English: It's been just an amazing insight into the other benches today. I just want to say one thing. They talked about HGV drivers and training them, well, I just want to say this to you: by the time you've trained an HGV driver, the food will be rotten in the lorry. Just a thought for you to think about, that's all, and I thought it might be useful to help you in that deliberation. But I want to ask a few questions. We all know that removing a £20-a-week lifeline is cruel, but I want to ask a question: what did the UK Government think the people were spending that £20 a week on, that they no longer need now? Did they think that it might have been for food, for rent, for heating, for clothing for their children? I have to ask this question, because if they did think that that's what people were spending that £20 a week on, why is it that they think they don't need it now? Is it the intention of the Prime Minister, of course, to do what the Tories always do and blame the poor, yet again? And we've seen evidence over here this afternoon - for being poor. Does he recognise that key workers are receiving this very small lifeline? Those key workers that you went outside to clap, those are the people you're taking this £20 a week from. And the Tories do have a good history, of course, of removing things from people. They put the bedroom tax in so that they removed the right for people to have two bedrooms. They failed to give women their pensions on time, but claimed that they did it. They also just last week decided that the wealthy don't need to pay for healthcare, because they put the rise on national insurance. Who is paying that, I ask? But also, the healthcare that that NI rise was intended to cover had absolutely nothing to do with COVID, but had everything to do with 10 years of austerity. So, you've brought the country to its knees, and now you want to bring people to their knees. But you won't be happy in doing that, of course, because you're going to blame those people - those very people you will be depending on to fill those shelves, once we've trained those HGV drivers, of course, and the food isn't rotten - you'll be taking the money out of their pockets. And the Resolution Foundation has said that those claiming universal credit will have to work nine hours a week to make up for the £20 shortfall. It's a pity that the work and pensions Secretary, who thought it was only two hours, hadn't read that brief first, because she clearly didn't understand that 63 pence in every pound would be reclaimed. She couldn't even do simple maths, for goodness' sake. It's an absolute insult. This is an absolute insult. And to claim that you can't afford it and to actually agree that you can't afford it is somewhat baffling. I notice that Stephen Crabb, today, has come out and said that it is a shameful thing to do. I would be very interested to know whether his colleague, Paul Davies and some of you from this bench agree with that.
Welsh: Cawsom gipolwg anhygoel ar y meinciau eraill heddiw. Rwyf am ddweud un peth. Roeddent yn siarad am yrwyr cerbydau nwyddau trwm a'u hyfforddi, wel, rwyf am ddweud hyn wrthych: erbyn i chi hyfforddi gyrrwr cerbyd nwyddau trwm, bydd y bwyd wedi pydru yn y lori. Rhywbeth i chi feddwl amdano, dyna'r cyfan, ac roeddwn i'n meddwl y gallai fod yn ddefnyddiol i'ch helpu wrth i chi ystyried hynny. Ond rwyf am ofyn ychydig o gwestiynau. Gwyddom i gyd fod cael gwared ar raff achub o £20 yr wythnos yn greulon, ond rwyf am ofyn cwestiwn: ar beth oedd Llywodraeth y DU yn credu bod y bobl yn gwario'r £20 yr wythnos, fel nad oes ei angen arnynt mwyach? A oeddent yn credu y gallai fod ar gyfer bwyd, rhent, gwres, dillad i'w plant? Rhaid imi ofyn y cwestiwn, oherwydd os oeddent yn credu mai ar y pethau hyn roedd pobl yn gwario'r £20 yr wythnos, pam eu bod yn credu nad oes ei angen arnynt mwyach? Ai bwriad y Prif Weinidog, wrth gwrs, yw gwneud yr hyn y mae'r Torïaid bob amser yn ei wneud a beio'r tlawd unwaith eto? Ac rydym wedi gweld tystiolaeth yma y prynhawn yma - am fod yn dlawd. A yw'n cydnabod bod gweithwyr allweddol yn cael y rhaff achub bitw hon? Y gweithwyr allweddol yr aethoch allan i guro dwylo drostynt, dyna'r bobl rydych yn mynd â'r £20 yr wythnos oddi wrthynt. Ac mae gan y Torïaid hanes da, wrth gwrs, o fynd â phethau oddi wrth bobl. Fe wnaethant gynnwys y dreth ystafell wely fel eu bod yn dileu'r hawl i bobl gael dwy ystafell wely. Methwyd rhoi eu pensiynau i fenywod ar amser, er iddynt honni eu bod wedi gwneud hynny. Yr wythnos diwethaf hefyd, fe wnaethant benderfynu nad oes angen i'r cyfoethog dalu am ofal iechyd gan iddynt roi'r cynnydd ar yswiriant gwladol. Pwy sy'n talu hwnnw, gofynnaf? Ond hefyd, nid oedd gan y gofal iechyd y bwriadwyd i'r cynnydd yn yr yswiriant gwladol dalu amdano ddim oll i'w wneud â COVID, a phopeth i'w wneud â 10 mlynedd o gyni. Felly, rydych wedi llorio'r wlad, ac yn awr rydych am lorio pobl. Ond ni fodlonwch ar hynny, wrth gwrs, oherwydd rydych yn mynd i feio'r bobl hynny - yr union bobl y byddwch yn dibynnu arnynt i lenwi'r silffoedd, wedi inni hyfforddi'r gyrwyr cerbydau nwyddau trwm wrth gwrs, pan na fydd y bwyd wedi pydru - o'u pocedi hwy y byddwch yn mynd â'r arian. Ac mae Sefydliad Resolution wedi dweud y bydd yn rhaid i'r rhai sy'n hawlio credyd cynhwysol weithio naw awr yr wythnos i wneud iawn am y diffyg o £20. Mae'n drueni nad oedd yr Ysgrifennydd gwaith a phensiynau, a oedd yn credu mai dim ond dwy awr ydoedd, wedi darllen y briff hwnnw yn gyntaf, oherwydd mae'n amlwg nad oedd yn deall y byddai 63c ym mhob punt yn cael eu hawlio'n ôl. Ni allai wneud mathemateg syml, er mwyn popeth. Mae'n sarhad llwyr. Mae hyn yn sarhad llwyr. Ac mae honni na allwch ei fforddio a chytuno na allwch ei fforddio braidd yn ddryslyd. Sylwaf fod Stephen Crabb, heddiw, wedi dweud ei fod yn beth cywilyddus i'w wneud. Byddai'n ddiddorol iawn gwybod a yw ei gydbleidiwr, Paul Davies a rhai ohonoch chi ar y fainc hon yn cytuno â hynny.