Childcare Bill

I would like to speak to Amendments Nos. 37, 38 and 40, which are in my name and that of my noble friend Lady Walmsley. As the noble Baroness, Lady Morris, has indicated, there is a good deal of overlap between the amendments in her name and those in mine and that of my noble friend. First, I will speak to Amendment No. 37 and then pick up Amendments Nos. 38 and 40. On Amendment No. 37, Clause 8(3) makes it very clear that the role of the local authority is essentially that of the commissioner. It states:"““An English local authority may not provide childcare for a particular child or group of children unless the local authority are satisfied—(a) that no other person is willing to provide the childcare . . . or (b) if another person is willing to do so, that in the circumstances it is appropriate for the local authority to provide the childcare””." The slightly contorted words of paragraph (b) leave the definition of ““appropriate”” unclear. The purpose of Amendment No. 37 is to clarify further what is meant by ““appropriate””. It would insert:"““In subsection 3(b) ‘appropriate’ means that provision of a suitable quality and type of childcare would otherwise not be available””." As the noble Baroness, Lady Morris, pointed out, we are still left with uncertainty about precisely what ““suitable quality”” is. There perhaps is not a definitive definition, but the amendment nevertheless tries to clarify the matter a little more than the slightly contorted words of subsection (3)(b) do. Its aim is absolutely clear: if the local authority did not step in and provide suitable quality of provision, that provision would not otherwise be available in the area, and only in those circumstances would a local authority be allowed to step in and be the provider, as distinct from the commissioner of childcare. Amendments Nos. 38 and 40 address a different issue. As it stands, schools are exempt from the requirements placed on local authorities to assess what provision is available in the private and voluntary sectors. Local authorities are required to consider what provision is available in schools, but schools do not have a reciprocal responsibility. Therefore, there is a considerable risk that in setting up childcare facilities schools will duplicate existing provision, thereby undermining the sustainability of that provision, often in the voluntary or the private sector. To a degree, therefore, there is a danger that in giving schools the right to set up provision without taking account of what else is available locally, it defeats the whole object of the Bill, which is to provide a diversity of provision and a choice for parents on childcare. It is important therefore, in making a judgment about appropriate provision, that local authorities should judge childcare provided by schools in exactly the same way as they would judge those provided by other providers. In addition, it is equally important that schools play a full and vital part in local childcare planning arrangements. The two amendments seek to put schools on the same footing as other providers and not to set them apart.