Children and Adoption Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 32: "Page 2, line 16, at end insert—" ““(   )   The effect of the contact order on the welfare of the child must be monitored annually for three years from the date of the order and a report made to the Court and the child’s views must be sought during the preparation of the report.”” The noble Baroness said: I tabled the amendment when I realised that no one—in the past, anyway—seems to have monitored how well the contact orders work. Once the label, ““In the best interests of the child””, has been attached to the contact order, as it should due to the primacy of that welfare, the family must put it into practice. As the noble Baroness, Lady Pitkeathley, said yesterday, a contact order that is made when a child is six is not suitable when a child is 13. As I suggested in the debate on the previous amendment, moved by the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, the geographical situation might change. I have heard from fathers who had great difficulty contacting their children, because the mother had moved to the other end of the country. Try as they might, they found it difficult to fulfil their obligations to the child. So the problem is that no one ever reviews such matters unless there is a real dispute and it returns to court. We all know how reluctant parents are to drag their children into the courts, even if they have the confidence that they will obtain the desired result. I was heartened a few minutes ago when the Minister, stated that in future CAFCASS would follow up how orders were working and that the courts would be able to ask for them to be reviewed. That second part is not new—the courts could always do that. However, in that case, how much follow-up will there be? My amendment suggests that the order should be monitored for at least the first three years from the date of the order, until it has bedded down and is working smoothly. Will that apply in all cases? How can one predict which orders will work and which will not? How can one predict in which cases the mother might move to the other end of the country or when other circumstances might change that make the original contact order unsatisfactory for the child. For how long will that monitoring take place? I very much welcome the statement that has been made, but I would be grateful if the Minister could tell us a little more. Apart from monitoring, I mentioned in my speech yesterday that there should be some general research about how well contact orders work out in the interests of the child. I note that Amendment No. 114 in the name of the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, in this group, states that research into contact orders should take place. I support that approach, because combining the monitoring and the research would produce a package that would provide the information to ensure that practice is improved. So I support the noble Earl’s amendment. Can the Minister say a little more about CAFCASS’s plans—will that be put into guidance or regulations or whatever? Perhaps the noble Baroness, Lady Howarth of Breckland, can tell us. I beg to move.