English: If I could initially respond to Steffan Lewis, who chose not to take an intervention from me earlier. When I was listening to him, he was speaking with great confidence about what will happen in 2020, or what will inevitably happen in 2021. I just think he needs to consider he was referring to forecasts, and however august those bodies are, whether they're the Treasury or the OECD or the OBR, they are just forecasts. The OBR itself admits that it's only 90 per cent sure that growth at that time will be somewhere between -1 per cent and 4 per cent, and the OECD and the Treasury that he quotes, of course, told us there was going to be a severe recession immediately were we to vote to leave the European Union. That has not come to pass. I would, though, congratulate him and Plaid on the extent to which they've been able to influence the Welsh Government by using their numbers here. It's only a shame that they haven't used their numbers in Westminster to give support to the UK Government there in return for extra money for Wales, which I'm sure would have been welcomed across this Chamber. I also note that when he talks about the implications of potentially leaving the single market for the budget, his view and mine would be very different, but what I hadn't taken account of is that the First Minister's view was very different just in the session earlier. Again, on this subject, he contradicted himself in answer to questions. When responding to Leanne Wood, he stuck to his usual formulation - and he was responding in English - that he wanted 'full, unfettered access' to the single market, the very carefully crafted phrase he has developed. I've never heard him say in English that he wants to stay in the single market. He's been very careful not to. Yet, when he answered Rhun ap Iorwerth in Welsh, the translation I heard in my headphones at the time, and as I've confirmed with translation since, was very clear. He said: 'What is the answer? Well, it's quite clear: the United Kingdom should remain within the single market'. He then went on to say he wanted to leave the EU in a way 'which keeps us in the single market'. Why is it that the First Minister says one thing in Welsh and another in English? Is it because he wants to disguise the extent to which he is not respecting the result of the referendum? Just as we consider the budget today, the first Minister says, 'We respect the result of the referendum, but - .' Today he has let the cat out of the bag and revealed that Labour's true position is to want to stay within the single market, notwithstanding the result of that referendum. Cabinet Secretary, this is the first budget in which you have tax-raising and tax-altering powers, and I want to focus the rest of my remarks on the taxation arrangements for Wales as you announced them today. You've emphasised the progressive principles you hold and how you are applying these through the land transaction tax - both through the residential thresholds and rates but also, I'd emphasise, through placing a greater burden on commercial property purchases at the higher rate than is done either in England or in Scotland. With the extent that the economic strategy of the Welsh Government relies on city deals and enterprise zones, which necessitate a certain level of private investment, often from outside Wales, I'm concerned that the Cabinet Secretary's principles run counter to the Government's wider economic strategy. Setting the rate on higher-band commercial properties 1 per cent higher than England and 1.5 per cent higher than Scotland is not going to help us secure private sector investment. It may tip the decision to invest in Wales compared to other parts of the UK. Does this Cabinet Secretary want to strangle the growth in Cardiff commercial property that his colleague Ken Skates is trying to support with an enterprise zone? It seems there is a lack of joined-up thinking between the two departments, whose strategies may be running in direct opposition to each other. Now, today I detected a difference, at least in the tone from the Cabinet Secretary, to his previous responses to me on the issue of stamp duty and first-time buyers. Before, I had the impression that he was considering how and to what degree he might respond to the UK announcement around first-time buyers and, in particular, whether he would allow a similar concession, potentially - perhaps not so large but nonetheless a concession - within Wales. And as I've said, again, this is a particular issue for first-time buyers in Monmouthshire, close to the border. Could he clarify his position on that, or has he, essentially, decided that he's going to stick with the LTT rates he had before? He rightly observes that the amount of the block grant will be influenced and corrected for any potential surge in first-time buyer purchases encouraged in Wales through this, and I wonder what he will do with the additional money that he may get for future years, and I ask that he at least considers again that rise to 6 per cent in that commercial stamp duty rate, just because of what that could do to disincentivise internal investment in Wales. The bigger danger, perhaps, though, is if Wales were to take a similar approach to income tax in future, I fear that the Cabinet Secretary's exposition of his progressive principles are such that he will allow, to keep his hands on the tiller, the consequent increases in taxation, which would undermine Welsh competitiveness and keep us on the economic slow lane.
Welsh: Os caf i ymateb yn gyntaf i Steffan Lewis, a ddewisodd beidio â chymryd ymyriad gennyf yn gynharach. Pan oeddwn i'n gwrando arno, roedd yn siarad yn hyderus iawn am beth fydd yn digwydd yn 2020, neu beth fydd yn anochel yn digwydd yn 2021. Rwy'n meddwl bod angen iddo ystyried y ffaith ei fod yn cyfeirio at ragolygon, a does dim ots pa mor fawreddog yw'r cyrff hynny, y Trysorlys neu'r OECD neu'r Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol, dim ond rhagolygon ydyn nhw. Mae'r Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol eu hunain yn cyfaddef mai dim ond 90 y cant yw eu sicrwydd y bydd twf ar yr adeg honno rywle rhwng 1 y cant a 4 y cant, a dywedodd yr OECD a'r Trysorlys y mae'n eu dyfynnu, wrth gwrs, wrthym y byddai dirwasgiad difrifol ar unwaith pe byddem yn pleidleisio i adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Nid yw hynny wedi digwydd. Fodd bynnag, byddwn yn ei longyfarch ef a Phlaid Cymru am allu dylanwadu ar Lywodraeth Cymru i'r fath raddau drwy ddefnyddio eu rhifau yma. Yr unig drueni yw nad ydynt wedi defnyddio eu rhifau yn San Steffan i roi cymorth i Lywodraeth y DU yno yn gyfnewid am arian ychwanegol i Cymru; rhywbeth yr wyf i'n siŵr y byddai wedi cael croeso ar draws y Siambr hon. Rwyf hefyd yn nodi, pan mae'n sôn am oblygiadau'r posibilrwydd o adael y farchnad sengl i'r gyllideb, y byddai ei farn ef a'm barn i'n wahanol iawn, ond yr hyn nad oeddwn i wedi'i ystyried yw bod barn y Prif Weinidog yn wahanol iawn yn y sesiwn gynharach. Unwaith eto, ar y pwnc hwn, mae wedi ei wrth-ddweud ei hun wrth ateb cwestiynau. Wrth ymateb i Leanne Wood, cadwodd at ei ffurf arferol - ac roedd yn ymateb yn Saesneg - ei fod eisiau mynediad llawn a dilyffethair i'r farchnad sengl, yr ymadrodd hwnnw y mae wedi'i saernïo a'i ddatblygu'n ofalus iawn. Nid wyf erioed wedi ei glywed yn dweud yn Saesneg ei fod eisiau aros yn y farchnad sengl. Mae wedi bod yn ofalus iawn i beidio â dweud hynny. Eto, wrth ateb Rhun ap Iorwerth yn y Gymraeg, roedd y cyfieithiad a glywais i yn fy nghlustffonau ar y pryd, ac rwyf wedi cadarnhau hyn gyda'r cyfieithwyr ers hynny, yn glir iawn. Dywedodd: 'Beth yw'r ateb? Wel, mae'n eithaf clir: dylai'r Deyrnas Unedig aros o fewn y farchnad sengl'. Yna aeth yn ei flaen i ddweud ei fod am adael yr UE mewn ffordd 'sy'n ein cadw yn y farchnad sengl'. Pam mae'r Prif Weinidog yn dweud un peth yn Gymraeg a rhywbeth arall yn Saesneg? Ai oherwydd ei fod am guddio i ba raddau nad yw'n parchu canlyniad y refferendwm? Dim ond wrth inni ystyried y gyllideb heddiw, mae'r Prif Weinidog yn dweud, 'Rydym yn parchu canlyniad y refferendwm, ond - .' Heddiw mae wedi gollwng y gath o'r cwd ac wedi datgelu mai gwir safbwynt y Blaid Lafur yw yr hoffen nhw aros o fewn y farchnad sengl, er gwaethaf canlyniad y refferendwm hwnnw. Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, dyma'r gyllideb gyntaf lle mae gennych bwerau i drethu a newid trethi, ac rwyf am ganolbwyntio gweddill fy sylwadau ar y trefniadau trethu i Gymru yr ydych chi wedi'u cyhoeddi heddiw. Rydych chi wedi pwysleisio'r egwyddorion blaengar sydd gennych a sut yr ydych yn cymhwyso'r rhain drwy'r dreth trafodiadau tir - drwy'r trothwyon a'r cyfraddau preswyl ond hefyd, byddwn yn pwysleisio, drwy roi mwy o faich ar brynu eiddo masnachol ar y gyfradd uwch nag sy'n digwydd yn Lloegr nac yn yr Alban. Gan fod strategaeth economaidd Llywodraeth Cymru yn dibynnu cymaint ar y bargeinion dinesig ac ardaloedd menter, mae angen lefel benodol o fuddsoddiad preifat, yn aml o'r tu allan i Gymru, ac felly rwy'n bryderus bod egwyddorion Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn groes i strategaeth economaidd ehangach y Llywodraeth. Nid yw pennu cyfradd eiddo masnachol band uwch 1 y cant yn uwch nag yn Lloegr ac 1.5 y cant yn uwch nag yn yr Alban yn mynd i'n helpu i sicrhau buddsoddiad sector preifat. Gallai droi'r penderfyniad i fuddsoddi yng Nghymru o gymharu â rhannau eraill o'r DU. A yw'r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet hwn am dagu'r twf mewn eiddo masnachol yng Nghaerdydd y mae ei gyfaill Ken Skates yn ceisio ei gefnogi gydag ardal fenter? Mae'n ymddangos bod yma ddiffyg meddwl cydgysylltiedig rhwng y ddwy adran, ac o bosibl bod eu strategaethau'n gwrthwynebu ei gilydd yn uniongyrchol. Nawr, heddiw synhwyrais wahaniaeth, o leiaf o ran tôn Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, i'w ymatebion blaenorol imi ar fater treth stamp a phrynwyr tro cyntaf. Cyn hyn, roeddwn o dan yr argraff ei fod yn ystyried sut ac i ba raddau y gallai ymateb i gyhoeddiad y DU ynglŷn â phrynwyr am y tro cyntaf ac, yn benodol, a fyddai'n caniatáu consesiwn tebyg, o bosibl - efallai ddim mor fawr, ond consesiwn serch hynny - o fewn Cymru. Ac fel yr wyf wedi'i ddweud, unwaith eto, mae hwn yn fater penodol i brynwyr am y tro cyntaf yn Sir Fynwy, sy'n agos at y ffin. A wnaiff e' egluro ei safbwynt ar hynny, neu a yw, yn y bôn, wedi penderfynu ei fod yn dymuno cadw'r cyfraddau treth trafodiadau tir a oedd ganddo cynt? Mae'n nodi'n briodol y bydd swm y grant bloc yn cael ei addasu a'i gywiro ar gyfer unrhyw gynnydd posibl yn nifer y prynwyr tro cyntaf sy'n cael eu hannog yng Nghymru drwy hyn, a thybed beth y bydd yn ei wneud â'r arian ychwanegol y gallai ei gael ar gyfer y dyfodol, ac rwy'n gofyn iddo o leiaf ystyried eto y cynnydd hwnnw i 6 y cant yn y gyfradd treth stamp masnachol honno, dim ond oherwydd yr hyn y gallai hynny ei wneud i anghymell buddsoddi mewnol yng Nghymru. Y perygl mwyaf, efallai, fodd bynnag, yw pe byddai Cymru yn dangos agwedd debyg at dreth incwm yn y dyfodol, mae arnaf ofn bod y bydd egwyddorion blaengar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn golygu y bydd yn caniatáu, i gadw ei ddwylo ar y llyw, cynnydd mewn trethiant o ganlyniad i hynny, a fyddai'n tanseilio cystadleurwydd Cymru ac yn ein cadw yn y lôn araf economaidd.