fewer than 13 per cent of local authority members who were surveyed who responded at all. One would expect, under those circumstances, that they would be members who were opposed. I think we just have to be a bit careful about how we use those figures, and I've already made the point about the New Zealand survey, which was just that - it was an opinion poll commissioned by the organisation that had opposed the ban in the first place.

Mae'n swyddogaeth nad yw wedi'i datganoli; [ Anghlywadwy.] - gwariwch arian arni.

It's a non-devolved function; [ Inaudible.] - spend money on it.