---

Column 90

Newton, Rt Hon Tony

Nicholls, Patrick

Nicholson, David (Taunton)

Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)

Norris, Steve

Onslow, Rt Hon Sir Cranley

Oppenheim, Phillip

Ottaway, Richard

Page, Richard

Paice, James

Patnick, Sir Irvine

Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

Pawsey, James

Pickles, Eric

Porter, David (Waveney)

Portillo, Rt Hon Michael

Rathbone, Tim

Redwood, Rt Hon John

Renton, Rt Hon Tim

Richards, Rod

Rifkind, Rt Hon Malcolm

Robathan, Andrew

Robertson, Raymond (Ab'd'n S)

Robinson, Mark (Somerton)

Roe, Mrs Marion (Broxbourne)

Rowe, Andrew (Mid Kent)

Rumbold, Rt Hon Dame Angela

Ryder, Rt Hon Richard

Sackville, Tom

Scott, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas

Shaw, David (Dover)

Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)

Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)

Shersby, Michael

Sims, Roger

Skeet, Sir Trevor

Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

Soames, Nicholas

Speed, Sir Keith

Spencer, Sir Derek

Spicer, Sir James (W Dorset)

Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)

Spink, Dr Robert

Spring, Richard

Sproat, Iain

Squire, Robin (Hornchurch)

Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John

Steen, Anthony

Stephen, Michael

Stern, Michael

Stewart, Allan

Streeter, Gary

Sumberg, David

Sykes, John

Taylor, Ian (Esher)

Taylor, John M (Solihull)

Taylor, Sir Teddy (Southend, E)

Temple-Morris, Peter

Thomason, Roy

Thompson, Sir Donald (C'er V)

Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

Thornton, Sir Malcolm

Thurnham, Peter

Townsend, Cyril D (Bexl'yh'th)

Trend, Michael

Trotter, Neville

Twinn, Dr Ian

Vaughan, Sir Gerard

Walden, George

Walker, Bill (N Tayside)

Waller, Gary

Ward, John

Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

Waterson, Nigel

Watts, John

Wells, Bowen

---

Column 91

Whitney, Ray

Whittingdale, John

Widdecombe, Ann

Wiggin, Sir Jerry

Wilkinson, John

Winterton, Mrs Ann (Congleton)

Wolfson, Mark

---

Column 91

Wood, Timothy

Yeo, Tim

Young, Rt Hon Sir George

Tellers for the Noes: Dr. Liam Fox and Mr. David Willetts.

---

Column 91

Question accordingly negatived.

New clause 3

Overarching principles

`.--(1) Where any person, court or children's hearing makes any decision in a matter affecting a child, the welfare of the child throughout his childhood shall be their or its paramount consideration, and they shall have regard in particular to-- (a) the views of the child concerned, taking account of his age and maturity, where it is practicable to ascertain such views and the child wishes to express them, and

(b) the general principle that any delay in determining matters relating to a child is likely to prejudice the welfare of the child.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) above, a child of 12 years of age or more shall be presumed to be of sufficient age and maturity to form a view. (3) A court or children's hearing shall not make any order under this Act unless it considers that it would be better for the child that the order be made than that none should be made at all. (4) The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision for the procedures to be applied in identifying children who wish to express views to the children's hearing or court, and in facilitating that expression, and without prejudice to the generality of this section, such regulations may provide for--

(a) a psychological assessment of a child to assess his ability to form views and his maturity;

(b) representation of the child's interests in any proceedings by persons drawn from the panel referred to in section 87 of this Act, and

(c) representation of the child's views by a solicitor.'.-- [Mr. Wallace.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Wallace: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this, it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 154 and 153.

Mr. Wallace: The new clause to which this one relates was considered in Committee and concerned what were generally referred to throughout the Committee stage--including the evidence taking--as overarching principles. The idea was that the Bill should include, almost as its starting point, a set of principles that would apply to all parts of the Bill, especially those relating to decisions affecting children taken by courts, children's hearings, local authorities and so on.

I tabled the new clause immediately after the Committee ended to ensure that the whole House could return to this important matter. Without making any commitment in Committee--he said that he would have to be sure that the Bill would be improved and strengthened by any additions--the Under- Secretary of State said that the matter would be given some consideration, adding that my aim was a fine one: "We will be prepared to reconsider the issue to determine whether the Bill can be improved and strengthened without imposing unnecessary rigidity . . . It will involve quite a lot of work as the options will have to be examined very carefully and weighed up.

---

Column 92

We will return to the option which provides the most advantages to children."--[ Official Report, Special Standing Committee , 23 February 1995; c. 288-89.]

One can only assume that the matter has been given serious thought, that all the difficulties have been weighed up and that the Government have concluded that it is better to do nothing. That is a matter of some regret to me, but I am at least glad that I tabled the new clause to give the House the opportunity to consider the matter further.

The rights of the child are set out in the new clause. They were referred to at some length in Committee, and have been mentioned again this evening. They are: that bodies making decisions affecting children shall have regard to

"the views of the child concerned, taking account of his age and maturity . . . and the general principle that any delay in determining matters relating to a child"

should be avoided; and further, that the interests and welfare of the child should be paramount.

I acknowledge that it might be objected that the words "any person" should not form part of the new clause. If the Minister tells me that that is the only technical flaw preventing him from accepting the new clause, I shall not push it to a vote. But if the Government's objections are more fundamental--and they do not believe that there is a need for an overarching set of principles enshrined in the Bill--I would urge the House to come to a decision on the matter. In legislation relating to Northern Ireland and to England a series of overarching principles are enshrined at the very heart of the provisions. The Government have argued in the past that these overarching principles are specifically imported to certain parts of the Bill, but in many other parts the important principles are missing. Clause 3(5), relating to parental responsibilities and parental rights, includes no reference to the views of the child or the child's welfare. The same can be said of clause 4(1). Clause 5 contains no reference to children's views, and in clause 6 the very principle is abrogated, inasmuch as a failure to take into account the views of children will not constitute a barrier to certain transactions being legitimated.

Clause 9 contains nothing about children's welfare. Clause 11(6) stipulates that

"any order . . . does not adversely affect the position of a person who has, in good faith and for value, acquired any property of the child concerned".

Where do children's views or welfare appear in that? Clause 14, entitled

"Jurisdiction and choice of law in relation to certain matters", includes no reference to delays that may adversely affect children. I could go on taking samples at random. In clause 35(2), which concerns safeguarders, there is nothing about children's views or welfare, or about undue delays in making appointments.

I could more amply illustrate the point if the House wanted to stay here half the night--we could have added a good many more examples of failures to provide for the taking into account of children's views, to ensure that their welfare is paramount, or to avoid undue delay in coming to decisions. Hence the need for a general clause to ensure that all decisions to be taken by courts, children's hearings or local authorities be taken by reference to these principles. That is why such a fundamental provision should be incorporated in the Bill.

---