Examination of Witnesses (Questions 580
- 599)
WEDNESDAY 9 FEBRUARY 2005
RT HON
MARGARET HODGE
MP
Q580 Jonathan Shaw: That "time
will tell" seamlessly brings me to the next question. Do
you plan to evaluate the role? There have been lots of concerns
from a range of different NGOs and throughout the Bill, as you
rightly said, Minister. So will you put these concerns to the
test? Will you evaluate the role of the commissioner? Will we
be able to see if there is concern about complaints not being
picked up? Will there therefore be a commitment to introduce new
powers, if that is necessary?
Margaret Hodge: I always evaluate,
always reflect, and always think about it. I am pretty certain
here though that we have actually established a much more effective
independent voice for children than the other countries have—but
that is my personal view. I have been consistent in that view
since we first engaged in that debate. I think that if we had
established a commissioner whose main focus was looking at individual
complaints, it would have been a less effective champion for children
in England.
Q581 Jonathan Shaw: One final point,
on the role of parents. You referred earlier on to parents being
central to the way that we shape our children's services. There
was an amendment to the Children Act in the Lords which was accepted
there. You were really a bit of a Johnny-come-lately, were you
not? Nevertheless, that was welcomed by people. On the issue of
the Children's Centres which will now be under local authority
control, one of the benefits, it seemed to me, is that the SureStart
centres, now to be Children's Centres, are being run by local
parents. Those parents have been able to shape those services
in accordance with their wishes and local needs. Also, and importantly,
it provides a good learning opportunity for parents to take some
control. Certainly some of the parents I have spoken to have benefited.
They have been on a range of different courses and they have started
to understand how services are delivered and how they can affect
that. Is there not a danger that, in handing it over to the local
authority, you will lose that autonomy; you will lose that creativity;
and you will lose the very point that you have said that you are
so passionate about—involving the parents? It will just
become all part of the council's services, will it not?
Margaret Hodge: No, and we will
ensure, both through guidance that we give local authorities and
the way in which we inspect and manage the performance of local
authorities, that that essential ethos of SureStart, which is
the involvement of parents in all aspects of the delivery of services
for children and families in the earliest years, is maintained.
Q582 Jonathan Shaw: How many people
have you got writing guidance in the department?
Margaret Hodge: Loads!
Q583 Jonathan Shaw: You tell us on
the one hand that you are worried about the mountain of guidance
you are giving local authorities, and then in every other sentence
you say, "We are doing some more guidance. That will sort
that out".
Margaret Hodge: We have a new
Children Act—
Q584 Jonathan Shaw: Why do you not
leave things as they are? Then you would not have to give any
guidance to anyone, and you could do the thing that you wanted
to—which is to reduce guidance. Leave parents running SureStart
Children's Centres. Let them call them what they want.
Margaret Hodge: This is a whole
system-change programme for children's services, based on that
legislative framework that we had in the Children Act. I am afraid
that, to create that whole system change right the way through,
requires much more guidance than I would wish seeing occurring.
This is why I keep saying it is a long-term programme; it is a
long-term transformation; and we have to bring those professionals
with us. Every time I get a bit of guidance, I try to cut it by
half—which is my first step in trying to minimise the burden,
but it is undoubtedly—
Q585 Jonathan Shaw: It is a bonfire
of guidance?
Margaret Hodge: You were probably
around—were you around?—at the time of the 1989 Children
Act. I assume there was a whole load of guidance that came out
of that Act, and we are basically—
Q586 Chairman: Much of which was
never implemented.
Margaret Hodge: This is going
to be implemented.
Q587 Chairman: To remain on that
track, when you evaluate the ability of local authorities to deliver
your programme, do you take into account previous work in terms
of Early Years? Because that is an area where they say nice things
about much of the Early Years investment of the Government.
Margaret Hodge: Yes.
Q588 Chairman: Yet Early Years partnerships
have been patchy, have they not, in terms of how they involve
parents and the not-for-profit sector, the voluntary and the private
sector? Too often, we noticed even when we did our report some
years ago, the local authority had to assert their chair—
to make sure that it did not get out of their control; whereas
we thought that we should have independent chairs. There was some
evidence at that time that the independent chairs were better.
Have you done an evaluation of that type—the Early Years
partnerships?
Margaret Hodge: Much of the Change
for Children Programme is built on the experience we have had
from the Early Years, where we have brought professionals together
across the divide, and where we are beginning—and only just
beginning—to see that cultural change in the way people
work on the ground with children, young people and their families.
So of course we have done that. What I would say to you, Chairman,
is I think that we will always have probably 10% of local authorities
whose performance and commitment to the ethos of the Change for
Children Programme causes us concern. I think that will probably
always be the case. But you cannot let a government policy be
driven by the performance of a minority in that way. You need
to go with a broad thrust of government policy, where we know
the majority will go with us, and then look at what levers you
can employ to bring up the performance of those people who do
not share our commitment to transforming children's services.
That is why the power to intervene, the way in which we assess,
star-rate, the way in which we encourage the money driver—all
that sort of stuff is very important.
Q589 Chairman: I want to get on to
finance for our final section, but I must say this. Evidence given
to this Committee suggests that the European Network of Children's
Commissioners believes that the powers you are giving the English
commissioner are so weak that he or she will not be allowed to
join the European Network of Children's Commissioners. That is
true, is it not?
Margaret Hodge: I would like our
English commissioner to join the European club, and I am sure
that when we have someone in post they will sort out any concern.
Q590 Chairman: Does it not cause
concern at all that they think the powers are so weak that they
will not be allowed to join?
Margaret Hodge: I do not agree,
Chairman. I think that we have established a very powerful, independent
champion for children. The proof of the pudding will be in that
record—
Q591 Chairman: Will this commissioner
have a car or a chauffeur?
Margaret Hodge: I do not have
a clue!
Q592 Chairman: Perhaps if there was
not a ministerial car, you would see more of the exploited children
that I see used as accessories to begging on the Tube.
Margaret Hodge: There is no answer
to that one!
Q593 Chairman: Join me on the Tube,
and see how ordinary people work.
Margaret Hodge: I do at weekends,
but I accept that—
Q594 Paul Holmes: In all the guidance
that you are in the process of writing for the roll-out of the
new SureStart and the expansion from 500, and so on, what is the
role of nursery schools in your guidance?
Margaret Hodge: We want to build
Children's Centres on all existing early years' provision. For
a long time, I have preached that nursery schools need to change
and transform themselves into SureStart Children's Centres. Nursery
schools provide some of the most excellent early years' education
experience that we have in the country, so we need to build on
that excellence but provide the multi-agency support for children,
going down the age range to birth. The best of nursery schools
are doing that. My own view is that if the others do not, they
will die. So they have to come on board the game if they wish
to have a continued existence in the long term—and I want
them to do that.
Paul Holmes: That is certainly consistent
with your writing to the local authorities in October 2003, saying
that. Are you concerned that there appears to be a trend developing
of local authorities closing nursery schools down, rather than
turning them into Children's Centres? For example, Slough, Bristol,
Durham, Lancaster, Oxfordshire, Rochdale, have all been closing
nursery schools down—some of them highly rated by Ofsted.
Mr Chaytor: Chairman, it is a Liberal
Democrat council in Rochdale that is doing it, of course.
Chairman: I thought that we were not
partisan!
Q595 Mr Chaytor: I thought that the
Minister might like to have that information.
Margaret Hodge: Thank you. It
is very helpful information!
Q596 Chairman: Minister, you have
a very bad effect on my Committee, I have to say!
Margaret Hodge: I think that I
have probably seen every proposal from a local authority to close
a nursery school. So we have tried to put stops in the system.
In the end it is their decision, but we have tried to put stops
in the system to encourage their evolution into SureStart Children's
Centres. In the end, sometimes because the nursery school itself
is not prepared to change, or because of the particular circumstances
in a particular locality, sadly, decisions are taken to close
nursery schools. I regret that. What I want to happen in policy
terms is for every nursery school to become a SureStart Children's
Centre.
Q597 Mr Chaytor: Minister, in your
lengthy discussions with Dr Ladyman have either of you considered
the impact of the Government's policies on choice in the acute
health sector on your efforts to bring about greater integration
in primary care?
Margaret Hodge: Yes, there are
tensions between the pressures to invest in the acute sector to
meet the Health Service performance targets and our desire to
expand community children-based services, which on the whole tend
to be around the public health agenda. That is why we have these
three very important documents—the NSF for Children, the
Public Health Service White Paper, and the Chief Nursing Officer's
review. That is why we are working with those to try to ensure
that appropriate priority decisions are taken at the PCT level
to get us the investment we need in children's services. The Health
Service has been generously funded over time. It is expanding
massively. We need to ensure that some of that expansion comes
into children's services. But it is not an easy road—I accept
that.
Q598 Mr Chaytor: If the Secretary
of State is insisting that "x" per cent of the acute
commissioning is now contracted out, this will cause enormous
problems for the budgets of primary care trusts, is it not? We
will see a huge amount of instability in the acute sector, and
this will suck resources in like never before. I just cannot see
how you can expect the primary care trusts to readjust their budgets
in the way you want to see them do so, whilst at the same time
they will be compensating for the cost of contracting out into
the private sector.
Margaret Hodge: There is a presumption
there that the choice agenda will create such financial problems
for the acute sector that it will draw in resources, which I am
sure Health Service ministers would challenge. I am not au
fait with the detail.
Q599 Mr Chaytor: The Ministers have
fixed this arbitrary percentage of acute commissioning—
Margaret Hodge: Yes, but I think
they would challenge your presumption as to whether that will
create the sorts of financial pressures that you describe. It
is something you need to take up with them.
| 
