Children and Adoption Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 44: "Page 3, line 7, after ““individual”” insert ““falling within subsection (2A)””" The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment—this is going to be a Baroness Crawley moment—I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 46, 50, 63, 64, 65, 68, 69, 70, 78, 80, 106, 107 and 108. Despite the volume of amendments, their aim is simple and straightforward: to clarify the provisions of the Bill in respect of who can be made subject to or apply for the new provisions and provide for a consistent approach to be taken with parallel provisions. The amendments create three groups of people. The first group is the group who may be subject to a contact activity condition. The second group is people who may apply for an enforcement order or a financial compensation order. The third group is those who may be subject to monitoring by CAFCASS in respect of their compliance with a contact order. The first group comprises the person with whom the child concerned lives or is to live; the person whose contact with the child is provided for by the contact order; and the person with whom the contact order imposes a condition under Section 11(7)(b) of the Children Act. The Bill currently states that only parties may be subject to contact activity conditions. The amendments would broaden this to encompass those above, irrespective of whether they are parties. This group may be subject to contact activity conditions, even where there is an order for no contact. The policy behind this is that the courts should have greater flexibility in respective contact activity conditions because they will be able to make orders involving all the central people in the child’s life and involved directly in the contact order if necessary. Clearly, in most cases, the relevant people will be the child’s parents, and these will be the parties to the proceedings. However, it is possible that grandparents or others may be involved so, in essence, while it is likely that the people referred to in the amendments will be parties to the case, the fact is that they may not be so. The amendments ensure that they are included, whether or not they are parties. The second group is those who may be subject to an enforcement order or a financial compensation order. This group comprises the person who is, for the purposes of the contact order, the person with whom the child lives or is to live; the person whose contact with the child concerned is provided for in the contact order; any individual subject to a Section 11(7)(b) condition or a contact activity condition imposed by the contact order; and the child concerned. Again, we hope that this will make the Bill more consistent in its application. It is necessary to amend the provisions as currently drafted in respect of who may apply for financial compensation orders because these orders will now apply to a wider range of contact orders, including orders for no contact as well as orders for contact. Therefore, the same people who may apply for an enforcement order may also apply for a compensation order. The third group of people is those who may be subject to monitoring of compliance with a contact order made by CAFCASS. The group that may be subject to monitoring comprises a person who is required to allow contact with the child; a person whose contact with the child is provided for; and a person who is subject to a condition under Section 11(7)(b). This group is slightly different from the first because monitoring is only to take place in the case of orders for contact as opposed to orders for no contact, which courts can and do make. As with the first group, this second group is wide enough to capture people who may be involved in the contact order but are not parties to the case. I beg to move. On Question, amendment agreed to. [Amendment No. 45 not moved.]