Universal Credit (Standard Allowance Entitlement of Care Leavers) Bill [HL]
Tuesday 10th September 2024
(4 months, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Universal Credit (Standard Allowance Entitlement of Care Leavers) Bill [HL] 2024-26 Read Hansard Text
Universal Credit (Standard Allowance Entitlement of Care Leavers) Bill [HL]
Friday 17th January 2025
(1 week, 6 days ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Universal Credit (Standard Allowance Entitlement of Care Leavers) Bill [HL] 2024-26 Read Hansard Text Watch Debate
The Lord Bishop of Manchester
That the Bill be now read a second time.
The Lord Bishop of Manchester
My Lords, care leavers under the age of 25 who are claiming universal credit receive the same rate as their peers, who are far more likely to be able to access support from their parents. That means that young people under 25 receive £81.77 less in universal credit per month compared to those over 25—a 21% reduction. This Bill would complement proposals by providing increased financial support for care leavers currently living on the lowest incomes. It would mean that care leavers claiming universal credit would see their monthly payment increase to a total of £393.45. That monthly figure is not dissimilar to the daily allowance that Members of your Lordships’ House can claim; it is not a huge sum to live on.
I thank those who have made time to participate in this debate on a Friday—not least the Minister and shadow Minister, with whom we had constructive conversations in advance—and the group of care-experienced young people, facilitated by the charity Become, who were very generous with their time and shared some extremely perceptive insights with me and my right reverend friend the Bishop of Derby about the differences that this policy change would make to their lives. They have agreed that we can name them in our speeches today.
There are over 92,000 care leavers in England under the age of 25. This cohort of young adults is in particular need of further support, including through the social security system. This Bill would equalise the standard allowance for universal credit for care leavers under the age of 25, but that is just one of a number of steps that could be made to ensure that young care leavers receive the support they need to flourish. I hope that, in this debate, there will be an opportunity for noble Lords to explore those, and perhaps other, steps and for us to commit ourselves to supporting young adults leaving care.
I will set out the problem. Many of the young people we talked to last week spoke about the additional support that they would have benefited from, particularly leading up to the age of 18. Research shows over and again that being in care is one of the key adverse childhood experiences that can exacerbate problems in later life. You often go into care because of other things that are on that list of key adverse childhood experiences. No matter how well the state has performed its role as a corporate parent in those formative years—whether through foster parents or a children’s home—young care leavers are still likely to have had significant adverse experiences, and so they merit a higher level of support as they enter those early years of adulthood.
At the same time, we know—many of us have personal experience of this—that financial dependence on older relatives continues longer into adulthood than in previous decades. While around half of 24 year-olds still live with their parents, less than one-fifth of all care leavers in that 19 to 21 age group live with a parent, relative or foster carer. To put it bluntly, most young care leavers do not have the financial cushion of the “bank of mum and dad” or any equivalent. Some foster carers manage to provide an important bridging facility through the Staying Put and Staying Close schemes, but for a very large number of young care leavers there is no family home to go back to. The state has been their family, so it should accept some ongoing responsibility, which is what I am trying to achieve through this Bill.
Moreover, young care leavers are significantly more likely not to be in education, employment or training compared to the general population. In fact, they are three times more likely: 39% of care leavers aged 19 to 21 are what we call NEETs, compared with an estimated 13% of all young people in that age range. That is almost two in every five, compared with a figure of about one in eight.
The benefits system does not currently recognise the specific circumstances that have led a young person to be taken into care or recognise their unique issues that they will face throughout their life. It is vital, for example, that staff at job centres can identify care leavers and are equipped to respond to their particular needs. We have also learned from the conversations we have had that care leavers are three times more likely to be sanctioned in the benefit system than their peers. One young woman, Louise, explained that it was not a simple process. She had to work through pages and pages of information; there was no proper guide and no help if she missed an appointment because of morning sickness during her pregnancy, and job coaches who she was assigned to did not know what a care leaver was.
It is now almost a decade since the Children’s Society produced its research on sanctions for care leavers. Will the Department for Work and Pensions look into whether under-25s who present as care leavers are disproportionately affected by benefit sanctions? Some young care leavers, as a result of sanctions combined with the lower rate, are left with something closer to £200 a month—£50 a week. That cannot be enough to live on. Equalising universal credit is one small thing the state could do to perhaps exercise its extended parental role and put those young care leavers on a path that is a bit closer to that of their peers. The Bill is a way of achieving that.
There was universal agreement among the care leavers who met us last week that the under-25 rate is not sufficient to meet their needs. Many are struggling to pay bills. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the Trussell Trust have shown that that reduced rate means that young people are left with about half of what is needed to afford essentials such as food, water and clothing, even though under-25s are the age group at greatest risk of experiencing destitution. Chereece, who met us, noted that care leavers are much more likely to be living independently from a younger age. After gas, electric bills, TV licence and so on, she had about £60 per month—for food. As a result, she was visiting food banks to survive, could not meet up with friends and could barely even travel. Again, when you do not have family behind you, to be able to travel to meet up and maintain such relationships as you have been able to form is really important.
Some local authorities help: there is a discretionary rule that they can exempt care leavers from council tax in those early years, and the majority of local authorities do that. But, of course, they may move to a different authority. We know that many care-experienced young people are in care homes in the poorest parts of the country; if they are going to get a job—and we want them to get jobs—they have to move to somewhere where it is easier to find work. However, the local authority in their new setting is much less likely to grant them exemption from council tax than where they were officially in care. So many whom we spoke to noted that if they just had the extra 21%—the over-25 rate of universal credit—it would have given them stability, avoided debt, and helped with their mental health.
We are not creating a new principle with the Bill. The local housing allowance system already recognises that care leavers are a special case, and they get the one-bedroom rate rather than the lower shared accommodation rate. So the principle that we could treat care leavers as a special case is already there in law; the Bill simply wants to extend it to the universal credit part of the welfare system.
How much will it cost? Barnardo’s and the Children’s Society have estimated that it would cost just under £25 million per year if we considered all care leavers under the age of 25 who are not in employment, education or training. It could be even less than that, because some will be in other households where others are earning. This small investment—it is small in national terms—could have significant human and financial benefits, reducing the risk of poverty, mental ill-health, homelessness and debt. Will the Department for Work and Pensions look at the data it holds on care leavers to assess what the cost would be of raising the standard allowance for this cohort? We are going with the charity figures because those are the only figures that we have.
I note a number of measures contained within the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, currently making its way through the Commons, that would support young care leavers. Perhaps that would be another way of bringing about this change. I would welcome any conversations with noble Lords about introducing such changes when that Bill makes its way to your Lordships’ House.
In conclusion, with targeted support through the social security system as they take their first steps into adulthood, young care leavers would have a basis from which to afford essential goods, maintain contact with their support networks and enter the world of work.
The moral case for making the change is strong. These are young people for whom the state has effectively been the corporate parent, and as the corporate parent the state can support them better into adulthood, in the same way that parents—including me, I declare an interest—have done for our own children, well into adulthood.
I look forward to hearing the speeches of other noble Lords today, not least from those who were in the care system or who have experienced being fostered, formally or informally, as children themselves, and to working with Peers across this House to facilitate this important change. I beg to move.
Lord Davies of Brixton (Lab)
My Lords, we owe a debt to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester for introducing this Bill and highlighting a significant problem.
It has been said today that many people come through the care system and move on to a full, successful life, but—and it is a big but—it is tougher for people who come out of the care system, and they deserve the support which is suggested by this Bill. I thank the charitable organisations for the briefings they have provided, which highlight the financial challenges faced by care leavers and certainly their entitlement to this additional support.
As the right reverend Prelate said, each year, 13,000 young people leave care in the UK, transitioning to independence far earlier than young people more generally, most of whom continue to receive some sort of support from their parents. Typically, and now increasingly, young people are living with their parents and retaining that support, unlike people from care backgrounds. Of course, the picture is mixed. Many foster parents keep supporting children even after the age of 18, but it is still more difficult for care leavers, and the system should recognise this.
As the right reverend Prelate mentioned, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has highlighted that the current rate of universal credit provides only about half of the level of what is required for food, shelter and clothing; the justification for paying them a lower rate of universal credit just is not there. The financial penalty disproportionately impacts care leavers, many of whom, because of the greater struggles they face, depend entirely on universal credit due to the problems they have had with education and employment opportunities. As has been mentioned, the statistics from 2024 show that around two-fifths of care leavers aged 19 to 21 are not in education, employment or training, compared with 13% of children more generally. Care leavers themselves have made clear how they struggle and what a significant difference this measure would make.
I argue that although we have a strong case in terms of costs and savings, I see this as a moral issue. We owe these young people the best possible start in life. They are entrusted to our care, and this Bill would give them the resources they need to meet our obligation towards them.
Baroness Benjamin (LD)
My Lords, I support this important Bill and commend the right reverend Prelate for bringing forward this measure with such clarity and compassion.
As a society, we have a duty to ensure that young care leavers are given every opportunity to thrive, reach their full potential and contribute to their communities. Yet despite some positive steps in recent years, we know that care-experienced young people continue to face significant barriers. Many of these barriers are financial, and they are amplified by the unique circumstances of their lives.
Young people leaving care often find themselves living independently, without the safety net of family support that so many others rely on well into their 20s. The struggles they face are basic needs: paying for food, utilities and other essentials, while trying to take their first steps into adulthood. These challenges are compounded by the rising cost of living today. The Bill offers a simple but effective remedy. By equalising the standard allowance of universal credit, we can help ensure that care leavers aged 18 to 25 have access to the financial resources they need to build stable and independent lives. For a young person, that extra £81.77 per month can make the difference between surviving and thriving.
I have seen the transformative impact that support and guidance can have on the lives of care-experienced young people. Organisations such as First Star Scholars UK—I declare an interest as patron—are leading the way in this regard. First Star’s four-year programme for young people in care has achieved remarkable results, with its scholars now reaching national averages of GCSE attainment and university placements. Through life-skills programmes such as those offered by First Star Scholars, care-experienced young people are not only gaining qualifications but learning essential tools for independence, such as financial literacy.
These skills are vital in enabling care leavers to navigate adulthood with confidence, ambition and resilience, with a strong foundation to succeed, but financial stability is critical to that success. Without adequate support, care leavers face significantly poorer outcomes, including homelessness, unemployment and imprisonment. It is estimated that failing to invest in care leavers costs the taxpayer an additional £1 million per individual over their lifetime. Surely providing the financial support and programmes they need to thrive is both a moral and economic necessity.
The Bill represents a step forward towards fairness, dignity and opportunity for young care leavers. It is not just about financial support; it is about saying to these young people, “You matter. We believe in you, and we are committed to your success”. I urge the Government to support the Bill and ensure that care leavers, who have already faced so many challenges in their young lives, are given the chance to stand on an equal footing with their peers. We have the opportunity to help care-experienced young people realise their full potential and build a future they can be proud of.
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)
My Lords, I apologise that your Lordships’ House has already heard rather a lot from me today, given that I had the previous Private Member’s Bill, but I wanted to make one particular point here, which is why I put my name down on the list. I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester for bringing forward this humane, constructive and practical Bill, which I have no doubt at all would end up saving the Government money—not that that should be the main point, but it is worth highlighting. I also thank him for introducing it so clearly.
The chief comparative point I want to make is this. In Wales, a trial of something much more radical and much larger than this proposal is continuing. It is a trial of universal basic income for care leavers that has seen a total of 635 young people receive payments after tax of £1,280 a month for two years. This trial will continue until May 2025, and, unfortunately, anyone leaving care after that point will not be eligible for it. There will then be continuous careful academic study and reports on its impact.
I note that the Minister for Social Justice in Wales has said that there has already been fantastic feedback from participants. I was at a meeting where we heard some direct testimony from some of the care leavers who have benefited from this programme. One story that will stick with me is of a couple of care leavers who chose to leave their minimum wage jobs to take up apprenticeships so that they could establish themselves in their lives, establish a career and get training and education, which the current system did not allow them to do. It was only because they were able to access this trial that they could do that. While the proposal before us would not necessarily entirely achieve that aim, it kind of demonstrates the ways in which it could open up people’s horizons and possibilities.
It is also worth pointing out some recent global research, which shows how universal basic income can substantially improve the mental health of young people generally—but, obviously, of care leavers in particular. Potentially, that would mean enormous savings in costs for the NHS.
I will briefly raise a couple of other points. I note a study from Become, the national charity for children in care and young care leavers, which found that more than 9% of care leavers aged 18 to 25 were statutorily assessed as being homeless or facing homelessness in the past year. That is 10 times the rate of non-care-experienced children, and that is a huge failure. You emerge from the experiences of care and then they find yourself statutorily homeless—what a difficult position that is. Again, the right reverend Prelate’s Bill would not solve all of that, but it would be a step towards it.
There is one other point on which the Minister may wish to write. I note that Coram Voice, after a freedom of information request to 153 local authorities in England, found that care leavers were receiving vastly different levels of support. There is supposed to be a setting up home allowance of £3,000, but some councils are paying only £1,500. Can the Minister tell me what is happening to make sure that all care leavers are at least getting the setting up allowance that they obviously greatly need?
Finally, with reference to my position as a vice-president of the Local Government Association, I note a call from the LGA last year suggesting that care leavers should be exempt from council tax and prescription charges, as well as NHS dental charges and optician costs, to help them further, as the right reverend Prelate’s Bill does. Could the Minister respond to any of that?
Lord Watson of Invergowrie (Lab)
My Lords, I commend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester for securing this debate and for the passion that he put into his opening speech, which set out the landscape very starkly.
Striking out into the world on your own for the first time is exciting and daunting for anyone: the opportunity to carve your own path, with new-found independence, is a major step. On the other hand, learning to budget and keep on top of bills, remembering to put a wash on in time so that you are ready for work or college and managing to keep the fridge stocked, let alone keeping yourself healthy, all combine to form a huge learning curve for any young person. It is even more difficult for those without supportive families to fall back on, or for those who cannot stay at home for other reasons.
In most cases, local authorities act as corporate parents for care leavers, giving them the practical, social and emotional support that any good parent would give their child—from help to find the right accommodation to guiding them through job applications and interviews to making sure that they know where to turn if they are having trouble. However, local authorities cannot always meet the needs of young people in care, and that highlights the vital role of charities such as Barnardo’s, Become and the Children’s Society, which have combined to provide noble Lords with an excellent briefing for today’s debate.
In the offer to young people in care, I believe that the question to be asked should always be, “Would this be appropriate for my child?” Can we honestly say that decisions are always made in their best interests? If we cannot, as a society we are failing some of our most vulnerable people—people who need and deserve support to build their lives.
I do not intend to say much about universal credit. In fact, I am indebted to my noble friend Lady Sherlock, herself an ordained priest in the Church of England and now the Minister of State at the Department for Work and Pensions. She is the only person I have come across—and I have listened to quite a bit on this—who can explain universal credit in a manner that is understandable.
I understand the importance that universal credit has for care leavers. They are often expected to leave care before they are ready, and without the support they need to make a positive start to adulthood. According to Become, around 13,000 young people leave the care system in England each year and, as the right reverend Prelate said, it is estimated that there were around 90,000 care leavers aged 17 to 25 in England last year.
Young people have described leaving the care system as a cliff edge—being forced to leave home abruptly at 18, sometimes even younger, when crucial support, care and relationships fall away and they are expected to become independent overnight. I return to the question that I posed earlier and that every parent should ask: “Would this be appropriate for my child?” Of course, it is not appropriate for any child, and universal credit itself cannot solve the problems facing young people leaving care.
But what universal credit could do is better provide for them by allowing all care leavers from the age of 18 to receive the full standard allowance entitlement for those aged 25 or over. To deny that is to suggest that the essentials for living are somehow available more cheaply to those under the age of 25. That is clearly not the case. Again as the right reverend Prelate outlined, there are precedents in law for treating care leavers as a special case, and I believe this should be added to that. Care-experienced young people generally have more financial responsibilities than their non-care-experienced peers from a younger age, and without the same safety net to fall back on. So I urge my noble friend the Minister to give an undertaking that this problem will be addressed, to give young care leavers a better chance of successfully making their way in life—which, as I said, is something that they both need and deserve.
The Lord Bishop of Derby
My Lords, I congratulate my right reverend friend the Bishop of Manchester on bringing this Private Member’s Bill. I declare my interest as chair of the Children’s Society—a charity rooted in the Church of England and a key partner in the Church’s work to support care-experienced children and young people. I therefore welcome this Bill for the difference that it would make to care leavers.
As mentioned, last week we were privileged to hear directly from care leavers. I pay tribute to their resilience and I know that they are listening closely today. Their testimony reinforces my support for the Bill.
Three recurring themes emerge from our conversation: vulnerability, inconsistency and disempowerment. First, too many young people are made profoundly vulnerable as they leave care without a sufficient safety net around them. A recent survey by the National Leaving Care Benchmarking Forum found that 82% of care leavers struggled to afford food some or all the time.
We have heard how much more vulnerable care leavers are to the risk of homelessness. Our conversation evidenced how, without the familial networks on which others may rely, care leavers often do not have access to support while applying for universal credit. On leaving the children’s home where she had lived until turning 17, Helen shared with us that she did not start claiming universal credit for two years, because she was not aware that she was eligible. Leo was thrown into the deep end, as he described, without access to a professional adviser. He had to rely on the support staff at his hostel to learn about how to submit his claim.
Another theme is inconsistency. We have heard the difference experienced by care leavers following the Children’s Society’s Fighting for a Fairer Start campaign, which means that 80% of local authorities across England have now committed to exempt care leavers from council tax until they are 25. Aaliyah reported to us the traumatising experience of being in council tax arrears because she was in one of those areas that did not exempt care leavers. So I echo the request already made to the Minister to explore with colleagues in MHCLG whether exemption from council tax and other matters could become a universal entitlement for care leavers under the age of 25.
Finally, the current system disempowers care leavers. Rona now works in this sector. As a care leaver herself, she observes a contrast between the way in which some people engage with her, as a professional, and the claimant she is supporting. Young care leavers experience all too often an ill-informed disregard, distrust and hostility in these interactions. Last year, in a policy paper the Government committed to creating
“a culture change in which we realise our shared ambition to support children in care and care leavers”.
This must start with taking them seriously, giving due regard to their experience and perspective. I, too, welcome the introduction of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which aims to increase financial support for care leavers on the lowest incomes; I look forward to engaging closely with noble friends in this Chamber.
Navigating young adulthood is challenging enough. It is simply unacceptable to allow some of the most vulnerable young adults in our country to continue to face undue and unnecessary financial pressures just at the time when they are striving to build healthy, positive and productive lives. That is why I support this Bill.
Lord Palmer of Childs Hill (LD)
My Lords, first, I must compliment the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester on bringing this Bill forward and eloquently supporting it in his opening speech.
I listened to my noble friend Lady Benjamin, who was right to stress the point about carers leaving for adulthood and the need for financial stability, which is not that clear. The noble Lord, Lord Davies, rightly spoke about the moral issue. We tend to deal in pounds and pence all the time, but there are morals as well; we ought to be aware of our moral responsibilities to those people in society who are less fortunate.
We on these Benches clearly support this Private Member’s Bill but, like so many Bills, it does not go far enough. That is easy to say, but we maybe start with small things and go on to more. Under-25s receive £81.77 less per month in universal credit, because the assumption is that they can call on support from family members, but do they in fact receive that support? Are they actually required to pay their very reduced universal credit into the family coffers? There are responsibilities for everybody, and the people leaving care have that problem.
What are we actually concerned about? We are concerned about people slipping through the holes in society. As has been said, this is a real moral issue. Again, I stress that we should extend the full rate of universal credit to under-25s from care—I would welcome this—but they should not receive less than the full rate anyway because people have costs. As my noble friend Lady Benjamin said, the idea is to give people both financial stability and the fact that they are paying for themselves.
There will, of course, be a cost to the public purse for Ministers, but so many of these assumed costs to the public purse are not the whole story. We saw this with the winter fuel allowance: here was a wonderful way to cut down benefits, via the winter fuel allowance, but a Government Minister said very clearly that they welcomed the big increase in people claiming supplementary benefits, which meant that they could then claim the winter fuel allowance, and therefore there was no economy of any size, if at all. Here, by depriving these young people of a small sum of money—and it is a small sum—we are not behaving in a moral manner.
I was rather taken by comments I read such as, “I would have had more stability and not been in debt if my mental health would have been better”, and “It would mean that care leavers may have food on the table and they are more likely to likely to be fed and more likely to be able to have some heating on in this freezing weather”. It could go towards food, and care leavers could be more motivated to go to college or even see a friend”.
Many care leavers have said they were resorting to borrowing money to enable them to meet essential costs. As most care leavers have limited credit histories and many are either out of work or in very low paid jobs, access to lower-cost credit is very limited. Many therefore find themselves resorting to high-cost lenders, often getting trapped into a debt cycle that is difficult to escape. This brings us back to the moral issue of not treating people as people whom we respect.
Support for the Bill should be very strong in your Lordships’ House. It is, as with so many Private Members’ Bills, a Bill of two pages. We do not have a lot of amendments, subsections, schedules and the like. In fact, there is very little in the Bill—it just says, basically, this is a moral issue and we should deal with it. That is how we should take it, and I hope the Government will make time for the Bill and do an impact study on how much would be saved and how much it would cost to be more expansive with universal credit for all youngsters under the age of 25. From these Benches, we support the Bill and hope that as it progresses it might cover wider areas of interest.
The Earl of Effingham (Con)
My Lords, let me thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester for successfully bringing the important issue of universal credit allowances for care leavers before your Lordships’ House. Children who are in care have had an extremely challenging start in life, and it is the responsibility of those who have been more fortunate to do everything we can to ease that transition for care leavers from care to living independent, enriching and successful lives.
For many individuals, universal credit plays a key role in their transition out of the care system. To that end, care leavers over the age of 18 are already able to claim benefits on the same basis as other adults of that age. Those who are 16 or 17 years old and leave care cannot generally claim benefits, as the local authority remains responsible for meeting their needs for maintenance, accommodation and support, unless they are responsible for a child or have a limited capability for work, but awards will not include an amount to cover rent.
There are other measures in place to support care leavers, such as staying-put arrangements, which help former foster children to continue living in their foster homes as boarders and lodgers. They may also be eligible to claim housing costs for setting up home allowance, which is a grant local authorities can give to care leavers to help them get their new homes up and running, as well as education bursaries for those completing in full-time and higher education. Some local authorities provide financial gifts and bill exemptions.
As I flagged earlier, doing everything that we can for care leavers should be the top priority—that is not in question—but there appear to already be a number of financial assistance provisions in place. It merits further discussion of whether additional monetary assistance by itself would achieve the goal that all noble Lords share of improving outcomes for care leavers.
It is not a surprising statistic, but it is none the less hugely regrettable that care leavers are more likely to be at risk of poor educational outcomes, unemployment, homelessness, drug and alcohol dependency, offending and mental health issues. These are the key issues that require a laser focus. If we are able to address them with a holistic approach, many other issues will disappear. We might consider improving mental health support for care leavers or working with charities to give children in care and care leavers positive role models to emulate.
Having a roof over your head is the foundation stone of a stable environment. Additional assistance in finding a home may be particularly beneficial. To that end, I ask the Minister to what extent the household support allowance is supporting care leavers. We would also be particularly keen to see more assistance given to care leavers in finding long-term stable employment, which would strengthen the aim to deliver on our commitment to helping them by providing a consistent and reliable income stream from which they could make plans for the future.
The noble Baroness, Lady Benjamin, very rightly mentioned qualifications. The noble Lord, Lord Watson of Invergowrie, mentioned training. What training are the Government providing to work coaches at jobcentres to give specialist employment support to care leavers? What steps is the department taking to recruit additional work coaches in order to specifically help care leavers? Would the Government consider committing to allowing care leavers to see the same work coach every time they engage with employment support services? Consistency of both approach and relationship can make a huge difference in the positive progress of an individual as they move forward on their journey into adult life.
There is also the question of regional disparity. The noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, mentioned different payouts from different councils. Is the Minister aware of outcomes for care leavers differing across regions? If that is the case, what action will the Government take to provide additional support to local authorities in regions, which could improve their outcomes?
Children in care and care leavers are some of the most vulnerable people in our society. It is our collective responsibility to do more to reduce this vulnerability. Additional financial assistance is one potential way of improving outcomes, as the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester is suggesting, but other measures may be necessary.
I turn now to the wording of the Bill and the fact that parliamentary oversight is essential. It is a concern for His Majesty’s Official Opposition that statutory instruments made under powers bestowed on the Secretary of State by the Bill will not automatically be scrutinised by this House. Given the likely potential cost of implementing the provisions in the Bill, an assessment must first be conducted to ascertain the cost to the taxpayer, particularly in light of the fact that there may well be more efficient and effective ways to deliver positive outcomes to support care leavers. It is indeed possible, as mentioned by many noble Lords, that there would be positive cost benefits, such as less homelessness and less dependence on local services, but until such an assessment has actually been made, we simply do not know.
In conclusion, there are measures in place to support care leavers as they take their first steps into the world, which we hope will lead to them becoming thriving, independent adults. However, as the right reverend prelate the Bishop of Manchester correctly identifies in this Bill, there is always more that can be done. We must consider all options, as a nuanced approach may prove more beneficial for care leavers, with things such as tailored work coaches, mental health support and mentors, to name but a few.
Please allow me to end by highlighting to all noble Lords that many children in care and care leavers deserve our support and protection from those who would do them harm. I am absolutely sure that every speaker in this debate wants that 100%. When later this year we see the results of the urgent national review, announced yesterday, into the scale of grooming gangs, we very much hope that positive action will be taken to stop this happening once and for all.
Baroness in Waiting/Government Whip (Baroness Blake of Leeds) (Lab)
My Lords, it gives me enormous pleasure to respond on behalf of the Government. I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester for introducing the Bill, for his eloquent advocacy and for taking the time for the briefing we had. I am sure that all noble Lords pass our best wishes to my noble friend Lady Sherlock for a speedy return to her rightful place on this Bench.
I will be open and honest in saying that this subject is very close to my heart. Before I became leader of Leeds City Council, I was the executive member for children’s services on Leeds City Council and moved an inherited inadequate service to one with outstanding provision. My experience in local government, across the piece at the LGA, has stood me in good stead to have some understanding and has left me with the firm conviction that everyone in all our communities has a responsibility and a role to play in addressing the challenges facing care leavers. We have heard about many of these from Members across the House, and I thank everyone for their contributions. Every partner organisation and every sector, whether it is public agencies or the private sector, have a contribution to make. We have heard some brilliant examples of where work is being done to address the challenges.
What we have heard today, and what we all know, is that the adverse experiences faced by many care leavers can have a significant impact on their ability to transition into independent living. Without meaningful support, many struggle with financial, emotional and health challenges, and are often left lonely and isolated, without support from family—the mental health issues that have been brought up by noble Lords today.
On the long-term impact, we have had quite a good discussion about the increased number of NEETs. I suggest that there is another category that we need to take account of: the not knowns, the ones for whom we do not have any data. The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester, my noble friend Lord Davies and the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, all raised issues around that.
To respond to the comments from my noble friend Lord Watson, again, it is about how we draw everyone’s experience together to make sure that we have a holistic package to support care leavers into independent living. I note the comment that was so well made by my noble friend Lord Davies about the financial stress that we are talking about.
We must emphasise in this debate that the Government offer a range of services and support for care leavers. First and foremost, of course, is ensuring that the benefit system meets their specific needs. Because care leavers are less likely to receive family support for accommodation, they can receive the higher local housing allowance one-bedroom rate of either housing benefit or universal credit, up to the age of 25. We provide staying-put arrangements whereby care leavers aged 18 to 21 who remain with former foster carers may be eligible for means-tested benefits.
We need to take into account that, in addition to the exemption from the shared accommodation rate, discretionary housing payments, administered by local authorities, can be paid to those entitled to housing benefit or the housing element of universal credit. Government guidance includes care leavers under 35 on the list of priority groups for that support.
I think we are all looking forward to the discussions on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which will make the Staying Close programme a national offer to applicable children up to the age of 25. Care leavers under 25 will also be exempt from rules that require a connection to a local area before accessing social housing. I am pleased to say that additional funding has been given to local authorities to provide extra support to care leavers at the highest risk of rough sleeping.
Care leavers receive priority access to universal credit alternative payment arrangements, offering greater flexibility for those who need it. To support the transition to the adult welfare system, care leavers’ single points of contact work with the local authority leaving care teams, and care leavers can prepare their universal credit application before they turn 18.
We know that the best way to support care leavers into independent living is through work, which is why the DWP works across and beyond government to offer bespoke educational and employment support. The Second Chance Learning scheme ensures that benefit support is available to care leavers aged 18 to 21 who want to catch up on missed education. I pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Benjamin, for her comments and the work that she is involved in with the first STAR Scholars.
We work to ensure that care leavers get the most out of the DWP’s youth offer, which includes tailored work coach support for those aged 16 to 24. Of course, the Government must lead by example, which is why it is so important that different departments are offering career opportunities to care leavers through schemes such as the Civil Service care leaver internship. I commend organisations such as the NHS and private companies that have outstanding practice in this area.
More widely, the Government have improved support for those in care so that they get the start in life they deserve and are prepared for adulthood. In addition, our focus has to be on early support and early intervention, which means intervening at the earliest possible moment when problems within families start to emerge. We want to move to a position where we can enable children to safely remain with their families, kinship carers or fostering families. We are putting in work to try to attract more foster carers to the system. We are also looking at fixing the care market so that it puts the needs of children first.
In response to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester, statutory guidance requires local authorities to work with children in care aged 16 and 17 to develop a pathway plan setting out what support will be provided when they leave care. This includes how they will support the young person to develop their financial capability and money management skills. It is vital that care leavers, and their supporters, understand the full extent of the support available to them. This is the issue about consistency across the piece. We are working with partners in local authorities and elsewhere to raise awareness, including through factsheets to signpost how and where to access support. We know that this needs to be extensive, inclusive and continually updated.
In response to the consistency points raised by the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, there have been concerns about patchy support across local authorities. There are obligations on local authorities to meet the standards specified in the Children Act. Jobcentres work with local authority leaving care teams to support care leavers who need to claim benefits so that they can transition to jobcentre support and find employment. Gathering more effective data is, of course, a prerequisite to all of this work.
Councils already have powers to provide council tax discounts, including for care leavers. It is for councils themselves to determine whether a discount is appropriate. I note the comments made by the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, and the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Derby about this.
The DWP has updated guidance and introduced additional support to help care leavers navigate the benefits system. There is a report on these issues from the Children’s Society that goes back a number of years, and I recognise there is a frustration here. There is a requirement, however, that before imposing sanctions, work coaches must speak to a care leaver’s single point of contact, who works with the local authority personal advisor to consider relevant information. We believe this has led to improvements, but reliable data is not yet available. Of course, we would welcome any further evidence of this from partners and noble Lords so that we can get a much more up-to-date picture.
Universal credit is an important part of the support available to care leavers on low incomes, as referenced by so many of the contributions today. My noble friend Lord Davies raised the specific issue of adequacy of universal credit. The fair repayment rate, to be introduced from April, will reduce the overall cap on universal credit deductions from 25% to 15%. This will make a contribution, but it does not address the wider points. We need to ensure that we get continual feedback and evidence on these issues.
The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester correctly identified the key point in the Bill that under-25s are paid slightly lower rates than the universal credit standard. Indeed, there are reasons why the standard allowance differs according to age. Younger workers typically receive lower wages, with the lower rates of standard allowance maintaining the incentive to find and progress in work. As we have heard, younger people are also generally more likely to live in some someone else’s household, with living costs decreasing significantly for under-25s. Of course—this is the point—care leavers are much less likely to live in someone else’s household.
However, as I have noted, the Government offer support and easements to help care leavers meet their additional needs. The point I need to make again is that it is not possible to make a reliable assessment at this point because data coverage on care leavers is still limited. This is not about cutting costs, however. We want to make sure that we do everything in our power to enable care leavers to move into long-term employment as we believe this is the is the best way to support their transition to independent living.
More generally, support for accommodation and other living costs is available to those most in need. For example, the Government have provided £742 million to extend the household support fund in England until 31 March 2026. Local authorities can also use discretionary housing payments to provide further assistance.
For these reasons, the Government do not believe the Bill is the best way to deliver all the support that we believe care leavers deserve. However, I assure noble Lords that the Government have committed to reviewing universal credit to ensure it tackles poverty and makes work pay, and we commit to listening carefully to all perspectives and to welcoming input from across the House, as has been expressed today. The noble Lord, Lord Palmer, has requested that this be fed in; I hope he will come forward to feed his comments into the overall review that is being undertaken. It is critical that we get the widest possible background to support this review. Of course, we will continue to improve the support available to care leavers.
On future work, the youth guarantee announced in the Get Britain Working White Paper will be available to young people aged 18 to 21 in England, including care leavers, to ensure they can more easily access quality training opportunities and apprenticeships or help to find work. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, as I have referenced, will introduce a staying close duty, requiring local authorities to support care leavers to find accommodation and support services, and to publish plans for facilitating their transition into independent living.
This work is a cross-government priority. Indeed, a care leaver ministerial board, comprising Ministers from 12 government departments and chaired by the Education Secretary and Deputy Prime Minister, has now been established to identify what more can be done. As well as the voices of noble Lords, we have to make sure that we hear the voices of care leavers and young people generally and learn from those with lived experience to ensure that we are not in this Building passing judgment, when it is clear from the testimonies that we have heard today that it is so important that their experience is front and centre of any changes that we take forward.
The noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, referenced the Wales universal basic income. I acknowledge that comment; DWP officials are working closely with Welsh local authorities to ensure that transition can take place smoothly.
On the comments from the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, in exceptional circumstances 16 and 17 year-olds may claim universal credit in their own right, but there is no direct entitlement to universal credit for children under the age of 17. I do not have time to go into the detail, but I am happy to pick up on that at another point.
Again, I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Manchester for bringing this matter to the House. I look forward very much to the continuing discussions. The Government share his commitment to supporting care leavers. We will continue to build on existing support to ensure that care leavers, and indeed all young people, receive the support that they need to live securely and independently into adulthood. I have not had time specifically to refer to the comments about mental health issues, but we know how significant that is—and I reference the work ongoing in this area.
One thing that we know in this area of work is that we all need a relentless focus. We know that too many of our vulnerable young people have been let down in the past. I emphasise that we remain committed to working closely with care leavers and those who support them to bring about the transformation that we need in the way that support is given to them.
The Lord Bishop of Manchester
I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this debate this afternoon, and thank them for the concern for care leavers that has come from all sides of this House.
Particularly in the past few minutes, we have heard that we do not have adequate data. Of course, waiting for data can be an excuse, so can we commit to collecting the data that we need so that we can have an informed debate—particularly as the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill goes forward? That may be a place where we can continue some of these conversations beyond the scope of this Bill. We have heard also that, while lots of statutory guidance exists, its application, in the Minister’s own words, is at best patchy. The advantage of tackling this matter through universal credit is that it takes away the postcode lottery.
I know that many noble Lords are here for the next debate, so I shall be brief. In my years with the Church Commissioners, I discovered that, when you are prepared to look at things in the long term, the moral and financial cases often point in the same direction. We have heard many noble Lords speak in this debate about the moral and financial case. If we improved universal credit rates for young care leavers, we would in the long term save money. I know that I do not have to be re-elected every five years and I can take a long-term view—but please can we recognise that, if we take a moral and financial case, they can both point in the same direction, particularly when we look long term?
Today sees the retirement of the reverend canon Dr Malcolm Brown, who has led the Church of England’s public affairs work nationally for something like 18 years. I want to thank him for his support of me and my friends on these Benches over so many years. I am glad to be able to put that on the record of your Lordships’ House. I also echo the Minister in wishing the noble Baroness, Lady Sherlock, who is just as gifted in the pulpit as she is in explaining universal credit, a speedy recovery.
I finish on the words of the noble Lord, Lord Watson of Invergowrie. He said, “Would this be appropriate for my child?” With that question echoing in my heart, I beg to move.