UK Parliament / Open data

Childcare Bill

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hughes of Stretford (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 9 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bills on Childcare Bill.
I think the hon. Lady will agree that she is using figures up to the end of December 2004. It is the case that, as the strategy was developing, there was turbulence in the system as private providers came into being. Perhaps they did not have the sustainability and went out of business, and some child care places were lost in that sector. I have not got the relevant figures with me, but I shall ensure that the hon. Lady gets them if she does not have them; however, I suspect that the hon. Member for Wycombe (Mr. Goodman) has them. On reading those figures, she will see that since December 2004 there has been much greater stability, even in that part of the child care market catered for by private-sector providers. So there has been much greater stability not only across the board, but in that particular part of the market, in the past 15 to 18 months. The market is settling down and we are not seeing the degree of churn that existed 18 months to two years ago, to which the hon. Lady referred. That said, I am concerned about this issue. Like the hon. Lady and the hon. Member for Wycombe, we want a diverse and varied market that includes the private sector. As with the voluntary sector, where the private sector achieves good quality provision, we want local authorities to work with it to develop and grow such provision. I turn to amendments Nos. 38 and 39 and local area agreements. I appreciate the attempt to use existing levers to ensure that local authorities are working in real partnership, but there are several difficulties with citing local area agreements. First, they apply to England only; secondly, they are voluntary agreements and have no statutory basis, so we could not include them Bill. As I have hinted, because the local area agreement process does not exist in Wales, amendment No. 39 is not appropriate. A number of amendments—Nos. 5, 35, 13 and 59—deal with the ways in which local authorities relate to various groups of people who might want to use child care in their areas. On amendments Nos. 5 and 13, the child care needs of many of the carers cited is already covered by the duty on local authorities. They will be in—or be seeking to be in—employment, education or training, so they will be part of the population to whom the duty on local authorities will apply. There are also other initiatives to support carers of children or adults—regardless of whether they are in employment, education or training—through the social care and social security system: the carer’s allowance, the carer’s grant and council tax discounts. I do acknowledge that parents and carers of disabled children need breaks, and such children also benefit from new experiences and opportunities to interact with other children, away from their families. However, the point is that we do not need new legislation to achieve that. Section 17 of the Children Act 1989, and standard 8, on disabled children, of the national service framework for children, young people and maternity services, already make such provision. We must look to such measures, rather than expanding the duty on local authorities to ensure such provision for disabled families.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

443 c1000-1 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top