The next group of amendments is group 9, and this group relates to categories of providers of funded childcare. Amendment 24 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 amendment in the group. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Amendment 24 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. We have re-tabled amendments 24 and 25 from Stage 2 because, while we recognise that the Minister has listened to the committee and stakeholders and included relatives registered as childminders within both regulations and the draft administrative scheme, this is again left to secondary legislation and a non-statutory scheme to determine. As has been made clear within Stage 2, this is not just about the types of provider listed but the registration process.

We agree that childminders should be subject to registration, and we have heard the Minister's reassurance about both schools and grandparents, yet this misses the fundamental point about the current registration process for being a childcare provider. Grandparents are still unable to register with Care Inspectorate Wales if they only look after their own relatives. I have to say, Minister, that when we've met with you, you yourself have said that the ones not taking up the offer have sometimes been those where grandparents look after their children. As PACEY Cymru, the Professional Association for Childcare and Early Years, noted at Stage 1, this leaves out a vast swathe of people who also care for their relatives, leading to concerns about the sustainability of the childcare sector, especially within our rural areas.

This ties in somewhat with our continued concerns about workforce planning, which will be dealt with under amendment 34. The Minister pointed out at Stage 2 that there is no stipulation for relatives to care for other children under the offer. However, this isn't made clear either on the face of the Bill or within the draft administrative scheme. Likewise, the exemption for schools under the Child Minding and Day Care Exceptions (Wales) Order 2010 has the side-effect of preventing the Minister's aim of wraparound care, as schools would have to work in partnership with a registered childminder to provide the childcare element or create a separate legal entity for representatives to register. While we received assurances at Stage 2 and Stage 3 that these will be reviewed, this needs to be made clear during the legislative process. That's why we're here today. The Children, Young People and Education Committee is also still waiting for the results of the call for evidence to review the Child Minding and Day Care Exceptions (Wales) Order 2010, which could ease the registration of both relatives and schools as childcare providers.

It is deeply disappointing that the Minister has issued a call for evidence during the latter stages of the Bill's progress, meaning that we as Assembly Members do not have the ability to scrutinise this evidence before the Bill is passed. This is surely where the processes of the Bill are lacking. We are debating a framework Bill, which the Minister claims is merely technical, but essentially it's delivering part of the childcare offer through HMRC. The Bill was at Stage 1 six months into testing the pilot areas; at Stage 2 before a call for evidence on childcare registration; and at Stage 3 before the first evaluation of early implementers of the offer was published. It does very much feel as though we are going back to this Bill in a year's time when the next evaluation report is published, and the year after, when the national roll-out has begun. That, surely, is not just putting the cart before the horse, but a whole caravan. Pr—. Right. Thank you. I nearly said 'Presiding Officer' then. [Laughter.] 

The Minister to contribute to the debate—Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch Llywydd. I understood what you meant—I got it.

One of the benefits of doing a piloted roll-out, where we've moved from seven to 14 and we'll move upwards in terms of local authorities, is that we learn as we go and we evolve and we modify the scheme. But the question here is what is put on the face of primary legislation. I understand, because it's a running challenge with this, but this is a narrow technical Bill to allow HMRC to deliver the childcare offer, and the rest will be described in regulations or in the operational scheme and so on and the administrative scheme. The administrative scheme, as I've said, I've made clear I will bring in front of the committee and I will be happy to have it reviewed and to discuss and analyse it. But, look, we've been very, very clear from the start about who can provide childcare under the terms of this offer. Only registered providers can deliver this childcare offer. These providers are regulated and they're inspected—that, for us, is important as a measure of quality and standards. It provides us with the assurance that the funding used for the childcare offer is being spent on childcare that meets a number of requirements.

Now, providers who sign up to things such as voluntary approval schemes, which are very, very welcome, such as the one run for nannies by Care Inspectorate Wales—they're very useful schemes, they really are, but they're not registered, they're not inspected, and therefore they cannot deliver this offer. We have, however—to clarify—already flexed the rules, learnt from the first year of early implementer, to ensure that childminders can be funded through the offer to care for children who are also relatives. We heard from the committee, we had direct face-to-face conversations with grandparents out there who were saying, 'Well, I am actually a registered childminder, I'd like to do this.' We talked about this internally, we came in front of the committee and discussed it, and we changed what we're doing on the basis of learning live on the ground.

But we do realise that the existing legislation has some prohibitions around this arrangement in the wider context, and it's for this reason that I've already committed to reviewing that aspect of existing legislation, so that we can look at who can provide. But the benefit of pilots is that I will keep coming back to the Assembly and saying, 'We've now learnt this—do you think it's a good idea that we flex it again before the full roll-out?' Now, it's important to keep that in mind. Childminding and day care are already defined in other pieces of legislation. Replicating this within this context is unnecessary—I've said that already. It raises the risk that those definitions could actually fall out of sync in the future, resulting in confusion or having to revisit primary legislation. 

Just to be clear, as well, we really do appreciate as a Government—I do, crikey, as a parent as well who has had three children—the contribution that many grandparents make in caring for their grandchildren. But my nonno and nonna would not have been able to access this childcare offer as providers, because they weren't registered with CIW; they were not inspected. I love them dearly, and they provided brilliant childcare, but they wouldn't have been able to access the scheme and it's the right thing. So, that's where the clarity lies.

Now, I can't see what would be gained from these regulation-making powers in amendments 24 and 25, which would only, in effect, be stating and defining categories of providers already stated and defined in other legislation. So, on that basis, whilst I understand where you're coming from on this, we can't support these amendments.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

Thank you. I am particularly disappointed in this one and I'll tell you why. Within my own constituency, and I'm sure it's replicated across Wales, we have many living in our rural, isolated communities who actually have Welsh grandparents who teach their children and provide childcare now, today, through the medium of Welsh. I know for a fact that they will not be able to access that and I see the aims for the Welsh language of the Welsh Government, and I really, really just cannot comprehend how you cannot support this amendment.

The question is that amendment 24 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, 24 against. Amendment 24 is not agreed.

Ammendment 24: For: 18, Against: 24, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

The next amendment is amendment 25. Janet Finch-Saunders. 

Amendment 25 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 25 be agreed. Is there any objection? [Objection.] We will move to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 18, no abstentions, 25 against. Amendment 25 is not agreed. 

Ammendment 25: For: 18, Against: 25, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected