English: Diolch, Llywydd. I rise to speak against the fundamental principles of this Bill, a Bill that sees this Government intervening inappropriately and excessively in family life. What we have here is a nanny-state approach, which disagrees that it is parents who are best placed to decide on the appropriate punishment or discipline for a child. We know from a UK Government review that the defence appears to be little used. Similarly, between 2009 and 2017, the defence was only raised three times in cases where a decision to charge had been made. So, the defence has not been hindering many parents who have actually caused anything more than a temporary reddening of the skin from being held accountable. Therefore, it seems that the allegation that this whole exercise is a demonstration of virtue signalling is absolutely right. It is indefensible in this instance to be infringing further on parents' rights in respect of private and family life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The Welsh Government argue that the interference is justified by the need to protect the rights of children, but is it? I think not. It is acknowledged in the explanatory memorandum that there is unlikely to be any research evidence that specifically shows the effects of a light and infrequent smack as being harmful to children. This is actually supported by the 'Parental Physical Punishment: Child Outcomes and Attitudes' review. There is evidence that the processing of emotional pain in the brain is actually in the same area as physical pain. The independent Psychology Associates tell us that physical punishment is less harmful than some other non-physical, such as mind games, and that sending a child to a room and isolating them for several hours would be a very, very harmful thing to do. It was no surprise, therefore, that only half of the consultation respondents agreed that the legislative proposal will achieve the aim of protecting children's rights. Therefore, the advice of Professor Larzelere cannot be ignored - that a better alternative is to identify the most appropriate chastisement. As it stands, we are now on track to be unreasonably criminalising good parents, of which there are many in Wales. It is admitted in the explanatory memorandum that parents, if reported, will be charged, prosecuted and convicted, or offered a statutory out-of-court disposal, which would be disclosed as conviction information on an enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service check. Even worse is that the chief constable for south Wales admitted that reports of alleged criminal behaviour will still show up, even if that person has not been prosecuted. I ask this Chamber: do we really want such parents to see their career chances challenged and travel to certain countries curbed as a result of a minor incident and removal of the defence? Have we even thought of the fact that punishing the parent may actually cause harm to the child too? It was noted in committee that senior officers in Wales have warned that children may be removed from their family home whilst cases are prosecuted. It has also been explained that the ban could delay some of the 6,500 court cases where parents can't agree arrangements for their children, and weaponise smacking in divorce cases. If you don't believe me, listen to the Deputy Minister. She herself has admitted that malicious reporting via ex-partners is likely to occur. It is true that the police already have to identify genuine cases, and that multi-agency safeguarding hubs are used to understand the context of families. Despite the Welsh Government response to recommendation 17 portraying them as being unfazed by the fact that there is not a hub in every area, in evidence, a police and crime commissioner noted the necessity of greater funding levels, and essentially agreed that it is a concern that the Welsh Government is proposing a law that it is not funding with regard to the greater impact on our police force. Funding is an even greater problem when questioning the impact of the Bill on social services. Astoundingly, the Deputy Minister comes across as being clueless as to the pressure this legislation will cause to the cash crisis in social services.
Welsh: Diolch, Llywydd. Rwy'n codi i siarad yn erbyn egwyddorion sylfaenol y Bil hwn, Bil sy'n gweld y Llywodraeth hon yn ymyrryd yn amhriodol ac yn ormodol ym mywyd teuluol. Yr hyn sydd gennym ni yn y fan yma yw ymagwedd gwladwriaeth famaeth, sy'n anghytuno mai rhieni sydd yn y sefyllfa orau i benderfynu ar y gosb neu'r ddisgyblaeth briodol i blentyn. Rydym yn gwybod o adolygiad gan Lywodraeth y DU nad yw'n ymddangos bod llawer o ddefnydd o'r amddiffyniad. Yn yr un modd, rhwng 2009 a 2017, dim ond tair gwaith y codwyd yr amddiffyniad, mewn achosion pan wnaed penderfyniad i gyhuddo. Felly, nid yw'r amddiffyniad wedi bod yn llesteirio llawer o rieni sydd mewn gwirionedd wedi achosi dim mwy na chochi'r croen am gyfnod byr rhag cael eu dwyn i gyfrif. Felly, mae'n ymddangos bod yr honiad mai arwydd o ddangos rhinwedd yw'r ymarfer cyfan hwn yn hollol gywir. Yn yr achos hwn, ni ellir cyfiawnhau amharu ymhellach ar hawliau rhieni o ran bywyd preifat a theuluol, rhyddid meddwl, cydwybod a chrefydd. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn dadlau bod yr ymyrraeth wedi'i chyfiawnhau gan yr angen i amddiffyn hawliau plant, ond ydy hi? Nac ydy yn fy marn i. Mae'r memorandwm esboniadol yn cydnabod ei bod yn annhebygol y bydd unrhyw dystiolaeth ymchwil sy'n dangos yn benodol bod effeithiau smac ysgafn yn awr ac yn y man yn niweidiol i blant. Yn wir, cefnogir hyn gan yr adolygiad 'Cosb Gorfforol Rhiant: Canlyniadau Plant ac Agweddau'. Mae tystiolaeth i ddangos bod poen emosiynol yn cael ei brosesu yn yr un rhan o'r ymennydd â phoen corfforol mewn gwirionedd. Mae'r Cymdeithion Seicoleg annibynnol yn dweud wrthym fod cosb gorfforol yn llai niweidiol na rhai dulliau eraill nad ydyn nhw'n gorfforol, fel gemau meddwl, ac y byddai anfon plentyn i ystafell a'i gadw ar wahân am nifer o oriau yn beth niweidiol iawn, iawn i'w wneud. Nid oedd unrhyw syndod, felly, mai dim ond hanner y rhai a ymatebodd i'r ymgynghoriad oedd yn cytuno y bydd y cynnig deddfwriaethol yn cyflawni'r nod o amddiffyn hawliau plant. Felly, ni ellir anwybyddu cyngor yr Athro Larzelere - mai dewis gwell fyddai nodi'r gosb fwyaf priodol. Fel y mae hi, mae llawer o rieni da yng Nghymru ac rydym ni ar y trywydd iawn erbyn hyn i'w gwneud yn droseddwyr a hynny'n afresymol. Cyfaddefir yn y memorandwm esboniadol y bydd rhieni, os cyflwynir adroddiad arnyn nhw, yn cael eu cyhuddo, eu herlyn a'u collfarnu, neu'n cael cynnig gwarediad statudol y tu allan i'r llys, a fyddai'n cael ei ddatgelu fel gwybodaeth am gollfarn ar wiriad uwch y Gwasanaeth Datgelu a Gwahardd. Gwaeth fyth yw bod prif gwnstabl de Cymru wedi cyfaddef y bydd adroddiadau am ymddygiad troseddol honedig yn dal i ymddangos, hyd yn oed os nad yw'r person hwnnw wedi'i erlyn. Gofynnaf i'r Siambr hon: a ydym ni wirioneddol eisiau i rieni o'r fath weld eu cyfleoedd gyrfaol yn cael eu herio a llesteirio ar deithio i rai gwledydd o ganlyniad i fân ddigwyddiad a chael gwared ar yr amddiffyniad? A ydym ni hyd yn oed wedi meddwl am y ffaith y gall cosbi'r rhiant achosi niwed i'r plentyn hefyd? Nodwyd yn y pwyllgor bod uwch swyddogion yng Nghymru wedi rhybuddio y gellir symud plant o'u cartref teuluol wrth i achosion gael eu herlyn. Esboniwyd hefyd y gallai'r gwaharddiad beri oedi yn achos rhai o'r 6,500 o achosion llys lle na all rhieni gytuno ar drefniadau ar gyfer eu plant, a gwneud smacio yn arf mewn achosion o ysgariad. Os nad ydych chi'n fy nghredu i, gwrandewch ar y Dirprwy Weinidog. Mae hi ei hun wedi cyfaddef bod adroddiadau maleisus yn debygol o ddigwydd gan gyn-bartneriaid. Mae'n wir bod yn rhaid i'r heddlu eisoes nodi achosion gwirioneddol, a bod hybiau diogelu amlasiantaeth yn cael eu defnyddio i ddeall cyd-destun teuluoedd. Er gwaethaf ymateb Llywodraeth Cymru i argymhelliad 17 yn eu portreadu fel bod yn ddigyffro am y ffaith nad oes hyb ym mhob ardal, mewn tystiolaeth, nododd comisiynydd heddlu a throseddu fod angen mwy o lefelau cyllid, a chytunodd yn y bôn ei fod yn destun pryder bod Llywodraeth Cymru yn cynnig cyfraith nad yw'n ei hariannu o ran yr effaith fwy ar ein heddlu. Mae cyllid yn broblem fwy fyth wrth gwestiynu effaith y Bil ar wasanaethau cymdeithasol. Yn syfrdanol, ymddengys bod y Dirprwy Weinidog yn anymwybodol o'r pwysau y bydd y ddeddfwriaeth hon yn ei roi ar yr argyfwng ariannol yn y gwasanaethau cymdeithasol.