The next item of business this afternoon is a statement by the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language on the Additional Learning Needs and Educational Tribunal (Wales) Bill, and I call on the Minister to make his statement—Alun Davies.

Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd. I was pleased yesterday to introduce the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Bill, with its explanatory memorandum, to the National Assembly. Reform of the current statutory framework for supporting learners with special educational needs and learning difficulties and/or disabilities has been on the agenda for over a decade. We are now making it a reality.

Nearly a quarter of children and young people in Wales will have some form of additional learning need during their education. The current legislative framework for supporting them is based on a model introduced more than 30 years ago, which is widely recognised as being no longer fit for purpose. The Bill proposes a complete overhaul of the system, which will affect nearly every early years, school and further education setting in Wales.

The Bill responds to concerns from families, who say that the current system is inefficient, bureaucratic and costly, and is not either child-centred or user-friendly. Needs are sometimes identified late, and interventions are not planned or implemented in a timely or effective way. Families say they have to battle at each stage of the process to get the right support for their child, and that they do not know where to turn for advice and information. The Bill targets directly these concerns, whilst building on what works well in the current system. It will place the learner at the heart of the process, and make the system more equitable, far simpler, and less adversarial for those involved.

The Bill will create a single statutory system to support children and young people from birth through to 25 who have additional learning needs, instead of the two separate systems currently operating. It will replace the terms ‘special educational needs’ and ‘learning difficulties and/or disabilities’ with the new term ‘additional learning needs’. It will replace the system of statementing, and create a single statutory plan—the individual development plan—to replace the existing range of statutory and non-statutory plans for learners, ensuring equity of rights regardless of the learner’s level of need or the educational setting they attend.

It will ensure the views of learners and parents are considered throughout the planning process, so that they view it as something that is done with them rather than done to them, and that the child or young person is at the centre of everything. And, finally, it will encourage better collaboration between agencies, by introducing and establishing new statutory roles in health and education, so that needs are identified early and the right support is put in place.

The Bill has, of course, already been the subject of extensive consultation. It has been informed by action research and two White Paper consultations. A draft of the Bill was published during 2015 for consultation, and was the subject of pre-legislative scrutiny by the former Assembly’s Children, Young People and Education Committee. This has served to reinforce the legislative proposition that we have presented, and informed the development of an ambitious package of wider reforms. In response to feedback received during the consultation on the draft Bill, we have developed the legislation in some key areas, including, for example, on the role of the health service and the position of Welsh-medium support. I have no doubt at all that we will debate these issues as the Bill makes its way through the scrutiny process, but I am also confident that the Bill is robust and operationally sound—something we have key stakeholders and professionals to thank for.

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Ann Jones) took the Chair.

I would also like to thank professionals and partners for the role they have played in co-producing the next working draft of the additional learning needs code. An extensive programme of work has been undertaken to develop the draft that we published in September 2015. Deputy Presiding Officer, I will be making this available in February 2017, with a view to it supporting the scrutiny of the Bill. At the same time, I intend to publish for consultation options for introducing the new statutory system. There are various ways we can roll out the new system, and I want to ensure timely access to the benefits of the new approach, whilst ensuring the time frame is realistic and viable for delivery partners. So, I would like to hear their thoughts on the approach that we take.

We have been clear from the outset that we recognise that moving from the current system to the new system will be challenging. We will be asking a lot of delivery partners, but they will have our absolute support. Our additional learning needs strategic implementation group is already in place and is already working on practical approaches to the challenge of effective transition. We will also be providing a significant package of financial support. This has already begun, with a £2.1 million innovation fund in place for the next two years. I will say more on our intentions regarding the transition funding next year.

Whilst legislation provides the statutory framework and drives change, it cannot and should not be the whole story. That is why the Bill is part of a wider programme aimed at transforming the additional learning needs system to secure successful futures for all our learners. Our additional learning needs transformational programme includes a comprehensive suite of work streams aimed at delivering improvements in practice now, today, to benefit learners within the current system, a fundamental aspect of which is development of the workforce. But we also need to make the cultural and operational changes required to ensure effective implementation of the new system, including the development of a multi-agency working practice. It is important to keep in mind that these reforms are not a peripheral issue. They will directly affect a quarter of learners in Wales, and the impact will extend beyond this. Getting it right for children and young people with additional learning needs means getting it right for everyone. So, the improvements the Bill and the wider reforms will help deliver will lead to better outcomes for all of our learners.

It is also the case that delivery of the wider system reforms, such as the vision set out in ‘A curriculum for Wales’ can only happen if we have a system, and a workforce, that embraces inclusive education and delivers for every learner in every setting. This is about whole-system improvement. It is a cornerstone of our ambitious programme of educational reform in Wales. So, we will now move to a new phase with these reforms. I wish to continue the debate, but I also wish to move the debate forward. I have made clear my intention to work collaboratively and across all parties in this place today. I want a good Act, and not a quick Bill. We have a duty to deliver the best deal for our most vulnerable learners. That is our collective challenge, and I look forward to working together to deliver it. Thank you very much.

May I thank the Minister for his statement and welcome the fact that the Bill has been tabled this week, and also declare an interest, of course, as a school governor, because there are responsibilities placed on boards of governors through this Bill, of course? May I also say that I agree that getting a good Act, rather than a swift Bill, is the important thing here, although I do think that it’s about time we got to this point after many years of recognising that the current regime possibly wasn’t fit for purpose?

Plaid Cymru supports the objectives of this Bill as you’ve outlined them in your statement. The Bill, of course, was in our manifesto, and, of course, it was part of the agreement that we drew up with the Labour Party after the election in May. So, securing new legislation on additional learning needs is a priority of ours, but, of course, not just any old legislation, and we, like all other parties, will be scrutinising the Bill as it travels through this Assembly in order to make sure that we do have robust legislation that will make a real and positive difference to the education and lives of those with additional learning needs.

Now, the Bill, of course, places a duty on health bodies, and that has been the cause of some debate in terms of the previous draft Bill and so on, but, in the tabled Bill, you mention a duty to ensure a treatment or service to a child or young person when that is necessary and available, but can you give us some clarity as to whether that will be at the expense of the health service, or the school through the board of governors, or the education authority? Can you expand upon how this question of who pays will be answered in this Bill? Because there is huge pressure on school budgets, as there is across the public sector, and the concern is that this could be the cause of conflict when it comes to service provision. Is there a risk, Minister, in your view, because of the lack of resources, that the threshold for intervention or additional support will be raised continuously in order to avoid expenditure? How does the Bill tackle that risk? What is there contained within the Bill that will guard against that kind of situation arising?

Now, the Bill also, of course, creates additional learning needs co-ordinators—quite a responsibility for an individual, perhaps—and that requires a range of skills and relevant experience. You are perhaps going to tell me that that will not be too different to the current SENCOs in terms of some of those responsibilities, but, in section 54 of the Bill as tabled, you say that regulations will be made in order to make it a requirement that these co-ordinators do have designated qualifications or experience or both. Now, those regulations have yet to be drawn up, but do you anticipate a change in terms of those responsibilities as compared to the current SENCO system? Do you believe that we will need a higher level of skill, a higher level of experience, and how will that be provided if it is the case, and how will it be funded? Because teachers are concerned that, as a result of this Bill, there will be a significant burden falling upon them.

It’s good to see that there are elements that are strengthened in terms of advocacy in the Bill and the right to advice and information, and that’s certainly to be welcomed. In terms of Welsh-medium provision, and this is something that was covered in the media last night, I see in the Bill that all reasonable steps should be taken—that’s the quote—to ensure additional learning needs provision through the medium of Welsh. Now, everyone accepts, of course, that there is a shortage of practitioners in some areas and that it won’t be easily achieved, but can you expand upon your plans to ensure that the appropriate workforce will be in place, and not just in a specific language? We know that educational psychologists are few and far between, as well as a number of other disciplines, perhaps, but, particularly, how can we ensure that there are more Welsh speakers available to secure this provision? Will you perhaps consider, from the point of view of this Bill, that language is a fundamental need on the face of the Bill, and, through that, establish a right to a service or support through the medium of Welsh? It’s not just the workforce that’s important here in terms of the Welsh language, resources are also an important part of that equation: resource for diagnosis, for example, test material for dyslexia. We know that are deficiencies in terms of Welsh language provision in that area. So, how do you hope that this Bill will assist in resolving some of those challenges?

Now, the code of practice that you referred to is going to be quite crucial—almost as crucial as the Bill itself—in terms of the scrutiny process, and I am grateful that you are willing to release a draft of the additional needs code as part of the scrutiny process in February. Now, the aim of the legislation, or one of the aims of the legislation, is to reduce conflict within the process, but it is inevitable that that will arise on occasion, particularly in the early years, and, at the moment, as a fellow Member of mine, Steffan Lewis, has highlighted recently, there is no specialist legal firm specialising in education in Wales, and there are only three educational companies throughout England and Wales, and all of them happen to be in England. Now, getting access to specialist support of that kind is going to be difficult. Whilst the Bill and the new tribunal system, or the proposed system, will reduce the need for specialist independent legal support, what will the Welsh Government do to ensure that children with additional learning needs and their families can have access to the necessary advice that they will need when that problem arises?

You’ve mentioned in response last week to a question on concerns from Diabetes UK and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health on the concerns that children and young people with special healthcare needs have—. What assurance can you give to those with these additional healthcare needs, who perhaps feel that they have been confused or left in limbo, that their needs will also be met under this Bill?

And, finally, whilst the provision and responsibilities are clear in this Bill for those children and young people of statutory education age, I’m not sure if it’s true to the same extent for those who are of preschool age and older people up to the age of 25, for example, in terms of workplace training, apprenticeships, and so on. It was a concern identified by many in the draft Bill, so can you perhaps expand upon how you have responded to those concerns in this Bill? As I say, we generally do welcome what’s contained within the Bill but obviously look forward to scrutinise the issues that I’ve raised and I’m sure that there will a number of other issues that we will want to raise as we scrutinise this Bill in the Assembly.

I’m grateful to the Plaid Cymru spokesperson for his words of support. Let me say this as a general point before attempting to answer the particular questions: I think it’s important that we do have a wide-ranging debate on these matters in the way that the Member has sought to commence, and it is important that we do look at the issues that he and others will raise this afternoon. I want to listen to those concerns and those questions. I want to seek to answer them today and during the Stage 1 scrutiny, but I’m also prepared to listen again if those answers are not sufficient. I think it is important that, as a Government, we not only listen to what is said here but across the professions and listen to practitioners and continue to listen. So, this is the first start of a process that will involve significant debate, further debate, and, at all times, I can give an undertaking that we will seek to actively listen and to hear what is said and then, if necessary, make the amendments that we need to make.

The Member began his substantive comments in relation to the health service, and he will recognise a significant strengthening in the Bill that was published yesterday as opposed to the draft that was published last year. I hope that goes some way, or goes a long way, to answering the concerns that were raised during the committee’s consideration of this matter before the election this year. It is clearly a matter for the health service, if they identify and diagnose particular issues or conditions, to ensure that those conditions are treated and treated according to the diagnosis made by health professionals, and I would expect and anticipate that to happen. There is no threshold in this Bill or this legislation for conditions that would enable a request or enable an individual development plan to be written for an individual learner. We understand that other legislation does include those thresholds. This does not. This seeks to be a comprehensive response to the needs of learners at whatever age or in whatever setting. So, there is no threshold for treatment, there is no expectation that this will involve an additional administrative burden on the schools, and, certainly, the experience that we have had so far in piloting this system is that practitioners found it a system that enables them to work more effectively together, that provides a far richer person-centred, child-centred, if you like, plan that is delivered by agencies working together, and that is certainly our ambition. It is not to create additional bureaucracy, but to bring people together and in doing so reducing the burden on individual practitioners.

So, yes, there will be new responsibilities, and yes, there will be additional responsibilities on the staff identified in section 54, as he’s pointed out. We will ensure that there is training provided, and this is why I try to be very, very clear, in debating and discussing this legislation, that the Bill we published yesterday is an element of, and a part of, but not the totality of, the transformational programme that we are seeking to undertake at this time. We will be ensuring that training is available for the professionals delivering the legislation. We will ensure that the statutory guidance, which will be published in February, is available for consultation so that those people who will need to work with it understand it and have an opportunity to scrutinise it before we actually bring it in front of this place. And we will ensure that, when we do have new responsibilities, training is available for them.

On the issue of resources, which has been raised by the Member, he understands that £2.1 million was made available in the statement I made some weeks ago. We will be looking, and we will continue to look, at the issue of resources. He’s absolutely right in his analysis—unless we have the resources available to support the introduction of this system, it will not work and we will not achieve our vision, therefore we will seek to ensure that resources are made available. And in doing so, let me say this and make this absolutely clear: it is absolutely wrong that parents and families have to fight, fight and fight again to get the support needed for their children to learn effectively and to achieve their potential. It is absolutely wrong. The purpose of this legislation is to move away from that system, which has not delivered in the way that we would expect and anticipate, to move away from the adversarial nature of all too many of these cases, and to move to a child-centred system where people work and collaborate together and don’t have to fight and campaign for education that should be delivered as a right. The tribunal system is there where there are issues that need to be addressed, but I think that if this Bill is to work and the transformation programme is to deliver our vision, then we want to see a reduction in the need for legal representation and legal support. That is one of the criteria against which we will judge this Bill in the future.

Whenever I debate and discuss any of the services available to children under this legislation, take it as read that I expect those services to be available bilingually and in the Welsh language where necessary. I hope that the wording we have found in this legislation is sufficiently strong to deliver that, but it is not my expectation in any way at all that we will deliver a system that delivers for people in the English language only. This has to be delivered bilingually across Wales, and children have to be given the support they require in either one of our national languages where necessary. I’m absolutely clear in my own mind that, in pursuing this legislation, our expectations as a Government are that service providers will deliver the services required in the English or Welsh languages as necessary, and that all children who require services in the medium of Welsh will receive them.

Can I also make a declaration of interest as a school governor? I’m very grateful for your statement today, Minister, and, indeed, for the briefing that you and your officials provided last week. I know that you are personally very committed to addressing the shortcomings in our existing statutory framework for learners with additional needs, and I do appreciate the way in which you’ve responded to the concerns that have been expressed by the children’s commissioner and all of the other stakeholders following the publication of the draft legislation earlier this year. We all know that the current system isn’t working, and you’ve alluded to the fact that many people spend far too long having to fight the system in order to get the support that they need for their children at present, and it simply isn’t good enough. When you consider the fact that just 23 per cent of pupils with additional learning needs last year achieved five GCSEs or more compared with 59 per cent of their peers, we know that the system simply isn’t working. We’ve got to improve our game.

We very much welcome some of the provisions in the Bill. I appreciate the work that you’ve done to extend the scope of the Bill right up to the age of 25 so that young people accessing college and other places of education are able to benefit from some support, and, indeed, the redress opportunities that come if they don’t get that support. They currently don’t have that, of course. And I also appreciate the work that you’ve done in order to improve the Bill in terms of making sure that we’re holding the national health service to account for the provision of access to health professionals and, indeed, for them to meet their obligations to meet the individual needs of learners. We also appreciate the work that you’ve done to increase the emphasis on Welsh-medium support, and I very much welcome the comments that you made in response to Llyr Huws Gruffydd on that.

But I do have some concerns. I know that I’ve discussed some of these with you, but I think it’s important that we also put them on the record here in the Chamber, particularly in relation to those learners with health needs. They may not have additional learning needs, but they may have health needs that require some interventions in the classroom or their place of learning. Those with diabetes, epilepsy and other conditions, for example, are not currently within the scope of the Bill, but it may well be necessary to manage their conditions during the school day, during educational hours, to ensure that their needs are met so that they can sustain their learning in the classroom. I’m very concerned that, with them not being included in the Bill, we may well be falling foul of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. So, I would appreciate it, Minister—and you’ve already indicated that you’re prepared to look at amendments to the Bill in the future and I know that that’s a genuine offer, as it were—if you could consider that more widely and perhaps tell us what you might do to address those particular concerns.

The Bill also, of course, fails to touch on home-to-school transport, specifically. We know that this Assembly passed legislation in the learner travel Measure many years back in respect of home-to-school transport, but some individuals require special home-to-school transport arrangements by virtue of their additional learning needs or by virtue of their health needs, particularly if they’ve got very long journeys to school, as is often the case in rural parts of Wales. So, I wonder whether you might tell us whether the code that is well under way, in terms of the working on the code, will actually address some of those issues.

One of the important features, of course, in the Bill is the introduction of these new individual development plans and the support that they will underpin. You’ve made it quite clear in the past, although not in your statement today, that one of the main features of that is that it’s going to be portable between local authorities in Wales, so that people don’t have to face what can be a devastating upheaval if they relocate from one local authority to the next and they then have to restart the battle, reboot the battle, with the new local authority to get the support that their child needs in school. I know that that is something that this Bill seeks to address by ensuring that there will be that portability, but that is only portability within Wales, of course, particularly in my part of north Wales and, indeed, in other parts of Wales, the issue of people relocating from one country to the next, into Wales, is an issue. I wonder, Minister, whether you can tell us what your plans are in terms of making sure that there are some short-term interim arrangements for those pupils moving from an education system elsewhere in the UK into Wales with a package of support that they’ve been used to having, and whether that is something you would expect local authorities and schools to continue to maintain in the short term, while they transition into our new framework, once this Bill ends up being law in Wales.

The education sector unions quite rightly have expressed some concerns regarding the demands that the new legislation might place upon the education workforce. You’ve touched on this in your response to Llyr Huws Gruffydd, just in terms of the capacity building that needs to be done within the education workforce. I know that you’ve made some resources available to upskill the workforce, and I think everybody in this Chamber would want a professionalised workforce dealing with what can be a very specialised area, but, clearly, the capacity of smaller schools in particular is going to be a challenge to meet these new obligations. I wonder whether you can tell us whether you want to see schools working together to ensure that they have adequate specialism being developed, which is local to them, as it were, and easily accessible to them, in order that the vision that this Bill seeks to achieve is actually fulfilled.

Can you also give us some assurances about the access to health professionals? We’ve heard about educational psychologists, and many of us in this Chamber have been lobbied by educational psychologists about the need for them to be involved, as appropriate, in ensuring that there’s an appropriate package of support, but what about speech therapists and other health professionals who, sometimes, a parent or a school may not know they need to access in order to ensure that a young person is adequately assessed? I just wonder whether the code might have something to say on this and about that sort of access, particularly for those parents who may be trying to navigate what is a complex system, sometimes for the very first time.

Finally, just on transition to the new arrangements, this is a cause of quite a bit of anxiety at the moment, particularly for parents and pupils that are already in the current system receiving excellent support, in some cases, across the country. Many of those parents will be very concerned that the new arrangements may mean that their children get less support in the future. I think it’s important, Minister, for you to put on the record some sort of guarantee about the support being provided to them: that that will not be diminished as a result of the Bill, and that those children who are already in the system, receiving support—. Yes, absolutely, it is appropriate that that support is reviewed from time to time, but there’s nothing in this Bill that would cause that support to be diminished of right to those children. I think, perhaps, Minister, if you could give us some assurances on that, it would be very welcome. As I said at the start, I’m very pleased to see the Bill being published. I very much appreciate the way in which you’ve been working on a cross-party basis, and with stakeholders thus far. I look forward to working with you to improve this Bill through the legislative process before it finally becomes law.

I’m grateful to the Conservatives’ spokesperson for his kind remarks. I know that the Conservatives have played a significant role in the development of this legislation, with Angela Burns chairing the committee in the previous Assembly. I would certainly put on record my thanks to Angela for the work that she did at that time. It has certainly helped us in developing the new draft.

I’m grateful to Darren for looking at the Bill, both in terms of what we published yesterday, but also the wider transformational process and programme upon which we are embarking at the moment. Without wishing, then, to become immediately churlish, I would say very gently that we’re not seeking to hold the NHS to account in these reforms. What we’re seeking to do is to ensure that the NHS works seamlessly with local authorities, with schools, with the educational services, in order to ensure that the child comes first and not the ease with which some professionals might see these services being delivered. It’s the child’s needs that we’re talking about it, and it is the interests of the child that should come first, second and third. It is the purpose of this legislation to bring those services together. The final point that was made about existing provisions and support for existing learners is one where we wish to build upon and not diminish. It’s certainly the importance of ensuring that we do have those services in place to build upon—that is what we’re seeking to do as part of this wider transformational agenda.

Let me say, in terms of the health needs and the issue that was raised by Llyr Gruffydd as well—which, I apologise, I didn’t answer in full or, in fact, at all. I apologise for that. We believe that local authorities and governing bodies already have responsibilities to support children and young people who do have healthcare needs. We are delivering and revising specific guidance on these matters, which will be published in the new year. If Members, having read through those guidelines, believe that they need to be improved or strengthened, then we’ll have an opportunity to do that in the new year. Let me say this: the Bill is silent on those issues, but our minds are open to conversations on those matters. If the guidance that will be published does not deliver the sort of certainty that people wish to see, then we will consider that at Stage 2.

In terms of transport, we are aware that learner transport is already covered by legislation. We do not believe there is a necessity for an additional layer of legislation on these matters, but we recognise the force of the argument, and we recognise that what has been said about the ability of people to access the courses and the support required will sometimes require access to transport as well. If we believe, looking through the scrutiny of this legislation, that the existing transport legislation requires strengthening, then, clearly, that is something that we are prepared to consider. At the moment, we believe that the existing legislation does cover all of these matters.

I've been in correspondence with the United Kingdom Government in recent days on cross-border issues. We’re having a conversation on these matters. On some of these matters, we’re having a robust conversation; on others, we're having conversations of a different nature. But let me say this: the United Kingdom Government recognises the policy agenda, and I think both Governments share the same ambition for our learners, and what we will seek to do is to ensure that we do have a seamless service available across the border. It is important, as far as learners are concerned, that the border becomes almost invisible and that people are able to access the services that they require wherever those services are located, and that we deliver legislation that enables that to happen. There have been some cross-border issues. I recognise that, but, certainly, I hope that those are being addressed in the legislation.

Members will be aware that the Cabinet Secretary for Education has already been very, very clear that she wants to see schools sharing services and sharing facilities, and that what we want to do is to introduce flexibility for particularly smaller schools to be able to access excellence in terms of the support required for learners. This legislation will build upon those ambitions, and this legislation may well be a test for those ambitions as well. Certainly, the changes that the Cabinet Secretary outlined here some weeks ago will enable and, we hope, will ensure that schools do have the flexibility to ensure that we do have access to the best services and that they will be able to share services where necessary.

In terms of health professionals, the wider transformational agenda, and the wider transformational programme, is one that looks at bringing people together, strengthening the system, strengthening what we have available to us, enabling people to work together. A designated clinical lead in each individual health board will, I hope, enable that to happen, so that we don't have the cumbersome, overly complex ways of working that we’ve seen all too often between different elements of our public services. So, when we debate and discuss these matters at both Stage 1 and Stage 2, I hope that we will have the opportunity to test the strength of this Bill—to test the strength of the Bill and the code, the statutory guidance that will be published in February—to enable us to understand whether we need to make further provisions to ensure that these services are able to work together.

And, in closing, I will apologise to the Deputy Presenting Officer, who did, of course, chair that committee. [Laughter.]

That's quite all right. Lynne Neagle.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer and former Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. [Laughter.] And what a fine job she did of it, as well.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. I was so pleased to see this Bill introduced yesterday, and I think the exchanges here today demonstrate the almost unprecedented level, really, of cross-party support that there is for getting a piece of legislation that really works for children and young people in Wales, mindful of the difficulties that you've highlighted with parents often finding themselves in the middle of a prolonged battleground to get the services that they need. I also personally want to welcome the collaborative approach you’ve shown towards me as Chair of the committee and the assurances you’ve given the Chamber about continuing in that vein today.

Many of the points that I would have wanted to make have been covered, and I’m looking forward to the detailed scrutiny in the committee. I did just want to pick up on two particular points, both related to health. The first was: in your answer to Darren Millar, you said that you don't see the Bill as being a vehicle to hold the health service to account, which I fully recognise. But can I ask you whether you also recognise that, in a lot of cases where parents are fighting to get services, it is the lack of access to a health service that actually puts the barrier to their getting the educational support that they need? It is absolutely critical that we address that through this legislation.

The other point was also on the medical needs issue. As you know, I've been working with Diabetes UK and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health to try and see if we can get that included in this legislation. I hear what you’re saying—that it’s not in there at the moment—but also your assurances that you’re open to listening to views on that. Can I just ask whether you recognise that, although new guidance is being developed, there is a very strong feeling there that, without the inclusion on the face of the Bill of a statutory duty to meet medical needs, too often that guidance is implemented in a patchy way, and sometimes ignored? Thank you.

Thank you very much. I clearly have got myself into terrible trouble by trying too hard to be too nice and too generous. I can assure Members across the Chamber it won’t happen again.

I’m grateful to Lynne for the approach that she’s taken as Chair of the committee. Members will know that the committee system is something that I hold very dear, and I’ve served both as a Member and Chair of committees. I hope that we will be able to provide the committee with all the information necessary in order to provide the fullest possible scrutiny of this legislation. It’s absolutely essential that we provide yourselves with the information—the financial information and the explanatory memoranda that are demanded by the Standing Orders—but also that we go further than that and deliver to you the sort of guidance that we will intend to deliver to public services in order to deliver this legislation. We will also be seeking to consult on how we seek to implement this legislation as well, and I’d be very grateful for the committee’s views on all of those matters.

In terms of the points that were made Lynne Neagle, I absolutely agree that all too often it is lack of access to NHS services that has impacted and affected families up and down the country. This is unacceptable. Let’s make it absolutely clear: it is unacceptable, it is wrong, and we will not tolerate a system whereby families and parents have to continually fight to get the sort of support their children require in order to learn at school, or whatever the setting happens to be.

That is the purpose of this legislation. It is the purpose of the wider transformational programme. It is the vision, but it is also what we will be held to account for in achieving. We will have failed if there remain parents who have to fight tooth and nail year after year to get the support that their children need, require and should have as a right. It is the purpose of this transformational programme to change that and to deliver real change for people across the country. I hope that by bringing the system together, by putting the child at the centre, what we are doing is delivering not just a new structure, a new process, a new way of working, but delivering cultural change within a number of different public services in order to deliver those services. I have to say this to Members: we are piloting this in different schools at the moment, and what I’ve seen has been absolutely inspiring in terms of people being brought together, working together and delivering through the IDP system support that the child needs when they need it. It is working where we’re able to deliver it. Our challenge today is to create a statutory framework that means it will be delivered across the whole country.

I understand the point that has been raised on medical needs at school. I’ve got no issue with what has been said be Members this afternoon. I would say: look at the guidance when it’s published in the new year. The invitation to continue the conversation is an open invitation, and it is one where I hope that we will be able to reach agreement. If Members or if others continue to believe that the guidance that we will publish in the new year is not sufficient, then certainly we will give serious consideration to making changes and making amendments at Stage 2 during the debate on the Bill.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. The additional learning needs Bill has much to recommend it, although the Bill does raise a number of questions in my mind. In principle, the provision for a code of practice is a good step. However, much will depend on the content of the code and how it’s applied. How will you ensure that the code of practice is achieving its objectives? Although the Bill sets out persons who must be consulted on the content of the code, groups representing children and their parents are not included. What’s the reason for this? Why isn’t a duty being placed on Welsh Ministers to consult parents, children and young people on a code that will directly affect them? I welcome that the Bill places a requirement on decision makers to involve children, young people and their parents in the decision-making process, but what weight will be placed on their views in that decision-making process? The requirement will ultimately be meaningless if their views and wishes aren’t given sufficient priority. An effective structure will also need to be in place to ensure that their views are properly taken into consideration. How will the Minister ensure that this duty is operating to the benefit of people with additional learning needs and that the relevant decision makers have the resources to involve learners and their parents effectively?

I welcome the provision in the Bill to favour placing children with additional learning needs in mainstream schools where possible. Making it more difficult for mainstream schools to refuse a child with additional learning needs is a good step. However, it should be kept in mind that if a mainstream school refuses a child with additional learning needs, this may well be because they simply don’t have the resources to cater for that child. How are you going to ensure that mainstream schools are given the support they will need? The duty placed on maintained schools to admit children with additional learning needs, if that school is named in the individual development plan, sounds like a positive measure. However, there is no requirement that the school has the capacity to take the additional learner. The duty could therefore be a recipe for disaster if the necessary resources are not put in place at the school.

But there is little point providing the resources if you can’t guarantee that they will be spent as intended. Can the Minister give us an assurance that sufficient resources will be provided to these schools and that any funds provided to local authorities for that purpose will be ring-fenced? I note the Bill provides for a registration system for independent providers. Can the Minister provide some detail on how the registration system will work, and in particular, will independent providers be vetted carefully before being placed on the register?

The Bill doesn’t appear to require independent providers not in receipt of moneys from local authorities to be registered, which would appear to leave parents sending children to specialist schools privately on their own with regard to the quality of education being offered or the standards of staff. Will the register be available for inspecting by parents? As I said earlier, this Bill has much to recommend it. However, to operate effectively, local authorities, schools and other decision makers will need the processes, staff and money in place to be able to implement it. Without that, the Bill won’t be worth the paper it’s written on. Thank you.

I’ve said a number of times in answer to a number of questions that we’re seeking to achieve cultural change as well as structural and statutory change. Let me say this: I trust health professionals and I trust school leaders. The tone that we’ve tried to adopt in Government has been to work with professionals and not against them or work on the basis of mistrust. If you listen to the work that the Cabinet Secretary is undertaking in terms of educational leadership, it is about creating a team of people who will work together. It’s not about putting in place structures that are open either to abuse or are there in order to deal with mistrust. That’s not the approach that we take in this Government and it’s not the approach that I would want to take with this legislation.

The code of conduct will be statutory guidance. It will have the force of law and it will be something that will ensure consistency of delivery across the face of the country. It has already been informed by consultation with the professionals and practitioners and with stakeholders over the last few years. It will be published in February in order to continue to both inform scrutiny here in this place but also to enable practitioners, stakeholders and others to understand not simply the legislation but how that legislation will be implemented. We will then consult again on issues of implementation to ensure that we don’t simply deliver the best possible system but we deliver it in the best possible way.

All of those different means of consultation, debate and discussion are designed to enable us to hear from people and to work with people. I’ve always sought to place a great emphasis, both in terms of what we’re seeking to do here and in other fields as well, that we work with professionals and that we work with them on the basis of trust.

The issues about decision making are issues that are well made. There are, all too often, cases where families, parents, young people and children feel that decisions are being taken for them and communicated to them, not with them and by them. The tenure and tone of this is to move away from that system: that we create a system that is child or person centred, that decisions are taken with the family, with the individual, with the child, with the young person, and that those decisions are taken collectively, using the help, support and advice of professionals and practitioners who have the knowledge and the expertise to inform those decisions. These are decisions that are taken with the child and with the family, not simply for them and presented to them. That is the sort of cultural change that we are seeking to pursue and to deliver through this transformational programme.

In terms of the resources available to schools, clearly we want children who have additional learning needs to be educated as part of the wider community. We don’t want those children taken out of their own communities, except where that’s absolutely necessary and where specialist help and support is required, and we’ve discussed issues of transport and how we do that, whether it’s in Wales or across the border, in order to do that, and certainly, we will do that where necessary. But the key thing that we want to achieve is for everybody to feel a valued part of the school community and a valued part of the school environment. What I hope we’ll be able to do, working with school leaders, is to deliver the resources they require in order to do that. I feel very strongly that we have great leadership in schools and colleges across Wales. What this Government wants to do is to work with those people to deliver the very best for our children and young people.

Thank you very much. We have had all the main speakers, and I have allowed them to ask several questions. That leaves us with a dilemma: we have five speakers and we have very little time left. So, can we ask for just quick opening statements and then a question? Minister, if you can respond briefly as well, that would be helpful. Julie Morgan.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome the Bill, and lots of Members have already referred to the battles that families feel they have to undertake in order to get the right opportunities for their children with additional learning needs, so I think this is definitely a step in the right direction, and I welcome it very much. Lots of the points have been covered. The one particular point I wanted to raise was the involvement of the children and young people in the process. I am very pleased that the process will now be centred around the needs of the young person and of the family, but I am particularly concerned that every effort is put in to support, particularly, the young person in that process. I think we’ve already had some discussion about the support for the family, but some of these children and young people may have very complex needs, and I think it’s very important that if they have communication difficulties, for example, every opportunity is used to provide them with a range of different resources so that their views can be understood and they have the opportunity to express themselves. I think that’s the point that the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists make in particular: that children need visual aids, talking maps and a whole variety, if it’s going to be meaningful and if the children and young people and the families are going to be at the core of this legislation. And if they are, it will be a success; it’s bound to be. We will have to make great efforts to ensure they are supported and that the children, in particular, have this individual support to let their views be known and to be part of the process.

I absolutely agree with the points made by the Member. I think she’s absolutely right. There’s no point a Minister standing up in this Chamber saying that it has to be person centred and child centred if we don’t put in place the means and the mechanisms to ensure that happens in reality. That means looking at all the issues that the Member has raised and ensuring that all those matters are put in place to enable the individual child or the young person to not only be at the centre of decision-making theory, but at the centre of decision making in practice as well.

Well done, Minister. I’m really pleased to see this Bill before us today. I truly didn’t think we would see it and, in fact, Huw Lewis, to his eternal credit, pulled the last one, because he was unable to make great inroads into the provision of the health element that we need here. You’ve done that and I am very pleased with it. It’s not 100 per cent right—there’s still a lot that could be done, and I could go through it line by line, but I’m not going to, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am really pleased to hear this, especially as I organised and led the opposition coup that made your Government agree to bring this Bill forward.

There are two things I think this Bill has to achieve. The first is a good education for those children who need it, because 22 per cent—just under a quarter—of our young people will grow up to be just under a quarter of our adults who are not able to be the best they can be and are not able to contribute to our society, help our economy, add to us and just feel respect for themselves. So, to be able to educate them is absolutely your prime objective.

The second objective, Minister, and I’m so glad to hear all of the things you’ve said this afternoon, is to rebuild trust with the families and the parents. On Friday, I saw a couple with a very autistic child, who came to see me because for years SNAP Cymru had been working—one official there—with them to get a statement for them. That official now works for the local council and, suddenly, that same person with the same training is saying, ‘You don’t need a statement for that child—that child doesn’t need our extra help.’ Why? Finances. County councils have a different agenda and the third sector has a different agenda to families. Anything and everything that this Bill does must be about getting rid of that tension and allowing parents to go back again and again to the relevant authorities, because their children will change and develop—some will get better, some will improve, some will never change and some will get worse.

The one thing that the Bill does have, which I have a slight concern about, is that it appears to give an inability to go back for a reassessment once you’ve had that first assessment. I look forward to working with you through Stages 1, 2 and 3 to bring this.

My last question to you is: could you, for the record, make an absolute commitment—? The legislative process tends to have an axe of its own—time. We’re very committed to all of our stages—it has to go through committee in the appropriate way. If, during this process, it becomes apparent that we need to take a pause, take a small breather, consult with more parents and consult stakeholders, will you commit to halting that legislative process? I’m not asking you to put it on the backburner or halt it for months—literally, we’re just talking about making sure that there’s adequate scrutiny by all parties, because this is the one Bill that all of the parties and all of the politicians in this place could really bring forward for Wales that would make an outstanding difference to the people in our country and, ultimately, to our country.

I hope I can give you that commitment. The legislative process, of course, is a matter for the National Assembly and not for the Government, but let me say this: it is not my intention to stick to a timetable if that timetable isn’t delivering robust scrutiny and enabling us to make amendments that we feel are required by that. I know that Lynne Neagle, as Chair of the committee, is absolutely committed to ensuring that we do have that robust scrutiny in place, and I’m absolutely confident that this National Assembly will have the opportunities in order to scrutinise, but then, crucially, to make amendments that we believe are necessary.

Let me say this: I’ve sat on enough legislation committees and I spent many years on the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, so I hope that I have an understanding of these matters. It is not my intention—. I will not simply seek to block opposition amendments because they are worded poorly or we disagree with this or that. My intention is to pursue a process so that this Bill will become law. It will become good law, it will be great law and it will deliver what we are saying—it will deliver our vision, it will deliver our ambitions, but, most of all, it will deliver for the people who require this legislation.

The people who you described that you met on Friday—. Let me say this to you: I met parents of autistic children yesterday in my constituency and had a very similar conversation with them. I am determined not to let them down, and if that means that we take one or two months extra to get it right, so be it—let’s be absolutely clear about that. You’re absolutely right: we need to rebuild trust, and you don’t rebuild trust by trying to rush something through.

Dawn Bowden.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I will try to keep this brief but I—

Yes, just a question, please.

I’m not sure that I can, so if you’re going to stop me—

I will stop you. Go on—carry on.

[Continues.]—then I may have to write to the Minister, because this is quite a complex issue.

I recently hosted an event here at the Senedd, to raise awareness of something called Irlen syndrome. For those of you who weren’t able to come along to that, Irlen syndrome is a visual perceptual problem that can affect children and adults of all ages, but parents of children with Irlen syndrome are having difficulty in (a) getting it recognised, and (b) getting it actually dealt with. It causes reading and learning difficulties, light sensitivity, headaches, migraines, problems with depth perception, and so on. And it’s particularly significant at a young age, as it impacts on a child’s performance, and is generally not recognised as Irlen. It is commonly misdiagnosed as dyslexia, and, as a result, appropriate treatment is not provided, despite it being very simple to address with coloured overlays and lenses. So, when a child is not progressing at an early stage, schools should be looking at Irlen syndrome as being a possible cause, before they start looking at dyslexia or ADHD, or at the very least at the same time.

Can you come to a question, please?

The question is, because I have also written to the education Secretary and the health Secretary about this, because there is only one local authority in Wales—Caerphilly council—that actually recognises Irlen syndrome, and has Irlen screeners in the schools, who are working at an early point to try to diagnose this particular problem. Now, the question, I guess, is whether the Minister can look at the potential, within the parameters of this Bill, and under the code, whether the provision of early screening for Irlen in all schools could fall in line with the draft code stated, and that early identification and intervention would fall within the scope. There’s an awful lot more to it than that, Chair—

I gather there probably is.

I think you’ve got the point.

I think we have the point, but I think there are many other conditions that people would want to raise as well. So, Minister.

Can I say this? The Member has clearly got a very good point to make in her remarks. Her remarks are on the record. I will write to her to give a fuller response to that, and I will place that correspondence in the Library for all Members to see.

Thank you. Mark Isherwood.

I believe I may be the only Member left of the committee in the second Assembly that produced the three-stage report on which these proposals are based. It does go back a long way, and this does replicate many of the recommendations in that committee. We took evidence from Baroness Warnock, whose original recommendations led to the introduction of statementing in 1981. And she told us that the system had become needlessly bureaucratic, that it was originally intended that 1 per cent of pupils might need statements and it had risen to 5 per cent, but, nonetheless, that the needs of that particular cohort with complex specific needs still needed to be protected.

How will you ensure, therefore, and assure parents like me, and many others, who had to battle for a statement to access the services otherwise being rationed; parents like me and others, who, once armed with a statement, could, only because of its legal status, access services that were withdrawn from my child and others in his unit, because we had that statement; and parents across Wales who’ve seen the rate of exclusions of children without statements, but with additional learning needs, doubling since the emphasis on statements was withdrawn, that replacing a legal document, which the statement is, with your proposals for a generic individual development plan meeting the needs of all learners, will not water down the legal status and strength that that legal document—that very important statement—provided for parents like me, and continues to provide for many other parents across Wales?

I recognise the power and the strength of his arguments, but the purpose is to move away from that system. The Member has described very well a system that is failing, and we do not want to pursue or to sustain a system that is not delivering the services we require, whether it’s for his family or for other families. And, as a consequence, the foundation, if you like, of this new system is the individual development plan, which will enable us to understand the needs of a child and then deliver those needs without the need for the confrontational campaigning, the arguing and the fighting that have been well described by the Member and others this afternoon. We recognise that the current system is not fit for purpose, it is not working, and that is why we want to replace it with a different system, a system that means that we move away from that sort of adversarial approach to one which is based on collaboration and co-operation. We need the experience and knowledge of Mark Isherwood and others to enable us to get that right, and I look forward to continuing the conversation during the scrutiny process.

Thank you very much, Minister.