---

Child Protection

It would have been much better if the hon. Gentleman had decided to speak in this debate instead of just intervening from the Front Bench. We might then have thought that his commitment on these issues was serious rather than just posturing. I made the following clear to him in a letter on 18 November:"““You may be aware that the Information Commissioner took a decision on a request to make available a Serious Case Review in 2006. This risk was one of the considerations taken into account by him in that case.””" I made it clear in that letter, and in the House, that based on that 2006 ruling and our judgment concerning the safety of children, we would not publish the serious case reviews. I wrote to him again a week and a half later—[Interruption.] The issues being raised in this debate are intended to divert attention from the real issues. My letter of the 28 November to the hon. Gentleman says:"““I have not claimed to have done so””—" that is, to go to the information commissioner for a ruling. It continues:"““Nor do I intend to do so. It is my judgment, consistent with Working Together to Safeguard Children, that it is imperative to keep the SCR confidential””" That judgment is shared by the NSPCC and the deputy children's commissioner. We should not be playing politics with this issue. We are doing the right thing for the safety of children, and the Conservatives' persistent attempt to find a political difference is at the expense of that safety, which is why I reject their arguments outright.