Children and Young Persons Bill [HL]

It is hardly necessary for me to add my voice to those who have already supported the amendments. They are of the utmost merit and I support them fervently, particularly in the light of the matters referred to by the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss. I had been tempted to make this point about Amendment No. 19, but I believe that it applies equally in this case: when we talk about the provision of accommodation by local authorities, we are not talking about something that local authorities can do directly in the sense of a cause-and-effect situation. In other words, no one suggests that local authorities can designate A, B and C as potential carers and then exercise some draconian statutory powers to force them into that position, almost in the way that during the Second World War people were forced to billet children who were evacuees from bombed cities. You have to rely on—this point is relevant to much of what we are discussing in many amendments—the capacity of government, whether local or central, to create a situation in which it is likely that more rather than fewer persons will come forward to care. There is a reason of the utmost sensitivity why one should concentrate on family and friends in the first instance before one has to look further afield. However, to be able to do so, local authorities must be prepared to pay, honourably and realistically, for that service. Indeed, it may be that one is talking about the efforts not only of local government bodies but also of central government. It may be that a campaign of television advertising should be launched, perhaps not dissimilar to the blood donor campaign that has been taken up most excellently. Every support should be given to entice people to come along, most of whom will have an idea more of vocation than of occupation. Be that as it may, not only should this be socially acceptable and have the approbation of society, but it should have adequate and realistic financial support.