English: Plaid Cymru supports the general principles of the children (Wales) Bill before us today, and, as a member of the children and young people committee, I have had numerous opportunities to listen carefully to the arguments for and against the introduction of a Bill of this kind, and I have been convinced entirely that children in Wales can only benefit as a result of this minor legislative change. Therefore, the Bill should certainly be allowed to proceed to the next legislative stage in this Assembly. There's a strong argument to be made that this Bill could reduce the risk of possible harm to children and young people. Along with the introduction of the Bill, we must do much more to help families with the inevitable challenges of parenting that face us all, and the Chair of the children and young people committee has already mentioned the importance of enhancing and expanding that support, and we look forward to seeing what the outcomes of the mapping exercises will be, and what steps will be taken as a result of that. Very briefly, why should the law change? Well, there are a number of very good reasons for this change. Children should have the same defence against violence as adults, and that should be enshrined in law. Reasonable punishment is not accepted as a defence in cases of common assault when the victim is over 16 years old, so why on earth should we have one rule for children under 16 and another for everyone else? According to article 19 of the UNCRC we must take all appropriate steps to safeguard children while they're in the care of their parents or other individuals, and Wales has adopted that convention as a baseline for policy development in relation to children and young people in Wales, and that was done back in 2004. Therefore, I would argue that we are duty bound under human rights legislation to change the law. The abolition of the defence of reasonable punishment is a minor change to the law and it will affect only a small number of people. The Crown prosecution sentencing guidance will not need to change because, as we heard in committee, a decision will need to be made in all cases as to whether prosecution is in the public interest and in the child's interest. A UK Government review of the efficiency of the 2004 Children Act found that there was a lack of understanding of current legislation and that many believed that section 58 allowed physical punishment. Some practitioners, such as social workers, who want to advise parents not to strike their children see it difficult to do that because of the legal position. Therefore, the abolition of this defence would make their work so much easier and the situation would be far clearer for everyone. For all those reasons, therefore, I am pleased to support the general principles of this Bill, and I thank Julie Morgan for her detailed work and her determination with this issue.
Welsh: Mae Plaid Cymru yn cytuno ag egwyddorion cyffredinol Bil plant (Cymru) sydd gerbron heddiw, ac, fel aelod o'r pwyllgor plant a phobl ifanc, dwi wedi cael llawer iawn o gyfleon i wrando yn ofalus ar y dadleuon o blaid ac yn erbyn cyflwyno Bil o'r math. Dwi wedi cael fy argyhoeddi yn llwyr mai dim ond daioni a ddaw i blant Cymru yn sgil y newid bychan yma i ddeddfwriaeth. Felly, yn sicr mi ddylid caniatáu i'r Bil symud ymlaen i gyfnod nesaf proses ddeddfwriaethol y Cynulliad. Mae dadl gref y bydd y Bil hwn yn lleihau'r risg o niwed posibl i blant a phobl ifanc. Law yn llaw â chyflwyno'r Bil mae'n rhaid gwneud llawer mwy i helpu teuluoedd efo'r heriau anochel sy'n wynebu ni i gyd wrth fagu plant, ac mae Cadeirydd y pwyllgor plant a phobl ifanc wedi sôn am bwysigrwydd ehangu'r cymorth hwnnw, ac edrychwn ymlaen at weld beth fydd canlyniadau'r ymarferion mapio, ac, yn bwysicach, i weld beth fydd y camau i'w cymryd yn sgil hynny. Yn sydyn iawn, pam ddylai'r gyfraith newid? Wel, mae yna nifer o resymau da iawn dros greu'r newid yma. Mi ddylai plant gael amddiffyniad cydradd i oedolion yn erbyn trais, a hynny drwy gyfraith. Dydy cosb resymol ddim yn cael ei derbyn fel amddiffyniad ar gyfer achos o ymosod cyffredin pan fydd y dioddefwr dros 16 oed, felly pam yn y byd bod angen un rheol i blant o dan 16 oed a rheol arall i bawb arall? Yn ôl erthygl 19 o gonfensiwn y Cenhedloedd Unedig ar hawliau'r plentyn, mae'n rhaid cymryd pob cam posib i amddiffyn plant tra eu bod nhw yng ngofal eu rhieni neu bersonau eraill. Mae Cymru wedi mabwysiadu'r confensiwn hwnnw fel sylfaen creu polisi dros blant a phobl ifanc yng Nghymru, a hynny nôl yn 2004. Felly, mae'n ddyletswydd, byddwn i'n dadlau, o dan ddeddfwriaeth hawliau dynol, i newid y gyfraith. Mae cael gwared â'r amddiffyniad cosb resymol yn newid bychan iawn i'r gyfraith, ac fe fydd yn effeithio ar nifer bychan iawn o bobl. Mi fydd canllawiau dedfrydu erlyniaeth y Goron - fydd ddim yn rhaid i'r rheini newid, achos mi glywsom ni yn y pwyllgor mi fydd angen penderfynu ym mhob achos os yw erlyniaeth o fudd i'r cyhoedd ac o fudd i'r plentyn. Roedd adolygiad gan Lywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig i effeithlonrwydd Deddf Plant 2004 wedi darganfod bod yna ddiffyg dealltwriaeth o'r gyfraith bresennol, a bod nifer yn meddwl bod adran 58 yn caniatáu cosb ffisegol. Mae ymarferwyr fel gweithwyr cymdeithasol sydd eisiau cynghori rhieni i beidio â tharo eu plant yn ei gweld hi'n anodd gwneud hynny oherwydd y safbwynt cyfreithiol. Felly, mi fyddai dileu'r amffddiffyniad yma yn gwneud eu gwaith nhw gymaint yn haws ac mi fyddai'r sefyllfa yn llawer mwy eglur i bawb. Am yr holl resymau yna, felly, dwi'n falch o gefnogi egwyddorion cyffredinol y Bil yma, a dwi'n diolch i Julie Morgan am ei gwaith manwl a'i dyfalbarhad efo hwn.