Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 1st May 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, I welcome the opportunity to debate the Bill. I take this opportunity to thank the Minister and the Secretary of State for the briefing they gave us and the opportunity to express, in my case, the concerns I have about the resources and funds available to run the breakfast clubs. I declare my interest as a patron of the National Association of Child Contact Centres.

I welcome the provisions in the Bill setting out child protection and safeguarding and working towards keeping families together as far as possible. I also welcome the kinship care provisions. In my capacity shadowing early years in the other place, I was acutely aware of the role that grandparents and other close family members wished to play but in many instances were not able to do so.

In Committee, I would like to explore the opportunity and the increasing role that could be played by child contact centres and other venues, which offer space for parents to meet and spend time with their children in the event of a family break-up. I urge and encourage the Government to promote and support child contact centres and the vital role they play.

My other main comment at this stage relates to admissions policy—in particular, access to, and the cost of, school transport. Previously, rural counties such as North Yorkshire enjoyed good relations between local education authorities and schools, which is possibly why the take-up of academies was less in those education authorities than others. Recently, however, tensions have been created over the funding of home-to-school transport.

In my view, that is a direct result of the Government cutting the rural services delivery grant. In 2024, that grant provided £110 million to 94 rural authorities to help maintain essential public services. Ending the grant has deprived rural areas of around 40% of funds, so they have 40% less money to spend per head than urban areas. I hope the Government will take the opportunity of the passage of the Bill to urgently address the inequality of funding between rural and urban schools. Previously, that was addressed by policies such as rurality and sparsity of population, but that is no longer the case. We have the opportunity in the Bill to address that.

Finally, I admire hugely the role that academies have played in those areas where they have performed well. I pay tribute to successive Governments and former Secretaries of State, as well as those around the House, who have made these such a success. I hope the Government will listen very carefully to the comments that have been made today and will take them on board when it comes to the passage of this Bill. I hope these issues can be addressed and monitored and that the Bill can be improved, but I do wish it a swift passage through the House.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts

Committee stage
Thursday 22nd May 2025 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering]

65: After Clause 4, insert the following new Clause—
“Child contact centres(1) The Secretary of State must by regulations—(a) require all child contact centres and organisations that offer child contact services to be accredited in accordance with national standards in relation to safeguarding and preventing domestic abuse;(b) require all child contact centre staff and volunteers to undertake mandatory safeguarding and domestic abuse training which must establish processes to centre the voice and experience of the child and parent or carer at all stages of parental involvement;(c) establish mechanisms to support and develop the role of contact centres in multi-agency risk assessment at a local level;(d) set out a system-wide approach to risk assessment and risk management in child contact centres, including the provision of specialist support for parents, carers and children;(e) ensure adequate funding and investment into child contact centres to ensure locally accessible and affordable provision.(2) A statutory instrument containing regulations under this section may not be made unless a draft of the instrument has been laid before and approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament.”

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, I realise I am coming between noble Lords and the Whit Recess at this stage. Before I speak to Amendment 65, I declare my interest as patron of the National Association of Child Contact Centres and celebrate all the work it does. Amendment 65 is a probing amendment. I thank warmly the noble Baronesses, Lady Finlay of Llandaff and Lady Burt of Solihull, and the noble Lord, Lord Meston, for kindly supporting the purposes and contents of this amendment.

I believe that we benefit greatly from having a good number of and variety of facilities for child contact centres—places where, in the event of a breakdown in a relationship or a marriage, the absent parent or carer can spend time with their children in a safe and comfortable environment. There is a particular issue that we tried to address in a previous Bill, which I will come on to in a moment: effective safeguarding of adults and children, particularly from the risk of domestic abuse or harm.

We benefit greatly from the network of child contact centres, but they are patchy. I pay particular attention to the fact that distances—especially in the north of England, where people have to travel further—increase the costs for parents and carers in reaching contact centres. These contact centres play a crucial role: they enable thousands of parents and carers to have contact with their children safely, and approximately 20,000 children are visited in this way each year. Their facilities are offered both in private law proceedings and by local authorities during public law proceedings.

Amendment 65 is based very much on a report written in June 2023 and drafted from research into child contact centres in England by Cordis Bright, commissioned by the Ministry of Justice. This was required under Section 83(1) of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. I pay fulsome tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay of Llandaff, for moving the amendment so eloquently and vigorously during that Bill’s passage through the House of Lords.

While the amendment was not agreed to by the Government at that time, they committed to building the evidence base on the robustness of current safeguarding policies and practices across contact centres. This amendment reflects that and is based on the results of that research and the recommendations contained in that report. The amendment recognises that there is a high prevalence of referrals to contact centres with a history of domestic abuse and the research in the report that reflected that there was at least one referral with a history of domestic abuse in the 12 months preceding the publication of the report in June 2023. I believe that that justifies the need for training and management of a particularly sensitive nature, as set out in the amendment.

I hope that the amendment speaks for itself. I will not go through each proposal in turn, given the lateness of the hour. I was delighted to attend the briefing hosted by the Minister and led by the Secretary of State for Education, which I think shows the commitment and interest of the Government in this Bill. That was appreciated. The Secretary of State, and indeed the Minister, showed a real interest in this matter. I hope that the Minister sees fit to adopt and accept the provisions as set out in Amendment 65, accept that they are needed and agree to them. I beg to move.

[The Earl of Dundee (Con)]

My Lords, I support these very useful proposals, which, as my noble friend has just outlined, would ensure that child contact centres are adequately funded and their staff and volunteers properly trained to guard against domestic abuse.

However, I would add a further recommendation, also made within the final report of the Ministry of Justice on research into safeguarding processes in child contact centres in England. This urges a greater exchange of learning and good practices, to improve consistency across contact centre procedures and policies. Child contact centres themselves can benefit from learning networks, across and beyond their region or local authority, by comparing notes on what is necessary and what works best, including not only the prescriptions of this proposed amendment but the advocacy of certain other proven expedients, whereby the spread of knowledge of their collective efficacy then serves to raise standards, both here and abroad.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Meston (CB)]

My Lords, just to add to what has just been said, my understanding is that accreditation depends on the centre having been approved by the national association, and that accreditation lasts, I think, for three years.

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

On a point of clarification, I can confirm to my noble friend that what we are asking for, and what we asked for in the earlier amendment, is proper training and management, so that in those cases—perhaps only one a year, but to me that is sufficiently important—of domestic abuse that present to a child contact centre, the volunteers will be properly trained and will be able to manage the situation. It is not a case of inspection and increasing fees; it is giving them the confidence so that they know how to deal with that situation.

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

I thank my noble friend Lady McIntosh for her intervention and I very much look forward to discussing this further.

--- Later in debate ---

The common view is that it is important that accreditation, or local authority oversight, ensures that, in cases of potential domestic abuse or coercion, the necessary standards are in place. Given these assurances, I hope that the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, will be sufficiently reassured to withdraw this amendment.

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, I am grateful to all those who have spoken—my noble friend Lord Dundee, the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay of Llandaff, and the noble Lord, Lord Meston—and for the support of the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, in her absence.

I think the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, put her finger on it: it is not so much the accreditation. I am very aware of the protocol, which is a great step forward, and I would like the Bill to reflect where we are in that protocol. It would be extremely helpful to have a very short meeting between the authors of the amendment and the Minister, because it is not so much the accreditation as the fact that her predecessor, my noble friend Lord Wolfson, felt that the evidence was not available at the time of the Domestic Abuse Act.

The beauty of the Cordis Bright report is that we now have evidence of the cases involving coercion and other forms of domestic abuse. We do not think that this is necessarily being sufficiently catered for by all the contact centres. We want them all to work to the same standards, whether they are a private or a public facility, and I would like to have the opportunity to take that forward with the Minister.

As the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, indicated, the wording that I have come up with might not be the most sophisticated—so it will be a wonderful opportunity to have that meeting so that we can reach agreement and have that in the Bill. For the moment, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment 65 withdrawn.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts

Committee stage
Tuesday 16th September 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, this is only the second intervention I have made in this very important Bill. I draw the attention of the Minister, the department and, indeed, the House to the plight and funding of rural schools.

One of the first actions that the incoming Government undertook was to end the rural services delivery grant, which had greatly benefited rural areas and allowed many outlying villages and farms to access the schools for their children. This has had an immense impact on counties such as the very rural and isolated North Yorkshire. When I was in the other place, a group of about 100 MPs felt that they represented deprived areas of local education funding, for the simple reasons that we lost what was initially an element of the funding for rural and sparsely populated areas and that the grants seem to change every single year. In addition to the loss of the rural services delivery grant, the Government took away the grant that was dedicated to rural schools’ transport funding, so there was a sort of double whammy, a double effect, from this first action from the Government.

In the year up to the end of the financial year 2023-24, I understand that the rural services grant totalled over £100 million, and the Government saw fit to redirect that money from what are called “more deprived areas”. On my Amendment 455, I want to point out the lack of understanding of how changes to this funding really impact individual rural schools—which face the risk of closure—and the parents and their children, who are trying to access what I believe are very good schools. I understand that the thinking of the Government is to transfer resources from rural to urban areas, so in this amendment I ask them to review within six months of the passing of the Bill their rural school admissions policies, to include an assessment of whether admissions policies in those areas have been affected by the availability of home-to-school transport.