| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
- House adjourned at twenty-seven minutes before nine o'clock.
Official Report of the Grand Committee on the
Adoption and Children Bill
Tuesday, 2nd July 2002.
The Committee met at half-past three of the clock.
The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Ampthill) in the Chair.]
Clause 13 [Information concerning adoption]:
Baroness Thomas of Walliswood moved Amendment No. 46:
- Page 10, line 32, at end insert "and his department or any other government agency designated by him shall produce an annual report to Parliament detailing such statistics as are deemed relevant and reviewing progress made on the previous annual report"
The noble Baroness said: I rise to move Amendment No. 46 in the name of my noble friend Lady Barker and myself. The amendment is to subsection (5) of Clause 13, which is concerned with ensuring that statistical and other information can be obtained by the Minister from the adoption agencies themselves and the Magistrates', County and High Court officials. Subsection (5) says that the Minister may publish abstracts of this information. Our amendment adds a requirement for the department or some other agency to produce an annual report to Parliament containing relevant statistics and reviewing progress since the previous year, which, quite plainly, enlarges upon the original requirement.
We have put down this simple amendment for four reasons. First, the Government are committed to achieve a considerable increase in the numbers adopted in any year. Parliament and the public are entitled to know how much progress is being made. Secondly, there needs to be a greater understanding of the new processes of adoption and how they are bedding down. Thirdly, there is the general principle that transparency, openness and all these wonderful things aid enormously in a practical way in that they tend to prevent people making the same mistake twice. Finally, we want to ensure that this reporting back actually occurs, and we believe that this is best achieved by putting the Government's duty in respect of the matter of reporting to Parliament on the face of the Bill. I beg to move.
Baroness Andrews: The Government have much sympathy with the intention behind the amendment. We are all for openness, we are all for statistics being available so that progress can be monitored, and we are all for government being accountable. Under Clause 13 we already have the requirement for adoption agencies and courts to give the Minister statistical and other general information relating to adoption. The appropriate Minister can use that
information for statistical and other general purposes, such as for performance management. Subsection (5) enables the appropriate Minister to publish abstracts of that information.The intention of the amendment is, quite understandably, to enlarge the clause, as the noble Baroness said, to ensure that there is transparency and accountability, that performance management structures work and that the intention of the Bill comes to fruition.
I would like to refer to what we have in terms of the four points that she made. In the Children Act report itself, which is an annual report, we have a section on adoption which brings together key analysis and information. It has a section relating to adoption statistics. The report for 2000 is currently available. The report for 2001 is just about to come out and includes, for example, information about the numbers and ages of children adopted from care, the time scales and the length of time taken to find adoptive placements. It also includes key judgments and messages from the inspections of councils' adoption services. So we have an annual report to Parliament which can also be used by practitioners and by people involved across the field in monitoring progress of that kind.
It is our intention to continue to provide that information and, to pick up on what the noble Baroness said, certainly to make sure that the next annual report—the one after the Bill becomes an Act in 2004—will reflect the changes and the improvements that will have been made as a result of the Act. We are absolutely committed to that.
One of the reasons for saying that the Children Act is a good vehicle is because it enables us to put adoption into the context of children's services as a whole and, alongside the protection of children—children in care—we can see what is being achieved through adoption. I commend that to the noble Baroness.
In addition, there is a range of dynamic statistics available—which, if the noble Baroness so requires, I will certainly write to her about—which describe these issues. They are available to Parliament, on line, in the form of different reports and inspection agreements. In the light of the debate today I can assure the noble Baroness that the next Children Act report will take into account the points that she raised.
Baroness Barker: On behalf of my noble friend, I thank the Minister for her answer. The reason for asking for this report in the amendment is that it has become clear throughout our debates so far that we are hampered by a lack of information about the current system of adoption. Furthermore, government policy making has been hampered to a large extent by a lack of information. For example, we talked the other day about the lack of a tracking system. As we have already noted in our debates, many of the children that we are talking about end up being a part of the statistics of a plethora of different services.
The intention behind the amendment is to ensure that adoption in its widest sense had a locus for one coherent analysis. My fear is that given the diffusion of services at local level—not only social services but also health and education services—somewhere along the line what is happening in the adoption processes will be lost. Were we at a different stage of the Bill we might pursue this issue. But we are not and we will of course withdraw the amendment.
However, I urge the noble Baroness to think again about the need to look at adoption in its fullest sense and in a coherent fashion—not in a way which is distinct and apart from other services, but with a very specific analysis. As we have noted time and time again in our debates, many things happen to children which, although not unique to adopted children, happen more to adopted children than to others. We are in danger of losing that somewhere along the line.
Lord Campbell of Alloway: I will be very brief. I am not quite sure about this amendment because the issue seems to be whether there should be a mandatory obligation on the Minister to produce an annual report to Parliament. There is no issue about anything that any noble Lord has said so far. I agree with it all. However, I cannot for the life of me see why, looking at subsections (4) and (5), it is necessary to put a mandatory obligation on the Minister to produce a report to Parliament. He can do it within his own remit and no doubt will do what he wishes.
Baroness David: Perhaps I may ask a question which I put down as a Question for a Written Answer. I do not know whether it would come into a report of this kind. How many adopters have been rejected in each of the past five years? I hope to receive an answer from the official quarters quite soon, but I wondered whether it was the kind of thing that would be reported, or whether it was reported in the Children Act report.
Baroness Andrews: I am grateful for the intervention of the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Alloway, and the point is well taken. In relation to the question about information relating to adopters who are rejected, we do not have that information at present and, without taking further advice, I am unable to answer it. I see that there would be difficulties under any circumstances and systems of collecting that kind of information. Perhaps the noble Baroness will allow us to come back to her on that point.
Baroness Thomas of Walliswood: Perhaps I may refer to an earlier discussion. The clause states:
- "Each adoption agency must give to the appropriate Minister any statistical or other general information he requires about—
- (a) its performance of all or any of its functions relating to adoption,
- (b) the children and other persons in relation to whom it has exercised those functions".
We have had an interesting discussion. I will read again what the Minister said in response to my original proposal and meanwhile I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 14 [Default power of appropriate Minister]:
Earl Howe moved Amendment No. 47:
- Page 10, line 34, leave out subsection (1) and insert—
The noble Earl said: Amendment No. 47 modifies subsection (1) of Clause 14. Under the existing Clause 14, when a Minister determines that a local authority has failed to comply with its duties, either under the Bill or under the Adoption (Intercountry Aspects) Act 1999, he can make an order declaring the authority to be in default. That process seems to exist quite separately from the very significant independent review of determination provisions in Clause 12.
The Bill is silent as to how the Minister might form the view that there is no requirement for him to consider the outcome of the independent review panels that he will set up. If there is to be an independent review process—and we believe, as was debated the other day, that this should be stronger and more extensive than provided for in Clause 12—it seems only logical that the review process is the best way to determine whether an authority is in default. That is what the amendment seeks to achieve.
If the Minister is not minded to look with favour on the amendment, I hope that she will say how the Government expect the process of adoption to have failed before a default declaration is made. What other considerations will lead the Minister to such a decision? I beg to move.
"(1) If as a result of an independent review any local authority is found to have failed, without reasonable cause, to comply with any of the duties imposed on them by virtue of this Act or of section 1 or 2(4) of the Adoption (Intercountry Aspects) Act 1999 (c. 18), the appropriate Minister may make an order declaring that authority to be in default in respect of that duty."
3.45 p.m.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page