English: I think, just to say, that we all have a responsibility to all our children. Whether we have children or not, they are our future. And the best way in which society looks out for children, once they're of a school age, is in school. So, it seems to me that, while it doesn't mean to say that just because a child is being home educated that they are at risk, the fact that they are not in school means there needs to be extra special attention paid to ensure that somebody is seeing that child. This clearly didn't happen in this case. The Minister has already talked about the opportunities lost when vaccinations were due to occur. I'm not arguing and saying that the state has a right to insist that a vaccination occurs, but if the vaccination isn't going to take place, then the child needs to be seen anyway just to make sure that the well-being of the child isn't compromised. The child is entitled to nursery education aged three. So, the local authority - I wonder why they weren't wondering why this child wasn't putting their name down for a free nursery place. If not, why not? Because every local authority needs to be planning for that and, if the parent doesn't wish to take it up, that can be recorded. But, at least the question needs to be asked for those who maybe don't know about that entitlement. When a child doesn't present in a reception class when rising five that, surely, is another opportunity for the local authority to check that the child is either registered at school or is registered as being home educated. So, I'm concerned that there is not an express requirement in the 1996 education Act for LEAs to investigate whether parents are complying with the obligation for all children to be educated. I hope that that is one of the -
Welsh: Rwy'n meddwl, dim ond i ddweud, bod gan bob un ohonom ni gyfrifoldeb i'n holl blant. P'un a oes gennym ni blant ai peidio, nhw yw ein dyfodol. A'r ffordd orau y mae cymdeithas yn gofalu am blant, cyn gynted â'u bod o oedran ysgol, yw yn yr ysgol. Felly, mae'n ymddangos i mi, er nad yw'n golygu dweud bod plentyn sy'n cael ei addysgu gartref o reidrwydd mewn perygl, mae'r ffaith nad yw yn yr ysgol yn golygu bod angen rhoi sylw arbennig ychwanegol i sicrhau bod rhywun yn gweld y plentyn hwnnw. Yn amlwg, ni ddigwyddodd hyn yn yr achos hwn. Mae'r Gweinidog eisoes wedi sôn am y cyfleoedd a gollwyd pan roedd brechiadau i fod i gael eu rhoi. Nid wyf yn dadlau ac yn dweud bod gan y wladwriaeth hawl i fynnu bod brechiad yn digwydd, ond os nad yw'r brechiad yn mynd i ddigwydd, mae angen gweld y plentyn beth bynnag, dim ond i wneud yn siŵr nad yw lles y plentyn yn cael ei beryglu. Mae gan y plentyn hawl i addysg feithrin yn dair oed. Felly, yr awdurdod lleol - tybed pam nad oedden nhw'n meddwl pam nad oedd enw'r plentyn hwn i lawr i gael lle meithrin am ddim. Os nad oeddent, pam ddim? Oherwydd mae angen i bob awdurdod lleol fod yn cynllunio ar gyfer hynny ac, os nad yw'r rhiant yn dymuno ei gymryd, gellir cofnodi hynny. Ond, mae angen gofyn y cwestiwn o leiaf, i'r rhai nad ydynt efallai'n gwybod am yr hawl hwnnw. Pan nad yw plentyn yn bresennol mewn dosbarth derbyn pan mae'n codi'n bum mlwydd oed, mae hwnnw, does bosib, yn gyfle arall i'r awdurdod lleol wirio bod y plentyn naill ai wedi ei gofrestru yn yr ysgol neu wedi ei gofrestru fel rhywun sy'n cael addysg gartref. Felly, rwy'n poeni nad oes gofyniad penodol yn Neddf Addysg 1996 i AALlau ymchwilio i weld a yw rhieni'n cydymffurfio â'r rhwymedigaeth i roi addysg i bob plentyn. Rwy'n gobeithio bod hwnnw'n un o'r -