Rachel Gilmour
Main Page: Rachel Gilmour (Liberal Democrat - Tiverton and Minehead)Department Debates - View all Rachel Gilmour's debates with the Department for Education
(1 day, 11 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
John Whitby
I do agree. It appears as though the Government are expanding the services available to children in kinship care, and that sounds like a good thing. I would like every child in care to have therapeutic support, because they all need it. They have all been massively traumatised by something.
The next question is: why has the number of residential placements increased so much faster than the number of children in care? The answer is simple: the number of foster families has remained fairly flat in the same period, despite the significant efforts of authorities and independent fostering agencies to attract new carers.
Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)
Some time ago, I worked in international development roles, including with former orphanage children in eastern bloc countries in the former Soviet Union, such as Bulgaria, Romania and Moldova, and it was abundantly clear then that children are better off raised in families. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we should be doing much more to support fostering and adoption processes, without losing our grip on safeguarding practices?
John Whitby
I obviously want children to stay in the family network as much as possible. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill supports that with family group decision making and the kinship care offer, so hopefully more children will stay within the familial network, which is better for them and for the state.
The previous Government introduced a couple of positive innovations on fostering. They came quite late in their term and were not extended to all areas, but they are worth pursuing. First, they introduced regionalisation. Derby, Derbyshire, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire have combined along East Midlands combined county authority lines to form Foster for East Midlands, which creates a combined and increased marketing resource. The results are positive, especially against the backdrop of UK-wide fostering inquiry numbers falling.
In preparation for this debate, I did the obligatory Google search for “fostering in Derbyshire” to replicate what a potential new foster carer might find online, and I am afraid Foster for East Midlands was the fifth hit after four sponsored ads. The ability for independents to outspend even combined local authority budgets should not be a surprise, given the significant cost of independent placements compared with local authority placements. The reality is that the taxpayer is paying for them to outspend local authorities.
The other recent positive innovation is Mockingbird. One of the most cited reasons for foster carers leaving the role is the lack of support. It is easy for new foster carers to feel isolated, given the nature of the role. Mockingbird puts a constellation of new carers around an experienced foster carer, who will guide and support them, and enables the building of support networks among the carers.
If we cannot get enough new foster carers into the system, we need to ensure that the ones we have do not leave unnecessarily. That support means fewer placement breakdowns and less disruption in children’s lives.