Y grŵp nesaf o welliannau yw grŵp 10. Mae'r gwelliannau yma yn ymwneud â dysgu seiliedig ar waith. Gwelliant 16 yw'r prif welliant. Rwy'n galw ar Darren Millar i gynnig y prif welliant ac i siarad ar y gwelliannau eraill.

Amendment 16 (Darren Millar, supported by Llyr Gruffydd) moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move amendment 16 and also want to speak to amendments 22, 23 and 24, all of which have been tabled in my name.

The substantive amendment in this group is amendment 16, and it seeks to provide for an Order-making power to enable Welsh Ministers to extend the scope of the new additional learning needs system to providers of work-based learning being funded by the Welsh taxpayer in the future. The Bill as it is currently drafted only requires those bodies with duties on the face of the Bill, i.e. schools, colleges and local authorities, to make additional learning needs provision in work-based learning environments. But Members will be aware that there are many other providers, both in the private and third sectors, also delivering work-based training.

During Stage 1 of the Bill's scrutiny, the committee heard evidence from the National Training Federation for Wales, which represents more than 100 training providers across the country, and that federation made it clear that they wanted to see the scope of the Bill extended for apprenticeship and other work-based learning environments to ensure that all young people could access the support that they need to develop their skills and employment opportunities. They saw this as a key component of delivering against the Welsh Government's stated aim, which is shared across this Chamber, of course, of creating parity of esteem between vocational and academic learning. They also highlighted that learners with more complex needs, including learning difficulties, are more likely to undertake work-based learning than other young people and that, as a result of that, many training providers are already very experienced in providing additional learning needs support for individuals.

But, to date, in spite of the support for extending the new system to all work-based learning providers, the Welsh Government has resisted calls to do so. The previous portfolio holder suggested that he had some concerns over the implications of extending the provisions to the private sector. But my own view, and that of the committee at Stage 1, was that any work-based learning provider that's in receipt of public funds ought to be required to deliver additional learning need support to ensure that there's a level playing field for all learners.

Now, I recognise that there might be some work to do to ensure that such an extension of the scope of the Bill is proportionate, especially given that many work-based learning providers are sometimes very small organisations. That's why my amendment seeks an Order-making power that can be exercised at a future date to allow for proper consideration of the implications of the extension.

Amendments 22, 23 and 24 are all consequential to amendment 16 and make references to those Order-making powers elsewhere on the face of the Bill. So, I urge all Members to support the amendments.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

Presiding Officer, I recognise that a proportion of young people with ALN will go on to receive work-based learning after they leave school or further education. We must ensure that these young people continue to receive appropriate support for their needs. And we will ensure that the appropriate connections are made between the new ALN system and work-based learning providers.

Exploring the opportunities for appropriate connections offered by contractual arrangements is, I believe, a potentially more powerful lever than the amendment. If action is not taken, there will be a financial consequence for providers, and this is likely to be a more effective tool to ensure compliance. The Government’s position throughout the passage of this Bill is that it would be disproportionate to impose statutory duties on providers in this respect.

In any event, the power included in these amendments is unlikely to be wide enough to be effective. It will not, for example, provide for appeals or for the imposition of requirements through the code. Nor could we police the system under the proposed amendment, as there are no powers of direction for work-based learning providers. Contractual agreements, on the other hand, can potentially provide an effective mechanism to require compliance.

There are also likely to be other issues with relying on the power. For example, in terms of operational effectiveness, there might be an issue with how this provision would fit with what happens on the ground. Specifically, there is a question as to whether subcontractors, for instance, providing work-based learning, would be caught by the wording of the amendment. On the face of it, there does not appear to be anything that this power would allow for that we could not achieve through a contract with providers. Current contractual requirements for work-based learning already make provision for additional learning support for off-the-job training, with funding available to contractors to cover the associated costs of that. I'm happy—very happy—to repeat the previous commitment of the Government to consider what improvements can be made to the current arrangements as part of the move to Working Wales from 2019. IDPs will be a fundamental resource for providers in determining how to support young people with additional learning needs, and a key consideration here is that it must be with the consent of the young person. But I want to ensure that the opportunities are fully exploited for integration with the tools Working Wales will use to identify barriers to employment and subsequent provision delivery. And for all the reasons I have outlined, I would urge Members to oppose these amendments.

I have just realised that I didn’t call Llyr Gruffydd as part of this group, so Llyr Gruffydd.

Perhaps I am the only Member disappointed by that, I don't know. I just wanted to put on record that I am happy to support the amendments in this group and have done so formally. I won’t rehearse the points already touched upon, but I would just say that, previously, the Government has said that they are reluctant to extend this Bill into the private sector when it comes to training providers and work-based training providers, particularly, but, of course, they have done that in terms of nurseries that are in receipt of public funds, and the same principle exists here. That is, there are training providers that receive public funds too, and therefore I do believe that some consistency would be welcome here. And Estyn have also told us, during our evidence gathering, that if you do look at the principle underpinning the Bill, Estyn says that it is difficult to see why this specific group of learners shouldn’t be included. Therefore, I would ask Members to carefully consider the need to support these amendments—not to include work-based training providers within the remit of the Act, but at least to allow Welsh Ministers to do that by Order at some point in the future.

Darren Millar to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank Llyr Gruffydd for his support and just say how disappointed I am with the Government's response? I do appreciate that you can use contractual levers to secure changes in the way that services are delivered, but you have the representative body of work-based learning providers—many of them private sector providers, some third sector providers, others public sector providers—saying, 'We want these duties imposed upon us.' They're actually asking for these things because they want to provide the services that our children and young people need, and in addition to that, many of them already have expertise in delivering support in ways that might be useful for the private sector to learn. So, many of them said: 'We're already supporting people with additional learning needs; we want to see these duties extended to us.' As Llyr Gruffydd has quite rightly pointed out, you've already extended these requirements into the private sector when it comes to early years providers, and I cannot for the life of me see why there should be a different approach when it comes to work-based learning providers. At the end of the day, the taxpayer is paying for these things and there ought to be consistency when it comes to that provision. 

Now, we all know that where contractual agreements are put in place, it's really important to make sure that contracts are enforced and that contracts are written in such a way that people can't pick holes in them and escape the opportunity to be held to account for the delivery against those contracts. The public sector doesn't always have a good record on being able to do that, and we're going to be in a potential position where FEI colleges, if they've got work-based learning, could potentially subcontract that work out to a private sector provider, to a third sector provider, who has no responsibilities under these new arrangements and completely escape the policing system—completely escape the policing system—that you are seeking to introduce. I'm not asking you to work out all of the ways in which we need to make sure that that system works at the moment. I'm simply giving you an opportunity as Welsh Ministers to have Order-making powers so that you can extend the provisions of the Bill in the future. I don't know why you don't take this opportunity to seize them with both hands, and that's why I still want to push these amendments to the vote. 

If amendment 16 is not agreed to, amendment 24 falls. The question is that amendment 16 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, no abstentions, and 27 against. Therefore amendment 16 is not agreed. 

Amendment 16: For: 23, Against: 27, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 24 fell.