---

Lords amendment: No. 3

Mr. Caplin: I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.

 
20 Oct 2004 : Column 948
 
Madam Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to discuss Lords amendment No. 4.

Mr. Caplin: I am pleased to tell the House that the Government accept Lords amendments Nos. 3 and 4 from their lordships' House. They are uncontroversial Government amendments. Lords amendment No. 3 is beneficial to the ex-service community as it broadens the definition of "appeal" in the Late Appeals Regulations 2001 to include late interim assessment appeals.

Lords amendment No. 4 corrects a technical defect in the initial drafting of the Bill that was identified by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee when it considered the Bill. It provides that a commencement order under clause 8 is not subject to any parliamentary procedure.

Mr. Gerald Howarth: We have no problem in agreeing to the amendments and we are delighted that the Government have accepted at least some amendments from their lordships' House, even if they have been less than gracious in rejecting the other two.

I welcome the Government's move in the direction outlined in amendment No. 3. As the Minister said, we discussed the matter in Committee and it is right and proper to make provision for late appeals against final as well as interim assessments. We therefore welcome amendment No. 3.

I confess that I am not as technically familiar with the substance of Lords amendment No. 4 as perhaps I should be.

Mr. Crispin Blunt (Reigate) (Con): Shame.

Mr. Howarth: My hon. Friend says, "Shame." However, I understand that the amendment would inhibit to some extent some of the amazing powers that the Bill confers on the Government.

It has been an issue for all parties that the Bill is an enabling measure that confers enormous powers on the Secretary of State. I warmly welcome anything that limits the Secretary of State's powers and I therefore welcome amendment Lord No. 4.

Mr. Breed: We are happy to signal our support for both amendments.

Lords amendment agreed to.

Lords amendment No. 4 agreed to.

Committee appointed to draw up Reasons to be assigned to the Lords for disagreeing to their amendments Nos. 1 and 2 to the Bill: Liz Blackman, Mr. Colin Breed, Mr. Ivor Caplin, Mr. Gerald Howarth and Derek Twigg; Mr. Ivor Caplin to be Chairman of the Committee; Three to be the quorum of the Committee.—[Derek Twigg.]

To withdraw immediately.

Reasons for disagreeing to certain Lords amendments reported, and agreed to; to be communicated to the Lords.
 
20 Oct 2004 : Column 947
 

 
20 Oct 2004 : Column 949
 

National Service Framework for Children, Young People and Maternity

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Dr. Ladyman.]

4.7 pm

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Dr. Stephen Ladyman): Children are special and precious but, too often, we do not treat them like that and we have not designed health and social care services to treat them like that. That is why we need the national service framework for children, young people and families.

Even before the national service framework was published, there should have been no doubt about the Government's commitment to putting children and young people at the forefront of our policy agenda. We believe that every child should have the care and opportunities that they need to live healthy, safe and fulfilled lives. That is why the Government created the post of Minister for Children, Young People and Families and I am delighted that my right hon. Friend could join us for the debate.

That belief is also why we set out a comprehensive plan of action in the Green Paper, "Every Child Matters" and followed it with a series of initiatives, including the change for children programme, to begin the task of transforming services for children. It is why we have introduced the Children Bill, set ourselves the target of eliminating child poverty by 2020 and increased spending on our schools to a total of £40 billion by 2008.

That is also why we have set about producing the national service framework for children, which is a key part of our overarching agenda to generate a step change in the quality and consistency of children's services. It initiates an ambitious programme of change. It has, for the first time, set out standards for health and social care, and the interface with education for children, young people and pregnant women. This is the first time that any such thing has been attempted by any Government anywhere in the world. The attempt is so ambitious that its publication has been eagerly awaited around the world and experts have described it as the biggest step forward for children for 50 years.

This framework has not been plucked from the ether and, although politicians have guided its development, it is not exclusively the work of politicians. It is based on a huge body of evidence and best practice that has been collated for us by a dedicated team of experts and practitioners who worked on it for more than two years. It was pulled together by a superb team of officials led by Professor Al Aynsley-Green. I did my best to ensure that they were all acknowledged in the national service framework itself, but let me say again that the Government and all the children who will benefit from this work owe a great debt of thanks to all those people.

Healthy children become healthy adults. Improving the health of children is the right thing to do, but it is also the best insurance policy that we can have. Experience before birth and in early life has a huge impact on the life chances of each individual, not only in childhood but in adult life. And as healthy children start with healthy mothers, so this framework looks back to before birth to include maternity services, as well as looking forward across the transition into adult life.
 
20 Oct 2004 : Column 950
 

Of course, there is already a lot of good to be found among the existing services. The majority of children and young people today enjoy better health than any previous generation. Pregnant women have greater choice in their health care than ever before. So before I go any further, let me pay tribute to the staff working across health, social care and education for their enthusiasm and commitment to those in their care. Every day—day in, day out—they help children, care for children, and keep tens of thousands of children out of harm's way.

But we all know that there have been problems. Sir Ian Kennedy's report into the deaths of children undergoing heart surgery at Bristol and Lord Laming's investigation into the death of Victoria Climbié both revealed key failings in the care that we provide to children. Equal care and equal protection are not available for all. Inequalities affect a significant minority of children and young people. Too many face a damaged childhood, disaffection, underachievement and social exclusion. Child poverty, though greatly reduced, still adversely affects the health and opportunities of those from disadvantaged backgrounds. The difference in outcomes between those children and the successful majority is too wide. So, at the heart of this national service framework is a fundamental change in thinking about health and social care services. Its aim is to bring about a cultural shift in services, so that high-quality services are planned and delivered around the needs of children and their families, not around organisational structures or within professional boundaries.

Dr. Jenny Tonge (Richmond Park) (LD): Of course, I welcome the national service framework for children, just as I welcomed "Every Child Matters", but will the Minister assure us that this is not just writing in a book or ideas from civil servants and that it really will be implemented? Will the framework be audited regularly? Will he address the problem that was so obvious in the Victoria Climbié case, namely that we do not have enough well-trained, well-paid social workers, teachers, paediatricians and nurses working in the field with children? What are we doing to address that deficit?

Dr. Ladyman: I can give the hon. Lady the assurances that she needs. The framework will be audited thoroughly by the Healthcare Commission, which will not only look to see which parts are being implemented but ensure that all parts of the service have plans in place to complete the implementation during the 10 years of the framework's life. Later in my speech, I shall detail exactly how that will work. She is entirely right about the work force issues. That is why we have a work force strategy being implemented. We have a whole range of initiatives to increase the recruitment of social workers, to improve their status through measures such as protection of title and to improve the training and practice learning opportunities that they receive. There is a huge agenda to deal with exactly the problems that she identified.

---