The next group of amendments is group 6, which relates to qualifying children. Amendment 14 is the lead amendment in this group, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment, and the other amendments in the group. Janet Finch-Saunders. 

Amendment 14 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. 

Amendments 14 and 18, brought forward from Stage 2, place the age of the qualifying child on the face of the Bill, and allows Ministers to change that age at a later date through regulation. While the explanatory memorandum and the draft administrative scheme clearly outline that three- and four-year-old children would be entitled to free childcare, the Bill declines to place the age of the child clearly within its provisions, instead leaving it to secondary legislation. 

While we understand the Minister's point of view on flexibility, we believe it is still necessary for the Bill itself to be open and transparent about its application. We recognise that the Minister tabled an amendment at Stage 2 to say that funding will only be available to those under compulsory school age, and has clearly included the age within the draft administrative scheme. However, this brings us no further forward to a transparent piece of legislation, as it is again left to secondary legislation or non-statutory guidance.

Therefore, amendment 18 is somewhat of a compromise to the Minister's wishes for future flexibility, allowing Welsh Ministers to change the age should evidence show that younger children need to access the offer. For example, evidence from the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee inquiry into parenting and employment highlights the need for the childcare offer to be extended to nought to two-year-olds, to ensure higher employment rates. They also found that the biggest barriers to employment were to parents who are seeking work soon after their first child is born. Although there are concerns about Henry VIII powers, this places the current aim clearly on the face of the Bill, while providing Welsh Ministers some flexibility to change the age at a later date, should evidence show further extension of the offer is needed.

Turning to amendment 15, my colleague Suzy Davies AM has ably outlined why we had to table these at Stage 2, and this sets out the reasoning why we will do so again at Stage 3. Essentially, this is about what actions the Welsh Government must take so that the Bill can even function, and, if they are not, would simply leave the Bill as an empty vessel. There are duties here that Welsh Ministers must undertake to make the Bill work. As a result, we call on the Welsh Government to accept this amendment in the true spirit in which this was intended.

As to amendment 16, this is intended to ensure that whatever the eligibility requirements asked for by Welsh Government to apply for the offer are underpinned by giving parents information. Essentially, it's about helping eligible parents for the offer to understand themselves what a qualifying child is. It is concerning that the Welsh Government is intending to set out regulations informing groups of people about their eligibility for a certain offer or grant without providing clear information as to what they need to bring along to evidence their claim. Thank you.  

Members, amendment 15 simply introduces a duty on Ministers to introduce those regulations to define the age of children whose parents can then rely on this legislation. Despite the very welcome duty embodied in amendment 4, which actually commits Ministers to funding the childcare offer, the likely fall of our amendment 22 means that we are no nearer certainty on which parents will be eligible because we don't know what 'care' means, and now, because we don't know what 'qualifying children' actually are. So, Welsh Government, of course, we know they can introduce the regulations to make this clear, but there is no obligation on them to do so. And for this Bill to be actually operable, functional, we need to have that age range, and so, we must have those regulations. So, if we don't have the regulations, the Bill remains inchoate and unenforcebale.

Amendment 16 also improves the subsection that helps us understand what a 'qualifying child' means. Section 1(7)(d) refers to a child who is the subject of a declaration made by virtue of, as yet, non-existent regulations. And I think it could be possible on a generous interpretation actually for that subsection to function without regulations, but I really wouldn't want to put money on it. So, if they are to be made, I think that they must include—. If they are to be made, the Bill already says they 'may' include a range of requirements to be met by a person making such a declaration. The amendment here simply says that if regulations are introduced, placing such conditions on a person making a declaration, then they must also set out what that person needs to produce or prove, or say, to show that they have actually met those conditions. I don't suggest what you might want to introduce by way of evidence, but, basically, I don't think you should be placing legal requirements on people unless you're clear how they can comply with those requirements. That's all this says. The amendment protects parents or others from potential uncertainty about how this Bill affects them. Thank you. 

The Minister to contribute. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I welcome the welcome we've just had for my Stage 2 amendment, even though it doesn't appear to go quite far enough? Can I also welcome the fact that we got to group 6, before Henry VIII powers were mentioned within this Chamber? [Laughter.] Now, Government amendments were passed at Stage 2, placing more details about eligible children on the face of the Bill. These made it clear that eligible children must be below statutory school age, but provided the Welsh Ministers with the flexibility to set that specific age range within regulations. Now, the Children, Young People and Education Committee made it very clear in our discussions that it doesn't wish to close down the debate about the age of qualifying children. The Bill, I would argue, as drafted, gives us that flexibility to vary the age of qualifying children in future, should the evidence tell us that that is what we need to do, making amendments 14, 15 and 18 unnecessary and, in that way, unhelpful. But, furthermore, I'd argue that the Bill as drafted provides Welsh Ministers with the power to specify in regulations the type of information a person making a declaration may need to provide. There is, therefore, no need to pass amendment 16 to allow for this to happen. 

Now, the Stage 2 amendment was passed and the Bill, as—

Will you give way?

Indeed. I will give way.

Sorry, before we move on—thank you, Minister—the whole point is that if these regulations need to be introduced, the power isn't strong enough; you should have a duty. That's all that my amendments 15 and 16 were about. 

I fully understand, but my argument, Suzy, is that they're not actually necessary, because we've made clear the commitment to actually bring this forward, and there's no doubt about that. But if I can just briefly turn to the amendment that we passed at Stage 2 deliberations, and the Bill as drafted, both now require that an eligible child be below statutory school age. It allows the Welsh Ministers, provides the ability for Welsh Ministers, to set by regulations that age range. It allows us also to specify by regulations the type of information that parents should supply when making a declaration about a child's eligibility. Now, I accept this is not the same as specifying exactly what information a person must supply, but being very specific about the nature of information to be supplied in regulations could indeed fetter HMRC in terms of what they can accept as proof of eligibility. And HMRC—it isn't an accident that we're using them, because they're delivering the very similar offer across the border. So, saying to HMRC, 'Well, if things change, we're going to have to come back to our legislation and change it', that seems the wrong balance. 

Now, I don't see what is added by these amendments, which seek to both specify a child must be three years of age to access the offer but provide the Welsh Ministers with the power to change that age, and require Welsh Ministers to include details of the information to be provided in support of a declaration in regulations. So, I just don't see that they are necessary beyond what we're already doing and what we've committed to do. And on that basis, although I welcome the welcome you had for the amendment that we brought forward in Stage 2, I would urge Members to reject these amendments—14, 15, 16 and 18.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

Let's move to the vote.

The question is that amendment 14 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 30 against. Therefore, amendment 14 is not agreed.

Amendment 14: For: 13, Against: 30, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Janet Finch-Saunders, amendment 15.

Amendment 15 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

I move.

The question is that amendment 15 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 30 against. Therefore, amendment 15 is not agreed.

Amendment 15: For: 13, Against: 30, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 9, Siân Gwenllian.

Amendment 9 (Siân Gwenllian) moved.

Formally.

The question is that amendment 9 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour eight, no abstentions, 35 against. Therefore, amendment 9 is not agreed.

Amendment 9: For: 8, Against: 35, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 16, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Amendment 16 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

I move.

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 13, no abstentions, 30 against. Therefore, amendment 16 is not agreed.

Amendment 16: For: 13, Against: 30, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 17, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Amendment 17 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

I move.

The question is that amendment 17 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 18, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 17 is not agreed.

Amendment 17: For: 18, Against: 25, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 18, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Amendment 18 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

I move.

The question is that amendment 18 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 30 against. Therefore, amendment 18 is not agreed.

Amendment 18: For: 13, Against: 30, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 19, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Not moved.

Not moved.

Amendment 19 (Janet Finch-Saunders) not moved.

Amendment 19 is therefore not moved. We reach amendment 20. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Not moved.

Also not moved.

Amendment 20 (Janet Finch-Saunders) not moved.

Amendment 21, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Amendment 21 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Move.

No?

Move.

Moved?

Yes, sorry—moved. [Laughter.]

Amendment 21 is moved.

The question is that amendment 21 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 18, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 21 is not agreed.

Amendment 21: For: 18, Against: 25, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Siân Gwenllian, amendment 10.

Amendment 10 (Siân Gwenllian, supported by Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Formally.

The question is that amendment 10 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 17, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 10 is not agreed.

Amendment 10: For: 17, Against: 25, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected