Children and Young Persons Bill [HL]

I have put my name to Amendment No. 17 and therefore perhaps I may be forgiven for speaking at this juncture. I simply say that we need to get our commitments straight. All sides of the Committee emphasise the importance of family, but what has often happened is that in some respects the family does not exist or has broken down, which is why children are in care. In the absence of the full family, brothers and sisters—we call them ““siblings”” for the purpose of our debate, but let us spell them out in human terms—can become emotionally tremendously important to the person concerned. It is important that, wherever it can be done and the children so want it, every muscle should be stretched to ensure that the siblings can stay together. If that is impossible, not to have generous and practical arrangements for contact is a pretty sad state of affairs. It can also have very costly consequences. I heard the other day about a group of siblings who were separated. I will not go into all the details, but every one of them in follow-up discussions made it absolutely clear that nothing mattered more to them than being in touch with their brothers and sisters, and how distressed they were that they had been separated. One of them had been showing great promise. He was settling down to studies and was very successfully playing rugby; it looked as though he had a considerable future in rugby. However, when the children were separated, he withdrew completely into himself. He gave up his commitment to sport and his improved performance at school, and he ended up in an alcoholic, homeless and distressed situation. This is the foolishness of not giving enough priority to these emotional needs at the right moment. The cost later, not only in human but in economic terms, can be ongoing and considerable. These amendments are, therefore, not just important but crucial. We all draw on our experience. Mine is not directly and specifically related to children, but I look back at my time as director of Oxfam; that was a completely different setting but, by God, we dealt with children there. One of my reflections on my years there—this was one of the most important learning experiences in my life—was that if you are trying to stand by those who are excluded, deprived or in need, perhaps the most important form of support that you can provide is advocacy: making sure that children do not become just objects and do not feel that they are pushed around by a system. That can sometimes be an extremely sad situation, because there are often dedicated people working within the system, but sometimes that is the overall perspective of the child. Children matter as individuals and they need to be heard. Therefore, Amendment No. 71 is terribly important in this context, too. I hope—I know—that my noble friend will not only recognise the force of these arguments but see whether specific arrangements can be put in place to meet their objectives.