English: It is a serious concern to me that the attitude of this Government toward health funding focuses too much on the sum of money provided to the NHS today, despite the importance of that, of course, and isn't sufficiently focused on how to make health and care services more sustainable for the longer term. There is an intention to substantially increase the revenue funding provided to health, and on the face of it, who could disagree with that? The problem, of course, is that most of the additional money available for 2020-21 is going to the NHS - an increase of £341 million, 2.6 per cent in real terms. We cannot ignore the fact that increasing the health budget continually at the expense of other areas does weaken those areas, and that, in turn, can add to the costs of the NHS ultimately. It is a vicious circle. Indeed, health expenditure has increased over the years of austerity by some 16 per cent in real terms, whilst other budgets have shrunk by a similar amount. And if we continue without making the investments and without making policy decisions that are innovative and preventative, as we should do now, then the part of the cake that needs to be given to health will continue to grow and now, surely, as the financial shackles are loosened slightly, then now is the time to make that innovative change. So, when I see minor amounts praised in the budget in the statement made in December - £2.7 million to help primary school children become healthy and fit; £5.5 million for 'Healthy Weight: Healthy Wales'; and diabetes, much of it relating to obesity, costing some 10 per cent of the whole NHS budget - then I can't help but think that we are missing a trick in failing to invest health and welfare budgets in infrastructure for physical activity and sport to make us a healthier nation in the long term. I see references to £190 million for preventative health measures in this budget. That is only something over 2 per cent of the total expenditure on health. The warmer words that we hear on the preventative agenda must be matched by funding too, and the same is true of mental health. There is still a lack of preventative spend in this budget, particularly for younger people. Also, we can't think in the longer term by continuing to sufficiently support the social care service and the services provided by our local authorities. Yes, there's a proposal to increase local authority budgets by £184 million, but the WLGA itself said that some £254 million would be required for a standstill position. Costs related to salaries weigh heavily, there are pressures from social services and children's services have also increased greatly, and we know that if local government doesn't receive the necessary support for providing social care, then it's the NHS that picks up the bill, ultimately - a vicious circle once again. I could go on to talk about so many different areas where short-term management is the theme here rather than long-term innovation. The Welsh language is another example. We can all agree on the target of one million Welsh speakers, why, therefore, reduce the budget for the Welsh language specifically? Llywydd, although we've heard today that we're expecting the first new Conservative Government budget on 11 March, I will make a brief comment on that. It's another example of us having to change our arrangements because of the whims of a Government in Westminster. A budget there decides on expenditure here after we've completed our budgetary process here. There is an alternative way of dealing with that and that is by taking responsibility for this ourselves. But we do know, because of the forecast of a slowdown in the economy and a pledge not to increase income tax, national insurance or VAT and so on and so forth, that there is very little scope for increasing public expenditure further. The economic uncertainty related to leaving the European Union is part of the problem, of course. But to conclude, today, we are not talking about proposals from Government to change tax rates in Wales, but with the public purse likely to be under significant and increasing pressures to provide the kind of services that people require and insist upon in an uncertain economic context, the discussion on how we can use our limited taxation powers is going to have to become a more prominent issue of budgetary discussions in oncoming years.
Welsh: Mae'n gonsyrn difrifol i fi bod agwedd y Llywodraeth yma at gyllido iechyd yn canolbwyntio gormod ar y swm o arian sydd yn mynd i'r NHS heddiw, er mor bwysig ydy hynny, wrth gwrs, a dim digon ar sut i wneud gwasanaethau iechyd a gofal yn fwy cynaliadwy yn yr hirdymor. Mae yna fwriad i gynyddu'n sylweddol yr arian refeniw sy'n mynd i iechyd, ac ar yr arwyneb, pwy fyddai'n anghytuno efo hynny? Y broblem, wrth gwrs, ydy bod y rhan fwyaf o'r holl arian ychwanegol sydd ar gael ar gyfer 2020-21 yn mynd i'r NHS - cynnydd o £341 miliwn, 2.6 y cant mewn termau real. Gallwn ni ddim anwybyddu'r ffaith bod cynyddu'r gyllideb iechyd o hyd ar draul meysydd eraill yn gwanhau'r meysydd hynny, ac mae hynny, yn ei dro, yn gallu ychwanegu at gostau'r NHS yn y pen draw - mae o'n gylch dieflig. Yn wir, mae gwariant iechyd wedi cynyddu drwy'r blynyddoedd o lymder o ryw 16 y cant mewn termau real, tra bod cyllidebau eraill wedi gostwng tua'r un faint. Os cariwn ni ymlaen heb wneud y buddsoddi, a heb wneud penderfyniadau polisi arloesol, ataliol fel y dylem ni rŵan, parhau i gynyddu gwnaiff y darn o gacen gyllidol sydd angen ei roi i iechyd, a rŵan, siawns, wrth i'r cyfyngiadau ariannol lacio rhywfaint, ydy'r amser i wneud y math yna o newid arloesol. Felly, pan dwi'n gweld symiau pitw yn cael eu clodfori yn y gyllideb, yn y datganiad ar 16 Rhagfyr - £2.7 miliwn i helpu plant cynradd i fod yn heini ac iach; £5.5 miliwn i raglen Pwysau Iach, Cymru Iach; pan mae diabetes, a llawer ohono fo yn gysylltiedig â gordewdra, yn costio rhyw 10 y cant o holl gyllideb yr NHS - gallaf i ddim peidio â meddwl, er enghraifft, ein bod ni'n colli tric enfawr mewn methu buddsoddi arian iechyd a lles mewn isadeiledd gweithgarwch corfforol a chwaraeon er mwyn ein gwneud ni'n genedl iachach yn yr hirdymor. Dwi'n gweld cyfeiriadau at ryw £190 miliwn ar fesurau iechyd ataliol yn y gyllideb yma. Mae hynny ond ychydig dros 2 y cant o gyfanswm y gwariant ar iechyd. Mae'n rhaid i'r geiriau cynhesach sydd y dyddiau yma ar yr agenda ataliol gael eu match -io efo arian hefyd. Mae'r un peth yn wir am iechyd meddwl, lle mae yna dal diffyg gwariant ataliol yn y gyllideb yma, dwi'n meddwl, yn enwedig ar bobl ifanc. Hefyd, wrth gwrs, dŷn ni'n methu meddwl yn yr hirdymor drwy barhau i beidio â chefnogi'n ddigonol y ddarpariaeth gofal cymdeithasol a gofal sy'n cael ei ddarparu gan ein hawdurdodau lleol ni. Oes, mae yna gynnig i gynyddu cyllidebau llywodraeth leol i ryw £184 miliwn, ond mi oedd Cymdeithas Llywodraeth Leol Cymru ei hunain yn dweud y byddai angen £254 miliwn, a hwnnw i sefyll yn llonydd. Mae'r costau yn gysylltiedig â chyflogau'n pwyso yn drwm, mae'r pwysau'n dod o wasanaethau cymdeithasol a gwasanaethau plant hefyd wedi cynyddu yn arw, a dŷn ni'n gwybod os ydy llywodraeth leol ddim yn cael y gefnogaeth angenrheidiol ar gyfer darparu gofal cymdeithasol, yr NHS sydd yn talu yn y pen draw - cylch dieflig unwaith eto. Mi allwn i fynd ymlaen i sôn am gymaint o feysydd lle mae rheolaeth fyrdymor yw'r thema yma yn hytrach nag arloesedd hirdymor. Felly, yr iaith Gymraeg, fel enghraifft arall. Dŷn ni i gyd yn gallu cytuno ynglŷn â'r nod o filiwn o siaradwyr Cymraeg. Pam felly gostwng y gyllideb i'r iaith Gymraeg yn benodol? Llywydd, er ein bod ni wedi clywed heddiw bod disgwyl cyllideb gyntaf y Llywodraeth Geidwadol newydd ar 11 Mawrth, gwnaf sylw am hynny yn sydyn - enghraifft arall ydy ohonom ni'n gorfod newid ein trefniadau ni oherwydd mympwyon Llywodraeth San Steffan. Cyllideb yn y fan honno'n penderfynu ar wariant yn fan hyn ar ôl i ni gwblhau'r broses gyllidol yn fan hyn. Mae yna ffordd amgen i ddelio â hyn, drwy gymryd y cyfrifoldeb ein hunain. Ond dŷn ni'n gwybod, oherwydd rhagolygon am arafu yn yr economi, addewid i beidio â chynyddu treth incwm, yswiriant gwladol na threth ar werth, ac ati, sgôp bychan sydd yna i gynyddu gwariant cyhoeddus ymhellach. Mae'r ansicrwydd economaidd ynghlwm â gadael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd yn rhan o'r broblem, wrth gwrs. Ond i gloi, dydyn ni ddim heddiw yn sôn am gynigion gan y Llywodraeth i newid cyfraddau trethiant yng Nghymru, ond efo'r pwrs cyhoeddus yn debyg o fod o dan bwysau sylweddol a chynyddol i ddarparu'r mathau o wasanaethau y mae pobl yn eu mynnu, a hynny mewn cyd-destun economaidd ansicr, mae'r drafodaeth ar sut gallwn ni ddefnyddio'n pwerau trethiant cyfyngedig yn mynd i orfod dod, dwi'n meddwl, yn elfen mwy amlwg o drafodaethau cyllideb mewn blynyddoedd i ddod.