Children and Young Persons Bill [HL]

First, I acknowledge the work of the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, in pressing the cause of social workers. As a social worker, I could not have done it better myself. We owe him a great deal. I would be the first to acknowledge the important intent behind the amendment. Again, however, as I said at Second Reading, good practice does not depend on legislation but on implementation. Indeed, to put this into legislation or contracts would be detrimental to change and the ability to move forward. I say this from my recent experience in trying to unpick similar contractual arrangements in another organisation. It is obviously the job of unions to ensure that contractual arrangements are adhered to, which can lead to inflexibility and lack of change—real difficulties can ensue. That does not mean that there cannot be other ways to drive this forward. As the noble Baroness, Lady Morris, said earlier, my great wish is to find drivers to ensure that these things happen. Legislation would not make this happen, but would make it more difficult. I hope that the Minister will give us some idea of how the workforce planning and some of the guidance might help local authorities to move some of these issues forward. While I am speaking I make one other point, about bureaucracy, which has been raised on a number of occasions. The Climbié inquiry made it clear, because it made an analysis of some of the bureaucracy, that it can be cut significantly. However, there is a difference between bureaucracy and good management, and we should be careful not to confuse the two. Young social workers on the job need help, management and supervision. That is what the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, points out in the amendment. We must not say that they need that and then say that it is bureaucracy. We must be clear about what we are moving forward on.