UK Parliament / Open data

Children and Adoption Bill [HL]

Proceeding contribution from Lord Adonis (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bills on Children and Adoption Bill [HL].
My Lords, I will not follow that up by saying that this will be a second triumph in that line. Our concern on this amendment is straightforward. The House debated this at some length last time. A significant change was made in the notification scheme that was enacted by the Children Act. The new regime set out in the Children Act has only just come into force. It did so on 1 July this year, as did the regulations to implement it. The sunset clause, as I believe it is called, which my noble friend Lady Ashton talked about at great length in the last debate, expires in 2008, so the requirement to undertake the assessment the noble Earl referred to is something we take seriously. We will do so during the lifetime of this clause. Since the arrangements have only just come into effect, however, it would be too soon at the moment to seek to replace one set of arrangements, to which local authorities are now working and seeking to upgrade their services to meet, with another. However, the Bill does give the Government the power, if they believe it necessary on their evaluation of the progress of the new notification system, to bring in an enhanced system if they believe this would be in the public interest. I shall deal with the two specific points that have been raised. I am told that the first statistics from the new monitoring arrangements will be available at the end of this month. I will see that they are made available to all noble Lords who are participating in this debate so they can add some factual basis to our discussions. With regard to the pilots, I am told by my officials that they are not pilots as such, but:"““proactive schemes for engaging with private fosterers””," which is somewhat different, because we want to see all local authorities move rapidly to a greatly enhanced service in respect of notification. I cannot give details of how those schemes are working at the moment, but I will write to noble Lords to give them that information when we have gathered it. The case I make is therefore similar to the case that was made last year, but with the added force that we have legislated for a new arrangement that has just taken effect. We do not believe that to replace the one with the other at this stage would be a well-founded move. The new notification scheme offers a robust framework of safeguards. In particular, the new regulations that came into effect on 1 July require local authorities to satisfy themselves of the suitability of a proposed arrangement before it commences, where advance notice has been given to them. Previously there was no requirement for the local authority to take action prior to the commencement of an arrangement. Local authorities can now exercise their powers to impose conditions upon, or prohibit, a proposed arrangement before it begins. There are corresponding new obligations on local authorities to promote awareness within their areas of the need to notify them of private fostering arrangements. Local authorities are required to monitor closely the operation of notification schemes in their respective areas, and they are now under a duty to appoint an officer for this purpose. Our objective is to encourage parents and private foster carers to come forward so that local authorities can fulfil their Children Act duty to satisfy themselves that the welfare of privately-fostered children is satisfactorily safeguarded and promoted. We believe the new arrangements set out in the Children Act, and in the regulations that have just come into force, will ensure that we have the additional powers as set out under the Act. We have a requirement to assess progress against criteria that we will develop, and we have a sunset clause that means this must all take place within the next three years. On that basis, we do not believe the time has come to change the law just a year after it was last changed. I know there are still strongly held views on this matter, but I hope that the amendment can be withdrawn at this stage.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c944-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top