English: Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I fully agree with the indictment that we just heard from Alun Davies of both the Welsh Government and, indeed, the United Kingdom Government for the limitations that we are faced with in this debate. It's a bit like a debate about moving the deckchairs on the Titanic as the Welsh economy hurtles towards the iceberg, and that's for two reasons. First of all, the Government's budget is of course restrained by the restrictions imposed by the UK Government, but also because health and education gobble up by far the lion's share of the total budget in Wales, more than 75 per cent, so there is a limit to the discretionary expenditure that the Government has at its disposal, which we can debate this afternoon. The fundamental reality after 20 years of Labour Government is that Wales is not only older and sicker than other parts of the United Kingdom, but it is also poorer. We're at the bottom of the income tables of the UK for raising revenue in order to pay for the public services that are delivered - at less than £10,000 per head, compared with nearly £20,000 per head in London. As Adam Price pointed out in First Minister's questions this afternoon, the Welsh Government had a noble ambition to end fuel poverty by 2018 and end child poverty by 2020, and in both of those it has spectacularly failed. On the one hand the budget is too small to pay for public services that we all want in Wales, and secondly, the Welsh Government lacks the tax and policy levers in so many areas that are required to make a real difference to the size of the economy, as Alun Davies pointed out. It's either that we have to raise more in taxes or we have to grow the economy, and the Welsh Government finds it very, very difficult to do either. Within the last year or so, the Welsh Government has had to write off nearly £500 million of NHS debts that have been run up since 2013, otherwise the health service would have been in an even worse state than it is now. In other respects also, the Welsh Government does have levers of power that it insists on using in a way that is counterproductive from its own perspective in terms of improving the economy and increasing the well-being of the people of Wales. For example, in respect of environmental policy - green policy on renewable energy, et cetera - the effect of its policy is that it's using its powers to damage businesses and further impoverish the poor whilst pouring cash into the pockets of millionaire developers, who are invariably based in England. And meanwhile, the poorer of Wales in places like Blaenau Gwent have to pay exaggerated electricity bills in order to keep warm in the winter. Now, an average of £200 per household on everybody's electricity bill is accounted for by green taxes and charges. I think what this debate illustrates is that the halfway house of devolution simply doesn't work, and I believe it can't work because public expenditure being constrained by the UK Treasury is never going to be a workable answer to Wales's problems. On the one hand, Westminster won't give Wales more cash. Why would a Tory Government in Westminster ever want to give a Labour Government in Cardiff more cash? Well, the answer is it won't. When we had a Labour Government in Westminster, that didn't see anything change very much either. The Barnett formula remains as it was in 1978 and Wales is institutionally disadvantaged by that. On the other hand, independence is, I believe, a fiscal fantasy. The fiscal gap in Wales - the difference between what Wales raises or can raise in taxes and what the Government actually spends at all levels in Wales - is 25 per cent of Wales's national income, £4,300 per head. If we did have independence, that would immediately see either a collapse of Government spending in Wales or massive increases in taxation, although Rhun ap Iorwerth a moment ago was inveighing against the iniquity of the UK Government imposing borrowing restrictions on the Welsh Government. Well, I know that he has an insatiable appetite for English taxpayers' money, but I don't think the English taxpayer would be prepared to indulge him. So, the reality is that independence of Wales is bound to lead to that kind of squeeze that I've just mentioned. On the other hand, the Welsh Government does seem to have plenty of money, in some respects, to waste. We know we spent £114 million on the M4 inquiry around Newport, although the First Minister said he would have vetoed the decision to have the M4 improvements whatever the inquiry had said. And -
Welsh: Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Rwy'n cytuno yn llwyr â'r cyhuddiad yr ydym ni newydd ei glywed gan Alun Davies yn erbyn Llywodraeth Cymru ac, yn wir, Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig am y cyfyngiadau yr ydym yn eu hwynebu yn y ddadl hon. Mae'n debyg i ddadl ynglŷn â symud y cadeiriau haul ar y Titanic wrth i economi Cymru ruthro tuag at y mynydd iâ, a hynny am ddau reswm. Yn gyntaf, mae cyllideb y Llywodraeth, wrth gwrs, wedi ei chyfyngu gan y cyfyngiadau a osodir gan Lywodraeth y DU, ond hefyd am fod iechyd ac addysg yn cymryd y gyfran fwyaf o bell ffordd o gyfanswm y gyllideb yng Nghymru, dros 75 y cant, felly mae terfyn ar y gwariant dewisol sydd ar gael i'r Llywodraeth y gallwn ni ei drafod y prynhawn yma. Y realiti sylfaenol ar ôl 20 mlynedd o Lywodraeth Lafur yw bod Cymru, yn ogystal â bod yn hŷn ac yn fwy sâl na rhannau eraill o'r Deyrnas Unedig, mae hefyd yn dlotach. Rydym ni ar waelod tablau incwm y DU am godi refeniw er mwyn talu am y gwasanaethau cyhoeddus a ddarperir - llai na £10,000 y pen, o'i gymharu â bron i £20,000 y pen yn Llundain. Fel y nododd Adam Price yng nghwestiynau'r Prif Weinidog y prynhawn yma, roedd gan Lywodraeth Cymru uchelgais amlwg i roi terfyn ar dlodi tanwydd erbyn 2018 a rhoi terfyn ar dlodi plant erbyn 2020, ac mae wedi methu'n gyfan gwbl yn y ddau beth hynny. Ar y naill law, mae'r gyllideb yn rhy fach i dalu am y gwasanaethau cyhoeddus yr ydym ni i gyd eu heisiau yng Nghymru, ac yn ail, nid oes gan Lywodraeth Cymru yr ysgogiadau treth a pholisi mewn cynifer o feysydd sy'n ofynnol i wneud gwahaniaeth gwirioneddol i faint yr economi, fel y nododd Alun Davies. Mae'n rhaid i ni naill ai godi mwy mewn trethi neu mae'n rhaid i ni dyfu'r economi, ac mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei chael hi'n anodd iawn, iawn i wneud y naill na'r llall. O fewn y flwyddyn neu ddwy ddiwethaf, bu'n rhaid i Lywodraeth Cymru ddileu bron i £500 miliwn o ddyledion y GIG sydd wedi eu cronni ers 2013, neu fel arall byddai'r gwasanaeth iechyd wedi bod mewn cyflwr gwaeth fyth nag ydyw ar hyn o bryd. Mewn ffyrdd eraill hefyd, mae gan Lywodraeth Cymru ysgogiadau pŵer y mae'n mynnu eu defnyddio mewn ffordd sy'n wrthgynhyrchiol o'i safbwynt ei hun o ran gwella'r economi a chynyddu lles pobl Cymru. Er enghraifft, o ran polisi amgylcheddol - polisi gwyrdd ar ynni adnewyddadwy, ac ati - effaith ei pholisi yw ei bod yn defnyddio ei phwerau i niweidio busnesau ac arwain y tlawd at fwy o dlodi ac, ar yr un pryd, yn arllwys arian i bocedi datblygwyr sy'n filiwnyddion, sydd wedi eu lleoli yn Lloegr yn ddieithriad. Ac yn y cyfamser, mae'n rhaid i bobl dlotach Cymru mewn lleoedd fel Blaenau Gwent dalu biliau trydan rhy uchel er mwyn cadw'n gynnes yn y gaeaf. Nawr, mae trethi a thaliadau gwyrdd yn cyfrif am gyfartaledd o £200 y cartref ar fil trydan pawb. Rwy'n credu mai'r hyn y mae'r ddadl hon yn ei ddangos yw nad yw'r datganoli rhannol hwn yn gweithio, ac rwyf i o'r farn na all weithio oherwydd na fydd gwariant cyhoeddus sy'n cael ei gyfyngu gan Drysorlys y DU byth yn ateb ymarferol i broblemau Cymru. Ar y naill law, ni fydd San Steffan yn rhoi mwy o arian i Gymru. Pam byddai Llywodraeth Dorïaidd yn San Steffan byth yn bwriadu rhoi mwy o arian i Lywodraeth Lafur yng Nghaerdydd? Wel, yr ateb yw na fydd. Pan oedd gennym ni Lywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan, ni welodd hynny yn newid fawr o ddim byd ychwaith. Mae fformiwla Barnett yn parhau fel yr oedd ym 1978 ac mae Cymru dan anfantais sefydliadol oherwydd hynny. Ar y llaw arall, mae annibyniaeth, yn fy marn i, yn ffantasi cyllidol. Mae'r bwlch cyllidol yng Nghymru - y gwahaniaeth rhwng yr hyn y mae Cymru'n ei godi neu'n gallu ei godi mewn trethi a'r hyn y mae'r Llywodraeth yn ei wario mewn gwirionedd ar bob lefel yng Nghymru - yn 25 y cant o incwm cenedlaethol Cymru, £4,300 y pen. Pe byddai gennym ni annibyniaeth, byddai hynny yn arwain naill ai at gwymp ar unwaith yng ngwariant y Llywodraeth yng Nghymru neu gynnydd enfawr mewn trethi, er bod Rhun ap Iorwerth eiliad yn ôl yn lladd ar annhegwch Llywodraeth y DU yn gorfodi cyfyngiadau benthyca ar Lywodraeth Cymru. Wel, rwy'n gwybod bod ganddo awydd diddiwedd am arian trethdalwyr Lloegr, ond nid wyf i'n credu y byddai trethdalwyr Lloegr yn barod i'w fodloni. Felly, y realiti yw bod annibyniaeth Cymru yn sicr o arwain at y math hwnnw o wasgfa yr wyf i newydd ei chrybwyll. Ar y llaw arall, mae yn ymddangos bod gan Lywodraeth Cymru ddigon o arian, mewn rhai ffyrdd, i'w wastraffu. Rydym ni'n gwybod ein bod ni wedi gwario £114 miliwn ar ymchwiliad yr M4 o amgylch Casnewydd, er i'r Prif Weinidog ddweud y byddai wedi nacáu'r penderfyniad i weithredu gwelliannau i'r M4 ni waeth beth y byddai'r ymchwiliad wedi ei ddweud. Ac -