| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Filkin: Yes, my Lords, the Government are aware of the problem and of the poor quality of life of young people with disabilities as they move into adulthood. The proportion of those who have their own home, or have a job or have choices over their own form of care is much lower than we believe is desirable or should be the case for the future. That is clearly why the White Paper, Valuing People, set out a range of actions to try to improve the quality of care in that respect.
Perhaps I may make two specific comments. First, we should try to determine the extent to which it is possible to provide the appropriate level of education and social care without putting people into residential schools. A number of local authorities are doing some pioneering work in that respect which may reduce institutionalisation and may increase contacts. Another element is the Connections programme, which attempts to target disabled people as needing specific support so that, wherever possible, they can obtain appropriate work when they finish their full-time education. One should not expect a transformation in either area, because these are difficult and intractable problems. But there is certainly a commitment to make progress in them.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, the Minister will agree that there is a tendency to describe improvement in terms of the amount of money that is being spent. My noble friend asked for practical examples of how the Quality Protects programme is working on the ground for children in residential homes.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, it is a good question. It may be best if I give a comprehensive reply in writing.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the Government's proposal to harmonise the two great departments of state on this issue is very welcome? However, in a sense that deals with only half
the problem. Many of the serious difficulties involved for such children lie at local level. There is no legal requirement on local departments to work together; and, often, they do not. Sometimes, they are in conflict, and the children suffer accordingly. Will the Government consider imposing a legal requirement on local departments?
Lord Filkin: My Lords, in one respect the Government have done exactly what my noble friend signals. The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 will place, from September this year, a legal obligation on local authorities not to discriminate against the needs of disabled children when making educational judgments. That is exactly the kind of thing that my noble friend was referring to. It is saying that such people cannot be given services that are second-best in quality just because they are disabled. The LEA has to seek to bend its services to meet their needs in a more committed way than might have been the case for what one hopes was a limited number of local authorities. I am certain that there are many other examples as well.
Baroness Howarth of Breckland: My Lords, is the number of children with autistic spectrum disorder who are funded by social services authorities to attend residential schools increasing or declining? Is the number of children with profound and multiple learning disabilities who are funded by social services authorities to attend residential schools increasing or declining? Do the Government have a view on whether public resources should be spent on such placements? Does the Minister agree that it is crucial to have proper statistical information in order to plan for such children for the future?
Lord Filkin: My Lords, I strongly agree with the noble Baroness's last question and I respect her considerable experience with Childline in that area. On the other two points, my recollection is that there is some increase in the number of children diagnosed with autism. The central thrust of the Government's position on residential schooling has been to enable children and their parents to sustain education and normal family life in their home area as far as possible. A number of authorities are radically reviewing their policies and practices in that respect. That is often, but not always, possible, for reasons that the noble Baroness will be aware of. In some situations, either the child's needs are too specific or the family cannot sustain the pressures that are imposed on them. Over the coming years, I expect to see more children who in the past would have gone into residential schooling being helped to stay in domestic circumstances, with the appropriate range of support.
International Campaign Against Terrorism
3.2 p.m.
Lord Judd: My Lords, in the time that remains, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.
-
To ask Her Majesty's Government what are their priorities for the next phase of the international campaign against terrorism.
Lord Judd: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that any military action beyond Afghanistan must be in the context of a clear political strategy, which must be explicitly straightforward about what is anticipated after the military action? Does she also agree that that must cover a regional approach and that the good will of, for example, Iran and Russia to whatever is proposed will be essential? Is not that why the explicit authorisation of the United Nations will be essential? How is it that some Ministers are saying that to go back to the UN is just one legal option available?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I entirely agree with my noble friend that any military action must only ever be undertaken when other possibilities have been exhausted. I also agree with the implication of his question that all such action must be taken in a way that is consistent with international law and that it must be action that could lead to a successful outcome and is commensurate with the risks posed by any country against which it is taken. Of course it is desirable that any action be taken on the widest possible consensus. Action will always depend on precise circumstances. Since no decisions have been taken to launch any military action as yet, I do not wish to add to any speculation of that nature.
Baroness Williams of Crosby: My Lords, does the Minister agree that if one of the goals of an operation is a change of regime, it is quite important to have some idea of what sort of regime might succeed the existing one? Does she also agree that to rely on very old and rather out of date United Nations resolutions is not the best way to get the moral support of the international community for any action?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, we should be very careful about the noble Baroness's second point. If we are saying that there is a sell-by date over a United Nations Security Council resolution, countries may choose to flout and ignore those resolutions. I am thinking particularly of Iraq, which has failed to comply with 24 of the 27 obligations placed on it under UN Security Council
resolutions. If countries know that they simply have to let time go by and the rest of the world will eventually say that a resolution no longer matters, we will get into a very dangerous position. I have tried to make clear the Government's absolute adherence to the principle that any such action should always be taken under the auspices of international law.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, does my noble friend acknowledge that the threats are made mostly by terrorists and that, therefore, the Government have to respond? What immediate action are the Government taking in the light of the incidents that have taken place in the past few days at Heathrow?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, we have to acknowledge that we face a range of threats. As I said in my original Answer, threats may come from organisations based in countries that would like to be able to deal with terrorists but do not have either the capacity or the skills to do so. That is a very different position from that of a country that deliberately promotes or condones terrorism as a tool of foreign policy. The Government are pursuing a number of ways of dealing with the issues. We are doing so through the European Union, through the Commonwealth and, very importantly, through the United Nations, where Sir Jeremy Greenstock, our ambassador to the United Nations, is chairing the committee on terrorism.
Business
3.7 p.m.
Lord Carter: My Lords, at a convenient moment after 3.30 p.m., my noble friend Lord Sainsbury of Turville will, with the leave of the House, repeat a Statement which is being made in another place on the Consignia restructuring announcement. It is hoped that the Statement will be repeated after the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, and before the speech of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, during the Proceeds of Crime Bill Second Reading debate.
After the conclusion of the Second Reading debate and before the debate on Afghanistan, my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton will, with the leave of the House, repeat a Statement which is being made in another place on Railtrack.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page