English: Llywydd, I'm sad to say that the particular example that the Member refers to is an object lesson in how the fund does not meet the needs of Wales. Transport for Wales had a plan to increase services on the Wrexham to Bidston line to two trains an hour from May of this year, from this month. Now, it will not be able to do so. It's not been able to do so because Network Rail has refused permission for those two trains an hour, because there has been an objection from a freight carrier, saying that two trains an hour would interfere with its day timetable for carrying freight. All that could have been avoided had that levelling-up fund bid gone forward - a bid supported by all the local players, a bid supported by the Welsh Government and, astonishingly, supported by the Department for Transport in the UK Government as well. So, here you have a scheme, supported by every level of government that you can imagine, that failed to get funding by the levelling-up fund, and it now means that Transport for Wales cannot go ahead with the timetable improvements that they would have introduced this May, because the matter remains in the hands of the Office of Rail and Road. What does this illustrate, Llywydd? Well, it illustrates, to my mind, that in a fund, over which there has been no discussion at all with the Welsh Government, funding that ought to have come to Wales - . Remember that the Treasury originally said that there would be Barnett consequentials of the levelling-up fund, only to change its mind a short number of weeks later. So, here is funding that is fragmented, that is unpredictable, where there is blurred accountability, where the risk of duplication and poor value for money is on the surface of the way that that fund has been constructed. It leads to the perverse outcomes that you've heard from Carolyn Thomas this afternoon and, I'm afraid, it's residents of north Wales who are the losers.
Welsh: Llywydd, mae'n drist gen i ddweud bod yr enghraifft benodol y mae'r Aelod yn cyfeirio ati yn enghraifft dda o'r ffordd nad yw'r gronfa'n diwallu anghenion Cymru. Roedd gan Trafnidiaeth Cymru gynllun i gynyddu gwasanaethau ar y rheilffordd rhwng Wrecsam a Bidston i ddau drên yr awr o fis Mai eleni, o'r mis hwn ymlaen. Yn awr, ni fydd yn gallu gwneud hynny. Nid yw wedi gallu gwneud hynny oherwydd bod Network Rail wedi gwrthod caniatâd ar gyfer y ddau drên yr awr hynny, oherwydd bu gwrthwynebiad gan gludwr nwyddau, gan ddweud y byddai dau drên yr awr yn ymyrryd â'i amserlen ddydd ar gyfer cludo nwyddau. Gellid bod wedi osgoi'r cyfan pe bai'r cais hwnnw am gronfa ffyniant bro wedi ei gyflwyno - cais a gefnogwyd gan yr holl bartïon lleol, cais a gefnogwyd gan Lywodraeth Cymru ac, yn rhyfeddol, gan yr Adran Drafnidiaeth yn Llywodraeth y DU hefyd. Felly, yma mae gennych chi gynllun, gyda chefnogaeth pob lefel o lywodraeth y gallwch ei ddychmygu, a fethodd â chael cyllid gan y gronfa ffyniant bro, ac mae'n golygu yn awr na all Trafnidiaeth Cymru fwrw ymlaen â'r gwelliannau i'r amserlen y bydden nhw wedi eu cyflwyno ym mis Mai eleni, oherwydd bod y mater yn dal yn nwylo'r Swyddfa Rheilffyrdd a'r Ffyrdd. Beth mae hyn yn ei ddangos, Llywydd? Wel, mae'n dangos, yn fy marn i, mewn cronfa, na chafwyd trafodaeth o gwbl gyda Llywodraeth Cymru yn ei chylch, fod cyllid a ddylai fod wedi dod i Gymru - . Cofiwch i'r Trysorlys ddweud yn wreiddiol y byddai symiau canlyniadol Barnett o'r gronfa ffyniant bro, dim ond iddo newid ei feddwl ychydig wythnosau'n ddiweddarach. Felly, dyma gyllid sy'n dameidiog, sy'n anrhagweladwy, lle mae atebolrwydd aneglur, lle mae'r risg o ddyblygu a gwerth gwael am arian yn deillio o'r ffordd y mae'r gronfa honno wedi ei llunio. Mae'n arwain at y canlyniadau gwrthnysig yr ydych wedi eu clywed gan Carolyn Thomas y prynhawn yma ac, mae arnaf ofn, trigolion y gogledd sydd ar eu colled.