English: Can I thank Adam Price for his contribution and for his questions? I'd agree, people in Wales would be right to be not just cross, but absolutely livid with the historic underfunding of rail investment in infrastructure in Wales over many years. I think it's worth saying that we're not alone, though, in terms of finding the position totally unacceptable. I've been working closely with some of the metro mayors across the border in recent months, and it's very clear that underfunding of rail infrastructure, right across the north - and by the north, I mean above the Watford junction - has constrained the ability of regional economies to grow, and to grow sustainably. My view is that we can't let the UK Government off the hook for historic underfunding, and we must, whilst the responsibility for investment is reserved, play our duty in bringing forward compelling business cases for the UK Government to consider, and to make them so strong that they cannot be resisted, but, at the same time, to do what we can to convince the UK Government to step away from a funding regime, from formulas that have an inbuilt bias to the south-east, in particular to London. So, in terms of there being a plan B, I would not wish to see UK Government excused of their responsibility, and if they are not willing to provide an equitable share of funding for rail infrastructure to be delivered by Network Rail, then they should enable and empower us to be able to have devolved responsibility for rail infrastructure, and with it a fair funding settlement. I take what the Member says regarding borrowing powers and the ability for us to be able to invest in rail infrastructure, and, of course, we have done just that on many occasions. The problem, at the risk of repeating myself, is that we don't have the ability to direct Network Rail, and, for example, on some of the projects, including rail enhancements to the north Wales main line - the south Wales journey, rather, the south-north journey - the predicted benefits of the enhancements were not realised equally. Some of the projects concerning the improvement to the Wrexham-Chester line have not yet resulted in the predicted and expected benefits, and so it's absolutely essential, if we get devolved responsibility, that we also get the funding to go with it. I think Professor Barry's report does contain a compelling vision. Adam Price makes the important point that we can't just look at those projects that are contained within the report. For that reason, I should just outline why Professor Barry's report contained the focus that it did on, particularly, the north Wales main line and the south Wales main line - it was because the investment proposals were focused initially on the areas that the Secretary of State for Transport had already identified for further development in north and south Wales, following the cancellation of electrification. Our view is that it's essential, if we are to achieve and realise the benefits of increased investment, that we put forward those business cases relating to areas of work that the Secretary of State himself has identified as a priority, so that we can expedite some of the work that's so crucially required. But, equally, as this work is progressed it will consider further how the connectivity between the regions, including how links between the south, mid and north Wales can be developed and enhanced. And, again, I would stress to Members that, under the current devolution arrangements, the reopening of any lines and the investment in major station improvements remain the responsibility of the UK Government, but our role is in bringing forward those business cases that make it so irresistible for UK Government to invest in them and, at the same time, to continue our fight - and we now have very strong allies in many of the metro mayors - for a rebalancing of investment across the UK's infrastructure network.
Welsh: A gaf i ddiolch i Adam Price am ei gyfraniad ac am ei gwestiynau? Byddwn yn cytuno, byddai pobl yng Nghymru yn iawn, nid yn unig i fod yn flin, ond i fod yn hollol gandryll ynghylch y tanariannu hanesyddol ar fuddsoddi mewn seilwaith rheilffyrdd yng Nghymru dros nifer o flynyddoedd. Rwy'n meddwl ei bod yn werth dweud nad ydym ar ein pennau ein hunain, er hynny, o ran ystyried bod y sefyllfa'n gwbl annerbyniol. Rydym wedi gweithio'n agos â rhai o'r meiri metro ar draws y ffin yn y misoedd diwethaf, ac mae'n glir iawn bod tanariannu'r seilwaith rheilffyrdd, ar draws gogledd Lloegr - ac wrth 'y gogledd', rwy'n golygu uwchlaw cyffordd Watford - wedi cyfyngu ar allu economïau rhanbarthol i dyfu, ac i dyfu mewn ffordd gynaliadwy. Fy marn i yw na allwn ni adael i Lywodraeth y DU gael maddeuant am danariannu hanesyddol, a bod yn rhaid inni, wrth gadw cyfrifoldeb dros fuddsoddi, cyflawni ein dyletswydd drwy gyflwyno achosion busnes cryf i Lywodraeth y DU i'w hystyried, a'u gwneud mor gryf fel na ellir eu gwrthod, ond, ar yr un pryd, i wneud yr hyn a allwn ni i argyhoeddi Llywodraeth y DU i symud oddi wrth gyfundrefn ariannu, o fformiwlâu sydd â rhagfarn annatod tua'r de-ddwyrain, yn enwedig i Lundain. Felly, o ran cael cynllun B, ni fyddwn yn dymuno i weld Llywodraeth y DU yn cael ei hesgusodi o'i chyfrifoldeb, ac os nad ydyw'n barod i ddarparu cyfran deg o'r cyllid ar gyfer seilwaith rheilffyrdd i'w chyflawni gan Network Rail, dylent ein galluogi a'n grymuso ni i allu cael datganoli'r cyfrifoldeb am seilwaith y rheilffyrdd, a rhoi setliad cyllido teg gydag ef. Derbyniaf yr hyn a ddywed yr Aelod ynghylch pwerau benthyca a'r gallu i ni fuddsoddi yn y seilwaith rheilffyrdd, ac, wrth gwrs, rydym wedi gwneud hynny ar sawl achlysur. Y broblem, er fy mod i mewn perygl o ailadrodd fy hun, yw nad oes gennym ni'r gallu i gyfarwyddo Network Rail, ac, er enghraifft, ar rai o'r prosiectau, gan gynnwys gwelliannau rheilffyrdd i brif reilffordd y Gogledd - taith y De, neu yn hytrach, y daith de i'r gogledd - ni wireddwyd manteision disgwyliedig y gwelliannau yn gyfartal. Mae rhai o'r prosiectau sy'n ymwneud â gwella lein Wrecsam-Caer nad ydynt eto wedi arwain at y manteision disgwyliedig a ragwelir, ac felly mae'n gwbl hanfodol, os cawn ni gyfrifoldeb datganoledig, ein bod ni hefyd yn cael yr arian i gyd-fynd ag ef. Rwy'n credu bod adroddiad yr Athro Barry yn cynnwys gweledigaeth gymhellol. Mae Adam Price yn gwneud pwynt pwysig na allwn ni ystyried dim ond y prosiectau hynny a gynhwysir yn yr adroddiad. Am y rheswm hwnnw, dylwn amlinellu mai'r rheswm pam yr oedd adroddiad yr Athro Barry yn cynnwys y pwyslais hwnnw, yn enwedig, ar brif reilffordd y gogledd a phrif reilffordd y de - oedd oherwydd bod y cynigion buddsoddi yn canolbwyntio i ddechrau ar yr ardaloedd hynny yr oedd yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol dros drafnidiaeth eisoes wedi'u nodi ar gyfer datblygiad pellach yn y gogledd a'r de, ar ôl diddymu'r cynlluniau i drydaneiddio. Ein barn ni yw ei bod yn hanfodol, os ydym ni'n mynd i sicrhau a gwireddu manteision buddsoddiad cynyddol, ein bod yn cyflwyno'r achosion busnes hynny sy'n ymwneud â meysydd gwaith y mae'r Ysgrifennydd Gwladol ei hun wedi'u nodi yn flaenoriaethau, fel y gallwn ni hwyluso rhywfaint o'r gwaith sydd ei angen mor daer. Ond, yn yr un modd, wrth i'r gwaith hwn fynd yn ei flaen, byddwn yn ystyried ymhellach sut y gellir datblygu a gwella'r cysylltedd rhwng y rhanbarthau, gan gynnwys y cysylltiadau rhwng y de, y canolbarth a'r gogledd. Ac, unwaith eto, pwysleisiaf i'r Aelodau, o dan y trefniadau datganoli presennol, mae ailagor unrhyw linellau a buddsoddi mewn gwelliannau i orsafoedd mawr yn dal yn gyfrifoldeb ar Lywodraeth y DU, ond ein swyddogaeth ni yw cyflwyno'r achosion busnes hynny sy'n ei gwneud mor atyniadol â phosibl i Lywodraeth y DU fuddsoddi ynddynt ac, ar yr un pryd, i barhau â'n brwydr - a bellach mae gennym ni gynghreiriaid cryf iawn mewn llawer o'r meiri metro - i ailgydbwyso buddsoddiad ar draws seilwaith rhwydwaith y DU.