Children and Young Persons Bill [HL]

In addition to the provisions of Clause 11, we will set out in regulations a description of the IRO that specifies the qualifications and experience that the IRO must have and which will require the IRO to be independent of the management of the case in question. At the moment, there are about 1,200 IROs. The noble Earl, Lord Listowel, asked how many would be needed after the legislation is implemented. We are proposing to set out case loads for IROs and therefore how many IROs are needed in statutory guidance following the implementation of the legislation. The Government will monitor progress closely. If, as we hope, the evidence shows that the desired change in the effectiveness of IROs can be achieved through the new framework introduced by Clause 11, then that is all well and good, for precisely the reasons given by the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp. However, it is right to have the option of exercising the enabling power in Clause 12 to establish a new national IRO service, which is entirely independent of local authorities, should that be necessary because of the important role that IROs play in ensuring effective outcomes for looked-after children. On consultation under Clause 12, I assure the noble Baroness that if the Secretary of State were to consider exercising the powers in Clause 12, the department would consult all the relevant stakeholders, including local government, IROs and their representative organisations, looked-after children and their parents and carers, CAFCASS, Ofsted, the Children’s Commissioner for England, the Children’s Rights Director and the Courts Service regarding any such proposals that might come forward. However, before even getting to that stage, a proper review of the impact of Clause 11 to establish in what respects, if any, it had failed to have the necessary impact in transforming local IRO services would be necessary. Such a review would necessarily include the views of stakeholders and professionals on the effectiveness of the reforms introduced by Clause 11 and the statutory guidance, and would reflect the experience of children and young people as well as their parents and carers. Furthermore, there is the provision that Clause 12 can be brought into operation only within seven years of the Bill being passed, otherwise it will cease to have effect. Seven years gives us the appropriate amount of time in which to assess the impact of Clause 11, decide whether we need to introduce further changes to the way in which the IRO functions and, if necessary, the right lead time for CAFCASS to establish a national service. Taking all those factors into account, we believe that Clauses 11 and 12 get the right balance between seeking to improve the existing IRO service, without going towards a national service that could have the bureaucratic implications that the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, set out, while having the backstop power to establish such a national service if the IROs do not prove sufficiently independent and effective to perform the important tasks with which they are charged.