Diolch. I can understand that the Member is concerned about the impacts of this Bill on public services, and absolutely accept that that is a genuine concern. However, you will see from the updated explanatory memorandum, and from the raft of impact statements published with the Bill, that we have done a thorough and extremely diligent job of considering the potential impacts of this Bill, both before introduction and during the scrutiny process. 

And, as Helen Mary Jones has said, Ireland didn't do any of the work that we're actually doing, and, as far as I'm aware, no other country has done more than us to consider the impacts of similar legislation or to so comprehensively prepare for implementation. We have worked flat out to do all that we possibly can do to prepare for this legislation. The published data available from other countries on the impact of measures they've taken to prohibit the physical punishment of children have been explored and we've had discussions with a wide range of people in Ireland, New Zealand and Malta, who have similar legal systems to our own. And, in these countries, there is no evidence that public services have been overwhelmed following law reform. And stakeholders here in this country have been clear when giving evidence to the Children, Young People and Education Committee—I'm sure Janet Finch-Saunders will have heard this—that they do not consider that there will be runaway costs, and I think we should trust their judgment on this. 

As the Children, Young People and Education Committee noted in its Stage 1 report, those delivering services on the front line have said, without exception, that the Bill

'will improve their ability to protect children living in Wales because it will make the law clear.'

And that is why we are doing this. Sally Jenkins of the Association of Directors of Social Services said to the committee:

'In terms of thresholds for children's services, we would not be anticipating a huge number of referrals to us. There may be a small number of referrals that come through. What we know from other nations is that it will peak and then settle. We recognise that's likely to happen.'

Jane Randall, chair of the National Independent Safeguarding Board, said

'there's no expectation that there's going to be a huge increase in the number of referrals coming through to local authority social services, I think it would be dealt with within their existing resources.'

And Dr Rowena Christmas, Royal College of General Practitioners, has said:

'I can't see it's going to lengthen consultations. I can't see that it's going to increase the number of consultations, and I don't think it's going to increase the number of referrals I make to the health visitor or to social services, because if I was worried, I'd make those referrals now regardless of the Bill.'

And unanimously, from all the experts working in the childcare field, they all came forward with this: that they don't expect that this will result in a huge increase in referrals. And the Irish Senator Jillian Van Turnhout told a number of us last week, when she visited here:

'Professionals in Ireland feel the change in the law has brought clarity. It has changed the relationship between professionals and parents enabling them to talk about what they can do rather than what they can't. There is a sense that this has been preventative because advice and information can be provided earlier.'

Now, this Bill is removing a defence to an offence of common assault, which has formed part of the common law of England and Wales for a very long time. Social services already receive and investigate reports of children being assaulted, including from health and education, so this is not a whole new area of costly activity for any of them. We're working with organisations to put in place arrangements to collect data about the possible impact on their services. And this will be analysed as part of the post-implementation review. We can consider with relevant organisations how best to manage any impact on workloads or resources, and any cost implications.

So, what is being proposed is outside the normal funding arrangements that operate within Government and it's not clear why, in the context of the evidence heard at Stage 1, such provisions are necessary. I'm sure Members will agree that future Governments need to be able to consider, within the context of the budget-setting process, what their priorities are. And these considerations would need to be made within the context at the time, for example, taking into account what happens in relation to Brexit or any other unforeseen impact on the economy or fabric of Welsh society. Future Governments need to be able to make those decisions.

Furthermore, as is the case now, the Senedd scrutinises the Welsh Government budget annually, so it would be able to make an argument for additional funding for public bodies should it consider this is required. But I think we should listen to all those people who work in the services and the public services that we are talking about, and so I therefore urge Members to reject these amendments, which I consider unnecessary.