National Assembly for Wales

If I may begin, Chair, as most will know, I was part of the work of developing this Bill as the designated Member, as part of the co-operation agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Government, but the agreement came to an and before the first draft of the Bill was published. So, it's worth noting that and placing it on the record.

Thank you very much, Chair. Good morning, everyone. May I, at the very outset, give my heartfelt thanks to the clerks and lawyers here at the Senedd, for their assistance during this stage of the Bill's journey, as I was preparing, drafting and tabling my amendments? Your support has been invaluable, so thank you very much to all of you.

Firstly, if I may, Chair, I would like to say a few general words about this crucially important Bill. A quarter of a century, and a little bit more, after the opening of this Senedd, it is a cause of great concern and disappointment that the majority of children and young people in Wales continue to be deprived of the opportunity to speak, use and learn the Welsh language. So, this Bill seeks to provide some redress in that regard. The journey of the Bill through the Senedd is a historic moment, I think, because we are legislating, hopefully, to ensure that every child in Wales becomes a confident Welsh speaker. And this is a major step in terms of creating those million Welsh speakers, or at least the million Welsh speakers that we are all seeking to aim towards.

If we look at the situation over the past decade, in 2014, 10 years ago, 21.9 per cent of primary school pupils in Wales received their education through the medium of Welsh. By 2024, the corresponding percentage was 22.5 per cent, so an increase over a decade of around 0.6 per cent. And in terms of secondary schools, the percentage of those who received their education through the medium of Welsh has decreased over the past decade, from 14.2 per cent to 13.5 per cent. So, the trajectory, certainly in secondary schools, is going in the wrong direction. So, it underlines how important this Bill is in terms of transforming the current system to see that vital growth in the number receiving education through the medium of Welsh to reach that aim of creating at least a million Welsh speakers.

So, if I may now turn to my amendments in this group, amendments 99 and 100 seek to amend the target on the face of the Bill to read 'at least' one million Welsh speakers by 2050. The Bill as it stands sets out an objective to increase the number who are Welsh speakers in Wales to a million. As you've already heard, although there has not been sufficient progress on reaching the million Welsh speakers to date, I believe we need to ensure that we do not place a ceiling by 2050 in terms of the ambition. If we can go beyond a million, well, I'm sure that that would be very good news indeed. So, the wording does not change the current policy commitment at all, but it does provide scope for the Government and future Governments to aim higher in terms of that ambition.

Amendment 101 adds a reference to digital platforms in the subsection that calls on the Welsh Ministers, through the Government's Welsh language strategy, to set targets for increasing the use of the Welsh language, which is crucially important; language procurement is one thing, but using the language is just as important a matter. There is a reference in the strategy, or course, to increasing the use of the Welsh language in the workplace and in social settings, but in today's world, of course, we realise how important the digital sphere is in terms of using the Welsh language. This is noted in the Government's strategy on technology, and I quote here from that document:

'Accurate, reliable and useful Welsh language technology can help us increase the daily use of Welsh, 1 of the 2 main targets of Cymraeg 2050: A million Welsh speakers. Technology can make it easier for us to use Cymraeg in all aspects of life, from education and work to chatting with friends, family and colleagues.'

And I heard a statistic recently noting that young people—over 70 per cent of those young people—contact their friends solely using technology. So, that practice of picking up the phone and having a chat has disappeared in terms of young people's practices, which underlines how important it is to include the digital element as an objective. 

And in terms of the Cabinet Secretary's amendments in this group, I'm content to support them. And I was very pleased to see amendments 1 and 2 and the related amendments being tabled by the Government. If the Government hadn't done so, I had intended to do so anyway. So, I very much look forward to hearing the discussion on this group and these amendments. Thank you, Chair. 

Well, thank you very much, Chair. The target of a million speakers has become widely recognised since it was adopted by the Welsh Government in our 'Cymraeg 2050' strategy. As I told the committee during Stage 1, setting the target on a legal foundation safeguards its future and underlines its importance. The target is a challenging one, and we will need efforts across many different spheres to deliver it. The purpose of the Bill is to help create the conditions for attaining that target. The intention of the target is to inspire growth, and it was never intended to act as a cap or ceiling. Amendments 99 and 100, in the name of Cefin Campbell, will place that beyond any doubt, and the Government will be supporting the amendments. 

However, the Government does not agree that the strategy should include targets on the use of the Welsh language on digital platforms. I agree with everything that Cefin Campbell said about the importance of those digital platforms, but it's not clear from the wording of the amendment what 'on digital platforms' actually means, and therefore formulating targets around this is not easily achieved. So, at the moment, the Government cannot support amendment 101. 

Turning to the Government’s amendments in this group, I listened carefully to the evidence presented to the committee during Stage 1. Some stakeholders felt that the Bill did not articulate clearly enough the importance of Welsh-medium education. I'm happy to give an assurance again today that the Welsh Government is fully committed to seeing an increase in the percentage of pupils who receive their education in primarily Welsh language schools. In order to underline this, the aim of the Government’s amendments in this group is to make it clear in the first section of the Bill that continuing to grow the Welsh-medium sector, alongside addressing the teaching of Welsh in all schools, is a central part of our strategy for the Welsh language.

The effect of amendment 1 is that section 1(1)(c) would specifically state that the strategy must include targets to increase the number of pupils of compulsory school age receiving education in primarily Welsh language category schools, to increase the number of primarily Welsh language category schools and to increase the amount of Welsh language education in dual language and primarily English language, partly Welsh category schools. Amendment 3 provides Welsh Ministers with the power, by regulations, to amend the targets required to be included in the strategy. Amendment 69 provides that those regulations would be subject to the affirmative procedure in the Senedd.

Amendments 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are technical amendments to reflect amendment 1. Amendment 31 removes the specific targets to be included in the national framework in light of amendment 1, but it does create a requirement instead that the targets to be placed on local authorities in the national framework reflect the targets in the strategy. 

Amendment 36 will allow Welsh Ministers to set further targets to be met by local authorities for the purpose of implementing the national framework. Amendment 32 removes the need for the information that must be included in the framework under section 23(6) to be for the purposes of setting targets on local authorities.

Amendment 73 is consequential to amendment 36. It allows Welsh Ministers to require local authorities to provide them with any information that they need in order to set targets under the new subsection inserted by amendment 36. I urge Members to support all amendments in this group, apart from amendment 101.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you very much. Once again, I'm very pleased to see the Government's full commitment to increasing the number of pupils who will be attending in future primarily Welsh language schools, and the provision also in dual language schools, and increasing the provision in primarily English language schools. Therefore, that's very significant, and we of course support that.

I thank you too for supporting putting those two words—although they are very small words, they mean a lot—'at least' in that intention of creating a million Welsh speakers. So, 'at least 1 million' Welsh speakers; hopefully that's what it will be from now on.

In terms of, perhaps, the lack of support, not for the principle but for the wording of the amendments relating to the use of digital technology in the Welsh language, perhaps, Chair, this could be a conversation to be had in preparation for Stage 3 of the Bill, to see if we can strengthen the wording slightly to make the definition clearer, in terms of what we mean exactly by 'digital platforms'. They vary and they are complex. I accept that. So, if the Cabinet Secretary is willing to have that conversation, I would be very content to do so.

Happy to have that conversation, between now and Stage 3, of course.

Thank you.

Yes. Move.

Thank you very much, Chair. Amendments 103, 104, 105 and 106 ensure that it's the census in its current form that is the main instrument used to calculate the number of Welsh speakers in Wales. Evidence from Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg, for example, notes that it needs to be set out clearly on the face of the Bill that it's the census held in accordance with the Census Act 1920, whilst such a census is conducted, that should be used to calculate the number of Welsh speakers. Now, we know that the census isn't entirely scientifically accurate as an instrument to measure the number of Welsh speakers, but this is the most reliable method that we have currently, and the census is used for assessing all kinds of aspects of life in Wales, including the number of Welsh speakers. So our amendments therefore seek to place a greater emphasis on the census itself, as compared to the Bill's current wording.

Amendment 102 is a simple one that seeks to change the period during which Ministers must analyse the situation and status of the Welsh language. Rather than every five years, we suggest that that should be changed to four to reflect the new Senedd terms after 2026, which will move from a five-year term to a four-year term. It is possible that no analysis will be undertaken at all during some Senedd terms if we adhere to the current pattern of every five years. That would curtail the ability of Members of the Senedd to scrutinise the progress that the Government is making, and perhaps also curtail the ability of the Government of the day to change policy if needed, based on the data analysis.

In a similar vein, amendment 103 is an addition to the Bill that seeks to place a duty on Welsh Ministers to measure the use of the language more regularly and in greater detail. I believe that by assessing the number and percentage of pupils of compulsory school age in each local authority area who are educated in primarily Welsh language category schools, we would then be able to measure the progress that the Government is making across Wales and understand whether some local authorities need more support and encouragement, more perhaps than others, in order to enhance the provision of Welsh-medium education in that area.

And with regard to the Government's amendments, Chair, in this group, I'm very content to support them and I look forward to hearing the discussion again on this group of amendments. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair. I've listened carefully to the arguments put forward by Cefin Campbell in introducing the amendments that he's moved in this group.

Now, I ask Members to reject amendment 102, because I believe that the five-year cycle is consistent with the cycles for preparing and reviewing the national framework and the local Welsh in education strategic plans. I don't believe that it would be reasonable to change all timetables across all of the areas of what the Government does because of a change to Senedd terms. At least, there would be one a year before the new term.

Turning now, Chair, to amendment 103, the information that Cefin Campbell refers to will be available. Therefore, it could be included in the report published under section 78(8) of the Government of Wales Act 2006, and I ask Members to support amendment 103.

I am not persuaded by the arguments for amendments 104, 105, 106, 107 and 157 to change the policy emphasis so that the census will be the default basis for calculating the number of Welsh speakers, unless regulations are made that specify other data to be taken into account. I can give an assurance today that data from the census will be a fundamental building block of our policy whilst the data exists. We want to create a Bill that is fit for the future. We have drafted it in such a way that it gives us flexibility to respond to changes. Changes to the census are already being considered by the UK Government. I have listened to Ministers within the Conservative UK Government who said that they were going to move away from the census in the future. It's entirely possible that we have seen the last census in the format that we've experienced for more than a century. So, it would not be sensible for us to anchor our policy to that. For those reasons, I ask Members to reject amendments 104, 105 and 106.

Turning now to the Government's amendments—and I thank Cefin Campbell for what he said about supporting the Government's amendments in this group—the purpose of the Government's amendment 8 is to change the age from which a decision is made regarding whether a person is a Welsh speaker solely on the basis of self-assessment from age 16 to 17.

The purpose of amendment 9 is to change the age until when a decision can be made about whether a person is a Welsh speaker on the basis of the methods specified in section 3(2)(b) to under the age of 17.

The purpose of amendment 10 is to move Welsh Ministers' regulation-making power in the Bill, which was in section 3(2)(b). The power allows Welsh Ministers to make regulations specifying a method of deciding whether a person is a Welsh speaker for the purposes of section 1 and 2, and whether that method is to be used in addition to, or instead of, the assessments referred to in subsection (2)(b). This would enable, for example, information and data on learners’ achievements when they are aged 16 in their final year of compulsory education to be used as a basis for deciding whether they are Welsh speakers, subject to suitable regulations being made.

As amendment 107 is consequential to amendment 106, I urge Members to reject amendment 107, because we've already asked you to reject amendment 106.  

The purpose of amendment 68 is to reflect amendments 9 and 10 to ensure that regulations under section 3(3) in amendment 10 are subject to the affirmative procedure. 

I therefore call on committee members to support the Government’s amendments 6, 8, 10 and 68.

The purpose of amendment 157 is to reflect amendment 106. Because we have rejected amendment 106, I also ask Members to reject amendment 157.

Thank you very much, Chair, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his response to the group of amendments that I proposed. I don't think that I want to split hairs in terms of assessments every four years rather than every five; I just felt that every four years was proportionate with the new Senedd terms, and I thought that it would be more appropriate that it should align. But it isn't something that I want to overemphasise, so I'm content to have a further conversation about that matter.

I thank you for supporting amendment 103, on the need for more regular assessments of use in schools of different categories. Your comments with regard to the census are very interesting. I'm aware, of course, like everyone else, that there are discussions ongoing about the possibility of changing the census for the future, and I accept the comment that we need to be alive to those changes. But I do believe that the spirit of our amendment is that, whilst the census exists, we should be using the census as the basis for data on use of the language and the number of those able to speak Welsh. But we need to have that conversation, as the census changes in future, and as we move to a different method of measuring. So, I am happy to note that the census is an important source of information, whilst the census exists, and that we need a further conversation again in future when things change. Thank you.

Yes, move.

Yes, move.

Yes, move.

Move.

Move.

Move.

Thank you, Chair. Amendment 108 is a simple one that seeks to strengthen and build upon the current content of the Bill in section 1 and section 4 under Part 1 of the Bill. A number of witnesses very much welcomed the inclusion of target setting for increasing the use of the Welsh language in the workplace by increasing the number of spaces where Welsh is spoken, and I agree with them on that point. The emphasis at the moment is too individualistic, so we need to prepare specific spaces for Welsh speakers to use the language in the workplace—a place for learners and those who lack confidence to come together to practice their language skills.

The purpose of amendment 108, therefore, is to use a review of the standards to facilitate the delivery of targets set under this Part of the legislation, to increase the number of workplaces where the internal administration is undertaken through the medium of Welsh, and to collect data on the use of the Welsh language in the internal administration of a workplace.

This would also help to fulfil the vision of the Welsh Language Commissioner, who said 10 years ago—the then commissioner, of course—when the discussion began about standards, that it would be possible, perhaps, to categorise a workplace as Welsh medium, bilingual or mostly English medium. But the Government rejected that idea at the time. However, this would now be consistent with the Welsh Government's current aim of increasing the number of spaces where Welsh is spoken—that's part of the Government's strategy—and workplaces, of course, are a key element of that. As we move to greater use of the language in public administration, creating those spaces for the use of the language is crucial. A categorisation process would be important in order to measure progress. So, those are my comments on this group, Chair.

Thank you very much, Chair, for my first opportunity to contribute today. I will be voting against this, because I don't believe that it's appropriate to legislate in this way on how a workplace operates internally. So, we will be voting against amendment 108.

Thank you very much, Chair. Well, I agree with Cefin Campbell's comments on the importance of the language in the workplace, and what we want to do to increase the use of the Welsh language in the workplace. There is a debate to be had on the point that Sam Kurtz made, as to whether it is the role of the Act to deal with those internal aspects relating to the workplace.

But, I propose that this amendment should be rejected because it does go beyond the purpose of section 4 of this particular Bill, which is to conduct a review of specific standards in order to ensure that they facilitate reaching a target within the Welsh language strategy, or to reflect and support the provisions in Part 2 of the Bill in describing the ability to use Welsh.

Welsh Ministers have powers to amend standards regulations at any time, but the purpose of section 4 is to ensure that Ministers conduct a timely review of the specific standards that can directly support the process of implementing the Bill. Extending the review beyond that is unnecessary due to Ministers' existing powers.

Now, more generally, the Welsh Language Commissioner works with public bodies that come under standards to support them on their internal journey to increase the use of the Welsh language, and to help them gather relevant data. This support from the commissioner helps organisations and bodies to increase their Welsh language capacity, and helps them to provide more services to the public in Welsh.

I believe that persuasion and practical assistance remains a preferable route to the shared objective of increasing the use of Welsh in the workplace. And, for this reason, and because Ministers already possess the necessary powers, I ask Members to reject the amendment in this group. 

Thank you very much. If I may just respond to the comments made by the Cabinet Secretary, I accept the comment in the sense that we all want to see and support the principle of seeing more spaces that are Welsh speaking, more use of the Welsh language being made in the workplace; I don’t think that we disagree with that objective.

The purpose of our amendment is that legislation strengthens the commitment of public bodies to ensuring that that happens. We could use the best persuasion tactics in the world. Certainly, as the commissioner is doing, we could provide support and guidance to encourage more Welsh-speaking spaces in workplaces. But we all know, after years of implementing standards, that the use of the Welsh language in the workplace is arbitrary, and that we’ve seen slow progress being made in some areas, and in some sectors too, in terms of the use of the Welsh language in public administration.

So, strengthening through legislation the need to create spaces where people who lack confidence, Welsh learners, Welsh speakers, can come together to use the language, and to develop their confidence in using the language, in domains and sectors where there's a need for technical language or expert language, I think that is what we need to do in order to strengthen the status of the Welsh language once again in our public workplaces.   

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much. This amendment, or rather these amendments, are probing amendments. Amendments 109 and 113 clearly add on the face of the Bill a statement that none of us should disagree with, because the next quotation that I will read out is included in a number of Government strategies already, namely, and I quote,

'Education through the medium of Welsh is the most effective method of ensuring confident and fluent speakers who are more likely to use the Welsh language beyond education, communally, in future jobs and to transmit the ability to use the Welsh language within families.'

That’s a quote from a number of Government strategies.

That quotation has also been included in the White Paper that came before this Bill. But, unfortunately, there is no reference to that particular statement and policy intention on the face of the current Bill. And, as far as I’m aware, it is not included in the explanatory memorandum either. So, I have tabled these amendments to try to ensure that it’s clear to everyone involved in the implementation of the Bill which method is the most effective if we are truly serious about delivering an increase in the number of confident Welsh speakers.

I hope that I can receive the Government’s support for this, or at least a commitment to include the statement in the next version of the explanatory memorandum after the conclusion of Stage 2. So, Chair, as these are probing amendments, I will not be moving them to a vote, but I would be very grateful if I could ask the Cabinet Secretary for a further conversation on this, to see whether we could incorporate this quotation and policy position in the explanatory memorandum for Stage 3.

Thank you, Chair. I agree with what Cefin Campbell has said and the general theme of these amendments. They highlight the importance of education to the Welsh language and if this doesn't go to the vote, I would be supportive of these amendments and the theme of these amendments.

Thank you, Chair, and of course the Welsh Government would also agree with the thrust of the statement in amendment 113 regarding the importance of Welsh-medium education, and as Cefin Campbell has said, it is set out in many of the documents that we have published as a Government. But these are issues for policy documents, rather than for legislation.

I am not persuaded that the text of the Bill is the best place for declaratory statements that don't have legal consequence. Rather, they belong in policy documents. And of course, I am more than happy to work with the Member to see if we can reflect that in the new explanatory memorandum that we will place before the Senedd before Stage 3.

I am also very willing to reflect the substance of the amendment when speaking for the Government on the floor of the Senedd at Stage 3. That will provide a clear point of reference to all those charged with implementing the Bill. I thank the Member for what he said in terms of how he will deal with amendments 109 and 113.

The Government amendments in group 1 address the importance of Welsh-medium education by including targets in the strategy to increase the number of pupils in primarily Welsh language schools. There will be clear legal effect to those provisions, and the Government will be required to take action as a result, i.e. it will be required to set targets.

Therefore, if the Member does move these amendments to the vote, I would ask that Members reject the amendments.

I don't intend to move to a vote on this, but I welcome the opportunity perhaps to discuss further before Stage 3, in the hope that I could persuade the Cabinet Secretary perhaps to at least include that statement in an explanatory memorandum, possibly, but certainly that's the route that I would wish to pursue, and I look forward to that discussion in future.

Thank you very much. Again, this is a probing amendment, so I won't be moving it to a vote, but I am very eager for the committee to hear why I am eager for a further conversation to be had on this specific issue.

A key element that was included in the White Paper that came before this Bill was to consider the trajectory for the percentage of children and young people in Wales who are in Welsh-medium schools. And this is what the White Paper stated, and I quote:

'The current trajectory set by "Cymraeg 2050" in 2017 sets a goal that at least 40% of all learners will receive Welsh medium education by 2050.

'As part of the co-operation agreement between the Government and Plaid Cymru, the Government will also carry out a full technical study on the trajectory with expert input to match the new ambition that will be central to the Bill. The study will consider a steeper trajectory for 2050 and beyond which models for 50% of pupils in Welsh medium education by 2050.'

So, that quotation was part of the agreement between me and the Cabinet Secretary for education at the time, and we included that as part of the White Paper, in the hope that it set out some sort of hopeful context in terms of the content of the Bill itself. 

Now, as far as I am aware, the technical study was not carried out—the study that is referred to in the quotation. However, considering that the Bill sets out a medium and long-term framework and interventions for the Welsh language—for example at least a million Welsh speakers by 2050 and setting a 2050 educational goal as well—I believe that stating a different trajectory in the Bill would complement and support these related objectives, as well as underlining clear expectations for the education sector and relevant stakeholders regarding the extent of the ambition.

If this Government and Senedd, with cross-party support for the target of at least a million speakers, are serious about transforming the situation of the Welsh language by significantly increasing the number who can speak the Welsh language confidently, then this ambition must be pushed further, with a target of 50 per cent of pupils in Welsh-medium education by 2050 and commitments then to ensure further growth beyond that in the long term—such as a 10 per cent increase every decade. That would be a very laudable and simply understood goal—so, 60 per cent by 2060, and so on. If we do not increase the level of ambition, the Government will continue to deprive 60 per cent of Welsh children of the opportunity to learn the language and to become confident speakers, even within a quarter of a century.

As evidence from Cymdeithas yr Iaith notes, in the 20 years between 2003-04 and 2023-24, a period of 20 years, there's been an increase only from 19.06 per cent to 22.47 per cent, an increase o 3 per cent, in the percentage of children receiving Welsh-medium education in primary schools, and an increase of just 0.5 per cent in the secondary sector. So, we haven't been convinced that this target of 40 per cent by 2050 is sufficiently challenging and ambitious. And we also need to bear in mind that we know that there has been a slowing down in terms of the numbers of those attending Welsh-medium education settings during the pandemic and in the post-pandemic period. So, there is work to do to catch up. That's the point. So, 40 per cent for 2050 was a laudable aim years ago, but we have lost ground since then, so we need to catch up. And the point that we are making in this amendment, this probing amendment, is that we need to increase the level of ambition and to move, every decade, with a 10 per cent increase every decade.

This is a probing amendment, so I won't move it to a vote, but, again, I am very eager to have that conversation with the Cabinet Secretary about that principle of changing the trajectory so that it's more ambitious. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Chair. Whilst I agree with the 'Cymraeg 2050' targets, in my view amendment 110 seeks to scrap the choice for parents and pupils to attend Welsh-medium, bilingual or English-medium schools. Although I think it's important that children learn more Welsh at school, protecting parental choice is just as important. I also oppose the targets set out in amendment 129, which would make it a requirement for Welsh Government Ministers to ensure that a specific percentage of pupils attended primarily Welsh language schools by a specified date without providing options to parents and pupils. I agree with the theme of equal opportunities for pupils to receive Welsh-medium education, but, as I said earlier, I think parental choice is just as important, and, for these reasons, I can't support amendments 110 and amendment 129.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to Cefin Campbell for his comments at the end of his contribution on the importance of having a conversation on the important issues contained within the amendments in this group. I can explain the Government's stance as to why we can't accept the amendments in this group and what we can suggest doing, too.

Supporting amendment 129 would mean that no dual language category schools or primarily English language, partly Welsh school categories would exist in Wales by 2100, and the Government cannot support that policy. We, of course, agree that primarily Welsh language schools is the fastest way for pupils to become confident Welsh speakers, and the Government's policy, as we've heard this morning, remains clear in increasing the percentage of pupils who receive their education through the medium of Welsh. But the Bill also conveys a clear message that there is a role for dual language schools and primarily English language, partly Welsh schools in creating Welsh speakers. The amendments, if agreed, or if moved and agreed, would eliminate these schools by 2100. That is not the policy of Government and we cannot agree to the amendments in this group.

Given everything that will change as a result of the Bill and everything else that could happen over the next 25 years, I am not convinced that it would be appropriate to set targets beyond 2050 for the time being. But I am willing to work with the Member to look at the possibility of introducing an amendment in Stage 3 that sets a duty in 2050 to review which targets may be set beyond that date. But, for today, if the amendments are put to the vote, I urge Members to vote against the amendments in this group.

Thank you, Chair. As I stated at the beginning, I'm not going to move this group of amendments to the vote, because they're probing amendments, but I do want to respond to some of the comments made.

The important principle for me in proposing these amendments is that we don't deprive any child of the right to be immersed in the Welsh language through the education system and enabling them to become confident Welsh speakers—and fluent Welsh speakers, hopefully, too. Through stating that, in 75 years' time, or whatever it might be, that we wouldn't want to see, or—I'll turn that on its head—by saying that schools need to be primarily English language in 75 years' time, that's an admission that there will be some children who will still be deprived of the right and the ability to learn the language and to become fluent speakers. I oppose that principle because I would like to see every child in Wales having that right and opportunity to learn the language. But I welcome, again, the offer from the Cabinet Secretary to have a further conversation on this. We have a commitment and I would like to see that commitment and that ambition being set at a higher level than 40 per cent by 2050. We then need to have that conversation about what to do after that target date. But the principle, for me, is that every child should have the right to learn this special language in Wales, and that's the principle that I stand behind. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Chair. Again, these amendments are probing amendments, so I won't be moving them to a vote. The amendments in this group seek to ensure that the role of sixth forms in schools is made clear in terms of contributing to the aims and objectives of this Bill.

School sixth forms are in a relatively unique position in that they are part of schools but they are also part of the post-compulsory education and training sector and, therefore, come under Medr's ambit. Part 3 of the Bill, which includes duties on schools to designate their own language category, to have Welsh learning objectives for the Welsh language, to have a Welsh language education delivery plan in place, and to provide a minimum amount of Welsh language education in accordance with their category, is not relevant to learners over compulsory school age and, therefore, is not currently relevant to schools in relation to their sixth form.

Now, Medr stated in its evidence that its role of having a regulatory oversight over sixth forms is not given sufficient consideration in the Bill, including the provisions for Welsh language education delivery plans in schools. They felt that schools should be looked at as a whole to provide a co-ordinated pathway for learners. Considering, Chair, the importance of progression from the compulsory education sector to the post-compulsory sector, I believe that the delivery plans, and the proportion of education through the medium of Welsh that is determined in each school according to its language category, should also extend to the provision in sixth forms within a particular individual school, and that's why I have tabled amendments 111, 112 and 127 in that regard.

I would be very grateful to hear from the Cabinet Secretary how the Government will ensure that sixth forms do play their part in ensuring that progress is made in the provision of Welsh language education and in increasing the number of confident Welsh speakers. And to repeat what I said at the beginning, as these are probing amendments, I will not move them to a vote, but I would be very grateful for that further discussion with the Cabinet Secretary on how sixth forms in schools can be included in the spirit and objectives of this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Chair. Very regularly during Stage 1 discussions, I emphasised that this Bill had been brought forward to focus on creating more confident Welsh speakers through the efforts made during a student’s compulsory education. I also regularly recognised the importance of ensuring that those learners who choose to continue their education in school sixth forms can continue with their Welsh language learning or education through the medium of Welsh. The Bill already makes provision regarding this in section 23(3)(e), the national framework, and 28(2)(d), which deals with the WESPs. The effect of amendment 127, in the name of Cefin Campbell, would be to create an expectation that schools that have sixth forms will provide Welsh language provision in the sixth form that is the same as the Welsh language education that is provided during compulsory school age periods. This would, to all intents and purposes, extend the Welsh language as a mandatory element beyond compulsory school age.

Sixth-form provision is different in nature to provision for compulsory school age and it is part of tertiary education. It is subject to regulatory oversight by Medr, the Commission for Tertiary Education and Research. Medr works with the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol, as the organisation designated under the Tertiary Education and Research (Wales) Act 2022 to advise Medr on its statutory duty to promote and ensure sufficient provision of Welsh-medium tertiary education. I think there is also a risk of unintended consequences should there be a requirement on schools to provide a certain level of Welsh language education in the sixth form. There is a risk that some schools would lose pupils if they had less flexibility regarding the language that sixth-form subjects are taught in. That, in some cases, could put at risk the ability of schools to provide sixth-form subjects. This could be particularly true in rural schools. We believe that allowing flexibility will support more pupils to stay in a Welsh-speaking environments in sixth forms, even if they do not study all subjects through the medium of Welsh. 

Now, I agree with Cefin Campbell once again on the importance of Welsh-medium education in sixth forms. But, in my view, what we currently have, and the work that is being done by Medr and the coleg cenedlaethol, and those things that we're doing through this Bill in relation to tertiary education, are the best way of doing the work that Cefin Campbell referred to in his contribution. 

Thank you very much, Chair. There are a number of points that arise here following the comments made by the Cabinet Secretary. The fundamental point behind our amendments in this instance is that the provision in sixth forms reflects the ethos and objectives of the school itself, and if that school is a primarily Welsh language school then one would expect the provision in the sixth form to reflect that in the same way. I don't entirely agree with the comments made by the Cabinet Secretary that there is a danger that we would lose pupils because of a limitation on the choice of medium. I think we need to create an ethos in Wales, through our education system in general, where we embrace bilingualism, where we see the advantages of Welsh-medium education, and bilingual education, as a crucial skill that can be transferred to the workplace and to those diverse sectors, those numerous sectors, that call for bilingual skills. So, we need to encourage our pupils to see the value of pursuing education through the medium of Welsh in the sixth form or in post-16 college, or any other kind of post-16 provision, because that is the kind of objective and ambition that we want to create for the future: to develop those confident bilingual skills for that range of sectors that are crying out for these kinds of skills.

So, our amendment seeks to tackle the provision in sixth forms of that same linguistic ethos and objective as seen in the compulsory sector in the years leading up to the sixth form. So, I don't agree with the comments by the Cabinet Secretary on that specific point. But, yes, I'm content to conclude on that point.  

Well, thank you very much, Chair. There are a large number of amendments in this group, and I apologise in advance for the details that I am going to share with the committee on every amendment. But it is important to get everything on the record, because there are important amendments in this group.

Evidence to this committee during Stage 1 asked for greater definition and clarity in parts of the Bill. The amendments in this group respond to the work of the committee in this regard. Amendment 11 provides that the definition of Welsh language education is limited to education and training provided during school sessions. Amendment 13 makes it clear that the definition of 'school' means a maintained school with pupils of compulsory school age.

Amendment 14 leaves out the definition of 'school sessions' in section 8(5) in light of amendment 64, which amends section 49. The purpose of amendment 76 is to broaden the range of persons that the athrofa, the institute, can fund in relation to the teaching or learning of Welsh. Through the change of 'Welsh language learning provider' to 'person', it broadens the power so that the athrofa can fund any person, including Welsh language learning providers, in relation to teaching or learning Welsh. The scope of the funding power is much wider and enables the athrofa to assist more people in respect of teaching or learning Welsh.

Turning to amendments 79 and 85, the purpose of amendment 79 is to narrow the definition of a Welsh language learning provider in section 37(6), so that it only captures those providers funded by the athrofa to provide Welsh language teaching to people over compulsory school age. Evidence to the committee received from Medr and the coleg Cymraeg highlighted the potential for ambiguity in terms of responsibilities in the tertiary education sector and the need for clearer definitions for Welsh language learning providers in Part 5 of the Bill.

The athrofa will have roles in relation to promoting equality of opportunity, continuous improvement and setting quality frameworks, and we need to make sure that the roles and responsibilities of Medr and the athrofa are clearly defined. 

Amendment 79 makes it clear that, where Welsh-language learning providers are mentioned in the Bill, the athrofa’s role is limited to those providers it funds to provide Welsh language teaching to people over compulsory school age. This will ensure that school sixth forms and other providers who teach Welsh as a subject are not automatically subject to the athrofa’s oversight simply because they provide Welsh language learning to persons over compulsory school age. The second part of amendment 79 ensures that the definition of 'compulsory school age' in Part 5 is consistent with the definition used elsewhere in the education system, as set out in section 8 of the Education Act 1996.  

Turning to amendment 85, this ensures that the definition of Welsh language learning providers in section 44(3)(e) has the same meaning as in section 37(6).

I would like to take amendments 80, 81 and 82 together, Chair. The purpose of these amendments is to provide a clear definition of the Welsh language learning provision that will be captured by section 39 of the Bill. Section 39 will include references to and a definition of 'Welsh language learning programmes'. By tabling amendments 80 to 82, I am making it clear that the athrofa’s duty in section 39 to promote equality of opportunity and encourage participation in Welsh language learning is limited to the programmes the athrofa provides or funds, rather than every Welsh language learning activity. This will provide clarity about responsibilities, for example, in the tertiary education sector.

Amendment 86 leaves out subsections (1) and (2) of section 49 as a result of amendment 87. Amendment 87 inserts new subsections in section 49 to make reference to definitions in the Education Act 1996. The combined effect of amendment 86 and amendment 87 is that, where the Education Act 1996 gives a meaning or defines a term, the definition or meaning given in the 1996 Act applies, unless, that is, specific provision is made in this Bill. This amendment replaces amendment 59, which has been withdrawn.

Amendment 60 provides clarity that the Bill’s provisions are relevant to community, foundation or voluntary schools in Wales. Amendment 61 provides clarity that the Bill’s provisions are relevant to community special schools in Wales. Amendment 63 provides clarity that the Bill’s provisions are relevant to pupil referral units in Wales. Amendment 64 provides for the meaning of the term 'school sessions' in the Bill as a whole in light of amendments 11, 12 and 55. May I thank Members for their patience and ask you to support every amendment in this group?

Just to say you'll be pleased to hear that I'm not going to speak to these technical amendments, and agree entirely that they are required in order to tidy up the Bill. So, I'm happy to support them. 

And I would agree.

No thank you. 

Thank you very much, Chair, and I apologise once again because it's rather a long group, group 8. The amendments in this group relate to requirements in terms of Welsh language nursery education, as the Chair has set out. Firstly, I want to draw attention to amendment 12, which defines 'Welsh language nursery education' as

‘(i) teaching Welsh, and

'(ii) education through the medium of Welsh

'in a school or maintained nursery school during school sessions to pupils under compulsory school age’.

Other amendments in this group refer to 'Welsh language nursery education' in line with the definition provided in amendment 12.

Amendment 15 places a duty on maintained schools, in preparing their Welsh language education delivery plan, to include specific information if they provide education to pupils under the compulsory school age, and I can give further detail about this specific information if Members wish to hear those details.

Amendment 20 places a duty on community special schools to include certain information if they provide education to pupils under compulsory school age. They must note the amount of Welsh language nursery education that they provide.

Amendment 22 creates a new section that places a duty on maintained nursery schools to prepare a Welsh language nursery education delivery plan.

The other amendments in this group are made as a result of these references to nursery education in maintained schools and maintained nursery schools.

Amendments 17 and 18 reflect amendment 15. The purpose of amendment 17 is to state that maintained schools that have pupils of compulsory school age must take all reasonable steps to implement the proposals in the plan regarding Welsh language nursery education. Amendment 18 has the same purpose, but in relation to an amended delivery plan.

Amendments 50 and 51 relate to section 28 of the Bill, which is the list of organisations or persons that local authorities must consult when preparing their local Welsh in education strategic plan. Amendment 50 adds,

'the head teacher of every maintained nursery school',

and amendment 51 adds,

'the governing body of every maintained nursery school'.

Amendment 53 requires local authorities to send their approved local Welsh in education strategic plan to the governing body of each maintained nursery school in their area.

The purpose of amendment 56 is to provide clarity in terms of the definition of 'school' in Part 4 of the Bill, namely,

'a maintained school that has pupils of compulsory school age'.

In the Bill as introduced, sections 28(4)(b) and 31(1) were excluded from the definition, meaning that the definition was wider than schools that have pupils of compulsory school age. But as a result of amendments 50, 51 and 53, that exception is now unnecessary.

Amendment 58 ensures consistency of drafting throughout the Bill as a whole. It makes it clear that maintained schools and maintained nursery schools must have regard to guidelines issued by the Welsh Ministers. This is linked to amendment 62, and amendment 62 ensures that maintained nursery schools are not treated as maintained schools for the purposes of the Bill, as specific provision is made for them in amendment 22.

Amendment 83 removes the reference to 

‘schools in Wales (that are not Welsh language learning providers)’

in section 41(b) of the Bill, and includes a reference to maintained schools and maintained nursery schools. This will mean that the athrofa’s duty in section 41(b) focuses on promoting collaboration between Welsh language learning providers and maintained schools, and between Welsh language learning providers and nursery schools.

Thank you to Members for listening so carefully to those details about the amendments in this group, and I ask Members to support every amendment in this group.

If I may. I welcome these amendments very much as they relate to the early years. As Mudiad Meithrin pointed out in their evidence to the committee, and I quote,

'the statutory education sector cannot be separated from the early years care and education sector...The close relationship between the sectors means that reforms to the statutory education sector directly affect the early years care and education sector—and that is more prominent in the Welsh language sector.'

We are very aware of the excellent work of Mudiad Meithrin, and it is a key supply line for the growth of Welsh-medium education, something that the Commission for Welsh-speaking Communities also notes in terms of its importance. So, for those simple reasons, Chair, I am happy to vote in favour of these amendments.

No, thank you. 

Thank you very much, Chair. In my opinion, the categories outlined in the Bill are problematic, so I propose that they need to be more clearly defined. What we've seen over decades in Wales is that we categorise schools, and the result of that is that we put them in a state of stasis, in reality, without any motivation for them to make progress along the linguistic continuum and to move to a higher category in terms of Welsh-medium provision. The Bill as it stands doesn't provide an assurance that schools will move up that language category, as I've already mentioned, which raises a fundamental question, in my view, on the effectiveness of the Bill in terms of moving schools forward.

Various stakeholders, including the Welsh Language Commissioner, RhAG, Cymdeithas yr Iaith, the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol and the National Centre for Learning Welsh, have argued that the primarily Welsh language category should reflect the current 3 and 3P categories, where the vast majority of teaching takes place through the medium of Welsh, which, in reality, is all subjects except English in the case of the 3P category. Otherwise, there is a risk of slippage in terms of the amount of Welsh-medium provision offered, because, the moment, it would be perfectly possible for a school in the primarily Welsh language category to provide as little as 51 per cent of learning through the medium of Welsh. Now, I'm sure that the majority of us would agree that that isn't what we want to see happening in terms of defining that particular category.

So, in order to address this, amendment 114 and related amendments in my name seek to define primarily Welsh language schools in line, essentially, with the current definition of a category 3P school. This would then mean that there would be no doubt in terms of the status of the Welsh language in these schools, and the amount of Welsh-medium education provided there.

Further to that, amendment 116 is consequential to amendment 114, as Ministers would not need to set a minimum amount of Welsh-medium education in primarily Welsh language schools, as it would have been defined more clearly in the previous clause. 

Amendments 119 and 120 seek to change the timescale, as it were, for schools in the other two categories to reach their Welsh learning goals. I am very concerned about the current wording on the face of the Bill, which sets a target for children's linguistic attainment by a date—and I quote from the draft Bill—

'specified by the Welsh Ministers by regulations',

rather than, as it should be, in our view, quite simply, 'by 2050', as was originally stated in the White Paper. In my opinion, there is a need for greater clarity in terms of the timescale. Now, if we didn't do this, it would provide leeway for future Ministers to push this target back through regulations if they're not on the right track to reach it, repeating the pattern that, unfortunately, we've seen in recent years in terms of downgrading targets rather than taking firm actions to reach those higher targets.

The intention of these amendments, therefore, is to clearly state that schools need to reach their learning goals by 2050, which is a date that we have accepted as some kind of threshold for reaching at least a million Welsh speakers, and it accords with the main objective and targets outlined in the first section of this Bill, as I've just mentioned.

Amendment 123 seeks to prevent Ministers from changing the language category of a school in the primarily Welsh language category. In my opinion, Ministers should not be able to remove the category of a primarily Welsh language school. Although I accept that there is no provision in the Bill that would allow regulations to abolish the primarily Welsh language category, this amendment prevents regulations from amending that category just as a safeguard for the future should Ministers have differing views on the importance of Welsh-medium education.

The intention of amendment 124 and, therefore also, the consequential amendment 125, is to increase the minimum provision of Welsh in dual language category schools and in primarily English language, partly Welsh schools over time, and the purpose of amendment 126 to ensure on the face of the Bill a duty on the governing body to plan for the change of the language category of its school. This would reflect the thinking that the categories are not static, and that a school should not remain within a category either. That's the main burden of this, namely that we're eager to see schools moving along the language continuum rather than staying in a single category permanently.

Likewise, the purpose of amendment 142 was to make it clear within the national framework that schools need to increase their Welsh-medium provision over time so that schools can move through the education categories. So, I look forward once again, Chair, to having a discussion on these particular amendments. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Chair. The Government does not believe that the evidence that was heard during the Children, Young People and Education Committee sessions supports the proposals made in these amendments, and I cannot ask the committee to support them.

Amendment 114 defines the primarily Welsh language category as schools that provide their entire education provision through the medium of Welsh, except where languages other than Welsh are taught as a subject, and, as you've heard, that the ethos and culture promoted by and within the school is Welsh.

This amendment, in its current form, would mean that many schools currently within category 3 of the non-statutory categories would be classed as dual language schools, and this could lead to a negative perception of the Bill’s effect on current category 3 schools. However, I believe that there may be merits in stating what the minimum requirement of primarily Welsh language schools is, and I believe there is the potential to explore an amendment to this end at Stage 3.

Amendment 116 is consequential to amendment 114. As we cannot support amendment 114, it is not appropriate to support amendment 116. Amendment 119 removes the ability of Welsh Ministers to specify by regulations the date by which the learning goal of dual language schools is increased so that pupils reach the B2 common reference level for oral interaction. Instead, the amendment states that this will be the learning goal by 31 December 2050. This amendment is, therefore, potentially a backward step to what is currently included in the Bill. The Bill, as introduced, means that the learning goals may be uplifted by regulations, and we envisage that this would happen before 2050. We didn't place an exact date on the face of the Bill to allow for flexibility in uplifting the learning goal when factors allow that to happen, such as sufficient workforce and resources. However, we could look at an amendment at Stage 3 that provides that the uplift must occur by 31 December 2050, and no later than that date—and I think that responds to the point that Cefin Campbell made when he contributed—and that the regulations will not specify a date further away than 31 December 2050.

Following the same reasoning as our rejection of amendment 119, we also reject amendment 120, as it could potentially be a backward step. But, once again, we could explore tabling an amendment in Stage 3 that provides that the uplift must occur by 31 December 2050, and no later than that date. 

As we reject amendment 114, we must also reject amendment 123.

We reject amendment 124. We believe that it will be appropriate to exercise the power in section 13(2)(b), which is the Welsh Ministers’ power to amend section 10(3), so as to increase the minimum amount of Welsh language education provision for the primarily English language, partly Welsh category, when factors allow for that to happen, and, as I said, those factors could include a sufficient workforce and sufficient resources.

The amendment proposes a duty on Welsh Ministers to make regulations to increase the minimum amount of Welsh language education specified for both the primarily English language, partly Welsh category and the dual language category. From a legal standpoint, this lacks clarity in terms of when exactly these regulations must be made. It is an open-ended perpetual duty.

Amendment 125 was proposed on the assumption that amendment 124 would be passed. This amendment removes the duty on Welsh Minister to decide every five years whether the minimum amount for the primarily English language, partly Welsh category should be increased. But we continue to be of the view that this regular revision every five years is of more practical value, rather than the open-ended duty that is proposed by amendment 124.

Amendment 126 places a requirement in the school's Welsh language education delivery plan to set out how they will prepare to move to the next category. We do not believe it would be reasonable to expect all schools to work towards moving to the next category. The committee received rather robust evidence from some stakeholders about the challenge that exists to reach the point that the Bill sets out now. And, of course, this could also be a backward step, as the amendment in its current form would not allow primarily English, partly Welsh schools to move directly to the primarily Welsh language category.

Section 14(1)(g) of the Bill requires governing bodies to set out, if they intend to increase the amount of Welsh language education provided with a view to changing the school's language category, how they will prepare for that change.

On the same premise as my rejection of amendment 126, I also reject amendment 142. As we are rejecting amendment 120, we must also reject amendment 158. And, as we are rejecting amendment 124, we must also reject amendment 160.

Yes. Thank you, Chair. There are a number of points that have been made there, as there are a number of different amendments in this group. I perhaps would want to take them as a group within the group, if I can describe them in that way.

In terms of better defining the primarily Welsh category, you said, Cabinet Secretary, that you didn't believe that there was sufficient robust evidence presented to the committee. I'm not sure if I would agree, because, as I said in my opening remarks, the Welsh Language Commissioner, RhAG, Cymdeithas yr Iaith, the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol and the National Centre for Learning Welsh, which are, broadly speaking, our main language institutions in Wales, disagreed. They believed that there was a need to strengthen that primarily Welsh category to better reflect the 3 and 3P categories as they currently exist, because, as I said, as little as 51 per cent could be provided through the medium of Welsh and it still be a primarily Welsh language school. Having said that, I do recognise that you did open the door for a further conversation before Stage 3 in terms of setting a minimum for that particular category, and I look forward to having that conversation with you, because it is one of the issues that concerns me and concerns the language organisations that I mentioned earlier. So, that is something to be welcomed.

If I could move on to the next point, in terms of the amendments that seek to set a date for moving these schools along the Welsh-medium learning pathways, I accept the point that you’ve made, namely that there is a duty on Ministers to uplift as we move forward over the years, and I look forward, once again, to having a conversation with you on that particular issue. I don’t want to see any slippage, and therefore I agree with that principle as you set out, but I do think that, although we can uplift and encourage uplift to happen, I still don’t think that we should be concerned about setting 2050 as a target for that uplift to happen. As I’ve said, it aligns with that important milestone that we’ve set for 2050.

And then there was that further point of it not being reasonable that all schools should move through the categories. You mentioned external factors that could make that impossible, such as workforce and resource issues and so on. Now, I think that there’s a risk here that we send a message to schools, saying, 'Look, there may be factors coming into play, so don’t worry if you don’t move through the categories.' That’s not the message that we want to convey. We want to tell them, 'Look, there is an expectation that you do make progress, but we accept under certain exceptional circumstances that might be impossible for you to achieve.' So, the message is that we expect them to move through the categories and that we would provide all the support for them to do that, but we also, of course, accept the reality of the situation in education at the moment, we accept that there will be challenges, but those should be exceptions, rather than us setting that out as a possible norm for those schools. So, the language is important here in terms of how we support our schools to develop.

So, those are the only comments that I have. I am pleased that there will be a further opportunity to have discussions on seeing continuous progress as part of that journey, and personally I don’t see a problem with setting 2050 as a deadline, but we can certainly discuss that further in due course. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Chair. These amendments refer to the Part of the Bill that sets a minimum of 10 per cent of provision in category 1 schools, namely, those primarily English language, partly Welsh schools. It’s unclear—and this is part of the evidence that was submitted by a number of organisations that have submitted evidence—it is unclear in the Bill whether this includes the time that is already set aside for learning Welsh as a subject, and that can vary between 6 per cent and 8 per cent of the curriculum, depending on the school, or whether the 10 per cent proposed is on top of that, if I understand correctly. So, we need clarity on this point. The current minimum includes the percentage of education that is compulsory in learning Welsh as a subject. So, if this 10 per cent mentioned in the Bill includes the 6 per cent to 8 per cent that is currently taught in terms of the Welsh language as the subject, well, it isn’t much of an increase, truth be told. But our amendments, amendments 117 and 118, seek to add a further 10 per cent to the current minimum; in other words, it changes the minimum to be around 20 per cent. This means that schools will have to meet the minimum level through the two elements, namely teaching the Welsh language as a subject and also holding one or two educational sessions per week in another subject through the medium of Welsh. And, as it happens, I attended an evening held by Estyn last night when they were presenting their annual report, and Estyn referred to a very large number of schools that are already demonstrating good practice in terms of introducing subjects beyond the Welsh language as a subject, and these in primarily English schools. So, I believe that this higher minimum of 20 per cent should be set in the first instance, which would be an increase on the current situation, and all schools could start working towards this immediately, with support from the Government to do just that. As I’ve said, there are a number of schools doing this already.

Amendment 118 beyond that calls on governing bodies to ensure that the school offers at least 5 per cent of any activities provided outside of formal school sessions through the medium of Welsh. And we’re talking here about informal activities, extra-curricular activities, that could include sessions held by the Urdd, rugby sessions and so on.

I have tabled amendment 115 because Government officials have told the committee that the current 10 per cent minimum wouldn’t be offered to each pupil, but as 10 per cent of the general education provision offered by a school, and that’s a matter of deep concern, because a related matter, which is relevant to this element and to the provision in each school category, is the principle of ensuring a minimum amount of Welsh language education for each pupil. That’s the principle here, in my view, that every pupil should have the opportunity to master the Welsh language. Otherwise, it’s not clear how it will be possible to achieve the educational goal that every pupil reaches at least B2 level if there is no guarantee that every pupil receives the provision and the necessary contact hours.

The aim of amendment 115, therefore, though it is a probing amendment, is to try to obtain further information from the Government on how we can ensure that every pupil, or as close to all pupils as possible, receives the minimum amount of Welsh language education provision. Otherwise, how do we ensure that every pupil leaves school as an independent and confident Welsh speaker at level B2, if there is no guarantee that they will receive the core contact hours that they require? So, there is a combination here, Chair, of a probing amendment and amendments that I would wish to move to a vote on. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Chair. Just very briefly on this, we will be supporting amendment 115, but, in relation to 116, 117 and 118, we won't be supporting them today, but we would be open to working with the Member, Cefin Campbell, to bring something forward at Stage 3. But, in relation to the 5 per cent in amendment 118 in terms of any extra-curricular activities, I do have some concern on this issue, because I think it's crucial that children, outside of school, do have something that's in addition to their education; it's not just through their lessons that children learn in schools. So, I don't want to see anything that would stop any child accessing additional education outside of school, through extra-curricular activities. But I'd be more than happy to work with the Member during the next stage as we move to Stage 3.

Thank you very much, Chair. I want to deal first with amendment 115. The problem that we have with amendment 115 is that it is contrary to the policy stance that we have taken, namely that the provisions of the Bill relate to the language provision of the school generally, not the language provision provided to every pupil, as is proposed by this amendment. The Bill as introduced allows for some needed flexibility for schools, and that's what we've heard from the schools. Of course, we want to see almost all pupils receiving the provision set out in the Bill, but if we're going to place a duty on schools to ensure that every student in that school should be treated in the same way, well, what about pupils who are out of school for a fortnight because of illness? What about pupils who have additional learning needs? What the schools were asking for was some flexibility, under the ceiling of what [correction: flexibility about what] the Bill sets out more generally, in order to deal with specific circumstances and needs and to provide flexibility to schools if they need to meet them by [correction: if they need it by] tailoring the provision. There is a key difference between ensuring that all pupils receive the same provision and the current requirement of the Bill that the general provision at school level meets the requirements of the language categories.

As you've heard, the aim of amendment 117 is to change the minimum Welsh language education required of schools in the primarily English language, partly Welsh category. Now, throughout Stage 1, the committee heard evidence from some key stakeholders that 10 per cent would be difficult to achieve. Now, I believe that the minimum of 10 per cent is an ambitious but realistic requirement, as introduced by the Bill. There is a real danger, in increasing that minimum to 20 per cent, that schools would simply not have the teaching capacity, even with the exemption periods, to provide that amount.

Certainly, some schools in the primarily English language, partly Welsh category will have the capacity to provide 20 per cent of their education through the medium of Welsh, and local authorities will encourage and support such ambition. However, there would be significant risks in setting a minimum of 20 per cent for all primarily English language, partly Welsh schools when the evidence that we have indicates clearly that this is not feasible at the moment. 

It's also to remind the committee that there is a power for Welsh Ministers to amend section 10(3), so as to increase the minimum amount of Welsh language education provision for the primarily English language, partly Welsh category. And there is a duty on Welsh Ministers under section 13(5) to decide every five years whether that minimum should be increased. So, every five years we will reflect on the capacity of schools to achieve an increased minimum, especially with a view to meeting the upgraded learning goal set by section 11(3).  

Amendment 118 proposes a requirement on governing bodies to ensure that the school offers at least 5 per cent of any activities that it provides outside of school sessions through the medium of Welsh. And I agree with Sam Kurtz—I want to see more opportunities for students to use the Welsh language outside the classroom. But extra-curricular activities are not mandatory and, therefore, a five per cent minimum requirement would be difficult to enforce, and it's likely that it would not be a meaningful requirement. In a practical sense, a school could provide activities outside school sessions through the medium of Welsh, with little or no participation. They could provide the sessions, but that doesn't mean that everyone is going to turn up and take advantage of those sessions. And, of course, I support the sentiment behind this amendment and acknowledge the importance of providing opportunities for pupils to use their Welsh language skills outside the classroom. However, the fact that this couldn't be effectively enforced leads me to reject this amendment. I believe that this principle is accomplished more effectively in practice through the provision in section 14(1)(f) of the Bill, that requires schools to set out the steps that they will take to, first of all, promote a Welsh language ethos and culture within the school—and I agree with Cefin Campbell's comments on the importance of that ethos within the school—and, secondly, to promote the use of the Welsh language within the school. These are intended to cover the school’s actions outside of the Welsh language education. I think those steps are more practical and more effective, and I urge Members to reject the amendments in this group. 

Thank you once again. There are a number of points that have been made that I want to respond to. May I begin with the comments made by Sam? I am sure that I understood rightly that Sam, like the Cabinet Secretary and myself, wish to see more informal, extra-curricular activities taking place through the medium of Welsh—that is, using the Welsh language in fun activities, where children don't think twice about using the language; they do it naturally when playing their games,  and so on. So, I'm sure that we are all on the same page in that regard, and I am very pleased to have that further conversation with you, Sam, about the minimum of 10 per cent.

So, just to respond to the Cabinet Secretary, there are three elements, I think, to these amendments. On the difference between school-based provision and provision for every pupil, I accept the point that there would be exemptions in terms of additional learning needs and long-term absences and so on. But we do have to be consistent throughout the Bill. If we say in the Bill that we expect every pupil to reach level B2 at least, then that needs to be consistent with ensuring that the Welsh language is provided to each pupil, or that objective won’t be able to be achieved. So, I do think that we need to have a conversation, Cabinet Secretary, about providing consistency in terms of those two elements, in terms of every pupil reaching level B2 and every pupil receiving provision through the medium of Welsh. But I acknowledge and recognise your point that there are exemptions to that under some very specific circumstances.

The second element, then, is what the current provision is in terms of teaching the Welsh language in primarily English language schools. If you are arguing that 10 per cent is difficult to achieve, well, I would argue that 6 to 8 per cent is already being provided. So, according to your argument, we are only asking secondary schools to increase their provision by about 2 per cent. I don’t think that that is sufficiently ambitious over the coming years—2 per cent on top of what they currently receive in Welsh language subject lessons. That’s why, if we accept that the average is between 6 and 8 per cent—. If the spirit of your contribution is 10 per cent on top of the subject provision, then we need to think in terms of 18 to 20 per cent as a total in terms of the proportion of the curriculum to ensure that there is a level of confidence here.

If I can say this very openly, we know that the current second language system is failing to deliver on the objectives that we want to see. We know that Welsh as a second language, as Sioned Davies’s report 12 years ago notes, is failing to provide adequate skills to our children to become confident Welsh speakers. So, what you are suggesting is to add 2 per cent only on top of what is currently failing. So, I certainly don’t see that as progress at all that will lead to confident Welsh speakers. That’s why our amendment suggests around 20 per cent, in order to make that real and effective progress in the use of the language and the skill set needed. So, I would welcome a further conversation with you, if you would be content, on that specific point.

Then, to conclude, on the requirement in our amendment for governing bodies to provide 5 per cent of extra-curricular, informal activities through the medium of Welsh, I accept entirely that schools can only provide that. They can’t compel every pupil to be part of, and to participate in, those activities. So, possibly, we need to refine our amendment for Stage 3, in order to reflect what you have referred to, entirely correctly, namely that it’s offering that provision and opportunities that schools can do, rather than compel every pupil to attend, because, as we know, after-school hours is when a lot of these activities are held, and there's no compulsion for pupils to remain after school to participate in those activities. It's another matter in terms of what happens during the lunch hour, when teachers have more control in that regard. But the point I'm making, I think, is that there is common ground here that we can agree on in terms of a lot of these elements, so I would welcome a further conversation with you on them. Thank you very much, Chair.

Yes, move.

Yes, move.

Move.

Move.

Move.

Thank you very much, Chair. Promoting Welsh-medium education and progression within and between schools is a key element in our aspiration to increase the number of children who receive Welsh-medium education. In looking back over a period of 30 years, we can see that there have been steps along the journey where there has been a move away from Welsh-medium education, which can happen as pupils progress from one key stage to another, mainly as pupils move from primary education into secondary education. Amendment 121, therefore, emerged from evidence submitted by RhAG, Parents for Welsh Medium Education, and, in their evidence, they said that

'A key element in order to ensure progression from primary to secondary and avoid losing pupils to Welsh secondary schools is to ensure that children do not slip into a secondary school of a lower category. Too often, we see this happen when English-medium schools are closer to children's homes or easier to reach as a result of a lack of suitable and accessible transport. Section 11(4) provides an opportunity to clearly place the assumption that children move to a school in the same category or higher. This section will strengthen the ability of local authorities and schools to bridge with schools in the same category. It will also align with the desire to provide pupils with late immersion opportunities in years 7 and 8.'

So that's why I'm introducing this amendment, which will mean, if successful, that the subsection will now read as follows, and I quote:

'In relation to the Welsh language goals for a primary school, there is a strong expectation that the pupils of the school will continue with education in schools of the same language category until they cease to be of compulsory school age.'

Chair, I have also tabled amendment 143 in this group. With your permission, at this point I would like to refer to amendment 29 in the name of the Government, although it was identified as part of group 15, which we will address later. The reason for this is that amendment 29 by the Government seeks to amend the Bill in the same place as my amendment in this group. Therefore, I will be voting against the amendment in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. While amendment 29 strengthens the English text so that it is compatible with the Welsh text, the intention of amendment 143 is to try to strengthen the Bill in Welsh and English—not only to encourage progression, but also to encourage and maintain that progression when pupils transition.

To conclude, in terms of the Government's amendments in this group, I am supportive of the purpose and effect of those amendments as outlined by the Cabinet Secretary, and I would be happy to vote in favour of them.

Thank you, Chair. I wish to speak on amendments 121, 27 and 47. While I can support some amendments in this group, I can't support these three because they once again seek to eradicate choice for parents and pupils with regard to Welsh-medium education. There are examples in areas of west Wales, for example, where the option is available to pupils in terms of whether they want to attend a Welsh-medium or an English-medium secondary school, and I think it's vital that parents and children have a choice in terms of what they want to do. There is work to be done on this, of course, but I don't think that we need to legislate in the way that these amendments do.

Thank you very much, Chair. I'm going to deal to begin with with amendment 121. We're talking here about the words that we use. And truth be told, I don't feel as strongly here, but I just want to explain the advice that I've received and why I can't support the amendment.

The original intention of the wording in the Bill as introduced was to aid primary schools in planning their provision. Primary schools need to know what they are working towards, as the pupils will leave the primary school before they reach compulsory school age. While I understand the intention behind the wording of the amendment, namely ‘strong expectation’, I believe that 'it is assumed' is stronger than 'expectation', and I have received legal advice that shares the same view. Whilst I'm eager for the Bill to be strengthened during the Stage 2 scrutiny process, I am reluctant to support an amendment that, according to the advice that I've received, weakens the original provision.

Turning now, Chair, to amendment 26 from the Government, the purpose of the amendment is to make it clear that the requirement in section 23 is for the Welsh Ministers to specify in the national framework the steps that they will take to promote 'Welsh language education' provided in primarily Welsh language schools rather than 'education' in general.

Amendment 27 from the Government removes the requirement for Welsh Ministers to specify in the national framework the steps they want to take to promote Welsh language education provided in dual language category schools. This places greater emphasis on promoting the Welsh language education provided by primarily Welsh language category schools, in line with our belief that this category is the fastest way of becoming a confident Welsh speaker.

Regarding the amendment in the name of Cefin Campbell, amendment 143, we have heard what Cefin Campbell has said already, but I am concerned that ‘maintaining continuity’ would be a backward step. There are duties in the Bill to promote late immersion education. This will provide an opportunity for pupils to move from a primarily English language school to a primarily Welsh language school, if it's possible. I'm sure that we've all met pupils with the most enthusiastic teachers who show that that is entirely possible. That is more than 'maintaining continuity'. 

The Government's amendment 30 places a requirement on Welsh Ministers to specify in the national framework the steps they will take to encourage continuity in terms of teaching Welsh and education through the medium of Welsh between maintained primary schools and maintained secondary schools.

Amendment 47 removes the duty on local authorities to specify in their local Welsh in education strategic plan the steps that they will take to promote and provide information about the Welsh language education provided in dual language schools. This duty will apply only in relation to primarily Welsh language schools. Similar to amendment 27 in this group, this amendment means that the Welsh language education provided by primarily Welsh language category schools will be promoted. 

Now, as I've already said, this is in line with our belief that this category is the fastest way of becoming a confident Welsh speaker. I don't agree with Sam Kurtz that that takes choice away parents. Parents can make any decisions that they wish to make. What this amendment does is to promote the fact that we believe as a Government that the fastest way to become a Welsh speaker is via education through the medium of Welsh. 

The purpose of amendment 49 is to place a requirement on local authorities to specify in the local Welsh in education strategic plan the steps they will take to facilitate progression between maintained primary schools and maintained secondary schools in terms of teaching Welsh and education through the medium of Welsh. This reflects amendment 30 in this group, and highlights the importance of continuity in Welsh language provision from primary to secondary school. Thank you, Chair. 

Thank you very much. If I may respond to Sam's comments first of all, this word 'choice' is very often mentioned. Usually, it's parents that make the choice, but sometimes the pupil himself or herself doesn't have that adequate choice of choosing a path that will allow him or her to become a fluent Welsh speaker. And we know that they will become confident Welsh speakers, in Welsh-medium or dual language schools, at least, if they are immersed in the Welsh language, if they hear the language and have an opportunity to use the language regularly. Because as anyone who's had piano lessons years ago, or golf lessons, will know, if you don't practise those skills regularly, then those skills are eroded. And what we see too often in schools in Wales is children becoming relatively fluent by year 6, the end of primary school, and they speak confidently, then they go to English-medium education and the skills that they've acquired at primary school are lost. They lose the confidence, then, in terms of the use of the language. So, I'm afraid that we are denying that choice to children, and that's hugely important, in my view.

In terms of semantics, it's interesting, when we discuss the meaning of individual words—and I'm no lawyer, so I'm not going to challenge the legal advice that you've received; I wouldn't dare to do so. But we have, on the one hand, 'disgwyliad cryf', which translates to—I was going to say 'great expectations', but that sounds rather Dickensian. That is, 'expectation' is 'disgwyliad', isn't it? And then the word 'tybiaeth' is 'assumption'. So, I don't know. Perhaps someone far smarter than me would need to explain the nuances behind those two words, but perhaps that is something that we could discuss at a later date, over a cup of very strong coffee, I would suggest, so that we could get to the heart of the meaning of those two terms.

But just to return to the final point that you made: those late immersion opportunities are something that we warmly welcome. We've seen so many examples of children going through immersion and becoming confident Welsh speakers. So, I think this is to be continued in terms of the discussion on semantics. But I do think that we all accept the principle that we need to promote that linguistic continuity as much as possible between the various stages of a child's education in the compulsory school-age phase. So, if I could suggest, through the Chair, that we continue with that discussion, to see how best we can convey that positive message to parents and to pupils alike.

Thank you, Chair. Yes, exemptions, that is what we're focusing on in this small group of amendments. The purpose of the amendments in this group is to remove section 19 of the Bill that refers to a further exemption for primarily English language, partly Welsh language schools, particularly those that continue to be of the opinion that it is not reasonably practicable for them to provide the minimum amount of Welsh language education that would be required as part of this Bill.

As I've already referred to, in discussing the minimum level that should be set out on the face of the Bill in terms of Welsh language education, and if the Bill—and going back to the argument made by the Cabinet Secretary—continues to set a minimum of 10 per cent, well, I wouldn't expect any secondary school to demand, at the very most, more than one exemption from that, because, as I've argued, they're already providing around 8 per cent regardless. So, I don't see that argument holding water at all. But if we can reach the point, by Stage 3 of this Bill, that we're seriously considering adding 10 per cent to the current minimum that is taught as Welsh as a subject, well then we can consider one exemption as the expected norm, bearing in mind the challenges that you've already referred to, and that two exemptions should be entirely, entirely exceptional, truth be told. Now, I accept that some stakeholders presenting evidence on the Bill, such as local authorities through the WLGA, the Education Workforce Council and some unions, had said that exemptions would give flexibility to schools, but I also remember the Welsh Language Commissioner suggesting that an exemption could continue for a period of up to 10 years. I don't believe that any one of us would want to give that length of exemption because it's unlikely then that we will achieve the aim of at least a million Welsh speakers, because losing 10 years of partly Welsh language education would be too much of a loss to make up in terms of developing language skills. Cymdeithas yr Iaith's evidence also suggested that we could see a long delay. They were very concerned about the exemptions to reaching the minimum, and they noted that this could impair the development of pupils' language skills.

Now, if a school is in the position of requiring an exemption, and then another exemption, that allows almost no time for the school, as I've said, to play its part, as we expect every school to do, in terms of increasing provision of Welsh-medium education by 2050. That would not be fair to those pupils who are affected, who should, in my view, have the right, the same right as every other pupil in schools that make the effort to have Welsh-medium education. 

Now, Cymdeithas yr Iaith had suggested deleting sections 18 and 19 entirely, and Mudiad Meithrin was of the opinion, and I quote, that:

'It shouldn't be acceptable for a school to be given a permanent exemption under "exemption" and "further exemption" regulations.'

However, in order to ensure flexibility, especially if we see the minimum increase over time, I have suggested these amendments, which remove section 19 and further exemptions in order to make it clear that everyone—the Welsh Government, local authorities and schools—must work thoroughly to increase the provision of Welsh language education in Wales, and must plan accordingly, giving only one opportunity for an exemption. I look forward once again to hearing the committee's views on these amendments.

Thank you very much, Chair. I can't support this amendment, as it, as Cefin Campbell recognised, goes against what this committee heard in evidence from a number of witnesses and also the conversations that we have had with stakeholders. A second exemption could be reasonable under certain circumstances. Although I do understand some of the frustration with providing a further exemption, I would remind Members that section 19(2) requires the delivery plan to provide information regarding how they will ensure that the 10 per cent minimum is delivered. Section 19(2)(b) in particular requires the governing body to detail exactly when the minimum will be achieved, being no later than the end of the three-year period of the delivery plan.

I would also remind Members that a second exemption is not something that a school can decide for itself. Delivery plans are subject to an approval process by the local authority under section 15 of the Bill. If a local authority is not convinced by the reason for applying for a further exemption, or if the local authority believes that enhanced support can be provided to a school that requests a further exemption, the local authority could reject the delivery plan, or it could approve it with modifications.

I think, Chair, that the difference between Cefin Campbell and myself is not one of ambition. I want to see all schools providing 10 per cent of education through the medium of Welsh, or through Welsh language lessons, as soon as is possible. But it’s important that we bring everyone with us on this journey, and, on occasion, to show that we have responded to the concerns expressed by some people working in this area. And I would anticipate that a very small number of schools across Wales would actually apply for that further exemption. But, just in giving them that opportunity, it will give them confidence that they will be able to deal with the new responsibilities that this Bill places upon them. And it does place new duties on governing bodies and so on. So, in providing that one further opportunity—and only one—in the Bill then I believe that that will just help give people confidence that we have listened to them, and that we are dealing with things in a reasonable way. And, in my view, that will hasten the process in the sector, because they don’t think that we are asking them to do things that they feel that at the moment are beyond their capacity. So, that is why I support a further exemption within the Bill, and, for those reasons, I cannot support the amendments in this group.

Thank you very much, and thank you for that explanation, Cabinet Secretary. I accept that there isn’t a great deal of distance between us on this issue, and that we share the same ambition. But what concerns me, perhaps, is the kind of messaging that we are sharing with secondary schools here. I remember your evidence to this committee, when you said that secondary schools could receive an exemption of up to 10 years in some rare circumstances. And I’m certain that it wasn’t your intention that every secondary school should do so; I accept sincerely that you want to get to the same point as me on this.

But perhaps some secondary schools would see this as an opportunity to delay the process. If they are entirely sincere reasons—and I accept that there would be a role for local authorities in this regard—then one could sympathise and provide appropriate support. But I don’t see why we couldn’t get to that point within seven years from now. Because, by the time this Bill is operational, and that first exemption is given to a secondary school, six or seven years will have elapsed. I think that is a reasonable period of time to expect schools to plan their workforce and plan their curriculum to provide, in my view, at least 20 per cent of education through the medium of Welsh. I am genuinely concerned that if we give those two exemptions on top of this period of implementing the Bill, that some 12 years will be lost in the development of pupils' language skills. And if too many secondary schools were to make that decisions, well, then that target of at least a million Welsh speakers would be entirely impossible to achieve.

So, I am concerned about giving two exemptions, for the reasons that I've outlined, because some perhaps would take advantage of it for the wrong reasons. But for me to be positive, to conclude my comments, I very much hope that we can be put very positive messages out there for pupils, for parents, for schools, so that they see the value there, that they don't go for a second exemption—governors as well as local authorities—in order to start that child, that pupil, on that journey to becoming a confident speaker. Thank you.

Move.

Move.

Move.

Thank you very much, Chair. This is the first time that I will be speaking on a lead amendment, so I want to commend the Bill's aspiration of increasing the number of Welsh speakers in Wales. As a Welsh speaker, I fully support greater daily use of the language and its role in education. However, for this legislation to be effective and fair, we need to scrutinise it thoroughly. While I have inherited this Bill, and I was not involved in its development from the outset, I anticipate bringing forward further amendments at Stage 3.

Our education system is already under significant strain, facing a teacher recruitment crisis, low attendance and barriers related to the pandemic. These issues must be addressed. One of the most pressing concerns is the shortage of Welsh-medium teachers. Reports from Estyn and NEU Cymru have highlighted the urgent need for recruitment and training. Without sufficient support, placing additional requirements on teachers will be difficult, particularly in traditionally predominantly English-speaking areas.

My amendments 92, 94, 95 and 96 focus on (1) developing a workforce plan to meet future staffing needs, and (2) ensuring that subject teaching standards match the quality of Welsh-medium instruction, so that subject teaching is not compromised by language ability. In my view, these amendments align with recommendations 2, 3 and 4 of the committee’s report on this Bill.

Estyn’s latest annual report highlights a significant concern over declining teacher recruitment. Fewer than 25 students per year have been trained to teach Welsh over the past four years—less than a third of target figures. In a similar vein, the number of students training to teach through the medium of Welsh at secondary level has fallen sharply over the past decade. This must be addressed for the Bill to succeed.

Despite the clear link between teacher availability and Welsh-medium education, the Welsh Government’s January announcement on its education workforce plan made no mention of the Welsh language. And this omission is concerning, especially because it was published just before Stage 1 of this Bill was debated. Statistics from 2024 reveal a decline in the percentage of registered teachers able to work through the medium of Welsh over the last five years. However, there is a key distinction to be made between teachers who can speak Welsh and those confident enough to teach through the medium of the Welsh language, and failure to acknowledge this risks undermining educational quality. Strong subject expertise is needed as well as language ability. This Bill must ensure we have a sufficiently well-trained Welsh-medium education workforce to safeguard children’s education and raise teaching standards. That’s why I have submitted amendments 92, 94, 95 and 96.

In terms of the Minister’s amendments, amendments 28 and 35, I am concerned that they would remove the requirement to assess the number of Welsh-medium teachers in each local authority and provide sufficient training. Without these provisions, we risk losing oversight of workforce needs and failing, then, to support teachers to improve their Welsh-language skills, which could affect education quality.

And finally, I support Cefin Campbell’s amendments, amendments 153, 154 and 155, as they will help to maintain high standards in Welsh-medium education. Thank you.

Thank you very much. In my view, there is no commitment in this Bill to create a plan for the development of a bilingual workforce across the different education sectors, from nursery to further and higher education. This was noted as a shortcoming by the vast majority of stakeholders who provided evidence to us as a committee. For me, this is absolutely central to the success of the Bill and to the aim of creating a million Welsh speakers by 2050.

As the Welsh Language Commissioner pointed out to the committee,

'this priority could be expressed more clearly by placing a duty in the Bill on Welsh Ministers to produce and publish a Welsh in Education Workforce Plan as part of the National Framework for Welsh Language Education and Learning Welsh.'

And that is why I have introduced amendments in relation to the creation of a bilingual education workforce plan through amendment 147.

Quite simply, as Sam has already noted, we are not recruiting enough Welsh-medium teachers. Again, in the evening hosted by Estyn last night, they highlighted that very clearly, and that we are failing particularly in the secondary sector. And the Welsh Government has expressed a goal in terms of the numbers training through the medium of Welsh of around 30 per cent per annum, but the most recent recruitment figure was 20 per cent, back in 2021-22. And only some 325 of the 1,600 who started initial teacher training courses did so through the medium of Welsh. Indeed, since 2015, the figure has not increased much at all. Only 18.7 per cent did so then. So, we’re not moving in the right direction and, in my view, unless there is a statutory plan put in place, I do fear that this lack of capacity will be a barrier to the development of Welsh-medium education in the next years. So, I think we need a statutory plan. I do recognise and acknowledge the Government’s amendments, but I can’t support them as they do not go far enough, in my view.

I’m also concerned with the Government’s commitment to creating a non-statutory plan in relation to the workforce, based on the recent statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Education on this issue. In her statement, she made no reference at all, not a single paragraph, not a sentence, not even one word, about the creation of a bilingual workforce, so I am concerned about that commitment as a result of that statement. Also, it’s not clear to me how the inclusion of the Government’s amendment on the workforce aligns with the plan set out in the education Minister’s written statement. So, there  are inconsistencies between your amendment and the Cabinet Secretary’s statement. And stakeholders have been clear that a specific statutory plan is required—that was the majority view—which would stand alone and set a clear way forward in terms of recruitment and retention of teachers. Actions within a national framework are not sufficient, in my view. And in accordance with the Education Workforce Council’s response to the consultation on the White Paper, we have included a reference for a need for Ministers to set targets in terms of the workforce.

And to conclude, just on that particular section, my amendment also states that Welsh Ministers would have to publish the first bilingual education workforce plan by the end of the 10 months that start on the day that the Act comes into force, and would set a duty to review or update the plan after each Senedd election, so that the plan is regularly updated in order to ensure progress.

Moving on now to the role of the athrofa, I acknowledge that there is an important role for the athrofa in developing the education workforce for the purposes of improving Welsh language teaching methods and providing opportunities to learn Welsh for the education workforce. Now, that’s absolutely essential, but it’s not enough in and of itself. Amendments 153, 154, and 155, therefore, seek to impose a duty to ensure that the athrofa has sufficient resources to provide intensive courses for improving the capacity of the current workforce in relation to the Welsh language in order to realise the objectives of the Bill, and to provide support and incentives for the education system to undertake that provision.

And to conclude, in terms of the other amendments in the group, I will vote in favour of amendments 94 and 95, as they will also seek to put a particular workforce plan on the face of the Bill. Although they are very similar to our amendments, I want to improve the chances of such a plan being implemented, so I will vote in favour of 92 and 96, in the name of Sam Kurtz, which seeks to strengthen the ability of governing bodies to ensure a workforce that is sufficiently trained. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you very much, Chair, and I thank Sam Kurtz and Cefin Campbell for the comments that they have made in committee. Their committee’s report at the end of Stage 1 articulated clearly the evidence it had heard from many stakeholders about the challenge of ensuring there is sufficient capacity within the education workforce to deliver the Bill’s ambition. The Government agrees with the committee’s conclusions in its report that the challenge of ensuring that there is a sufficient workforce to deliver the Bill should be addressed alongside the other challenges regarding the education workforce. On 13 January, the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Lynne Neagle, published a statement on the work that she has commenced in drawing up an education workforce plan for Wales. I had an opportunity to speak to her when she was preparing that statement, and I can tell the committee today that the work that Lynne Neagle is doing will include and will cover capacity for providing education through the medium of Welsh. But the plan will include the teaching of Welsh and teaching through the medium of Welsh, not to set that as something that is separate from education workforce development more generally. For the specific purposes of this Bill, I am persuaded of the need to strengthen its provisions regarding the workforce. That is the context for the Government’s amendments in this group.

Amendment 38 ensures that there is a duty on Welsh Ministers to include in the national framework the steps that they will take in relation to the workforce. Specifically, the new duty will require the framework to set out the steps the Welsh Ministers will take to ensure that the number of education practitioners working in Wales meets the need. That need will be based on the assessment of the number of education practitioners needed in each local authority in order to meet any target set in the national framework. As such, I would urge Members to reject amendments 94 and 95 in the name of Sam Kurtz and amendment 147 in the name of Cefin Campbell as they seek to do very similar things to the Government amendments, but as a stand-alone, independent plan, rather than as part of the national framework. We prefer the Government amendment as it ensures that the workforce element of the national framework is developed in the context of the overall policy, and not in isolation.

Amendment 147 in the name of Cefin Campbell also strays into the territory of the English language education workforce. It would not be appropriate to include powers in this Bill for the English language education workforce. The Government has committed to developing a non-statutory strategic education workforce plan, which will include all education sectors. The elements of this strategic plan that relate to the Welsh language education workforce will be reflected in the national framework.

Amendment 38 in the name of the Government also ensures that the provisions relating to the workforce within the national framework are all in one section. The purpose of amendments 28 and 35 is to omit provisions relating to the workforce from other sections to ensure that all of the provisions related to the workforce in the national framework are in the new section inserted by amendment 38. Amendment 40 is needed in light of the new section inserted by amendment 38. The effect will be to place a requirement on local authorities to provide any information required by the Welsh Ministers to enable them to carry out what is required under the new section.

Amendment 153 in the name of Cefin Campbell is unnecessary given amendment 38, and amendment 153 risks a duplication or overlap of functions. It would not be appropriate for the athrofa to undertake a separate assessment of the needs of the education workforce in order to meet targets for increasing the provision of Welsh language education. Amendment 38 places that duty on the Welsh Ministers. However, the Government does believe that there is merit in amendment 154, tabled by Cefin Campbell, in so far as the athrofa should make arrangements to provide opportunities to learn Welsh and take the assessment of the needs of the workforce into account. The Government amendment 38 also impacts the amendment. So, whilst the Government cannot support the amendment as drafted, I would be interested in working with the Member with a view to tabling an amendment at Stage 3.

The Government is also of the view that there is merit in amendment 155, tabled by Cefin Campbell, in so far as this has the potential to secure the future of intensive provision, namely the sabbatical provision currently provided for the education workforce. However, subsection (b), as currently drafted, is open ended. It encompasses a wide range of education workforce support and incentives that currently sit elsewhere in the system. These would be set out by Welsh Ministers in the national framework in relation to the workforce. So, once again, whilst the Government cannot support the amendment as drafted, I would be interested in working with the Member with a view to tabling an amendment at Stage 3.

Amendment 92, in the name of Sam Kurtz, seeks to require governing bodies to include in their school Welsh language education delivery plan what they will do to ensure education practitioners are sufficiently qualified. Similarly, amendment 96 seeks to place a requirement on local authorities to include in their local Welsh in education strategic plans what they will do to enable governing bodies to ensure that education practitioners are sufficiently qualified. These amendments are unnecessary in the Government’s view, bearing in mind that there are already regulations to deal with the suitability of staff. Local authorities and governing bodies must fulfil their functions under the Staffing of Maintained Schools (Wales) Regulations 2006, with a view to ensuring that there is, in the words of the regulations themselves, 

‘employed, or engaged otherwise than under contracts of employment, a staff suitable and sufficient in numbers for the purpose of securing the provision of education appropriate to the ages, abilities, aptitudes and needs of the pupils’. 

I urge Members, therefore, to support the Government’s amendments in this group, but to reject those of Sam Kurtz and Cefin Campbell.

Yes, thank you, Chair. First of all, I'm grateful to Cefin Campbell for his support for the amendments in my name. And to return, I did hear and listen to what the Cabinet Secretary had to say about the amendments in my name. And the first point, I think, is in terms of the standard of education that children receive in both the language and the subject. I think that that's very important. Because if we do want children who develop confidence, not only in the language but in the subject too, I think it's crucially important that both are equal, and that's the reason behind this amendment. And I think that empowering governors is crucially important in that regard, because there are examples of teachers being recruited to teach in one subject and, as soon as they enter the school and start teaching, they move to teach a different subject, and perhaps the standards aren't as high as in the subject that they were recruited to teach initially. So, to clear that up, I think that's why some sort of amendment is necessary.

I also think that there was disappointment—. The Cabinet Secretary mentioned what the Cabinet Secretary for Education issued, namely her statement. There was no mention of the Welsh language in that statement, the day before we discussed this in the Chamber. That caused me a little concern. Of course, a workforce strategy is necessary, but to not mention the Welsh language at a time when you are bringing forward a Bill on the Welsh language and education, I think that that places a greater responsibility on me, as an opposition politician, to ensure that the Welsh language is central to any recruitment or staffing strategy that is brought forward.

So, perhaps in collaboration with the Cabinet Secretary for Education, we could have something that has been updated to ensure that the Welsh language has equal status in that long-term workforce strategy. But, yes, I am grateful to have listened to and heard what the Cabinet Secretary has had to say. I will pass back to you, Chair, at that point.    

Thank you very much, Chair. I will be addressing all of the amendments in this group. Parents and guardians are important to children's education. They are home educators and support what their children learn at school. Their contribution is essential in helping Welsh children to not only speak the language, but also to succeed in their studies. They play a crucial role in Wales’s future. 

One of the key strengths of this Bill is that every child will learn Welsh, regardless of the language of their home. However, for this to work, parents need to support homework and school projects. I am concerned that non-Welsh-speaking parents could find this difficult, and could lack confidence in participating.  

Amendment 93 would make it a requirement for schools to support parents in understanding Welsh language education, enabling them to assist their children. During the pandemic, many English-speaking parents found it difficult to support their children attending Welsh-medium schools, with some younger students relying on older siblings to translate. We must resolve this issue. The Bill provides an opportunity for us to equip parents to help their children to learn. Amendment 97 would allow local authorities to support school governing bodies in this effort, reinforced by amendment 98. Thank you, Chair.

Yes, very briefly, I just want to support the amendments. Sam is entirely correct in saying that we need to provide support to parents. They've often made that choice of placing their children in Welsh-medium education, and perhaps they don't speak Welsh themselves. So, if they are learning Welsh, or if they're helping with homework or just helping in general in terms of supporting the school's ethos, then I do think that that is important and that it's important that it's reflected in the Bill, and that we perhaps share this good practice across the whole of Wales. So, those are the comments I wanted to make.

Thank you very much to Sam Kurtz and to all other contributors. I certainly support the thinking behind these amendments. It is crucial that we do enable parents to feel that they are supported in understanding their child's Welsh language learning journey, and I'm happy to work towards something that could be placed on the face of the Bill to reflect the points that Joyce Watson has made.

At the moment, there are a couple of problems with the amendments as drafted, and I do want to work with Sam Kurtz prior to Stage 3 to see if we can bring forward amendments that achieve what we want to achieve but avoid the problems that are currently contained within the amendments.

I am aware that the committee heard quite some evidence expressing concern about the workload on the teaching workforce, and I am keen to be mindful of this. The amendment as currently drafted doesn't include sufficient detail in this regard, so that's one point for discussion.

In relation to amendment 97, of course, there is merit in the purpose of this amendment as it would require local authorities to consider what steps they would take to support governing bodies to engage with parents on Welsh language education. It would be a matter for local authorities in terms of gauging what those steps should be. However, the wording in terms of 'engagement' requires greater legal clarity if it is to avoid unintended workload consequences.

As I said, I believe there is potential to work on this at Stage 3, but, for today, I will have to ask Members to vote against the amendments in this group. But I am eager to work with the Member to get something on the face of the Bill during Stage 3.

Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you to every Member who has supported not perhaps the amendment itself, but the theme of the amendment. I appreciate that and I appreciate the offer made by the Cabinet Secretary to work together on this. I think it's important to show, in these days in particular, that the language has been depoliticised. We as political parties can talk about the language with the offer to collaborate, and that's to be welcomed at this time. So, I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for that, and I'll be sure to send a message to him over the weekend to start the conversation on this, because support for parents who support their children is vital. We've got a new Welsh-medium primary school in Pembroke, south of the Landsker line, a historically English-speaking area, and parents are choosing to send their children to a new Welsh-medium primary school, but those parents need the support to ensure that they can send their children to Welsh-medium schools, and that they do so in increasing numbers. So, I appreciate that, and back to you, Chair. I won't be moving these to a vote at this point.  

Move? 

Thank you, Chair. There are a large number of amendments in this group, but they are all technical in nature, and we have tabled these amendments to ensure that the Bill’s provisions work as intended. I will try to canter through all of these amendments. More details are available if any committee member wants to know more. 

The purpose and effect of amendments 16, 29, 52, 54, 70 is to ensure accuracy of the text. The purpose and effect of amendments 19, 21, 24, 39, 44, 45 is to ensure drafting consistency with other provisions in the Bill. The purpose and effect of amendments 25, 33, 34, 46 is to omit the words 'in schools' from section 23 as it is implicit in the definition of 'Welsh language education' in section 35. The purpose and effect of amendments 48 and 67 is to ensure consistency between the Welsh and English texts. The purpose and effect of amendment 77 is to ensure drafting consistency within the section and to ensure equivalence between the Welsh and English texts. I would be happy to elaborate on these amendments should Members wish.

Just a brief comment, Chair, to note that I am content to support all of these amendments. They're technical in nature, with the exception of one, amendment 29, for the reasons that I noted earlier when we were discussing group 11. Thank you. 

No. I heard the Member's comments when he made reference to amendment 29 before the break. 

Thank you very much, Chair. Amendment 128 seeks for a linguistic impact assessment to be held when a local authority seeks to open a new school in an area. A new school means either a new building or the reorganisation of existing schools to create a new school. This then will provide an assurance and will safeguard Welsh-medium provision in an area, to ensure,  in turn, that there is no negative decision made that would impact detrimentally on the growth of the Welsh language in an area. Amendment 159 was tabled as a result of amendment 128, but, for technical reasons with regard to drafting, I intend to withdraw amendment 159, Chair. So, if amendment 128 is passed, I will be tabling a further amendment at Stage 3, to ensure that any regulations passed by Ministers using these powers are subject to the affirmative procedure at the Senedd.

In terms of new schools, there, is no mention made of this matter at all in the current Bill. Paragraphs 66 to 67 of the White Paper set out two possible positions, but, unfortunately, neither position is included in the provisions of this Bill as it currently stands. Personally, I favour setting a presumption that any new school would be a Welsh-medium school. Amendments 131 and 132 therefore, respond to this point, and also to evidence from Cymdeithas yr Iaith, which noted that

'Establishing any new English-medium provision would undermine the aim of increasing the percentage of Welsh-medium education provision.'

And I agree with that point of view. So, we need new sections in the Bill to deal with the linguistic status of new schools or current schools that are reorganised. My amendments, therefore, seek to ensure, within the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, that there will be a presumption in favour of Welsh-medium education in any new school that is established and that any school that results from the reorganisation of existing provision should move along the language continuum. Thank you.

Just briefly, Chair, I agree with the general theme here, but we do see certain areas where schools in the primary and secondary sectors have come together, and the way that I've read the amendments tabled by Cefin Campbell is that if they are two English-medium schools, they would have to move towards becoming Welsh-medium schools, and I do think that that is perhaps too much to ask in the first instance. So—

To move one category.

—moving up one category. So, at the moment, I'm unable to support these, but I want to look to see whether we can ensure that, where English-medium schools come together as a federation, or whatever it might be, they do need to move forward as soon as they come together, to ensure that there is some sort of transition, which is crucially important.

Yes, I agree.

Thank you, Chair. The Bill seeks to improve the way Welsh language provision is planned within the education system. The policy objective is that all local authorities take decisions that positively affect the Welsh language locally and contribute towards and contribute towards the targets placed upon them by Welsh Ministers through the national framework. Every local authority has local factors that will be unique to them, and in planning they will need to take account of those factors. As such, the Government's view is that it is within the context of the local Welsh in education strategic plans, and the targets that will drive those plans, that local authorities should decide on the language category of new schools, thereby enabling them to consider local factors.

In deciding on the language category of a new school, the local authority will need to consider the targets placed upon them by the national framework and their duty to take all reasonable steps to meet those targets. They will also have to satisfy the requirements of the code. That is reasonable given that the Bill as a whole evolves the way in which Welsh in education is planned, and the WESPs will be a key part of that. A requirement for a presumption that all new schools are primarily Welsh language schools would cut across that target-driven planning process. There is also a risk that going down the route of setting a presumption could have unintended consequences that would be detrimental to the Welsh language. For example, enforcing the decision on a local community could lead to a lack of buy-in. We've all seen that happening, when we lose ground for the Welsh language by taking too strong an enforcement action in this area. The Government must therefore reject amendment 132 in the name of Cefin Campbell.

The principle that certain school reorganisation proposals should, where reasonable, not lead to a reduction of Welsh language education provided to pupils affected by a proposal appears to be a reasonable one. However, the wording of amendment 131 also refers to an assumption that education will be provided through the medium of Welsh. The Government cannot support that wording, for the reasons I outlined with regard to amendment 132. There are also a number of very complex policy matters surrounding this amendment that require careful consideration. I therefore urge Members to reject amendment 131. However, the Government is willing to continue to discuss this issue with the Member, but with no guarantees of a Stage 3 amendment.

Chair, strengthening the requirements for assessing the impact of proposals for new schools, as well as proposals for the reorganisation of schools, is also part of the solution to ensure that local authorities take decisions that give the Welsh language the best chance of thriving locally. Welsh Ministers already have the power to include in the school organisation code what amendment 128 in the name of Cefin Campbell is seeking to achieve. Indeed, there is currently a consultation on a revised code, and the closing date is tomorrow, 14 February. The draft revised code has been strengthened to require that—and this is what's included in the draft code—

'A Welsh language impact assessment...must be undertaken for all proposals regardless of the language category of the schools which are the subject of the proposals. It must include relevant evidence and mitigating factors below as a minimum requirement'.

It also makes it a requirement for the Welsh language impact assessment to be included as part of the consultation document or published alongside that document. Given that this is a live consultation, and that the outcome of the consultation will be known very shortly, the Government would prefer to consider the responses to that consultation before considering next steps. I therefore call on Members to reject amendment 128.

Yes, thank you very much. If I may perhaps refer to the final point that you made, I accept that the consultation is live and open until tomorrow, so I would very much like to have a conversation after tomorrow to see what the results of the consultation are. I very much welcome, personally, that there is a language impact assessment undertaken where there are plans to create a new school, but, as these amendments suggest, I would like it to go further, of course, than that, and that there should be a presumption in favour of a new school at least moving to a higher category. To accept entirely the point that Sam made, it is quite a challenge to go from being an English-medium school to being a primarily Welsh language school overnight, so I would expect those arrangements to ensure a step-by-step process towards the objective of being a Welsh-medium school ultimately, and that’s the spirit of these amendments, that we send positive messages about our statement of intent that we want more schools to be Welsh-medium schools, because we know that that is the most effective method of creating the confident Welsh speakers that we all want to see being produced. So, I would be in favour of a presumption. A presumption isn't absolute. A presumption states, 'Well, if you can do this, that is the path that you should be following. If there are good reasons why you cannot achieve that, then let us discuss the related issues.' So, the presumption, for me, gives the flexibility, but it does give that positive message to local authorities to say, 'Well, listen, consider moving all of your schools along the continuum now that you have an opportunity to do so.' So, that's what lies behind these amendments.

Move.

Move.

Yes, move. 

Thank you very much, Chair. As we all know, one of the biggest challenges facing pupils and parents when it comes to securing access to Welsh-medium education is transportation. And far too often we hear of cases where parents need to pay for or arrange transport for their children themselves, or cases where children have to walk to a Welsh-medium school that is a little further away than the nearest English-medium school, which often provides bus transport by the local authority, which makes it very unfair for those who choose Welsh-medium education.

So, by putting unnecessary obstacles in front of our pupils and children, we are enabling a system where, very often, the easiest decision is to send children to the nearest English-medium school, rather than perhaps the choice that was in the parents' heart, and, because of problems of transportation and issues around distance, they choose the nearest English-medium school. Now, I don’t think that this can continue if we are serious about ensuring equal and fair access for all those who want to access Welsh-medium education for their children. It’s therefore surprising that there is no provision on the face of the Bill to deal with this issue, and the purpose of amendments 134 and 135 is to remedy that.

Now, a number of stakeholders noted during the consultation that this is an issue that should be considered for reform, particularly Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg, who said that:

'We are concerned that no coverage of free school travel provision is included in the Bill to strengthen existing provision through the Learner Travel (Wales) Measure 2008. As stated, the ultimate aim is for all schools to deliver through Welsh, but in the meantime we believe that the current provision of learner travel must be strengthened to ensure fairness.'

Section 10 of the Learner Travel (Wales) Measure includes a general duty that:

'Each local authority and the Welsh Ministers must promote access to education and training through the medium of the Welsh language when exercising functions under this Measure.'

The duty to provide free transport is based on the concept of the, in quotes, 'nearest suitable school'. The local authority therefore needs to provide that when a primary pupil lives two miles or more from the nearest suitable school, and for a secondary pupil when that distance is three miles or more.

Now, in the guidance document, ‘Learner Travel: Statutory Provision and Operational Guidance June 2014’, the Welsh Government confirms that local authorities need to fulfil their duty to promote education and training through the medium of Welsh when deciding on the nearest suitable school. It is further noted that section 6 of the learner travel Measure allows discretion for local authorities to provide transport for a pupil who does not attend his or her nearest suitable school because of language preference. But the suggestion that the nearest school can be 'suitable' even though it doesn't provide the language medium of choice of the parents is misleading and stems from the fact that the concept of a 'suitable' school is defined in the Measure in relation to age, ability, aptitude and any learning difficulties that the pupil may have. There is no reference at all here to the suitability in terms of the medium of the education provided, and therefore this appears to be a fundamental weakness in trying to determine the duties arising from the legislation.

Therefore, in considering all of this, amendment 134 amends the learner travel Measure as it stands in order to include the medium of education unequivocally within the definition of nearest suitable school, in the context of learner travel arrangements.

I have also tabled amendment 135, which calls on local authorities to provide, instead of just promoting, access to Welsh-medium education as a probing amendment, as I would like to hear from the Cabinet Secretary exactly how the Welsh Government intends to ensure fair access to Welsh-medium education through transport. So, that's it from me. I look forward to the debate, and to hearing others' views on these issues.

I support the fact that transport to school needs to be improved, so I sympathise with Cefin's objectives outlined today.

Well, I too sympathise with some of the points made by the Member, but I cannot support the amendments in this group, because there is no way to limit the impact of these provisions to Welsh-medium provisions only. There would possibly be an expectation to also ensure fair access to other schools or settings, such as faith schools. This would result in implications in terms of cost that would be significant and implications that would be unsustainable.

The education Acts also refer to parents' right to express a preference for a Welsh-medium school, so an amendment that requires a child to express a language preference doesn't align with that. It could lead to a scenario where a child expresses a preference according to language, and therefore a school, that is different to that of his or her parents.

It could also be a requirement for local authorities, as a consequence of this amendment, to make school transport arrangements for learners specifying a preference for English-medium education, when it wasn't a requirement for them to do so previously. This would be particularly relevant in areas where the majority of education is provided through the medium of Welsh. 

As you've heard from Cefin Campbell, this is predominantly an issue when a learner lives within the 2 mile distance criteria for primary schools or within the 3 mile distance criteria for secondary schools, and therefore they're not eligible for free school transport. If the Bill is given the opportunity to deliver on what it sets out to do, namely to increase Welsh-medium provision and enable more learners to learn Welsh successfully at school, over time I would expect these issues to become less common.

Section 10 of the Measure should be used, alongside the WESP, to support local authority decisions to apply their discretionary powers to make school travel arrangements for learners to Welsh-medium education. This is already an expectation in the planning of WESPs and is a proportionate response to dealing with individual cases.

The purpose of amendment 135 is to amend section 10 of the Learner Travel (Wales) Measure 2008, which currently requires local authorities and Welsh Ministers to promote access to education and training through the medium of the Welsh language when exercising functions under the Measure. The amendment proposes to replace 'promote' with 'provide'. It is unclear what effect providing access to education and training would have in this context, in addition to the requirements set out in section 3 of the Measure. Section 3 already requires local authorities to make transport arrangements for all primary school-aged learners living 2 miles or more from their nearest suitable school, and for secondary school learners living 3 miles or more from their nearest suitable school. Sections 6 and 10 of the Measure already give discretion to local authorities to provide free transport to Welsh-medium schools in circumstances that sit outside the section 3 conditions, such as distance criteria. This is possible without amendment 135.

More focus is needed on supporting a more collaborative and consistent implementation of the learner travel Measure. For this reason, and those I've already outlined, I would like to ask Members to reject the amendments in this group. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you very much, Chair. I listened carefully to the comments made by the Cabinet Secretary. I have to say that, generally speaking, I’m disappointed by the response, whilst simultaneously I accept many of the things that he did say about unintended consequences, so I will come to those in due course.

Now, the status quo isn’t working in favour of growing Welsh-medium education, because we know and have known for a number of years that lack of transport to Welsh-medium schools where they are further away than the nearest English-medium school is a barrier for many parents in choosing Welsh-medium education. That’s been a factor that’s been highlighted time and time again by parents in all parts of Wales, almost. So, insisting that a failing system should continue, to me, isn’t the best solution in terms of moving things forward. But I also accept and recognise the point made by the Cabinet Secretary that in certain areas of Wales, the unintended consequence, providing the choice and the transport for someone to avoid Welsh-medium education and to access English-medium education, could be the case, but I think, in the majority of cases, a lack of transport is a barrier to the development of Welsh-medium education. I accept the point that in the medium and long term, as more Welsh schools are established, the situation may change, but I do fear in the short term that the catalyst that we’re looking to put in place to make it easy for people to choose Welsh-medium education, from the transportation perspective, is not going to be put in place.

But I do, as a final point, want to address something that the Cabinet Secretary referred to, namely that in our amendment, we noted the child’s language of choice. Now, we recognise that that was an error; we had intended to refer to parental choice. So, on that basis, I wish to withdraw amendment 134, so that we have time to redraft and perhaps have a further discussion before Stage 3, if that’s okay with the Chair. Yes? Okay. Thank you very much.