All 1 Lord Hope of Craighead contributions to the Children and Social Work Act 2017

Read Bill Ministerial Extracts

Tue 8th Nov 2016
Children and Social Work Bill [HL]
Lords Chamber

Report: 2nd sitting (Hansard): House of Lords

Children and Social Work Bill [HL] Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Education

Children and Social Work Bill [HL]

Lord Hope of Craighead Excerpts
Report: 2nd sitting (Hansard): House of Lords
Tuesday 8th November 2016

(7 years, 12 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Children and Social Work Act 2017 Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: HL Bill 57-II Second marshalled list for Report (PDF, 170KB) - (4 Nov 2016)
Lord Ramsbotham Portrait Lord Ramsbotham
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I remind the Minister that he used the word “depressed” in connection with our previous group on improvements. I have to admit that looking at the last committee report of the UN convention and comparing it with the previous committee report, I was depressed at how many in the previous one were still there in this present one. If you are looking for improvements, I suggest that you could start well with the two committee reports because they set out a very clear agenda for improvement.

Lord Hope of Craighead Portrait Lord Hope of Craighead (CB)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I add a word on how this matter might be viewed in the courts. As many of your Lordships will know, I was a member of the UK Supreme Court; from time to time the UNCR convention was cited and we always paid close attention to what it said. It is plain from a number of our judgments that it did influence the way we approached cases involving children but, more importantly, there was a case called P-S Children in 2013 in the Court of Appeal in England, where it was said:

“The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child has not been made a part of English law but the duty of the court is nonetheless to have regard to it when considering matters relating to it”.

In that case, the question was whether a child had a right to be heard in proceedings relating to him. There was no statutory right, but there was nothing to prevent it. However, the court—having regard to what the convention said—went on to say:

“It should now be declared that the child does have the … important but limited right, that is to say, a right to be heard in the proceedings”.

That is just one example of the way in which the courts today are drawing upon the convention in developing their jurisprudence. It is also well established as a matter of fundamental law that when the United Kingdom has signed up to an international convention, it is to be presumed that this Parliament, when legislating, will legislate in accordance with what the convention provides. Therefore, if you find a provision relating to children, or the duties of authorities relating to children, the courts, if asked to do so, would interpret the legislation in the light of the convention.

We are in an imperfect world so far as England and Wales are concerned, but the courts are doing the best they can to follow the guidance of the convention and it would seem far better that England and Wales should follow the example of Scotland and legislate to put the matter beyond any doubt.