| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Barker: Perhaps I may detain the Committee briefly to ask one question. Am I correct in making the assumption that the definition of contact here includes things like letterbox contact and that it is not just physical contact?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The noble Earl has eloquently answered his own amendments as regards Amendment No. 66. Clause 1(7)(a) explicitly provides that all the obligations in Clause 1 are to apply where a court is deciding whether or not to make, vary or
discharge any contact order under Clause 25. So, the welfare checklist in Clause 1 would apply to a decision to make an order under Clause 25. The court would have to take account of the child's discernible wishes and feelings concerning the proposed contact arrangements and consider them in light of the child's age and understanding.As regards the second amendment, which I understand is to give the child the right to apply to the court to review any contact arrangements made through orders under this section, again the sentiment is something with which I would agree. However, the Bill provides for the child to have a direct say in his or her own right. We would expect the agency, in line with its obligations under Clause 1, to discuss any proposed contact arrangements with the child and to take his views into account in making any arrangements, formal or informal. However, in Clause 25(3) the child can apply to the court to make provision concerning contact between him any anyone named in the order. So if a child were unhappy with the arrangements made for contact, he could apply to the court to make an order changing them.
This is slightly different from what the amendment suggests, which is that the child should apply to the court for the court to conduct a review. However, it achieves the same effect in that, where a child is unhappy about how contact arrangements are going, he can take the initiative in getting them changed. In order to forestall the noble Baroness, Lady Barker,
perhaps I may say that a child with the capacity to do so could instruct a solicitor. The route is also open to the adoption agency and, if the child were very unhappy with a contact arrangement made by an order under Clause 25, it would also be open for the agency to apply on his behalf to make new arrangements rather than placing the burden on the child.
Earl Howe: Once again, that was a very illuminating reply from the Minister for which I thank him. I believe that what he has said in relation to my Amendment No. 67 covers the point fully. However, I shall read carefully what he has said in Hansard. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: We have made good progress this afternoon. This would be a convenient moment for the Committee to adjourn until Thursday at 4 p.m.
The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Dean of Harptree): The Committee stands adjourned until Thursday at 4 p.m.
- The Committee adjourned at twenty-five minutes past seven o'clock.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |