Clause 11 - Duty to assess childcare provision
Childcare Bill
4:00 pm
Annette Brooke (Shadow Minister, Education & Skills; Mid Dorset and North Poole, Liberal Democrat)
In some ways it is fortunate that we might not remember all the words of the hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton (Mr. Gibb), because that allows me to be repetitive without having to apologise. There are similarities, as we said this morning, between the Conservatives’ amendments and amendment No. 272, which I wish to address. We have exactly the same objectives and those are echoed by some of the major organisations.
The purpose of amendment No. 272 is fairly clear: it is to ensure that the regular child care assessments that the new duty would oblige local authorities to carry out would include an assessment of parents’ demand for child care, both met and unmet, as well as of local child care provision. We have already heard that it is important to consider both supply and demand. I should like to add to this morning’s comments by saying that I welcome the proposals under clause 12 on the children’s information service and the idea that a local authority has to be proactive, possibly by engaging in outreach work to identify additional demand. There is a case for demand to be mentioned in the Bill.
Amendment No. 271, which was also covered towards the end of this morning’s debate, seeks to include quality in the definition of sufficiency—that is to say that the criteria should include an assessment of the quality of child care provision available. We debated the matter at great length under clause 6 and I remain unconvinced that it should not be the local authority’s duty to have anything to do with quality. We are aware that Ofsted will be involved, and although it can—and might well—be called in to make an inspection, inspections will generally take place once every three years.
It does not seem to me unreasonable to include quality as a criterion. It is difficult to define, but I am minded to say to the Minister that I am sure that precise definitions could be included in guidance. It is not our job, we are told, to write the guidance. We will read it in the Library in due course, when we notice that it has arrived. I cannot accept the argument that the fact that there is no definition of quality in the Bill is a reason for not accepting the amendment. Quality is an established concept in child care and early years provision, and part 3 of the Bill does take on the issue of quality in an important manner. Everyone is agreed that we are not talking just about the quantity of child care. Quality is of great importance and will be the real determinant of the future development of children who have benefited from child care.
When a local authority is in a commissioning role and it has the job of mapping out the child care that is available locally, it is all-important to include quality in the mapping. As a minimum, that could mean a reference to the latest Ofsted inspections, but I hope that it would go further. As I have explained several times before, I am keen on self-evaluation quality assurance, and the mapping could make reference to that, indicating which providers had, for example, achieved various awards in that sphere. The approach could be quite simple. The definition of quality would need to be worked up between local authorities and the main providers. I ask the Minister seriously to consider including quality in this part of the Bill, because the issue returns again and again; the use of the term “sufficiency” has a clear quantitative element. Yet in the sphere that we are considering, of all spheres, quality is all-important.
I should like my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire (Mr. Williams) to speak to amendment No. 304, which relates specifically to Wales.