This Bill is called the Childcare (Funding) Wales Bill, and the Minister will be aware from amendments tabled in my name at Stage 2 that we've been, well, unhappy about the fact that we have yet another Swiss cheese Bill laid before us. While I'm grateful to you for tabling the amendment in this group, it doesn't absolutely specifically put your policy from your manifesto, and indeed the policy from our manifesto, explicitly on the face of the Bill. So we are left with a Bill that still contains uncertainties, which I'll address in later groups as well.

But a core uncertainty is the meaning of 'childcare'. The Bill does not define it anywhere, and while you say, Minister, it may mean regulated childcare, it doesn't say that in so many words in the Bill. I think it would be quite easy, really, for all of us to turn around and say, 'Well, we know what you mean by "childcare". We don't need a definition', but it became very clear at Stage 2 that this wasn't the case, and it wasn't clear at all whether it included activity such as providing food, going on visits and so on. There is complete inconsistency at the moment about how or indeed even whether those activities are provided free of charge by childcare providers in Wales.

Minister, you argued at Stage 2 that there's no need for a definition of 'childcare' as it's contained in the administrative scheme accompanying the Bill, and you just mentioned that. Furthermore, to put it on the face of the Bill would hinder the ability of Governments to modify or update what we consider to be childcare over time. I'll start with that second point.

This legislature is being asked to pass a Bill on what we understand to be the meaning of 'childcare' today. If you plan to change the meaning of a concept so fundamental to this Bill that it appears in its very title, then you should come back to this Assembly and ask us to agree to those changes. At the very least you should seek to bring any change to this Chamber through the affirmative procedure, because we are voting to allow you to spend taxpayers' money in a very specific way, and if you want to change that, you must come back to this place and ask.

On the first point, about the need for a definition on the face of the Bill, as you say, the administrative scheme refers to childcare being defined as, and I quote,

'care [or other supervised activity] for a child in respect of which the providers require to be registered under Part 2 of the Children and Families (Wales) Measure 2010 or under Part 3 of the Childcare Act 2006'.

Section 18 of the latter, as it happens, contains a definition of childcare that includes non-school education and, crucially, and I quote again,

'any other supervised activity for a child'.

An administrative scheme is, of course, just that—some helpful guidance. It is not statutory, it is not scrutinised. The Assembly has no say on its contents, so it's not the place for a definition on which the whole purpose of a Bill, made by law in this Assembly, hinges. And it's purpose does hinge on it, and I'll explain why in a moment.

The Minister is confident in the definition of 'childcare', obviously. It's included in the administrative scheme because of that. And we as a legislature should not be content with it changing without thorough scrutiny. It is not appropriate to refuse to put the definition on the face of this Bill on the grounds of the need to be flexible about the definition of 'childcare'. That's what this Bill is actually about, so please put it on the face of the Bill if you're confident in it, or at least define it on the face of the Bill by reference to those two other pieces of legislation. It's hardly novel, if not in the spirit of the new, what can I call it, consolidation Bill, if the Counsel General will let me characterise it as that.

So, I've tabled this amendment because a definition of 'childcare' would undoubtedly improve the quality of the Bill. But in so doing, I recognise that this presents a huge headache for Welsh Government as regards the purpose of this Bill, namely to provide free childcare. If we adopt the definition, as the Minister is currently asking local authorities and providers to do via the administrative scheme, he's accepting that, quote, 'supervised activity'—providing lunch, going on visits, et cetera—are within the definition of 'childcare'. And childcare, under this Bill, is intended to be free. There can be no charge for anything that constitutes childcare. But at Stage 2 you made it clear, Minister, that you saw what you thought was childcare and these activities, these supervised activities, as different things. The offer, you said, is not

'30 hours of childcare plus everything else together', explaining that that could make the scheme unaffordable—and I agree—but I'm looking at the 2010 Measure and the 2006 Act, and they say that such activities are part of childcare. And you say that childcare is free. So, this Bill needs to distinguish between activities that can be charged for and those that must not be charged for and must be free. By referring to these two pieces of legislation in your administrative scheme, you've already muddied the waters by permitting charging for supervised activities.

If this amendment were to be moved and passed, this definition would not facilitate your policy aim, yet you're relying on that very definition for your policy to be delivered. So, I hope you see my point: firstly, the definition in your administrative scheme needs to be changed so that it doesn't contain contradictory guidance; and secondly, as this shows, this Bill does nothing to tell us what is free and what will not be free—failing in one of its primary purposes.

So, I'm not going to be moving the amendment, because that would embed your mistake into law, but what I hope you will do before Stage 4 is come back to this Chamber and tell us how you will overcome that mistake and make it clear, in law that we can scrutinise, what exactly families can rely upon being free under the law and what not. Thank you.