All 2 Debates between Jonathan Djanogly and Edward Timpson

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jonathan Djanogly and Edward Timpson
Monday 10th February 2014

(10 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Jonathan Djanogly (Huntingdon) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Will the Minister please say whether there will be a presumption in favour of disclosure to children and grandchildren? Specifically, if an adopted person does not wish to have contact with the birth parents, does the amendment state that prescribed persons can go against those wishes?

Edward Timpson Portrait Mr Timpson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for his continued interest in this important matter. The whole basis of the amendment is to extend the provisions that already exist, so that anyone who wants to make further inquiries, about accessing information or making contact, has to do so through the intermediary services. There is not a presumption, therefore, in that sense. We are looking to go beyond the direct line of descendants from the adopted person, who obviously fall within the prescribed relationship category, and consult on whether we should widen that to others. The provision certainly does not work on the basis that if someone does not want to have contact there is a presumption that that will take place.

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Djanogly
- Hansard - -

Is my hon. Friend saying that the intermediary might have more discretion than the adopted person, who may have a different view from the children?

Edward Timpson Portrait Mr Timpson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The intermediary service is there to ensure that anyone who seeks access does so in a way that does not compromise the position of the person they are seeking either to gain access to or make contact with. That is in line with the approach that already exists, and which works well and successfully. What I can say on the record to reassure my hon. Friend is that this will not force anybody to have contact if they do not wish to do so. Clearly, there will be lots of reasons why people will either want to make contact or have access to records. For example, someone may want to understand the genetic history of direct descendants to see whether there is a prevalent hereditary disease to which they are more prone.

At this juncture, may I say how grateful I am to my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield North (Nick de Bois) for his tireless campaigning on this issue, as well as to my right hon. Friend the Minister for Government Policy, my right hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Mr Letwin), who has continued his personal interest in pursuing these important changes? I believe that the changes will ensure, where it is appropriate to do so and through the intermediary services, a greater prospect for those who want to establish contact or have access to information, to be able to do so without compromising those who may be also involved.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jonathan Djanogly and Edward Timpson
Tuesday 31st January 2012

(12 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Djanogly
- Hansard - -

We have seen the King’s college figures, and we do not agree with them. The fact of the matter is that we have published full impact assessments, and we stand by them.

Edward Timpson Portrait Mr Edward Timpson (Crewe and Nantwich) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

More than half of male prisoners and almost three quarters of female prisoners have no qualifications at all. What efforts are being made, through the training of prison officers, to raise awareness of the importance and availability of prison education in our prisons?