Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and may I welcome this motion, tabled by the Welsh Conservatives? I will move amendments that we believe strengthen this motion further. We are, of course, aware of the impact that securing quality housing, healthcare, education and being safe in the home, and so on, have on a child’s development. I’m sure that some of you will recall some previous Plaid Cymru debates in this Chamber on preventing the eviction of families with children from their homes, where we’ve listed the numerous and negative impacts of homelessness, overly full and poor housing on children, but it’s always worth reminding ourselves that children living in houses that aren’t adequately heated and in a poor condition are more than twice as likely to suffer chest and breathing problems and conditions such as asthma and bronchitis. There’s a strong relationship between overfilled housing and the helicobacter pylori, which is one of the main causes of stomach cancer and other diseases in the digestive system. They are twice as likely to develop such diseases when they reach 65 to 75 years old. Homeless children have four times as many respiratory diseases; they are five times as likely to suffer diarrhoea or stomach complaints; they are twice as likely to have to have an emergency admission to hospital; they are six times as likely to have speech defects and a stutter; and four times as likely to have asthma as children who are not homeless. This list of the impacts of a poor start in life is a lengthy one, but it’s worth rehearsing it time and time again, and until the wider political culture in Westminster recognises, for example, that it’s never acceptable to balance a budget by making children ill through cuts to welfare and so on, we will repeat these points time and time again. And I think that issue of housing is reflected in our first amendment.

I will move to our next amendment. I think it is quite clear that the evidence that we’ve received from neurological scientists shows that brain development does continue swiftly through the teenage years and into one’s early adulthood, and therefore it is crucial, I think, that the health and well-being of children, both physically and mentally, are supported as they grow up through those years. The Government, of course, does have a child health strategy for children up to seven years of age, but we are of the view that we need appropriate support beyond that age and throughout the adolescent years. The strategy needs to deal with physical health. I think it is fair to say that we need far more support for preventing and treating mental health problems too, before they become lifelong conditions, which can be very grave indeed. We often talk about the importance of identifying and treating cancer at an early stage, for example, but the same is true with mental health issues too. We need to recognise that and take strategic action.

Our final amendment reflects the need for a continuous focus on tackling obesity. Schools have a crucial role to play here. I would like to see sport and other physical activities, because not all children enjoy or benefit from competitive sport, but all of this needs to play a far more prominent part in the new curriculum. Clearly, this will require improved facilities for sport. But, in addition to that, I do think that schools should consider how they can create an environment that tackles obesity: to consider what’s on the school menu more than they currently do—there have been some developments, of course; and controlling access to junk food through vending machines, or managing whether pupils can get takeaways at lunchtime and so on. I also think that science teachers could have a role in ensuring that pupils do get some health literacy, so that they can differentiate between healthy eating advice based on evidence and the scare stories and dietary fads and so on.

So, those are our amendments. We will be voting against the Government amendment. We are not convinced that the current support is sufficient. We would have preferred to see the wording emphasising the need for a revaluation of the situation, as it currently stands. But this is a very important motion and, in being amended in the ways that I have proposed, I do think that this can be a clear statement of our ambition to give children the best starts possible in life.