Now, in accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, both motions under items 18 and 19 related to the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Bill will be grouped for debate, but with votes taken separately. Does any Member object to the grouping for debate? I see no objections to that. Excellent. I will therefore call on the Minister for Education to move the motions. Kirsty Williams.

Motion NDM7513 Rebecca Evans

To propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 26.11:

Agrees to the general principles of the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Bill.

Motion NDM7514 Rebecca Evans

To propose that the Senedd, for the purposes of any provisions resulting from the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Bill, agrees to any increase in expenditure of a kind referred to in Standing Order 26.69, arising in consequence of the Bill.

Motions moved.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I move the motion on the order paper, and I'm very pleased to open this debate on the general principles of the Bill, having introduced it to the Senedd in July. It will provide the legislative framework to support our new curriculum and assessment arrangements.

The Curriculum for Wales, supported by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and at the very heart of our mission to reform education, will help raise educational standards for all and close the attainment gap. I would like to thank the respective committees for their thorough and constructive approach to scrutiny, and their subsequent report and recommendations. Unfortunately, I do not have the time today to address each of the nearly 90 recommendations, but I will, of course, reflect on Members comments as we move towards Stage 2. I'm also very grateful to everyone who's provided oral and written evidence to the committees, during what, of course, is a very challenging time for all organisations. On the totality of the recommendations, I am minded to accept 57 of them, accept 10 in principle, and I will be resisting 19.

Earlier this year, I committed to engaging with the debate on the position of English in the Bill, within the context of our ambitions for a truly bilingual system. The response to the survey on amending the Bill so that English would become a mandatory element at seven was overwhelmingly supportive, and therefore I do intend laying an amendment at Stage 2 to that effect. I note the committee's comments about a Welsh language code, and I am committed to working with stakeholders and the Welsh Language Commissioner in developing the clear Welsh language continuum for all learners as soon as possible. This will take time and thought, and many of the challenges that we face are not legislative, but they are about the ways of working, culture and mindset. I do not believe that the requirement of a code will aid us in this.

Welsh is mandatory from three on the face of the Bill, and that provides a very clear signal as to the priority that we give to this. Members will also be aware that we have launched a consultation on the draft non-statutory guidance for categorising schools according to their Welsh-medium provision. I sympathise greatly with the calls for this to be made statutory. However, that is beyond the scope of a curriculum and assessment Bill, and will need separate legislation. I very much hope that the next Government will choose to act in that way.

Now, more than ever, the mental health of our learners is so important. At Stage 2, I intent to table a duty to have regard to pupils’ mental health and emotional well-being. This duty will put mental health in a unique position, and it'll be a system-wide consideration to inform every decision a school makes about a curriculum. The teaching of mental health and well-being is already secured through the proposed 'what matters' code, and the amendment will ensure that all local decisions relating to a curriculum will need to factor in the impact of mental health and emotional well-being.

Turning to religion, values and ethics, I would like to express my appreciation to all stakeholders, including the Wales Humanists and the National Secular Society, for their contributions, as well as our education delivery partners, including the Church in Wales and the Catholic Education Service. The amendments I intend to table in Stage 2 will address some of the concerns that have been raised. The Bill will ensure that pluralistic RVE is available to all learners, whilst also ensuring that schools of a religious character can continue to operate in accordance with their trust deeds.

I also accept the CYPE committee's recommendation 50 in relation to section 58 of the Bill. The Government is content to place a duty on Welsh Ministers to make provision on assessment arrangements in regulations. I trust that Members know that my experience in the Senedd on the other side of the aisle means that I am wholly committed to appropriate scrutiny of secondary legislation, and in recognition of this, we have applied the affirmative procedure to powers and duties where it appropriate, proportionate and practical to do so.

I have accepted two of the recommendations to apply the draft affirmative procedure made by the LJC committee. First, I will bring forward Government amendments that will require that the RSE code and any subsequent revisions be subject to the affirmative procedure, as I recognise this is an area of wider public interest. Second, as the power under section 50 has a general role, I agree that I will bring forward amendments so that any regulations on further exceptions to the curriculum would also be subject to the affirmative procedure.

The changes to the curriculum in September 2022 will be significant, and I will publish our curriculum implementation plan and an outline research and evaluation programme early in the new year. These will set out how we will learn more about the progress and cost of curriculum reform, to report on these in the next Senedd. In my letters to the CYPE committee and the Finance Committee in the autumn, I committed to update the regulatory impact assessment to reflect information provided by our key stakeholders. I recognise the importance of having as much clarity as possible on this important matter.

I will not be accepting the amendments relating to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Quite simply, that is aimed at states, and it is not aimed at front-line service providers. Through this Bill, headteachers and governing bodies of schools will be obliged to design, adopt and implement a curriculum that includes learning on children's rights and the UNCRC. The proposed curriculum provides clear guidance on human rights learning and education, including an explicit reference to children's rights and the UNCRC. It is specific and practical duties, however, on public bodies that will result in improved outcomes, and this is very much the approach that we will take.

The progression code and the 'what matters' code are technical professional documents co-constructed with practitioners. The negative procedure means that we recognise the central importance of practitioners' professional judgment and provides the flexibility for changes to be made as needed, and I'm afraid that opening these to the affirmative procedure would call into question the validity and the trust that our process has in our professionals.

In conclusion, Presiding Officer, this is an important step on our journey to a curriculum for Wales, and another landmark moment for our national mission to raise standards for all. As I've said, I'm grateful for the committees' work to date on these matters, and I look forward to the debate amongst colleagues this afternoon. Diolch yn fawr.

Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee, Leanne—no, not Leanne—Lynne Neagle. 

Thank you, Llywydd. I’m very pleased to contribute to this Stage 1 debate to outline the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s main conclusions and recommendations in relation to the curriculum and assessment Bill. I want to begin by stating that our committee supports the general principles of this Bill.

The evidence we received made it clear that improvements are needed to the curriculum to enable our children to lead happy, successful and enriched lives, and to help them to make a full contribution to Welsh society and beyond. We've been particularly struck by the call for change from children and young people themselves. They want to see a new curriculum that enables them to develop the skills they need to begin their journey into adulthood. So, we welcome the emphasis on life skills and preparation for adulthood that runs throughout the new curriculum for Wales. Furthermore, we agree with the Welsh Government that the current curriculum is not fit for a modern Wales. The opportunity this Bill presents for schools to shape their own curriculum, based on pupils’ needs, is bold and ambitious. It has the potential to make a significant difference if implemented successfully.

Nevertheless, Members who have seen our detailed report and 66 recommendations will know that I have more to say about this Bill and the legislative framework it aims to create. As a committee, we are clear that, while we support the Bill’s general principles, there are still issues to be addressed. Our concerns are around the practicalities of how this curriculum will be rolled out effectively, whether there is enough time to train staff to deliver it, particularly in the context of COVID-19, and whether the Welsh Government is sufficiently clear about how it will ensure this legislation contributes to raising standards as well as providing pupils with the same opportunities and experiences from their education.

With only eight minutes, I can't discuss all elements of our report, so I will give a brief outline of the headline issues and some of the solutions we would like to see. But before I go into that detail, I'd like to pause to thank all of those who contributed to our scrutiny. This is the first Stage 1 to be conducted in a wholly virtual context. More importantly, it's the first Stage 1 to be undertaken in a global pandemic. We’re enormously grateful to all those who took the time to share their views and expertise with us in recent months. We know that so many of them have been on the front line, managing the impact of the coronavirus, and ensuring that our children and young people continue to receive care, support and education in Wales. So, I would like to give them my heartfelt thanks for helping us to ensure that, despite the challenges of the pandemic, our scrutiny has been as robust and as comprehensive as any piece of primary legislation rightly demands.

I also want to thank our clerk, Llinos Madeley, our researcher, Michael Dauncey, as well as Lisa Salkeld and Rhiannon Lewis from the legal team for all their hard work on this Stage 1. I've said before that the committee is blessed to have such a brilliant team supporting us, and this report is further evidence of that.

I’ll turn now to the main issues we think need further work between now and the Bill’s passing. Firstly, we think more reassurance is needed about the balance that will be struck between local flexibility and national consistency. We support the aim of empowering teachers to design a curriculum that meets the needs of pupils. We also recognise that the new curriculum will not be uniform across all schools. But we think it’s vital that children in Wales receive consistent opportunities and experiences from their education. On that basis, we’ve asked for further clarity on the checks and balances the Government will put in place to monitor and maintain that correct balance. Closely linked to this, we’ve called on the Government to monitor closely any variation in the curriculum offer and any impact that has on particular groups of pupils. This is essential if we are to avoid entrenching existing disadvantage.

Our report recognises the significant hope stakeholders have that the new curriculum will have a positive impact on standards and school improvement. While we agree with the Minister that the status quo is not fully delivering in this regard, we have not been shown demonstrable evidence that the new curriculum will lead to higher standards. In view of this, we call on the Government to monitor closely and transparently the impact that curriculum reform has on standards. It’s crucial to ensure it complements the wider school improvement efforts under way.

Moving now to details on the face of the Bill. This has been a matter of some discussion during Stage 1. Some stakeholders agreed with the Minister that including significant detail and prescription on the face of the Bill would undermine the overarching aim of allowing flexibility for schools to design a curriculum tailored to the needs of their children and young people. Others were concerned that more detail is needed on the face of the Bill to be sure that important areas not currently listed have a secure place within the new curriculum. We accept that the longer the list of requirements on the face of the Bill, the narrower the opportunities may be to realise the flexibility it seeks to deliver. Nevertheless, the reasoning applied to decisions surrounding what is placed on the face of a Bill and what resides in secondary legislation must be clear. We think more work is needed here, so we have called on the Government to set out the principles that have guided decisions about what aspects of teaching and learning are included on the face of Bill as mandatory elements.

Closely linked to this, while we recognise the Government’s desire to avoid overcrowding the Bill, we believe that explicit reference to mental health and well-being is indeed needed on the face of this legislation. As a committee, our commitment to ensuring parity of esteem for mental health is clear, and we believe this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity that warrants a belt-and-braces approach. As such, we have called for an amendment in this area during Stage 2, and we look forward to hearing more detail from the Minister on the amendments she is suggesting.

With the time remaining I will touch briefly on some other important recommendations. Firstly, we’ve called on the Welsh Government to amend the Bill to resolve concerns about the impact on immersion in the Welsh language up to age 7. We welcome the Minister’s intention to table an amendment removing English as a mandatory element for this age group. More broadly, if the Government is to reach its target of a million Welsh speakers by 2050, the scale of the transformation of teaching and learning Welsh in English-medium schools cannot be overstated. The extent of the Welsh Language Commissioner’s concerns about this was clear, so we have called on the Government to work with the commissioner to strengthen the basis within the Bill and the wider curriculum framework for the single Welsh continuum.

Moving now to RVE and RSE. As a committee, we support unanimously the provisions in the Bill to make these mandatory elements of the curriculum. We also support the fact that the Bill does not include a right to withdraw from either subject. Our report is clear that this support is predicated on provision being objective, pluralistic and critical. We make a number of recommendations in that regard, and have asked the Minister to clarify some specific points during today’s debate. We believe developmentally appropriate RSE is essential to creating the necessary conditions to enable our children and young people to access the high-quality, comprehensive relationships and sexuality education befitting of a modern, tolerant and inclusive country. It is also a vital mechanism to help children and young people to understand and respect both their own rights and those of others under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and more broadly, under the European convention on human rights. Our report notes our deep concern about the circulation of misinformation about the Bill's RSE provisions. I would like to place on record that it's completely clear to the committee that the intention of RSE is to educate and protect children and young people, rather than in any way to expose them to inappropriate content.

Finally, barriers to the Bill's effective implementation formed a key part of our scrutiny. Making time to enable sufficient professional learning and development for the workforce is vital to the success of this Bill, especially given the backdrop of COVID, and this will be challenging. We do not think this should prevent the Bill passing through the Senedd, but we do think more work is needed to assure us, the sector, and parents and carers that everything that needs to be in place is in place for the new curriculum's roll-out.

In closing, Llywydd, I'd like to thank the Minister and her officials for their positive engagement with our Stage 1. We've undertaken our scrutiny in the spirit of providing constructive and rigorous oversight of what we view as the biggest change to education since devolution began. We urge the Senedd to support this Bill, and look forward to seeing our recommendations delivered during the next stages of the legislative process. Diolch yn fawr.

Chair of the Finance Committee, Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. I'm very pleased to contribute to this debate today as Chair of the Finance Committee. We've made nine recommendations. Given the time available, I will perhaps focus on some of our main concerns in this debate this afternoon.

The committee heard from the Minister that the Bill provides the legislative underpinning for the development of a wholesale reform of the curriculum and assessment for Wales, but there were only two options contained within the regulatory impact assessment, namely do nothing, or legislate, and we believe that the RIA should be a key tool to critically assess a range of methods, and to provide an evidence-based approach to policy-making decisions and the committee is concerned that informed, comprehensive RIAs are not driving the decision-making process here. Whilst the committee accepts that the impact of the pandemic may have created a more difficult environment for the preparation of the Bill, we are concerned that the Welsh Government has replaced the explanatory memorandum two months after the original was laid. Whilst the changes weren't particularly relevant to consideration of the financial aspects of the Bill, that's a worrying precedent that has been set.

The RIA notes that the curriculum will be decided at school level with each school applying the curriculum requirements in their own contexts. Therefore, there is no single basis on which to assess the costs of the legislation. However, a significant proportion of the costs are estimated to fall to schools, and that is between £146 million and £438 million, or between 45 per cent and 71 per cent of the total costs.

The methodology used to estimate the costs for schools was based primarily on a survey of 15 innovation schools, with the RIA providing a plus or minus 50 per cent range on the estimate costs. It's disappointing that a more representative sample of the wider school population has not been used, and that more detailed work of the costs to schools across Wales was not undertaken. Our second recommendations recommend that this work should be undertaken and included in a revised RIA.

The duties placed on pupil referral units and education other than at schools are different to those placed on schools. The Welsh Government undertook a small-scale investigation with these stakeholders. However, the transition and ongoing costs were not included in the RIA, as they weren't considered robust enough to aggregate to an all-Wales level. The Minister confirmed the Bill would provide a framework for learners in education other than at school, entitling them to have access to the new curriculum arrangements. However, she said that given the wide range of different learning needs in that sector, it was difficult to quantify costs, because it's a needs-based approach, and therefore the costs were not included. We recommend in our third recommendation that the Welsh Government should undertake further work to define and estimate the costs for education other than at school in consultation with stakeholders.

Now, £126.8 million will be provided to schools for professional learning. The Minister confirmed that the funding allocated to schools is determined by a funding formula. We also heard from the Minister that other elements of professional learning are accounted for in different ways, and that the National Academy for Educational Leadership is funded via an annual grant.

To aid transparency, the committee recommends that details of the teacher-based formula used to fund schools and information on the other ways schools receive funding should be published.

We heard that engagement with a number of key stakeholders had to be paused in response to COVID-19. As I mentioned at the beginning of my contribution, the committee acknowledges the impact of the pandemic, of course. However, it is disappointing that the engagement work with stakeholders had not progressed further upon the Bill’s introduction. This leads to a number of concerns around the evidence used by Welsh Government in making the decisions outlined in the explanatory memorandum.

We are grateful to the Minister for providing an update on engagement with stakeholders, which stated that Welsh Government officials had met with representatives from the further education sector to discuss the potential impact on the post-16 education system, including financial implications for training. We recommend that the detail on the Welsh Government’s discussions with stakeholders around the potential costs to the post-16 education sector should be published along with any details of the financial implications.

That's a brief outline of some of the main recommendations that we made, but the full range of recommendations is available in the committee's report. Thank you.

I call the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Thank you, Llywydd. Our report contains 11 recommendations, and I thank the Minister for addressing our report and some of those recommendations in her opening remarks, and in particular the commitment to apply the affirmative procedure to certain parts of the Bill in connection with the recommendations that our committee has made.

My opening remarks will focus on our consideration of the human rights matters. We have acknowledged that the Minister has given a lot of thought to human rights issues when developing the Bill, which we welcome. It is vital that the new curriculum for Wales is both designed and delivered in a way that is objective, critical, pluralistic and altogether compliant with the convention rights of both children and parents.

In this regard, we consider that the codes that will be made under sections 6 to 8 of the Bill to be of fundamental importance. As such, we are unconvinced by the Minister’s reasoning as to why these codes should be subject to the negative procedure in the Senedd. While we welcome the Minister’s commitment to involving the relevant professions in developing the codes, we could not see why such co-construction should influence the determination of which scrutiny procedure would be applied. It was our view that an enhanced affirmative procedure should apply to the making of the codes. Therefore, our first recommendation was that the Bill be amended to require the codes made under sections 6 to 8 of the Bill to be subject to the affirmative procedure, whilst retaining the consultative provision in section 72(2)(a).

Just moving on quickly to section 25 of the Bill, Members will know that section 25 enables Welsh Ministers to make regulations that may impose further curriculum requirements in relation to pupils aged 14 to 16 at a maintained school. The Minister considers that flexibility is needed to see how schools’ practice develops. However, we have concerns that this is a broad power that lacks sufficient detail, and our third recommendation is that section 25 be amended to include a non-exhaustive but comprehensive list of the circumstances in which the regulation-making powers in section 25(1) may be used. Furthermore, recommendation 4 says the Bill should be amended so that regulations made under section 25(1) are subject to the affirmative procedure.

Section 40 of the Bill also contains a substantial power for the Welsh Ministers. In recommendation 6 of our report, we asked the Minister to use today’s debate to clarify why the power in section 40 is needed in addition to the power in section 50. We also asked the Minister to explain how the power of direction in section 40 may be used by Welsh Ministers. Given the nature of the power in section 40 of the Bill, and the fact that it is not subject to a Senedd procedure, recommendation 7 asks that the Welsh Ministers notify Senedd Members via written statement on each occasion that the power of direction is used.

Moving on quickly again to section 47 of the Bill, the Minister told us that she has already assessed the need for using the powers in section 47 at the outset to set time limits in respect of appeals about temporary exceptions for individual pupils. In our view, these time limits should be placed on the face of the Bill. In order to provide flexibility, this could be accompanied by a provision permitting the time limits to be amended by regulations. However, such a Henry VIII power must be subject to the affirmative procedure. Our recommendation 8 deals with these matters.

In the event that the Minister rejected recommendation 8, our ninth recommendation is that the Minister amends section 47(8) so that the Welsh Ministers are placed under a duty to make regulations that make further provision regarding the time limits for appeals under the section, rather than providing the Minister with a general power.

My final comment relates to section 50 of the Bill, which the Minister did address. She herself recognised that the disapplication or modification of the curriculum for any pupil is a serious step. There are also no conditions attached to the exercise of the power in section 50. For these reasons, we did not consider that the negative procedure is appropriate, and our tenth recommendation was that the Bill should be amended so that regulations made under section 50 are subject to the affirmative procedure. And, of course, I welcome—. I think it was the Minister's confirmation that the affirmative procedure would be applied; I hope I heard that correctly from the Minister, but thank you for that. Diolch, Llywydd. 

Could I just begin by thanking fellow committee members and our hard-pressed clerks and researchers, the Minister and her officials and, of course, our witnesses? Can I please urge everyone to read this report in full to see quite how thoroughly we have examined this, not just the overhaul of the system but the new time pressures brought around by COVID, and the controversial mandatory elements in the new curriculum? It is a distillation of a phenomenal amount of written and oral evidence acquired through well-publicised consultation, including with children and young people.

And I just want to emphasise that last point: this Welsh Parliament in legislation introduced over a decade ago committed to giving due regard to children's rights in the process of legislating or making policy, and balancing these with parents' rights has really exercised our committee, as well as, clearly, the LJC. 

The evidence, of course, has been far from one way, but what has come through loud and clear is that our current curriculum could be so much better in helping teachers and parents guide our children to adulthood in a modern world with new and age-old challenges, and perhaps prepare them for it in a way that most of us didn't experience. 

Now, whilst I support the general principles of the Bill, I'm still sceptical about whether it can achieve the aims as it stands. It's my perennial complaint about Swiss cheese Bills—so much is left to guidance or codes and, without them, the Minister is asking us to take a lot on trust, and support at this Stage doesn't guarantee my support later on, because I share some of Lynne's concerns about rolling out the practicalities. But at this Stage, I'm certainly supporting the Bill. 

I'm grateful that the Minister has already agreed to address the issue of teaching English below the age of seven and mental health, and I'm keen to hear a little bit more, actually, about the response to our concerns regarding religion, values and ethics in voluntary-aided schools' teaching. Other schools, as you may know, will be required to give regard to the locally-agreed RVE curriculum, whereas voluntary-aided schools must teach in accordance with that curriculum, a much stronger obligation, or provide that curriculum separately on request. I think that's an obligation that discriminates against faith schools. 

All schools should be subject to the 'give regard' requirement, and the right to request a parallel curriculum be removed as unnecessary or at least limited. I saw no persuasive evidence that the current locally-agreed religious education curriculum is being taught in a way that is not pluralistic, and so I also reject the argument that the new RVE curriculum is bound to be at odds with trust deeds or religious tenets of a faith school. Those schools already meet the needs of children from all kinds of faiths and none, but I do make this point: faith schools, you have told us that you can be broad and balanced, that you can do that. You will still be party to the design of the local RVE curriculum. There will be no secular risk veto. If you have the same 'give regard' compliance requirement as every other school, then you should not need to look behind your deeds. You should be able to deliver a denominational curriculum that has regard to a local RVE curriculum.

Minister, I'm afraid I'll still be looking for an amendment, or putting in one myself, permitting the start date for the implementation of the curriculum to be staggered. I know, Minister, that you're worried that some schools will take things to the wire, regardless of where the wire is, but I'm genuinely worried about teachers who won't be ready, because of COVID or lack of guidance, but who absolutely want to do this well.

I appreciate the confirmation that we as Members will get some oversight of the RSE codes, possibly some guidance—certainly more than the Bill currently suggests—but we are not sighted on them now. Relationships and sexuality education in particular has some controversial elements, and teachers are looking for very clear instruction. And I'm not surprised, because, despite the fact that older children have been quite categoric that they want this to be on the curriculum, there are some very understandable concerns on the part of parents about what exactly children will be taught when they're younger, and on the part of teachers who do not feel trained well enough at the moment to teach and respond to children. Parent governors will be key individuals in signing off a school's curriculum; let's remember this crucial role. But I'm afraid the Welsh Government has not helped manage these worries particularly well during the development of this Bill.

My group has a free vote on this, incidentally, but my own experience is of working in domestic violence and family law before becoming a Member of this Senedd. Instances where child protection has completely failed make me certain that we need this in the Bill, but information has been spreading and mutating, leaving parents not knowing what to believe, so much of which could have been avoided if we'd had a draft RSE code, after almost five years of preparation, to consider alongside the Bill, and so urgent action on recommendation 24 is needed. Lots more to say, Llywydd, but I appreciate my time is up. Diolch.

If implemented and operated correctly, the new curriculum could provide the skills and confidence required for future generations. The committee's work has been crucial in trying to identify any barriers and any unintended consequences that could arise from the Bill, and the fact that we have drawn up 66 recommendations does demonstrate that our scrutiny did uncover a number of issues that are a cause of concern, and I would like to thank everyone who has assisted us through this process.

One of the key considerations that the Government and the Senedd need to take into account is how we secure a consistent national curriculum across Wales. There is a general desire among young people to learn about the same things. We need details as to how the Government will ensure that individual school curricula will be appropriate, balanced, and will lead to consistency. We also need to be entirely clear that the new curriculum won't lead to widening disparity and disadvantage.

I continue to argue that the Bill itself is inconsistent in terms of what's included on the face of the Bill and what is not on the face of the Bill. I agree with the mandatory elements already there. They are important. But in my view there are two other areas that are just as important, and I agree entirely with the committee that mental health and well-being should be referred to on the face of the Bill, and I look forward to seeing what the Minister will bring forward in that area.

I also believe that the same status should be provided to the story of Wales, the history and stories of Wales in all their diversity, including the histories of BAME communities and people of colour. Specific reference should be made to the story of Wales on the face of the Bill, for the same reasons as the others are included on the face of the Bill: in order to provide prominence to the area and the need for it to be taught; to ensure its value for future generations; so that we don't ignore or avoid issues that may be seen as difficult or ones that teachers don't have sufficient information about.

I will pause on the story of Wales and the need for this to be mandatory. The emphasis on Cynefin, local history, is a great thing, but the national story also needs to have status, and the only way to do that is to include it on the face of the Bill. There are new resources for Welsh history and BAME history in the pipeline, which is excellent, of course, but they must be mandatory. It would be a huge mistake, in my view, not to include one specific unit on the story of Wales as part of the humanities, and the only way to put that right now is to include a specific reference to it on the face of the Bill.

What country would actually omit its own story from its education curriculum? It has to be on the face of the Bill, or there is a risk that some future citizens will be deprived of information about their past. Learning about Wales and its people is central to the process of helping learners to develop an awareness of their national identity, but also about other identities—those that overlap and are multiple and relate to each other. This is crucial to encourage empathy, social awareness and to encourage active citizenship among learners, citizenship that is open-minded and sensitive socially and culturally. I very much hope that I will be able to persuade you on this point as this Bill proceeds through its parliamentary journey.

In turning now to a section of the Bill dealing with the Welsh and English languages, I'm pleased that the Minister is to bring an amendment forward at Stage 2 to deal with the problems arising with the immersion policy. But I do think that there is an opportunity to strengthen other aspects—for example, the language categories of schools and the process of implementing the continuum for the learning of Welsh. I do believe that the Bill needs to be amended to make it a requirement for Welsh Ministers to publish a statutory code for teaching and learning Welsh under the curriculum. I've heard what the Minister has said today, but I will be continuing to pursue that particular point.

Others have already focused on other aspects of the Bill. It is disappointing that the guidance for religion, values and ethics is not available for scrutiny so as to allay fears. The committee also notes that we need to launch a campaign to destroy the myths that have surrounded RSE in the Bill, but the committee was unanimous in the view that this aspect, RSE, should be included as a mandatory part of the Bill.

To conclude, there are many concerns about the implementation of the new curriculum. We must have adequate funding and training to support the process. Without that, and bearing in mind the challenges of COVID, then everything could go awry and none of us wants to see that happening. And, as the Bill proceeds through its parliamentary journey, we do have to think about the implementation as well as what's contained within the Bill.

As it stands, we cannot support the curriculum Bill. If the Bill continues to remove the rights of parents as primary educators, I cannot, in all good conscience, vote to support its introduction, regardless of any other improvements it brings to education in Wales.

The compulsory teaching of RSE, or relationships and sexuality education, and RVE, or religion, values and ethics, is derisory and has been rejected by the public in not one, but two public consultations. Yet, despite the lack of support, the Welsh Government have removed the rights of parents to withdraw their children from RSE and RVE lessons, and they are, in effect, telling parents that the state knows their children better than they do themselves. But, according to the House of Lords judgment in Regina v. Secretary of State for Education and Employment, the child is not the child of the state and it is important, in a free society, that parents should be allowed a large measure of autonomy in the way they discharge their parental responsibilities. The Welsh Government, however, are clearly prepared to ignore that judgment, just as they are prepared to ride roughshod over the views of the parents who have twice rejected the Welsh Government removal of the parental opt-out.

This is a topic that parents up and down this nation feel extremely strongly about, and I've had more correspondence urging me to reject this Bill than I have had on any other piece of legislation. And some parents and grandparents have spoken to me regarding what is currently being taught to their children, and some do not think that the content of the lesson for a child of eight, as was told to me, was at all appropriate.

So, why do parents feel so strongly on this? Why do religious groups and secular groups share the same opinion on maintaining the opt-out? Because some say, they have stated, that they have seen the sorts of lessons that will be taught under the new curriculum.

No, they haven't.

And parents are now—

How?

If it's a roll-out, if it's a national roll out, they have seen—

How?

—things that can come.

Allow Caroline Jones to carry on. The Minister can respond at the end and clarify. 

She's allowed to parade her ignorance. 

Teachers have—. Thank you, Mike. 

Carry on. Carry on, Caroline Jones. 

That's recorded.

Teachers have confided in me that they do not have training in this subject, and some would prefer a healthcare professional to teach the subject, because they don't feel equipped to teach it. And I passionately believe that children should be allowed to be children and there is no developmental need to teach sexuality and relationships to young children, and especially, as they've said, the kinds of materials that parents, teachers and psychologists have stated that they believe are coming into the curriculum.

Before we can agree on this Bill, this Senedd and parents in Wales need to see concrete lesson plans for the teaching of both RSE and RVE. And the best way to approach this would be for the Welsh Government to remove RSE and RVE from the curriculum Bill and move these elements to their own Bill. This would allow wider curriculum reform to proceed, and allow greater parental input into both RSE and RVE teaching. And unless the opt-out is restored and the Welsh Government establish a parental panel to review all RVE and RSE lesson plans and materials, I cannot support the legislation. Thank you. 

I was surprised—. No, I wasn't surprised with what Caroline had to say, because she said something last week that was equally appalling in my view. I cannot understand why it is derisory that a child has no understanding of what is going to happen to them aged nine when they start menstruating. About 30 per cent of all children do not know what is happening the first time they menstruate, and that is because parents are too embarrassed to actually talk to them about it. We have the worst of all worlds in our culture, both here and in the United States. We use women's bodies to sell all manner of products, from cars to perfume to chocolate, but we don't want to talk about what our bodies do and how we can keep ourselves safe from it. So, in the balance between children's rights against parents' rights, I firmly come down on the right of the child both to know what their bodies are for, the fact that it belongs to them, that nobody else has the right to invade this space, and nothing should be done to them that they are not content with. That is what we are up against, Caroline, and, in the world where the internet is everywhere, we absolutely have to provide children with the knowledge to keep them safe, and we are absolutely against everything that we need to do to keep them safe if we are not teaching them about how we have good relationships, respectful relationships, respecting difference and ensuring that we're not entering into abusive relationships because we're so desperate to please somebody. 

So, those are really, really important issues, and, not least, we know about all the research that's been done on adverse childhood experiences—if children are experiencing domestic violence, they must at least have the tools to understand that this is not normal, because otherwise they will simply go on to being either an abuser themselves or being abused, entering into abusive relationships. This is so important. Of course, all children must have mandatory RSE. So, I hope that the code will include mandatory menstrual education, because not just girls, but boys as well, need to understand that this is something to celebrate, not to be regarded as a curse, because if we don't have periods we won't have the human race. So, it's as simple as that.

I think the whole curriculum is absolutely brilliant and I think the education Minister has so much to be proud of. Just turning to the slightly more contentious issue of religion, values and ethics, I think that Catholic and Church in Wales leaders have, to some extent, interpreted this as a Trojan horse for undermining the denominational character of their schools. I think the obligation to provide both a denomination-led pluralistic education and, also, allow parents to opt-out and demand another type of religious education seems to be utterly burdensome on individual schools. How would we manage that?

I think if parents choose a school of a religious nature, they know what they're entering into. They are going to get something that's slightly different from the county school that they've chosen not to go to. So, I was interested to hear Suzy Davies talk about the recommendation to insist that all religious education needs to be of a pluralistic nature with due regard to the multiple religious feelings and none of the whole community. So, I think that this is an important distinction, but I think we also have to make a complete difference between religious education and an act of worship, because they are two completely different things. After 30 years of religious conflict in Northern Ireland still fresh in our minds and, sadly, it could come back, as a result of negotiations going on elsewhere in Brussels, we absolutely need to ensure that all pupils have respect for people of all religions and none. So, I think this is such an important issue, but I look forward to reading the report from the committee of young people, because I think this is such an important part of the work of the Senedd. 

I, too, would like to extend my thanks to all involved: the Minister, the Chair, all our committee members, the clerks and all who have contributed so thoughtfully and passionately in providing evidence to our committee. 

The Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Bill marks the first construction of a distinct Welsh curriculum. The curriculum that I was, admittedly, at first, very dubious about and very sceptical of. However, sitting on the education committee and listening to evidence, I now feel reassured in my concerns, although a couple still remain. But on the general principles of the curriculum and assessment Bill, I am genuinely excited for our children and young people in Wales to have the opportunity to engage in a curriculum that, I now believe, will, in the most part, far better prepare them for the real world. 

There will be relatively less prescription of what schools must teach, with no programmes of study, and I welcome this flexibility, but there, at the same time, needs to be a level of consistency across schools, which I outlined and debated on in committee, ensuring that there are levels that must be attained and taught across schools, so, as Lynne Neagle said earlier, there is fairness and equality in education across our schools. The last thing that we want to do is highlight the already apparent inequalities that do exist right now. And, as Lynne Neagle said, it is absolutely necessary that we monitor those standards and the content of what is being taught, particularly during the bedding-in period, when we get to that point, and that is an essential part of it. 

In addition to the four purposes and six areas of learning and experience, the Bill establishes three cross-curricular skills, namely literacy, numeracy and digital competence. I welcome that children will now be undertaking projects like starting their own business, which will teach them maths, English and other subjects in the round and constructively, with people seeing how to use the basic principles of these subjects in the real world. 

It also makes relationships and sexuality education, and religion, values and ethics, mandatory elements in addition to Welsh and English. Concerns have been raised on both of these issues. My son attends a Church in Wales school, which was through choice, as I strongly believe that the values that come out of that school, which happens to be a school that I attended, are so, so good and he learns—. He's such a rounded little boy and he's come back with such an understanding and respect for all religions, and I'm so proud of him for that and I'm proud of the school for delivering that sort of education to him. Therefore, I believe that the current curriculum, in terms of religious education, is delivering right now in my opinion and my experience. I do see all the arguments today, and I'm not going to go over them because they'll be talked about a lot today by people who are much more in the know than me actually. But I am concerned that the Bill notes that there is no right to withdraw from RVE. It's something that I'm still uncomfortable with, in my constant battle in my head between the rights of the parent and the rights of the child, and which one should come out on top, really. It's not black and white, but it is so important that we get that right and get everyone on board with it.

Relationships and sexuality education is intended to be taught across the curriculum to support physical, mental and emotional health and well-being. This was my biggest issue with it, when faced with this curriculum at first. I was at first very sceptical and uncomfortable with the idea of my 10-year-old son being taught RSE at that sort of level. But having taken the evidence and listened to people throughout the committee process of scrutinising this, I am now comfortable with what my son would potentially be taught. It is directed on what age you are. And it is so important that our children also learn about what's right and what's wrong in terms of relationships and things like that, and the massive impact that that will have on child abuse and things, going forward. I really do think it is absolutely the best part of the Bill actually—I think it's really, really important. So, I've completely turned around on that and I do think that if other people took the time to listen to people who contributed to our committee, they too would change their mind and realise that it is age appropriate and appropriate to be taught those things. I listened to the Member over here about being taught about the menstrual cycle. I was never taught about it. So, I had to find out, and that sort of thing should be taught in schools and not be a surprise like I had. It's a very scary and worrying time, and that sort of thing should be incorporated. I know that parents have a responsibility, but not all parents do that—not because they're irresponsible; my parents aren't irresponsible, but it wasn't the done thing to talk about it. It's those sort of barriers that we need to break down and this is a way of doing that.

On the preparation, I did want to talk about some other things. Firstly on the preparation of the new Bill in light of the disruption caused by this pandemic, there needs to be some consideration of the practical call from Suzy that it needs to either be delayed or staggered to give our teachers and schools more time to prepare, recognising the disruption that COVID-19 has caused. A recent survey we conducted found that 76 per cent of schools responded that the pandemic was having a negative effect on their preparation for the new curriculum, with planned work for the summer cancelled. Moreover, the recent OECD education review found that a large number of stakeholders interviewed, including experts in curriculum teaching practices, suggested that there was a need for more time and more targeted professional learning in order for teachers in Wales to be ready for implementation—

You're going to have to bring your contribution to a close now. I've been very generous.

Sorry, yes. There is a danger that, by rushing through implementation of the new curriculum, we are reducing the ability of teachers to deliver on its aims. It's a massive change, this curriculum, and I wholeheartedly wish it every success, but it is very important today that you listen to our concerns and that we iron out all of these concerns. Thank you.

Diolch, Llywydd, for letting Laura Anne Jones go on. I was enjoying her contribution. Indeed, I've been enjoying the debate in general. Thank you, Jenny, for your contribution.

My view on this is one that is on balance—it will, I think, go against most people here, but, on balance, I've decided to vote against the general principles of the Bill. But, for me, it is a finely balanced decision and it's not made with overbearing confidence. I speak with humility; I'm not sure that I'm correct. I speak tentatively in what I say. I also recognise some of the achievements of the education system in Wales under the leadership of Kirsty Williams during the fifth Assembly. I have spoken before particularly about the Seren scheme and the number of children getting into top, leading universities and the increase in that, and the rise in attainment at the highest A-level grades. I think both those are laudable. Also, when we had the PISA results—and I'm very struck by just how central the PISA results are to how we talk about education in Wales and how they frame that debate—I thought it was important—and those on the benches to my left I don't think did this in the debate—to recognise that there was an improvement, and it was a significant improvement. And while I think it's still fair to make the case that the results were less good than they were for other nations in the UK, they were better than the very poor results that had gone in the previous three-year cycle.

This is a bold and ambitious new curriculum, I think Lynne Neagle said, and the Minister said that it was intended to raise educational standards for all and to reduce the attainment gap. I hope it does, but I fear that it may not, and it is because of how bold and ambitious and how radical it is that there are greater possibilities of things going wrong and perhaps going seriously wrong, and I would just ask others to be alert to those. The Minister says that Welsh Government will monitor how it's implemented, and of course they must. Siân Gwenllian said, 'If implemented and operated correctly', but that is a very big 'if', because you are giving hugely greater discretion to schools and to teachers than we have in the current system. I appreciate the argument why that can be a good thing. Sometimes people refer to the system in Finland, where teaching is held in incredibly high regard. It's very, very competitive to get into, and teachers are paid much more there than they are here. And in that system, I've no doubt that greater discretion and professional judgment will work. But I worry whether it will work to the extent that the Minister and others hope within our system, where we have had a long period of austerity and where teachers are not well paid compared to many other professions and it's not as competitive to enter the system. I think if you do have that greater discretion, there will tend to be a greater diffusion of approaches and, potentially, results, and it could lead to an increase in attainment gaps. For me, what would make me comfortable about that is if it wasn't just Welsh Government monitoring it but that parents were better able to monitor it by having results that were on a consistent basis and that were published to allow parents to assess schools and teachers as well as for them to assess children.

I also think there should be quite a high hurdle before we move in a very independent direction about how education should develop in Wales compared to England. I know a lot of people don't like me making that comparison, but wages are very substantially higher, on average, in England, particularly in London, and if, through having a very different education system going in a very different direction, it makes it harder for people from that system to get the most competitive and well-paying jobs and into universities in that system—I'm not saying it will; I'm just saying I fear that it might, no more than that—I ask for that to be considered.

I also don't support the unequal treatment of our two languages, and Welsh being mandatory from three, but English only from seven, although I understand the reasons—other people make the argument for that.

Finally, what's happening in RSE and RVE, I hear the arguments made on both sides, and I thought Jenny Rathbone spoke in a very compelling manner in that, but I was concerned by how strongly people dismissed what Caroline Jones said and what was shouted across the Chamber at her, because I think she speaks for a lot of parents. And we've had a very British compromise from the 1944 Butler Act, and how that's evolved over time, and to move in a very radical direction away from that is something just for which I would recommend caution. I'm not convinced that this Bill is going to lead to what its proponents believe, and I fear it may not be a success, and that's why I vote against it, but I do it with humility rather than confidence.

I'll be supporting the Bill, and I'm going to particularly focus on aspects of the RSE code. I'm going to welcome the fact that the Minister has removed the right of withdrawal and is sticking with RSE and healthy relationships, and that the Welsh Government is going to make that mandatory, and I'm really, really pleased that that is happening.

Many of you here will know that I have campaigned for years about what a healthy relationship looks like. I have approached schools right across Wales to join me, even providing materials from the White Ribbon campaign, and I've had some success where schools have done that, but not much. And the reason being is trying to find that time within that school year—not that the teachers or the school themselves don't want to do it, but they're not mandated either. I've sat in schools, in classrooms where young children have talked about healthy relationships in all age groups, and understanding what that is and what it isn't, once they've been guided through age-appropriate teaching. What that does, for me, is teach those children respect, first of all for themselves, and secondly for other people. And they grow up with that respect. Because we all know that the incidence and numbers of domestic abuse are just the same as they were 30 years ago, and the only chance and opportunity that we have to do anything at all about ending violence against women and children is to start much earlier; to start with young people and to teach them respect. And they get it; they absolutely get it once you engage them in those conversations.

And, of course, that respect has to be wider; it has to be about respect for different religious outlooks and, as Jenny Rathbone quite rightly said, this is about education. And that's what we're teaching: wider perspectives. It's about also recognising that people are different, and that relationships are different too. I'm really pleased that, again, through age-appropriate education, children, going forward, will have the opportunities to have that education. 

And I, again, want to support the notion that Jenny has brought up about menstrual well-being. Because unless people know what a good period is, what a normal period looks like, and they can then speak up for themselves and have a conversation at home, things like endometriosis go undiagnosed. And I have two family members who've suffered the consequences of that, and they can be, indeed, serious and life-changing. So, I really, really want that to be there.

I think we have, today, an opportunity to do some bridge building, to give a genuine narrative of tolerance and of difference, and to allow young people to experience and to share and to celebrate, but, most of all, to accept that. And that is exactly what will happen in schools with allowing RSE education and not allowing the parents to withdraw, whether that's through fear or misunderstanding, which it very often is.

I will absolutely support this, but I do want to take issue with this idea that it's too radical and it can't happen within the state schools, by the previous speaker. And yet it's obviously okay to give radical and difference and freedom within the public schools, within free schools and any other school, as long as it's not a school that is run by the local authority—that's the exception that I have.

While there's a great deal of good in this Bill that I really do welcome, unfortunately I'm afraid that I can't actually vote for it today. That will probably come as no surprise to the Minister, but I'm afraid that, unfortunately, there are aspects of the Bill that I fundamentally disagree with.

Our education system in Wales is based on the principle that parents, not the state, are the primary educators of their children, and that schools look after children, not on their own terms, but in loco parentis, in the place of parents and with parental permission. It's in recognition of this very important principle that parents have long enjoyed the right to withdraw their children from the two subjects that engage questions of families' world views, namely sex education and religious education. The provision of the right to withdraw in relation to these two subjects has also provided a means by which we can demonstrate that the state meets its obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998. Article 2 of protocol 1 refers to the right of education and it states that, and I quote,

'the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.'

Now, I must stress that the importance of the right to withdrawal is manifest not in its frequent use, but rather its potential use. The existence of the right to withdrawal reminds schools that they sit in loco parentis. When children go home at the end of the day, they're not looked after by parents serving the state in loco res publica. It is vital that in a free society parents should be allowed a very large degree of autonomy in the way that they discharge their parental responsibilities to educate and raise their children.

Another benefit of the potential use of the right of withdrawal is that it provides an incentive for schools to actually seek to engage proactively with parents, because it requires school leaders to sit and listen to parental concerns in order to minimise withdrawals. Now, of course, it doesn't mean that you can't engage in the sort of education that both Jenny and others in this Chamber have advocated today about protecting children from harm, talking to them about the way that their bodies work and about what's private on their body and what isn't and how a relationship should work. But I think this fundamental principle of schools acting in loco parentis is absolutely essential.

I think it's important to remind all Members in this debate today that a significant majority, not just a small majority—a significant majority—of respondents to the Welsh Government's two consultations that have been undertaken in relation to the progress that this Bill has made opposed the removal of the right to withdrawal from RSE and RVE. A staggering 88.7 per cent of respondents to the 'Our National Mission: A Transformational Curriculum' wanted to keep the right to withdraw, and 60 per cent of those responding to the consultation document 'Ensuring access to the full curriculum' also wanted to maintain that right to withdrawal. And that's in spite of the fact that, actually, the second consultation didn't expressly ask a question about the subject. People were still writing in saying how important it was to them. Now, look, I accept that the outcomes of any consultation are not necessarily a proxy for public opinion, but let's be clear about this, in completely removing the right to withdrawal, the education Minister is seeking to fundamentally shift the balance between the rights of parents and the rights of the state, something for which no party in this Welsh Parliament has a mandate.

And it's not just the right to withdraw that's a problem. The Bill will also require faith schools to provide two sets of religion, values and ethics curriculums, as has already been articulated by Suzy Davies and others: the denominational curriculum and the curriculum agreed by the local county-wide standing advisory councils if requested. This is in spite of the fact that parents, as Jenny Rathbone quite rightly said, already choose to send their children to church schools in the knowledge of the religious curriculum that is offered. The Bill places no similar requirement on non-faith schools, even if parents have no local faith school option and want their children to access a denominational curriculum. It seems to me that it's grossly unfair to expect a certain thing of a faith school, when not expecting that in the opposite direction too, and I do believe that that will be a huge burden for church schools, for Catholic schools across the country.

And then, finally, there's the issue of the locally agreed RVE curriculum. At the moment, of course, religious education curriculums in local areas are developed by standing advisory councils on religious education, or SACREs, as they're currently known, the membership of which is determined locally. But the Welsh Government's Bill wants to give the powers to change SACREs by allowing non-religious or even anti-religious groups to join those committees. That enables the potential for anti-religious values to be incorporated into local curriculums and taught in Welsh classrooms. It will diminish the voice of faith communities across Wales and that, unfortunately, is not something that I'm prepared to countenance. And it's for those reasons that I'm going to be voting against the progress of this Bill today. Our system already works well, and I think it should be maintained.  

The Minister for Education to reply to the debate—Kirsty Williams. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. A number of times today, the curriculum and assessment Bill has been described as 'bold, big and ambitious', and I have to admit at 19:40 this evening, I'm not feeling any of those things, but I will give it my best shot in trying to respond to the points that have been raised.

Firstly, can I just reiterate my thanks to all the committees involved? I think there should be a special shout-out for the CYPE committee, because I think the report that they have produced—I don't agree with it all, but I think the quality of that report shows the importance of scrutiny in this particular Parliament, in this Senedd, and I'm very grateful for all the work that has gone into it.

Now, a lot of the debate today has been about raising standards and closing the attainment gap. Let me be absolutely clear: a new curriculum is at the centre of that, but a curriculum on its own can't do all the heavy lifting, and that's why the curriculum is part of a wider set of Welsh Government education reforms that focus on improvement in pedagogy, that focus on a reformed initial teacher education programme—the largest single investment in professional learning that we have ever seen in the history of this Senedd; a revised accountability regime that drives the right kind of behaviours in our schools. So, yes, absolutely, the curriculum is important, but please don't think that the curriculum alone can achieve these goals; it's part of a wider reform programme.

I've talked about how we intend to address mental health, but I do think that having a duty to have regard to mental health and well-being when designing your curriculum, alongside the absolute necessity—the legal necessity—to teach mental health and resilience in our schools, I think, will take us a massive step forwards. 

Mick Antoniw talked about the huge amount of work that has gone into looking at the issue of rights. And Darren Millar just described this Bill as a conflict between the rights of parents and the rights of the state. Well, I tell you what, Darren, this is about moving rights and it's about moving to children's rights, and putting children's rights front and centre in how we educate them. And I will not apologise for that.

I'm grateful for Suzy Davies's support, and she and other Members have raised the issue of how, at the moment, schools of a religious character are treated within the legislation. There is a discrepancy that does place extra burdens and I, as I said in my opening remarks, intend to bring forward an amendment that will address that issue.

Suzy also talked about governors, and again we've heard a lot from Darren Millar about parents. The local curriculum within a school has to be agreed: first of all, it has to be consulted on with parents, and it has to be agreed by a governing body. And the last time I looked, we had significant parental representation on our governing bodies. This is not a case where a parent is not going to have the opportunity—in fact, the parent will have more of an opportunity to talk about what is discussed and taught in their school than they currently have under the system where it is previous Governments that have dictated what is to be taught. So, I would argue parents have a greater role and a greater voice in local curricula than they currently have at the moment. 

Can I just talk about RSE and address the issues that Caroline Jones raised? I will not be moving from my position that we finally get rid of the anomaly that children can be prevented from attending certain subjects within their schools. Children have to—they must—have access to information that keeps them safe from harm and allows them to navigate the world in which we live. In the new curriculum, all children will have the right to access information that keeps them informed on these vital issues, to stay safe online, to know what's right and wrong, so that they can raise issues of concern with responsible adults and protect themselves if necessary. Now, the Member may be raising these issues with what she considers the best of intentions. I have to say to you, Caroline, I'm surprised that your constituents are bringing forward material that is going to be taught in this curriculum, because I've just been accused by other Members saying that I haven't done enough work and the stuff isn't ready yet. So, both things can't be true. The curriculum doesn't exist until 2022, and what you've been shown are not the focus of our new curriculum. They are not—absolutely not. And if you were so concerned about them, then I would have hoped that you would have written to me as the Minister to expose what you believe is being taught in Welsh schools at the moment.

Let me be absolutely clear to Members in this Chamber: I am aware of the choice of the fellow travellers that Caroline Jones has chosen to align herself to at this time. You know, it is a dangerous concoction of pernicious influences, baseless prejudice and paedophile conspiracies. And the way in which some of my colleagues here in this Chamber have been addressed by those individuals, and you know what I'm talking about, is disgraceful—is disgraceful. I'm willing to put up with it as the Minister, but I do not believe that other Members of this Chamber should also be subject to that kind of abuse, and you should distance yourself from it—[Interruption.] You should distance yourself from it—[Interruption.] You should distance yourself from it.

The reality is, Laura, that your experience is not unusual. At best, I got my sex education from reading a Judy Blume book; at worst, it was a very well-thumbed copy of a Jackie Collins novel that passed its way around the classroom. But I have to tell you now, Presiding Officer, there are much more malign influences out there for our children to revert to now. The stuff that they can see at a click of a button is highly dangerous and detrimental to their well-being, and we need to protect them, and we need to give them the knowledge and the information that what they see on that screen is not a reflection of what a healthy relationship is, or the manifestation of what a healthy sexual relationship is. We need to act. We need to act, because the children of Wales are banking on us to act, and banking on us to have the courage to face down the misinformation.

Siân Gwenllian, I want to reassure you that I take very seriously the committee's recommendations around the public information campaign, because I recognise that there are parents out there who are indeed confused and scared because of the misinformation that is being spread. We need to be very clear about what RSE in Wales will look like, and perhaps more importantly, what it won't include. I give my commitment that that work will begin in the new year, so that we can go forward with some confidence.

Presiding Officer, for the first time in our nation's history, we have the opportunity to create a curriculum that has been made in Wales by our practitioners, to be delivered by our practitioners to our children. Siân Gwenllian, there is no way that children in Wales will be able to escape from the story and the stories of Wales. There is no way, because we have accounted for that within our areas of learning and experience and our 'what matters' statements. But this is a chance for our children to be equipped with the skills, the knowledge and experiences that will ensure that when they leave our education system, they can be successful, happy, healthy, confident individuals that will take our nation forward, because when we change our curriculum, we will indeed change our children. We will change their futures, and when we do that, we change the destiny of this country.

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 18. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We will therefore defer voting until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

And that—[Interruption.] And the question is—. Yes, of course. I understand what I'm doing now. I do apologise. The proposal is to agree the motion under item 19. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We will therefore defer all voting until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

And that brings this to voting time, so we will take a five-minute break to prepare for voting. We'll take a break.

Plenary was suspended at 19:49.

The Senedd reconvened at 19:58, with the Llywydd in the Chair.