English: Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm very pleased to be able to respond to many Members who've shown great interest and spoken with passion about rail services in Wales and, indeed, across Britain. I'm just going to deal first and foremost though with some of the misinformation and false statements that have been made concerning the service that Transport for Wales are managing and also historic levels of investment in the Wales route network. First of all, in terms of performance - and, of course, this forms the heart of the Conservative amendments - the current public performance measures, which are determined by whether a service departs within five minutes of scheduled arrival, show that 95.1 per cent are meeting the current period PPM level. That compares nationally to just 90 per cent. In the previous period, which ran from December through to January, 91.98 per cent were meeting that level of service, compared to the national average of 87.3 per cent. In addition, in terms of cancellations on the Transport for Wales route, 1.6 per cent of services were cancelled compared last year at this time to 2.1 per cent. Clearly, Transport for Wales is delivering better services and improved punctuality. In terms of the figures relating to historic levels of investment and future levels of investment, several Members identified the figure that Professor Mark Barry has quoted in his report: £1 billion should have come our way. A number of Members, like Huw Irranca-Davies, spoke about how Wales has been deprived of that vital investment. Now, why is that important? It's important because Conservative Members referenced the increase in Network Rail budget of 24 per cent over the next control period. However, what Members in this Chamber perhaps are not aware of is that that increase of 24 per cent in the next control period is just for maintenance and renewals, not for new services, new lines and new interventions. And arguably, you could say that, actually, such an increase would not be required if the Government had been maintaining our railways properly since 2010. That, in turn, is what has led to a 28-year backlog in Wales. And, indeed, much was made of the new trains running between south Wales and London. Well, indeed, there are new trains and they are faster, but they're still only going to get you from south Wales to London in the same time that it would have taken you in 1977. That is the fact of the matter, and why is that? Because our infrastructure is creaking. Now, I think it was a bit rich of Mark Isherwood to suggest that other politicians are trying to grab headlines with their rhetoric, and would he really argue that Wales has had its fair share in rail infrastructure investment? On these benches, we would say absolutely not. Now, in terms of HS2, he asked a direction question and I'll give him a direct answer: HS2 has the potential to greatly benefit Britain as a whole and, in particular, north Wales, but there will be an impact on south Wales unless mitigating investments are made along the south Wales main line. That is why we have been consistent in saying to the UK Government, 'Bring forward the business cases for improving the south Wales main line, particularly between Cardiff and Swansea'. Mark Isherwood also talked about the need for devolution to north Wales over decisions concerning rail and transport as a whole, and he asked when we're going to make a statement. Well, if he was to read the White Paper on public transport, he would see that very statement about joint transport authorities having more control and responsibility within that document, and so I hope he will support that. In terms of the motion from the Conservatives that references the growth and city deals - 'Notes the scale of the contribution to Welsh rail infrastructure that the UK Government's city and growth deals will make' - what is the scale? Is there any scale of investment? In the north Wales growth deal, for example, certainly we would note it if there was any investment, but I don't see a penny going to north Wales as a consequence of that particular growth deal. I'm conscious that many Members spoke about services in their own constituencies, and I am pleased that the Welsh Labour Government is in a position to be able to improve rolling stock, improve services, increase the number of services, improve punctuality and also ensure that stations are more attractive places. Rhun ap Iorwerth spoke about his personal experiences of travelling on the express service between north and south Wales. I think it showed why the previous contract was not fit for purpose, why it let us down. It also shows why we're right to be spending £800 million on new rolling stock. I'm pleased to say that new trains on the north-south service will be introduced later this year, and there'll be three express services per day. But, thirdly, it shows why the funding model is broken. And I think all of us around this Chamber could surely agree that the model that's been adopted for infrastructure across Britain for many, many years has been biased towards the more intensely urbanised areas of the country and they, generally, lie in the south-east of England. Now, we've said that we wish to ensure that we grow inclusively the economy of all parts of Wales, and in order to do that we'll be publishing regional indicative budgets to drive investment decisions across the regions. So, my point to those Members who are wavering about whether to support the motion today is simple: if you believe that Wales should get its fair share of rail investment funding, if you believe that we should then have greater control over where that money is spent, and if you believe that it should be improved - rail services, rail infrastructure - right across Wales, then please vote for the motion.
Welsh: Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Rwyf yn falch iawn o ymateb i lawer o Aelodau sydd wedi dangos diddordeb mawr ac wedi siarad ag angerdd am y gwasanaethau rheilffyrdd yng Nghymru ac, yn wir, ledled Prydain. Er hynny rwyf yn mynd i ymdrin yn gyntaf â'r wybodaeth ffug a rhai o'r datganiadau anghywir a wnaed ynghylch y gwasanaeth a reolir gan Trafnidiaeth Cymru a hefyd y lefelau hanesyddol o fuddsoddiad yn rhwydwaith llwybr Cymru. Yn gyntaf oll, o ran perfformiad - ac, wrth gwrs, mae hwn yn ganolog i welliannau'r Ceidwadwyr - mae'r mesurau perfformiad cyhoeddus presennol, sy'n cael eu penderfynu pan fo gwasanaeth yn gadael o fewn pum munud i'r amser cyrraedd a drefnwyd, yn dangos bod 95.1 y cant yn cyrraedd y lefel PPM presennol. Mae hynny'n cymharu'n genedlaethol â 90 y cant yn unig. Yn y cyfnod blaenorol, rhwng mis Rhagfyr a mis Ionawr, roedd 91.98 y cant yn bodloni'r lefel honno o wasanaeth, o gymharu â chyfartaledd cenedlaethol o 87.3 y cant. Hefyd, o ran achosion o ganslo ar lwybr Trafnidiaeth Cymru, cafodd 1.6 y cant o wasanaethau eu canslo o gymharu â 2.1 y cant yr adeg hon y llynedd. Yn amlwg, mae Trafnidiaeth Cymru yn darparu gwasanaethau gwell ac mae prydlondeb wedi gwella. O ran y ffigurau sy'n ymwneud â lefelau hanesyddol o fuddsoddi a lefelau o fuddsoddi yn y dyfodol, nododd nifer o Aelodau'r ffigur y mae'r Athro Mark Barry wedi ei ddyfynnu yn ei adroddiad: fe ddylem ni fod wedi cael £1 biliwn. Siaradodd nifer o Aelodau, megis Huw Irranca-Davies, ynghylch sut mae Cymru wedi'i hamddifadu o'r buddsoddiad hanfodol hwnnw. Nawr, pam mae hynny'n bwysig? Mae'n bwysig oherwydd roedd Aelodau Ceidwadol yn cyfeirio at y cynnydd yng nghyllideb Network Rail o 24 y cant dros y cyfnod rheoli nesaf. Fodd bynnag, yr hyn nad yw Aelodau yn y Siambr hon yn ymwybodol ohono efallai, yw bod y cynnydd hwnnw o 24 y cant yn y cyfnod rheoli nesaf ar gyfer gwaith cynnal a chadw ac adnewyddu yn unig, nid ar gyfer gwasanaethau newydd, llinellau newydd nac ymyriadau newydd. A gellid dadlau mewn gwirionedd na fyddai angen cynnydd o'r fath petai'r Llywodraeth wedi bod yn cynnal a chadw ein rheilffyrdd yn iawn ers 2010. Dyna, yn ei dro, sydd wedi arwain at ôl-groniad dros 28 o flynyddoedd yng Nghymru. Ac, yn wir, cafodd trenau newydd rhwng de Cymru a Llundain dipyn o sylw. Wel yn wir, fe geir trenau newydd ac maen nhw'n gyflymach, ond maen nhw'n parhau i'ch cludo chi o dde Cymru i Lundain yn yr un amser ag y byddai wedi ei gymryd ym 1977. Dyna'r ffaith, a pham hynny? Oherwydd bod ein seilwaith yn gwegian. Nawr rwy'n teimlo bod Mark Isherwood braidd yn hŷ yn awgrymu bod y gwleidyddion eraill yn ceisio cipio'r penawdau gyda'u rhethreg, ac a yw'n dadlau mewn gwirionedd bod Cymru wedi cael ei chyfran deg o fuddsoddiad seilwaith rheilffyrdd? Ar y meinciau hyn, fe fyddem ni'n dweud, dim o gwbl. Nawr, o ran HS2, gofynnodd gwestiwn am gyfeiriad ac fe roddaf i ateb uniongyrchol: mae gan HS2 y potensial i fod o fudd mawr i Brydain gyfan, yn benodol, gogledd Cymru, ond bydd yn effeithio ar dde Cymru oni bai y gwneir buddsoddiadau lliniaru ar hyd prif reilffordd de Cymru. Dyna pam yr ydym ni wedi bod yn gyson wrth ddweud wrth Lywodraeth y DU, 'Cyflwynwch yr achosion busnes ar gyfer gwella prif reilffordd de Cymru, yn enwedig rhwng Caerdydd ac Abertawe'. Soniodd Mark Isherwood hefyd am yr angen i ddatganoli penderfyniadau yn ymwneud â rheilffyrdd a thrafnidiaeth yn gyffredinol i ogledd Cymru, a gofynnodd pa bryd y byddwn ni'n gwneud datganiad. Wel, petai'n darllen y Papur Gwyn ar drafnidiaeth gyhoeddus, byddai'n gweld yr union ddatganiad am awdurdodau trafnidiaeth ar y cyd yn cael mwy o reolaeth a chyfrifoldeb o fewn y ddogfen honno, ac felly gobeithio y bydd yn cefnogi hynny. O ran y cynnig gan y Ceidwadwyr sy'n cyfeirio at dwf a bargeinion dinesig - Yn nodi maint y cyfraniad y bydd bargenion twf a dinesig Llywodraeth y DU yn eu gwneud tuag at seilwaith rheilffyrdd Cymru ' - beth yw'r maint? A oes unrhyw raddfa fuddsoddi? Ym margen twf gogledd Cymru, er enghraifft, yn sicr byddem ni'n ei nodi petai buddsoddiad, ond nid wyf yn gweld ceiniog yn mynd i ogledd Cymru o ganlyniad i'r fargen twf arbennig honno. Rwy'n ymwybodol bod llawer o Aelodau wedi siarad am wasanaethau yn eu hetholaethau eu hunain, ac rwy'n falch bod Llywodraeth Lafur Cymru mewn sefyllfa i wella cerbydau, gwella gwasanaethau, cynyddu nifer y gwasanaethau, gwella prydlondeb a hefyd sicrhau bod gorsafoedd yn lleoedd mwy deniadol. Dywedodd Rhun ap Iorwerth am ei brofiadau personol wrth deithio ar y gwasanaeth cyflym rhwng y gogledd a'r de. Rwy'n credu ei fod yn dangos pam nad oedd y contract blaenorol yn addas i'r diben, pam ei fod wedi ein siomi. Mae hefyd yn dangos pam ei bod hi'n briodol i ni wario £800 miliwn ar gerbydau newydd. Rwy'n falch o ddweud y bydd trenau newydd ar y gwasanaeth rhwng y gogledd a'r de yn cael eu cyflwyno yn ddiweddarach eleni, ac y bydd tri gwasanaeth cyflym y dydd. Ond, yn drydydd, mae'n dangos pam fod y model ariannu yn ddiffygiol. Ac rwy'n credu y gallai pob un ohonom ni o amgylch y Siambr hon gytuno bod y model a fabwysiadwyd ar gyfer seilwaith ledled Prydain ers llawer iawn o flynyddoedd wedi rhoi'r flaenoriaeth i ardaloedd mwy trefol a dwys y wlad ac mae'r ardaloedd hynny, yn gyffredinol, yn ne-ddwyrain Lloegr. Nawr, rydym ni wedi dweud ein bod eisiau sicrhau ein bod yn tyfu'r economi'n gynhwysol ym mhob rhan o Gymru, ac er mwyn gwneud hynny byddwn yn cyhoeddi cyllidebau dangosol rhanbarthol i sbarduno penderfyniadau buddsoddi ar draws y rhanbarthau. Felly, fy mhwynt i i'r Aelodau hynny sydd yn petruso ynghylch pa un a ddylen nhw gefnogi'r cynnig heddiw yn syml yw: Os ydych chi'n credu y dylai Cymru gael ei chyfran deg o gyllid buddsoddi yn y rheilffyrdd, os ydych chi'n credu y dylem ni gael mwy o reolaeth dros ble y gwerir yr arian hwnnw wedyn, ac os ydych chi'n credu y dylid ei wella - gwasanaethau rheilffyrdd, seilwaith rheilffyrdd - ar hyd a lled Cymru, yna pleidleisiwch dros y cynnig os gwelwch yn dda.