English: I agree with what Dyfan has said. I would remind the committee that around 40 per cent of the houses that came onto the market in Gwynedd were sold as second homes or as holiday lets recently. I would also remind you that, again in Gwynedd, something in the region of 67 per cent of housing is in private hands, so, obviously, the public sector has a role in the housing market. The right to a roof over your head, of course, is a fundamental human right, isn't it? In terms of how you deliver that, well, there are two questions. One is: how do you provide housing, whether they are affordable, with the risk that they will become available on the open market? Or, social housing, again, with the housing associations, you have to ask the question as to whether they've got too large and too corporate. I think perhaps we need to look at legislation - well, not 'perhaps'; we do need to look at legislation as to whether it's ethical that people should be able to own a second home, or a second house, where others can't afford a first home. We need to look at particular areas where there is too much emphasis on tourism where there should be, perhaps, a maximum limit on the housing market that serves tourism, including Airbnb, or the second home market. There are examples in other places of where that's done. Now, in terms of home ownership, there is scope to ask the question as to why, I think, most of us would aim and hope to be home owners, whilst, on the continent, that simply isn't the case. So, ultimately, if my home has increased in value a great deal since I bought it, it's no profit to me, because I would have to spend more on my next home. And we do have to bear all of that in mind and think about those who come after us, of course. Thank you.
Welsh: Dwi'n cytuno efo beth mae Dyfan wedi'i ddweud. Buaswn i'n atgoffa'r pwyllgor fod tua 40 y cant, dwi'n credu, o dai ddaeth ar y farchnad yng Ngwynedd wedi cael eu gwerthu fel ail gartrefi neu ar gyfer busnes gwyliau yn ddiweddar yma. Byddwn i hefyd yn eich atgoffa, eto yng Ngwynedd, dwi'n meddwl bod yna rywbeth yn debyg i 67 y cant o dai yn eiddo preifat, felly, yn amlwg, mae gan y sector gyhoeddus le yn y farchnad dai. Mae'r hawl i do uwch eich pen yn greiddiol, a dweud y gwir, i'r ddynoliaeth, onid ydy? O safbwynt sut rydych chi'n ei wneud o, mae yna ddau gwestiwn. Un ydy: sut ydych chi'n darparu tai, os ydyn nhw'n fforddiadwy, efo'r peryglon iddyn nhw ddod allan i'r farchnad agored? Neu, yn gymdeithasol, eto, efo'r cymdeithasau tai cymdeithasol yma, mae'n rhaid ichi ofyn y cwestiwn: ydyn nhw wedi mynd yn rhy fawr ac yn rhy gorfforaethol ar hyn o bryd? Dwi'n meddwl efallai bod angen i ni edrych ar ddeddfwriaeth ynglŷn â - nid 'efallai'; mae eisiau i ni edrych ar ddeddfwriaeth ynglŷn ag a ydy o'n foesol gywir bod pobl efo ail gartref, neu ail dŷ, lle nad ydy pobl eraill ddim efo nhw. Mae yna le i edrych ar ardaloedd penodol lle mae twristiaeth wedi mynd yn ordwristiaeth, lle dylid pennu uchafswm, os liciwch chi, o dai sydd yn gwasanaethu, neu farchnad ail gartrefi, neu fasnach dwristiaeth mewn rhyw ffordd, ac mae hynny'n cynnwys Airbnb. Mae yna enghreifftiau mewn llefydd eraill lle rydych chi'n tynnu'r pwysau i raddau a phethau felly. O ran perchnogaeth tai, mae yna le i ofyn y cwestiwn pam ydym ni, os liciwch chi - y rhan fwyaf ohonom ni, mae'n siŵr - yn gobeithio anelu at fod yn berchen ar dai, tra, ar y cyfandir, dydy hynna ddim yn uchelgais o'r un fath, nac ydy? Achos, yn y pen draw, os ydy fy nhŷ i wedi cynyddu yn ei werth sawl gwaith ers i mi ei brynu o, yn y pen draw, dydy o ddim yn llawer o elw i mi, achos, taswn i eisiau symud, dwi'n gorfod rhoi pres mwy amdano fo. Ac mae'n rhaid inni feddwl am y bobl sydd yn ein dilyn ni ar yr hen gornel yma o'r byd, onid oes? Diolch yn fawr i chi.