Questions now from the party spokespeople. Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you, Llywydd. One of the main action points under the theme 2, 'Increasing the use of Welsh', in your 'Cymraeg 2050' strategy, relates to the central role of the workplace in reaching the target of seeing 20 per cent of the population using the Welsh language on a daily basis. You recognise the crucial role that the Welsh Government has, as an important employer in Wales, in that regard and commit that you as a Government, and I quote, will ensure that Welsh Government leads by example by promoting and facilitating increased use of Welsh by our own workforce.'

Can you give us an update on that work?

Well, of course, we do encourage members of staff working for Welsh Government to learn Welsh, and there are many opportunities for them to do so, but there is an internal report that is being further developed looking at how we as a Government will respond to the requirements of 2050. I met with the Permanent Secretary yesterday to discuss that.

Thank you very much. I have a copy of a report that demonstrates that you do have an internal working group of senior civil servants that has been established, as you said, and that was back in the summer of 2016. The report recommends that the Welsh Government civil service should commit to becoming a bilingual organisation, with Welsh and English as official administrative languages by 2036. As part of that, your civil servants have come to the conclusion that a level of what is called courtesy Welsh or basic Welsh should be a requirement for all posts within the Welsh Government as a starting point. Now, we’re in agreement up until that point. There are a number of organisations, including the Assembly Commission, South Wales Police and Carmarthenshire council, that have introduced a courtesy model that is similar, which would require bilingual skills—at a very fundamental level, or a basic level, such as enunciating Welsh words correctly and giving simple greetings such as 'bore da', 'prynhawn da', 'hwyl fawr' and so on and so forth. But, last month, in a letter to me, the Permanent Secretary said that the Welsh Government has no plans to introduce a very basic courtesy level of this kind and to make it mandatory. So, a year and a half since your expert panel recommended that, why hasn’t the Welsh Government been able to commit to implementing these fundamental measures and isn’t it about time that the Government led by example?

Well, thank you very much. As I said, I met with the Permanent Secretary to discuss this exact same matter yesterday. Part of what was recommended in the report involves definitions of exactly what is meant by whichever level of Welsh language proficiency we’re talking about, and I think we need to talk about that further. There are ways of doing that. We must get a better understanding of that. But I do know that she has requested that more work is undertaken on this issue and that will then appertain to the way in which we are going to ensure that our aim of attaining our aim of attaining a million speakers will be an integral part of what we're doing within Welsh Government.

So, it'll be another year and a half, it seems, until we get a definition of something that is entirely clear and simple, namely exactly what courtesy Welsh is. I've just given examples: things such as saying, 'bore da', 'prynhawn da', and being able to say Welsh words correctly. That's all it is. It's a very basic level of skills, the lowest level of Welsh language skills. So, I can't understand why it's taken quite so long to introduce this. The only thing that I can think is that the will isn't there to make progress here and that that is what is underpinning this and that you as a Government are not willing to show that clear example, which is so necessary.

Well, we haven't actually received this paper officially as yet, because it hasn't been signed off by the Permanent Secretary as yet. So, we have to wait until that report is issued, and then we will take the political decision as to whether we wish to continue with that system or whether we want to take it further.

Conservative spokesperson, Suzy Davies. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. First of all, can I just thank Paul Davies for appointing me to this new position? I cannot tell you how much I'm looking forward to it. I hope the Cabinet Secretary won't mind if I start with something of personal interest and return to rural schools, bearing in mind the experience of my own family over the last 15 years or so.

I can see that the consultation on these changes, and of course other changes to the code—we mustn't forget that—was held over a year ago, pretty much during the summer holiday period of 2017. How did your department comply with its obligation to give due regard to article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in the course of the consultation?

Presiding Officer, could I take this opportunity to welcome Suzy Davies to her new role? I look forward to working with her. And I take this opportunity to thank Darren for the working relationship that we have had—[Laughter.]

That's the first time that's ever happened. [Laughter.]

The truth about Darren Millar is that his bark is worse than his bite. While we have exchanged jibes here over the dispatch box, behind the scenes it's quite easy to work together and do business. 

You're too kind—[Interruption.] [Laughter.] 

You're shattering our illusions. 

Come on, you've done enough damage to my reputation. Please move on. [Laughter.]

I say to Suzy Davies that I know that she and I both share a passion for improving the standards of rural education, recognising that rural schools have an important part to play, not just in the education of rural children but in the wider community. In many rural locations, the school is the last standing public building in that location, and therefore we need to do what we can to support them. With regard to the consultation, I'm satisfied that, in carrying out that consultation last year, Welsh Government was consistent with all requirements that were placed upon them.

Well, thank you for that answer and for your very kind words, of course. I have to say, though, that the majority of responses that came in on the consultation were from councils, diocesan bodies and unions, and the children's voice was represented solely, it would seem to me anyway, by the children's commissioner, and I'm not quite sure how she managed to get the information or views of young people during that period, bearing in mind that it was their school holidays.

I'd be especially keen to know, actually, how those young people grappled with the national statistics office's urban/rural classification, which David Rees was talking about earlier. Certainly, a third of the adults who responded to the consultation weren't happy with adopting just one of the eight classifications in this method of identifying a rural school. But then it took nine months to report back to them with a longer list of schools, adding in that second classification to aid identification. And the stated audience for that report, released only on 2 July of this year, comprised local authorities, governing bodies, diocesan authorities, Estyn and some others with interest. No clear route to children's views or, indeed, school staff, as it was issued once again shortly before the summer school holiday.

You laid the new code on Monday, so at least that wasn't during the summer break, but the 16 months it has taken this to come into force hasn't given local education authorities a chance to sneak under the wire of a stringent regime; you've given them over a year to accelerate consideration of the very types of closure you rightly hoped to avoid. And I can tell you with my experience of the closure of Cwrt Sart, which isn't a rural school, that local authorities may be cognisant of a direction of travel, but they can be very, very determined to ignore it if they wish. So, can you tell us why it took nine months to report back on just 70 surveys, and why in June 2017 you didn't ask education authorities to pause any closure plans they may have been considering pending these material changes?

Well, Suzy, the purpose of the consultation is to seek as wide a range of views as possible. In the choice that I had as the Minister, I could have ignored the results of the consultation and laid the code earlier or I could have taken on board the comments that were made in the consultation that the list of schools wasn't long enough, and therefore ignore that and just plough on. I took the decision that I would rather delay the implementation of the code so that we could have a longer list of schools, so that we could respond positively to the points that have been made in the consultation. Otherwise, why have the consultation at all if I was determined to plough on ahead with the initial proposals? The reason why the second consultation was a limited one was because I felt it was only fair to those local authorities who, perhaps, had not responded to the first consultation because they felt they weren't affected by it because they had no schools on the list, but they would suddenly find themselves with schools on the list. I thought it was only fair to our partners in local government that they had an opportunity to respond to a policy that would now affect them if they were labouring under the misapprehension that previously the policy didn't affect them. The code has been laid as soon as it can under the proper Standing Orders here at the National Assembly for Wales, and I've been quite clear since I took up this office of my determination to support and protect rural schools as much as possible. But we have to be realistic: even with this code, that does not mean that all rural schools will remain open, but the case for closing them has to be strong, and local authorities in those areas, if they have a school that's on the list, should start on the basis that closure is the last option and they should seek every opportunity through a variety of ways to keep those schools open. 

Well, thank you for that answer. It takes nine months to produce a child; I hoped it would have been a bit quicker to produce a code. The school standards Act and the rights of children and young persons Measure aren't the only pieces of legislation that are relevant to school reorganisation; the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 is now in force, and I'm pleased to say that in the course of these changes—and, in fact, you referred to this earlier as well—you have said more than once that the existence of a small school in a community can be material to the sustainability of that community. At what point should an education authority consider the principles of the future generations Act? Is it during the process of deciding whether or not to go ahead and consult on a school closure, or is it during any consultation itself? 

Well, all local authorities are subject to the legislation that was passed here by a previous Assembly. What is really important is that they use the provisions of the future generations Act to inform their actions at the earliest opportunity, and I would argue, under the code that has been laid and hopefully will come into force in November, if nobody prays against it, that that presumption against a closure and the option to seek alternatives to keeping a school open, again, should not be left to the official consultation period, but should be employed by the council before they make any decision to go out to consultation on the future of the school. Because you and I both know that once you start that official consultation process, that can blight an individual educational establishment. So, it's very clear that the local authority should use this code and consider the presumption even before they go to a formal consultation and they should take into their consideration their obligations under the future generations and well-being Act at that point. 

UKIP spokesperson, Michelle Brown. 

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. In August, the Children’s Commissioner for Wales, Sally Holland, said she believes change is not happening quickly enough to safeguard children who are educated at home. This comes after two cases in as many years of children having been neglected, one of whom sadly died as a result. Can you tell me what you've been doing to safeguard children who are home schooled?

First of all, I would just caution the Member to make a direct correlation between the decision for parents to home educate and that, potentially, leading to a child being unsafe. I think that is a point of principle we need to start from: there is not a read-across in that situation. Since I made my statement to the Chamber previously about my intention to go out to consultation on the establishment of a database and enhanced support for parents who choose home education—that consultation will happen in this autumn term.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. On the point of the principle of whether children are safe with their parents, I would completely agree with you—we shouldn't be approaching this from the point of view that children are inherently at risk with their parents. However, Sally Holland has identified a risk. There is obviously a risk because one child who was being home schooled, who was then anonymous to the authorities, ended up dying. Now, I acknowledge that you've announced the establishment of a database to identify children not on the school register, but this falls well short of what the children's commissioner asked for when she said, and I quote:

'I've been calling for the government to act in a stronger way, so have all the directors of education in Wales, all the directors of social services and the government's own independent safeguarding board.'

She went on to say, and, again, I quote:

'For me the pace of change has been too slow and hasn't been strong enough to ensure every child gets the right to an education to be safe and to have their say.'

Is she right?

The commissioner, of course, will have every opportunity to formally comment on the Government's proposals when we go out to consultation. Let me be absolutely clear with the Member: what I am preparing to do is part of our educational reform journey in ensuring that every child is in receipt of suitable education. Any safeguarding issues that arise out of that are incidental and I think it is really, really important for Members to be clear that, even with the establishment of a database, that does not remove the need for all professionals to remain vigilant when dealing with their children, and to remember that that database will only apply to children who are of a compulsory school age, which begins at the age of five. Therefore, if a parent is determined to keep their child away from services, this proposal will only kick in when a child turns five, and I think it is also important to remember that there are limitations—naturally there are limitations—with this proposal if you are looking to ensure that all children are seen at all ages of their lives.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. I am rather surprised that you would think that safeguarding a child would be peripheral to anything, but I'll move slightly on.

Can you tell me if you've had any conversations with the Cabinet Secretary for health over a way that home-schooled children can receive similar or the same medical checks that children schooled in a normal school would be offered?

Actually, only this morning I had a meeting with the chief nursing officer to understand how, as part of our enhanced package of support for those parents who choose to home educate, we can ensure that those children have access to some of the health services that they would normally receive in school. So, for many of us—you'll be aware that, if you have teenage children, they'll have vaccinations whilst at secondary school. So, only this morning, I was discussing with the chief nursing officer the issue of vaccination hubs so that children who are educated at home can have access to those services.