English: Yes, again, I agree entirely with David's points. If anything, I would perhaps just go a little further. If we were to move away from the kind of valuation processes we've had in the past - the models that were used back in the 1990s and in 2003 - and were to move towards a system that uses hedonic pricing models, then that would mean that we could have valuations and prices reassessed far more often at a very low cost. So, I would suggest that the kinds of systems and methods that we have now for valuation purposes, if we take full advantage of those - . I think that Sam's point was very valid indeed, in saying that, in banking, these kinds of models are used on a daily basis to find daily valuations for property. But we all go onto Rightmove and Zoopla and see these models being used regularly - they're very popular indeed in the real world. And I agree with David, as he said earlier, that these models do provide valuations far more effectively than the systems that are reliant on individual valuers. So, I would move to an automated system in terms of house price valuation, and then, annually, you could reflect any changes in the value of those homes. So, I don't see this as a significant problem, and it's clear to me that we should move in that direction. In terms of the question as to whether this needs to be on a statutory basis, well, clearly, in 2003, the intention was that there would be a revaluation happening every - . Was it every three years or every five years? I can't recall. Well, that hasn't happened, so, clearly, we do need to do something in order to ensure that that revaluation happens more regularly. And I'm not an expert in law, so I don't know whether that needs the force of statute, but perhaps it would be necessary.
Welsh: Ie, dwi'n cytuno eto'n llwyr efo pwyntiau David. Os unrhyw beth, eto, buaswn i jest yn mynd ychydig bach ymhellach. Os ydym ni yn symud i ffwrdd o'r mathau o werthuso rydyn ni wedi'u cael yn y gorffennol - y math o fodelau wnaeth gael eu defnyddio nôl yn y 1990au ac yn 2003 - a symud tuag at system sydd yn defnyddio modelau prisio hedonig, buasai hwnna'n meddwl ein bod ni'n medru cael prisiau yn cael eu hailasesu yn llawer amlach am gost isel iawn. Felly, mi fuaswn i'n gweld bod y fath systemau, y fath ddulliau sydd gennym ni erbyn hyn i werthuso tai, os ydym yn cymryd mantais lawn o'r rheini - . Dwi'n credu bod pwynt Sam yn un dilys iawn, yn dweud yn y byd bancio fod y math yma o fodelau yn cael eu defnyddio o hyd i gael gwerth dyddiol ar dai. Ac eto, dŷn ni i gyd yn mynd ar Rightmove a Zoopla ac yn gweld y modelau yma'n cael eu defnyddio'n gyson - maen nhw'n boblogaidd iawn yn y byd go iawn. A dwi'n cytuno efo David, fel y gwnaeth o ddweud yn gynharach, fod y modelau yma'n gwerthuso tai yn llawer gwell na'r math o systemau sy'n dibynnu ar unigolion i brisio. Felly, buaswn i'n mynd at system o awtomeiddio prisiau tai, ac wedyn, bob blwyddyn, buasech chi'n gallu adlewyrchu unrhyw newidiadau yng ngwerth y tai hynny. Felly, dwi ddim yn gweld hwn fel problem sylweddol, ac mae'n amlwg i fi y dylem ni symud i'r cyfeiriad yna. Ar y cwestiwn a oes angen iddo fod yn beth statudol, wel, yn amlwg, yn 2003, y bwriad oedd y byddai yna ailwerthuso yn digwydd bob - . Dwi'n methu cofio a oedd e bob tair blynedd neu bob pum mlynedd. Dydy hynny ddim wedi ddigwydd, felly, yn amlwg mae angen gwneud rhywbeth i sicrhau bod yr ailbrisio yna'n digwydd yn amlach. A dwi ddim yn arbenigwr ar y gyfraith, felly dwi ddim yn gwybod a oes angen modd statudol o wneud hynny, ond efallai mai dyna beth sydd ei angen.