English: Well, first of all, I'm sorry I gave a direct answer to a question she asked; she was clearly knocked backwards by it verbally. But let me give you some more direct answers: the project six years ago is not the same project as the project we dealt with. It has changed many times in terms of its financial structure. The project that we looked at was a project that we had seen recently in the course of the last few months. It's a project, of course, that was based on the guarantee that's out there publicly. We looked at the financial structure that was proposed, we went through the due diligence, and the due diligence revealed that there was a very high risk of the cost or the guarantee being regarded as being on balance sheet. I don't know if she knows what that means, but 'on balance sheet' means that it'll be treated as if we had given the company money now. It would mean we would find £157 million-worth of capital reductions in this financial year - that's the risk that we took. We worked with the company to see what we could do to help. There was a meeting between the company and officials after the decision. It was explained to the company what the issues were, and they accepted it. They clearly haven't spoken to her because the company accepted the issue with regard to the issue of being on balance sheet and the risks that that posed to us - they did not argue with it. Could I suggest she talks, perhaps, to the company to take their view on this? One thing that Plaid Cymru have never said is whether they agreed with the decision or not. Until we know whether they agree or not, so we can assess whether they think that there are high risks to be taken with Welsh public spending, then, of course, I cannot accept a lecture from the leader of Plaid Cymru.
Welsh: Wel, yn gyntaf oll, mae'n ddrwg gennyf fy mod wedi rhoi ateb uniongyrchol i gwestiwn a ofynnodd; cafodd ei tharo'n ôl ganddo yn llafar, yn amlwg. Ond gadewch i mi roi mwy o atebion uniongyrchol i chi: nid yw'r prosiect chwe blynedd yn ôl yr un prosiect â'r prosiect i ni ymdrin ag ef. Mae wedi newid sawl gwaith o ran ei strwythur ariannol. Roedd y prosiect a ystyriwyd gennym ni yn brosiect yr oeddem ni wedi ei weld yn ddiweddar yn ystod y misoedd diwethaf. Mae'n brosiect, wrth gwrs, a oedd yn seiliedig ar y warant sy'n allan yna'n gyhoeddus. Fe wnaethom edrych ar y strwythur ariannol a gynigiwyd, aethom drwy'r diwydrwydd dyladwy, a datgelodd y diwydrwydd dyladwy bod risg uchel iawn y byddai'r gost neu'r warant yn cael ei ystyried fel bod ar y fantolen. Nid wyf yn gwybod os yw hi'n gwybod beth mae hynny'n ei olygu, ond mae 'ar y fantolen' yn golygu y bydd yn cael ei drin fel pe byddem ni wedi rhoi arian i'r cwmni nawr. Byddai'n golygu y byddem ni'n dod o hyd i werth £157 miliwn o ostyngiadau cyfalaf yn y flwyddyn ariannol hon - dyna'r risg a gymerwyd gennym. Fe wnaethom ni weithio gyda'r cwmni i weld beth allem ni ei wneud i helpu. Bu cyfarfod rhwng y cwmni a swyddogion ar ôl y penderfyniad. Eglurwyd i'r cwmni beth oedd y problemau, ac fe wnaethant dderbyn hynny. Maen amlwg nad ydynt wedi siarad â hi gan fod y cwmni wedi derbyn y mater o ran y broblem o fod ar y fantolen a'r risgiau yr oedd hynny'n eu peri i ni - ni wnaethant ddadlau â hynny. A gaf i awgrymu ei bod hi, efallai, yn siarad gyda'r cwmni i gael eu safbwynt nhw ar hyn? Un peth nad yw Plaid Cymru erioed wedi ei ddweud yw pa un a oeddent yn cytuno â'r penderfyniad ai peidio. Tan y byddwn ni'n gwybod a ydyn nhw'n cytuno ai peidio, fel y gallwn ni asesu a ydyn nhw'n meddwl y dylid cymryd risgiau uchel gyda gwariant cyhoeddus yng Nghymru, yna, wrth gwrs, ni allaf dderbyn pregeth gan arweinydd Plaid Cymru.