Supplementary evidence from the Ministry
of Justice and the Department for Education following the evidence
session on 26 April 2011 (FC 74)
In oral evidence Mr Loughton told the Comittee
that:
"...certainly the number of children in care
about whom the courts have then upheld that was the right decision
would suggest that perhaps more children should have come into
the care system pre-Baby Peter than actually did."(Q323)
Could the Department confirm which figures the
Minister is referring to?
Prior to Baby P, in roughly 9 out of 10 cases, the
courts made an order (ie to take the child into care, adoption,
or place with a relative etc).
The Ministry of Justice has no evidence to suggest
that the proportion of orders made has decreased in the post Baby
P cases (and the Cafcass study backs this up).
This generally indicates that local authorities were
therefore right to bring these applications to court, but that
perhaps there were cases pre-Baby P which should have come to
court but didn't.
The Review of Child Care Proceedings System in England
and Wales (2006) found that in relation to section 31 child care
proceedings "in 7% of cases applications are withdrawn, no
order is made, or an order of 'no order' is made". Therefore,
roughly speaking, the court will support around 90% of applications
made to it. With the costs of court proceedings, including staff
resources, it would clearly not make sense for the Local Authority
(LA) to take forward proceedings unless they felt it was correct
to do so (as part of their statutory duty towards children) if
an alternative solution could be found allowing a child to stay
with its parents. In addition the LA will then face the costs
of supporting the child in relation to the order made eg taken
into LA care accommodation, so again it is not in the interests
of the LA to take children to court unnecessarily.
June 2011
| 
