Children and Young Persons Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 69: 69: After Clause 16, insert the following new Clause— ““Advocacy for looked after children in the review of their care plan (1) In section 26 of the 1989 Act (review of cases and inquiries into representations) in subsection (2), after paragraph (d), insert— ““(da) requiring the authority when seeking the views of the child to make arrangements for the provision of independent advocacy for the child;””. (2) In section 26, after subsection (8) insert— ““(9) For the purposes of this section, ““independent”” means that the person appointed is not connected with the local authority by virtue of being— (a) a member of the local authority or any of their committees or sub-committees, whether elected or co-opted; (b) an officer of the local authority; or (c) a spouse or civil partner of any such person.”””” The noble Baroness said: I will also speak to Amendment No. 72 with which Amendment 69 is grouped and which also stands in my name. Both amendments are about independent advocacy for looked-after children. Amendment No. 69 concerns advocacy when their care plan is being reviewed and Amendment No. 72 concerns advocacy when significant decisions are being made about the care plan. We have been briefed by Voice and the Children’s Society on this issue. Both organisations are concerned at the fact that looked-after children and young people continue not to be heard when decisions are made about their care despite successive legislation and guidance requiring a whole range of professionals to ensure that this happens. Research studies provide evidence that in practice authorities are failing to meet their duties in this regard. While many more children in care are actively involved in reviews and planning meetings than used to be the case, some professionals continue to make assumptions that children will not want to, or would be unable to, participate in reviews and planning meetings. A 2006 CSCI report on children’s views found that many continue to be intimidated by the number of adults in meetings, find the language used difficult to understand and are not confident enough, or are not given enough time, to get their views across. Looked-after young people continue to tell us that their views are not being listened to and taken into account despite the existing responsibilities of the IRO to facilitate the child speaking at their review meeting and to ensure that the child understands what is going on. In a paper by Boylan and Braye, one young man is quoted as saying: "““You ain’t got a say in what’s going off—everybody’s talking about you and not to you””." In stark contrast, Chase noted in a 2006 paper the following view from a young person who had an advocate from the organisation Voice. The young person said: "““Before I had an advocate social services and I were talking at cross purposes and I wasn’t getting proper help … the advocate improved the communication between all of us … she gave me some power back””." Isn’t that significant—she gave me some power back? He continued that, "““all the others, teachers, social workers etc were talking amongst themselves but no one was talking to me, they were not involving me or explaining anything to me””." By supporting children in reviews and planning meetings, professional independent advocacy empowers them to have their views taken seriously, as required in law. A professional independent advocate makes sure that children understand what is happening to them, helps them to navigate the system and supports them in understanding their rights. The need for high-quality, professional independent advocacy will be further heightened by the commitment in the Care Matters White Paper, taken forward in Clause 8 of this Bill, to strengthen the statutory framework so that a local authority cannot place a child out of authority unless it is satisfied that such a placement is in the child’s best interests. We have had numerous debates on that issue. Although we are wholly supportive of this measure, with the caveats about children’s welfare, it will inevitably result in a significant number of placement changes, especially for those already placed out of authority. It must be recognised that looked-after children, particularly those with communication impairments, about whom we talked yesterday evening, are particularly vulnerable during times of change. The existing statutory right in relation to complaints has had only a limited impact. That is in part because the number of looked-after children making complaints remains low. Many children simply do not understand that they have a right to complain and do not know that they have a right to an advocate to support them through the process. Anyway, children and young people do not want to have to resort to a complaints procedure before they can get the support that they need to get their views over. They would rather have support at an early stage and therefore avoid the problem escalating and avoid having to come into confrontation with the people who care for them day to day. I believe that better outcomes and potentially long-term cost savings can be achieved if independent advocates are involved and support children to be involved far earlier in the decision-making process. As I mentioned yesterday when we were talking about another amendment, a survey of advocacy services across England carried out by the Children’s Society in 2006 found that a quarter of advocacy providers reported that they had not been able to respond to a referral from a disabled child at all. It is quite clear that the most vulnerable children are not getting the advocacy that they need and they are the ones who need it most. I hope that the Minister will look kindly on these amendments and I beg to move.