Clause 106
Education and Inspections Bill
1:45 pm
Frank Cook (Stockton North, Labour)
With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 528, in clause 106, page 78, line 29, leave out ‘Rights' and insert ‘Welfare'.
Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister (Schools), Education; Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
We tabled the amendments before seeing the draft regulations in order to probe what is envisioned by the title “children’s rights director.” Our initial concern was that the title over-raised expectations of the true extent of the functions of that post. The children’s rights director established by the clause is limited to assisting the chief inspector in three main areas. First, he is to be responsible for functions under section 87 of the Children Act 1989, which relates to the welfare of pupils at boarding schools. Secondly, he is to be responsible for functions under the Care Standards Act 2000 relating to the regulation of care homes, children’s homes, and independent hospitals, among other things. Thirdly, his functions will cover the inspection of social services functions relating to children aged under 18 and functions conferred on local authorities by the Children Act 1989. Those functions appear to be far more about welfare than about children’s rights.
The draft Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Children’s Rights Director) Regulations give the children’s rights director the functions of advising and assisting the chief inspector with all the functions that I have mentioned. When doing so, he should have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the rights and welfare of children, and to views expressed by relevant persons about activities within his remit. He is also able to inform the chief inspector of any matters that could be considered as significant to the rights and welfare of children in those three areas.
The regulations clarify the purpose of the children’s rights director, and we broadly welcome them. However, there is a risk that the role could be confused and overlap with that of the children’s commissioner established by the Children Act 2004, which is to promote awareness of the views of young people. The children’s commissioner
“must have regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child”,
and is able to initiate inquiries into children’s issues and publish them. He is charged with representing the interests, and therefore the rights, of all children. The functions of the children’s rights director are instead primarily related to the welfare of certain groups of children, particularly vulnerable children, and not with children’s rights more generally. That is why the amendment would change the title to “children’s welfare director”.
Annette Brooke (Children & the Family, Cross-Portfolio and Non-Portfolio Responsibilities; Mid Dorset and North Poole, Liberal Democrat)
I, too, had some concerns that there could be confusion about the roles of the children’s commissioner and the children’s rights director. As I understand it, in effect, the latter position already exists; I look to the Minister for clarification. Indeed, I am not even sure whether the title already exists.
I am certainly aware of the reason for all the functions. The inspection of boarding schools is important as part of the overall inspection regime. It makes sense to bring everything under one umbrella.
I reiterate that I should like to be clear about whether the children’s commissioner will work with the children’s rights director. Is there any overlap? Will we expect any communication between them? Does the commissioner have the right to get any information from the director? Has the title been used before? I agree that there is an element of confusion, as things stand, and I should like to hear the Minister fully explain the title.
Phil Hope (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Adult Skills), Department for Education and Skills; Corby, Labour)
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton for moving the amendment, which gives me an opportunity to clarify the position of the children’s rights director. I am going to argue that we do not see any benefit in changing the title, and perhaps he will be convinced of that after hearing what I have to say. I shall come on to the point that the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke) raised about relationships.
The essence of the post of children’s rights director, which is set out in the draft regulations to which the hon. Gentleman referred, is to be the voice within Ofsted of the most vulnerable children. That is the most critical function. To encapsulate all that the hon. Gentleman described, the director’s role is to be the voice of those most vulnerable children. We intend the children’s rights director to assist and advise the chief inspector with his duties, to have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the rights and welfare of children when carrying out his functions, and in particular to find out what children think about the services they receive. His function is restricted to those children in receipt of social care services—that is a crucial difference between his role in the inspectorate and that of the commissioner. He must ensure that the most vulnerable and those most are risk are protected and that those accommodated in schools and further education colleges are given a voice in the new Ofsted.
The post of children’s rights director has been in existence since 2002. Last summer, we consulted on transferring the post, at present hosted by the Commission for Social Care Inspection, to the new Ofsted as part of the wider consultation that I have already mentioned. There was great support across the piece for the transfer of the post to the new inspectorate and we responded by making a commitment to doing so. No one who responded to the consultation suggested that we should alter the title of the post, and I hope that that I have clarified its functions.
I want to make it clear that the word “rights” in the title refers to the entitlement of children to receive the services set out in legislation. I cite the example of the regulatory framework in part 2 of the 2000 Act for establishments such as children’s homes. The inspectorate’s job is to undertake responsibility for those rights.
Let me describe the relationship between the role of the children’s rights director and that of the commissioner. Each will have his own separate powers and duties as set out in the relevant measures and they will have separate, but inter-related roles, as the hon. Lady rightly said.
The children’s commissioner has been appointed to ensure that there is someone looking out for all children and young people and to see that they have access to the universal services. The children’s rights director is appointed especially to look out for the three groups of children and young people described in his duties and to see that they have access to the specialist services.
There is a relationship between the two posts and it is important that the holders work together. However, they have different functions, roles and responsibilities, which are located in different parts of the legislation. I hope that that satisfies the hon. Lady. I am happy to write to her and to other members of the Committee to spell out in more detail matters that I do not have time to explain now if that will help hon. Members to understand how the two roles differ, how they relate to one another and how they might work together or separately, depending on the circumstances.
I hope that that clarifies the position and that the hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton will therefore ask leave to withdraw the amendment.