---

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

My Lords, I am exceptionally grateful to all noble Lords who have contributed to the debate. I recognise the commitment and contribution they have all made during the passage of the Bill. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Mohammed, for not pursuing any of the points further, as he said.

To address the main points raised, as I said in my opening speech, I fully recognise the importance of what the noble Baroness is trying to achieve with Amendment 2 on the discharge of child protection plans. I hope I have provided reassurance that, although the statutory framework already requires robust multi-agency oversight of child protection plans, we will strengthen expectations for reasons to be recorded.

5.45 pm

To pick up on the points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Crisp, children who have previously been on child protection plans may leave their birth parents’ care, as he is fully aware and outlined in his comments, but many continue to receive support to meet their needs and support placement stability, with education being a central consideration in this. It is right, therefore, that these children are included in the consent requirement if they have been on a child protection plan in the last five years, because school can be a protective factor for these children in ensuring that they maintain stability and do not become vulnerable to other types of harm, such as extra-familial harm.

However, that said, we recognise that the child’s new carers will have been through rigorous approval processes already, and we will make clear in statutory guidance that we expect local authorities to make use of the relevant information they already hold on birth parents and adoptive, kinship or foster carers through existing assessment and approval processes to help make the consent decision. In practice, this will mean that, in most cases, the consent process is expedited for these families.

The introduction of multi-agency child protection teams will also be critical in strengthening decision-making. Going further than the amendment, the teams will make robust decisions for every child needing protection regardless of age or where they are in the system.

Extending the consent measures to children who are currently the subject of care or supervision proceedings is unnecessary. Risks to the child are managed through statutory care planning processes. The local authority will be involved with these families, and there should be either a child protection plan or a care plan in place to support the child day to day. These children would almost certainly either be caught by the Government’s proposed consent measure due to a child protection

plan or be a looked-after child and, therefore, education provision would be a matter for the local authority to decide.