English: Can I thank the Conservative Party for bringing this debate forward, as I feel it covers matters that are fundamental to the governance of Wales? If we are to discuss the funding available to Wales, we cannot do so without consideration of the Barnett formula, which - I am sure there would be agreement across the Chamber - is fundamentally flawed. In this respect, I think it is pertinent to point out that, for the first 12 years of the Assembly, we had a Labour Government both here and at Westminster, and yet the Barnett formula remained unchanged. Discrepancies between the funding Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales receive persist under the Barnett formula, with Wales being the lowest recipient per head of population. But rather than criticising incoming funding, a constant complaint here in the Assembly, perhaps it would be more appropriate to take a more robust approach as to how those funds are used. After all, whether taxes are raised in Westminster or in Wales, it is taxpayers' money and they have a right to see due diligence used in the way it is spent. There are many instances where it could be said that very large amounts of money have been wasted on projects that are not delivered as promised. This is borne out by the concerns of the Auditor General for Wales, who said: 'The Welsh Government has not yet implemented an approach to balancing potential risks and benefits'. If the amount of money received for our public services is reduced, then it becomes even more imperative that we use those funds that are available more productively. We have to accept - and I do acknowledge - that decisions on funding companies and/or organisations are not without inherent risks. I've pointed out before that the Government is often lending at the higher-risk end of funding, particularly in areas where commercial banks are failing to provide such funds due to them being completely risk averse. But, in reality, it is not in the support of the private sector that we find the greatest Government ineptitude, it is in the support they give to institutions that are Government led but implemented on an arm's-length basis. It is universally accepted that Wales is far too reliant on its public sector, but there is a growing dependence on third sector institutions. We now have one third sector organisation for every 89 people in Wales. One has to ask the question, 'Are they all giving value for money?', when there is such a plethora of such bodies. I urge the Government to stop complaining about lack of funding, but to concentrate on spending, not income.
Welsh: A gaf fi ddiolch i'r Blaid Geidwadol am gyflwyno'r ddadl hon, gan fy mod yn teimlo ei bod yn cwmpasu materion sy'n sylfaenol i lywodraethiant Cymru? Os ydym am drafod y cyllid sydd ar gael i Gymru, ni allwn wneud hynny heb ystyried fformiwla Barnett, sydd - rwy'n siŵr y byddai cytundeb ar draws y Siambr - yn sylfaenol ddiffygiol. Yn hyn o beth, credaf ei bod yn berthnasol nodi, am 12 mlynedd cyntaf y Cynulliad, fod gennym Lywodraeth Lafur yma ac yn San Steffan, ac eto fe arhosodd fformiwla Barnett yn ddigyfnewid. Mae anghysondeb o hyd rhwng y cyllid a gaiff Gogledd Iwerddon, yr Alban a Chymru o dan fformiwla Barnett, a Chymru sy'n cael leiaf y pen o'r boblogaeth. Ond yn hytrach na beirniadu'r cyllid a ddaw i mewn, sy'n gŵyn gyson yma yn y Cynulliad, efallai y byddai'n fwy priodol mabwysiadu dull mwy cadarn o ddefnyddio'r cronfeydd hynny. Wedi'r cyfan, p'un a yw'r trethi'n cael eu codi yn San Steffan neu yng Nghymru, arian y trethdalwyr ydyw ac mae ganddynt hawl i weld diwydrwydd dyladwy o ran y ffordd y caiff ei wario. Ceir sawl enghraifft lle gellid dweud bod symiau mawr o arian wedi cael eu gwastraffu ar brosiectau nad ydynt yn cael eu cyflawni fel yr addawyd. Ategir hyn gan bryderon Archwilydd Cyffredinol Cymru, a ddywedodd: 'Hyd yma, nid yw Llywodraeth Cymru wedi gweithredu dull o gydbwyso'r risgiau a'r manteision posibl'. Os caiff y swm o arian a dderbynnir ar gyfer ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus ei leihau, bydd yn bwysicach fyth inni ddefnyddio'r arian sydd ar gael yn fwy cynhyrchiol. Rhaid inni dderbyn - ac rwy'n cydnabod - nad yw penderfyniadau ar gyllido cwmnïau a/neu sefydliadau heb eu risgiau cynhenid. Rwyf wedi dweud o'r blaen fod y Llywodraeth yn aml yn rhoi benthyg arian ar y pen uchaf o risg, yn enwedig mewn meysydd lle mae banciau masnachol yn methu darparu arian o'r fath am eu bod yn gwbl wrth-risg. Ond mewn gwirionedd, nid mewn cymorth i'r sector preifat y gwelwn yr anfedrusrwydd mwyaf ar ran y Llywodraeth, ond yn y cymorth y mae'n ei roi i sefydliadau sy'n cael eu harwain gan Lywodraeth ond sy'n cael eu gweithredu ar sail hyd braich. Mae pawb yn derbyn bod Cymru'n llawer rhy ddibynnol ar ei sector cyhoeddus, ond ceir dibyniaeth gynyddol ar sefydliadau'r trydydd sector. Erbyn hyn, mae gennym un corff trydydd sector am bob 89 o bobl yng Nghymru. Mae'n rhaid gofyn y cwestiwn, 'A yw pob un ohonynt yn rhoi gwerth am arian?', pan fo cynifer o gyrff o'r fath. Rwy'n annog y Llywodraeth i roi'r gorau i gwyno am ddiffyg arian, ond i ganolbwyntio ar wariant, nid incwm.