Childcare Bill

I am still finding the burdens of parenthood quite demanding enough. All Members of the Committee recognise the vital role of grandparents. Indeed the Grandparents’ Association, which has been mentioned—I had not realised that the noble Baroness, Lady Howarth, was there at its act of creation—has in the past been funded by my department. I hasten to add, in case the noble Baroness, Lady Morris, thinks that we are seeking to nationalise grandparents, that nothing could be further from our objectives. However, we have sought to foster the work of the Grandparents’ Association and others who seek to promote the interests of that vital part of our society. Some figures were given earlier about the prevalence of care by grandparents. I have a more up-to-date survey carried out by my department last year, the parents’ needs survey, which showed that 26 per cent of families reported using grandparental care within the previous week. I cite that survey because it is from last year and shows a very high level of reliance on grandparents, for all the reasons that the noble Baronesses, Lady Massey and Lady Walmsley, rightly set out. That shows that there is no evidence whatever of a decline in the use of grandparents, despite the big increase in the provision of childcare and state support for childcare. The noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, said that he thought that there might be a haemorrhaging—I think that that was his word—of grandparents and wider kinship relations for care. We see no evidence at all for that. On the contrary, we see the increase in the availability of childcare going alongside the vital role that kinship care provides, not least in enabling more parents to get to work, which we regard as a worthwhile activity if that is what they want to do. We see no adverse impact on kinship care. However, most of the concerns of the noble Lord are met in the Bill and our wider support for childcare, including support for parents and other relatives. In the first place, local authorities will necessarily take into account family carers in fulfilling their Clause 1 duties to improve the well-being of young children and to reduce inequalities between them through integrated early childhood services. We have specifically included services such as family support and parenting services in the definition of early childhood services to be secured effectively in Clause 2 because we recognise the importance of helping families to establish strong, supportive relationships. It is these services which local authorities and their partners must plan and deliver in integrated ways that maximise access and the benefits in their localities. Implementation of these duties through the expansion of children’s centres will extend services for family carers, such as drop-in facilities and support. Children’s centres focus on the child and how their services can achieve the aim of improving children’s well-being, regardless of the precise family relationships of the participants. In some areas, there are also examples of good practice where local authorities have developed services specifically targeted at members of extended families, such as grandparent and toddler groups, and included grandparents in parenting classes. I am told that Essex and Hertfordshire, to name just two authorities, do this effectively. Lessons learnt from this experience will be emphasised in the children’s centre practice guidance when it is updated later in the year. We are also funding a number of organisations through my department’s Strengthening Families Grant programme which work with extended and wider family groups. After Adoption, for example, works to stabilise the dynamics in adoptive families and help them to establish strong family relationships. Another project we are supporting with the National Deaf Children’s Society is aimed at identifying the specific needs of fathers and grandparents of deaf children, to help them build family relationships that support deaf children. Particularly relevant here is the Strengthening Families Grant funding of the Family Rights Group which also works in partnership with the Grandparents’ Association. It is currently looking at the role of the wider family, including the rights and responsibilities of grandparents and other relatives and friends who provide childcare. The Family Rights Group is particularly concerned with relatives and friends who take on the care of children where there are child welfare and protection issues in the parents’ home, to take up a point mentioned by my noble friend Lady Massey. The Family Rights Group expects to publish guidance for such families in the summer of 2006, and we wish to give that guidance prominence. I should also mention the Respect Action Plan on which I have exchanged views in the Chamber with the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne. It has £70 million for projects to support families, particularly parents, in fulfilling their responsibilities. I turn now to the effect of the amendments. On the duty to secure sufficient childcare, the effect would be to require local authorities to include family arrangements in the assessment and securing of childcare. We agree that for local authorities to establish parents’ needs and identify gaps in the childcare market, they must assess the full extent of those needs, including any which are currently being filled by family carers purely because parents feel they have little choice of available childcare. However, inclusion of family childcare in the duty under Clause 6 would also mean that local authorities would be required to secure sufficient of this type of childcare to meet parents’ needs. That is clearly a nonsense in the circumstances since there is no way that the state can act to secure sufficient care by family members. The duties proposed for local authorities rightly, in our view, focus on formal, registered childcare to meet the needs of parents to enable them to work, or to train for work, and in particular those on low incomes or with disabled children. They deliberately do not extend into family provision. That is because we know that the dynamics of the childcare sector, with set-up and other costs, mean that formal childcare for these groups tends to be under-supplied and that meeting these needs will be vital in improving outcomes for those families who are most in need. The amendment would also bring family carers within the powers of Clauses 8 and 13. Clause 8 gives local authorities powers to give assistance, including financial assistance, to childcare providers; Clause 13 requires them to provide information, advice and training to registered and school-based childcare providers and allows them to do so for other providers, permitting them to make reasonable charges for this support. If the noble Lord’s intention is to require local authorities to provide support to relatives providing childcare, under the Bill, family members would need to be registered or to intend to register in order for this duty to be triggered.