English: Thank you very much and thank you for the statement here today. We wouldn't, obviously, dispute the fact that a target of the nature you've arrived at is to be welcomed, but I would echo some of the comments that have been made in relation to whether there is an issue with regard to the figure that stands. I say this not because I am saying it only - I'm saying it because I've had that reflected to me by the sector. Of course, 6,000 of those homes will be Help to Buy homes and obviously, that is to help those buy a house up to £300,000. While that may be of significance in the south-east of England, affordability in that relation is not comparable in Wales, and I would want to find out - being new into this brief - whether any of your civil servants did some research into whether there would be ways of adapting that Help to Buy situation here in Wales. Of course, I don't know about your area, but in the area where I live, a £300,000 house is quite substantial as compared to others that are available in Wales. So, I think that's quite fundamental for the debate that we have in relation to affordability. I'd also like some clarity to that definition, again having spoken to people in the sector. Your definition of affordability is: 'Those whose needs are not met by the open market.' I wonder whether you've had any thoughts as a Minister - as Cabinet Secretary - about variation of this definition in different parts of Wales. For example, in Neath, the affordability of a house would be very different to what the affordability is in Penarth. And so, having that quite broad definition sometimes confuses residents when they are attending consultation processes, because they know that their families will not be able to afford the definition of a house as defined by, say, Barratt Homes or another company in their area. I would be intrigued to find out more about the fact that you said that you would be releasing more public sector land and Government land for housing. I think it would be interesting to find out more details on that, because, of course, sometimes there is controversy about where that land is, and how then that housing is distributed locally. So, I think that's something that I would be interested to find out more about, and also to do with the tripartite pact that you now have with Community Housing Cymru and the Welsh Local Government Association to support your delivery. Obviously, you had this pact with the CHC before, but could you tell me how they still retain their 'critical friend of Government' when they're working with you on this particular matter, because, of course, we need to have that scrutiny element from CHC also? You also mention in your statement that having good-quality housing has benefits for children in terms of health and education, and I wouldn't want to dispute that, but so, too, does stability and not being evicted and moved. So, what measures will you be taking to ensure that the social housing section of these 20,000 homes are being run by organisations that are not using evictions as the first resort, as Shelter Cymru exemplified in recent research. And my other question would be that housing may be affordable when built, but if it merely ends up in the hands of buy-to-let landlords, it won't be affordable for very long. So, how do you ensure longevity of affordable homes that are built, not by your Government, as you don't build houses, as you said, but by partners in the sector? And forgive me if I haven't read your statement correctly, but can you tell us, by seeking to abolish the right to buy, which, of course, we support, what element - ? How does that play into the figures, because, of course, the Conservatives will say, 'Well, you're not building enough'? But, surely, by abolishing the right to buy, that would feed into the social housing statistic. Can we understand how that would play a part in that? My final question is something, again, we had at a fringe meeting at the Plaid Cymru conference arranged by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. They were curious to find out, with the new infrastructure commission, whether housing would be a key part in that, because, of course, we have skills here in Wales, we have people wanting to build more houses. How will they play a role in the infrastructure commission, because I think they were seeing it more as a sort of transport infrastructure project, as opposed to a housing one? And they wanted to be part of the conversation, really. So, if you could answer those questions, I'd be very grateful.
Welsh: Diolch yn fawr iawn a diolch ichi am y datganiad yma heddiw. Ni fyddem, yn amlwg, yn dadlau â'r ffaith bod targed o'r natur yr ydych wedi cyrraedd i'w groesawu, ond byddwn yn adleisio rhai o'r sylwadau sydd wedi'u gwneud mewn perthynas â pha un a oes problem o ran y ffigur fel ag y mae. Rwy'n dweud hyn nid ar ran fy hunan yn unig - rwy'n ei ddweud oherwydd bos y sector wedi cyfleu hynny i mi. Wrth gwrs, bydd 6,000 o'r cartrefi hynny yn gartrefi Cymorth i Brynu ac yn amlwg, mae hynny er mwyn helpu pobl i brynu tŷ hyd at £300,000. Er y gall hynny fod yn arwyddocaol yn ne-ddwyrain Lloegr, nid yw hynny'n cymharu â fforddiadwyedd yma yng Nghymru, a byddwn yn awyddus i gael gwybod - gan fy mod yn newydd i'r briff hwn - a wnaeth unrhyw un o'ch gweision sifil ychydig o ymchwil i weld a fyddai ffyrdd o addasu'r sefyllfa Cymorth i Brynu yma yng Nghymru. Wrth gwrs, nid wyf yn gwybod am eich ardal chi, ond yn yr ardal lle'r wyf i'n byw, mae tŷ o £300,000 yn dŷ eithaf sylweddol o'i gymharu ag eraill sydd ar gael yng Nghymru. Felly, rwy'n credu bod hynny'n eithaf sylfaenol ar gyfer y ddadl sydd gennym o ran fforddiadwyedd. Hoffwn hefyd rywfaint o eglurder i'r diffiniad hwnnw, unwaith eto ar ôl siarad â phobl yn y sector. Eich diffiniad chi o fforddiadwyedd yw: Y rhai hynny nad yw eu hanghenion yn cael eu diwallu gan y farchnad agored. Tybed a ydych chi wedi cael unrhyw syniadau fel Gweinidog - fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet - am amrywio'r diffiniad hwn mewn gwahanol rannau o Gymru. Er enghraifft, yng Nghastell-nedd, byddai fforddiadwyedd tŷ yn wahanol iawn i'r hyn sy'n fforddiadwy ym Mhenarth. Ac felly, mae cael y diffiniad eithaf eang hwnnw weithiau'n drysu trigolion pan fyddant yn cymryd rhan mewn prosesau ymgynghori, oherwydd eu bod yn gwybod na fydd eu teuluoedd yn gallu fforddio'r diffiniad o dŷ fel y'i diffinnir gan Barratt Homes, dyweder, neu gwmni arall yn eu hardal hwy. Byddwn yn chwilfrydig i ddarganfod mwy am y ffaith eich bod wedi dweud y byddech yn rhyddhau mwy o dir sector cyhoeddus a thir y Llywodraeth ar gyfer tai. Rwy'n credu y byddai'n ddiddorol i ni gael gwybod mwy o fanylion am hynny, oherwydd, wrth gwrs, weithiau mae dadleuon ynghylch ble y mae'r tir hwnnw, a sut wedyn y mae tai yn cael eu dosbarthu yn lleol. Felly, rwy'n credu bod hynny'n rhywbeth a fyddai o ddiddordeb imi gael gwybod mwy amdano, a hefyd ynghylch y cytundeb tridarn sydd gennych yn awr gyda Chartrefi Cymunedol Cymru a Chymdeithas Llywodraeth Leol Cymru i gefnogi'r targed tai y byddwch yn ei gyflawni. Yn amlwg, roedd gennych y cytundeb hwn gyda Chartrefi Cymunedol Cymru o'r blaen, ond a allech ddweud wrthyf sut y maent yn dal i gadw eu statws fel 'cyfaill beirniadol y Llywodraeth' pan fyddant yn gweithio gyda chi ar y mater penodol hwn, oherwydd, wrth gwrs, mae angen i ni barhau i gael yr elfen graffu honno gan Gartrefi Cymunedol Cymru hefyd? Rydych hefyd yn sôn yn eich datganiad bod cael tai o ansawdd da yn cynnig manteision i blant o ran iechyd ac addysg, ac ni fyddwn yn dymuno amau hynny, ond felly, hefyd, y mae sefydlogrwydd a pheidio cael eich troi allan a'ch symud. Felly, pa gamau y byddwch yn eu cymryd i sicrhau bod yr elfen tai cymdeithasol o'r 20,000 o gartrefi hyn yn cael ei rhedeg gan sefydliadau nad ydynt yn defnyddio troi allan fel y dewis cyntaf, fel y gwelwyd mewn ymchwil diweddar gan Shelter Cymru. A fy nghwestiwn arall fyddai hyn: efallai bod tai yn fforddiadwy ar adeg eu hadeiladu, ond os byddant yn glanio yn nwylo landlordiaid prynu i osod yn y pen draw, ni fyddant yn fforddiadwy am yn hir iawn. Felly, sut ydych chi'n sicrhau hirhoedledd y tai fforddiadwy sy'n cael eu hadeiladu, nid gan eich Llywodraeth, gan nad ydych chi'n adeiladu tai, fel y dywedasoch, ond gan bartneriaid yn y sector? A maddeuwch i mi os nad wyf wedi darllen eich datganiad yn gywir, ond a allwch chi ddweud wrthym, drwy geisio diddymu'r hawl i brynu, yr ydym, wrth gwrs, yn ei gefnogi, pa elfen - ? Sut mae hynny'n dod i mewn i'r ffigurau, oherwydd, wrth gwrs, bydd y Ceidwadwyr yn dweud, 'Wel, nid ydych yn adeiladu digon'? Ond, yn sicr, trwy ddiddymu'r hawl i brynu, byddai hynny'n bwydo i mewn i'r ystadegau tai cymdeithasol. A allwn ni gael deall sut y byddai hynny yn chwarae rhan yn hynny? Mae fy nghwestiwn olaf yn rhywbeth, unwaith eto, yr oedd gennym mewn cyfarfod ymylol yng nghynhadledd Plaid Cymru a drefnwyd gan Sefydliad Brenhinol y Syrfewyr Siartredig. Roeddent yn chwilfrydig i ddarganfod, gyda'r comisiwn seilwaith newydd, a fyddai tai yn rhan allweddol yn hynny o beth, oherwydd, wrth gwrs, rydym yn meddu ar sgiliau yma yng Nghymru, mae gennym bobl sydd eisiau adeiladu mwy o dai. Sut y byddant yn chwarae rhan yn y comisiwn seilwaith, oherwydd rwy'n credu eu bod nhw'n ei weld yn fwy fel rhyw fath o brosiect seilwaith trafnidiaeth, yn hytrach na phrosiect seilwaith tai? Ac maent yn awyddus i fod yn rhan o'r sgwrs, mewn gwirionedd. Felly, pe gallech ateb y cwestiynau hynny, byddwn yn ddiolchgar iawn.