English: I agree with the Member about the need for very significant investment, but the investment comes from water companies. They are responsible, not the Welsh Government. There is money that the Welsh Government invests, and we have £40 million already being spent in this field over the next three years, but the responsibility does not lie with the Welsh Government. The responsibility lies with the water companies, and we are very lucky in Wales to have a not-for-profit water company so that millions and millions of pounds are not siphoned off from bill payers into the profits. This is the irony, Llywydd, isn't it? We have a publicly owned water industry in the United Kingdom; it's just that it's owned by the French Government and the German Government, not by our own Government, where those profits would be reinvested, as they are in Wales, and we're fortunate to be in that position. I hope that the next quinquennial review will see the sort of step change in investment in dealing with the issues. I do agree with the Member, and I agree with Peter Fox, that these are serious matters and we deserve to have a serious debate about it in Wales. And that does mean that we have to be prepared to face some challenging conversations. I will chair a summit at the Royal Welsh Show on phosphate pollution in our rivers. Yesterday, the Minister published research findings that have been carried out by independent researchers funded by Dŵr Cymru into the River Usk. It looked at daily levels of phosphorus in the river. Twenty-one per cent of those daily loads are the result of sewage treatment works. Those are elderly works without the modern levels of sophistication, and they need to be upgraded so that that can be reduced. Twelve per cent comes from what the researchers describe as other categories: septic tanks, urban run-off. One per cent comes from combined sewage outflow areas, and 67 per cent comes as a result of agricultural use of the land along the riverbanks. That's why it is necessary to have a mature, non-blaming conversation with our farmer colleagues. I'm going to be absolutely clear about that. I'm not giving you these figures in any sense of wanting to point the finger at anybody, but it is just to illustrate the fact that if we are to have the impact on our rivers that I know the Member will want to see, and that's shared around the Chamber, you have to have a mature conversation in which all the interests that have a part to play are prepared to be part of that conversation, to recognise the actions that they can take. Cumulatively, that will lead to making the difference.
Welsh: Rwy'n cytuno â'r Aelod ynglŷn â'r angen am fuddsoddiad sylweddol iawn, ond daw'r buddsoddiad gan gwmnïau dŵr. Nhw sy'n gyfrifol, nid Llywodraeth Cymru. Mae arian y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei fuddsoddi, ac mae gennym £40 miliwn eisoes yn cael ei wario yn y maes hwn dros y tair blynedd nesaf, ond nid Llywodraeth Cymru sy'n gyfrifol. Y cwmnïau dŵr sy'n gyfrifol am hyn, ac rydym yn ffodus iawn yng Nghymru o gael cwmni dŵr nid-er-elw fel na chaiff miliynau a miliynau o bunnau eu tynnu oddi ar dalwyr biliau er mwyn elw. Dyma'r eironi, Llywydd, onid e? Mae gennym ddiwydiant dŵr sy'n eiddo i'r cyhoedd yn y Deyrnas Unedig; ond mae'n eiddo i Lywodraeth Ffrainc a Llywodraeth yr Almaen, nid ein Llywodraeth ni, lle byddai'r elw hwnnw'n cael ei ailfuddsoddi, fel y mae yng Nghymru, ac rydym yn ffodus o fod yn y sefyllfa honno. Rwy'n gobeithio y bydd yr adolygiad pum mlynedd nesaf yn gweld y math o newid sylweddol mewn buddsoddiad wrth ymdrin â'r problemau. Rwy'n cytuno â'r Aelod, ac rwy'n cytuno â Peter Fox, fod y rhain yn faterion difrifol ac rydym yn haeddu cael dadl ddifrifol yn eu cylch yng Nghymru. Ac mae hynny'n golygu bod yn rhaid i ni fod yn barod i wynebu rhai sgyrsiau heriol. Byddaf yn cadeirio uwchgynhadledd yn Sioe Frenhinol Cymru ar lygredd ffosffad yn ein hafonydd. Ddoe, cyhoeddodd y Gweinidog ganfyddiadau ymchwil sydd wedi'u cynnal gan ymchwilwyr annibynnol a ariannwyd gan Dŵr Cymru i Afon Wysg. Edrychodd ar lefelau dyddiol ffosfforws yn yr afon. Mae 21 y cant o'r llwythi dyddiol hynny o ganlyniad i waith trin carthion. Mae'r rheini'n hen weithiau heb y lefelau modern o soffistigeiddrwydd, ac mae angen eu huwchraddio fel y gellir lleihau hynny. Daw deuddeg y cant o'r hyn y mae'r ymchwilwyr yn ei ddisgrifio fel categorïau eraill: tanciau carthion, dŵr ffo trefol. Daw un y cant o ardaloedd all-lif carthion cyfunol, a daw 67 y cant o ganlyniad i ddefnydd amaethyddol o'r tir ar hyd glannau'r afon. Dyna pam mae angen cael sgwrs aeddfed, heb feio gyda'n cydweithwyr sy'n ffermwyr. Rwy'n mynd i fod yn gwbl glir am hynny. Nid wyf yn rhoi'r ffigurau hyn i chi gan fy mod yn dymuno pwyntio bys, ond dim ond i egluro'r ffaith, os ydym ni am gael yr effaith ar ein hafonydd y gwn y bydd yr Aelod eisiau ei gweld, ac mae hynny'n cael ei rannu o amgylch y Siambr, mae'n rhaid i chi gael sgwrs aeddfed pryd y mae'r holl fuddiannau sydd â rhan i'w chwarae yn barod i fod yn rhan o'r sgwrs honno, i gydnabod y camau y gallan nhw eu cymryd. Gyda'i gilydd, bydd hynny'n arwain at wneud y gwahaniaeth.