Examination of Witnesses (Questions 320-328)
MS ROSIE
WINTERTON MP, AND
SALLY FIELD
22 MAY 2003
Q320 Ross Cranston: Putting aside
all these issues about structure, and so on, can I just commend
you, as a Minister, for doing that, and walking the job, as it
were, and that is very good, and you have got that reputation
for a hands-on approach in other areas, and I think that is always
welcome. I just want to ask quickly about the Board. You have
heard the evidence, not representative, too many managers, not
enough people who know about the subject area. Mr Hewson told
us this morning it was a representative Board. I think MCSI has
said that you have to look at the composition. Can you tell us,
do you accept that criticism, that it was not a representative
Board in the past, and what are you going to do, in terms of new
appointments?
Ms Winterton: I think, when you
look at, for example, the experience that is there from the voluntary
sector, people with experience of social services, people who
are, for example, from perhaps the more commercial world, I know
people often land on that and say, "No; what does that person
bring." I would say that somebody like that actually brings
the ability not to manage budgets but to challenge budgetary assumptions,
perhaps, so that they are saying, "What is the evidence that
you are basing on allocating X, Y, Z to a particular region?"
That is very important, for me, in terms of making the case for
resources within our own Division and within wider government.
I think there are ways that the Board can develop. There was particular
concern, I think, that there is not a judge on the Board at the
moment; now there are difficulties around that because it would
be very difficult for a serving judge actually to be on the Board.
Q321 Ross Cranston: There was one,
was there not; he left?
Ms Winterton: There was one, but
I think he retired in order to do it. Now I think what the Board
needs to look at is to draw in other experience, and I know that
Jonathan Tross and Anthony Hewson are very keen on pushing that
forward and making sure that the Board is aware, for example,
of the contribution that can be made by the judiciary into the
thinking and the policy development, and also the practice. So
I think that there is wide experience on the Board; because I
do not think the Board should be made up, if you like, of just
people who have been practitioners, because I think it does need
to think outside that, if it is going to be able to achieve the
approach which means that it is open to working with other agencies,
it understands the connections into the voluntary sector, it understands
the connections into social services departments.
Q322 Ross Cranston: So the bottom
line is that you and the Lord Chancellor are happy with the Board
and you do not anticipate changing the nature of it?
Ms Winterton: No; obviously, as
Board appointments come up, we will always look at whether there
needs to be a different type of expertise brought in at any time,
and it would be foolish to say that we would not be open to those
suggestions, and we would take on board any particular criticisms.
But I think the principle has to be that we do look for a different
range of experience from people.
Q323 Mr Dawson: Can you tell me,
Rosie, who does have the responsibility for the strategic development
of support services for children and their families, where they
are experiencing relationship breakdown, is it with CAFCASS, is
it with the Lord Chancellor's Department, is it located somewhere
else in government?
Ms Winterton: Obviously, within
the Lord Chancellor's Department, we have general responsibility
for policy development, but I think, as Sally Field set out, within
our Family Policy Division, we will look at what else we can do
to take on board the comments made by CAFCASS about how they think
their support could be developed, as we will talk with other organisations.
But perhaps I can give you a concrete example. Jonathan Tross
and Anthony Hewson earlier outlined how they were looking at the
relationship, for example, with the provision of contact centres,
and how they felt that referrals could be improved by CAFCASS
officers, and they signed the Protocol with the NACCC. What we
have been able to do, from the Lord Chancellor's Department point
of view, is make the case, backed up by discussions that we have
had with CAFCASS, for the need for more provision of these; that
has enabled us, for example, to go to Government, to secure from
the Children's Fund £2.5 million over the next three years
to put 12 new contact centres, to develop others. That is, I think,
a very good step forward in an important area. But what we have
to do is make sure that, whilst we are providing those nuts and
bolts, if you like, CAFCASS is looking at how its support, S for
support, fits in with that, so that we do not just set up 12 new
supervised contact centres, that there is a more improved referral
system to it. So, strategically, we will set a direction, but
we will build it on information from CAFCASS and making sure it
fits in to them. And I do think that is, again, one of the advantages
of that kind of national organisation, because we can achieve
a kind of equality, geographically, and in standards terms, which
I think is immensely important if the organisation is to thrive
and move forward in the way that I think it should.
Q324 Mr Dawson: And do you have other,
major aspirations for elements of support services?
Ms Winterton: We have talked earlier
about mediation; there are also some other areas that can be developed.
Looking, for example, in terms of the follow-through in some public
law cases, where perhaps a care plan has been set out, and if
a local authority, for example, is not following that through
and there are human rights issues of the child arising then the
practitioner will follow that through, that is a wider support
than is given at the moment.
Q325 Mr Dawson: And what is the resources
issue at the heart of this; does CAFCASS have enough cash to carry
out both of the vital aspects of its role, both advisory and the
support?
Ms Winterton: I think everyone
would always say more resources would be helpful, but I have to
say that certainly the message I get back from the Board and others
is that the current situation will enable the organisation to
move forward. Obviously, we will always continue discussions about
budgets, and so on, but what is very clear is that the organisation
does need to stabilise and look at what can be done at the moment
within not only existing resources but, in a sense, existing staff
and practitioner availability, and then we can look forward in
the future. But, certainly, if we get this proper, joined-up approach
with other agencies and other government departments, there are
ways that we can enhance that support from other areas, in the
way that I have described the contact centre approach. There are
issues around, I think, wider family mediation, but, I think,
there, it is important that we look at developments within other
areas, perhaps the Home Office, for example. If we can get that
approach, it is not all about one organisation getting all of
the money, it is about looking at what is happening elsewhere
and making sure that they are tied into those different areas,
and thus increasing the S for support.
Q326 Mr Soley: Can I return to the
accountability and the policy issue, because we know that the
supply of well-trained people is critical to this, and we have
heard about the problems with that, and we have heard about what
is trying to be done, and I understand that. We have also heard
that there is a problem about the management structure delivering
quality of service in time, and one of the things that troubled
me, in hearing answers this morning, was that there was almost
an acceptance that it might take longer to allocate cases than
it did previously; and that seems to me a policy issue which has
been slipped through, in some way. And I cannot believe, given
that in a number of those cases they have been moving from 24
hours, which is what it was, to 48 hours, there will be cases,
emergency cases, taking into care, where a child is at a hearing
without a guardian being there in a large number of cases, and
it is very hard to argue that you are putting children first if
actually you have a situation like that. And I just wonder how
that decision was made, without a political oversight of it from
a ministerial position; surely, there is a case for saying, "This
isn't good enough," or, if this is going to be the case in
the future, why is it going to be worse than it was before?
Ms Winterton: I am sorry, the
policy decision to . . .
Q327 Mr Soley: To accept that we
will not return to a position where the majority of guardians
were appointed within 24 hours; we are told it will be 48 hours?
Ms Winterton: Obviously, insofar
as we possibly can, we would like to return to the highest of
standards of quality in terms of allocation. I think it is important
to be realistic, as well, about what is achievable, and if you
were to say why have some of those problems arisen, and are they
being addressed, I would say, yes, they are, there are a whole
host of ways, through convergence, through the new practitioners
who were taken on, who can work in public law and private law.
But also what I think is important is to make sure that we are
offering the same quality in every different area. And I know
that you have evidence already where, in certain areas, people
have come and they have said, "No, it's exactly the same
quality standards, exactly the same allocation as previously,"
and in other areas there are very clear difficulties. I have to
say that there have before been, and this is particularly in London,
when I met the Inner-London Magistrates' Court, those who said,
"This was something that had happened before, in terms of
delays, it wasn't entirely new," and what I think we need
to do is make sure that, in all areas of the country, there is
a measure of exactly how many cases different people can be taking
on, whether it is employed or self-employed, so that the quality
is the same throughout the country. And what I feel is that where
we are working to a certain extent slightly in the dark is that
there was not previously, because of all the different allocating
organisations, if you like, because of the different employers,
there was not necessarily that overview. So, therefore, I think
that obviously I would like to move to a situation where allocations
were done as quickly as possible, but also I think we have to
combine the quality of service delivered with that, and it is
a mixture of the two and making sure that CAFCASS, as an organisation,
has a clear view of how to manage that. Now I do not know whether
Sally Field would like to comment.
Chairman: I think we are going to have
to draw the session to a close; we shall content ourselves with
your response to that question.
Mr Soley: Chairman, I would like the
Minister, if possible, to look at this question of delay in appointment,
because it does seem that we should not be aiming at less than
we were doing before.
Q328 Chairman: If, on reflection,
you have anything you would like to add to what you have said,
please, by all means, communicate with us and we will take it
into account, specifically on the delay?
Ms Winterton: Yes, on delay on
allocation; yes, it is something with which I am much occupied.
Chairman: And, indeed, the apparent departure
from the 24-hour standard, which appeared to be the prevailing,
previous standard.
Peter Bottomley: Which has been described
to us as "a grotesque acceptance of failure."
Chairman: So, thank you very much for
your assistance this morning. No doubt, you, too, will look forward
to the report.
|
