English: So, while we thought £52 million was quite a lot for the Welsh Government to spend on Cardiff Airport, compared to the KPMG estimate of a valuation of £25 million to £35 million, it suggests that, actually, the £52 million compares relatively well to the £40 million, when Cardiff had 1 million passengers compared to the 130,000 there, but whether that's the right valuation I don't know. But I would note, in response to Carwyn's comment, the response of five Labour council leaders to the Conservative mayor buying the airport in Durham Tees: they warned that the mayor's plans to sink money into the struggling airport would create a black hole in investment plans. I hope we'll look at these issues on merit, rather than simply from party political allegiance. I think the important point I'd like to make, in terms of cash going from Government into the airport - yes, if it's a black hole and it's consistently taking cash and there's no prospect of it generating cash to pay back down the road, then that wouldn't be a good idea. But, at the margin, what they are doing with the additional money? When I met with Roger Lewis and others, when he was chairing the airport, I think they made a case that at least some of the extra cash they were looking for was going to get a payback within a year or so, in terms of extra retail units and improving terminals. If that payback is the case, then it would be sensible to put the cash into it, and, given that the Government is the shareholder, for now that duty falls to Welsh Government. We heard, as Nick said, relatively limited mentions of austerity from the finance Minister, at least compared to previous contributions. However, she did emphasise - and her comparison was one, again, back to 2010-11, and how we, she says, have £300 million less in real terms now than then. I just think it's more helpful, in scrutinising and considering the budget, and deciding what we think of it, to compare what the budget is for the year ahead compared to the previous year. What are you actually doing in this budget? For that, I think the important number is that £593 million increase in spending, or 2.3 per cent in real terms. I think the finance Minister was a little unfair to criticise the UK Government for its chaotic approach to the budget timing, since I think the timing of that 12 December general election, or the necessity of having it, was not entirely in the UK Government's hands. Opposition Members in Westminster had at least as much responsibility for those timings and the impact they had on the budget process. However, I would like to commend the Welsh Government on its pragmatic response to those timing difficulties, its, I think, sensible liaison with the Finance Committee in terms of scrutiny and the debates we've had here. I think it's worked okay, in light of the challenges that we had. Certainly, compared to the Scottish Government, and the huge problems they've had, I think we have acquitted ourselves well in terms of those timings working together. I also think, in that context, we, on the Finance Committee, are looking to give greater consideration to the budget process, stepping back from the specifics of this budget to ask if this is the right process. The thing that I've become most concerned about, about the process and how it works, being on the Finance Committee on and off over the years, is that the draft budget, and then the scrutiny and the debates and the stakeholder meetings, I think possibly lead to heightened expectations from stakeholders, interest groups, those who are funded - AMs here, to an extent - of the prospect for change. And I wait to see what happens in the finance Minister's final budget to see what is changed then. But, if the scrutiny process is to have any value - . I'd just give one example of an area where I think there's been cross-party consensus, and that is bus services. Yes, it's welcome to have this £29 million of capital funding for electric buses, and I'm sure that those who use them and those in city centres who benefit, perhaps, from reduced air pollution because of them will appreciate that spending, but we're not clear as to whether that is the best value of spending compared to other projects, to the extent that the Minister is focused on climate change objectives. Obviously, there are other benefits to these as well, but are those benefits greater than how that money of £29 million could be used elsewhere to support bus services? Myself and the Member for Blaenau Gwent both brought this up repeatedly in committee: that, actually, if in Ebbw Vale you've seen the frequency of the service halved, whether it's an electric bus is much less important than whether there is a bus. I just hope the Minister, if she is listening to the scrutiny - and it's come from Plaid, us, Conservatives and from her own back benches. A real-terms cut in the subsidy for bus services on a revenue basis does not seem to gel well with her purported climate change objectives. And I just would, again, encourage her to reconsider that aspect prior to the final budget. I also wonder, given we've had this long period of relative austerity and we've come out of it - yet the approach of Welsh Government is largely to hand out fairly similar increases across the board. Some areas have particularly benefited; I see the Minister for the international side in her seat, and that's a significant percentage although quite small as an absolute-terms increase, and I hope she won't go overboard with opening too many offices across every EU country with the extra cash, but that's a big area of increase. But I just wonder, in terms of that core decision - the NHS versus local government - similar increases to both - . Yet, what has happened in dealing with austerity in Wales is there have been relative cuts in the health service compared to England, yet local government has been protected much more than has been the case for English local government. The Welsh Government used to tell us that we needed structural change in local government, and I agree with them. Why do we have so many councils, 22 unitary councils, much smaller generally than those in England that are delivering unitary services? There's a desperate need to try and encourage regional working to mitigate some of those inefficiencies. But ultimately, would it not be better if we had fewer and larger councils that were better suited to carrying out those tasks? I will give way to someone who will disagree strongly with what I've just said - Mike.
Welsh: Felly, er ein bod yn credu bod £52 miliwn yn gryn dipyn i Lywodraeth Cymru ei wario ar Faes Awyr Caerdydd, o'i gymharu ag amcangyfrif KPMG o brisiad o rhwng £25 miliwn a £35 miliwn, mae'n awgrymu, mewn gwirionedd, bod y £52 miliwn yn cymharu'n weddol dda â'r £40 miliwn, pan oedd gan Gaerdydd 1 filiwn o deithwyr o'i gymharu â'r 130,000 yn y fan honno, ond ai dyna'r prisiad cywir, wn i ddim. Ond byddwn yn nodi, mewn ymateb i sylw Carwyn, ymateb pum arweinydd cyngor Llafur i'r ffaith fod maer Ceidwadol wedi prynu'r maes awyr yn Durham Tees: Fe wnaethon nhw rybuddio y byddai cynlluniau'r maer i fuddsoddi arian yn y maes awyr a oedd mewn trafferthion yn creu twll du yn y cynlluniau buddsoddi. Gobeithio y byddwn yn edrych ar y materion hyn ar sail teilyngdod, yn hytrach na dim ond drwy deyrngarwch pleidiol. Rwy'n credu mai'r pwynt pwysig yr hoffwn i ei wneud, o ran arian yn mynd o'r Llywodraeth i'r maes awyr - ie, os yw'n dwll du ac mae'n cymryd arian parod yn gyson ac nid oes unrhyw bosibilrwydd y bydd yn cynhyrchu arian i wneud ad-daliadau yn y dyfodol, yna ni fyddai hynny'n syniad da. Ond, ar yr ymylon, beth maen nhw'n ei wneud gyda'r arian ychwanegol? Pan gyfarfûm â Roger Lewis ac eraill, pan oedd yn cadeirio'r maes awyr, credaf eu bod wedi dadlau bod o leiaf rhywfaint o'r arian ychwanegol yr oedden nhw'n chwilio amdano yn mynd i gael ei ad-dalu o fewn blwyddyn neu ddwy, o ran unedau manwerthu ychwanegol a gwella terfynellau. Os yw'r ad-daliad hwnnw'n wir, byddai'n synhwyrol i fuddsoddi'r arian ynddo, ac, o gofio mai'r Llywodraeth yw'r cyfranddaliwr, am y tro mae'r ddyletswydd honno'n disgyn ar Lywodraeth Cymru. Clywsom, fel y dywedodd Nick, ychydig iawn o sôn am gyni gan y Gweinidog Cyllid, o leiaf o'i gymharu â chyfraniadau blaenorol. Fodd bynnag, roedd hi'n pwysleisio - ac roedd ei chymhariaeth hi'n un, unwaith eto, a oedd yn mynd yn ôl i 2010-11, a sut y mae gennym ni, meddai hi, £300 miliwn yn llai nawr nag yr oedd gennym ni bryd hynny mewn termau real. Rwy'n credu ei bod yn fwy o gymorth, wrth graffu ac ystyried y gyllideb, a phenderfynu beth yw ein barn ni, i gymharu beth yw'r gyllideb am y flwyddyn i ddod o'i chymharu â'r flwyddyn flaenorol. Beth ydych chi'n ei wneud mewn gwirionedd yn y gyllideb hon? Ar gyfer hynny, rwy'n credu mai'r rhif pwysig yw'r cynnydd o £593 miliwn mewn gwariant, neu 2.3 y cant mewn termau real. Credaf fod y Gweinidog cyllid braidd yn annheg i feirniadu Llywodraeth y DU am ei hagwedd anhrefnus tuag at amseru'r gyllideb, gan fy mod i'n credu nad oedd amseriad yr etholiad cyffredinol hwnnw ar 12 Rhagfyr, na'r rheidrwydd i'w gael, yn nwylo Llywodraeth y DU yn llwyr. Roedd gan Aelodau'r wrthblaid yn San Steffan o leiaf gymaint o gyfrifoldeb dros yr amseroedd hynny a'r effaith a gawsant ar broses y gyllideb. Fodd bynnag, hoffwn ganmol Llywodraeth Cymru am ei hymateb pragmatig i'r anawsterau amseru hynny, ac rwy'n credu ei bod hi wedi cysylltu'n synhwyrol â'r Pwyllgor Cyllid o ran craffu a'r dadleuon a gawsom yn y fan yma. Rwy'n credu ei fod wedi gweithio'n iawn, yng ngoleuni'r heriau a gawsom. Yn sicr, o'i gymharu â Llywodraeth yr Alban, a'r problemau enfawr a gawsant hwy, rwy'n credu ein bod ni wedi rhoi cyfrif da ohonom ein hunain o ran yr amseriadau hynny'n gweithio gyda'i gilydd. Rwyf hefyd yn credu, yn y cyd-destun hwnnw, ein bod ni, ar y Pwyllgor Cyllid, yn bwriadu rhoi mwy o ystyriaeth i broses y gyllideb, gan gamu'n ôl o fanylion y gyllideb hon i ofyn ai hon yw'r broses gywir. Yr hyn yr wyf i wedi bod yn poeni fwyaf amdano, am y broses a'r ffordd y mae'n gweithio, gan i mi fod ar y Pwyllgor Cyllid o bryd i'w gilydd dros y blynyddoedd, yw bod y gyllideb ddrafft, ac yna'r craffu a'r dadleuon a'r cyfarfodydd i randdeiliaid, yn fy marn i o bosib yn arwain at fwy o ddisgwyliadau gan randdeiliaid, grwpiau â budd, y rhai sy'n cael eu hariannu - ACau yma, i raddau - o'r disgwyliadau o ran newid. Ac rwy'n aros i weld beth sy'n digwydd yng nghyllideb derfynol y Gweinidog Cyllid i weld beth gaiff ei newid bryd hynny. Ond, os yw'r broses graffu i fod o unrhyw werth - . Hoffwn roi un enghraifft o faes lle credaf fod consensws ar draws y pleidiau, sef gwasanaethau bysiau. Ydy, mae'n braf cael y £29 miliwn hwn o gyllid cyfalaf ar gyfer bysiau trydan, ac rwy'n siŵr y bydd y rhai sy'n eu defnyddio a'r rhai yng nghanol dinasoedd sy'n elwa, efallai, ar lai o lygredd aer o'u herwydd yn gwerthfawrogi'r gwariant hwnnw, ond nid ydym yn glir pa un ai hynny yw gwerth gorau o ran gwariant o'i gymharu â phrosiectau eraill, i'r graddau bod y Gweinidog yn canolbwyntio ar amcanion newid yn yr hinsawdd. Yn amlwg, mae manteision eraill i'r rhain hefyd, ond a yw'r manteision hynny'n fwy na'r rhai a fyddai'n deillio o ddefnyddio'r arian hwnnw o £29 miliwn yn rhywle arall i gefnogi gwasanaethau bysiau? Codais i a'r Aelod dros Flaenau Gwent y mater hwn dro ar ôl tro mewn pwyllgorau: mewn gwirionedd, os ydych chi, yng Nglynebwy, wedi gweld amlder y gwasanaeth yn cael ei haneru, mae'r cwestiwn a yw'n fws trydan yn llawer llai pwysig na pha un a oes bws o gwbl. Dim ond gobeithio y bydd y Gweinidog, os yw hi'n gwrando ar y craffu - ac mae'n dod oddi wrth Blaid Cymru, ni, y Ceidwadwyr ac o'i meinciau cefn hi ei hun. Nid yw gostyngiad mewn termau real yn y cymhorthdal ar gyfer gwasanaethau bws ar sail refeniw yn cyd-fynd yn dda iawn gyda'i hamcanion honedig ar gyfer newid yn yr hinsawdd. Ac unwaith eto, hoffwn ei hannog i ailystyried yr agwedd honno cyn y gyllideb derfynol. Tybed hefyd, o ystyried ein bod ni wedi cael y cyfnod hir hwn o gyni cymharol a'n bod wedi dod allan ohono - dull gweithredu Llywodraeth Cymru yn bennaf yw dosbarthu codiadau gweddol debyg yn gyffredinol. Mae rhai meysydd wedi elwa'n arbennig; gwelaf y Gweinidog dros yr ochr ryngwladol yn ei sedd, ac mae hynny'n ganran sylweddol er ei bod yn eithaf isel o ran cynnydd absoliwt, a gobeithio na fydd yn mynd dros ben llestri wrth agor gormod o swyddfeydd ar draws pob gwlad yn yr UE gyda'r arian ychwanegol, ond mae hynny'n faes mawr o gynnydd. Ond tybed, o ran y penderfyniad craidd hwnnw - y GIG yn erbyn Llywodraeth Leol - cynnydd tebyg i'r ddau - . Eto i gyd, yr hyn sydd wedi digwydd wrth ymdrin â chyni yng Nghymru yw y bu toriadau cymharol yn y gwasanaeth iechyd o'i gymharu â Lloegr, ac eto mae Llywodraeth Leol wedi cael ei warchod yn llawer mwy nag a gafodd yn achos Llywodraeth Leol yn Lloegr. Arferai Llywodraeth Cymru ddweud wrthym fod angen newid strwythurol mewn Llywodraeth Leol, ac rwy'n cytuno â hwy. Pam mae gennym ni gymaint o gynghorau, 22 o gynghorau unedol, sy'n llawer llai yn gyffredinol na'r rhai yn Lloegr sy'n darparu gwasanaethau unedol? Mae angen taer i geisio annog gweithio rhanbarthol i liniaru rhywfaint ar yr aneffeithlonrwydd hwnnw. Ond yn y pen draw, oni fyddai'n well pe byddai gennym lai o gynghorau a chynghorau mwy a fyddai'n fwy addas i gyflawni'r tasgau hynny? Fe wnaf ildio i rywun a fydd yn anghytuno'n gryf â'r hyn yr wyf newydd ei ddweud - Mike.