techiaith/cofnodycynulliad_en-cy huggingface dataset:
English: I thank Rhianon Passmore, of course, for that question and, indeed, I have seen the report of the Construction Industry Training Board for Wales, and it says that construction output in Wales is expected to be stronger than in any other part of the United Kingdom over the four years to 2021. The reason why construction output will be that strong in Wales is, in part at least, due to the nearly £7 billion-worth of capital expenditure set out in our budget for the next four years, investing in schools, investing in housing, investing in transport. All those things bring work to the construction industry and it is why the Construction Industry Training Board for Wales is able to predict that very strong period of output over the next four years.
Welsh: Diolch i Rhianon Passmore, wrth gwrs, am ei chwestiwn, ac yn wir, rwyf wedi gweld adroddiad Bwrdd Hyfforddi'r Diwydiant Adeiladu yng Nghymru, ac mae'n dweud fod disgwyl i allbwn adeiladu yng Nghymru fod yn gryfach nag yn unrhyw ran arall o'r Deyrnas Unedig dros y pedair blynedd hyd at 2021. Y rheswm pam y bydd allbwn adeiladu mor gryf â hynny yng Nghymru, yn rhannol o leiaf, yw oherwydd y gwerth bron i £7 biliwn o wariant cyfalaf a nodir yn ein cyllideb ar gyfer y pedair blynedd nesaf, ar gyfer buddsoddi mewn ysgolion, buddsoddi mewn tai, buddsoddi mewn trafnidiaeth. Mae'r holl bethau hynny'n dod â gwaith i'r diwydiant adeiladu, a dyna pam fod Bwrdd Hyfforddi'r Diwydiant Adeiladu yng Nghymru yn gallu rhagweld y cyfnod cryf iawn hwnnw o allbwn dros y pedair blynedd nesaf.
English: Diolch, Llywydd. I wonder if the Cabinet Secretary will agree with me that Theresa May has performed a minor miracle in this election campaign by making Jeremy Corbyn look half electable. If he does pull it off tomorrow and Labour is elected on their platform of increasing corporation tax from its current 19 per cent to 26 per cent, that's bound to have an adverse economic impact in Wales. Has he done any assessment of the impact on business confidence, business investment and, indeed, wages of such a marked increase in corporation tax?
Welsh: Diolch, Llywydd. Tybed a yw Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn cytuno â mi fod Theresa May wedi perfformio mân wyrth yn ystod yr ymgyrch etholiadol hon drwy wneud i Jeremy Corbyn edrych yn hanner etholadwy. Os yw'n llwyddo yfory ac os bydd Llafur yn cael eu hethol ar eu platfform o gynyddu'r dreth gorfforaeth o 19 y cant fel y mae ar hyn o bryd i 26 y cant, mae hynny'n siŵr o gael effaith economaidd andwyol yng Nghymru. A yw wedi gwneud unrhyw asesiad o'r effaith ar hyder busnesau, ar fuddsoddiad busnesau, ac yn wir, ar gyflogau o ganlyniad i gynnydd mor sylweddol yn y dreth gorfforaeth?
English: Well, I would agree with him to the extent that the Conservative election campaign seems to me to be the worst led campaign since the charge of the Light Brigade, and we're hoping to see the results of that tomorrow. I think he's quite wrong in trying to draw a direct line between rises in particular forms of taxation and their impact here in Wales. What I am confident of is that a Labour Government elected across the United Kingdom, determined to create the conditions of economic success, determined to invest in the conditions that will lead to economic growth and fair economic growth shared by everybody, can only be to the benefit of people right across Wales.
Welsh: Wel, byddwn yn cytuno ag ef i'r graddau fod ymgyrch etholiadol y Ceidwadwyr i'w gweld i mi fel yr ymgyrch a arweiniwyd waethaf ers cyrch y frigâd ysgafn, a gobeithiwn weld canlyniadau hynny yfory. Credaf ei fod yn gwbl anghywir i geisio awgrymu cysylltiad uniongyrchol rhwng cynnydd mewn ffurfiau penodol ar drethiant a'u heffaith yma yng Nghymru. Rwy'n hyderus y byddai Llywodraeth Lafur a etholwyd ar draws y Deyrnas Unedig, a fyddai'n benderfynol o greu'r amodau ar gyfer llwyddiant economaidd, a fyddai'n benderfynol o fuddsoddi yn yr amodau a fydd yn arwain at dwf economaidd a thwf economaidd teg wedi'i rannu gan bawb, o fudd i bobl ledled Cymru.
English: I can't believe that the finance Secretary seriously believes that such a staggering increase in corporation tax would have no effect on business confidence, business investment and, indeed, the capacity of companies to pay wages, and therefore the implication is bound to be that the true cost of such increases in business taxes are ultimately felt by ordinary people, both in forms of restrictions in wage increases or, indeed, actual wage decreases and, indeed, in unemployment. In 2009, the Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation published a major economic study that concluded that a rise of £100 in corporation tax would reduce wages by £75 through a combination of lower wages and fewer jobs. Does he really believe that that's in the interests of working people?
Welsh: Ni allaf gredu bod yr Ysgrifennydd cyllid yn credu o ddifrif na fyddai cynnydd mor syfrdanol yn y dreth gorfforaeth yn cael unrhyw effaith ar hyder busnesau, buddsoddiad busnesau, ac yn wir, ar allu cwmnïau i dalu cyflogau, ac felly mae'n rhaid mai'r awgrym yw mai pobl gyffredin yn y pen draw sy'n teimlo gwir gost codiadau o'r fath mewn trethi busnes, drwy gyfyngiadau ar godiadau cyflog, neu'n wir, drwy ostwng cyflogau, ac yn wir, drwy ddiweithdra. Yn 2009, cyhoeddodd yr Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation astudiaeth economaidd bwysig a ddaeth i'r casgliad y byddai cynnydd o £100 yn y dreth gorfforaeth yn torri £75 oddi ar gyflogau drwy gyfuniad o gyflogau is a llai o swyddi. A yw'n credu o ddifrif fod hynny er budd pobl sy'n gweithio?
English: Week after week here in the Assembly, Llywydd, we hear the Member offer us his version of supply side economics. He is addicted to the Laffer curve, to which he made indirect reference there. I can't remember which economist it was - it may have been J.K. Galbraith who said that the real explanatory power of the Laffer curve was that you could describe it to a congressman in six minutes, and you could go on repeating it for six months, and we've heard it repeated here for months on end. [Interruption.] Yes, coming up now for years. I simply reject the basic supply side approach that the Member takes. It is his belief that tax cuts lead to economic growth and tax rises lead to economic decline. I simply don't think that that is borne out by the empirical evidence when these things have been put into practice.
Welsh: Wythnos ar ôl wythnos yma yn y Cynulliad, Llywydd, clywn yr Aelod yn cynnig ei fersiwn ef o economeg cyflenwi. Mae'n gaeth i gromlin Laffer y cyfeiriodd ati'n anuniongyrchol yn y fan honno. Ni allaf gofio pa economegydd - efallai mai J.K. Galbraith a ddywedodd mai gwir rym esboniadol cromlin Laffer oedd y gallech ei disgrifio i gyngreswr mewn chwe munud, a gallech barhau i'w hailadrodd am chwe mis, ac rydym wedi ei chlywed yn cael ei hailadrodd yma ers misoedd bwy'i gilydd. [Torri ar draws.] Ie, blynyddoedd bellach, bron â bod. Rwy'n gwrthod derbyn dull economeg cyflenwi sylfaenol yr Aelod. Mae'n credu bod toriadau treth yn arwain at dwf economaidd a bod codi trethi yn arwain at ddirywiad economaidd. Nid wyf yn credu bod hynny'n cael ei gadarnhau gan y dystiolaeth empirig pan roddwyd y pethau hyn ar waith.
English: There is massive empirical evidence that proves the opposite of what the finance Secretary is asserting. It's not my study that I referred to a moment ago; that's an academic study performed by the wholly independent Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation. It must be obvious that if you put up taxes, therefore that has some economic impact, whether through reductions or increases. And given that business taxes reduce the amount of money that companies have available for investment and, indeed, for distribution to shareholders and to employees in the form of wages, there are bound to be very significant repercussions of such a dramatic increase in taxes as Labour is proposing. In those circumstances, it's bound to have an impact upon Wales in particular. And, as we have only 75 per cent of the average gross value added in the United Kingdom in Wales - we're the poorest part of the United Kingdom - it's the poorest people in the poorest part of the United Kingdom who are going to suffer most from a Labour Government.
Welsh: Mae cryn dipyn o dystiolaeth empirig sy'n profi gwrthwyneb yr hyn y mae'r Ysgrifennydd cyllid yn ei honni. Nid cyfeirio at fy astudiaeth i a wneuthum funud yn ôl; roedd honno'n astudiaeth academaidd a gyflawnwyd yn hollol annibynnol gan yr Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation. Os ydych yn codi trethi, rhaid ei bod yn amlwg fod hynny'n cael rhywfaint o effaith economaidd, boed drwy ostyngiadau neu godiadau. Ac o ystyried bod trethi busnes yn lleihau faint o arian sydd ar gael i gwmnïau ei fuddsoddi, ac yn wir, i'w ddosbarthu i gyfranddalwyr ac i weithwyr ar ffurf cyflogau, mae'n anochel y byddai sgil-effeithiau sylweddol o ganlyniad i gynnydd mor ddramatig mewn trethi ag y mae'r Blaid Lafur yn ei argymell. Yn yr amgylchiadau hynny, mae'n sicr o gael effaith ar Gymru yn benodol. A chan mai 75 y cant yn unig o werth ychwanegol gros cyfartalog y Deyrnas Unedig sydd gennym yng Nghymru - ni yw rhan dlotaf y Deyrnas Unedig - y bobl dlotaf yn rhan dlotaf y Deyrnas Unedig sy'n mynd i ddioddef fwyaf o ganlyniad i Lywodraeth Lafur.
English: Llywydd, Bill Clinton raised taxes. Tax take went up and public debt went down. His successor, George W. Bush, cut taxes. Tax take went down and he left office with public debt of 101 per cent of the level that Clinton had bequeathed to him in the final year of his presidency. It's simply untrue to assert, as the Member does time after time, that there is only one direction in which economies can move, and his prescription, which is to cut taxes, give money to wealthy people, and take it away from people who otherwise would be spending it and creating economic activity, simply would be very damaging to the way we do business in Wales.
Welsh: Llywydd, aeth Bill Clinton ati i godi trethi. Cododd y dreth ac aeth y ddyled gyhoeddus yn llai. Aeth ei olynydd, George W. Bush, ati i dorri trethi. Casglwyd llai o drethi, a gadawodd ei swydd gyda dyled gyhoeddus o 101 y cant o'r lefel a adawodd Clinton iddo ym mlwyddyn olaf ei arlywyddiaeth. Mae'n hollol anghywir awgrymu, fel y gwna'r Aelod dro ar ôl tro, mai i un cyfeiriad yn unig y gall economïau symud, a byddai ei gyfarwyddyd ef, sef torri trethi, yn rhoi arian i bobl gyfoethog, ac yn mynd ag ef oddi wrth bobl a fyddai fel arall yn ei wario ac yn creu gweithgarwch economaidd, yn niweidiol iawn i'r ffordd rydym yn gwneud busnes yng Nghymru.
English: I was wondering if we could return to the demise of the Barnett formula, rumours of which may have been exaggerated. We heard earlier in the week from the First Minister for Wales that it was going to be scrapped. Kezia Dugdale, the leader of the Scottish Labour Party, as we know, is on the record as saying, 'I'll keep the Barnett formula today, tomorrow and forever', which sounds pretty definitive to me. Now, the First Minister said that he has spoken to Kezia Dugdale. Well, on rare occasions, he even speaks to me, but that doesn't mean that we necessarily agree. So, I was wondering if the Cabinet Secretary could bring his usual calm rigour to this question, and tell us what is meant by the long-term reform of how the UK allocates public expenditure that is set out in the Labour manifesto. Does it necessarily mean removing and replacing the Barnett formula? What's the timescale of that reform, and when would its effects begin to be felt here in Wales if there is a change of Government at Westminster?
Welsh: Roeddwn yn meddwl tybed a gaem ddychwelyd at dranc fformiwla Barnett, y gorliwiwyd y sibrydion yn ei gylch, o bosibl. Clywsom yn gynharach yn yr wythnos gan Brif Weinidog Cymru ei bod yn mynd i gael ei diddymu. Mae Kezia Dugdale, arweinydd Plaid Lafur yr Alban, fel y gwyddom, wedi'i chofnodi'n dweud, Byddaf yn cadw fformiwla Barnett heddiw, yfory ac am byth, sy'n swnio'n eithaf pendant i mi. Nawr, dywedodd y Prif Weinidog ei fod wedi siarad â Kezia Dugdale. Wel, ar ambell achlysur prin, fe fydd yn siarad gyda mi hyd yn oed, ond nid yw hynny'n golygu ein bod o reidrwydd yn cytuno. Felly, tybed a allai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet ddefnyddio'i drylwyredd pwyllog arferol wrth ateb y cwestiwn hwn, a dweud wrthym beth a olygir wrth y diwygio hirdymor o ran y modd y mae'r DU yn dyrannu gwariant cyhoeddus a nodir ym maniffesto'r Blaid Lafur? A yw o reidrwydd yn golygu cael gwared ar fformiwla Barnett a chael rhywbeth arall yn ei lle? Beth yw'r amserlen ar gyfer y diwygio hwnnw, a phryd y byddai'r effeithiau'n dechrau dod i'r amlwg yma yng Nghymru, pe bai Llywodraeth San Steffan yn newid?
English: Llywydd, I listened carefully to what the First Minister said yesterday. I thought he was very clear in the position that the Barnett formula will remain in the short and probably into the medium term while its replacement is sought. That replacement will be a fair funding formula for the whole of the United Kingdom, and it will have relative need at its heart.
Welsh: Llywydd, gwrandewais yn ofalus ar yr hyn a ddywedodd y Prif Weinidog ddoe. Credwn ei fod wedi nodi ei safbwynt yn glir iawn y bydd fformiwla Barnett yn parhau yn y tymor byr, a'r tymor canolig yn ôl pob tebyg, wrth edrych am rywbeth yn ei lle. Fformiwla ariannu deg ar gyfer y Deyrnas Unedig gyfan fydd yr ateb hwnnw, gydag angen cymharol yn ganolog iddo.
English: Let's look at the short to medium term, then. The Welsh Government signed recently, in January this year, a fiscal framework with the Westminster Government. Would it be the intention of the Welsh Government, if there was a change of Government at Westminster, to revisit that agreement and to renegotiate some aspects of it - for example, the population related revenue risk that is an element within that, the limit on current borrowing and the fact, of course, that the needs assessment with that fiscal framework is already out of date? So, could we have a commitment from the Welsh Government that there will be an immediate renegotiation of that fiscal framework if the political weather in Westminster changes?
Welsh: Gadewch inni ystyried y tymor byr i'r tymor canolig, felly. Yn ddiweddar, ym mis Ionawr eleni, llofnododd Llywodraeth Cymru fframwaith cyllidol gyda Llywodraeth San Steffan. Ai bwriad Llywodraeth Cymru, pe bai Llywodraeth San Steffan yn newid, yw ailedrych ar y cytundeb hwnnw ac aildrafod rhai agweddau arno - er enghraifft, y risg refeniw'n gysylltiedig â phoblogaeth sy'n elfen ohono, y cyfyngiad ar fenthyca ar hyn o bryd a'r ffaith, wrth gwrs, fod oes yr asesiad o anghenion gyda'r fframwaith cyllidol hwnnw eisoes wedi darfod? Felly, a allem gael ymrwymiad gan Lywodraeth Cymru y byddai'r fframwaith cyllidol yn cael ei aildrafod ar unwaith pe bai'r hinsawdd wleidyddol yn San Steffan yn newid?
English: Llywydd, the fiscal framework already allows for it to be revisited. There is a mechanism within it that allows both the Welsh Government and the UK Government to require a relook at its terms. A new Government at Westminster will change many things in the relationship between ourselves and the Government that will be formed there. If a Labour Government is formed tomorrow, as we hope it will, then that fiscal framework will be part of that new relationship.
Welsh: Llywydd, mae'r fframwaith cyllidol eisoes yn caniatáu iddo gael ei ailystyried. Mae mecanwaith ynddo sy'n caniatáu i Lywodraeth Cymru a Llywodraeth y DU ei gwneud yn ofynnol i ailystyried ei delerau. Bydd Llywodraeth newydd yn San Steffan yn newid llawer o bethau yn y berthynas rhyngom ni a'r Llywodraeth a fydd yn cael ei ffurfio yno. Os bydd Llywodraeth Lafur yn cael ei ffurfio yfory, fel y gobeithiwn, bydd y fframwaith cyllidol hwnnw'n rhan o'r berthynas newydd honno.
English: On the wider question of the Barnett formula, could I ask the Cabinet Secretary about something that I find very curious in the Labour manifesto? It sets out the creation of a national investment bank - I absolutely support that principle - a national investment bank with £250 billion of investment, of which £10 billion is to be apportioned to Wales and the development bank that's being created here. Now, by my calculation, that's around about 4 per cent of the total for the national investment bank, i.e. Wales is not even getting its population share, let alone a Barnett consequential, effectively, from that investment. And yet, we're told that this is the tool that is going to reduce the disparity in prosperity across the UK. Finally, as well, the commitment on structural funds only runs to 2019-20. There is no commitment, actually, beyond that, to creating a long-term cohesion fund as part of a wider regional economic policy. On these two points, why, actually, is the Labour manifesto so incredibly weak in setting out real levers that can actually begin the work of lowering the disparity in wealth that we see across the UK?
Welsh: O ran y cwestiwn ehangach ynglŷn â fformiwla Barnett, a gaf fi holi Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet ynglŷn â rhywbeth rhyfedd iawn, yn fy marn i, ym maniffesto'r Blaid Lafur? Mae'n nodi'r broses o greu banc buddsoddi cenedlaethol - rwy'n cefnogi'r egwyddor honno'n llwyr - banc buddsoddi cenedlaethol gyda £250 biliwn o fuddsoddiad, gyda £10 biliwn ohono'n cael ei ddosrannu i Gymru a'r banc datblygu sy'n cael ei greu yma. Nawr, yn ôl fy nghyfrif i, mae hynny'n cyfateb i oddeutu 4 y cant o'r cyfanswm ar gyfer y banc buddsoddi cenedlaethol, hynny yw, nid yw Cymru hyd yn oed yn cael ei chyfran yn ôl y boblogaeth, heb sôn am swm canlyniadol Barnett, i bob pwrpas, o'r buddsoddiad hwnnw. Ac eto, dywedir wrthym mai dyma'r offeryn a fydd yn lleihau'r gwahaniaeth mewn ffyniant ledled y DU. Yn olaf, hefyd, tan 2019-20 yn unig y mae'r ymrwymiad ar gyfer y cronfeydd strwythurol yn para. Nid oes ymrwymiad, mewn gwirionedd, y tu hwnt i hynny, i greu cronfa cydlyniant hirdymor fel rhan o bolisi economaidd rhanbarthol ehangach. Ar y ddau bwynt hwn, pam fod maniffesto'r Blaid Lafur mor hynod o wan mewn gwirionedd wrth nodi dulliau go iawn a all ddechrau ar y gwaith o leihau'r gwahaniaeth mewn cyfoeth a welwn ledled y DU?
English: Well, I was glad to hear the Member welcome the action that the Labour manifesto sets out to make sure that there will be a major investment in the sort of infrastructure that will be so important to the UK economy and to the Welsh economy. Our manifesto makes it clear that there will be a direct Welsh share in the investment that a new Labour Government will make, and I can say to him that, as far as the continuation of cohesion funds are concerned, my party is committed to the principle that the investment that Wales has been able to draw down from the European Union, based on our relative needs, will continue to be available to Wales post our membership of the European Union.
Welsh: Wel, roeddwn yn falch o glywed yr Aelod yn croesawu'r camau a nodwyd ym maniffesto'r Blaid Lafur i sicrhau y bydd buddsoddi mawr yn y math o seilwaith a fydd mor bwysig i economi'r DU ac i economi Cymru. Mae ein maniffesto'n ei gwneud yn glir y bydd cyfran uniongyrchol i Gymru yn y buddsoddiad a wneir gan Lywodraeth Lafur newydd, a gallaf ddweud wrtho, o ran parhad y cronfeydd cydlyniant, fod fy mhlaid wedi ymrwymo i'r egwyddor fod y buddsoddiad y mae Cymru wedi llwyddo i'w sicrhau gan yr Undeb Ewropeaidd, yn seiliedig ar ein hanghenion cymharol, yn parhau i fod ar gael i Gymru wedi inni adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd.
English: Cabinet Secretary, yesterday, the Welsh Government didn't move the motion to agree the financial resolution in respect of the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Bill - the first time, I believe, that this has happened, although there have been issues with previous costings for legislation. As Cabinet Secretary for finance, are you concerned that the costings associated with legislation that the Government brings forward seem to be often - at best - woolly, or as was the case yesterday, completely misleading?
Welsh: Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, ddoe, ni chynigodd Llywodraeth Cymru y cynnig i gytuno'r penderfyniad ariannol mewn perthynas â'r Bil Anghenion Dysgu Ychwanegol a'r Tribiwnlys Addysg (Cymru) - y tro cyntaf, rwy'n credu, i hyn ddigwydd, er bod problemau wedi bod gyda chostio deddfwriaeth yn flaenorol. Fel Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros gyllid, a ydych yn pryderu ei bod yn ymddangos bod y costau sy'n gysylltiedig â deddfwriaeth a gyflwynir gan y Llywodraeth yn aml iawn - ar y gorau - yn niwlog, neu fel ddoe, yn gwbl gamarweiniol?
English: Chair, I saw the letter that Alun Davies sent to all Assembly Members explaining why he wasn't going to move the financial resolution yesterday and giving a very firm commitment to moving such a resolution in September, at which point Members will have an updated regulatory impact assessment. That will give Members the figures that I hope will give them confidence to support that financial resolution. The general point that Nick Ramsay makes is one to which I would respond by saying that I think it is very important that Welsh Government proposals come forward with as reliable an RIA as is possible. There are circumstances in which assumptions have to be made, and where you have to be able to make the best provision of information that you can in the circumstances, but it is the responsibility of Ministers bringing forward those pieces of legislation to make sure that we have done everything we can to make that information as reliable as it can be, and then for that to be tested by Members here. I know the Finance Committee is doing a piece of work looking at this aspect of the way that the system here in the Assembly works. I look forward to giving evidence to that inquiry, and I'm sure that there will be things that we will be able to take from it that will help us to strengthen the system to provide the sort of reassurances that Nick Ramsay was looking for.
Welsh: Cadeirydd, gwelais y llythyr a anfonodd Alun Davies at holl Aelodau'r Cynulliad yn esbonio pam nad oedd am gynnig y penderfyniad ariannol ddoe ac yn rhoi ymrwymiad cadarn iawn i gynnig penderfyniad o'r fath ym mis Medi, pan fydd yr Aelodau wedi cael asesiad effaith rheoleiddiol wedi'i ddiweddaru. Bydd hwnnw'n rhoi'r ffigurau i'r Aelodau a gobeithiaf y byddant yn rhoi'r hyder iddynt gefnogi'r penderfyniad ariannol hwnnw. Byddwn yn ymateb i'r pwynt cyffredinol a wnaeth Nick Ramsay drwy ddweud fy mod yn credu ei bod yn bwysig iawn fod cynigion Llywodraeth Cymru yn cael eu cyflwyno gydag asesiad effaith rheoleiddiol mor ddibynadwy â phosibl. Ceir amgylchiadau lle mae'n rhaid gwneud rhagdybiaethau, a lle mae'n rhaid i chi allu sicrhau'r ddarpariaeth orau o wybodaeth ag y gallwch o dan yr amgylchiadau, ond cyfrifoldeb y Gweinidogion sy'n cyflwyno'r deddfau hyn yw gwneud yn siŵr ein bod wedi gwneud popeth yn ein gallu i sicrhau bod y wybodaeth mor ddibynadwy ag y gall fod, a bod hynny wedyn yn cael ei brofi gan yr Aelodau yma. Gwn fod y Pwyllgor Cyllid yn gwneud gwaith sy'n edrych ar yr agwedd hon ar y ffordd y mae'r system yn gweithio yma yn y Cynulliad. Edrychaf ymlaen at roi tystiolaeth i'r ymchwiliad hwnnw, ac rwy'n siŵr y bydd yn cynnwys pethau y gallwn eu dysgu ac a fydd o gymorth i ni gryfhau'r system er mwyn darparu'r math o sicrwydd roedd Nick Ramsay yn edrych amdano.