|
Mr. Roger Williams: I enjoyed the Under-Secretary's explanation about how the amendments came into place. I have heard about devolution through stealth, but never of devolution through mishap. The Bill, as put forward by the Government in its original form, would have given more powers to the Assembly, which we would have welcomed. Indeed, if it were pushed to a vote now, some hon. Members and I would vote for the Bill as it stands, rather than for the Government's amendments. We are disappointed that they have again put aside progress in terms of the devolution settlement. Although we shall accept the amendments in the end, we shall do so with great disappointment.
Hywel Williams: To follow on from what the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire said, as the Bill stands, the National Assembly would have responsibility for non-devolved matters, such as police and probation. However much we on these Benches would like to agree to that, we can see the Government's point of view. That highlights the serious issue that has been behind a number of other discussions that we have had on this Bill in respect of Wales—the split between England and Wales and the Government's apparently sometimes slightly imperfect understanding of the devolution settlement. We could, as the hon. Gentleman said, oppose the amendments. We are somewhat depleted, so we shall not do that. The Under-Secretary is genial and, in this case, modest, and I was in the same position—perhaps even more so—earlier on. I shall leave my comments there.
Mr. Touhig: I thank the hon. Gentlemen for their comments and I recognise, as I know that they do, that we cannot remake the devolution settlement every time we come to pass additional legislation. However, I give the undertaking that, having agreed this with our colleagues in the Assembly, if there is any way in which it can be improved we shall consider it.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 21, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Column Number: 228
5 pm
Clause 22
Responsibility for functions under section 21
Amendments made: No. 146, in
No. 147, in
clause 22, page 17, line 10, leave out 'that section' and insert 'those sections'.
No. 148, in
clause 22, page 17, line 14, leave out 'section 21' and insert
'sections 21 and (children and young people's plans: Wales)'.—[Mr. Touhig.]
Clause 22, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 23
Arrangements to safeguard and promote welfare: Wales
Amendment made: No. 149, in
clause 23, page 17, line 37, at end insert—
'( ) the British Transport Police Authority, so far as exercising functions in relation to Wales;'.—[Mr. Touhig.]
Clause 23, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 24
Information databases: Wales
Amendment made: No. 205, in
clause 24, page 20, line 7, at end insert—
'(11A) Regulations under subsection (1)(a) and (5) may only be made with the consent of the Secretary of State.'.—[Margaret Hodge.]
Clause 24, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 25
Establishment of LSCBs in WAles
Amendments made: No. 150, in
clause 25, page 20, line 39, leave out from 'trust' to 'in' in line 40 and insert 'providing services'
No. 206, in
No. 151, in
clause 25, page 21, line 12, after 'establishment', insert 'and operation'.—[Mr. Touhig.]
Clause 25, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 26 and 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
<<229>>Clause 28
LSCBs in Wales: supplementary
Amendment made: No. 207, in
clause 28, page 22, line 16, at end add—
'(3) The Assembly must obtain the consent of the Secretary of State before giving guidance under subsection (2) at any time after the coming into force of any of paragraphs (a) to (c), (f) or (g) of section 25(3).'.—[Mr. Touhig.]
Clause 28, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 29 to 34 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Schedule 3
Advisory and support services for family proceedings
Mrs. Brooke: I beg to move amendment No. 199, in
schedule 3, page 42, line 7, at end insert—
'In section 12, in subsection (1), after ''in respect of family'', insert ''or immigration''.'.
I realise that it is late, but this is a probing and serious amendment, which seeks to test the Government's intentions to provide in this Bill and through the most appropriate existing legal framework a statutorily appointed guardian for all unaccompanied and separated children in the United Kingdom, particularly, although not exclusively, those seeking asylum. It also seeks to ensure that the welfare needs of these children are properly safeguarded within the context of their status, as determined by the immigration authorities and the courts, and to ensure that the support and care needs of this especially vulnerable group are met by all agencies charged with those functions.
The Committee has not passed earlier amendments to provide safeguards for asylum-seeking children, so in many ways the concept of a children's guardian becomes all the more timely and necessary. It is important to appreciate that the number of new asylum claims from unaccompanied children aged 17 and under, excluding age-disputed cases, was, according to Home Office statistics, 725 for the first quarter of 2004 and 585 for the second quarter. We really are talking about large numbers of children.
''Every child matters'' identifies unaccompanied children as the ''most vulnerable,'' and specifically asks how we can improve support for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, building on the work of the
Column Number: 230
children's panel. The Bill does not answer that rather difficult question, and the amendment would offer a solution or at least open the debate on what the solution might be. It is quite clear that a full model of guardianship would need to be worked out carefully and backed by detailed research to ensure a best-practice model that worked in the context of the UK.
The children's panel is often quoted as providing a guardianship role for unaccompanied children in the UK, but many professionals believe that that is a misconception. The panel has, without a doubt, played an important role, but the question is whether that is enough. Are these very vulnerable children accessing services in the way that they need to so that they are given the utmost protection after they have reached this country? I believe that we are all concerned about these children receiving that utmost protection while they are here. Will the Minister say what consideration has been given to developing the role of the children's panel to include that of a guardian?
Margaret Hodge: Because of an imminent vote, I must say that we had a lengthy debate on this point, and although I am happy to talk to the hon. Lady outside the Committee, I simply say to her now that unaccompanied asylum-seeking children are covered by the Children Act 1989, so they have the same protection for ensuring their safety. I accept that they are a vulnerable group, which is why all the things that I discussed this morning are central to ensuring that they are properly safeguarded when they are in this country.
Mrs. Brooke: I will accept the Minister's offer to discuss the matter further outside the Room. I sincerely believe that we need to discuss this issue further and develop the role of the children's panel. I know that several professionals in the field are working on this concept right now, so we are back to the assurance that there will be further discussion, albeit informally. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Schedule 3 agreed to.
Clauses 35 and 36 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Column Number: 231
The following Members attended the Committee:
Roe, Dame Marion (Chairman)
Brooke, Mrs.
Clappison, Mr.
Coaker, Vernon
Dawson, Mr.
Fitzsimons, Mrs.
Hodge, Margaret
Irranca-Davies, Huw
Ladyman, Dr.
Laing, Mrs.
McDonagh, Siobhain
Mole, Mr.
Morgan, Julie
Munn, Ms
Palmer, Dr.
Ruffley, Mr.
Tami, Mark
Taylor, Ms Dari
Touhig, Mr.
Turner, Mr. Andrew
Williams, Hywel
Williams, Mr. Roger
|
