---

Children and Young Persons Bill [HL]

When we discussed this amendment in Grand Committee, my name was attached to it. The fact that it is not tonight does not mean that I have lost interest or do not support the amendment, but last week’s goings-on were so complicated that one way or another I did not put my name on it again. I support it as fervently as I did when we first discussed it. I share with the noble Baroness, Lady Morris of Bolton, the view that the Minister was right when he said: "““In determining the appropriate level of support for each child, we should not have a single, automatic response to cover all situations””.—[Official Report, 17/1/08; col. GC 603.]" However, he will notice that the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Rix, is cleverly written and gives the local authority an opportunity not to take the child into care if that is not in the best interests of the child or if it is perfectly clear that the child will have plenty of visits from its parent, keep contact with its family and have the protection that those visits will give it. What particularly concerned the noble Lord, Lord Rix, and me in that debate on 17 January was that the Minister, on further questioning by the noble Lord, suggested that children considered to be in care in these sorts of placements might have visits only once every six months. Neither of us felt that that would be quite enough for such needy children who were a long way from home. I do not know whether the Minister can give us any comfort on that, but that suggestion did not seem to be sufficient protection for a particularly vulnerable child, who not only cannot protect himself or herself but may not even be able to communicate with anyone, apart perhaps from very close family, if any abuse is taking place. Although staff in many of the establishments where these children are placed are absolutely wonderful and are saints, there are a very few awful cases, and it is from those cases that we have to protect children. So I very much support the noble Lord, Lord Rix, in bringing back this amendment and having another go.