English: We will also be abstaining on the substance of this motion on the supplementary budget. However, can I compliment the Government on its much improved presentation of the supplementary budget? I recall three years ago, having recently been elected to the Assembly, the first supplementary budget that I encountered. I had hoped that my experience, in terms of looking at UK Government budgets or English local government budgets or private sector budgets of one sort or another, might stand me in good stead for the role of assessing and interrogating the supplementary budget, but it didn't to anything like the degree that I had hoped. And, given at the time, I was on the Finance Committee and chairing the climate change committee, the largest I think, or certainly the most controversial element of the budget was to implement much of the UKIP manifesto in the area of slashing climate change projects. A little of that money was then put back in the second supplementary budget, but it was substantial, and it wasn't immediately easy to interrogate what was happening. I am pleased to see that not just the main expenditure groups but the budget expenditure lines are now on the Welsh Government's website for people to interrogate in a coherent way. Also, I think this is a very good document that we have associated with the budget. It is referred to on our system as a note, and I think elsewhere as document; in the annex it's described as an explanatory note, and I wonder if, in future, it could be headlined as that as well, so that we know what it is we're referring to and this can become a regular part of the process, because I did find it helpful in understanding what the various changes are within it. The most exciting changes, in some way, for me, are the absence of changes on the revenue side, and I think it's actually quite significant, because we've had six months that have gone past since the final budget. And, other things being equal, one might have expected some variance in the forecasts for the Welsh rates of income tax, the land transaction tax and the land disposals tax, given the uncertainty around forecasting those. And I'm not sure whether the reason we haven't seen variance may be because we haven't got the processes fully set up that we're now seeing with the Office for Budgetary Responsibility that's going to be assisting Welsh Government in forecasting those, or whether, genuinely, they've been looked at in detail and everything is exactly as the finance Minister expected, but I do recall, between the draft budget for 2019-20 and that being finalised, there was a £40 million reduction in the forecast for what we were going to take from the Welsh rates of revenue tax, so, very significant. And, of course, in Scotland, they have this £1 billion black hole they're dealing with. So, how confident are we of those zero variances? I see that we have saved £173,000 on the administration by HMRC of those two new taxes, and having served on the committee for both of those and looked at those numbers and thought that they were relatively generous to HMRC in terms of what the costing was going to be, my fear was that that money would just be spent by HMRC. So, the fact that they have found savings and have given them back to us is to be welcomed. We also have the £100,000 funding for the OBR, which I think will be well spent and we must keep that under careful review. On the allocations from general capital reserves, we say at 3.10 of the document I showed that a total of £85 million has been allocated from capital reserves to provide additional investment in social housing and trunk road and motorway maintenance. Firstly, can I just ask, is it non-controversial to describe maintenance of roads as capital expenditure? Is there an argument that that should properly be considered revenue resource, or is it a well-worn assumption within our accounting that that's the way it should be treated?
Welsh: Byddwn ni hefyd yn ymatal ar sylwedd y cynnig hwn ar y gyllideb atodol. Fodd bynnag, a gaf i ganmol y Llywodraeth am ei chyflwyniad gwell o lawer o'r gyllideb atodol? Rwy'n cofio dair blynedd yn ôl, yn fuan ar ôl imi gael fy ethol i'r Cynulliad, y gyllideb atodol gyntaf i mi ddod ar ei thraws. Roeddwn i wedi gobeithio y byddai fy mhrofiad, o ran edrych ar gyllidebau Llywodraeth y DU neu gyllidebau llywodraeth leol yn Lloegr neu gyllidebau sector preifat o ryw fath neu'i gilydd, o fudd imi ar gyfer y swydd o asesu a chwestiynu'r gyllideb atodol, ond nid oedd hynny'n wir o gwbl i'r graddau yr oeddwn i wedi ei obeithio. Ac, o gofio ar y pryd, roeddwn i ar y Pwyllgor Cyllid ac yn cadeirio'r pwyllgor ar y newid yn yr hinsawdd, yr elfen fwyaf rwy'n credu, neu yn sicr yr elfen fwyaf dadleuol o'r gyllideb oedd gweithredu llawer o faniffesto UKIP ym maes torri prosiectau newid hinsawdd. Rhoddwyd rhywfaint o'r arian hwnnw yn ôl wedyn yn yr ail gyllideb atodol, ond yr oedd yn sylweddol, ac nid oedd yn hawdd cwestiynu ar unwaith beth oedd yn digwydd. Rwy'n falch o weld nad y prif grwpiau gwariant yn unig sydd ar wefan Llywodraeth Cymru erbyn hyn, ond mae llinellau gwariant y gyllideb hefyd ar y wefan, er mwyn i bobl eu cwestiynu mewn ffordd gydlynol. Hefyd, rwy'n credu bod hon yn ddogfen dda iawn yr ydym ni wedi ei chysylltu â'r gyllideb. Cyfeirir ati ar ein system fel nodyn, ac fel dogfen mewn mannau eraill, rwy'n credu; yn yr atodiad caiff ei ddisgrifio fel nodyn esboniadol, a tybed a fyddai modd ei galw yn hynny yn y dyfodol, fel ein bod yn gwybod beth yr ydym ni'n cyfeirio ato a gallai hyn fod yn rhan reolaidd o'r broses, oherwydd roeddwn i'n ei gweld hi'n ddefnyddiol i ddeall y newidiadau amrywiol oddi mewn iddo. Y newidiadau mwyaf cyffrous, mewn rhyw ffordd, i mi, yw'r diffyg newidiadau ar yr ochr refeniw, ac rwy'n credu ei bod yn eithaf arwyddocaol mewn gwirionedd, oherwydd bod chwe mis wedi mynd heibio ers y gyllideb derfynol. Ac, os byddai popeth arall yn gyfartal, gallai rhywun fod wedi disgwyl rhywfaint o amrywio yn y rhagolygon ar gyfer cyfraddau treth incwm Cymru, y dreth trafodiadau tir a'r dreth gwarediadau tir, o gofio'r ansicrwydd ynghylch rhagweld y rheini. Ac nid wyf i'n siŵr ai'r rheswm nad ydym ni wedi gweld amrywio yw oherwydd nad ydym ni wedi sefydlu'n llawn y prosesau yr ydym yn eu gweld bellach yn y Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol a fydd yn cynorthwyo Llywodraeth Cymru i'w rhagweld, neu a ydyn nhw wedi'u hystyried yn fanwl, o ddifrif, a bod popeth yn union fel yr oedd y Gweinidog cyllid yn ei ddisgwyl, ond rwyf i'n cofio, rhwng y gyllideb ddrafft ar gyfer 2019-20 a'r gyllideb derfynol, y bu gostyngiad o £40 miliwn yn y rhagolwg o'r hyn yr oeddem ni'n mynd i'w gymryd o gyfraddau treth refeniw Cymru, felly sylweddol iawn. Ac, wrth gwrs, yn yr Alban, mae ganddyn nhw'r twll du hwn gwerth £1 biliwn y maen nhw'n ymdrin ag ef. Felly, pa mor hyderus ydym ni ynghylch y dim amrywiannau hynny? Rwy'n gweld ein bod ni wedi arbed £173,000 ar weinyddiaeth Cyllid a Thollau EM o'r ddwy dreth newydd hynny, ac o fod wedi gwasanaethu ar y pwyllgor ar gyfer y ddwy ac ystyried y ffigurau hynny a meddwl eu bod yn gymharol hael i Cyllid a Thollau EM o ran yr hyn y byddai'r gost, fy mhryder i oedd y byddai Cyllid a Thollau EM yn gwario'r arian hwnnw. Felly, mae'r ffaith eu bod wedi dod o hyd i arbedion ac wedi'u rhoi yn ôl i ni i'w groesawu. Mae gennym ni hefyd y cyllid gwerth £100,000 ar gyfer y Swyddfa Cyfrifoldeb Cyllidebol, ac rwy'n credu y bydd yn cael ei wario'n dda ac mae'n rhaid inni barhau i adolygu hynny'n ofalus. O ran y dyraniadau o gronfeydd cyfalaf cyffredinol, rydym yn dweud ym mhwynt 3.10 o'r ddogfen a ddangosais fod cyfanswm o £85 miliwn wedi'i ddyrannu o'r cronfeydd cyfalaf wrth gefn i ddarparu buddsoddiad ychwanegol mewn tai cymdeithasol a gwaith cynnal a chadw cefnffyrdd a thraffyrdd. Yn gyntaf, a gaf i ofyn, a yw'n annadleuol i ddisgrifio gwaith cynnal a chadw ffyrdd fel gwariant cyfalaf? A oes dadl y dylid ystyried hynny'n briodol fel adnodd refeniw, neu a yw'n dybiaeth sefydledig o fewn ein cyfrifyddu mai dyna'r ffordd y dylid ei drin?