Proceeding contribution from Annette Brooke (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 20 June 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Children and Adoption Bill [HL].
Children and Adoption Bill [Lords]
That is the most demeaning point that could be made in a serious debate. Conservative Members may think that this is an issue to be put out in slogans and leaflets, but I think that children’s interests come first, first and first. That was a shocking intervention that reduced the level of discussion. Children’s lives and, at the other end of the scale, relationships with parents are at stake. I want to move on to our new clause 18, which people are right to say looks prescriptive, although I have in the past argued against too much prescriptiveness. The new clause was tabled in a very different form in Committee, but was not selected because it was not sufficiently detailed. We therefore faced a dilemma, as it would have been far more appropriate to discuss the principle behind it in Committee than to do so on Report. We do not mind if the Minister ignores the detail of our proposal, but we would like him to engage with its basic concept and the need to place a strong emphasis on mediation and efforts to find solutions. The provision is not perfectly worded, but it makes provision for a risk assessment to be carried out if there is an accusation of domestic violence. It applies to parents who have reached the end of the line, cannot be reconciled and are waiting for a slot in court. Opposition Members often say that it is a tragedy that 40 per cent. of parents lose contact with their children after a dispute. If a parent has to wait a long time before their case comes to the court, they may not be welcomed by the child because there is an automatic break in the relationship. One could argue that the solution is to ensure that the case comes to court more quickly—I wish that I believed that we would achieve that in the immediate future—but the latest report by the Select Committee makes it clear that we still do not have enough full-time judges, and that there is a long time to wait. Our proposal would not kick in until it was crystal clear that the situation was intractable and that there were no safety issues.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 447 c1229-30
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Children Adoption Abuse CAFCASS Arbitration Contact orders Absent parents Families Domestic abuse Human trafficking Divorce Intercountry adoption Family law Grandparents Family proceedings Parents Parental responsibility Separation Risk assessment
- Legislation
- Children and Adoption Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-01-26 17:05:38 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_331353
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_331353
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_331353