1. What assessment has the Welsh Government made of the UK Government's plans to abolish a commitment to protect child refugees in Europe who are seeking to reunite with their family in the UK post Brexit? OAQ54906

I thank the Member for that question, Dirprwy Lywydd. Last week, Welsh Ministers wrote to the Home Secretary supporting the retention of family reunion rights for refugee children. I regret the UK Government’s decision to abandon its previous commitments in this area, and urge the House of Lords to support amendments that protect the rights of vulnerable children to a family life.

I thank you for that answer, First Minister. But, by dropping from the EU withdrawal Bill proposals to protect child refugees, Boris Johnson's Government has clearly set out its stall. So, my question is: how can we in Wales distance ourselves from a UK Government that would abandon the most vulnerable children and betray Britain's proud humanitarian tradition? The Bill is now at the Committee Stage in the Lords this week and next week. So, will you, and will Welsh Government, lobby the Lords to restore the Dubs amendment, which would guarantee the right of unaccompanied child refugees to be reunited with their family members living in the UK after Brexit?

I thank Joyce Watson for that supplementary question, Llywydd. The Welsh Government welcomed the inclusion in the withdrawal Act of 2018 section 17, which was the result of cross-party action on the floor of the House of Commons, which provided a legally binding commitment to negotiate the continuation of the current Dublin III arrangements. That was deleted last week in the EU withdrawal Bill, and it is absolutely right that the Welsh Government work with others to see that commitment restored. 

Last week, in the House of Lords, my colleagues the Deputy Minister for equalities and the Counsel General were, on two separate days, talking with peers who are interested to support amendments that we have drafted, and there will be amendments in the House of Lords to protect these most vulnerable children. The Welsh Government believe that the previous arrangements did not go far enough. At the very minimum, we need to secure the continuation of those protections that have been there in the past that the previous Conservative Government was prepared to see put on the face of the 2018 Act. Yesterday, in the House of Lords, Dirprwy Lywydd, Lord Callaghan said that the policy position of the UK Government remained unchanged. In that case, why did they amend the Bill? Why did they take away a commitment that they had already made? They ought to replace it, and they ought to give security to some of the most vulnerable children we see in this country.

I'm very disappointed to hear the scaremongering from your back benches, and, indeed, from your Government today, on this very important and very sensitive matter. As you've already quite clearly stated, the policy position of the UK Government in respect of child refugees has not changed in the slightest, and the UK Government still wants to maintain the commitment that it has previously given, reiterated in the House of Commons last week as well. As you will know, the reason that the amendment was voted down, and that other amendments to the withdrawal agreement Bill were voted down, was because, frankly, to tack them on to that Bill is insufficient in regard to the importance of this policy. And that's why the UK Government has said, 'Let's address this separately in other ways rather than simply tacking it on to the end of this Bill.' Do you regret the shroud waving from your back benches and the shroud waving from your Government, and will you acknowledge the very clear commitments that have been given by the Government in terms of its stated policy?

Well, Llywydd, the Member simply gets the facts of the matter completely wrong. It's not a matter of amendments being voted down; the amendment was—the amendment is Government made. His Government, in the 2018 Act, included a legally binding commitment to negotiate the continuation of the Dublin III arrangements. They took it out, that's the change. That's what we're concerned about. It's not amendments, it's the change that your Government made and the amendments simply sought—[Interruption.] Their amendments, the amendments in the Commons and the amendments in the Lords, simply seek to restore the position that he and his colleagues here and his colleagues in Westminster were supporting just a month or two ago. It's indefensible. He knows it's indefensible and he hasn't offered us even a smidgen of a defence this afternoon. 

Will your Government carry out an assessment of how vulnerable children are protected or not protected in Wales today—children living here? Because there are examples, and I'll give you this, First Minister, where a child can allege abuse constantly, constantly—. I don't know why you're shaking your head, First Minister. A child in Wales can allege abuse constantly, not be given an advocate. You can have a child with learning difficulties and he's not given an advocate, not taken to a place of safety to be interviewed, and then to be told off by police. What assessment—this is the question—what assessment will you do to ensure that our children living in Wales are protected?  

Llywydd, none of those points are relevant to the protection of child refugees, which is the subject of this question. The points the Member makes are no doubt proper points and ones that he can pursue. But I don't think he should try to hijack a question that is about a very important matter, specifically about child refugees, which I've attempted to answer this afternoon.

First Minister, I grew up in a community of refugees post war and to this day have friends of mine who actually came over as children after the second world war, lived in displaced persons camps for periods. So, what has happened is something that I personally feel is incredibly distressing as to what has happened. We have commitments in any legislation we pass in respect of compliance with various conventions: the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the 1951 refugee convention, the 1967 protocol on refugee children and, of course, the UN guidelines with specific rights in respect of refugee children. Will you give consideration to the fact that, if we were to give any consent to the current European Union (Withdrawal) Bill without the commitments in respect of refugees, we might actually be legislating in breach of our obligations under the Government of Wales Act 2006? 

Well, certainly, Llywydd, I will do that. This is one of those many instances in which the Bill currently before the House of Commons is a deterioration in the Bill that the current Prime Minister presented just shortly before the Christmas recess. They were happy to have this last year—why are they not happy not have it this year? They should. They can put it right. They can put it right in the House of Lords and then all the difficulties that Mick Antoniw rightly points to will have been addressed in the way that previous Conservative Prime Ministers and Conservative Members of Parliament were willing to support.