This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/07/lords-debate-child-protection-public-scrutiny
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| If the Lords were debating this on any other day, children’s rights would be safer If the Lords were debating this on any other day, children’s rights would be safer | |
| (25 days later) | |
| It feels like a lifetime ago that the US presidential candidates launched their campaigns to become the Democrat and Republican nominees. The twists, turns, scandals and shocks of the race to the White House have provided the backing track to our own tumultuous politics ever since. Now, with votes being cast and the polls tighter than ever, the heavyweights of British journalism are landing in Washington, ready to provide wall-to-wall coverage of the final days, the result – and the fallout. | It feels like a lifetime ago that the US presidential candidates launched their campaigns to become the Democrat and Republican nominees. The twists, turns, scandals and shocks of the race to the White House have provided the backing track to our own tumultuous politics ever since. Now, with votes being cast and the polls tighter than ever, the heavyweights of British journalism are landing in Washington, ready to provide wall-to-wall coverage of the final days, the result – and the fallout. |
| When huge stories are breaking like tidal waves elsewhere, it’s always worth keeping one eye on what’s happening on home shores. Just look at Brexit. While we were distracted by the referendum result, the government quietly revealed it had spent £600,000 trying to prevent legal action being brought against it over allegations that British intelligence was complicit in torture. And sure enough, on America’s polling day, our House of Lords will debate one of the most reckless and undemocratic proposals to make its way through parliament in years. | When huge stories are breaking like tidal waves elsewhere, it’s always worth keeping one eye on what’s happening on home shores. Just look at Brexit. While we were distracted by the referendum result, the government quietly revealed it had spent £600,000 trying to prevent legal action being brought against it over allegations that British intelligence was complicit in torture. And sure enough, on America’s polling day, our House of Lords will debate one of the most reckless and undemocratic proposals to make its way through parliament in years. |
| A little-noticed amendment to the children and social work bill will allow councils to opt out of their child protection obligations under almost every law covering children’s social care since 1933. If a local authority is struggling with a tight budget and feels expensive social care should be next for the chop it could – even if it is already failing the children under its care – ask the education minister to let it ignore 80 years of legislation. | A little-noticed amendment to the children and social work bill will allow councils to opt out of their child protection obligations under almost every law covering children’s social care since 1933. If a local authority is struggling with a tight budget and feels expensive social care should be next for the chop it could – even if it is already failing the children under its care – ask the education minister to let it ignore 80 years of legislation. |
| The reason for this destruction of children’s rights? “To test different ways of working with a view to achieving better outcomes … or achieving the same outcomes more efficiently.” If the Lords were debating this on any other day it would receive the media scrutiny and public debate that such a morally dubious and profoundly risky proposal deserves. | The reason for this destruction of children’s rights? “To test different ways of working with a view to achieving better outcomes … or achieving the same outcomes more efficiently.” If the Lords were debating this on any other day it would receive the media scrutiny and public debate that such a morally dubious and profoundly risky proposal deserves. |
| Liberty has united with 40 organisations and social care experts calling for the plans to be dropped | Liberty has united with 40 organisations and social care experts calling for the plans to be dropped |
| This isn’t about reducing red tape or doing away with bureaucracy. This is a bonfire of carefully considered policy, the product of decades of thorough research, parliamentary scrutiny, public consultation and some of it the legacy of appalling cases of child abuse and neglect, like the death of Baby P. | This isn’t about reducing red tape or doing away with bureaucracy. This is a bonfire of carefully considered policy, the product of decades of thorough research, parliamentary scrutiny, public consultation and some of it the legacy of appalling cases of child abuse and neglect, like the death of Baby P. |
| A duty to investigate when a child is suffering significant harm, a requirement to provide children in need with day care and a ban on profit-making companies running child protection services are just some of the laws we stand to lose. Every social care service that children receive from local authorities – from child protection and the care system to support for disabled children and young people in custody – would be affected. | A duty to investigate when a child is suffering significant harm, a requirement to provide children in need with day care and a ban on profit-making companies running child protection services are just some of the laws we stand to lose. Every social care service that children receive from local authorities – from child protection and the care system to support for disabled children and young people in custody – would be affected. |
| When councils apply for exemption, the decision will be made by the education minister alone. There will be no need for full parliamentary scrutiny, expert input, or consultation with families, social workers and the children and young people who will be most affected. Exemptions would last for up to three years, and could then be extended for another three – so children born next year could be deprived of any support from the state, no matter how badly they need it, until they are six years old. The plan would create the cruellest of postcode lotteries: a child in one town could find herself with fewer rights to care and support than her cousin in the next town. | When councils apply for exemption, the decision will be made by the education minister alone. There will be no need for full parliamentary scrutiny, expert input, or consultation with families, social workers and the children and young people who will be most affected. Exemptions would last for up to three years, and could then be extended for another three – so children born next year could be deprived of any support from the state, no matter how badly they need it, until they are six years old. The plan would create the cruellest of postcode lotteries: a child in one town could find herself with fewer rights to care and support than her cousin in the next town. |
| The coalition of those expressing their outrage is diverse – and it’s growing. More than 100,000 people have signed a petition, and Liberty has united with 40 organisations and social care experts calling for the plans to be dropped. A recent survey of almost 3,000 social workers by public services union Unison found that just one in 10 thinks local authorities should be able to exempt themselves from children’s social care legislation. More than two-thirds are against the idea – and almost 70% believe it will put more children at risk. | The coalition of those expressing their outrage is diverse – and it’s growing. More than 100,000 people have signed a petition, and Liberty has united with 40 organisations and social care experts calling for the plans to be dropped. A recent survey of almost 3,000 social workers by public services union Unison found that just one in 10 thinks local authorities should be able to exempt themselves from children’s social care legislation. More than two-thirds are against the idea – and almost 70% believe it will put more children at risk. |
| Making children’s rights an optional extra might sound cruel and unusual, but sadly it seems nothing is safe with a government that boasts of plans to scrap our Human Rights Act and is proud of turning our country into a “hostile environment” for migrants. | Making children’s rights an optional extra might sound cruel and unusual, but sadly it seems nothing is safe with a government that boasts of plans to scrap our Human Rights Act and is proud of turning our country into a “hostile environment” for migrants. |
| This American election is a moment in history none of us should ignore. But we mustn’t allow the rights of our children to vanish in its wake. So keep an eye on the House of Lords as America goes to the polls tomorrow. Sign the petition. Spread the word. Our government needs to learn that public scrutiny never rests, and that no matter what is happening elsewhere, attacks on the rights of the most vulnerable will always be newsworthy. | This American election is a moment in history none of us should ignore. But we mustn’t allow the rights of our children to vanish in its wake. So keep an eye on the House of Lords as America goes to the polls tomorrow. Sign the petition. Spread the word. Our government needs to learn that public scrutiny never rests, and that no matter what is happening elsewhere, attacks on the rights of the most vulnerable will always be newsworthy. |