Group 4: History and diversity of Wales (Amendments 43, 44, 46, 47, 48)

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 6:05 pm on 2 March 2021.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Siân Gwenllian Siân Gwenllian Plaid Cymru 6:05, 2 March 2021

(Translated)

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and thank you for the opportunity to open the debate on group 4. Supporting amendment 43 would add the sentence

'The History of Wales in all of its diversity, including Black and People of Colour History' to the list of mandatory elements within the areas of learning and experience. It would be in addition to what we've just been discussing, namely relationship and sexuality education, and be in addition to RVE also as mandatory elements on the face of the Bill.

Supporting amendment 44 would make it a requirement for the 'what matters' code to note how an understanding of key historical events of Wales and the world would be provided across AoLEs. During our Stage 2 debate, the Minister quite fairly highlighted the fact that the history of Wales is not a matter for humanities alone, and amendment 44 recognises that point, making an understanding of the key historical events, in all their diversity, a cross-curricular issue.

Amendments 46, 47 and 48 would make it a requirement for every curriculum in every school to be planned in order to allow pupils to develop a common understanding of the diverse history, cultural heritage, ethnic diversity, identities, experiences and perspectives of Wales. So, following on from the Stage 2 amendments, we've listened to the advice of the education Minister and have changed our approach in seeking to deliver our objectives. In rejecting these amendments, it will not be possible to provide consistency and assurance that every pupil in Wales will have the experience of learning about the rich and diverse history of our nation.

The Children and Young People Committee, in its report on the Bill, has noted that the Government needs to strike the right balance between local flexibility and consistency at a national level. Ensuring that every pupil in Wales learnt about key historical events of national significance would help them to become informed citizens with cultural and political information, which would be crucial, and I believe that including this on the face of the Bill would strike that right balance between the need for consistency at the national level and flexibility at the local level.

The amendments would also secure equal access to education in history, which is crucial to ensure equality in education across Wales. In order to help tackle structural injustice and racism and to promote racial and cultural diversity, we must secure education for all pupils on the history of black people and people of colour. And by ensuring that Welsh history has a statutory basis in the Bill, we can ensure that teachers are able access the necessary information about Welsh history, providing the necessary guidance in order to support teachers and to develop their confidence in teaching a subject that can be complex, but one that is crucial, just as we've discussed in relation to RSE. We need major structural change to tackle racism, and we need to promote identities and diversity within Wales to be a cross-curricular theme that deserves the same status and consistency of approach as other areas.

The Minister's argument is likely to be that the Bill provides a framework without much detail, but she does argue that certain issues need clarity and specific focus, and that's her argument for including RSE on the face of the Bill. My argument is that that is also entirely appropriate in terms of the addition of the history of Wales in all of its diversity. And the fact that RSE and RVE are included on the face of the Bill does open the door to the addition of other issues of national importance too—issues that can be transformational in their nature, and for the very same reasons as we have discussed in relation to RSE. I would therefore assert that there is a lack of rationality in terms of rejecting this as a mandatory element and, therefore, that the Bill is deficient because it is not consistent in that regard. Thank you, Llywydd. I look forward to hearing the debate and the response.