English: No - to the second. We've been here before, where VisitBritain, or the British Tourist Authority, as it was, was responsible for tourism, and I think it's right to say that they looked at London, Scotland and Stratford, and virtually nowhere else. Of course the problem with VisitBritain now is that it's the same as VisitEngland, so there's a fundamental problem there that couldn't arise in the private sector. People would say, 'That wouldn't be allowed - you're representing four nations but also representing one nation.' That makes no sense whatsoever, so, no, we wouldn't want to see that. What's the resolution here? This is true of tourism and European structural funds, and it's also true of agriculture. A fund should be created outwith Barnett. The regulations governing that fund should be the same as they are now, so there would be a system in place and there would be rules and regulations in place so that people could access that capital or revenue funding. But that system wouldn't change until there was agreement from all Governments in the UK. The same is true of agriculture: we wouldn't want to see agricultural funding Barnettised because we'd lose out, and I don't think that farmers would want to see farm payments competing with health and education, in terms of where that money should be spent. So, for me, the way to do this is to say, 'Well, this is the pot of European money available now. That should be replicated at a UK level, and the rules and regulations, generally speaking, shouldn't change.' But the last thing that should happen is that the UK Government should get hold of any such fund and manage that fund in a new, central way, without any agreement from other Governments.
Welsh: Na - i'r ail. Rŷm ni wedi bod yma o'r blaen, lle'r oedd VisitBritain neu'r British Tourist Authority, fel yr oedd e, yn gyfrifol am dwristiaeth, ac rwy'n credu ei bod yn iawn i ddweud eu bod nhw'n edrych ar Lundain, yr Alban a Stratford, a braidd ar unman arall. Wrth gwrs, y broblem ar hyn o bryd gyda VisitBritain yw ei fod yr un peth â VisitEngland. Nawr, mae yna broblem fanna na allai fyth godi yn y sector breifat. Byddai pobl yn dweud, 'Gall hynny ddim digwydd - rydych chi'n cynrychioli pedair gwlad a hefyd, ar yr un pryd, yn cynrychioli un.' Nid yw hynny'n gwneud unrhyw fath o synnwyr, so, na, fyddwn ni ddim yn moyn gweld hynny. Beth yw'r ffordd o ddatrys hyn? Mae hyn yn wir am dwristiaeth a chronfeydd Ewropeaidd, ac mae'n wir hefyd am amaeth. Dylai cronfa o arian gael ei chreu tu fas i Barnett. Dylai'r rheoliadau sydd yn llywodraethu'r gronfa honno fod yr un peth ag y maen nhw nawr, so byddai system o reolau mewn lle er mwyn i bobl allu cael mynediad at gyfalaf neu hefyd at refeniw. Ond ni fyddai'r system hynny yn newid nes bod yna gytundeb gan bob Llywodraeth yn y Deyrnas Unedig. A'r un peth gydag amaeth: ni fyddem ni'n moyn gweld arian amaeth yn mynd i mewn Barnett; byddem ni'n colli arian o achos hynny, ac nid ydw i'n credu y byddai ffermwyr yn moyn gweld arian taliadau ffermio yn cystadlu ag iechyd ac addysg, ynglŷn â lle y dylai'r arian hynny fod. So, i fi, y ffordd o wneud hwn yw dweud, 'Wel, hwn yw'r crochan yn fan hyn o arian Ewropeaidd sydd ar gael nawr. Dylai hynny gael ei ail-greu neu ei gadw ar lefel Brydeinig, ac ni ddylai'r rheoliadau yn gyffredinol newid.' Ond y peth diwethaf a ddylai ddigwydd yw gweld Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig yn cael gafael ar unrhyw gronfa a rheoli'r gronfa mewn ffordd newydd, a heb gytundeb oddi wrth neb arall.