English: I appreciate the Member will have written that down before she had a chance to listen to what I said and the challenge that I gave to her. I don't accept the premise of her point. The movement of goods and people is clearly critical. That is not currently possible because we have congestion. You don't solve congestion by building more roads. There's ample international evidence that if you build more road capacity, you encourage more traffic, which leads to greater congestion and then demands for more road building. And we've been doing that for over 50 years. They shake their heads, but I'd like to see the evidence they have to contradict what I've just said. The academic research on that is absolutely clear. And if we can remove traffic from the roads that doesn't need to be there, that, in fact, opens up space for the freight sector. We obviously want to see freight shifting from roads onto railways where that's possible, but failure to adequately invest in the railways by the Conservative Government in Wales, where we are £5 billion short of investment - which, again, if they were sincere in their views, they would acknowledge - has hampered our ability to achieve modal shift from road to rail for freight. But it's simply not the case that we have inadequate roads at the moment. What we have not been doing is sufficiently investing in maintaining existing roads. And one of the objectives of the roads review is to look at how we could move investment away from building new roads to look after the ones we have and, as we do it, encourage modal shift. I again say to the Member on the benches opposite, you've signed up to net zero by 2050, 17 per cent of emissions come from transport - how do you plan to cut those emissions so that we meet our targets? I wait to hear your answer.
Welsh: Rwy'n sylweddoli y bydd yr Aelod wedi ysgrifennu hynny cyn iddi gael cyfle i wrando ar yr hyn a ddywedais a'r her a roddais iddi. Nid wyf yn derbyn cynsail ei phwynt. Mae symud nwyddau a phobl yn amlwg yn hollbwysig. Nid yw hynny'n bosibl ar hyn o bryd gan fod gennym dagfeydd. Nid ydych yn datrys tagfeydd drwy adeiladu mwy o ffyrdd. Mae digon o dystiolaeth ryngwladol yn dangos, os byddwch yn adeiladu mwy o gapasiti ffyrdd, eich bod yn annog mwy o draffig, sy'n arwain at fwy o dagfeydd ac yna at fwy o alw am adeiladu ffyrdd. Ac rydym wedi bod yn gwneud hynny ers dros 50 mlynedd. Maent yn ysgwyd eu pennau, ond hoffwn weld y dystiolaeth sydd ganddynt i wrth-ddweud yr hyn yr wyf newydd ei ddweud. Mae'r ymchwil academaidd ar hynny'n gwbl glir. Ac os gallwn dynnu traffig nad oes angen iddo fod yno oddi ar y ffyrdd, mae hynny, mewn gwirionedd, yn gwneud mwy o le ar gyfer y sector cludo nwyddau. Rydym yn amlwg am weld cludiant nwyddau'n symud oddi ar ffyrdd ac ar y rheilffyrdd lle bo modd, ond mae methiant y Llywodraeth Geidwadol i fuddsoddi'n ddigonol yn y rheilffyrdd yng Nghymru, lle rydym £5 biliwn yn brin o fuddsoddiad - sydd, unwaith eto, pe baent yn ddiffuant yn eu safbwyntiau, yn rhywbeth y byddent yn ei gydnabod - wedi llesteirio ein gallu i newid dulliau teithio oddi ar y ffordd ac ar y rheilffyrdd mewn perthynas â chludiant nwyddau. Ond nid yw'n wir fod gennym ffyrdd annigonol ar hyn o bryd. Yr hyn nad ydym wedi bod yn ei wneud yw buddsoddi'n ddigonol mewn cynnal a chadw ffyrdd presennol. Ac un o amcanion yr adolygiad ffyrdd yw edrych ar sut y gallem symud buddsoddiad oddi wrth adeiladu ffyrdd newydd i ofalu am y rhai sydd gennym, ac wrth inni wneud hynny, hybu newid mewn dulliau teithio. Dywedaf eto wrth yr Aelod ar y meinciau gyferbyn, rydych wedi ymrwymo i sero net erbyn 2050, daw 17 y cant o allyriadau o drafnidiaeth - sut y bwriadwch dorri'r allyriadau hynny er mwyn inni gyflawni ein targedau? Arhosaf i glywed eich ateb.