Children and Adoption Bill [HL]

Perhaps I may make a comment in response to what the noble Baroness, Lady Howarth, said. My firm understanding is that in those jurisdictions where there is a rebuttable presumption of ““reasonable contact”” there is no suggestion whatever that this presumption places children at greater risk of harm—absolutely none. The noble Baroness suggests something similar to that which I suggested earlier, that in deciding what the right level of contact for a child should be with a non-resident parent, there should be a test of reasonableness. That does not fetter the court in any way, except in so far as it will be prevented from giving weight to unreasonable arguments. Frankly, it is very difficult to argue against that proposition. If we look at Section 1(5) of the 1989 Act, we find confirmation of what the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, said; that a resident parent does not have to produce a material reason for seeking a low level of contact between the child and the non-residential parent. It can be a very poor reason indeed.