Naturally, if the parties concerned accept it, they will not object to having their fee removed, I suppose. The fee is removed from many foster carers while the allegations are being investigated, and it does not seem right that a local authority should simply be able to opt out of paying them. It is a self-defeating policy, because the local authority will then have the expense of recruiting more foster carers. Even when that foster carer may be found innocent, as many are, they have already flown the nest and got another job. I accept part of what the Minister said, but I am still concerned about another part of what he said, and I might want to bring the matter back on Report.
The Minister’s remarks on Amendment No. 97 are yet another example of what has happened many times in this Grand Committee when he has read out what the current situation is and cited the legislation, the regulations, the guidance and all the rest of it. Yet Members of the Grand Committee know that it is not happening. Listening to what he said about what should be in the fostering agreement, I was puzzled as to how any foster carer might be confused about what decisions they can and cannot take. Yet they are. They ring the fostering advice line for advice about what decisions they can take. They are greatly frustrated about not being able to take the sort of quick and fairly insignificant decisions that most parents would take without thinking twice. Local authorities might need further guidance on how regularly to refresh the mind of the foster carer about what exactly is covered in the foster caring agreement.
I accept what the noble Lord said about localism, that it makes sense for some of these decisions to be decided locally and that that is appropriate given the particular circumstances of the child. That makes a lot of sense to me, but the fact remains that some foster carers are confused and frustrated by the situation. And yet the noble Lord tells me that it is all there in black and white. However, this is not the first time that this has arisen. Many such situations have been mentioned by Members of the Grand Committee. However, in the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Children and Young Persons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Walmsley
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 17 January 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Children and Young Persons Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
697 c616-7GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:33:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_435713
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_435713
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_435713