Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

I thank noble Lords and in particular the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, for raising this issue. It gives me the chance to say a few words about this scheme. I am also grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, for telling us about the Sunderland scheme. My noble friend has already said that he will monitor it and we look forward to hearing more. The scheme is based on the Youth Justice Board’s intensive fostering pilot, which offers an innovative alternative to custody. Let me repeat—this is an alternative to custody and is pitched at this level as a reflection of its intensity. The fostering requirement retains its place as an alternative to custody alongside intensive supervision and surveillance. The Committee will know that intensive fostering is significantly different to standard fostering arrangements, which are a matter for local authorities to decide as a welfare issue. Intensive fostering works on an evidence-based model, delivered by a team who work directly with the young person and, critically, with their family of origin. I repeat that it is an alternative to custody, for use where the juvenile’s offending is directly linked to their home environment. It is designed to provide highly intensive care for the offender for up to 12 months, as well as a programme of support for the family. This structured intensive fostering programme of daily activity is clearly distinguished from standard foster placements, and its intensity underlines its position at the custody threshold. The Youth Justice Board emphasised the value of intensive fostering in its evidence to the Commons Committee, stating: "““It is also welcome that the YRO will include a fostering requirement as another clear alternative to custody allowing for use of the Intensive Fostering programme currently being piloted by the Youth Justice Board … Intensive fostering is being piloted on a small scale as an alternative to custody in cases where a young person’s offending is directly linked to his or her home environment””." Those places where it is being trialled are Stafford, Wessex—which is Hampshire and the Isle of Wight—and parts of east London. The programme is designed to provide highly intensive care for the child or young person for up to 12 months, as well as a programme of support for the wider family. This structured intensive fostering programme of daily activity is clearly distinguishable from ordinary fostering. Currently the programme is available on a small scale—so far 35 young people have taken part. The pilot is due to end in October 2008. As the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, suggested in moving his amendment, while evaluation of the scheme is not complete, initial indications are positive, although we have to put in the caveat that only a small number of people have been through it. The noble Lord properly raises the issue of money and resources. The first thing to say is that we do not think that this scheme will involve a large number of children, even when it is up and running. It is a vital tool in the kit of those who, like this Committee, want to keep young people out of custody. But we do not think it will be widely used and, as far as resources are concerned, let me quote from Mr Les Lawrence, the chairman of the children and young persons panel from the Local Government Association, who gave evidence to the Public Bill Committee on 18 October 2007. He said: "““The early indication is that the number of places and the resources, working with the court and the other agencies, are sufficient at this point, as is the number of places that are required to match the number of available resources. Yes, there is support from local authorities, because of the other services that need to go with the fostering service, but thus far, albeit from early indications from that pilot, it seems that the resources—if used in an aligned and the proper way—are sufficient at present””.—[Official Report, Commons, Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill Committee, 18/10/07; col. 141.]" So far, so good. The noble Lord is quite right, when considering a programme that I think will have the universal support of Members of the Committee, to ask how it will develop in future. He can rest assured that this scheme will not fail through lack of resources. Let us see how the pilot projects do and let us hope that we can move this programme forward as fast as possible.