New Clause 25
Children and Young Persons Bill [Lords]
2:45 pm

Annette Brooke (Shadow Minister (Children, Young People and Families), Children, Schools and Families; Mid Dorset and North Poole, Liberal Democrat)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
This amendment has also been supported by a number of organisations. I should like to make that clear from the outset. I suspect that I will be given assurances that it is all dealt with already, but the NSPCC, BAAF, Who Cares?, ChildLine and the NCB support this, so I am not alone in thinking that rather more could be done. Ever since the Sexual Offences Bill, I have had a particular interest in seeing that when a child has been sexually abused an assessment is made and therapeutic treatment is available. I have raised this on many occasions. A child who has been abused sometimes goes on to become a perpetrator. We have more and more unhappiness and misery by not addressing the situation at the time when it needs addressing. The availability of therapeutic treatment across this country is very patchy. We could prevent many tragedies if we could ensure that that treatment was available.
The amendment concerns assessment, treatment and support. My particular interest in therapeutic counselling and treatment for sexually abused children will, sadly, form part of that. About 60 per cent. of children are brought into care is because they have been abused in some way, be that physical violence, sexual abuse or other forms. That tells us quite a lot. Children who come into care have at least a 60 per cent. chance of needing some form of treatment. They often need mental health treatment.
Despite the fact that the Government have invested greatly, and I will not underestimate the extra investment, there is still a long way to go until we provide enough services. There can be a long time lag between assessment and treatment. That is critical for this group of vulnerable young people. They have already had a bad start in life. We need to be able to act to do the best that we can to remedy and make good as soon as possible
I therefore call in the new clause for an explicit duty to be placed on PCTs to co-operate with local authorities in the provision of health assessments and care to looked-after children, for assessment to be undertaken by suitably qualified and experienced practitioners and for regulations to set out in detail how joint arrangements for the individual child will be made, recorded and reviewed. I should add that 45 per cent. of looked-after children and young people aged five to 17 are assessed as having an emotional or mental health disorder, compared with 10 per cent. of the general child and young person population. Those are Government figures. Looked-after children and young people exhibit high rates of self-harm and high risk behaviour. Two thirds of looked-after children are reported to have had at least one physical health complaint. Some of those complaints are speech and language problems, and in other arenas we talk a great deal about how much such problems inhibit a child’s development.
The problem is that provision is patchy, as is working together, despite provisions that state that there should be a multidisciplinary approach and that primary care trusts should work closely with local authorities. I shall give an example from my own constituency, where local authority boundaries are not coterminous with primary care trust boundaries. That problem has been overcome with help from the Government for the council concerned. Nevertheless, I have a letter from a health service worker saying:
“It is not my responsibility in West Dorset to provide services for East Dorset children.”
Those east Dorset children have been sent to a specialist school in west Dorset. That problem has now been dealt with, but it has taken a long time and an MP’s intervention. I do not buy the assurances that “it is all happening”. We have a long way to go, and that is why the duty is important.
I have the feeling that everybody is trying to hurry me up. I am doing my best, but these are meaty new clauses. I am sure that Hansard will show that I have not had more than my fair share of time. The new clauses that I am leading on are really important to me and to all our looked-after children, and I do not want to rush through them at the cost of not making a point. I am looking for a number of assurances on how the arrangements will work. Given the intensity of the problems regarding the health of looked-after children, a duty in the Bill is called for.
