English: Starting with the European Investment Bank, Nick Ramsay said the time we have to make further approaches to the EIB, and I think Adam Price was also perhaps presaging his remarks potentially on our not being part of the EIB. In my party I don't think we've any objection in principle to the EIB. I think there's a negotiation about how it would work with us outside the European Union, and the European Union member states will clearly have majority ownership of it, but at the moment, if you look at its investment criteria and the way it works, there is at least the theoretical possibility of an agreement in the future, whether by shareholders' agreement or otherwise, in which case I don't believe UK participation is being ruled out. And I would just encourage the Minister to perhaps expand on the extent to which Wales benefits from current lending. Nick Ramsay, I think, mentioned perhaps an element of foot-dragging - I don't know if that's an over-emphasis on what he said in terms of applications before - and have we seen an upward trajectory in terms of loans being dispersed to Wales. And does the Cabinet Secretary think that a sensible approach is to look at this pragmatically, depending on what can be agreed, given the costs of setting up a new institutional bit? It would be wonderful if that were in Wales. There are, I think, some sensible things to welcome very much in this statement. Could the Cabinet Secretary explain just a little more about the joint registered social landlords, I think he referred to, and improving their borrowing powers? Clearly, if you've a larger group of organisations, you're going to be able to set off the risk within them, and that will give comfort to lenders who may lend more or at a lower interest rate. But how are the registered social landlords going to, between them, organise things if, in a worst case scenario, one of them were to default on one of these loans? Could I also ask the Minister about the Velindre Cancer Centre? His party at a UK level, and certainly his leader, has argued quite strongly against privatisation of the NHS and there has been a certain scepticism from many on the left about majority private ownership in this context. Could he just explain why he's so comfortable with having 80 to 85 per cent private ownership of this organisation, and what processes he has to make sure that it operates in the interests of the patients? I'd also just slightly caution him on the ONS - going and having an agreement with them about what might go on the balance sheet of the public sector and what might not. The UK Government tried this at a far, far larger scale for Network Rail, and then found that that later came unstuck. Is that not also a risk for us? And if that were the case, what impact would that have on the £1 billion borrowing limit that he described? Could I also just, again, caution slightly in terms of some of the numbers and how he presents this? We're talking about £1.5 billion potentially of extra investment, but when he talks about the actual public sector contribution of £3.6 million going up to £9 million for the housing finance grant, these sums seem to be leveraged up by quite a large multiple, and I just wonder about the potential risk involved with that. He refers with enthusiasm to the Welsh Government's other innovative financial instruments. There was quite a lot of that around in the banks before the financial crisis, and I just wonder if there is a risk that we are entering into instruments either that we don't fully understand, or are leading to a degree of leverage that creates an element of risk for the public purse that we might not perhaps want. He said that there was only 1 per cent PFI, traditionally, in Wales, but my major criticism of PFI is that it was trying to lever everything off the balance sheet and everything was done to that aim. The way he describes the negotiations with the ONS and what he's doing here, I just wonder, slightly, whether there's an over-emphasis on getting things off the public balance sheet.
Welsh: Gan ddechrau gyda Banc Buddsoddi Ewrop, dywedodd Nick Ramsay yr amser sydd gennym i fynd at Fanc Buddsoddi Ewrop eto, ac rwy'n credu fod Adam Price hefyd efallai yn argoeli yn ei sylwadau na fyddem ni'n rhan o Fanc Buddsoddi Ewrop o bosibl. Yn fy mhlaid i, nid wyf yn credu bod gennym ni unrhyw wrthwynebiad i Fanc Buddsoddi Ewrop mewn egwyddor. Rwy'n credu bod trafodaeth ynglŷn â sut y byddai'n gweithio gyda ni y tu allan i'r Undeb Ewropeaidd, ac aelod-wladwriaethau'r Undeb Ewropeaidd fydd berchen ar y mwyafrif ohono, yn amlwg, ond ar hyn o bryd, os edrychwch chi ar ei feini prawf buddsoddi a'r ffordd y mae'n gweithio, ceir y posibilrwydd damcaniaethol o leiaf o gytundeb yn y dyfodol, pa un a drwy gytundeb cyfranddalwyr neu fel arall, ac os felly nid wyf yn credu bod cyfranogiad y DU yn cael ei ddiystyru. A byddwn yn annog y Gweinidog i ymhelaethu efallai ar y graddau y mae Cymru'n elwa o fenthyca cyfredol. Soniwyd gan Nick Ramsay, rwy'n credu, am elfen o lusgo traed efallai - nid wyf yn gwybod a yw hynny'n or-bwyslais ar yr hyn y dywedodd am geisiadau yn gynharach - ac rydym ni wedi gweld trywydd ar i fyny o ran benthyciadau yn cael eu dosbarthu i Gymru. Ac a yw Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet o'r farn mai dull synhwyrol yw ystyried hyn yn bragmataidd, yn dibynnu ar yr hyn y gellir ei gytuno, o ystyried y costau o sefydlu darn sefydliadol newydd? Byddai'n wych pe bai hynny yng Nghymru. Ceir, rwy'n credu, rhai pethau synhwyrol i'w croesawu'n fawr iawn yn y datganiad hwn. A allai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet esbonio ychydig bach mwy am y landlordiaid cymdeithasol wedi'u cofrestru ar y cyd, rwy'n meddwl y cyfeiriodd atynt, a gwella eu pwerau benthyca? Yn amlwg, os oes gennych chi grŵp mwy o sefydliadau, rydych chi'n mynd i allu gwrthbwyso'r risg o fewn iddynt, a bydd hynny o gysur i fenthycwyr a allai roi benthyg mwy neu ar gyfradd llog is. Ond sut y mae'r landlordiaid cymdeithasol cofrestredig yn mynd i drefnu pethau rhyngddynt, pe bai, o ystyried y sefyllfa waethaf bosibl, un ohonynt yn diffygdalu ar un o'r benthyciadau hyn? A gaf i ofyn hefyd i'r Gweinidog am Ganolfan Ganser Felindre? Mae ei blaid ef ar lefel y DU, ac yn sicr ei arweinydd, wedi dadlau yn eithaf cryf yn erbyn preifateiddio'r GIG a bu amheuaeth benodol gan lawer ar y chwith am berchnogaeth breifat fwyafrifol yn y cyd-destun hwn. A allai esbonio pam ei fod mor gyfforddus â chael perchnogaeth breifat o 80 i 85 y cant o'r sefydliad hwn, a pha brosesau sydd ganddo i wneud yn siŵr ei fod yn gweithredu er budd y cleifion? Byddwn yn cymell ychydig o bwyll ynghylch y Swyddfa Ystadegau Gwladol hefyd - o ran mynd a chael cytundeb gyda nhw am yr hyn a allai fynd ar fantolen y sector cyhoeddus a'r hyn na allai. Rhoddodd Llywodraeth y DU gynnig ar hyn ar raddfa lawer, lawer mwy ar gyfer Network Rail, ac yna canfod bod hynny wedi mynd i drafferthion. Onid yw hynny'n risg i ni hefyd? A phe bai hynny'n digwydd, pa effaith fyddai hynny'n ei chael ar y terfyn benthyca o £1 biliwn a ddisgrifiodd? A gaf i hefyd, unwaith eto, gymell ychydig o bwyll o ran rhai o'r rhifau a sut y mae'n cyflwyno hyn? Rydym ni'n sôn am £1.5 biliwn o fuddsoddiad ychwanegol o bosibl, ond pan mae'n sôn am gyfraniad sector cyhoeddus gwirioneddol o £3.6 miliwn yn mynd i fyny i £9 miliwn ar gyfer y grant cyllid tai, mae'n ymddangos bod y symiau hyn wedi eu trosoleddu gan luosrif eithaf mawr, a meddwl ydw i am y perygl posibl sy'n gysylltiedig â hynny. Mae'n cyfeirio gyda brwdfrydedd at offerynnau ariannol arloesol eraill Llywodraeth Cymru. Roedd cryn dipyn o hynny i'w weld yn y banciau cyn yr argyfwng ariannol, ac rwy'n meddwl tybed a oes risg ein bod ni'n ymgymryd ag offerynnau nad ydym yn eu deall yn llawn, neu sy'n arwain at faint trosoledd sy'n creu elfen o risg i bwrs y wlad na fyddem ei eisiau o bosibl. Dywedodd mai dim ond Menter Cyllid Preifat gwerth 1 y cant sydd yng Nghymru yn draddodiadol, ond fy meirniadaeth fawr o Fenter Cyllid Preifat yw ei bod yn ceisio trosoleddu popeth oddi ar y fantolen a bod popeth yn cael ei wneud i'r perwyl hwnnw. Y ffordd y mae'n disgrifio'r trafodaethau gyda'r Swyddfa Ystadegau Gwladol a'r hyn y mae'n ei wneud yma, rwy'n meddwl braidd, tybed a oes gor-bwyslais ar dynnu pethau oddi ar y fantolen gyhoeddus.