Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have to reform
the system of children’s care homes.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Education () (Con)
My Lords, we want all looked-after children to live in stable,
loving homes where they are safe and cared for. We are taking
forward the commitments already made to improve the quality and
consistency of safeguards across residential settings through new
standards of care; to develop a new financial oversight regime
for the market; to increase provision; and to take steps to
ensure a stable and skilled children’s home workforce.
(Lab)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for her Answer. What is obvious, I
am afraid, is how desperately unambitious the Government have
been in reforming a broken system. In spite of the commitment of
all who work in this area, it is a system that adversely affects
the life chances of the most vulnerable children in our society.
Is the Minister aware, as reported in the Observer on 8 October,
that the 20 largest private operators of children’s homes, 10 of
which have private equity or sovereign fund ownership, made a
£300 million profit—I repeat: £300 million—last year, at the same
time as local authority spending was being squeezed? Does the
Minister agree that this is just plain wrong? What urgent steps
will the Government take to stop so obvious an outrage happening
again this year?
(Con)
I do not accept the noble Lord’s assertion that the Government’s
plans are unambitious, but I do recognise some of the concerns he
raises about profiteering, which, as he knows, we would
distinguish from being profitable. We are particularly concerned
about those larger providers which have complex and sometimes
very opaque ownership structures. That is why we want to bring
much greater transparency to the market.
(Con)
My Lords, will my noble friend look very favourably on the work
done by local authorities for looked-after children? Will she
ensure that in the Autumn Statement sufficient resources are
available for the excellent work they do? Have the Government
ever looked at the possibility of extending looked-after care
beyond 18?
(Con)
The noble Baroness will be aware that in some cases there is a
duty of care up to age 25 for children who have certain special
educational needs and disabilities. I share my noble friend’s
gratitude for local authorities and the work they do in this
area.
(CB)
My Lords, the Minister understands that many local authorities
rushed into outsourcing these services. They then quickly
discovered that not only were they facing increased demands, but
the new providers could set their fees wherever they wanted and
could select whichever young people they wanted. One of the
terrible results of this is that young people are being placed in
hugely distant parts of the United Kingdom and are losing contact
with their extended family, their schools and their friends.
Would the Minister consider setting up a review of the current
situation in residential childcare so that we can do better for
the most vulnerable young people?
(Con)
I absolutely accept that far too many children who are in
children’s homes—around two-thirds last year—were placed outside
their local authority area. Obviously, I enormously respect the
noble Lord’s expertise in this area. I hope he would agree with
me that we have done a lot of reviewing. We are doing a lot of
consulting, and we are very focused on growing the response from
foster carers and increasing that part of the market,
particularly in relation to kinship care, which I think the House
believes may be the best solution for many of these children.
(LD)
My Lords, in understanding that certain of these firms that are
running children’s homes are making an excessive profit, would it
not be a good idea if we addressed one of the accepted problems
with the childcare system: the transition to adult life? If
services were required to give active support to these
individuals, we might have fewer problems carrying on, and we
would make sure that this transition to being an independent
person is easier. There is the money there because there is an
excessive profit. Surely it should be used for this.
(Con)
To be fair, we need to be careful not to generalise too much. We
have had some egregious examples, of which the most notable
recently was the Hesley Group, with terrible abuses happening in
children’s homes. We also have some very high-quality providers
which are focused on many things, including the transition to
which the noble Lord refers.
(Lab)
Local authority budgets are absolutely squeezed; profiteering is
eye-watering; there are reports of horrendous abuse; and
vulnerable children are being sent half way across the UK. What
will the Government do to end the profiteering and ensure that
children in care receive the best the system can offer?
(Con)
I have already talked about the change to the financial oversight
that we want to bring in the children’s social care market. The
noble Baroness will also be aware that we are introducing a
regional model for providing homes for children and we are
working with partners both within the sector and in health and
justice to co-design this. We will be piloting two regional care
co-operatives, which we hope will rebalance that power dynamic
between the providers and the local authorities.
(Con)
For those who were fortunate enough to grow up in a Sheffield
City Council children’s home at a time when councils had
children’s departments, the input of private equity into this
sector is totally wrong. It sends all the wrong messages, and it
also prevents integrated care between a local authority and the
homes that are provided. All of this about loving care is,
frankly, nonsense. What are needed are decent homes, and the
realisation that some children actually like living in a
children’s home, as I did, because it provided security and a
good environment. Can we look at chasing private equity out of
the system?
(Con)
I thank my noble friend and have great respect for him sharing
his own experience from Sheffield. The reality of our situation
today is that just over 80% of children’s home places are
provided by the private sector, so we need to make sure that the
sector is resilient. We are working on this in a number of ways,
including increasing funding and provision, and reform, before we
chase people out in a way that could destabilise provision.
(CB)
My Lords, would the Minister accept thanks for having mentioned
kinship care, which is a very important part of dealing with this
problem? Could she also tell us when the Government’s kinship
care strategy, which has been trailed umpteen times, is actually
going to see the light of day?
(Con)
We are going to publish the long-awaited kinship care strategy by
the end of this year, which will set out our national direction.
Over the next two years, we will establish a new kinship carer
training offer, with an investment of over £45 million to begin
implementing practical and financial support packages, so that
children can stay safely within a kinship group.
(Lab)
My Lords, for many years, I served on a fostering panel in my
local authority. Research shows that, for various reasons,
children in care homes have a higher rate of mental health
problems. We always put that down to the shortage of funds in
local authorities; does the Minister agree? For the last 10 years
or so, local authorities have experienced something like 50% cuts
to their funding.
(Con)
I do not agree with that. While I agree that children in care
homes potentially have more severe mental health issues, I think
that, typically, children who go into a care home have also
experienced severe neglect and abuse, and have more complex needs
than those who are fostered.
(CB)
My Lords, what efforts are the Government making to support a lot
more foster carers?
(Con)
The Government are making a great deal of effort in this area. We
are investing over £27 million, in this spending review period,
in a foster care recruitment and retention programme. That will
start in the north-east, with £3 million for a pathfinder hub;
the additional £24 million will be for a wider rollout.
