---

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

My Lords, I will speak in support of Amendment 221, cogently moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, to place child’s rights impact assessments on a statutory basis for the purposes referred to in her amendment.

In Committee, the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, referred to the

“shared goal of putting children’s rights at the very centre of policy-making

”.—[Official Report, 18/9/25; col. 2429.]

Last week, in answer to a question by the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, the noble Lord, Lord Hanson, described the UNCRC as

“an essential framework which will guide both Ministers and officials in drawing up the appropriate policies

”.—[Official Report, 27/1/26; col. 764.]

There is therefore no doubt about the Government’s stated intentions and commitment, but those make it only more difficult to understand why there has been a reluctance to act on the recommendations of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, as long ago as 2023, for stronger national frameworks with greater efforts to embed child rights into law by full incorporation. That would be the best way to maintain and raise standards, enhance accountability, and show that children’s rights are regarded as truly important and should have a strong influence on decision-making.

11.15 pm

The United Kingdom ratified that convention in 1991. At present, there remains a noticeable disparity between the different jurisdictions of the United Kingdom and the British Isles. As we have heard, in 2011, Wales introduced a Measure to provide that Ministers, when exercising their functions, must have due regard to the requirements of Part I of the convention and specified protocols. There was indirect incorporation by Jersey in a law passed in 2022. Scotland went further with direct and full incorporation of the convention in 2024. England is now lagging behind. In a speech in 2019, the former President of the Family Division, the late Sir James Munby, said this:

“The fact that, even now, the Convention has not been incorporated … into our domestic law says much about our systems. And it is not a matter for pride. If it is probably utopian to imagine that any Government within any reasonably foreseeable future will decide to incorporate the Convention in English law, is there any good reason why we should not, at least, follow Wales? If section 1 of the Measure is good for the Welsh—as it obviously is—then why not also for the English?”

His point has been firmly reinforced by what has happened in Scotland. The Scottish statute was described by Professor Ann Skelton, then chair of the UN committee, as one of the most impressive pieces of domestic legislation on children’s rights in the world.

I turn to the amendment. CRIAs are a necessary first step to ensure that children’s rights are not overlooked but systematically considered and upheld across all government departments, both central and local, and considered properly before decisions are finalised and implemented. That is clearly better for all concerned, rather than looking at the impact later as a voluntary, optional and sometimes rather awkward afterthought. This amendment is therefore timely.

As the noble Baroness mentioned, and as is now well known, in the report of the Covid-19 inquiry there was strong comment on the absence of child’s

rights impact assessments, which would have focused greater attention on the avoidable impacts of decisions on children’s interests and what could have been done to mitigate their potential effects. We heard much about that earlier in the day in connection with schooling. That comment led to the unambiguous recommendation in module 2 of the inquiry report that the UK Government should introduce legislation to place CRIAs on a statutory footing in England and for Northern Ireland to consider equivalent provision.

As has been said, such assessments must be seen as a powerful tool to protect the interests of children, in particular vulnerable and marginalised children. They not just uphold the interests of children but protect them and their individual rights, and do not treat them simply as objects of concern. Children’s rights should not be put into effect only partially and selectively. Assessment should be seen as central to the decision-making and of practical value. It should be seen not as another bureaucratic burden but rather as routinely manageable with a light touch, as the noble Baroness mentioned. If children’s rights are to be applied consistently, coherently and fully, they should be underpinned by statute, at least as far as this amendment would allow. We should therefore use the opportunity to implement the clear recommendation of the Covid inquiry.