Clause 25
Children and Young Persons Bill [Lords]
5:00 pm
Tim Loughton (Shadow Minister, Children, Schools and Families; East Worthing and Shoreham, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 20, in clause 25, page 19, line 38, at end insert ‘appropriate’.
The amendment is probing and is intended to give the Committee the opportunity to ask questions about the clause. We welcome the clause and the work that has gone into it. The measure originated with the Secretary of State who, when he was a Back Bencher, did some good work on the role of carers for disabled children and the need to give better support for carers, who are often parents or other family members, and who do a remarkable job caring for disabled children day in, day out. Many of them do so in challenging conditions, with little recognition and not nearly enough support from the state.
Without the work of those carers, the bill that would fall on the state would be considerable, let alone the additional hardship for the disabled children themselves. We owe an enormous debt of gratitude to carers, who take upon themselves, often unasked and without demurring from the challenge, the enormous role of looking after disabled children and giving them as much love and attention as they possibly can within a home environment. That is to be applauded, and we should be putting every service at their disposal, rather than putting obstacles in their way, which happens too often. It is always a great frustration to me when I am told about yet another piece of bureaucracy or yet more form filling that a carer will have to go through to get a basic entitlement for the person for whom they care.
It is welcome that the Bill includes a provision for carers to take breaks from their duties, that it recognises them in that way, and that the Government have given a sum of money for that purpose. We hope that that is only the first instalment, because this is a huge enterprise and we are talking about a large number of children and their carers. I have seen carers in my constituency for whom the odd bit of respite—it could be a weekend off or a week away, just to regain their sanity and to spend time with their partners, husbands, wives or whatever—can make all the difference. It can help them to recharge their batteries and allow them to get on with what would otherwise be the 365-day-a-year job of looking after somebody with a disability. That could provide an enormous boost and would be great for allowing people to recharge their batteries to enable them physically to be able to do the job. It is also a positive recognition that the job that they do is greatly appreciated. We should be doing more to make it easier for them to carry out their job.
The Opposition welcome the extra provisions that will enable carers to have breaks. Subsection (3) is about assisting
“individuals who provide care for such children to continue to do so, or to do so more effectively, by giving them breaks from caring”.
The amendment would simply add a rider that the breaks should be “appropriate”. Usually, people do not ask for much, but they ask for breaks at appropriate times—when pressure has built up, for example, or when they can take a whole week off. We are not talking about a couple of hours here and a couple of hours there, although some carers need such breaks. Carers simply want to know that they are entitled to breaks and that they can rely on the provision, so that they can take every Friday evening off or one Friday evening a month or whatever it might be. In any case, it must be “appropriate”. It is no good the local authority saying, “We can provide respite care for you between 2 o’clock and 6 o’clock on a Wednesday afternoon every fifth week,” or such like if that does not fit in with what the carer needs and can use.
Inserting the word “appropriate”, subject to definitions within regulations, would give that extra bit of strength to the clause. Carers would not simply get a token bit of respite, for which they are meant to be grateful, but “appropriate” respite, as far as practicably possible, so that it really makes a difference and they are in a better position to resume and continue their very important role as carers for disabled children.