Clause 3 - Review of exercise of functions of Assembly and other persons
Children's Commissioner for Wales Bill
9:30 am
Mr Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley, Conservative)
I hope that the hon. Gentleman's interpretation, which is also mine, is the right one, but I have been here long enough to know that what is intended in legislation is not always achieved in practice. We look to the Minister for reassurance. I admit that I did not exactly remember that, but a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since Tuesday. We have even had a mini Government reshuffle, so goodness knows what may happen between today and our next sitting. We look forward to the next exciting instalment.
If that is the case, I am happy to accept amendment No. 46, because the non-devolved areas are important. Having a body to which to report is important. We know from the Government of Wales Act 1998 that the Assembly can consider anything that affects Wales, whether devolved or not. That is right and as it should be.
There are a couple of areas that are non-devolved on which the Children's Commissioner might wish to comment, and amendment No. 46 would allow him to do so. One is the Child Support Agency, which was mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for North Dorset on Tuesday. I suspect that the legislation establishing the Child Support Agency will not go down in history as the best ever enacted. In its general thrust and ethos it had the support of both sides of the House, but I suspect that a fair whack of most hon. Members' surgery cases will concern the CSA. Some are complete horror stories. It is not simply a case of whether the mother or father has been disadvantaged by the CSA—I have had a fair whack of both—but that the child may become the victim.
The CSA has resulted in a bureaucratic nightmare, and I am sure that in Wales as in England some cases have taken months to be dealt with properly, and, even if they are dealt with properly, whoever pays the child support may find that he or she has had a bundle of paperwork from the CSA and in virtually every letter the amount of money requested from the parent has differed, so that there has been no stability.
Then there is the angst, which is something that the Children's Commissioner might want to consider, felt by the parent who, because of the considerable amount that he or she is required to pay by the CSA, feels that he or she does not then have enough money to be able to give to the child personally. That parent may want to take the child out for a treat, but, because of the amount of money already paid—I am avoiding referring only to one parent because either might be involved—cannot do so, and, as a result, feels deficient as a parent.
The problem is not simply one of bureaucracy or inefficiency, or that people have to speak to somebody different each time they telephone, who has to acquaint himself with all the paperwork involved in that child's case, but that there is no continuity for the parent. The Children's Commissioner might want to consider the whole aspect of how the CSA is working and to make recommendations to the National Assembly for Wales. Under amendment No. 46, Peter Clarke would be able to do so.
If several parents wrote to the Children's Commissioner about cases similar to those to which I have referred, he might want to get involved in the Child Support Agency. Would he be within his rights either to investigate single cases of how people were treated or to consider in general how the agency worked and impacted on children in Wales? Would he be able to make recommendations to the National Assembly for Wales, and would the Assembly be within its rights to make its own recommendations under the Government of Wales Act, as it did on the position of Children's Commissioner itself? I assume that Ministers and the Assembly would then negotiate over any legislation that might be introduced to help to solve the problems mentioned in the commissioner's report.
The commissioner would need financial support if he became involved in the Child Support Agency, because the funding mentioned would be totally deficient. The area is a hornets' nest, and when he solves one problem many others will emerge. If the commissioner makes recommendations in relation to the agency in Wales, cross-border problems will also emerge, so we should sort out the English aspects of the legislation at the same time.
A child whose parents live separately in England and Wales may flit back and forth—hence the need for the word ``ordinarily'' in the amendment, as we discussed earlier. Someone will have to adjudicate on whether agency legislation differs between Wales and England—which could easily be the case, as we have already debated legislation that differs in that way. We have been told, simply, that such differences are a good thing and what devolution is all about, because Wales and England can do what they like. However, that may have an impact on clients, customers, taxpayers and British citizens. One can imagine that there might be problems in cases such as I have described, where parents live separately in England and Wales. Who would adjudicate in such a case? Which rules would govern—those for Wales or those for England?
Another non-devolved area is home affairs. What will be the position of the commissioner in relation to children in youth detention? He may be barred from discussing anyone within the court system, but I assume that he is not barred from commenting on how the court system operates—not on individual cases, but on how it treats children generally. For example, a 17-year-old with a car living in a border area may have committed crimes in England and Wales. If the Children's Commissioner made recommendations for changes in the way in which children were treated in Wales, the court system might change and the law might be different in England; in such a situation, someone would have to adjudicate. Children are presumably treated differently from adults in courts—I suspect that there are already differences.
What would the consequences be for those non-devolved matters if amendment No. 46 were adopted? In the light of what the Minister says, the hon. Members for Bridgend and for Cardiff, North may want to comment, and we shall then decide on our approach.