Childcare Bill [HL]

Viscount Ullswater Excerpts

Wednesday 14th October 2015 Lords Chamber

[Lord Touhig]

My Lords, I beg to move and wish to test the opinion of the House.

[The Deputy Speaker (Viscount Ullswater) (Con)]

My Lords, I must inform the House that if this amendment is agreed to I will not be able to call Amendments 28 and 29.

Children and Families Bill

Viscount Ullswater Excerpts

Wednesday 9th October 2013 Grand Committee

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Lord Nash) (Con)]

My Lords, I shall speak to the government amendment to Clause 1. I start by thanking the adoption Select Committee for its invaluable contribution to the proposals under consideration today. I am also grateful to all those noble Peers who, over the summer, gave me the somewhat backhanded encouragement, “Don’t worry, everybody wants this Bill, it’s fantastic—but you’ll still get plenty of amendments”. They were right. I have also been most struck by the level of passionate, professional and rigorous scrutiny that the Bill—my first—is receiving in your Lordships’ House. The committee’s thoughtful and thorough consideration has helped to shape Clause 1 in a way that will better meet the needs of vulnerable children.

The key aspect of the Government’s adoption reform programme is to reduce delay for children needing adoption so that they are able to move in with their potential adopters earlier than they currently do. Fostering for adoption has the potential to achieve this. Clause 1 imposes a duty on a local authority to consider placing a looked-after child for whom the local authority is considering adoption with foster carers who are also approved prospective adopters. This is a fostering placement that, subject to a placement order or parental consent, may become an adoptive placement. Highly respected organisations in the adoption field, such as Coram, Barnardo’s and the British Association for Adoption and Fostering have expressed their support for this policy.

However, while we have tried to draft the clause in the way we consider most appropriate, concerns about it were raised during the debate in the other place. Many felt that the clause disapplied the duty to give preference to a placement with family and friends and that, as a result, it would encourage social workers to overlook this type of placement. Ministers made it clear that it was not the Government’s policy to exclude family and friends, whose role in caring for these children we highly value. The Government have carefully considered these comments, as the Minister for Children and Families said he would. I now seek to amend the clause to put it beyond doubt that before a local authority considers a fostering for adoption placement, it must have explored placement with relatives and decided that it is not the most appropriate placement for the child. I hope noble Lords will agree that this amendment is appropriate. I beg to move.

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees]

My Lords, I must advise your Lordships that if this amendment is agreed to, I will not be able to call Amendments 4 to 8 because of pre-emption.

Amendment 2 (to Amendment 1)

Moved by

Education Bill

Viscount Ullswater Excerpts

Wednesday 14th September 2011 Grand Committee

[Lord Hill of Oareford]

I am not sure what the protocol is but I will write to the right reverend Prelate.

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Viscount Ullswater)]

The Minister can reply.

[Lord Hill of Oareford]

I will write to the right reverend Prelate setting out the matter rather than holding up the Committee.