I am grateful to Members of the Committee for raising the issue of guidance, which is a crucial element in the implementation of the new duty in making it clear to the UK Border Agency, our customers and other bodies with whom we work what the duty means in practice. I am glad to have the opportunity to discuss this more fully.
Clause 51(3) requires a person exercising the immigration, asylum, nationality or customs functions in subsection (2) to have regard to any guidance given by the Secretary of State for this purpose. Subsection (5) requires the same of anyone exercising a function of the Director of Border Revenue. Amendments 113 and 115 would require the Secretary of State in turn, when issuing and reviewing such guidance, to have regard to guidance issued under Section 11 of the Children Act 2004 and Section 17 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.
These amendments are unnecessary. It is already our intention that the guidance to support Clause 51 will be developed and issued jointly with the Department for Children, Schools and Families—a point made by the noble Earl, Lord Listowel—and will reflect closely the existing Section 11 guidance, about which I will say more shortly. Before I do, I should also make a technical point about the references to Scottish legislation. Section 17 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 is not analogous to our new duty, and thus not an appropriate model to follow for the following reasons.
Section 17 sets out the duty of a local authority to a child looked after by the local authority. This is a wholly different relationship from that between UKBA and the children it deals with in the UK immigration system. Section 17 section sets out that the local authority’s duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children shall be a paramount concern, whereas our new duty is to have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children when exercising specific functions. Section 17 is also a duty for the local authority to make services available to children and to take steps to promote relations and contact between the child and the person with parental responsibilities. Again, this is quite different from UKBA’s role.
Let me now return to the substance of the amendment and the relationship between our guidance and the existing Section 11 guidance. It might assist noble Lords if I describe the existing statutory guidance on making arrangements to safeguard and promote the welfare of children under Section 11. The guidance is divided into two parts. Part 1 sets out the general arrangements to safeguard and promote welfare, which all bodies subject to the duty must have in place. It includes strategic and organisational arrangements such as senior management commitment to children; a clear statement of the agency’s responsibilities towards children that is available for all staff; staff training; effective inter-agency working; and so on. Part 1 also highlights some of the ways in which the duty affects direct work with children and families; for example, in the need to ensure that children are listened to and taken seriously; to be clear when to refer children in need to other agencies; to keep good records; and so on. Part 1 is drafted in such a way as to be relevant to all the different bodies that are subject to the duty and to enable them to apply it in ways appropriate to their own functions. We think that Part 1 as drafted is equally relevant to the UKBA and should apply in the same way.
In Part 2 of the guidance, there are individual chapters devoted to each individual organisation to which the duty applies. This is because the duty applies differently to each and every body or organisation to which it relates because it always applies within the context of the specific organisation’s exercise of its specific functions. We will produce something along similar lines for the UKBA. It will set out the UKBA’s primary functions, including those of the director of border revenue, and the main areas where it has a contribution to make to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children in the exercise of those functions. Although the duty applies to all functions, it will be of greater relevance to some than others—for example, in relation to identifying possible victims of trafficking. The guidance will also set out how we will give effect to some of the broad organisational and strategic arrangements in Part 1 in the specific context of the border force.
As the amendment recognises, the Section 11 guidance applies to England only. Therefore, in addition to working closely with DCSF, we will also work with the devolved Administrations to ensure that our guidance takes proper account of the different arrangements in place elsewhere, and we will also consult other external bodies, including NGOs, in the drafting process. The amendments make a specific point about taking account of the Section 11 guidance when the guidance on this clause is reviewed. In view of the very close relationship between the two that I have described, it will be obvious that neither could be reviewed without reference to the other and that this aspect of the amendments is also unnecessary.
A couple of specific points were raised. One of the issues raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, was also touched on by other speakers. It is the withdrawal of funding from the Refugee Council’s children’s panel. We have agreed to fund it to carry out substantially the same services as in previous years; the only significant change is that we will no longer fund it to liaise with local authorities on age assessment. Instead, on that issue, we will go direct to trained social workers in local authority children's services departments, and we are providing additional funding for authorities with the largest number of such cases. Far from dropping money and taking it away, we are spending slightly more in a slightly different way.
The noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, asked about missing children. If children from overseas go missing, the police are immediately informed and normal police procedures are followed. The borders staff attend local safeguarding children boards where issues are raised involving children from overseas. The noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, also asked about the relationship between the border force and LSCBs. The Clause 51 duty will ensure that the border force fits within the inter-agency arrangements set out in Section 11 of the Children Act. That includes liaison with the local safeguarding children boards. He also asked whether we can confirm that the full implications of looking after children that are contained in Section 11 of the Children Act are being looked into. We are exploring with the Department for Children, Schools and Families how the Section 11 duty will apply in strategic arrangements and in the framework for co-ordinating with other agencies. That will be set out in detail in the guidance accompanying the new duty. The noble Earl, Lord Listowel, asked about guidance on this liaison. I assure him that we have had a close partnership in formulating that guidance. The new children’s champion will be meeting DCSF, and I have no doubt that, as part of his introduction to his work and his new role, he may well contact noble Lords.
I hope that the noble Lord is sufficiently reassured to withdraw the amendment.
Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord West of Spithead
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 4 March 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c832-4 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:55:47 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_534611
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_534611
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_534611