We'll move on to group 3, which is relationships and sexuality education. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 2, and I call on Suzy Davies to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in this group. Suzy.

Amendment 2 (Suzy Davies) moved.

Okay, diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm just recovering myself a little bit here.

Yes, I move amendment 2, which is the lead amendment in this group. Now, our group has always offered a free vote on matters of conscience and I'll be exercising mine on the basis of conscience too. Mine is governed by the principle that we all have a responsibility to keep our children and young people safe, and I'll be doing it on the basis of evidence, not just in the committee and the many meetings with interested parties, but on the basis of upsetting safeguarding situations that I think many of us will have encountered in our casework. I also do it on the basis of my previous work as a lawyer, where I had some really difficult cases to deal with. There is no getting away from the fact that so much abuse happens within families. Now, absolutely, this is a minority; I'm not suggesting otherwise. But, how can it be wise to refuse anything that can help a child to learn about protecting themselves or others? I think that in this internet age it has never been more of a challenge.

Part of keeping our children safe is to help them and their peers to grow up less comfortable judging others for being different, whatever that difference looks like; to get them to think increasingly about difficult questions—increasingly difficult questions—about why they develop prejudices, why some people exercise power over others through emotional as well as physical bullying and what a healthy relationship looks like, because this part of the curriculum is not just about sex education.

There is nothing stopping parents educating and influencing their children at home alongside school, of course, and we should also expect a child's cultural and religious background to be considered as part of deciding what is developmentally appropriate—a requirement of teaching RSE in school; amendment 42 just makes that explicit. But we can't get away from the fact that this Bill does remove a parental right, and any legislature should carefully examine any attempt by the Executive to remove anyone's right. That's why I've tabled amendments 6, 8, 9 and 10. These provide for parents of pupils in nurseries and schools to be informed of how RSE will be taught and when any changes are introduced.

These are watered-down versions of Stage 2 amendments that were not accepted. They are still, however, a signal to parents who've lost this right that they still have continuing status here, even if they have very little agency, as the RSE code will be very prescriptive, on this controversial area of the curriculum. If parents feel more informed and more inside the tent, we would all hope that it becomes a less controversial element of the curriculum after all, with more chance of learning being reinforced at home.

So, the argument against these amendments is that their existence will create a sense of difference between this and other parts of the curriculum, and that there's already local consultation built into the curriculum development. But these amendments are about updating parents, not consulting them. Maybe this will slow down the normalisation of the subject, but I'd say that that difference is baked in by this Bill, which singles out RSE for special status as a mandatory subject with a detailed code to which schools must stick.

Can I thank the Minister for her help with amendment 40? I think I'll be thanking her a lot during this debate. The Children, Young People and Education Committee had observed that young people in years 12 and 13, after compulsory education has ceased, are able to rely on this Bill to request the continuation of religion, values and ethics education provision, and it wasn't really easy to see why those same young people couldn't ask for a continuation of RSE at a time when they would really benefit from it. Minister, you accepted this argument, and I'm grateful for your willingness to agree to this.

Finally, of course, amendments 2 and 4. Members will be aware of the long-standing campaign by Fair Treatment for the Women of Wales for better education about menstrual well-being, supported by organisations like Endometriosis UK and several others. And you may ask, when there are so many other aspects of health, why we are using this Bill to highlight this particular one aspect. And the answer is, simply, because it's been taboo for so long. Half the population having periods for at least half their lives, and the other half being members of the same family, and so affected by their mother, their wife, their sister, their daughter's experience, and no-one seems to know what's normal and what's not. Women putting up with all kinds of period-related conditions because they know no different, seeking help in extremis, and finding too many medical practitioners ignorant of possible diagnoses, and sometimes dismissive with it.  This curriculum gives all our children the chance to grow up being grown up about being a grown up, and these amendments are about stopping schools wriggling out of teaching it. Hopefully, it will also prompt greater demand for more research into therapies or even cures.

Perhaps the more obvious place to try and embed this would be in the health and well-being area of learning and experience, but I've taken my cue from the Minister herself at Stage 2, when she explained that she too was interested in finding a way to offer stronger reassurance on this. I know that everyone interested in this area was really grateful to hear that. And, Minister, it was you who suggested that the RSE code might be a way of doing this. So, reading between the lines, because the code will be mandatory, including menstrual well-being there rather than in AoLE guidance is perhaps a way of offering that assurance without the need for these amendments, or even in the 'what matters' statements. I suppose one difference there is that the RSE code is going to come before this Senedd for approval, which I applaud. I'm just checking—am I on the right track about why you mentioned the RSE code at Stage 2? Diolch.

I'm proud to speak in a debate today in support of Welsh Government's plans for high-quality, developmentally appropriate, inclusive, equality-based RSE for all children in Wales. Those Members who have read our Stage 1 committee report will know that the Children, Young People and Education Committee gave our unanimous support to the plans, having listened carefully to the evidence we heard. The fact that a cross-party committee of Members of the Senedd came to such a clear and unequivocal view on this is a testament to the power of the evidence we took. Those of you present for the Stage 1 debate will, I'm sure, remember Laura Jones's powerful contribution, describing how, as a parent, she had been worried about the plans for RSE, but having listened to the evidence, she now recognised the benefits that high-quality RSE will bring to children and young people, and I'm really grateful for the constructive engagement of the whole committee on this.

I'd like to recognise all those organisations and individuals who made such a strong case for RSE to the committee: NSPCC Cymru Wales, Welsh Women's Aid, Stonewall Cymru, Brook Cymru, Professor E.J. Renold, and the Children's Commissioner for Wales. Many of these organisations have written individually to MSs in recent days, making a case for high-quality RSE from a position of far more expertise than I could ever claim to have.

I also want to thank Kirsty Williams for her commitment to doing what's right for children and young people on this. This is not an easy issue, and it would have been all too easy for her to put this in the 'too difficult' tray. But that is not the Kirsty Williams I know, and I want to commend her for her courage and steadfastness on this. It will make a huge difference to children and young people.

Now, there has been a lot of what could be described as, at best, misinformation circulating about these plans. I hope that Members are reassured by the checks and balances that are in place, not least the statutory RSE code, which will have to be approved by this Senedd. I hope too that Members are willing to trust our teachers, the professionals who we'll be asking to deliver RSE. So, I don't want to focus today on the misinformation or what RSE is not; I want to focus on the positives, what high-quality RSE is.

RSE is a child's right. We rightly pride ourselves in this Senedd on our commitment to children's rights. Sometimes, we, myself included, take the opportunity to say in the Senedd that we'd like the Welsh Government to go further. Well, the commitment to RSE in this Bill is children's rights in action. RSE is about keeping our children safe. As NSPCC Cymru told our committee:

'We know that high-quality RSE is associated with a range of positive outcomes for children, but as its most basic function, it helps to keep children safe from harm. And the new compulsory RSE curriculum in Wales really brings an exciting potential to ensure that all children are equipped with the information and the language they need to understand that they have a right to safety, to recognise all forms of abusive or controlling behaviour and to empower them to speak out and get support at the earliest opportunity.'

But this is of course more than about children; it's also about building the foundations for those children and young people to grow up to thrive in safe, respectful relationships.

Finally, mandatory RSE is about protecting our children's mental health. Strong, positive relationships are the essential foundation for good mental health, and I particularly welcome the commitment that RSE should be LGBT-inclusive and equality based. There is nothing more important to me than protecting the mental health of our children and young people, and in particular, preventing young suicide. And there are, tragically, young people who have died by suicide because of homophobic bullying or because their sexuality was not accepted. When the RSE plans were first published, a constituent contacted me to say how much he welcomed the plans. He told me how he had barely survived growing up as a gay teenager in a family where his sexuality was not accepted, and he told me what a difference having access to inclusive RSE would've made to him. So, I say to Members today that it is the children and young people who are not getting messages of support and inclusivity at home who need mandatory RSE more than anyone else. Make no mistake about it, for some children and young people, this is a matter of life and death.

I welcome amendment 40 in the name of Suzy Davies, and I thank her for tabling it. As she said, it implements a recommendation in our Stage 1 report and ensures that the benefits I've described are also available to our post-16 learners. But I ask Members to reject Darren Millar's amendments in this group and to support Welsh Government's plans for RSE, which will be life-changing for so many young people, and even life-saving for some. Diolch yn fawr.

Plaid Cymru is also fully supportive of making relationships and sexuality education statutory. We support the Government fully on this issue, and I too would wish to praise the Minister for her commitment to this area. And here we are today, seeing the Welsh Parliament at its best, being progressive, working together, being robust on a crucially important issue. We also support adding menstrual well-being education and see the sense of providing updates to parents, and that post-16 pupils should also be able to access relationships and sexuality education, and I thank Suzy for bringing those amendments forward.

Elected Members within our party have argued consistently over many years that education is the key to change in this area, and it's good to see this becoming a reality at last. Relationships and sexuality education, which will be statutory and mandatory, will enable schools to empower every learner to develop their information, skills and values, and to do so in a gradual way, so that they can enjoy their rights in having safe and healthy relationships throughout their lives. By being pertinent, sensitive and appropriate to the abilities and needs of the children themselves, schools will now be able to develop high-quality content, deliver a whole host of positive outcomes as a result of this, and we can also safeguard our children, our young people and our communities.

I agree with everything that Lynne has said, and I'd like to commend the fantastic work done by the children and young people committee to really get that consensus around such an important subject. I absolutely agree with her that this is all about children's rights, and particularly the rights to understand how their own bodies work, as well as their rights to ensure that they are only involving anybody in their lives if they want them to, and this is what's going to protect them. I agree with her also that a lot of nonsense has been said about this. We've been accused of taking over the role of parents, when, in fact, it's absolutely right that we ensure that children have the right to know how their bodies work. Nowhere is this more clear cut than in menstrual education. It really is a scandal that at least 30 per cent of all girls do not know what is happening to them when they start their period. That is just such a clear-cut sign that parents find it embarrassing and difficult and avoid talking about such a basic subject to the girls in their family that we have to ensure that all girls know about this in order to avoid the trauma of bleeding between their legs without realising what it is.

I'd like to commend the work of Suzy Davies in having the courage and the tenacity to keep going on the importance of menstrual well-being—not just what a period is, but menstrual well-being—so that we all understand what a normal period is, and we can seek help when that is not what is occurring. March is endometriosis March. This is something that unfortunately affects a very large number of girls and women, and the earlier we detect it, the more likely we can avoid it becoming a really horrendous disease that affects people throughout their life. So, I'm very pleased that, as a result of the work of Suzy Davies, we now have that mandatory aspect of the relationship and sexuality code including menstrual well-being. It seems to me that this is also a real milestone, given the prejudice against women and girls across the world simply because we have periods. Thank you, Suzy Davies, for all your hard work. It's great to see the response from the Minister that we now have menstrual well-being in the RSE code. 

My apologies that Darren Millar has not been called as a mover of an amendment in this group. I will now call him. Darren.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move amendments 41 and 42 and amendments 20, 21 and 22, all of which are tabled in my name. Can I make it clear at the outset of my contribution to this debate that I fully support the principle that children should be receiving teaching on sex and relationships that keeps them safe from harm and enables them to make informed choices? I also agree that there ought to be education that is appropriate for them in terms of menstrual education et cetera. But I fear that the Bill, as it currently stands, may be less able to deliver on these objective than it might be.

My amendments 41 and 42 seek to place requirements on the face of the Bill in relation to the content of the Welsh Government's proposed relationships and sexuality education code—the RSE code, as the Bill describes it. At present, there's nothing on the face of the Bill to stipulate the contents of the code. The current legislative framework around the teaching of this sensitive subject of RSE, the Education Act 1996, contains some basic safeguards for the teaching of sex education. They were introduced by a Labour UK Government back in 2001, and those safeguards responded to a real need at the time to provide a more positive direction for the subject. But the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Bill seeks to disapply these safeguards here in Wales without putting anything similar in their place to ensure that the purposes of the mandatory element of RSE are appropriately met.

At present, the Bill simply requires that the mandatory element of relationships and sexuality education is, and I quote, 'developmentally appropriate'. But, of course, this doesn't go far enough. Should it become law, the legislation would require Welsh Ministers to publish an RSE code setting out themes and matters to be encompassed by the mandatory element of RSE education in Wales. But my amendment 41 places requirements on the face of the Bill regarding the contents of that code to ensure that children and pupils must learn about the following things: firstly, the nature of long-term relationships, including marriage, and their importance for family life and the bringing up of children—and, of course, this is something that replicates exactly what is already in the Education Act 1996—and then, in addition to that, the importance of safety in forming and maintaining relationships, the characteristics of healthy relationships, how relationships may affect physical and mental health and well-being, how values influence people's approach to sex and relationships and the importance of respecting the values of others with regard to sex and relationships.

These are all things that have been touched on by other speakers in this debate, so there's no disagreement between us. I want to ensure that people have healthy relationships with one another, and that's why I think it's important that these things are on the face of the Bill. I know that the Minister has referred to these things as well in the Senedd Chamber, and, indeed, in the committee when asked about them. All of these are non-contentious, and the Minister herself has suggested that an effective RSE code should contain references to all of them. But, of course, at the end of this Senedd term, she may not be around to be the Minister, and that means that somebody else will inherit the ministerial office and the responsibility to develop the RSE code, and they may have different attitudes than those of us who are elected in this Senedd now. That's why I think it's prudent of all of us to put these things onto the face of the Bill in respect of the code.

My amendment 42 seeks to require that relationships and sexuality education in Wales should have regard to pupils' religious and cultural backgrounds. This is currently the case in Wales and in England due to the Education Act 1996, but the Welsh Government is seeking to disapply this requirement in Wales with this new Bill. I think that that's a backward step. It's a backward step in a society like modern-day Wales, a nation that aspires to be tolerant and respectful of people of all faiths and cultures. I believe that introducing these protections will serve to strengthen the Bill and strengthen our commitment here in Wales to equip children with information about relationships that is respectful of their upbringing, respectful of their culture and their faith.

The Minister says that the RSE code, which no-one, of course, has seen yet, is going to provide some clarity and confidence for parents about what will and won't be taught, but because we haven't seen it, we're not able to have that confidence, and because parents haven't seen it, they haven't had that confidence. That's what has led, I think, to some of the misinformation that both Lynne Neagle and Jenny Rathbone have referred to. I think that if we are able to put some more information on the face of the Bill regarding the content of the code, it will give that confidence that parents need to see.

Moving on briefly to my amendments 20, 21 and 22, these amendments insert new sections into the Bill to give parents the right to withdraw their children from relationships and sexuality education lessons where they believe that they're inappropriate for them. These parental rights, of course, currently exist here in Wales, but the Bill will remove them and undermine the important principle that parents, not the state, are the primary educators of their children. The failure to include a right for parents to withdraw children from RSE lessons also seems to fly in the face of section 9 of the Education Act 1996, which says, and I quote, that children

'are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents'.

That particular provision in the Education Act 1996 will still be law in Wales even if the Bill before us today becomes an Act. The Bill also will do nothing to remove article 2 of protocol 1 of the European convention on human rights, which, of course, has been enshrined in UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998. That protocol says that the state must respect parents' rights to have their children educated in conformity with their religious and philosophical convictions. My amendments, if agreed, will simply seek to ensure that this Bill is compatible with the provisions of the Education Act 1996 and the Human Rights Act, which are already on the statute book.

Parents have long enjoyed the right to be able to withdraw their children from the two subjects that engage questions of families' world views, and they are of course sex education and religious education. The benefit of the potential use of this right to withdraw is that it provides an incentive for schools to engage proactively with parents regarding their children's education by requiring school leaders to sit and listen to parental concerns in order to minimise those withdrawals. And, of course, they've been exercised very, very rarely across Wales over the many years that they've been in place, because of the great engagement that they have resulted in. So, Dirprwy Lywydd, I urge Members to support my amendments in this group. 

It has been this part of the Bill that has given me the greatest concern. If the Bill had not removed the rights of parents to be able to remove their children from relationships and sexuality education lessons, I feel it would have had less opposition. I thought long and hard about tabling amendments to enable parents to remove their children from RSE lessons, but I was informed that such an exemption would be unworkable. So, I opted instead to vote against the Bill in its entirety. I'm told that the way RSE and, indeed, RVE will be taught will not be in separate lessons but across the entire curriculum. What this means in practice is that it would be difficult to exempt children from RVE lessons as it could result in children missing out on entire days of lessons.

I was also advised that proposing such an opt-out could be open to legal challenge under human rights legislation, as it infringed the rights of children and young people who have the capacity to decide for themselves. I passionately believe that relationships and sexuality lessons, particularly for the youngest children, should be a matter for parents and not for the state to decide. We have seen parents soundly reject the removal of parental opt-outs, not just once but twice. So, you have to wonder whether the fact that it is now nigh on impossible to remove children from relationships and sexuality lessons is by design. I don't see any choice but to reject the Bill in its entirety. However, I want to support some of the amendments in this group. 

I support the addition of menstrual well-being to the curriculum. Some children suffer with potentially debilitating symptoms of endometriosis for the majority of their school life, and learning about menstrual well-being in school will mean that young children will not have to suffer in silence. I will support Darren Millar's amendment seeking to restore some form of parental opt-out and his attempt to ensure that the RSE code looks at the nature of long-term relationships, including marriage, and their importance for family life and the bringing up of their children. So, whilst I accept that my rejection of the Government's decisions on RSE will carry little weight, I hope that others who share my concerns will also support amendments 20 to 22, 40 and 41. At least with these amendments, we can limit the impact. Diolch yn fawr. 

I call the Minister, Kirsty Williams. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. This is a large group of amendments with quite a variety of potential impacts on the legislation, so I'm going to try to go through them not necessarily in order, but in groups, if that's okay, starting with the easiest first. That is amendment number 40 in the name of Suzy Davies, which enables learners in years 12 and 13 in schools to request RSE, and where it is requested, the headteacher of such a school is required to provide it. This broadly matches, as Suzy said, the system that is in place for RVE for learners in school sixth forms, and whilst our view has always been that the Curriculum for Wales is a broad and balanced curriculum for the age groups 3 to 16, the points that Suzy and the committee have made with regard to older children I think are persuasive ones. Therefore, I would urge Members to support amendment number 40 that is tabled today. I think it's right to say that there are certain aspects of relationships and sexuality education that may be closer to the lived experience of the learner during this particular part of their growing up years, and therefore, having the opportunity to have a safe and constructive place to talk about issues that they may be going through at that particular time is relevant, so I do hope Members will support amendment 40.

Then, turning to amendments 2 and 4, which are related to the issue of menstrual health. Can I thank Suzy Davies and Jenny Rathbone for their comments in the debate today about the importance of ensuring that all of our children, both boys and girls, are well educated and have the information that they need to understand this perfectly natural process? For too many years and for too many children, that has not been the case, and the consequences of that are significant. But Suzy and Jenny talked about the difficulties sometimes in identifying what a normal period should be, and unless we discuss these issues, how is a woman able to make a judgement about the state of her own health and take the necessary steps to seek help for a condition? And we know for many, many, many, many women and girls, they can suffer in silence for years rather than actively seek treatment that can alleviate their symptoms and negate the impact that certain conditions such as endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome or simply very, very heavy periods can have on their physical health, their mental well-being, and their ability to do what they want to do with their lives.

Now again, in the spirit of trying to stick to the principles of how the Bill is created, but also wanting to ensure that there is certainty around this issue, then I absolutely do commit and have received reassurances that menstrual well-being and health will be part of our statutory RSE code, and as Suzy alluded to in her debate, that code will be subject—thanks to amendments that I brought forward in Stage 2—to a vote here in the Senedd. So, it is the Senedd Members themselves that will be able to actually vote on that code. So, I hope, Suzy, that provides the assurance that you need that these subjects will be there, will be required to be taught, and that issues around sexual health and well-being, our bodies and body image, will be a really, really important part of that code going forward.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

If I can therefore then turn to the other amendments in the group, can I ask the Senedd to resist amendment 41? There is a strong focus on developing healthy relationships in the new curriculum, and becoming healthy, confident individuals is of course one of the four purposes of our new curriculum, to enable learners to develop those healthy relationships that are so fundamental to all of us. In the new curriculum, the health and well-being AoLE is about developing the capacity of learners to navigate life's opportunities and its challenges, and the fundamental components of this area are physical health and development, mental health and emotional social well-being and understanding healthy relationships is clearly core to this.

High quality RSE has a vital role to play in supporting learners in recognising healthy, safe relationships and understanding, and developing respect for, differences between people, and the diversity of relationships that we see reflected around us in a modern Wales. Now, RSE will gradually enable our children and young people to develop an understanding of the importance of those relationships throughout life, beginning, of course, with our youngest children, with their friends and their families, and including what makes a happy and healthy committed relationship when they are older. 

Additionally, what's really important to recognise is that the draft guidance published as part of the Curriculum for Wales is very clear that the curriculum should be designed to meet the needs of a school's individual learner. As a part of this, there should be an ongoing conversation with the whole school and beyond, engaging with both parents and carers and the wider community, and it should be informed by the school’s values and ethos, as well as by its location and surroundings. So, Suzy and Darren, far from wanting to curtail debate and discussion with parents, our expectation is that that will happen. This is the whole ethos of the new curriculum: to engage on the development of it with parents, carers and the wider community. That applies to all areas, not just RSE. Suzy, you will know that I do not want to single out RSE for this specific legislative treatment, as I think that will contribute to the damaging narrative that some people are determined to pursue out there that RSE is somewhat different and dangerous. It's not. It is absolutely supportive of our learners’ mental health, their well-being, and, as Lynne Neagle pointed out, ultimately their safety. That's why I hope people will resist those amendments.

I also would ask Members to resist amendments 8 and 10. As I have outlined previously, the curriculum guidance is very clear that a curriculum should be designed to meet the needs of schools' individual learners, and as part of this, there should be those ongoing conversations. That does include RSE.  

I resist amendment 42. Now, I understand and I recognise that RSE raises complex issues that permeate throughout our lives. The Bill includes provisions to ensure RSE is provided pluralistically. The change of the name, for instance, with the focus away from the sex bit of it and the focus very much on the relationship, tells you all you need to know about this Government's approach. There is a reason behind that. It indicates the breadth of the subject and concepts that should be included. How many times, when we talked in a previous Parliament about domestic violence, did we talk about the need to educate children—again, both boys and girls—about what a healthy relationship looks like, and what our own personal responsibilities are within a relationship to treat other individuals with respect?

As Darren says, it does provide for a code, and I take your point, Darren. I haven't made it easier for myself. If the code was here, perhaps some of these things could have been avoided, and I take that. There's no getting away from it. I haven't made it easier for myself. But I hope that by bringing forward the amendments at Stage 2, which give Senedd Members—whether in this Senedd, but probably, likely, the new one—the opportunity to vote on the code, it should give reassurance that we're not trying to sneak anything through here, or be divisive, or not be fully transparent—. There will be an opportunity for Members to vote, to scrutinise that code, and to vote on it, and if they don't approve of what's in that code, then those Members will be able to vote it down. So, the ultimate power is not here in the hands of me, as the current Minister, or indeed a future Minister. The power will be with Members of the Senedd.

Of course, the code will also be required to be developmentally appropriate for the age of the pupils. I know that sometimes people say, 'Well, how can that possibly happen, because in the classroom, you're going to have children at different stages of their development?' Our teachers are well skilled in differentiation. They do this every single day of their working lives. We need to support them to do that within RSE, and that's what the code will be there, and the statutory guidance will be there, to do.

With regard to amendments 20, 21 and 22, which would allow learners to be excluded from receiving relationship and sexuality education by their parents, parents of course absolutely have a central role to play as educators of their children, and there is nothing in this legislation that prevents them from continuing to do that, and to be able to have those conversations with their own children. But we've also just said that schools also have a role, and I think that role is now more important than ever. Schools have the potential to create a safe and empowering environment to build upon learners' formal and informal learning and experiences. And as Lynne Neagle said, sometimes the children that need this support the most are those children, for whatever reason, that aren't able to get that support at home, and school becomes even more crucial in creating that safe space for them. 

We've all said this afternoon that it's really important that children get to learn about these subjects, but then some of us have said, 'Unless the parents decide it's not.' As we consider the impact of COVID-19, I recently became aware of a teacher who, while conducting well-being check-ins, became aware of a group of young men who during the summer holidays had had the courage and had been brave enough to admit to that teacher that they had developed a pornography habit. And they had reached out to that teacher to be able to express their worries and their concerns about that, and that teacher was reaching out, looking for support to be able to help those young men in those circumstances. If they have the courage to come forward and talk about those issues, I believe we absolutely have to have the courage to respond to that positively, and to ensure that all of our children have the right to be able to be in that safe space in their schools to receive the support that we're talking about today.

Darren, you talk about rights, and so did Lynne Neagle. This is absolutely a children's rights-in-action approach. Now, the right to express a preference to how your children should be educated is not an absolute right, and the Bill is entirely compatible with the European convention on human rights, including article 2 and article 9. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, I think I've covered the amendments that have been laid. As I said, I hope Members will support amendment 40. I hope that Suzy Davies will take my assurances with regards to the inclusion of menstrual health and withdraw amendments 2 and 4, and I urge Members to resist the others in the group. Diolch yn fawr. 

Suzy Davies to reply to the debate. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd, and thank you to everyone who's taken part in this debate. I hope Members won't mind if I just take this chance to give a really big shout out to the Children, Young People and Education Committee at this time—to Lynne and to the witnesses who came before us with evidence from all different points of view and, of course, to the committee staff, because I cannot overstate the commitment of everybody on that committee to being thoroughly scrupulous and always sensitive in interrogating the evidence that we heard in our consideration of this. And we came, of course, to an unanimous conclusion after serious scrutiny, and always with the paramountcy of children's welfare at the forefront of our minds. Can I just point out again how willing the Minister was to agree to the point on post-16 RSE, and I'm grateful to her for her help with that?

Just briefly, Caroline Jones and Darren Millar both talked about human rights in the round. We spent a lot of time considering human rights on this committee, the place of protocol 1, article 2 that Darren referred to, how that is read alongside other children's rights and, of course, being advised that we're talking all the time about qualified rather than absolute rights. And I could see that Caroline Jones had very similar advice to the advice that we heard from our lawyers.

There'll be people watching this who are going to be disappointed if the amendments on menstrual well-being don't pass. As the Minister said, it's so important for boys as well as girls to know about this. And I think it's the first time, at least that I can remember, that women's health, apart from cancer, has seen this level of public attention. There's a real will now in society to make better progress on this. This impetus reinforces how taking notice of this, as we are doing now, impacts on so many other policy areas—just things like the provision of public toilets, the design of buildings, guidance to employers, budgeting. So, it's not just menstruating women who are going to benefit from this better understanding of this natural life experience. But it won't have escaped Members' notice, and I am going to say this, Llywydd, as I can, that it's taken women MSs to bring this to the point of legislation, and it's not just me, Llywydd. We've heard from Jenny, but there are other female Members in this Chamber today who really pushed on this agenda, and the benefits of this education to men would never have seen the light of day if this Senedd didn't have women prepared to drag this into the light and make it a priority, and show that what may look like a women's subject at first instance is in fact a society subject.

I'm very pleased to hear what the Minister has had to say. Unlike the position with life skills, though, we don't know, as of today, precisely what the RSE code will say about menstrual health. That missing step was relied on by Darren Millar to support some of his amendments too. So, slightly counterintuitively, I'm going to push these amendments to a vote today not because the Minister has not offered assurance, for which we are hopefully all grateful here today, but to remind the Members that when they get to vote on the code in the next Senedd, they need to scrutinise it closely enough to ensure that it is strong enough, well informed by the campaigners, and it does what it needs to in order for it to be effectively taught in schools. But that's the only reason I'm going to put them to the vote, Llywydd. Diolch.

The question is that amendment 2 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes. There is objection, and therefore we will move to a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Suzy Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions and 28 against. And therefore, amendment 2 is not agreed.

Amendment 2: For: 26, Against: 28, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Before we move on to group 4, I'll just say that I am aware that one Member, Neil McEvoy, did try to object to the proposal to withdraw amendment 1, so that's a matter of record. Neil McEvoy wasn't seen by the Deputy Presiding Officer at that point. If I could remind you all to keep your cameras on as much as possible. Certainly, if you are participating either in the debate or wish to participate in voting time, then please do keep your camera on and don't leave it too late before expressing your view and turning your camera on.