English: I'll just deal with the last point first. The research that we've had done, we're going to publish all of it fully before Easter and we expect then for the final to-ing and fro-ing between civil servants and LE Wales to allow us to do that. It will show the range of different assumptions that you make, from the most optimistic about the most minimal level of increase, that's where you get the £35 million, to, if you like, the maximalist position in terms of the impact of the growth. There are a number of different scenarios, but actually tracking what's happened in the last seven years, that 5.5 per cent rise is much nearer to the top-end scenario. So I don't think that the £35 million is the most optimistic; I don't think you're going to see that founded in reality, certainly not within what's happened in the last seven years. When it comes to the estimates we provide for what different scenarios might produce, for example the £700 million figure in terms of fully funding personal care and accommodation costs, we'll, again, publish all the reasons why that is. So it's not about wanting to make it an unaffordable and unachievable aspiration, but to say 'At this point in time, is this achievable or not?' And that's because of the advantages we have in getting civil servants and others to do that work. So we'll debate openly and it'll be put out into the field, because obviously we don't have a fixed view in the Government about what the exact model future social care should be or, indeed, the exact funding mechanism to try to lever more resources into our system. And that's where we'll be genuinely trying to have an open conversation from Easter onwards, and that's why we've made offers of technical briefings to both the Finance Committee and the two committees, and I think both Chairs are in the room - the Children, Young People and Education Committee will have an interest, together, I'm sure, with the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee - and to make available a briefing from the civil servants who are doing this work to say, 'Here's how we get to these figures, here are the different assumptions, and here's a go at asking the public some open questions about what they want and how they value it.' It's about the balance between improving social care and extending what we have, or just keeping what we have, the choices that will mean, and then what that means about what they are or aren't prepared to pay. The most generous investing would be that if we all had the funding we needed without having to consider that, but I don't expect there to be a Green Paper any time soon; we've been promised a Green Paper for most of the last decade at a UK Government level. But there are real questions to consider about the impact, together with the rest of the UK system, because what I wouldn't want to see is that we try to provide a benefit to people in Wales and that's clawed back in a different way through the benefits system. So, we do need to think carefully about how to design something that would make sense and deliver an improvement in care for people. And, I think, on that, there isn't much difference between us, but it's about how we could get there. We've also taken seriously the point about, if we were to go down the line of suggesting there could be a tax rise, we'd have to think about how that could actually be linked directly to an improvement in the care that people receive, to be able to set out clearly what the offer would be if there were further income raised through taxes of any sort. Now, I say 'if' because, as I say, the Government doesn't have a fixed view. But it would be important to be able to understand not just the public view on that, but how you're going to link the two together. I think that's important in terms of people accepting that there really is something for something rather than another way for politicians to take money off them for no particular benefit. When it comes to health spend, I'm proud of the fact that we've got a Government where we have invested, despite austerity, more than we've had in terms of consequentials. The gap now is that, on average, we spend 9 per cent more than the UK average on health and social care in Wales, and we are taking steps to provide money to join the system more together, to have integrated models of health and social care together. But the way that the systems are funded is different. Social care is means tested, and many people are pretty horrified when they find out about that and they rub up against the system. So, it is a different system, so we do need to look at the funding around social care as a different matter to healthcare. Now, if there was a uniform way of funding it all, well, we could look then again about how that's organised in a different way, but I don't think a reorganisation is the answer to all of the challenges that we face. And I do want to just be clear that the focus on prevention is absolutely there - from the parliamentary review, to the 'A Healthier Wales' response, to the work we're doing with the transformation fund, prevention is absolutely a central focus on what we're looking to do in reforming and improving health and social care services - and, also, to give the assurance that we have maintained contact with the local government family, and will continue to do so across party. So, I and the Deputy Minister will openly brief local government cabinet members when they meet in their social services policy group. We'll meet them in the spring and over the summer, and I definitely want to hear from them the realities of actually having to make some of these choices in local government, together with the sorts of answers in terms of quality, reach and funding that they're prepared to support.
Welsh: Fe fyddaf i'n ymdrin â'r pwynt olaf yn gyntaf. Bydd yr ymchwil a wnaethom ni, fe fyddwn yn ei chyhoeddi yn ei chyfanrwydd cyn y Pasg ac yna byddwn yn disgwyl y rownd derfynol o gyfathrebu rhwng gweision sifil a LE Wales i'n galluogi ni i wneud hynny. Fe fydd yn dangos yr amrywiaeth o wahanol ragdybiaethau sydd gennych chi, o'r mwyaf optimistaidd am y cynnydd lleiaf posibl, ac o'r fan honno y daw'r £35 miliwn, at y sefyllfa eithafol, os mynnwch chi, o ran effaith y twf. Ceir nifer o senarios amrywiol, ond wrth olrhain yr hyn sydd wedi digwydd yn y saith mlynedd diwethaf, mae cynnydd o 5.5 y cant yn llawer nes at y senario ar y pen uchaf. Felly nid wyf i o'r farn mai'r £35 miliwn yw'r sefyllfa fwyaf optimistaidd; nid wyf i'n credu eich bod chi am weld hynny'n cael ei wireddu mewn gwirionedd, yn sicr nid yng nghwmpas yr hyn sydd wedi digwydd yn y saith mlynedd diwethaf. O ran yr amcangyfrifon yr ydym ni'n eu rhoi ar gyfer yr hyn y gallai'r gwahanol senarios ei gynhyrchu, er enghraifft, y ffigur o £700 miliwn o ran ariannu costau gofal personol a llety yn llawn, fe fyddwn ni, unwaith eto, yn cyhoeddi'r holl resymau am hynny. Felly nid yw hyn yn ymwneud ag anelu at rywbeth anfforddiadwy ac anghyraeddadwy, ond dweud 'Ar hyn o bryd, a oes modd cyflawni hyn ai peidio?' Ac mae hynny oherwydd y manteision sydd gennym ni o ran cael gweision sifil ac eraill i wneud y gwaith hwnnw. Felly fe fyddwn ni'n dadlau'n agored ac fe fydd yn cael ei droi allan i'r maes, oherwydd yn amlwg nid oes gennym farn bendant yn y Llywodraeth am yr hyn fydd yr union fodel gofal cymdeithasol y dyfodol, nac, yn wir, yr union fecanwaith cyllido i geisio denu mwy o adnoddau i mewn i'n system ni. A dyna lle byddwn ni'n wirioneddol yn ceisio cael trafodaeth agored o'r Pasg ymlaen, a dyna pam rydym ni wedi cynnig sesiynau briffio technegol i'r Pwyllgor Cyllid a'r ddau bwyllgor, ac rwy'n credu bod y ddau Gadeirydd yn yr ystafell - bydd gan y Pwyllgor Plant, Pobl ifanc ac Addysg ddiddordeb, ynghyd â'r Pwyllgor Iechyd, Gofal Cymdeithasol a Chwaraeon, rwy'n siŵr - a darparu sesiwn friffio gan y gweision sifil sy'n gwneud y gwaith hwn i fynegi, 'Dyma sut yr ydym ni'n cyrraedd y ffigurau hyn, dyma'r gwahanol ragdybiaethau, a dyma fynd ati i ofyn cwestiynau agored i'r cyhoedd am yr hyn y maen nhw'n ei ddymuno a sut maen nhw'n gwerthfawrogi hyn.' Mae'n ymwneud â chydbwyso'r gwelliant i ofal cymdeithasol ac ymestyn yr hyn sydd gennym ni, neu gadw'r hyn sydd gennym ni, y dewisiadau y bydd hynny'n ei olygu, ac yna beth mae hynny'n ei olygu o ran yr hyn y maen nhw'n barod i'w dalu neu nad ydyn nhw 'n barod i'w dalu. Y buddsoddi mwyaf hael fyddai pe byddai gennym ni oll yr arian angenrheidiol heb orfod ystyried hynny, ond nid wyf i'n disgwyl gweld Papur Gwyrdd ymhen dim o dro; cafwyd addewid o Bapur Gwyrdd am y rhan fwyaf o'r degawd diwethaf ar lefel Llywodraeth y DU. Ond mae cwestiynau gwirioneddol i'w hystyried ynglŷn â'r effaith, ynghyd â gweddill system y DU, oherwydd yr hyn na fyddwn i'n dymuno ei weld yw ein bod ni'n ceisio darparu budd i bobl yng Nghymru a bod hwnnw'n cael ei adfachu mewn ffordd arall drwy'r system fudd-daliadau. Felly, mae angen inni feddwl yn ofalus ynglŷn â sut i gynllunio rhywbeth a fyddai'n gwneud synnwyr ac yn sicrhau gwelliant i bobl mewn gofal. Ac, rwy'n credu, o ran hynny, nid oes llawer o wahaniaeth rhyngom ni, ond mae'n ymwneud â sut y gallwn gyrraedd y sefyllfa honno. Rydym hefyd wedi rhoi ystyriaeth ddifrifol i'r hwnt hwn. Pe byddem ni'n dilyn y trywydd o awgrymu y gellid cael codiad yn y dreth, byddai'n rhaid inni feddwl am sut y gellid cysylltu hynny'n uniongyrchol â gwelliant yn y gofal y mae pobl yn ei gael, a gallu nodi'n glir beth fyddai'r cynnig pe bai incwm pellach yn cael ei godi drwy drethiant o unrhyw fath. Nawr, rwy'n dweud 'pe' oherwydd, fel yr wyf i'n dweud, nid oes gan y Llywodraeth farn bendant. Ond byddai'n bwysig gallu deall nid yn unig farn y cyhoedd ar hynny, ond sut rydych chi am gysylltu'r ddau gyda'i gilydd. Rwy'n credu bod hynny'n bwysig o ran pobl yn derbyn bod rhywbeth yn cael ei roi yn gyfnewid am rywbeth arall, yn hytrach na bod hyn yn ffordd arall i wleidyddion gymryd eu harian oddi wrthyn nhw heb unrhyw fudd penodol i hynny. O ran gwariant ar iechyd, rwy'n falch o'r ffaith fod gennym Lywodraeth sydd wedi buddsoddi, er gwaethaf cyni, fwy na'r hyn a gawsom ni o ran cyllid canlyniadol. Y bwlch nawr yw ein bod ni, ar gyfartaledd, yn gwario 9 y cant yn fwy na chyfartaledd y DU ar iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol yng Nghymru, ac rydym ni'n cymryd camau i ddarparu arian i gydgysylltu'r system yn well, ar gyfer cael modelau integredig o iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol gyda'i gilydd. Ond caiff y systemau eu hariannu mewn ffordd wahanol. Mae gofal cymdeithasol yn seiliedig ar brawf modd, ac mae llawer o bobl yn arswydo pan fyddan nhw'n cael gwybod am hynny ac yn gwylltio gyda'r system. Felly, mae'n system wahanol, ac felly mae angen inni edrych ar yr arian sy'n ymwneud â gofal cymdeithasol fel mater ar wahân i ofal iechyd. Nawr, pe byddai ffordd unffurf o ariannu'r cyfan, wel, fe allem edrych eto wedyn ar sut y caiff hynny ei drefnu mewn ffordd arall, ond nid wyf i o'r farn mai ad-drefnu yw'r ateb i bob un o'r heriau sy'n ein hwynebu ni. Ac rwy'n awyddus i egluro bod canolbwyntio ar atal yno - o'r adolygiad seneddol, i ymateb 'Cymru Iachach', i'r gwaith yr ydym ni'n ei wneud gyda'r gronfa weddnewid, mae atal yn ganolog i'r hyn yr ydym ni'n bwriadu ei wneud wrth ddiwygio a gwella gwasanaethau iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol - ac yn rhoi sicrwydd hefyd ein bod ni wedi cadw mewn cysylltiad â theulu llywodraeth leol, ac fe fyddwn ni'n parhau i wneud hynny ar draws y pleidiau. Felly, fe fydd y Dirprwy Weinidog a minnau'n briffio aelodau cabinet llywodraeth leol yn agored pan fyddan nhw'n cyfarfod yn eu grŵp polisi gwasanaethau cymdeithasol. Fe fyddwn ni'n cwrdd â nhw yn y gwanwyn a thros yr haf, ac rwy'n bendant am glywed y gwirionedd ganddyn nhw o ran gorfod gwneud rhai o'r dewisiadau gwirioneddol hyn mewn llywodraeth leol, ynghyd â'r mathau o atebion o ran ansawdd, cyrhaeddiad a chyllid y maen nhw'n barod i'w cefnogi.