techiaith/cofnodycynulliad_en-cy huggingface dataset:
English: Yes. One of the things - turning to things that are entirely in your hands now - that you raised yesterday, with the seventieth birthday of the national health service, was the possibility of raising taxes to provide the necessary funding to maintain that service. Income tax will be devolved next year to the Assembly and, therefore, to the Welsh Government in order to be able to do that. How much would one penny of Welsh income tax raise for the NHS in Wales?
Welsh: Ie. Un o'r pethau y gwnaethoch chi - gan droi at bethau sydd yn llwyr yn eich dwylo chi, bellach - ei godi ddoe, adeg saithdegfed penblwydd yr NHS, oedd ein bod ni'n gallu codi trethi i godi'r arian angenrheidiol ar gyfer cynnal y gwasanaeth. Erbyn hyn, mae treth incwm yn cael ei ddatganoli, y flwyddyn nesaf, i'r Cynulliad ac, felly, i Lywodraeth Cymru gael gwneud hynny. Faint fyddai ceiniog o dreth incwm Cymraeg yn ei godi tuag at yr NHS yng Nghymru?
English: Around £100 million, so it's not a huge amount of money. What we don't have is a sufficient number of people paying taxes at the higher rates at the moment. So, we would have to increase taxes more than that to have any real impact on the health service. Returning to the point I made yesterday, it's better financially for us to see taxes increased at a UK-wide level and to get a share of that rather than imposing taxes ourselves. It's not to say that it won't happen ultimately, but there is a pledge made by my party not to do that during this Assembly term. Secondly, as I said, there are thousands of people from Wales being treated in England. That's always going to happen, because of the geography of Wales, and we wouldn't want people not to be able to access Chester, Shrewsbury or Hereford. So, it's crucially important that the service in England provides the same level of service too, and that would mean that taxes would have to increase in England too, in my opinion. So, I look at it in these terms: it's better to get a share of the larger fund rather than, at the moment, considering raising taxes in Wales alone.
Welsh: Amboutu £100 miliwn yw'r ffigur, so nid arian mawr. Beth sydd ddim gyda ni yw digon o bobl sy'n talu ar y lefel uchaf ar hyn o bryd. So, byddai'n rhaid codi trethi yn fwy na hynny er mwyn gwneud unrhyw fath o impact ar y gwasanaeth iechyd. Dyna pam, yn mynd yn ôl i'r pwynt y gwnes i ddoe, mae'n well yn ariannol i ni i weld trethi'n cael eu codi ar lefel Brydeinig a chael siâr o'r gronfa hynny na thrio codi trethi ein hunain. Nid yw hynny i ddweud na fydd yn digwydd yn y pen draw, ond mae yna addewid yn fy mhlaid i ddim i wneud hynny yn ystod tymor y Cynulliad. Ac yn ail, fel y dywedais i, mae yna filoedd o bobl o Gymru yn cael triniaeth yn Lloegr. Mae hynny'n mynd i ddigwydd. Dyna beth yw daearyddiaeth Cymru, ac ni fyddwn i'n moyn i bobl beidio cael mynediad i Gaer neu Amwythig neu Henffordd. So, mae'n hollbwysig, hefyd, fod y gwasanaeth yn Lloegr yn rhoi'r un gwasanaeth hefyd, ac mae hynny'n meddwl y byddai'n rhaid i drethi godi yn Lloegr hefyd, yn fy marn i. So, felly, rydw i'n ei ystyried e yn y ffordd hyn: mae'n well i gael siâr o'r gronfa fawr nag ystyried, ar hyn o bryd, godi trethi dim ond yng Nghymru.
English: As you say, one penny on income tax at the basic rate in Wales would only raise, at most, an additional 2 per cent for the funding of the NHS in Wales, which is already, as you know, about 50 per cent, to all intents and purposes, of Welsh Government expenditure, and it is anticipated that that will increase to almost 66 per cent over the next two decades. However, as you say it's better to discuss this in a British context - and I'm sure we will have a debate on this issue at some point when the next Assembly elections arise - why are you therefore proposing a social care levy and so interested in having a levy or an additional tax for social care in Wales when that also is clearly in the hands of the Westminster Government and is an inheritance from them? They had an opportunity to do something about this following Andrew Dilnot's report some seven years ago. Westminster Governments of different colours have all been sitting on this issue for over 15 years. So, why do you think Wales should solve a problem in Wales that has been created in Westminster in the case of the levy, but not in the case of income tax?
Welsh: Fel rŷch chi'n dweud, byddai ceiniog ar y dreth incwm ar y raddfa gyffredin yng Nghymru ond yn codi, ar y mwyaf, 2 y cant ychwanegol i gronfa'r NHS yng Nghymru, ac mae hynny, fel rŷch chi'n gwybod, eisoes tua hanner, i bob pwrpas, gwariant y Llywodraeth, ac wedi ei ragweld i gynyddu dros y ddau ddegawd nesaf i bron 66 y cant o hynny. Ond, gan eich bod chi'n dweud mae'n well trio trafod hwn yn y cyd-destun Prydeinig - ac rydw i'n siŵr y cawn ni ddadl ynglŷn â hynny rhywbryd pan ddaw'r etholiad Cynulliad nesaf - pam ydych chi'n cynnig lefi gofal cymdeithasol ac â chymaint o ddiddordeb mewn cael lefi neu dreth ychwanegol ar gyfer gofal cymdeithasol yng Nghymru pan mae hynny hefyd yn glir yn nwylo Llywodraeth San Steffan ac yn etifeddiaeth Llywodraeth San Steffan? Fe gawson nhw gyfle i wneud rhywbeth am hyn gydag adroddiad Andrew Dilnot ryw saith mlynedd yn ôl. Mae Llywodraethau yn San Steffan o bob lliw plaid wedi bod yn eistedd ar y broblem yma ers dros 15 mlynedd. Pam ydych chi'n meddwl y dylai Cymru ateb problem yng Nghymru sydd wedi ei chreu gan bolisi San Steffan yn achos y lefi, ond nid yn achos treth incwm?
English: Because the system is different. What we are considering in terms of the levy is the creation of a new fund where people would pay into that fund and could, therefore, access the care that they need, having paid for their stamps, to all intents and purposes. One model under which this could work is the national insurance system, but, rather than everything being thrown into the same pot, it would be ring-fenced to pay for social care. So, this would be something that would build over years, with people paying into a system that would be there for them when they needed it. But, of course, one of the things that we would have to do would be to ensure - there's no easy way of saying this - that people don't move into Wales and then access care without having paid into that pot, because that would place excessive pressure on the system. They're two different things, in my view, because, on the levy, there is a means of creating a system that is made in Wales for the people of Wales but that would be a fund that would increase over years. That's one way of doing it, and the easiest way of doing it in my view. Other people could have views on alternatives, but, rather than starting something where everyone has exactly the same service at the very outset, people would pay in, and those people who couldn't pay in would have stamps just as it works with national insurance at the moment.
Welsh: Achos mae'r system yn wahanol. Beth rydym ni'n ystyried ynglŷn â'r lefi yw hyn: creu cronfa o'r dechrau lle bydd pobl yn talu i mewn i'r gronfa honno ac felly, wrth gwrs, yn gallu cael y gofal sydd ei eisiau arnyn nhw ar ôl talu stamps, fwy neu lai. Un model y byddai hwn yn gallu gweithio oddi tano yw system insiwrans cenedlaethol, ond, yn lle bod popeth yn cael ei daflu i mewn i'r un crochan, byddai fe'n cael ei gadw tuag at dalu am ofal cymdeithasol. So, byddai hwn yn rhywbeth a fyddai'n adeiladau dros y blynyddau, a phobl yn talu i mewn i system a fyddai yno iddyn nhw pan fyddai ei heisiau hi arnyn nhw. Wrth gwrs, un o'r pethau y byddai'n rhaid i ni ei wneud yw sicrhau nad yw pobl - wel, nid oes ffordd rwydd i ddweud hwn - yn symud i mewn i Gymru a wedyn yn cael gofal heb fod wedi talu i mewn, achos byddai hynny'n dodi pwysau ar y system a fyddai'n ormodol. So, mae'r ddau beth yn wahanol yn fy marn i, achos, ynglŷn â'r lefi, mae yna ffordd i greu system yng Nghymru i bobl Cymru, ond byddai honno'n system a fyddai'n cynyddu fel cronfa dros y blynyddau. Dyna un ffordd ac, i fi, y ffordd rwyddaf i'w wneud e. Byddai gan bobl eraill farn arall ynglŷn â'r ffordd y gallai fe weithio, ond yn lle dechrau â rhywbeth lle mae pawb yn cael yr un gwasanaeth reit ar y dechrau - byddai pobl yn gorfod talu i mewn a ffeindio system lle byddai'r bobl sy'n ffaelu talu i mewn yn cael stamps yn yr un ffordd ag y mae'r system insiwrans cenedlaethol yn gweithio nawr.
English: That's an interesting proposal and it does deserve full consideration, and the Finance Committee is going to be asking Gerry Holtham about this very soon. But it is also a proposal that will take some time. If you are paying into a fund, it will take time to mature to its fullest extent. There's also an important political link here. The link between national insurance and the NHS was cut by a Conservative Government, as it happens. Although many people may not realise this, it is general taxation that today pays for the NHS. So, how can you, given what you told me in a different context about half an hour ago, which is that you don't want to be filling the gaps of policy failure in Westminster with Welsh money, how can you ensure that that pledge by any politician or any party that a social care levy would only be used for the purpose that it was created for or that people have paid into it for, does not then lead to a sense that something's been privatised in this context, or that it's something that is personal to individuals and not shared by everyone? Because, as you said, you can't have a situation where someone moves to Aberystwyth tomorrow and has all the benefits of a policy that they've not paid into for the past decade.
Welsh: Mae'n gynnig diddorol ac mae'n haeddu ystyriaeth lawn, ac mae'r Pwyllgor Cyllid yn mynd i holi Gerry Holham ynglŷn â'r cynnig yma yn fuan iawn. Ond mae e hefyd yn gynnig sy'n cymryd amser. Os ydych chi'n talu i mewn i gronfa, mae'n cymryd amser i aeddfedu a dod i'w lawn rym. Mae hefyd cyswllt gwleidyddol pwysig yma. Fe dorrwyd y cyswllt rhwng national insurance a'r gwasanaeth iechyd gan Lywodraeth Geidwadol, fel mae'n digwydd. Er efallai nad yw pobl yn sylweddoli hynny, i bob pwrpas, trethiant cyffredinol a threthiant heddiw sy'n talu am y gwasanaeth iechyd. Sut ydych chi'n gallu, o gofio beth ddywedasoch chi wrthyf fi mewn cyd-destun gwahanol tua hanner awr yn ôl, sef nad ydych chi'n dymuno llanw bylchau gydag arian Cymru - bylchau methiant San Steffan - sut ydych chi'n gallu gwneud yn siŵr nad yw'r addewid yna gan unrhyw wleidydd, gan unrhyw blaid, sef y byddai lefi gofal cymdeithasol ond yn cael ei ddefnyddio at y pwrpas y mae wedi cael ei greu ar ei gyfer ac mae pobl wedi talu i mewn ar ei gyfer, yn arwain at ymdeimlad bod rhywbeth wedi ei breifateiddio yn y cyd-destun yma, neu ei fod e'n rhywbeth sydd yn bersonol i unigolion a ddim yn cael ei rannu gan bawb? Achos, fel y dywedasoch chi, allwch chi ddim cael sefyllfa lle mae rhywun yn symud i mewn i Aberystwyth yfory ac yn cael buddion llawn polisi nad ydynt wedi talu i mewn iddo fe dros y degawd cynt.
English: That's quite right. The only way it could work if there were some sort of scheme in England and you could transfer the funding here.
Welsh: Mae hynny'n iawn. Yr unig ffordd y gallai hynny weithio fyddai petasai rhyw fath o gynllun yn Lloegr a byddai modd o drosglwyddo'r arian nôl yma.
English: Well, yes, that is a possibility.
Welsh: Wel, ie, mae hynny'n bosibilrwydd.
English: But without such an arrangement, it wouldn't work. You're entirely right. Privatisation - no. For me, in order for the public to accept such a levy, you would have to explain to people that they pay in and that the money will be ring-fenced. It's not just thrown into the pot and nobody can see where it's gone. So, you would have to ring-fence that fund and keep it separate from any other funding stream.
Welsh: Ond heb gynllun fel hynny, ni fyddai fe'n gweithio. Mae hynny'n iawn. Preifateiddio - na. I fi, er mwyn i'r cyhoedd dderbyn lefi fel hyn, byddai'n rhaid dweud wrth bobl, 'Rydych chi'n talu i mewn, ac mae'r arian yn cael ei gadw ar wahân. Nid yw e'n cael ei daflu'n syth i mewn i'r crochan a neb yn gallu gweld ble mae'r arian yn mynd.' So, byddai'n rhaid cadw'r gronfa ar wahân i unrhyw ffynhonnell arall o gyllido.
English: If I move to the other issues that I want to raise with you, last week, you as a Government published new targets for decarbonisation. This was in response to the Paris agreement challenge and the challenge that you have to reduce greenhouse gases and carbon emissions. Now, these new targets that you have are not ambitious, if I can put it in that way: by 2020, a 27 per cent reduction on the 1990 figures, and, by 2040, a reduction of 60 per cent. But Claire Perry from the UK Government has already talked about improving on the 80 per cent reduction that the UK Government wants to see by 2050. The European Union has a 40 per cent reduction by 2030. You have set figures that don't really fit in, as it happens. It's difficult to compare when you're using a different decade to everyone else, but, even so, from scrutinising those figures, it appears that you are less ambitious than the EU and less ambitious, even, than what the Conservative Westminster Government is currently considering. On top of that, carbon emissions have been increasing over the past decade in Wales, and last year suddenly jumped up by 5 per cent. Are you ambitious enough on the decarbonisation agenda?
Welsh: Os caf i symud at y materion eraill rwyf i eisiau eu codi gyda chi, wythnos diwethaf fe gyhoeddasoch chi fel Llywodraeth dargedau newydd ynglŷn â datgarboneiddio. Roedd hynny yn ymateb i her cytundeb Paris a'r her sydd gyda chi i ostwng nwyon ac allyriadau carbon. Nawr, mae'r targedau newydd sydd gyda chi yn rhai - wel, nid ydyn nhw'n uchelgeisiol, os cawn ni ei ddweud e fel hynny: erbyn 2020, 27 y cant o ostyngiad ar ffigurau 1990, ac, erbyn 2040, gostyngiad o 60 y cant. Ond eisioes mae Claire Perry yn Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Gyfunol wedi sôn am wella ar y gostyngiad o 80 y cant sydd gan y Deyrnas Gyfunol erbyn 2050. Mae'r Undeb Ewropeaidd â gostyngiad o 40 y cant erbyn 2030. Rydych chi wedi gosod ffigurau sydd ddim yn ffitio i mewn, fel mae'n digwydd. Mae'n anodd cymharu pan ŷch chi'n defnyddio degawd gwahanol i bawb arall, ond, hyd yn oed wedyn, o graffu ar y ffigurau yma, rydych chi'n llai uchelgeisiol na'r Undeb Ewropeaidd ac yn llai uchelgeisiol na beth mae hyd yn oed Llywodraeth Geidwadol San Steffan yn ystyried nawr. Ar ben hynny, mae'r allyriadau carbon wedi bod yn cynyddu dros y degawd diwethaf yng Nghymru, ac yn sydyn iawn y flwyddyn ddiwethaf wedi mynd i fyny 5 y cant. A ydych chi'n ddigon uchelgeisiol ar yr agenda datgarboneiddio yma?
English: I think we are. It's one thing to have targets; it's another thing to have realistic targets. I would say that our targets are realistic. The UK Government have said that they want to see a decline in emissions. One of the things that would have assisted that in Wales would have been the electrification of the rail line between Cardiff and Swansea.
Welsh: Rydw i'n credu ein bod ni. Mae'n un peth i gael targedau; mae'n beth arall i gael targedau sy'n realistig. Fe fyddwn i'n dadlau bod ein targedau ni yn realistig. Mae Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig wedi dweud eu bod nhw'n moyn gweld cwymp yn allyriadau. Un o'r pethau fyddai wedi helpu hynny yng Nghymru, er enghraifft, fyddai trydaneiddio y rheilffordd rhwng Caerdydd ac Abertawe.
English: And the tidal lagoon, too.
Welsh: A'r morlyn llanw hefyd, os caf i ychwanegu.
English: I accept some of the points you're making, but what's happened in Wales is that the steel industry has reduced its emissions by some 5 per cent, I believe. The sector that has increased is the energy production sector, and that has been a significant increase at 22 per cent in one year. It's difficult to see how that has happened directly. Certainly, in Scotland, it has decreased quite significantly as they've developed the onshore wind industry - something that has been at a standstill here in Wales. I return to my original point. Your targets, which were just published last week, for 2040 are less ambitious, meaning that Wales will not reach the Paris climate agreement aim, yet it was something the Assembly voted for. It is far from reaching net zero post 2050. That is where contemporary, modern, developed nations are currently looking to develop - on energy in particular, and transport, as you have mentioned. Don't you feel a little bit ashamed of being a Government that has talked about this for over a decade but which is off the pace when it comes to reducing carbon emissions in Wales?
Welsh: Rwy'n derbyn rhai o'r pwyntiau rydych chi'n dweud, ond beth sy'n digwydd yng Nghymru yw bod y sector dur wedi lleihau allyriadau, rhyw 5 y cant, rwy'n meddwl. Y sector sydd wedi cynyddu yw'r sector cynhyrchu ynni, a chynyddu'n sylweddol iawn - 22 y cant mewn un flwyddyn. Mae'n anodd gweld sut mae hynny wedi digwydd yn uniongyrchol. Yn sicr, yn yr Alban, mae wedi mynd lawr yn sylweddol iawn wrth iddyn nhw ddatblygu diwydiant ynni gwynt, nid ar y môr ond ar y tir - rhywbeth sydd wedi mynd yn stond yma yng Nghymru. Rwy'n dod nôl at y pwynt gwreiddiol. Mae eich targedau chi, newydd eu cyhoeddi yr wythnos diwethaf, ar gyfer 2040 yn llai uchelgeisiol, fel na fydd Cymru yn cyrraedd nod cytundeb Paris, sef rhywbeth wnaeth y Cynulliad bleidleisio drosto. Mae'n bell o fod yn cyrraedd unrhyw beth yn agos at net zero erbyn post 2050. Dyna lle mae'r gwledydd datblygedig, modern, cyfoes yn edrych i ddatblygu - ynni yn arbennig, a thrafnidiaeth, fel rydych chi wedi sôn amdano. Onid ydych chi'n teimlo jest bach o gywilydd, fel Llywodraeth sydd wedi sôn am hyn ers dros ddegawd, eich bod chi off the pace pan mae'n dod i ostwng allyriadau carbon Cymru?
English: It comes back to the same old argument that nobody knows the answer to this. It's one thing to create targets; it's an entirely different thing to achieve those targets. What's important for us is that we have targets that are achievable, rather than putting very ambitious targets in place and then finding that they are unachievable.
Welsh: Mae'n dod nôl i'r ddadl hyn nad oes neb yn gwybod yr ateb. Mae'n un peth i greu targedau; mae'n beth arall i'w cyrraedd nhw. Beth sy'n bwysig yw bod targedau gyda ni lle rydym ni'n credu ei bod hi'n bosibl i'w cyrraedd nhw, nid i greu targedau sydd yn edrych yn dda ar y dechrau a wedyn yn ffeindio nad yw'r targedau hynny wedi cael eu cyrraedd.
English: You have failed targets that have been set.
Welsh: Rydych chi wedi methu'r targedau sydd wedi cael eu gosod.
English: I just wanted to thank you very much for the invitation to come and give a presentation to you this afternoon. I give that presentation as an individual with links with various organisations, but it will be as an individual that I will give evidence. I am very glad that the committee is extending its research into what will happen after this period of time, and it's a privilege to try to talk about that, bearing in mind that I overheard some of the discussion that you had earlier on with the representative of the Committee of the Regions. The two bodies are often described as two sisters - two statutory, consultative bodies.
Welsh: Dim ond i ddiolch yn fawr iawn am y gwahodiad i ddod i roi cyflwyniad i chi heddiw'r prynhawn. Rwy'n rhoi hwnnw fel unigolyn efo cysylltiadau â gwahanol fudiadau, ond fel unigolyn rwy'n rhoi'r dystiolaeth. Rwy'n falch iawn fod y pwyllgor yn dyfnhau eich ymchwil i beth sydd yn mynd i ddigwydd ar ôl y cyfnod yma, ac mae'n fraint i mi drio gwneud hynny, gan gofio fy mod i wedi clywed rhywfaint o'r drafodaeth gawsoch chi yn gynharach efo cyngor y rhanbarthau. Fel dwy chwaer, mae'n debyg, mae'r ddau gorff yn cael eu disgrifio - dau gorff statudol, ymgynghorol.
English: We addressed the implications of Brexit for post-compulsory education in our White Paper 'Securing Wales' Future' and identified priorities for negotiations. We continue to press for these priorities in discussions with UK Government officials.
Welsh: Roedd ein Papur Gwyn 'Diogelu Dyfodol Cymru' yn rhoi sylw i effaith Brexit ar addysg ôl-orfodol ac yn nodi blaenoriaethau ar gyfer y trafodaethau. Rydym ni'n parhau i bwyso am y blaenoriaethau hyn mewn trafodaethau gyda swyddogion Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig.
English: Last week, in answer to the Plaid Cymru leader here in the Assembly, you told us that you and your Government had no plans for the Welsh NHS if there was to be, as is, of course, increasingly likely now, a 'no deal' Brexit. In fact, your exact words were 'There is no planning for a "no deal" Brexit. It's more like people running around in circles screaming. There are no plans at all for it.' Now, I'm not sure that's the kind of leadership that the people of Wales expected from somebody who stood on a promise of standing up for Wales, but if you have no plan for the NHS, could you tell us whether that's also the case for Welsh universities and Welsh colleges in the face of a 'no deal' Brexit, and, if it is, when exactly would you expect the HE and FE sector to start running around in circles screaming?
Welsh: Yr wythnos diwethaf, mewn ateb i arweinydd Plaid Cymru yma yn y Cynulliad, dywedasoch wrthym nad oedd gennych chi na'ch Llywodraeth unrhyw gynlluniau ar gyfer GIG Cymru pe byddai, fel sy'n gynyddol debygol erbyn hyn, wrth gwrs, Brexit dim cytundeb. Mewn gwirionedd, eich union eiriau oedd 'Nid oes unrhyw gynllunio ar gyfer Brexit 'dim cytundeb'. Mae'n debycach i bobl yn rhedeg o gwmpas mewn cylchoedd yn sgrechian. Nid oes unrhyw gynlluniau o gwbl ar ei gyfer.' Nawr, nid wyf i'n siŵr ai dyna'r math o arweinyddiaeth yr oedd pobl Cymru yn ei disgwyl gan rywun a safodd ar sail addewid o sefyll dros Gymru, ond os nad oes gennych chi gynllun ar gyfer y GIG, a allech chi ddweud wrthym ni a yw hynny hefyd yn wir ar gyfer prifysgolion a cholegau Cymru yn wyneb Brexit 'dim cytundeb', ac, os ydyw, pryd yn union fyddech chi'n disgwyl i'r sector addysg uwch ac addysg bellach ddechrau rhedeg o gwmpas mewn cylchoedd yn sgrechian?