English: I'd like to thank the Cabinet Secretary, Professor Diamond and his team for the report and her statement. There are elements of the report that my party welcomes - the sensible postgraduate arrangements, making them equivalent to undergraduates, support for part-timers and support for carers. One small part we had in our manifesto was the suggestion of pilot schemes for Welsh students to study globally at the best educational institutions. So, we're delighted to see that taken forward. I wonder, though, whether the Cabinet Secretary would agree that she has become the Government's most expensive Minister. I had thought that there was a consensus that the tuition fee grant at £237 million last year had become unaffordable, and that savings would need to be made. The Labour manifesto referred to having a student support system that was at least as generous as that available in England. That could have allowed savings from that £237 million. It could have allowed savings from the maintenance grant not having to be paid back in Wales. But all those potential savings, we are now told, are going to be spent. I asked Professor Diamond this morning whether there'd be any savings and he said, 'No, it was going to be broadly equivalent'. I referred him to his terms of reference, which said one of his focuses should be 'the funding of higher education in the light of continuing constraints on public expenditure', but he told me that he hadn't applied that; there'd been a more recent statement from the Welsh Government, and that had led to him producing a package that had no negative effect on the higher education budget. Now, of course, that phrase was included in what on her website the Cabinet Secretary initially styled as the coalition agreement. It's still searchable, with various lines of Latin underneath it. But that was then restyled 'the progressive agreement'. But I would like to ask the Cabinet Secretary: what is progressive about handing £1,000 to every student, however well off they are, no questions asked? What is progressive about increasing a maintenance grant that was £5,161 - part of which was paid up to family incomes of £50,000 - increasing that to over £8,000 and making that payable to households with incomes over £80,000, receiving at least part of that? Now, students, on account of graduating, will earn more over their lifetime than those who don't have the privilege of going to university. They come on average from significantly better-off families, yet we propose to give £132 million a year in increased maintenance grant to this group. Now, some in my party, and perhaps some Labour Members, might wish to spend that on the Welsh NHS or on our most deprived communities, but instead of that, it will go in maintenance grants that get paid, including to families earning up to £80,000. How is that progressive? I wonder - the Cabinet Secretary also mentions rent - how this is going to assist in paying rent. What analysis has the Welsh Government, or Professor Diamond and his team, done of the extent to which this extra money will go to reward landlords? Does she consider that that will be progressive? I also wonder why she thinks it benefits the Welsh economy to transfer over £30 million a year in maintenance grant to students who will be studying in England. Now, Plaid came up with a proposal that they want a potentially complex system that would forgive some of those loans. But, listening to Professor Diamond this morning, there seemed to be at least half a dozen hurdles on the way to that, not least that the Treasury may not agree. Listening to the Cabinet Secretary now, she emphasises the difficulties of that. There is £74 million that's been put in as a holding sum in the report, supposedly for those costs, but it's not included in the summary of the costs of the recommendations. Does the Cabinet Secretary really believe that this differential loan forgiveness scheme is ever really going to be implemented? Is not a better way to encourage students to stay in Wales, to support and expand the higher education system here, the provision of a more generous settlement to students who stay in Wales compared to those who choose to go to England and benefit from the loans, as English students have there? We could support the worst-off with some help while still supporting the Welsh education system in that way. Why will she not do that? Could I also ask her - ? She mentions this 'no detriment'. Is it the case that the terms of reference of the Diamond review were changed two years in and replaced with her progressive agreement? Please tell us how that is progressive. One final matter: there is a recommendation from Professor Diamond that students may continue to be paid and funded to study elsewhere in the EU, but he states that recommendation is 'subject to the UK remaining in the EU'. Is he not aware there was a referendum on 23 June, or does he agree with her party that we should be made to vote again?
Welsh: Hoffwn ddiolch i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, yr Athro Diamond a'i dîm am yr adroddiad a'i datganiad hithau. Ceir rhai elfennau o'r adroddiad y mae fy mhlaid yn eu croesawu - y trefniadau synhwyrol ar gyfer myfyrwyr ôl-raddedig, sy'n eu gwneud yn gyfartal â myfyrwyr israddedig, cymorth ar gyfer myfyrwyr rhan amser a chymorth i ofalwyr. Un rhan fach a oedd gennym ni yn ein maniffesto oedd yr awgrym y dylid cael cynlluniau peilot ar gyfer myfyrwyr yng Nghymru i astudio yn fyd-eang yn y sefydliadau addysgol gorau. Felly, rydym ni'n falch iawn o weld hynny'n cael ei ddatblygu. Er hynny, tybed a fyddai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn cytuno mai hi erbyn hyn yw Gweinidog drutaf y Llywodraeth. Roeddwn i wedi meddwl bod consensws nad oedd y grant ffioedd dysgu o £237 miliwn y llynedd yn fforddiadwy, ac y byddai angen gwneud arbedion. Cyfeiriodd maniffesto'r blaid Lafur at gael system cymorth i fyfyrwyr a oedd o leiaf mor hael â'r un sydd ar gael yn Lloegr. Byddai hynny wedi gallu caniatáu arbedion o'r £237 miliwn hwnnw. Gallai fod wedi caniatáu arbedion drwy beidio â gorfod talu'r grant cynhaliaeth yn ôl yng Nghymru. Ond mae'r holl arbedion posibl hynny, rydym yn cael ar ddeall nawr, am gael eu gwario. Gofynnais i'r Athro Diamond y bore yma a fyddai unrhyw arbedion, a dywedodd, 'Na, yr oedd am fod fwy neu lai yn gyfwerth'. Cyfeiriais ef at ei gylch gorchwyl, a oedd yn dweud mai un o'r pethau y dylai ganolbwyntio arno oedd, 'cyllido addysg uwch yng ngoleuni cyfyngiadau parhaus ar wariant cyhoeddus', ond dywedodd wrthyf nad oedd wedi gwneud hynny; bod datganiad mwy diweddar gan Lywodraeth Cymru, a bod hynny wedi peri iddo gynhyrchu pecyn nad oedd yn cael unrhyw effaith negyddol ar y gyllideb addysg uwch. Nawr, wrth gwrs, mae'r ymadrodd hwnnw wedi'i gynnwys yn rhan o'r hyn y cyfeiriodd yr Ysgrifennydd Cabinet ato, ar ei gwefan hi, fel cytundeb y glymblaid. Mae'n parhau i fod yn chwiliadwy, a cheir amrywiol linellau mewn Lladin oddi tano. Ond cafodd hwnnw wedyn ei ailfrandio yn 'gytundeb blaengar'. Ond hoffwn ofyn i Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet: beth sy'n flaengar ynglŷn â dyrannu £1,000 i bob myfyriwr, waeth pa mor gefnog ydynt, heb ofyn unrhyw gwestiynau? Beth sy'n flaengar ynglŷn â chynyddu grant cynhaliaeth a oedd yn £5,161 - yr oedd rhan ohono yn cael ei dalu i bobl a oedd ag incwm teulu hyd at £50,000 - gan gynyddu hynny i dros £8,000 a gwneud hynny yn daladwy i gartrefi ag incwm o fwy na £80,000, a fydd yn derbyn o leiaf rhan o hynny? Nawr, bydd myfyrwyr, ar ôl graddio, yn ennill mwy yn ystod eu hoes na'r rhai nad ydynt yn cael y fraint o fynd i brifysgol. Ar gyfartaledd, maent yn dod o deuluoedd mwy cefnog o lawer, ac eto rydym ni'n bwriadu rhoi £132 miliwn y flwyddyn mewn grantiau cynhaliaeth uwch i'r grŵp hwn. Nawr, mae rhai yn fy mhlaid i, a rhai Aelodau Llafur efallai, yn dymuno gwario ar y GIG yng Nghymru neu ar ein cymunedau mwyaf difreintiedig, ond yn lle hynny, caiff yr arian ei wario ar grantiau cynhaliaeth a fydd yn cael eu talu i bobl, gan gynnwys teuluoedd sy'n ennill hyd at £80,000. Sut y mae hynny'n flaengar? Tybed - mae Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet hefyd yn sôn am rent - sut y mae hyn yn mynd i helpu i dalu rhent. Pa waith dadansoddi y mae Llywodraeth Cymru, neu'r Athro Diamond a'i dîm, wedi'i wneud o ran i ba raddau y bydd yr arian ychwanegol hwn yn cael ei ddyrannu ar gyfer gwobrwyo landlordiaid? A yw hi'n ystyried y byddai hynny'n flaengar? Tybed hefyd pam y mae hi'n credu ei bod o fudd i economi Cymru i drosglwyddo dros £30 miliwn y flwyddyn mewn grantiau cynhaliaeth i fyfyrwyr a fydd yn astudio yn Lloegr. Nawr, lluniodd Plaid gynnig a oedd yn nodi eu bod am gael system a allai fod yn gymhleth a fyddai'n anghofio am rai o'r benthyciadau hynny. Ond, ar ôl gwrando ar yr Athro Diamond y bore yma, ymddengys bod o leiaf hanner dwsin o rwystrau i gyflawni hynny, ac nid y ffaith ei bod yn bosibl na fydd y Trysorlys yn cytuno yw'r lleiaf o'r rhain. O wrando ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn awr, mae hi'n pwysleisio'r anawsterau sydd ynghlwm wrth hynny. Nodir swm wedi'i gadw o £74 miliwn yn yr adroddiad, sydd i fod ar gyfer y costau hynny, ond ni chaiff ei gynnwys yn y crynodeb o'r costau yn rhan o'r argymhellion. A yw Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet wir yn credu y bydd y cynllun diystyru benthyciadau gwahaniaethol hwn fyth am gael ei weithredu mewn gwirionedd? Onid yw'n well annog myfyrwyr i aros yng Nghymru, i gefnogi ac ehangu'r gyfundrefn addysg uwch yma, darparu setliad mwy hael i fyfyrwyr sy'n aros yng Nghymru o'u cymharu â'r rhai sy'n dewis mynd i Loegr ac elwa ar y benthyciadau, fel sydd gan fyfyrwyr o Loegr yno? Gallem ni gefnogi'r rhai sy'n waeth eu byd drwy roi cymorth iddynt a pharhau i gefnogi system addysg Cymru drwy wneud hynny. Pam na wnaiff hi hynny? A gaf fi ofyn iddi hefyd - ? Mae hi'n sôn am 'ddim niwed'. A yw'n wir y newidiwyd cylch gorchwyl adolygiad Diamond ar ôl dwy flynedd i gynnwys ei chytundeb blaengar hi? Dywedwch wrthym sut y mae hynny'n flaengar. Un mater olaf: ceir argymhelliad gan yr Athro Diamond y gallai myfyrwyr barhau i gael eu talu a'u hariannu i astudio yn rhywle arall yn yr UE, ond mae'n datgan bod yr argymhelliad yn 'amodol ar y DU yn parhau i fod yn rhan o'r UE'. Onid yw'n ymwybodol y cynhaliwyd refferendwm ar 23 Mehefin, neu a yw'n cytuno â'i phlaid hi y dylem ni bleidleisio eto?