English: I can answer that, perhaps, because part of my work is allocating resources, of course. It goes back to Jon's point earlier: all the IBAs in the Green Book are is a mathematical construct for distributing resources. If anyone in Wales thinks that the IBA represents what you should spend in any specific area, they're entirely wrong, and we have to be clear about that. The IBA doesn't represent how much you should be spending on something. All it is is a set of IBAs that are drawn together in order to distribute one cake of however many millions of pounds that a local authority receives from Government. It is based on a mathematical construct, lines of best fit and other mathematical things, and that's why nobody understands it, because it's a mathematical construct, but it's very important that we understand that an IBA isn't a statement of how much should be spent on something because, in a way, all an IBA is is a mathematical line and every authority will spend more or less than that line, and I can't tell you if they're spending what they should be spending because the only one that can say that is the authority itself. I'll use Gwynedd, for example: five years ago, we were spending £4 million less than our IBA on education. Today, we are spending £1 million more than our IBA on education. We haven't changed our priorities. The only thing that's changed is that the IBA has shifted because of the mathematical construct underpinning it. So, I've had chief executives ask me to explain to them before today whether they should be using the IBA for allocating funding within their budgets. Well, no, it's you as local members who are responsible for allocation and prioritisation, and the IBAs are irrelevant, almost, to the distribution of funds.
Welsh: Gwnaf i ateb hwn, efallai, achos mae'n rhan o fy ngwaith i i ddyrannu adnoddau, wrth gwrs. Beth sy'n rhaid inni ddallt - ac mae'n mynd yn ôl at bwynt Jon gynnau - y cyfan ydy'r IBAs yn y Llyfr Gwyrdd ydy construct mathemategol ar gyfer dyrannu adnoddau. Os oes yna unrhyw un yng Nghymru'n meddwl bod yr IBA yn cynrychioli beth ddylech chi ei wario ar bwnc penodol, mae o'n hollol anghywir, ac mae'n rhaid inni fod yn glir am hynna. Dydy IBA ddim yn cynrychioli faint ddylech chi fod yn ei wario ar rywbeth. Dyna'i gyd ydy o ydy set o IBAs sy'n dod at ei gilydd i fedru dyrannu un gacen o faint bynnag o filiynau o bunnoedd mae llywodraeth leol yn ei dderbyn gan y Llywodraeth. Rŵan, mae o'n seiliedig ar mathematical construct, lines of best fit a rhyw bethau mathemategol, a dyma pam does yna neb yn ei ddallt o, achos construct mathemategol ydy o. Ond mae o'n bwysig ofnadwy ein bod ni'n dallt nad ydy IBA ddim yn ddatganiad o faint ddylai rhywun fod yn gwario ar rywbeth achos, mewn ffordd, y cyfan ydy IBA ydy lein fathemategol, a bydd pob awdurdod yn gwario'n uwch neu'n is na'r lein yna, a fedraf i ddim dweud wrthych chi os ydyn nhw'n gwario beth ddylen nhw neu beidio achos yr unig un a fedr ddweud hynna ydy'r awdurdod. So, fe wnaf i ddefnyddio Gwynedd, er enghraifft: pum mlynedd yn ôl, roeddem ni'n gwario £4 miliwn yn llai na'n IBA ni ar addysg. Heddiw, dŷn ni'n gwario £1 miliwn yn fwy na'n IBA ar addysg. Dŷn ni ddim wedi newid ein blaenoriaethau. Yr unig beth sydd wedi newid ydy bod yr IBA wedi sifftio oherwydd y construct mathemategol y tu ôl iddo fo, dŷch chi'n gwybod? So, dwi wedi cael prif weithredwyr yn gofyn imi egluro iddyn nhw cyn heddiw a ddylen nhw fod yn iwsio'r IBA ar gyfer dyrannu pres y tu fewn i'w cyllideb nhw. Na, chi fel aelodau lleol sydd yn gyfrifol am ddyrannu a blaenoriaethu, ac mae'r IBAs yn irrelevant, bron a bod, i ddyrannu pres, felly.