Annette Brooke (Shadow Minister, Education & Skills; Mid Dorset & North Poole, Liberal Democrat)

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

I am sure that the Minister knows that, as a result of a constituency case, I have been trying throughout the Bill to put some protection into the system without the need for more regulation. Something has to be done, given that there was nearly an horrendous incident in Poole town centre. It may be almost an obsession, but that is not to the detriment of the point that I am trying to make.

I suspect that the Minister will say that the new clause is too airy-fairy about the conditions under which such child care is provided. However, I want parents to be informed when they deposit their children with the provider of any form of child care, perhaps by a notice on the wall, that the carer is not regulated or registered. Parents should know exactly the terms under which children are being cared for.

In an open and competitive market, child care providers who are fully registered will automatically provide such information; it will be to their advantage to give parents the fullest encouragement to leave their children there. However, we have such a long list of exemptions that I believe that it would be right to require providers to tell parents, in some form or other, that they are exempted. They may also wish to say, “Nevertheless, all our staff have x, y and z qualifications.” It would be open to the provider to decide what additional information to give. That might be another safeguard to help deal with a situation that I have described many times before.

Maria Eagle (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Children and Families), Department for Education and Skills; Liverpool, Garston, Labour)

I was puzzling over the wording of the new clause when preparing for the debate. The hon. Lady uses the word “conditions”. Under the new clause, providers of early years child care would have to inform the parents of children in their care of the conditions under which the care was provided.

In the Bill, “conditions” has a particular meaning. It is used to describe the restrictions that can be placed upon carers in order for them to be registered. It may include requirements relating to the applicant, the premises or the care arrangements, including the hours of operation or the number and ages of the children cared for. It seems clear from what the hon. Lady said that that is not what she means. Introducing a different meaning to a word that already has a particular meaning would cause ambiguity, and I am sure that she does not seek that.

I agree with the hon. Lady that, when parents leave their children in the care of others, they will want to know that the children will be safe and well looked after and that certain standards will be met. Information about the conditions attached to the registration will enable parents to raise issues with the   provider and even to make formal complaints to Ofsted should they see those conditions being breached or not being met.

The current regulations require Ofsted to issue a certificate of registration confirming that the provider has met the standards for registration. In addition to the name of the provider, the certificate has to contain the address at which the care is to be provided as well as any specific conditions—I intend the meaning in the Bill—that are applicable to the registration. Typically, those include the hours of opening and the number and age of children that can be cared for.

We will continue that requirement in the regulations to be made under the Bill. The new regulations to govern providers’ activities will also require that the certificate must be displayed for parents to see. That will go some way towards meeting the hon. Lady’s aims, although it will not deal with those who are not registered—who perhaps do not have to be registered. However, it will mean that that information will be displayed for parents to see. If it is not there, they will know that it is not a registered setting. In a sense, that meets the requirements that she seeks to make with her new clause. Despite having some sympathy with her reasoning and regarding the constituency case that she talked about, which has given rise to the new clause, the use of the word “conditions” makes the meaning so ambiguous that it would not be very sensible to accept the new clause. I hope that on the basis of that explanation the hon. Lady can see that we are going three quarters of the way to meeting the requirements that she seeks to place in the Bill and that she will therefore be happy not to press her new clause.

Annette Brooke (Shadow Minister, Education & Skills; Mid Dorset & North Poole, Liberal Democrat)

I have spoken a great deal about the training and professional development of child care workers. I am beginning to feel that Members of Parliament might need some training in the writing of new clauses and amendments. I wrote the new clause in—I hope—fairly clear English, and I did not anticipate that the wording would be perfect but I wanted to ensure that the matter was thoroughly discussed. I thank the Minister for her comments; both Ministers have been very understanding about the point that I have been trying to make about all the child care settings that are not registered and the fact that parents do not know that they are not registered. I am still deeply concerned about that, but I have received some reassurance. I got the greatest reassurance from when we were talking about the advice and information that local authorities will be required to give to parents; that will probably be the crucial area. I hope that this issue will be picked up in relevant regulations, so that that information is available for parents.

I anticipated that I would withdraw the motion because I tabled it simply to make this specific point, but I would like the Minister still to consider how parents will know about all the exemptions, and whether they will assume that there is more safeguarding of those settings in the Bill than there is. I am still concerned about the problem, but I have raised the issue in every relevant part of the Bill that I could find. I think that raising it in relation to the   information that local authorities will give has been the most profitable such area. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.