Thank you very much indeed for your interesting report on a very important subject. I think too often in the past the primary purpose of the school system was to maximise the numbers of people who achieved five A to Cs, including English and Maths. I think it's called the capped score in the jargon. But this takes no account of the complexity and challenge of pupils' lives and their ability to learn. Many of you have already mentioned some of these and you've captured them in your report. I think, in particular, it's important to think about parental influence and families with complex and multiple needs.

Today, I had the privilege to meet a young man who's now in year 13, but he started his school career aged 6 as an asylum seeker who spoke absolutely no English and had ADHD. Had he not had some really good support through his school life, I'm sure that he might well have misbehaved and got himself excluded. In addition, his mother was a teacher, so she was able to give him the sort of support to follow the curriculum in primary school that he was struggling to understand and absorb. Imagine if that child's parent had not been a teacher, didn't understand how you support young people's learning—you can see how that person could have fallen behind in their learning. 

The National Autistic Society evidence lists, I think, nine reasons why young people who are autistic would struggle with learning. But I would suggest that that is something that all children could struggle with, not necessarily on the scale that autistic people have. If people are not reflective of the impact of their behaviour on others, then it can lead to terrible consequences. My own granddaughter had her first detention yesterday, because she and five other six-year-olds had been unkind. One of them had written an unkind note to another child in the class, which happily the primary school was able to pick up on, and I hope that will enable them to see the consequences of unkind actions. 

I think that nurturing environments can be created much more easily in primary schools, because everybody knows everybody else, and they have the same class teacher, who obviously will get to know those 30 children intimately and all their needs. It's a much bigger challenge in secondary schools, which are noisier, bigger, more challenging places, less likely that the people you sit next to are also living in exactly the same community. Mental health issues, particularly in adolescence, when there are such huge challenges on young people—. We all make mistakes. If we're not making mistakes when we're adolescents, we're not learning how we're going to navigate our way in the world.

What I would like to see from this debate is that we have trauma-informed approaches to all our pupils. We have the wonderful new curriculum, with its emphasis on well-being, and I want to see that being used by school leaders to revisit their responsibilities to develop enterprising and creative contributors, healthy, confident individuals, ambitious, capable learners and ethical, informed citizens, because we cannot have schools that simply exclude people because they can't be bothered to deal with their problems. That still exists in Wales, not in every school, but we need to ensure that all schools have responsibility towards the pupils who enter their school, particularly aged 11, and to ensure that they are with them until they are 16, and that the curriculum accommodates them, rather than the child having to be strait-laced into this particular curriculum. That is the way we will ensure that every child has the right to an education. That, it seems to me, is very important, as well as all the other issues around school transport that are also very important. But I just wanted to put that on the record. I'd like to challenge the Minister as to whether school leaders are expected never to exclude pupils on a permanent basis unless there were very, very special circumstances, which would have to be decided elsewhere, other than by the headteacher.