We will first discuss group 1. The first group of amendments relates to the duty to promote public awareness. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 1 and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move the amendment and to speak to the other amendments in the group—Janet Finch-Saunders.

Amendment 1 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Thank you, Llywydd. I speak to amendments 1 to 5, which relate to the duty to promote public awareness. Of course, we tabled these amendments at Stage 2 with the view that, because this is such a controversial piece of legislation with far-reaching effects on ordinary, otherwise law-abiding parents, the Welsh Government must continue its public awareness campaigns beyond the Bill's Royal Assent. Again, I would argue that, despite the Bill's aims to deter a certain type of behaviour, the potential consequences of removing the defence of reasonable punishment could not be more significant. This exposes parents to criminal penalties, rather than lesser civil offences, such as with the smoking ban, meaning that, for parents and families, permanent criminal records, harm to employment chances and potential separation could be the end result. Therefore, public awareness must be a central plank of the Bill's application. 

So, amendments 1 and 5: turning to amendment 1, at Stage 2, the Deputy Minister assured the committee that there would be public awareness campaigns beyond the Bill's Royal Assent, therefore she believed that this amendment was not necessary. Now, if future Welsh Governments are to report on the effectiveness and the consequences of the Bill to the Assembly, then surely public awareness is central to the Bill's success on changing behaviour and should also be considered in tandem by the Government. It's true that this amendment does not have a time limit, but we don't expect this to be continually applied ad infinitum. Amendment 1 is intended to ensure that the Assembly, when assessing and having an input to the Bill's application, is able to conclude how aware the public is of the Bill's consequences and whether future Welsh Governments do need to go further in their own campaigns. 

During the passage of the Scottish Bill, stakeholders giving evidence before the Equalities and Human Rights Committee noted that, aside from the public awareness campaigns at the time of legislation, there must also be a recognition that, because people are becoming parents all the time, there must be an ongoing commitment to campaigning around awareness. This is actually an excellent point that clearly shows the necessity for an ongoing awareness campaign. Parenting does not stop at a Bill's Royal Assent, nor does it stop six years later. Deputy Minister, I believe that it's your duty to take the Welsh public along with you, rather than to create an atmosphere of hostility and resistance, and continuous public awareness is vital for you to achieve that goal. 

Despite this Bill being laid before us for nearly a year, the feedback that we have received has been overwhelmingly negative. The committee's consultation showed that nearly two thirds of the respondents did not support this Bill. The Welsh Conservatives' own survey showed that 79 per cent of respondents were against the ban, with comments including the following: 'The state should not be telling people how to parent. There are already laws in place', and 'It is not necessary to seek to criminalise parents. The impact on a child of a parent taken away by police is greater than the impact of a slight smack.'

Such strength of opinion suggests that much more work needs to be done by the Welsh Government to gain acceptance for this idea outside, of course, of the usual professional circles. 

Amendment 5 extends the awareness-raising campaign to visitors to Wales. At Stage 2, I did outline that while the chief Crown prosecutor stated,

'ignorance of the law is no defence', more cases in Wales would pass the evidential stage than in England, raising issues of awareness of criminal offending for people from England who travel to Wales. Furthermore, while I really welcome the Deputy Minister's correspondence with the strategic implementation group and her commitment to consider awareness raising for visitors to Wales, I would be grateful if she could answer a concern I raised at Stage 2. In my speech to the committee, I asked the Deputy Minister about the options she will be considering with the strategic implementation group specifically about visitors to Wales. So, I therefore do urge Members to consider this amendment carefully and to support the meaning behind it, so that future parents are not disadvantaged by this Bill. 

Amendment 2. Speaking to amendment 2, this relates to information that is available to parents on alternatives to physical punishment. The Deputy Minister promised that she would ensure that harder-to-reach groups receive this information, but we believe that a duty to provide information on alternatives to physical punishment would guarantee the maintenance of a successful awareness-raising campaign.

So, I was dismayed that the Deputy Minister rejected my arguments at Stage 2. I disagree with her own arguments put forward that the parenting expert group's thinking about future campaigns would be constrained by this amendment. How? This is intended to be constructive and it is very unlikely that any expert group or future Welsh Government would disagree with the need to show parents the support available to them, so that they don't use corporal punishment.

During evidence, stakeholders raised deep concerns about groups of parents who could be much harder to reach. We also heard that the Welsh Government's current support package, 'Parenting. Give it Time' was woefully inadequate, missing a crucial cross-section of Welsh society because it is only available online. With this amendment, we're not placing too much emphasis on certain groups of parents, Deputy Minister; we're wanting to include everyone. The updated regulatory impact assessment has said that the age range of 'Parenting. Give it Time' would be expanded and in the last fiscal year, around £30,000 was actually identified to develop new resources. So, will the Deputy Minister provide an update on how this is progressing and whether tools are now available to those without access to the internet?

Finally, I must emphasise to Members here today that this amendment is not seeking to achieve a more complex constrained Bill, but we want to have some input as a Parliament to how the awareness of a smacking ban will be achieved. This will be an Act of the Assembly, not the Welsh Government, if it is passed at Stage 4. So, I therefore urge the Deputy Minister and Members to consider how we explain to our constituents across Wales about their involvement in making parents aware of the Bill's consequences.

Moving to amendment 3, on amendment 3, this ensures that the public are provided with information about what they can do if they see something. I think that the Deputy Minister's repetition at Stage 2 that safeguarding is everybody's business doesn't cut through to the concerns that we have. We want to make sure that members of the public are confident enough to feel that they have correctly judged a particular situation. And to judge is the key point here. The Welsh Government is asking everyone to be well equipped enough to see that an incident would definitely merit police or social service involvement. It would only be after a visit from the police or social services that context could be determined. By then, of course, the damage could already be done.

In evidence, the Welsh NHS Confederation and Swansea Bay UHB were concerned that the Bill's explanatory memorandum does not provide sufficient clarity on the definition of acceptable behaviour once the defence is removed, which could lead to more referrals. So, I therefore think that the Deputy Minister needs to re-evaluate her previous comments that it's up to the individual to do what they think is right in that circumstance, because, frankly, it's a bit of a cop-out. The answers we received at Stage 2 did not reassure me that individuals would be confident enough to know what to do in the event of seeing or learning of a child being physically punished. If the Deputy Minister's view is that it is up to the individual, then the Welsh Government has a duty to ensure that those who are reporting incidents are fully informed as to whether they should be or not and whether they are making things better or worse for the child. Alternatively, if this is not the case, then the Welsh Government should be clear that if the defence of reasonable punishment is removed, physical punishment is indefensible in criminal law. So, the public would have to report it regardless of the circumstances. So, I therefore, once again, ask Members to consider this very carefully and to support our amendment.

Amendment 4: I have re-tabled amendment 4 because I feel that we didn't receive a full or satisfactory response from the Deputy Minister about promoting awareness of the smacking ban amongst children themselves and young people. While I do respect the Deputy Minister's promises at Stage 2, I go back to the point that this amendment was based on a committee recommendation. What is the point of having committees if we ignore their recommendations? This was because we weren't satisfied with the Deputy Minister's replies on how the smacking ban would be taught in the new curriculum. I simply cannot accept that the Bill's objectives would be merely considered as part of developing the new curriculum. We need a clear response from both the Deputy Minister and the Minister for Education on how this is going to work. This legislation will precede the curriculum legislation, so we cannot be assured that it will be included in every school. The Deputy Minister also admitted that the new curriculum would not be designed to specify detailed lists of topics for teachers, so this could mean that awareness lessons differ from school to school, potentially leading to patchy knowledge of a law and its implications.

I welcome the updated explanatory memorandum that explains that work is being carried out to consider the legislation's objectives within the development of the new curriculum, but it does state that practitioners who develop the areas of learning and experience are still going through feedback and are considering how the guidance can be refined. Therefore, I would be grateful if the Deputy Minister would provide us with an update on their ongoing work, as well as a time frame for the Assembly to have sight of this guidance.

During Stage 2 discussions, the Deputy Minister did not quite respond to my specific questions, so I would therefore be grateful if the Deputy Minister would answer the following today: Deputy Minister, will you update us on the discussions you are having with the education Minister to embed uniform teaching of the smacking ban in the new curriculum? Also, will you advise how teaching of the smacking ban will inform children in a balanced way? And, also, how is the Deputy Minister addressing risks encountered by younger children who are unable to articulate their concerns? And of course, these weren't included within the Bill's equality impact assessment. Given that the Deputy Minister is seeking to protect the rights of the child through this Bill, it is only right for Assembly Members to be able to know how children themselves will be taught in the future. So, I therefore call on all Members to support this amendment.

Rounding off this set of amendments on awareness raising, I'd like to end with this point, which was so ably raised by my colleague Suzy Davies AM at Stage 2. She said, unless some of these amendments are accepted by Members of this Welsh Parliament, the position with this Bill is that our influence will be precisely zero over the content of an awareness-raising campaign. So, I therefore urge Members to consider these amendments carefully before casting their votes. Thank you.

I rise to speak in this debate on behalf of my colleague Siân Gwenllian, who is unfortunately unwell and unable to be with us today. But I also rise as a person who has campaigned for over 25 years to bring about this change. And this, of course, has been a matter that has been discussed on many occasions in this Assembly, long before we had the power, and the will was there. Well, now we have the will and the power.

I will speak to this group of amendments and then briefly mention our group's position on the others, but I'll make some brief general remarks to begin with. This is not about making a dramatic change in the way that the law currently works. It is currently impossible for a family to use the defence of reasonable chastisement if a child has been struck and a mark has been left. This is a very, very difficult law to enforce, because people are differently sensitive. I happen to be somebody who bruises very easily, so if my parents had smacked me, they would have got into a lot more trouble than if they'd smacked my big brother who never takes a mark and never seems to bruise at all. So, it's actually very difficult for parents to know what is and isn't permissible under the current law.

We're also not in this debate suggesting a revolution in parenting practices, because the truth is that all opinion surveys and all research now suggests that only a minority of parents continue to use physical punishment, and that most of those who do, when they're asked about it, will say that they did it in a moment of temper, that they regret it, and they don't actually think that it's taught the children very much.

So, while I do accept that the Members opposite have some really genuine concerns, and I think it's right that we exercise them and we discuss them, I really think we need to understand that while the change that the Government is proposing through this legislation is important, it really isn't as big as perhaps some of us feel that it is.

I understand, in turning to this group of amendments, the need to make the public aware of a change in the law. I have to say, I think the Government's commitment on this is substantial. We don't usually have massive public information campaigns when we change the law. We expect people to know that the law has changed. But when sometimes we are proposing a change that has a big influence on people's behaviour, potentially, then it is right to make them aware of the change. But I really don't think that the face of the Bill is the right place for this. We don't normally put these kinds of things on the face of a Bill. [Interruption.] I will, by all means.

Just on that particular point, of course we did take a decision to put this sort of item on the face of the Bill when it came to organ donation law, which again was a significant piece of legislation that was going to affect a lot of people's lives. I think it's absolutely right that we take a similar approach here, given that that's the Government's policy position, and, of course, they've been arguing earlier on today that policy positions should be put on the face of a Bill.

You could follow that through. I would argue that the change in the law on organ donation was actually much bigger in terms of its influence on people's practice than this is. But that said, the Government—if we just look at the evidence, and the most concrete piece of evidence is in the budget. We have a saying in Welsh, 'Diwedd y gân yw'r geiniog'—at the end of the song comes the penny. And the Government is committing, in this year's draft budget, to a £600,000 campaign to raise awareness. I'm aware, and I'm grateful to the Deputy Minister for her information in this regard, that they are consulting with focus groups, with people from minority communities, people from faith groups, to ensure that the messages get out in the most appropriate way to all parents who might need them. I don't see the necessity, therefore, to have it on the face of the Act. I would, in my contribution here, ask the Minister to assure us that, of course, this information will be made available bilingually, but I would make a plea for the design to be bilingual from the beginning, and for the Welsh information not just to be a translation of the information in English, just because that's usually pretty clumsy.

I have to say, Llywydd, when comparable legislation was introduced in the Republic of Ireland, the Government there didn't feel the need to do any kind of public awareness raising, because the debate had been extensively exercised in the press, and everybody was aware of the change in the law. From my own personal perspective, I can think of other things that the Government might usefully do with their £600,000, but I think that the benches opposite should acknowledge the commitment that the Minister is showing in this regard.

I'll turn briefly to the other groups of amendments, though I will return to them at the appropriate time. Group 2, about reporting requirements, again, I think the Government is generous in agreeing to accept this; it isn't necessarily usual to set down on the face of legislation two different time frames for reporting back, but I think, in doing so, the Deputy Minister is acknowledging that there are real concerns, and we do need to make sure that this legislation is working effectively and that there aren't any unintended consequences.

Again, group 3, with regard to sufficient funding, well, I would submit, and I think this is the Government's position, that there's unlikely to be much increased cost, because we are not going to see masses and masses of parents going through systems that they would not otherwise go through, but if there are additional costs, the Government has committed to the appropriate public bodies to meet those, and, again, we don't see the need to put this on the face of the Bill.

The amendment in group 4 is unnecessary, because, of course, this Assembly can always amend or repeal legislation if the majority of us decide that it is inappropriate.

And when it comes to the fifth group of amendments, amendment 10, the effect of this amendment, were we to pass it, would be to place in the hands of non-devolved bodies—much as we might wish these criminal justice bodies were devolved, it would place into the hands of non-devolved bodies the power to decide when or whether this piece of legislation is to be enacted.

Now, it is a matter, Llywydd, for this Chamber, not perhaps for me to say, whether this is deliberate on the part of the Conservatives—we've seen examples of them seeming to want to roll back devolution. These matters, Llywydd, are clearly devolved, and that is how they should stay. Of course it is right for the Welsh Government to be negotiating with the appropriate non-devolved criminal justice bodies and with the police to ensure that this legislation is appropriately implemented; it is not right to allow the Home Office to decide whether it gets implemented at all.

Llywydd, I look forward to the rest of this debate.

I call on the Deputy Minister, Julie Morgan.

Thank you—diolch. Can I start by thanking the members of the Children, Young People and Education Committee for the scrutiny of this Bill, and Members for their consideration of this very important legislation? 

This Bill is a simple one, with a very clear purpose: it aims to remove the defence of reasonable punishment. It removes the defence to an existing criminal offence, it doesn't create a new offence, and it seeks to provide children with the same level of protection from physical punishment as adults.

I've carefully considered amendments 1 to 5, relating to the duty to raise awareness. As you will be aware, the Bill already places a duty on Welsh Ministers to raise awareness, which I am fully committed to doing. Amendment 1 introduces a reference to public understanding, which I believe—in my view— adds nothing to the Bill.

Awareness raising will form one aspect of our efforts to inform the public, including parents, about the change in the law. We already provide a broad package of support for parents, which includes the 'Parenting. Give it Time' campaign as well as Flying Start, Families First and our universal health visiting service. We are engaging with a wide range of professionals who provide these face-to-face services for parents, including through our parenting expert action group, which has been set up as part of our implementation group. They obviously have a key role in ensuring parents are aware of the change in the law and how they can use positive approaches to behaviour management. 

Our communications strategy includes a comprehensive stakeholder engagement exercise, which will take place before commencement. This will include a wide range of organisations and individuals who work with children, young people and their families in Wales. Janet Finch-Saunders raised this proposal for an open-ended awareness-raising duty, and it was discussed and rejected at Stage 2, and my views on that have not changed.

But let me assure you that, by commencement, if this law is passed, this messaging about the change in the law will be absolutely integrated into the communications parents receive from health and other professionals and in a wide range of parenting resources, including the new parent information resources replacing 'Bump Baby and Beyond', given to all pregnant women and new parents.

I am fully committed to raising awareness, and I thank Helen Mary Jones for her comments. The Government is fully committed to raising awareness and have agreed to a focused and high-profile awareness-raising campaign. If this Bill is passed, the campaign will run for at least six years and will be refined based on regular research, including levels of awareness and changes in attitude. Therefore, in my view, an ongoing duty referring specifically to the law change is not required.

The updated explanatory memorandum sets out our plans to awareness raising with children, including our intention to consult with representatives of young people. Similarly, setting out specifically the topics that need to be covered in the awareness-raising campaign, which is suggested in amendments 2 and 3, I do not believe is for the face of the Bill. However, let me assure you, there is a clear plan that will ensure the campaign is effective and properly evaluated.

Also, don't let us forget the family information service within each local authority, our 'Parenting. Give it Time' campaign, and professionals working with parents, and they already signpost parents to available support.

All these issues are being considered by the parenting expert action group and their thinking should not be constrained in any way by specifications on the face of the Bill. We have a duty to have an awareness campaign, but I do not think we need all these details on the face of the Bill.

This Bill does not create a new offence. In this context, it doesn't make sense to include a provision requiring the provision of information about how a person may raise concerns if it appears to them that a child has been physically punished. And I repeat: safeguarding is everyone's business. As now, the public have a role in highlighting to relevant services if they are concerned about a child. This Bill does not change that.

In my view, I think it is unhelpful to highlight particular aspects of awareness raising over others. I believe there should be a flexibility to adapt and adjust the awareness-raising campaign, including taking into account ongoing research, and evaluation will be an integral feature of this campaign. This will ensure we find the best way to communicate with individuals, families, groups and communities as they will all need to be aware of this change in the law. Information, raising awareness: the information will be built into resources provided to parents as part of ongoing professional development. So, we will make sure that all this information is absolutely endemic. I don't think it's necessary to highlight particular groups, such as visitors to Wales. This will be built into all our communications. Indeed, I know Members of the Senedd have been putting their views into articles in different parts of the press, and I think that's very good, because it's also highlighting this.

I've already said that we are reaching out to hard-to-reach groups, and Janet Finch-Saunders mentioned those who don't use the internet. We already provide information in face-to-face discussions, support and in printed material. I do think we need to trust the public, as we do now. And people make decisions now about whether to raise concerns with social services and the police. I think it's important that we ensure parents are signposted to where they can receive help, support and advice on positive parenting, and this is what we are taking forward with the implementation group.

We have got fantastic commitment and enthusiasm on the implementation groups. I can't really think of a greater effort of work that is being made by our officials, by the—[Interruption.] Yes, certainly.

I'm listening to you there talking about protecting children, and I've been saying—hundreds of times on social media, in this Chamber—that children are alleging serious abuse in private care homes in Wales and nobody is listening to them. So, we're debating this now—whether that's criminal or not. I'm being told by children themselves, actually, some of them who've left care, that they have been assaulted in care and nothing is being done. There's silence from almost everybody in this Chamber, and we're debating that.

We're debating removing the defence of reasonable punishment here today, and if I can go on just to comment on the new curriculum, the curriculum guidance is clear: learners should develop an understanding of the range of legal rights and protections that they have. We will ensure that that happens as the curriculum is developed.

Therefore, I urge Members to reject the amendments proposed by Janet Finch-Saunders, as I don't think they are helpful in terms of what the awareness-raising duty, which already exists, needs to achieve.

I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Llywydd. If I can just say at the onset, before I start my next part, I am trying to be helpful. This is going to pass; we know already where the votes are today with Labour and Plaid Cymru. However, part of my role as an Assembly Member in scrutiny is to challenge as well, and I am, in my own way, trying to be helpful.

Now, what I'm asking isn't untoward. Examples of an open-ended duty of awareness can be found within the Health and Social Care (Quality and Engagement) (Wales) Bill, with the duties placed upon the health bodies and local authorities to promote awareness of the proposed citizen voice body. There is nothing to suggest that this is time-limited. So, there is no reason why this Bill could not have actually had that approach.

I still believe a public awareness campaign is vital. In New Zealand, a nationwide poll found that half of New Zealanders believe that the 2007 anti-smacking law has caused a decline in discipline. Almost 40 per cent of mothers of young children say they have smacked despite the law change, and the Curia Market Research poll of 1,000 respondents surveyed at the beginning of December also found low-income families—63 per cent—were far more likely to flout the law. Seventy per cent said they would not report a parent who they saw smacking their child on the backside or hand, while 20 per cent would. Twenty-two per cent of parents with young children said their child had threatened to report them to the authorities if they were smacked. Fifteen per cent of parents with young children had said they were aware of a family that had been negatively affected by the law, and 17 per cent of parents with young children said the law had made them less confident as a parent; 21 per cent of fathers.

So, those are my views, I would ask Members to support—. I cannot see, in my own mind—and members of the public have asked me, why there would be any reticence, and if this law is going to come forward, why you would not actually want to make the awareness campaign as strong as it could be, and, by that, I mean placing it on the face of the Bill.

The question is that amendment 1 should be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will move to the vote and open the vote on amendment 1. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. And, therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

Amendment 1: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Janet Finch-Saunders, amendment 2.

Are you moving?

Amendment 2 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

I move.

The question is that amendment 2 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will therefore open the vote on amendment 2. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is not agreed.

Amendment 2: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Janet Finch-Saunders, amendment 3.

Amendment 3 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 3 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will therefore open the vote on amendment 3. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. And, therefore, amendment 3 is not agreed.

Amendment 3: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Janet Finch-Saunders, amendment 4.

Amendment 4 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Move.

Amendment 4 is moved. The question is that amendment 4 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will therefore open the vote on amendment 4. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 4 is not agreed.

Amendment 4: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 5—Janet Finch-Saunders.

Amendment 5 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

I move. 

The question is that amendment 5 be agreed. Is there any objection? [Objection.] Therefore, I open the vote on amendment 5. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 5 is not agreed. 

Amendment 5: For: 15, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected