Written evidence submitted by His Honour
Judge Hugh Jones, Pontypridd County Court (CAF 17)
I am glad of the opportunity to respond to your
notice of 13 February relating to the work of CAFCASS.
I am not able to comment on the fifth and sixth
of the "key objectives". In the remainder, CAFCASS has
wholly failed to meet those objectives.
No doubt the formation of the new service was
well intentioned but far from improving the service given to litigants
and the courts, it has made things considerably worse.
You may be aware that a best practice guide
has recently been developed by Mr Justice Mumby and Mr Justice
Coleridge which envisages the appointment of a guardian within
four days. In this area, the waiting time has, in CAFCASS's own
figures, varied over the last six months or so from seven weeks
to 12 weeks. This is simply not acceptable.
It has been my practice for some time to fix
a final hearing in public law proceedings at the initial directions
appointment. I try to work to a time-scale of six months. It is
not always possible to achieve that target for a number of reasons
but it is a totally hopeless exercise when a guardian is unlikely
to be involved for the first two or three months of that six month
period.
I accept that local CAFCASS organisers are doing
their best and it is not for me to speculate as to whether the
fault lies in bad forward planning, under financing, or other
reasons. The fact is that the service is inadequate and I am not
convinced that the national executive appreciates the scale of
the problem.
I have attended a conference in each of the
last three years when senior officers of CAFCASS have given bland
assurances that matters would improve and that has simply not
been the case. Indeed, efforts by some judges to bring pressure
on local officers to reduce delay have been resented at national
level. The result is that court orders are widely ignored.
CAFCASS claims to have a system of giving priority
to urgent cases by reference to certain key features. One local
authority solicitor told me that all her cases qualified as urgent
on application of the CAFCASS criteria.
CAFCASS has adopted a system of appointing solicitors
to represent a guardian who has yet to be appointed. I do not
consider that this is an adequate alternative. Even experienced
solicitors are reluctant to take any steps until a guardian is
appointed and confine themselves to taking a note of court orders.
I suspect it also has the effect of easing the pressure on CAFCASS
to make an appointment.
In effect, therefore, the current service positively
inhibits the courts in discharging their statutory duties as set
out in the Children Act of 1979. I am also enclosing a copy of
a letter I have received from the Clerk to the Justices for this
area, where views, as you will see, are similar to mine.
His Honour Judge Hugh Jones
12 March 2003
TEXT OF
A LETTER
WRITTEN ON
4 MARCH 2003 BY
S MILLER, CLERK
TO THE
JUSTICES AT
MERTHYR TYDFIL,
AND ADDRESSED
TO HIS
HONOUR JUDGE
HUGH JONES
Dear Judge Jones,
Children and Family Court Advisory and Support
Service (CAFCASS)
I am grateful for your giving me the opportunity
to comment on the Lord Chancellor's Department letter of 13 February
2003, concerning the work of the above organisation.
I would begin by stressing that I believe the
formulation of CAFCASS had much to commend it, both in principle
and in practice. However, speaking on behalf of the Magistrates'
of the Miskin, Merthyr Tydfil and Cynon Valley Benches, and the
Family Proceedings Court administration for the same areas, I
would also state that it has wholly failed to achieve any of the
six key objectives set out in the letter of 13 February 2003.
The formation of CAFCASS has resulted in substantial
delays in the completion of all types of public law proceedings
brought before the Family Proceedings Courts in this area, caused
by waiting times required for the appointment of children's guardians.
Care proceedings and adoptions proceedings have suffered additional
delays of up to three months which have arisen directly from the
wait for the appointment of guardians—a problem which was
non-existent in this area prior to the formation of CAFCASS. Although
I have great sympathy for the CAFCASS staff based in this area,
and do accept that they are trying to do their best for all courts
operating in South Wales, the situation has unquestionably caused
inconvenience, frustration and distress to all those involved.
Needless to say, this further delay does not improve services
offered to families or children, nor can it promote the welfare
of children involved in the family courts.
I would add, however, that the situation has
improved to an extent over the last six months, and waiting times
have decreased in care proceedings, but still remain excessive.
S Miller
Clerk to the Justices
| 
