Clause 59 - Inspections
Childcare Bill
9:00 am
Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister (Schools), Education; Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 41, in page 30, line 5, at end insert—
‘(aa) must at such intervals as may be prescribed, but which should not be less than once every three years, inspect later years provision to which this section applies,’.
David Amess (Southend West, Conservative)
With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 277, in page 30, line 8, after ‘inspection,’, insert
‘and not less than every three years commencing the day after registration’.
Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister (Schools), Education; Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
The amendment seeks to prescribe a minimum period of three years between inspections of later years childminding provision—and on this occasion we do mean a minimum, and not a maximum. The point is one of staff turnover and the importance of parents having trust in the provider, and I believe that it is reasonable to require an inspection at least every three years, as in schools.
Annette Brooke (Shadow Minister, Education & Skills; Mid Dorset and North Poole, Liberal Democrat)
Amendment No. 277 has exactly the same objective as amendment No. 41. It makes sense to put something like it in the Bill. We had a prolonged debate about wording, but I think that it is right and I will be interested to hear the Minister’s comments.
Beverley Hughes (Minister of State (Children, Young People and Families), Department for Education and Skills; Stretford and Urmston, Labour)
The amendments would require all later year child care providers that are required to register with Ofsted to face compulsory inspection at least every three years. I agree that Ofsted plays an important role in assuring parents of the continuing quality of child care. However, we intend to make regulations requiring providers to demonstrate annually that they meet the requirements of the Ofsted child care register, and we think that that will ensure that safety and suitability standards continue to be met.
We are trying to strike the appropriate balance between safety, security and quality on the one hand, and a proportionate, risk-based inspection regime on the other. We have reviewed the role of inspection in delivering the best outcome for children. Ofsted will be able to inspect any providers who are on its child care register at any time, and will do so where there is concern or a complaint has been received, rather than on an automatic cycle.
Beverley Hughes (Minister of State (Children, Young People and Families), Department for Education and Skills; Stretford and Urmston, Labour)
Providers will have to demonstrate that to Ofsted every year. They will have to produce documentary and other evidence to establish that they are continuing to meet the registration requirements and Ofsted will review that information annually. That is a proportionate, risk-based approach. To inspect on a regular cycle would place a high cost and high burden on Ofsted, with no evidence of what benefits it would bring. I hope that, with those assurances, the hon. Gentleman will withdraw the amendment.
Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister (Schools), Education; Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
I am concerned about the Minister’s response. The requirement to demonstrate annually to Ofsted appears to be a documentary one: forms will be filled in and documents photocopied and dispatched. It does not seem to require any evidence that the quality of the child minding is sufficiently high. The Minister also indicated that there will be no minimum period between inspections. It could be up to Ofsted to inspect once a decade.
Beverley Hughes (Minister of State (Children, Young People and Families), Department for Education and Skills; Stretford and Urmston, Labour)
Just for clarification, we are talking to Ofsted about the way in which the scheme will operate. Ofsted will undertake a proportion of inspections randomly of those compulsorily placed on its child care register, but not of every child minder on an automatic cycle. That combination of random sampling and inspections in response to concerns is proportionate to the risks related to child minders, against whom there are few complaints, as the hon. Gentleman knows.
Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister (Schools), Education; Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
I am grateful for that intervention. I remain concerned, and the point is one that we will need to take up once the regulations are published. At that stage we can determine whether they need to be prayed against and a debate held to consider the issue more thoroughly.
My concern is that any state body naturally tends towards inertia—it is easier not to do something than to do something. That is particularly true when there are cost implications. Every inspection will cost Ofsted money, and it is under budget constraints. My suspicion is that it will be cheaper and easier not to do something than to be proactive. Unless a state body has a duty to do something, it will inevitably do less than is necessary to ensure that all child minders are inspected regularly. There is a risk that relying on random sampling and inspections when complaints arrive will make inspections less frequent than they ought to be. However, that is probably a debate for when the regulations are published, so I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.