CHILDREN BILL. [H.L.]

HL Deb 13 April 1948 vol 155 cc3-56

2.38 p.m.

Amendments reported (according to Order).

Clause 3:

Effect of assumption by local authority of parental rights.

(3) A resolution under Section two of this Act shall not prevent the local authority from allowing the child to be, either for a fixed period or until the local authority otherwise determine, under the control of a parent, guardian, relative or friend in any case where it appears to the authority to be for the benefit of the child.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT JOWITT) had given Notice of two Amendments in subsection (3), the first of which was to delete "the child to be." The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, I may explain quite shortly that the point of this and the succeeding Amendments proposed now to Clause 3 is that if a child (and I am dealing with a "resolution" child, by which, as your Lordships know, I mean a child with regard to which there is a resolution under Clause 2) is allowed to return to its parents, notionally the local authority still retain a duty of care although, of course, the child is de facto under the care of its own parents. Thus there is some possible division of authority, and it may be said that there is some excuse for the parents who have charge of the child being able to say "Well, we have not complete care, and therefore we are not entirely responsible." In view of this we have recast the matter in this way. If the local authority exercise their discretion and let the child go back to its parents or relatives, or someone of that sort, then so long as those parents or relatives have the custody of that child by reason of that order, the duty of the care and control of the child should be entirely with those parents or with those relatives. The local authority, however, should have power to resume their obligation for care and custody directly they see any reason so to do. Therefore, the Amendments which I am moving here to this clause have that effect. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 31, leave out ("the child to be").—(The Lord Chancellor.)

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, on behalf of those who sit on these Benches, I may say that we have no objection whatever to the recasting which is effected by the Amendment which the Lord Chancellor has just moved. I think it makes the matter rather clearer than it was before.

LORD O'HAGAN

My Lords, I should like to add to what the noble Lord has said. The solution arrived at is one which will commend itself to many of those who are directly concerned in this matter.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, this Amendment is consequential on what we have just done. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 33, after ("determine") insert ("the care of the child to be taken over by, and the child to be").—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, after subsection (3) to insert as new subsections: (4) Where a resolution under Section two of this Act is in force in respect of a child and the child has ceased to be in the care of the local authority by whom the resolution was passed, then (without prejudice to the provisions of Section one of this Act if those provisions apply) the local authority by whom the resolution was passed shall have power to receive the child back into their care in any circumstances in which it appears to them that their intervention under this subsection is necessary in the interests of the welfare of the child. (5) Where a local authority receive a child into their care under the last foregoing subsection, the provisions of this Act, except subsections (4) and (5) of Section one thereof, shall apply as if the child had been received into their care under the said Section one. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, there is just this to be said about these words. First of all, as I have just explained, they establish the right of the local authority to resume the care and control of the child. Subsection (5) makes it plain that, although all the earlier provisions of the Act are, in the event, to apply, yet there can be no question now of a discussion as to which local authority are to be responsible. If the local authority have had a child and have decided to return that child to its parents or relatives, then, if it becomes necessary for that local authority to resume the care and control of the child, it will be that local authority and no other which will be responsible. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 35, at end insert the said new subsections.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 4 [Duration and rescission of resolutions under Section two]:

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, this Amendment is consequential on what we have already done. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 20, leave out from ("eighteen") to end of line 21.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, this again is consequential on what we have already done I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 44, after ("allow") insert ("the care of the child to be taken over by, and").—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 10:

Duty of parents to maintain contact with local authorities having their children in care.

10.—(1) The parent of a child who has not attained the age of sixteen and is in the care of a local authority under Section one of this Act shall secure that the appropriate local authority are informed of the parent's address for the time being.

LORD HENLEY moved, in subsection (1), after "parent" to insert "or guardian." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment and the next were moved during the Committee stage, and an undertaking was given that they would be considered. I am not aware that any answer has been given on that matter. The Amendments have the object of enabling the local authority to keep in touch with parents or guardians, who presumably will be in loco parentis to the child, in order to carry out their duties under Section 1 (3) of "the Act. I therefore beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 8, line 31, after ("parent") insert ("or guardian").—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I undertook on the Committee stage to investigate this question, and the noble Lord who is now moving the Amendment had not then appeared on the scene in this particular matter. I am glad to see him now because it relieves me from any charge of discourtesy in saying that in the deliberations and discussions that we had on this matter, and which took place not with him but with other noble Lords, I came to the conclusion that it was undesirable to insert these words; and I think the other noble Lords rather agreed with me. What I think we felt was that the insertion of those words will not work unless you also extend to the guardian the criminal sanction which is to be found in subsection (3)—that is to say, if a person does not comply with the provisions of the subsection he is liable to a fine.

I agree that so long as you do apply that criminal sanction there is no particular reason why you should not extend that wording to a guardian. But, according to the law of this land, the guardian is, normally speaking, not liable to maintain the child. He has not the duty of a parent, and it seems to me that it is going very far to enforce a provision which requires the guardian to inform the local authority when he is not responsible for maintaining his child. It was for that reason that we came to the conclusion it was probably better not to include the words "or guardian." As I think I said before, I have no rooted objection to the matter, so long as it is quite plain that if we impose this duty we must also impose the sanction. On balance—and I think other noble Lords agree with me—I should be disposed not to accept the Amendment.

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, perhaps I may say a word on this Amendment. I agree with the Lord Chancellor in that I regard it as unnecessary and, in the circumstances which he mentioned, impossible to rank a guardian with parents in this particular Part of the Bill. For those reasons I think the Government are wise not to accept this Amendment.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 11 [Scope of Part II]:

The LORD CHANCELLOR moved to delete the proviso. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, this is consequential on the Amendments that we have already agreed to. We laid down by this proviso that, so far as Part II of the Bill is concerned, if a child were still in the care of the authority, during which time he was allowed by the authority to be under the control of a parent, he should not be deemed to be in the care of the authority. The Amendment we have already passed extends that to the whole Bill, and not merely to Part II of the Bill. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 24, leave out lines 24 to 30.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 13:

Mode of provision of accommodation and maintenance.

13.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a local authority shall discharge their duty to provide accommodation and maintenance for a child in their care—

(b) where it is not practicable or desirable for the time being to make arrangements for boarding-out, by maintaining the child in a home provided under this Part of this Act or by placing him in a voluntary home the managers of which are willing to receive him.

LORD HENLEY had given Notice of amendments in subsection (1) (b), to delete "or desirable" from the first line and reinsert it after "for the time being." The noble Lord said: My Lords, the implication of this clause is that the authority must board out children committed to them unless that course: is not practicable or desirable for the time being. It may be that they consider the child committed to their care should not be boarded out at any time, and therefore the object of this Amendment is to enable them to make the decision as to whether or not the boarding out is desirable in those cases and, at the same time, to give them the power to make temporary arrangements. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 2, after ("being") insert ("or desirable").—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, the next Amendment really comes first—namely, that on page 10, line 1. Perhaps we may discuss these Amendments together. The real point, as I see it, is this: Should the word "desirable" be qualified by the phrase "for the time being"; or, should we put the word "desirable" in a part of the clause which makes it plain that it stands there, absolute and unqualified? I am strongly of the opinion that the word "desirable" ought to be so qualified. I give you a simple illustration, which I think was pointed out at an earlier stage of this Bill. Take the case of a child suffering from the unfortunate habit of bed-wetting. That child is rather a nuisance, and it may be undesirable and impracticable that anybody should take this child. Obviously, however, it is desirable that an effort should be made to cure the child of this unfortunate habit and, when that has been done, it may be desirable to board that child out. Therefore we must be very careful to see that the phrase "for the time being" is made applicable not merely to the word "practicable" but also to the word "desirable." If the clause is made to read: where it is not practicable for the time being or desirable there will be no chance of altering the decision, in cases where there is the very thing which it may be easy to cure, but which makes it for the time being undesirable. Therefore, I do not think this Amendment is in the interests of the child at all.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, I am satisfied with that answer, and I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

LORD HENLEY moved to add to the clause: (8) Expenditure incurred by a local authority in providing accommodation under the provisions of any of the five preceding subsections to this section shall be regarded for the purposes of section forty-five of this Act as expenditure incurred by the authority for the purposes of the discharge of their functions under this Act. The noble Lord said: In certain circumstances, children may be accommodated in premises provided by the local authority under the National Assistance Bill. This Amendment seeks to clarify the position. The County Councils Association who are interested in the matter, are not clear whether the provisions of subsections (2), (3), (4) and (6) of Clause 13 would cover this case of a child being put into a home provided under the National Assistance Bill. They wish to have that point clarified and, therefore, I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 11, line 7, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I do not consider that it is desirable to insert these words, and I do not think there is any doubt about this. Will the noble Lord be good enough to look at Clause 46? He will see that there is there a provision that there shall be payments out of moneys provided by Parliament to a local authority in respect of expenditure incurred by them for the purpose of the discharge of their functions under any of the enactments specified in sub-section (1) of section thirty-eight of this Act. If he will look back to Clause 38 he will find therein set out the various functions, the last category being functions under this Act. Therefore it is quite plain, as the Bill is drafted, that in the functions of a local authority under this Bill are matters which obtain grant. If we make an unnecessary exception in one case, as the noble Lord knows as well as anyone, it sometimes has repercussions of a most unexpected nature. Therefore I think it would be unwise to make the Amendment which is now suggested.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, I find the statement made by the noble and learned Viscount the Lord Chancellor quite satisfactory, and I beg leave to withdraw this Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 14:

Regulations as to boarding-out.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the last foregoing subjection, regulations under this section may provide—

(c) for securing that where possible the person with whom any child is to be boarded out is either of the same religious persuasion as the child or gives an undertaking that the child will be brought up in that religious persuasion;

2.52 p.m.

THE EARL OF IDDESLEIGH moved, in subsection (2), after paragraph (c) to insert: (d) For securing that the local authority shall, as soon as any child is boarded out, inform in writing the incumbent of the parish in which the child resides or the priest, minister, or other person having charge of the church or chapel of the religious persuasion to which the child belongs and in the district in which the child resides of the name and address of the person with whom the child is boarded out; The noble Earl said: My Lords, you will recall that we discussed at some length during the Committee stage the position of a foster-parent who has boarded out upon him a child of a different religious persuasion. The Bill provides that if possible foster-parents will give an undertaking to bring the child up in the child's own religious persuasion. Clearly, a very difficult position may thereby be created, and I am anxious that in that difficult position the religious authorities of the denomination to which the child belongs should have every opportunity of helping and of making representations. Of course, it is much more satisfactory that the child should be boarded out with people of his own religious persuasion, if possible—that goes without saying. At an earlier stage of our discussions of this Bill, I moved an Amendment requiring consultation with the appropriate religious authority before such "mixed" boarding out, as it might be called, takes place. The noble and learned Viscount who sits on the Woolsack was good enough to promise consideration of my point, and it was suggested by the noble Earl, Lord Perth, that a circular might be devised to meet the situation. I have now put down this Amendment, which calls not for consultation before, but for information afterwards. That is a much less satisfactory matter and I do not intend to press it. I trust that I shall receive some reassurance from the noble and learned Viscount who sits on the Woolsack which will enable me to ask your Lordships to allow me to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 11, line 27, at end insert the said paragraph.—(The Earl of Iddesleigh.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I think the noble Earl who moved this Amendment realises now that, so far as I am concerned, at any rate, he is pushing at an open door. Religious instruction and the principle that children should be brought up in the religion of their parents are matters to which all right-thinking men attach the greatest importance. I have therefore, gone into this question with the Home Office with a view to finding out how far they are prepared to go with regard to this circular. I will tell your Lordships about its contents in a moment. The undertaking I am authorised to give is such as I hope and believe will be satisfactory. I would merely add for myself and my colleagues that I feel certain that by enlisting the help and cooperation of the Churches we shall greatly facilitate our task of providing suitable foster-parents. If for no other reasons—and there are others—it is plainly right and wise that this should be done by the local authority and that they should be spurred on, I think, by the central authority—the Home Office.

What the Home Office intend to do is this. As soon as the Bill passes into law a circular on boarding-out will be issued, urging upon local authorities the importance of securing the help and co-operation of the Churches in finding suitable foster-homes. The securing of the assistance of the Churches should not only make more good foster-homes available, but should enable children to be placed, to an increasing extent, with foster-parents of the same religious persuasion. It will, therefore, be suggested to local authorities in the circular that they should, where practicable, consult with the appropriate authority of the child's religious persuasion before boarding out a child with a person not of the same religious persuasion.

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, in the discussion which we had on this point during the Committee stage, I think it was shown that we were all conscious of the difficulties of finding appropriate words to cover what was generally agreed by the House ought to be done. It was difficult to ascertain exactly whom local authorities should be asked by the Act to consult on these matters. It is no secret that a number of efforts were made, and several drafts were prepared, but in my view none of them was wholly satisfactory because of that particular difficulty. I think this is quite a proper point for my noble friend the Earl of Iddesleigh, and the right reverend Prelate the Lord Bishop of Sheffield, to have brought before the House, and it is one for which we all hope a satisfactory solution will be found.

I think that the circular to which the noble and learned Viscount the Lord Chancellor has referred will afford the best means of doing what is desired, because as a result of the directions in the circular it will be made more or less incumbent on local authorities—not statutorily incumbent, of course, but incumbent so far as possible—to take the appropriate action. It is much better to leave it to them then to decide whom they desire to consult. I am certain that if they act under the direction of the circular and have consultation, good results will follow. It might happen, for instance, that in a particular case an authority had not on their lists a Catholic foster-home (I take this merely as an illustration), and if they went to the appropriate authority in that Church, the Bishop or whoever it might be, and said: "We would like to put this child in that kind of a home but we have not one on our list," then almost automatically it would follow that that religious authority would take steps to see whether amongst the members of his own Church a home could be offered for the accommodation of the child. The way out which the Lord Chancellor and the Home Office have found is, if I may say so, a good one. I am glad the point was raised, and I am glad that it is to be dealt with in the way which the Lord Chancellor has indicated.

LORD ROCHESTER

My Lords, I rather regret intervening because I fear that my doing so may be thought ungenerous after the way in which the Lord Chancellor has met us on this point. But I confess that for my part, speaking as a Free Churchman, I do not feel that this will afford quite the protection for which we ask. After all, we may not always have a Home Secretary who is as sympathetic or who has as wide a vision as the present occupant of the office. I should very much prefer that something on the lines we want should be incorporated in the Bill. Therefore, while thanking the Lord Chancellor for the concession which he has outlined, I must say that I cannot pretend we are altogether satisfied with the solution of the difficulty which he has now put forward.

THE LORD BISHOP OF SHEFFIELD

My Lords, I should like to say that in an imperfect world the solution which has been arrived at is probably the best one.

THE MARQUESS OF ABERDEEN AND TEMAIR

My Lords, as a member of a Scottish educational authority, I wish to ask the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack whether this undertaking would apply to the Secretary of State for Scotland. If so, I think the statement he has made outlines a very satisfactory way of meeting a difficult situation. I should like some assurance, however, that we, in Scotland, shall have the same treatment which it is proposed to give in England.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, exactly the same position will apply in Scotland.

THE EARL OF IDDESLEIGH

My Lords, I am very much obliged to the noble and learned Viscount and to those who have supported me, and I am well satisfied with this explanation of the case. I ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

3.2 p.m.

Clause 15:

Duty of local authorities to provide homes.

(4) The Secretary of State may make regulations as to the exercise by local authorities of their functions under this section and the conduct of homes provided thereunder and for securing the welfare of the children in the homes, and regulations under this subsection may in particular—

1. (a) impose requirements as to the accommodation and equipment to be provided in homes and as to the medical arrangements to be made for protecting the health of the children in the homes;
2. (b) impose requirements as to the facilities which are to be given for the children to receive instruction in the religious persuasion to which they belong;

(e) contain provisions for limiting the period during which children may be accommodated in homes provided for the temporary reception of children,

and may contain different provisions for different classes of cases and as respects different classes of homes.

THE EARL OF IDDESLEIGH moved, in subsection. (4) (b) to leave out "instruction in the religious "and to insert" a religious upbringing appropriate to the "The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment deals with religious instruction. I pointed out during the Committee stage that it was desirable that some larger and more impressive wording should be used than merely "religious instruction." After some discussion with the noble and learned Viscount, it has been suggested that we should leave out "instruction in the religious" and insert "a religious upbringing appropriate to the persuasion to which the child belongs." That occurs in Clause 15, and I think on two other occasions. I hope your Lordships will agree that this wording I am moving is preferable in every way.

I recognise that with this Amendment the Bill will impose a serious obligation on local authorities. If they retain children in homes run by them, they will be under the very important obligation to give these children religious unbringing according to the persuasion to which they belong. I have been wondering how this is going to work. If the recommendations of the Curtis Report are carried out in the fullest way, I believe the solution will arrive through sending children of different religions to small homes such as the Report recommends, of approximately family size, which should be under a house-mother. I have no doubt that local authorities will engage house-mothers of various denominations—Anglican, Free Church and Roman Catholic—and it should not be difficult to arrange in most cases that a child goes to a house-mother of its own religious persuasion. In some cases, where this is not practicable and greater difficulty is imposed on a local authority, they will have the alternative of sending a child to a voluntary home run by the child's religious persuasion, if such a voluntary home exists. Now that the voluntary homes are to be so much improved, inspected and, if necessary, aided financially by the State, I cannot believe that that would be a bad alternative. But that, perhaps, is somewhat outside the scope of the Amendment. What I ask your Lordships to accept is a form of words which is somewhat larger, more dignified and comprehensive than the mere mention of "religious instruction" which occurs in the Bill. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 12, line 16, leave out ("instruction in the religious") and insert ("a religious unbringing appropriate to the").—(The Earl of Iddesleigh.)

LORD ROCHESTER

My Lords, I desire in a sentence to associate myself with the noble Earl who moved this Amendment, and to say on behalf of those for whom your Lordships are good enough to allow me to speak, that I prefer this wording. I recognise how difficult it has been to find more appropriate words.

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, we had considerable discussion as to appropriate words and, if I may say so, these words are much better than those in the Bill and those which were put forward on Committee stage. But before the noble and learned Viscount the Lord Chancellor, replies (and I hope he will be able to accept the new wording) I have a doubt in my mind whether my noble friend is right in leaving out "religious" because (4) (b), as amended, would read: impose requirements as to the facilities which are to be given for the children to receive a religious unbringing appropriate to the persuasion to which they belong. Ought it not to be "appropriate to the religious persuasion." I do not quite know what persuasion is without the preliminary adjective "religious." I should have thought it better to make it clear what we mean.

THE LORD BISHOP OF SHEFFIELD

My Lords, I support that suggestion.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I think that these homes should not be turned into denominational institutions. That, I think, would be nothing short of disastrous. Subject to that, I am most anxious that we should do all we can to encourage this idea of religious upbringing. Therefore, I am prepared to accept the Amendment in the form in which it has been moved by the noble Earl. I do not think the repetition of the word "religious" is needed. If you have "a religious upbringing appropriate to the persuasion" the matter is clear. Surely it is implicit that the word "persuasion" must relate to a religious body. Suppose that we were dealing with free traders and tariff reformers, we could not say an "upbringing appropriate to the persuasion" in that sense. It just means nothing. Because all these contestants have the same religion and the same religious upbringing. Therefore, I think the second word "religious" is tautologous. I think it is implicit in the phrase "religious upbringing." I am quite willing to consult with those who have advised me, however, and, if it should be thought necessary, to do something at another stage of the Bill.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD HENLEY moved to add to subsection (4): provided that a local authority shall not be required for the purposes of paragraph (a) of this subsection to provide specialist services or services of a kind normally provided only on admission to a hospital or any services which, under the National Health Service Act, 1946, it is the responsibility of any other body to provide. The noble Lord said: My Lords, paragraph (a) of subsection (4) of Clause 15 authorises the Secretary of State to impose requirements on local authorities as to the medical arrangements to be made for protecting the health of the children in the homes. The object of this Amendment is to protect the local authorities from having to provide such specialist and other services which are the duty of the regional hospital board, the Minister of Health, or the executive council under the National Health Service Act. Clause 20 (7) (b) of the National Assistance Bill deals with the duty of local authorities to provide accommodation. It says that the local authorities may themselves provide medical health services, but it is specified that they are not to be specialist services or of a kind normally provided only on admission to a hospital. The object of this Amendment is to extend those provisions to the authorities who are responsible under the Children Bill. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 12, line 38, at end insert the said proviso.—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, we are in complete agreement with the principle of this Amendment, but the imposition of an obligation to provide such services would be such a complete departure from common sense that I think it is unnecessary to insert these words in the Bill. Your Lordships will remember that regulations dealing with these matters will be prepared by the Home Office, after consultation with the Ministry of Health, and are to be laid before Parliament for approval. Would anyone in his right senses imagine that the Home Office would lay down a regulation, let us say, that an X-ray instrument should be provided in a children's home? The thing would be completely ridiculous. I really do not think it is necessary to put in these words. I can assure the noble Lord that we have not the slightest intention of doing anything of the sort. We shall no doubt have to provide for medical attendance and examination, and, if necessary, for sick bays for sick children, but we shall not require the provision in a small children's home of expensive specialist apparatus; and even if we did provide for it in the home, probably no one would know how to work it. I cannot accept this Amendment, because it would seem to imply that we would do something that no ordinary person would contemplate doing.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, I do not think the intention of the Amendment is quite so drastic as that. There are many border line cases where specialists of various kinds (I am not sure whether the definition of "a specialist" is at all clear) may be called in to attend or to treat children in the homes. It may be desirable to say whose responsibility it is to pay for the specialists in such cases. May I ask whether the explanation covers such cases as those?

LORD CALVERLEY

My Lords, the authority on which I have the privilege to serve have twenty-one of these homes. We have the ordinary medical services and, the children being of school age, there is an efficient school medical service for teeth, for X-ray and for everything else. It is all covered under the Bill, and I think the noble Lord should withdraw his Amendment.

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, I should have thought there might be cases where it was necessary for a local authority to call in a specialist. There may be a case of a child suffering from, say, appendicitis, who cannot be moved to the hospital, and the operation may have to be done on the spot. That is not a thing it should be necessary to provide for in regulations, because it normally would be done. But it is certainly not something which we should preclude a local authority from doing by putting words like these in the Bill. I hope this Amendment will not be accepted.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I think it is quite obvious that if a child is ill and needs the services of a specialist, the child must have those services. What I was directing my remarks to were the actual appliances, and things of that sort, which would be inappropriate. Of course, the child would get specialist services, which would be paid for by the appropriate authority.

LORD HENLEY

The question arises as to who is the appropriate authority. That appears to me to be begging the question. Are the services of any specialist who may be called in to serve the child to be paid for by the local authority, or are they to be paid for under the National Health Service Act, or under any other provision? The object of the Amendment is to safeguard expenditure by the local authority on these services.

LORD CALVERLEY

I apologise for intruding again, but we shall simply carry on as we are doing. The services are paid for by the local authority and they get something like 50 per cent. from the Exchequer on the block grant.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

Does the noble Lord withdraw the Amendment?

LORD HENLEY

No definite answer has been given to my question as to whether the local authority would be covered in all cases of providing specialist services for the children in these homes.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 16:

Accommodation of children in voluntary homes.

16.—(1) Where under this Part of this Act a local authority provide for a child by placing him in a voluntary home, the authority shall thereupon notify the Secretary of Slate of the action taken.

(2) Notwithstanding any agreement made in connection with the placing of a child as aforesaid in a voluntary home, a local authority may at any time, and shall if required so to do by the Secretary of State or the managers of the home, remove the child from the home.

(3) Where under this section a local authority remove a child from a voluntary home otherwise than in compliance with a requirement of the Secretary of State, they shall thereupon notify the Secretary of State of the action taken and the reasons therefor.

(4) No child in the care of a local authority shall be placed in a voluntary home which does not afford facilities for him to receive instruction in the religious persuasion to which he belongs.

LORD ADDINGTON moved to omit subsection (1). The noble Lord said: My Lords, on the Committee stage of the Bill I endeavoured to ascertain from the noble and learned Viscount the object of this clause. I now submit that the object can be attained by far better methods than by requiring this large number of notifications, particularly of the admissions of children into a voluntary home. I understand, on the analogy of what has been done by one county council, that there might be as many as 2,400 notifications of admissions to a home in a single year. I think that is unnecessary. It will not serve any useful purpose, and will cause too much correspondence and the employment of too large a staff. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 13, line 3, leave out subsection (1).—(Lord Addington.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, may I say a word about this and the succeeding Amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Addington, and my own Amendment to leave out subsection (3)? I confess that I have been convinced by the arguments of the noble Lord. I think there is a danger of too much paper work, which is the last thing we want to have. I am going one better than the noble Lord. He proposes to leave out subsection (1), and I propose in due course to leave out subsection (3). We shall not then have quite so many notifications about these children. I am pleased to accept the noble Lord's Amendment.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD ADDINGTON

My Lords, the next Amendment is consequential on the previous Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 13, line 8, leave out from ("child") to ("may") in line 9 and insert ("in a voluntary home under this Part of this Act by a local authority, the authority").—(Lord Addington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I have already referred to the next Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 13, line 12, leave out subsection (3).—(The Lord Chancellor.)

LORD ADDINGTON

I am much obliged to the noble and learned Viscount.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD HENLEY moved to omit subsection (4). The noble Lord said: My Lords, it appears that in paragraph (c) of Clause 30 provision is already made for providing this religious instruction, and therefore this subsection appears to be redundant. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 13, line 17, leave out subsection (4).—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, we cannot accept this Amendment. We think it right that the discretion of local authorities as to the choice of voluntary homes in which children in their care may be placed should be restricted to the extent of preventing such a child being sent to a home which does not afford facilities for him to receive a religious upbringing appropriate to his religious persuasion. That is to say, if the child belongs to a particular religion, then we think we ought not to send him to a home where there is no facility for him to be brought up in that religion. I think it would be weakening the Bill if we were to strike out this subsection.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, in those circumstances I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF IDDESLEIGH

My Lords, this Amendment deals with the same point which I made upon a previous clause. I hope this Amendment will be similarly accepted. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 33, line 19, leave out ("instruction in the religious") and insert ("a religious upbringing appropriate to the").—(The Earl of Iddesleigh.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 18:

Burial or cremation of deceased children.

18.—(1) A local authority may cause to be buried or cremated the body of any deceased child who immediately before his death was in the care of the authority.

THE EARL OF IDDESLEIGH moved to add to subsection (1): Provided that the authority shall not cause the body to be cremated where cremation is not in accordance with the practice of the child's religious persuasion. The noble Earl said: My Lords, this Amendment is to provide protection to members of those religious persuasions who object to the practice of cremation. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 13, line 35, at end insert the said proviso.—(The Earl of Iddesleigh.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, we have given careful consideration to this Amendment, and are prepared to accept it.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 19:

Provision of hostels for persons under twenty-one.

19.—(1) A local authority may, with the approval of the Secretary of State, provide hostels for persons—

1. (a) who are over compulsory school age but have not attained the age of twenty-one; and
2. (b) who are, or have at any time after ceasing to be of compulsory school age been, in the care of a local authority,

for their accommodation near the place where they may be employed, or seeking employment, or in receipt of education or training.

LORD HENLEY moved, in subsection (1), to delete "with the approval of the Secretary of State." The noble Lord said: My Lords, it will be noted that the local authority are not bound to provide a hostel, so that even if one ought to be provided the Secretary of State has no power to insist upon it. Yet if the authority had come to the conclusion that one should be provided, it could be done only with the approval of the Secretary of State. It is considered that where a local authority, without central interference, decide that a hostel shall be provided, there is no need for the approval of the Secretary of State to be obtained. The authorities have, as an incident of their administration, been given responsibility for the conduct of the service, and to decide where that service requires the provision of hostels. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 14, line 4, leave out from ("may") to ("provide") in line 5.—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, it is quite true that a local authority may decide not to provide a hostel, and if so, of course, they do not incur what may be a substantial burden to their rates. They get their 50 per cent. grant, but in the case of some local authorities the expenditure may still be a heavy burden. Let us consider how wide their powers are if they do decide to provide a hostel. They may not only provide a hostel for those children who have been in care, but, in order to prevent the children who have been in care from being a class apart or segregated, they may have other children in with them. That obviously may involve expense. If they decide to do that, and in view of all that is involved by so doing, it is only right that the Secretary of State should have the power of control in the interests of other authorities and ratepayers throughout the country. Various local authorities may resist this being done. Consequently, we have deliberately put in these words, giving the Secretary of State the power to consent or withhold his consent, as the case may be, having regard to the local requirements. We think it would be a pity to do away with control by the Secretary of State, and I am not prepared to accept this Amendment.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 23 [Contributions in respect of children in care of local authority]:

LORD HENLEY moved to add to the clause: (3) Nothing contained in this or any other Act shall prevent a local authority from entering into and enforcing agreements for contributions to be made in respect of any children committed to the care of the authority.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, many local authorities made voluntary agreements with parents and others for contribution in respect of children in the care of the authority. It is felt that the insertion of these words would safeguard the authority having to collect the sums contributed at the end of a short stay of a child, and having to adopt legal proceedings to enforce payment. If they were enabled to make a voluntary agreement at the beginning of the arrangements it would make it easier for them to recover the contributions. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 16, line 13, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I am not prepared to accept this Amendment. In the first place, I do not believe the noble Lord means it at all in the sense of the words he uses. Supposing there had been an agreement, and the agreement was barred by a statutory limitation, does the noble Lord really mean to say that, nowithstanding a lapse of time by the passing of the period which bars the claim, that that claim should not be barred? I see no reason why that should be so, and yet the noble Lord says: "Nothing contained in this or any other Act." That seems to me to be quite an illogical provision.

If I may say so, I think there is a confusion of thought here. Clause 23 of this Bill sets out a list of certain persons who are responsible for maintaining children. Sections 87 and 88 of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933, deal with enforcement as against persons who are liable to maintain children. The fallacy underlying this proposed new provision seems to me to be this: Because it is declared that a local authority have a right to enforce payments by going to court it seems to be assumed that they have not a right to make an agreement which makes it unnecessary to go to the court to enforce payment. Of course they have. They can either go to the court and seek the judgment of the court, or they can make an agreement. Then, if the person does not pay up in accordance with the agreement, they can sue him on the agreement. It is quite plain that that right exists, and I am therefore anxious not to insert the words: Nothing contained in this or any other Act "— even if they are qualified, as they would have to be by adding: shall prevent a local authority from entering into and enforcing agreements for contributions to be made in respect of any children committed to the care of the authority. Of course, they have that right. If we do that we may find one of those repercussions appearing somewhere else.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, with that explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

LORD HENLEY moved to add to the clause: (4) For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that the administration of this section by a local authority may be undertaken by them as part of a general service of the authority within the meaning of subsection (7) of Section thirty-eight of this Act.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, many authorities maintain specialised departments, or sections of departments, of their council staff to deal with the question of the collection of contributions in respect of expenses incurred by local authorities in the exercise of their functions. This Amendment is designed to make it clear that the collection of these contributions, the enforcement of the debt, is a duty which is not necessarily the sole function of the children's committee. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 16, line 13, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, if there were any doubt I would be agreeable to having it removed; but I object strongly to subsections removing doubts if doubts do not exist. Your Lordships will see that subsection (2) of Clause 38 states that: All matters relating to the discharge of the functions of a local authority…shall stand referred to the children's committee. But subsection (7) becomes, if I may use rather technical language, a sort of "clause paramount." The object of subsection (2) was not to prevent the local authority referring to a committee appointed by them, other than the children's committee, any matter relating to their functions under the Act. If, for instance, there is a general committee for taking court proceedings I take it to be quite plain and beyond any doubt that agreements, whether they are for contributions towards children's upkeep or any other purpose, can be enforced by that committee. The only reason that I resist this Amendment is that there is no doubt about the law. The law is what the noble Lord desires it to be, and, that being so, I feel that to make this provision would not be desirable.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, in view of the noble and learned Viscount's explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 26:

Affiliation orders.

(4) Part IV of the said Act of 1933 shall apply in relation to an order made as aforesaid as if it were an affiliation order in respect of which an order had been made under subsection (1) of Section eighty-eight of that Act.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, the next is a drafting Amendment, I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 17, line 1, at beginning insert ("and no affiliation order has been made in respect of the child").—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in subsection (4), to omit all words from the beginning down to and including "aforesaid," and to insert: (4) Where in accordance with subsection (4) of Section eighty-eight of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933 (which limits the duration of affiliation orders) an affiliation order has ceased to be in force, and but for that subsection the order would still be in force, then if the condition specified in paragraph (a), (b) or (c) of subsection (1) of this section is fulfilled, the local authority whose area includes the place where the putative father of the child resides may make application to a court of summary jurisdiction laving jurisdiction in that place—

1. (a) for the affiliation order to be revived, and
2. (b) for payments thereunder to be made to the person who is from time to time entitled under Section eighty-six of the said Act of 1933 to receive contributions in respect of the child,

and the court may make an order accordingly. (5) Part IV of the said Act of 1933 shall apply in relation to an order made on an application under subsection (1) of this section or to an affiliation order revived under the last foregoing subsection. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, if I understand the present position aright, it is as follows. An affiliation order is made as against a putative father in respect and in favour of a third party, which may be the local authority. This involves the payment of a certain sum of money to that local authority. Now, if the child comes out of the care of the local authority, the affiliation order falls to the ground and cannot be resumed. But, should the local authority in the exercise of their powers under this Bill decide to allow the child to return to a relative or guardian, we are anxious to avoid the order being automatically destroyed. If it is necessary for the local authority to reclaim the child by reason of some unsatisfactory condition, it is obviously right that they should be able to revive that affiliation order—or, rather, that they should be able to apply to the court for the revival of the order. That is the object of this Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 17, line 36 leave out from beginning to the second ("as") in line 37 and insert the said new subsections.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, so far as I am concerned, I can see no possible objection to this Amendment. It would be quite absurd if an affiliation order lapsed for all time in such circumstances. We shall certainly support the Amendment.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON moved, in subsection (7), after "fulfilled" to insert "and no decree for aliment has been granted in respect of the child." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment corresponds to that made in page 21, line 1, in respect of affiliation orders made in England and Wales, and applies to Scotland. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 18, line 5, at end, insert the said words.—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

3.38 p.m.

Clause 29 [Registration of voluntary homes]:

LORD MORRISON moved to omit Clause 29 and to substitute the following new clause:

" Registration of voluntary homes.

29.—(1) After the end of the year nineteen hundred and forty-eight no voluntary home shall be carried on unless it is for the time being registered in a register to be kept for the purposes of this section by the Secretary of State.

(2) Application for registration under this section shall be made by the persons carrying on or intending to carry on the home to which the application relates, and shall be made in such manner, and accompanied by such particulars, as the Secretary of State may by regulations prescribe.

(3) On an application duly made under the last foregoing subsection—

1. (a) if the home to which the application relates was at the commencement of this Act open for the reception of children, the application shall be granted;
2. (b) in any other case, the Secretary of State may either grant or refuse the application, as he thinks fit, but where he refuses 28 the application he shall give the applicant notice in writing of the refusal.

(4) Where at any time after the end of the year nineteen hundred and forty-eight it appears to the Secretary of State that the conduct of any voluntary home is not in accordance with regulations made under section thirty-one of this Act, or is otherwise unsatisfactory he may, after giving to the persons carrying on the home not less than twenty-eight days notice in writing of his proposal so to do, remove the home from the register.

(5) Any person who carries on a voluntary home in contravention of the provisions of subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds and to a further fine not exceeding two pounds in respect of each day during which the offence continues after conviction.

(6) Where—

1. (a) a voluntary home is carried on in contravention of the provisions of subsection (1) of this section; or
2. (b) notice of a proposal to remove a voluntary home from the register is given under subsection (4) thereof,

the Secretary of State may, notwithstanding that the time for any appeal under the next following section has not expired or that such an appeal is pending, notify the local authority in whose area the home is situated, and require them forthwith to remove from the home and receive into their care under Section one of this Act all or any of the children for whom accommodation is being provided in the home; and the local authority shall comply with the requirement whether or not the circumstances of the children are such that they fall within paragraphs (a) to (c) of subsection (1) of the said Section one and notwithstanding that any of the children may appear to the local authority to be over the age of seventeen.

For the purpose of carrying out the duty of the local authority under this subsection any person authorised in that behalf by the local authority may enter any premises in which the home in question is being carried on.

(7) Where the Secretary of State registers a home under this section or removes a home from the register he shall notify the local authority in whose area the home is situated.

(8) Any notice under this section required to be given by the Secretary of State to the persons carrying on, or intending to carry on, a voluntary home may be given to those per sons by being delivered personally to any one of them, or being sent by post in a registered letter to them or any one of them.

For the purposes of Section twenty-six of the Interpretation Act, 1889 (which defines ' service by post ') a letter enclosing a notice under this section to the persons carrying on a voluntary home or any one of them shall be deemed to be properly addressed if it is addressed to them or him at the home.

(9) Section ninety-five of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933, and Section ninety- nine of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act, 1937 are hereby repealed as from the first day of January, nineteen hundred and forty-nine."

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I think it might be for your Lordships' convenience, if, with your permission, I dealt with the new Clause 29 and the new Clause after Clause 29 together.

LORD LLEWELLIN

And perhaps the First Schedule.

LORD MORRISON

Yes, I think that would be desirable. Your Lordships will remember that during the Committee stage I gave an undertaking that Clause 29 would be recast to provide an appeal procedure. This had previously been promised in discussion with the noble Lord, Lord Llewellin, when it was indicated that the independent schools tribunal procedure provided in the Education Act of 1944 would be adopted with the necessary modifications. As a result of the undertaking I gave, a number of Amendments were either withdrawn or not moved. Effect is given to all but one of these Amendments in the new Clauses 29 and 30 and in the Amendment to the existing Clause 30. Clause 29 of the Bill as introduced meant, in effect, approval of existing homes by the Secretary of State, since registration was at his discretion. An unattractive feature of the clause was that because of the connotation of approval, the appointed day for the purpose of the clause could not have been fixed for some time to come, as it would have been necessary to allow time to raise to a reasonable standard all the homes which were to be registered on that date.

The proposed new Clauses 29 and 30, providing for appeal against a decision of the Secretary of State to refuse or withdraw registration, present an opportunity to adopt procedure which will enable the scheme of registration to be effective soon after the Bill passes into law. The new clause, as it applies to England and Wales, to be substituted for Clause 29, provides as follows. First, as from January 1, 1949, it will be unlawful to carry on a voluntary home unless it is for the time being registered in a register to be kept by the Secretary of State. Secondly, the Secretary of State will be: (a) required, on receipt of an application for registration, to register any voluntary home which was open for the reception of children at the commencement of the Act; (b) empowered at his discretion, on receipt of an application for registration, to register any voluntary home which it is proposed to open for the reception of children after the commencement of the Act; (c) as from January 1, 1949, empowered, after giving the persons carrying on the home not less than twenty-eight days' notice in writing of his intention so to do, to remove a voluntary home from the register if it appears to him that the conduct of the home is not in accordance with regulations made under the provisions of Clause 30, or is otherwise unsatisfactory.

Thirdly, as from January 1, 1949, any person who carries on an unregistered voluntary home will be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds, and to a further fine not exceeding two pounds in respect of each day during which the offence continues after conviction. Fourthly, as from January 1, 1949, notwithstanding any rights of appeal, the Secretary of State will be empowered to cause children to be removed to the care of the local authority in which the home is situated (a) from a voluntary home which is not registered, and (b) from a voluntary home in respect of which notice of intention to remove from the register has been given. Removal of the children in these circumstances and their reception into care will be the duty of the local authority on receipt of a notification by the Secretary of State requiring them to act.

May I say, in parentheses, that this provision for notification will meet the Amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Addington, to page 19, line 10. It will not be possible to meet Lord Addington's Amendment to page 19, line 12, which, he will remember, was to provide that a local authority should be allowed twenty-eight days in which to receive into their care children who are removed from a voluntary home. I am sure the noble Lord will appreciate that there might be need to remove the children immediately from the home. It may be taken that there will be full co-operation on the part of the Home Office with the local authority where children are to be received into the authority's care in these circumstances. Fifthly, the Secretary of State will be required to give notice to the local authority in whose area a voluntary home is situated of (a) registration, and (b) removal from the register, of the hone. This also will meet Lord Addington's Amendment to page 19, line 4.

Sixthly, any notice required to be served by the Secretary of State under the provisions of this clause on the persons carrying on a voluntary home is to be served by personal delivery or by registered letter. I hope that this will meet Lord Llewellin's Amendment to page 19, line 27. Seventhly, Section 95 of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933, and Section 99 of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act, 1937 (containing the existing provisions for control over voluntary homes), will be repealed as from January 1, 1949. The new clause which it is proposed to insert after Clause 29 provides for appeal to a tribunal, constituted in accordance with the provisions of a new Schedule to the Bill (to which the noble Lord, Lord Llewellin, referred a moment ago), by a person carrying on a voluntary home, or proposing to open a voluntary home, against a proposal of the Secretary of State to remove the home from the register or his refusal to register it, as the case may be. The appeal will be, in form, a notice served on the Secretary of State requiring him to refer the issue to the tribunal. Fourteen days will be allowed in which to appeal. Where the appeal is brought against a proposal to remove a home from the register, the home will not be removed before the determination of the appeal.

The tribunal will be empowered to confirm the Secretary of State's proposal to remove a home from the register (or his refusal to register a home, as the case may be), or to direct that the home should not be removed from the register (or should be registered, as the case may be). The new clause, as it applies to England and Wales, empowers the Lord Chancellor, with the concurrence of the Lord President of the Council, to make rules as to the proceedings of the appeal tribunal. The new clause also provides for the payment of the fees and allowances of members of the tribunals and the expenses of the tribunals, and provides that the Arbitration Acts shall not apply to any proceedings before a tribunal except so far as they may be applied by the rules referred to above. These provisions as applying to England and Wales are in line with those of the Education Act, 1944, and as applying to Scotland with those of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1946, relating to proceedings before independent schools tribunals. I hope that these appeal provisions will meet the Amendment on this subject of the noble Lord, Lord Llewellin. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 19, line 11, leave out Clause 29 and insert the said new clause.—(Lord Morrison.)

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Lord for the way in which he has explained these two new clauses. On the Committee stage—indeed, I think it is revealing no secret to say that discussions took place before then—considerable doubts were expressed as to whether the clause as originally drafted was quite fair, especially to those who had run voluntary homes for some time. We wanted to get rid of any idea that there was going to be any "hole and corner" business in regard to striking a home off the register. As a result of the discussions (for which I am much obliged to the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack and to the noble Lord opposite) which we have been able to have on this matter, we have these two new clauses and the new Schedule proposed by the Government on the Order Paper to-day, under which this new tribunal is to be established. I should like to say that all the Amendments to which I attached importance on the Committee stage of this Bill have been handsomely met by the Amendments now put down.

As to the suggested form of tribunal, may I say that I like the idea of a legal panel providing the chairman and a welfare panel providing the other members of any such tribunal. It is a better tribunal than the one I originally suggested in my Amendment. I did not very much like the tribunal I suggested in my Amendment, but I took it from another Government measure which is shortly coming before us. However, I think that we in this House have improved on the kind of tribunal for a home of this sort, for it is much more satisfactory that it should be composed of a legal chairman and two members who are interested in and know about welfare work, and who are on the welfare panel, rather than of people who happen to be sitting as a court of summary jurisdiction on the particular day when an issue of this sort arises. Therefore, I think that we may all pet ourselves on the back for having improved the Bill in this regard. I am quite certain that these new Amendments give considerable satisfaction to a number of hard-working and conscientious people who in the past have done good work (as I hope they will continue to do in the future) in organising and subscribing to these voluntary homes and seeing that they do a good job of work. I conclude, as I began, by thanking the Government and the noble Lord for the full way in which he has met us with these Amendments.

LORD ADDINGTON

My Lords, may I also add a word of thanks for the way in which these Amendments, which I endeavoured to bring in on the previous stage, have been made? If twenty-eight days' notice is not possible, as much warning as possible should be given to local authorities who have to make arrangements to receive these children. We want to provide reasonable warning so that arrangements can be made properly.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, I beg to move the next Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 20, line 32, insert the following new clause:

" Appeals.

30.—(1) Where under the last foregoing section application for the registration of a voluntary home is refused, or it is proposed to remove a voluntary home from the register, the persons intending to carry on or carrying on the home, as the case may be, may within fourteen days from the giving of the notice under subsection (3) or subsection (4) of that section appeal against the refusal or proposal; and where the appeal is brought against a proposal to remove a home from the register, the home shall not be removed therefrom before the determination of the appeal.

(2) An appeal under this section shall be brought by notice in writing addressed to the Secretary of State requiring him to refer the refusal or proposal to an appeal tribunal constituted in accordance with the provisions of Part I of the First Schedule to this Act.

(3) On an appeal under this section the appeal tribunal may confirm the refusal or proposal of the Secretary of State or may direct that the home shall be registered or, as the case may be, shall not be removed from the register, and the Secretary of State shall comply with the direction.

(4) The Lord Chancellor may with the concurrence of the Lord President of the Council make rules as to the practice and procedure to be followed with respect to the constitution of appeal tribunals for the purposes of this section, as to the manner of making appeals to such tribunals, and as to proceedings before such tribunals and matters incidental to or consequential on such proceedings; and without prejudice, to the generality of the foregoing provisions of this subsection such rules may make provision as to the particulars to be supplied by or to the Secretary of State of matters relevant to the determination of the appeal, and as to representation before such tribunals, whether by counsel or solicitor or otherwise.

(5) The Secretary of State may out of moneys provided by Parliament—

1. (a) pay to members of tribunals constituted for the purposes of this section such fees and allowances as he may with the consent of the Treasury determine.
2. (b) defray the expenses of such tribunals up to such amount as he may with the like consent determine.

(6) The provisions of the Arbitration Acts, 1889 to 1934, shall not apply to any proceedings before a tribunal constituted for the purposes of this section except so far as any provisions thereof may be applied thereto with or without modifications by rules made under this section.

(7) In the application of this section to Scotland for the reference to Part I of the First Schedule to this Act there shall be substituted a reference to Part II of that Schedule, and for the references to the Lord Chancellor and the Lord President of the Council there shall respectively be substituted references to the Lord President of the Court of Session and to the Secretary of State; and rules made under subsection (4) of this section may make provision for a reference to the Court of Session, by way of stated case, of any question of law arising in such proceedings."—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

3.51 p.m.

Clause 30:

Regulations as to conduct of voluntary homes.

30. The Secretary of State may make regulations as to the conduct of voluntary homes and for securing the welfare of the children therein, and regulations under this section may in particular—

(b) authorise the Secretary of State to limit the number of children who may at any one time be accommodated in any particular home; and

(c) impose requirements as to the facilities which are to be given for children to receive instruction in the religious persuasion to which they belong,

and may contain different provisions for different classes of cases and as respects different classes of homes.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in paragraph (b) to leave out "and" and to insert: (c) require notice to be given to the Secretary of State of any change of the person in charge of a home; and. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, the purpose of this Amendment is to empower the Secretary of State, by regulation, to require notice to be sent to him of any change of the person in charge of a voluntary home. This provision is in substitution for the requirements in subsection (2) and (5) of Clause 29 of the Bill as introduced, that a home should be re-registered on a change in the persons carrying on the home. The reason for the alteration, which I think will make unnecessary the Amendment moved by Lord O'Hagan on the Committee stage, is that it was found to be impracticable to define change in the persons carrying on a voluntary home as used in subsections (2) and (5). But a change in the person in charge of a home, such as the superintendent, matron or other person in a similar position, will almost always be of much greater import than a change in the persons carrying on the home, that is to say the management committee. Accordingly, I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 20, line 43, leave out ("and") and insert the said new paragraph.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, this is a great improvement on the original draft, where, in the case of any change in the management of the home, one had to go through the whole process of re-registration. This is certainly a great improvement and, so far as we are concerned, it is welcome.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF IDDESLEIGH

My Lords, in moving the last of my Amendments I would like to thank those who have supported me and those who have advised me, and, above all, the noble and learned Viscount for the very kind manner in which he has co-operated in this difficult matter. I beg to move my Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 21, line 2, leave out ("instruction in the religious") and insert ("a religious upbringing appropriate to the").—(The Earl of Iddesleigh.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved to add to the clause: (2) Where any regulation under this section provides that this subsection shall have effect in relation thereto, any person who contravenes or fails to comply with the regulation shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, we feel that it is desirable to have in the background this power to keep people up to the mark; otherwise there is no sanction available except that of closing the home down. I can imagine cases, for instance, where instructions are given that certain alterations are to be made in the home, and I can imagine the authorities of the home saying to themselves: "We are not going to have any regard to this at all. It is quite true the Home Office could close us down, but they are so short of accommodation for children in this area that they simply cannot do it at all. Consequently we can snap our fingers at them." Why I think it is desirable to have this power in the background—and I hope very much in the background—is that if an order of this sort is given, the authority concerned have to comply with it at the risk otherwise of being liable to some action. That being so, we think it desirable to have this power. Accordingly, I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 21, line 5, at end insert the said new subsection.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, we have no objection to this. It is obviously better in some of these cases to have a lesser penalty in the background than that of closing the home. Therefore, it seems quite reasonable to us that these words should be inserted.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 32 [Powers of Secretary of State as to voluntary organisations]:

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, may I raise a point on Clause 32? I believe that I ought to have put in a manuscript Amendment because there is no Amendment on that clause. I would have liked to move to leave out Clause 32, and I had given notice of that to the Lord Chancellor. I wanted to raise one point on Clause 32: namely, that a great many societies which carry on these migration activities—such as the Fairbridge Farm Schools and other reputable bodies—are rather concerned lest the provisions in the first paragraph of Clause 32 are too weak. They would like to be assured that the Home Secretary will make regulations which will go some way towards carrying out the recommendations of the Curtis Report. There were recommendations that children should not be emigrated willy-nilly without much inquiry as to their physical condition or the kind of conditions to which they were going in the Dominions or perhaps somewhere else. That was one of the recommendations made by the Curtis Report, and it would be of great satisfaction to the societies who do this work best if they knew that some of the bodies who do not do it so well could be brought up to the mark, so that children are not sent out without any regard to whether they are likely to go to decent homes when they get overseas, and whether they are themselves in a fit condition and are the kind of children who ought to be sent abroad.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I am able to give the noble Lord the assurance for which he asks. I can give an assurance that the Home Office intended to secure that children shall not be emigrated unless there is absolute satisfaction that proper arrangements have been made for the care and upbringing of each child. If I went further I myself would be acting as irregularly as the noble Lord is doing, and I think we had better leave it there.

Clause 34:

CHILD LIFE PROTECTION.

General Extension of Child Life Protection Provisions to all Children below School leaving age.

34. The following provisions, that is to say— (a) Part VII of the Public Health Act, 1936, Part XIII of the Public Health (London) Act, 1936 and Part I of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act, 1937 (which provide for the protection of children under the age of nine who are maintained apart from their parents for reward); and shall be extended so as to apply to children of compulsory school age who are over the age of nine as they apply to children who are under that age; and subject to the provisions of the next following section references in the said provisions to the age of nine, and to nursing and maintaining, shall be construed accordingly.

LORD HENLEY moved, to leave out "of compulsory school" and to insert "under 16 years of." The noble Lord said: My Lords, Clause 34 provides that the Child Life Protection provisions shall be extended up to school leaving age. Therefore, it is to be inferred that it is desirable that children of sixteen years of age —to which the school leaving age will ultimately be raised—should have these services. The objects of this Amendment and the next are that the extension should not depend on the child's attaining school age, but upon its attaining the age of sixteen, and that this extension should take place forthwith. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 23, line 15, leave out from ("children") to ("age") in line 17 and insert ("under 16 years of").—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, we have considered this matter. The school leaving age at the present time is fifteen—or, dependent upon the accident of dates, it may be fifteen years and four months, I think. Let us take the case of a child of fifteen years and, say, nine months. That child would be outside my provision, but within the case dealt with by the noble Lord. Let us see how it might work out. Such a child would often want to continue its education and for that purpose would want to get what used to be called "digs." The child would want to find somewhere to live, and, in all probability, would find a place with a landlady. I am very anxious that if a child succeeds in finding accommodation the landlady should not have to make all sorts of reports and have her premises subject to inspection. Therefore, I think the provision adequate for the time being—what the future will bear in its train, heaven alone knows, but so long as the school leaving age is as it is to-day, it would be undesirable to extend this as proposed. Before the school leaving age is increased, we shall most probably have some experience of the working of this Act. At the present time, for the reasons which I have given, I think it would be undesirable to increase the obligation over and above that already provided.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, in view of that explanation I beg leave to withdraw this Amendment. I think that the same explanation applies to the following Amendment, which I shall not move.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

4.3 p.m.

Clause 38:

Children's committee.

(2) All matters relating to the discharge of the functions of a local authority under the enactments specified in subsection (1) of this section shall stand referred to the children's committee, and except with the consent of the Secretary of State no matter not relating to the discharge of the said functions shall be referred to or dealt with by the children's committee.

LORD ADDINGTON moved, in subsection (2), to delete all words after "children's committee." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this is a point that was raised during the Committee stage. Local authorities feel that the provision goes a good deal further than the requirement to have a children's officer and a children's committee, which is one of the foundations of the Bill, and I cannot say that they welcome it very cordially. The particular provision which it is proposed to leave out, states that except with the consent of the Secretary of State no matter not relating to the discharge of the said functions shall be referred to or dealt with by the children's committee. Local authorities feel that that does go a good deal further than the general principles of the Bill. They contend that they should be given a very full discretion to put certain other functions upon these children's committees when they think fit. They feel that they ought to be trusted to put on a children's committee only other functions which it is suitable for such' committees to discharge, functions which will probably be helpful to the committee, and not the reverse, in the exercise of their functions. I think there are likely to be a good many readjustments of functions under this Bill and other recent measures, and there may well be certain provisions affecting local authorities which may be more suitably carried out by the children's committees than by other committees that are being formed. Local authorities, therefore, think they should have a discretion enabling them to make the necessary arrangement of their own volition, without having to secure the consent of the Secretary of State.

Amendment moved— Page 25, line 4, leave out from ("committee") to the end of line 7.—(Lord Addington.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I do not think that I agree with the noble Lord about this. We consider that the work of the children's committees is of immense importance and we do not wish to run the slightest risk of it being overloaded with any other functions. We want the care of children to be in the forefront and not in the middle distance or the background of the work of these committees. We realise, of course, that there may be exceptional cases, as, for example, in some of the smaller local authority areas, where the volume of work is not great and where other duties may be put on the children's committees. But we want to mark the gravity of what may be done in that connection by saying that it can be done only with the approval of the Secretary of State. It is not really a case of the centre wishing to interfere with the work of the local authority. The underlying idea is to emphasise that this work, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, will be sufficient, if it is properly carried out, to occupy the entire time and attention of the children's committee. No committee concerned with children will be doing more important work than these committees. That being so, we have deliberately provided that if it is wished to put further work on these children's committees it can be done only with the consent of the Secretary of State. It may be an exceptional provision to make, but this is an exceptional matter, and one which ought to be dealt with in an exceptional way. Our concern is lest children's committees might be allowed to do any other work which in their estimation ought possibly to be given priority over this work connected with children. No one, I am sure, would feel more strongly about a committee doing that than the noble Lord who has moved this Amendment. For those reasons we are not prepared to accept the Amendment.

LORD ADDINGTON

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and learned Viscount the Lord Chancellor for the explanation which he has given of the reasons for the Government's refusal to accept this Amendment, and I am particularly grateful to him for emphasising that this is a quite exceptional provision. I note what he has said, and I think we may take it that when it is desired to put certain other functions on a children's committee, and it is clear that the children's committee are the most suitable body to deal with such matters, there will be sympathetic consideration for the application that is made to enable this to be done. In the circumstances, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 40:

The children's officer.

(4) The children's officer of an authority shall not, except with the consent of the Secretary of State, be employed by that authority in any other capacity.

4.8 p.m.

THE MARQUESS OF ABERDEEN AND TEMAIR moved to delete subsection (4). The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I put down this Amendment for consideration at the Committee stage, but I was unable to be present to move it and consequently it now appears again on the Report stage of the Bill. The object of the Amendment is to avoid unnecessary correspondence and consents from the Secretary of State. If local authorities are to be trusted at all, they should be trusted to know whether the job of the children's officer in their county is a whole-time one or nor. There are some counties in which a children's officer will not have a great deal of work to do. Accordingly, a full-time appointment would not be justified unless the officer were to be employed on other cognate work. I feel that we in Scotland are in a rather different position from authorities in England, on account of the scattered nature of the population and, in some counties, of the comparatively small number of children.

My main point is that if we are going to entrust powers to local authorities, we must rely on the common sense and the judgment of those authorities. If that is not done there will be a tendency to destroy the character of local authorities, by reason of their being too much bound by red tape or by instructions from the Secretary of State. If it is desired to encourge local government, members of local authorities must be given some idea of responsibility. If they cannot carry out any responsible work without the sanction of the Secretary of State the result will be a lowering of the standard of the people who are willing to serve on local authorities. I say emphatically that local authorities whose members give their services entirely voluntarily require some encouragement, otherwise candidates will not stand for those bodies at all or the level of persons willing to stand will be hopelessly lowered. Moreover a local authority know their own county better than does the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State is a changing personality, who has to learn his job when he is appointed to office. I think that the noble and learned Viscount, by his action in accepting the Amendment in Clause 16 this afternoon, has shown appreciation that some authority should be left in the hands of local government bodies. That is important if these services are to be properly administered. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 27, line 34, leave out subsection (4).—(The Marquess of Aberdeegn and Temeir.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I should be very sorry if subsection (4) were left out. The children's officer is to be one of the principal officers of the local authority. Not only is he to be that, but he also has to possess highly specialised qualifications. I venture to say that there will be no officer of the local authority invested with more important work than he. Where a local authority have a small area, they can make the children's officer do the same kind of work for a neighbouring authority, and spend his whole time as a children's officer between the two. That is permissible under the Bill. What is wrong—and there are some backward local authorities; I will not say whether they are in England or Scotland, but they are known to exist—is that the children's officer, a specialist in dealing with children and who has an immensely important task, should be taken off that work and made to deal with entirely different matters. I can conceive that it might lead to a local authority, when selecting a children's officer, having an eye not only on the sort of qualifications he would need as children's officer but also on other qualifications for the things he might do in his spare time. I think that policy is wrong.

This highly qualified officer ought to spend his whole time looking after children, and, as I have said, there should be not too much office work; he should get about and see that the children are all right. I do not think he can undertake more useful work than that. There might be exceptional cases. There might be times when the Home Secretary would say that a local authority could use a children's officer for other purposes, but that must be done most sparingly. I tell the noble Marquess frankly that, while I am one who desires to preserve a considerable measure of autonomy and responsibility for local authorities—which they do get under this Bill—it would be a mistake if it went forth that any local authority, without permission from anyone, should be able at their convenience to cast on the children's officer any work not concerned with children.

LORD SALTOUN

My Lords, I strongly sympathise with what the noble and learned Viscount has said, but in support of my noble friend I would like to point out that there are very large areas where there will be no work for a children's officer. Take the counties of Perth, Inverness, Ross, Caithness and Sutherland—I very much doubt whether we shall find any real need for a whole-time children's officer in those counties, which have no great centres of population and which exist at the northern end of a country which, if your Lordships will remember what was said by Sir Walter Scott, is notoriously too careful, too kind, and too indulgent to children. It seems to me that unless we are careful, we may force on local authorities the appointment of a children's officer who will have little to do and who will be rather an incubus. If the Government do not see their way to accept my noble friend's Amendment, I hope that when they come to frame exceptions they will remember cases of that kind.

THE MARQUESS OF ABERDEEN AND TEMAIR

My Lords, I am not entirely convinced by the noble and learned Viscount. I have had a considerable local government experience and I cannot think of any local government officer who has to be appointed with the sanction of the Secretary of State. This seems to be entirely an interference in local administration. But, on the understanding that the Secretary of State will not refuse an application save in very exceptional circumstances, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 41:

Powers of Secretary of State with respect to functions of local authorities.

41.—(1) Local authorities shall exercise their functions under the enactments specified in subsection (1) of section thirty-eight of this Act (including any discretion conferred on them thereunder) under the general guidance of the Secretary of State.

LORD HENLEY moved, in subsection (1), to leave out "including" and insert "excluding." The noble Lord said: My Lords, under Clause 41, local authorities will exercise the functions set out in subsection (1) of Clause 38 (those are the important functions of the children's committee) including any discretions conferred on them, under the general guidance of the Secretary of State. This Amendment moves to leave out "including" and insert "excluding," so as to leave to the local authorities any small discretions that have been left to them by the various Acts which are mentioned in Clause 38. Many local authorities who have administered these services in the past feel a great sense of frustration. They feel that they are bound hand and foot, not only in the general performance of these duties but in any discretion they may have, and Clause 41 ties them down entirely. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 28, line 3, leave out ("including") and insert ("excluding").—(Lord Henley.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I am afraid I cannot accept this Amendment. It is only where there is a discretion that general guidance is wanted. If an Act says," Do this," "Come here," "Go there," there is no room for discretion and equally no need for any general guidance. Ex hypothesi, it is only where there is a discretion that the need for general guidance comes in. If local authorities have a discretionary power then, just because it is discretionary, it is desirable so far as possible to get some uniformity between local authorities and make the experience of one available to others. That is precisely the class of case in which it is necessary to specify that there is an obligation to use the discretion in accordance with general guidance.

LORD HENLEY

I beg to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

4.20 p.m.

Clause 42:

Advisory Council on Child Care.

(2) The said council shall consist of such persons, to be appointed by the Secretary of State, as the Secretary of State may think fit, including persons specially qualified to deal with matters affecting the welfare of children.

LORD HENLEY moved, in subsection (2), after "persons" (where that word occurs a second time) to insert: being persons appointed as representing the interests of local authorities and persons. The noble Lord said: My Lords, Clause 42 deals with the appointment of the Advisory Council on Child Care. The local authorities consider that they should have ample representation upon this Council. It will have important advisory powers, and will deal with many of the functions with which they have to deal, and for which they have to pay. Many of them have had very great experience in the past in dealing with matters of a similar nature, and it is most important that their advice should be available to the Minister on this Advisory Council. Section 29 of the Fire Services Act, 1947, says: The Secretary of State shall constitute a council to be called the Central Fire Brigades Advisory Council for the purpose of advising him on any matters…in connection with the operation of this Act… Section 29 (2) provides that: the Council shall consist of a chairman appointed by the Secretary of State and…persons appointed as representing the interests of fire authorities "— that is, the county councils or borough councils— and of persons employed as members of the fire brigades… It seems to me that these are very similar cases, and that provision should be made to enable the local authority organisations to be fully represented on this important body. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 28, line 22, after ("persons") insert said words.—(Lord Henley.)

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, before the noble and learned Viscount replies, I would suggest to the House that this Amendment is quite unnecessary. What we want are people specially qualified to deal with matters affecting the welfare of children. As the Bill is drawn, we may obtain that type of person from those who have served on local authorities, from those who perhaps have done good work in children's homes, or from those who have been running one of these voluntary organisations. If we specify one particular class of persons, such as local authorities, then there will be pressure to pit in the others. I would much sooner see it left to the discretion of the Secretary of State to select the test people qualified to advise, whether they come from local authorities, from the voluntary organisations or from other people concerned with the welfare of children. I hope that the Government will not accept this Amendment.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Llewellin, has really anticipated the argument which leads me not to accept the Amendment. I agree with him that what we want on this Council are people who know about children—that first, that second and that third; that is the important qualification. Everything else is as dust in the balance compared to that. There will be amongst those child specialists who know all about children, people who serve on local authorities, who see how the child problem infringes on the local authority problem. But, equally, I am very much against putting them in the Bill. If I put them in, I have certainly to put in the voluntary associations. Then I have to set out a kind of category of people who have to be on the council. I think I can satisfy the noble Lord, and give him what he wants, by telling him that it is the intention to put on this Advisory Council members who while being expert on child problems are also experienced in local authority problems and, therefore, can speak from he local authority point of view as concerns the child. I am not going to put that in, because if I put it in for one set of people I must put it in for the others. I must resist the Amendment, but I hope that the noble Lord will derive some satisfaction from my explanation.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, with that explanation, I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

THE MARQUESS OF ABERDEEN AND TEMAIR

May I ask the noble and learned Viscount whether there will be a separate Council for Scotland?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I gather that there will be.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 45:

Grants to Voluntary Organisations

45.—(1) The Secretary of State may make out of moneys provided by Parliament grants of such amounts, and subject to such conditions, as he may with the consent of the Treasury determine towards expenses incurred or to be incurred by voluntary organisations for special purposes connected with the improvement of voluntary homes.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in subsection (1), to omit all words after "organisations" and to insert: in circumstances such that it appears to the Secretary of State requisite that the grants should be made, for improving premises in which voluntary homes are being carried on or the equipment of voluntary homes, or for securing that voluntary homes will be better provided with qualified staff. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords this Amendment really arises out of an Amendment which was moved on the Committee stage of the Bill by the right reverend Prelate, the Lord Bishop of Sheffield. If I remember rightly, he was anxious that we might make grants to secure that the voluntary homes were provided with a better qualified staff. The existing words in lines 40 and 41, on page 29, he thought were rather too narrow. They are merely: voluntary organisations for special purposes connected with the improvement of voluntary homes. It might have been thought by that that we meant grants in the mere physical or structural sense, and did not include the sort of grant which he particularly had in mind. I therefore thought it better to take out the words in lines 40 and 41, and put in the rather wider words, to make it quite plain that there is power to make grants for the sort of purpose which he had in mind. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 29, line 40, leave out from ("organisations") to end of line 41 and insert the said new words.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

THE LORD BISHOP OF SHEFFIELD

May I be allowed to say thank you?

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 46:

Grants to local authorities.

46.—(1) There shall be paid out of moneys provided by Parliament to a local authority in respect of expenditure incurred by them for the purpose of the discharge of their functions under any of the enactments specified in subsection (1) of Section thirty-eight of this Act, other than expenses incurred as managers of an approved school or in respect of children sent to an approved school or in respect of remand homes,— (a) such sums not exceeding fifty per cent. of the expenditure as the Secretary of State may with the consent of the Treasury direct, and subject to such conditions as he may with the like consent determine;

subject however to the deduction of an amount equal to such proportion not exceeding fifty per cent. as the Secretary of State may with the consent of the Treasury determine of so much of the expenditure incurred by the Secretary of State under the two last foregoing Sections as he may with the like consent allocate to that authority.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment is consequential on the Amendments to Clause 26 made in Committee. If your Lordships wish me to give a long and technical description of them, I shall be pleased to do so. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 30, line 20, after ("expenses") insert ("or under subsection (3), or paragraph (a) of subsection (8), of Section twenty-six of this Act").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD HENLEY moved, in subsection (1), to delete "the two last foregoing sections" and to insert "section forty-five of this Act." The noble Lord said: My Lords, the object of this Amendment is to draw the attention of the House to the fact that under Clause 44 grants are to be made for training in child care. The local authorities do not feel any objection to contributing towards the cost of the training in child care, but they do feel that they ought to have, as I said on the previous occasion, some representation on the body which organises this training. It is with that object in view, and to draw attention to that fact, that I move this Amendment. With reference to Clause 45, and the grants to voluntary organisations, the local authorities feel a very strong objection to contributing to those voluntary organisations, over which they have no control or direction. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 30, line 28, leave out ("the two last foregoing sections") and insert ("section forty-five of this Act").—(Lord Henley.)

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, as the noble Lord has just said, the effect of his Amendment would be that, while the Secretary of State could recover from local authorities up to 50 per cent. of his expenditure on making grants for the improvement of voluntary homes, under Clause 45 (1) he would be unable to recover any of his expenditure on training in child care under Clause 44. The general policy which has been indicated throughout this Bill, and in all our discussions, is that the cost over the whole field of child care should be shared equally between the Exchequer and the local authorities. This principle is applied by the Bill not only to new expenditure but also to expenditure which does not now qualify for direct aid; for example—and the noble Lord did not mention this point—the care of children now maintained under the Poor Law. It is accordingly considered to be reasonable that local authorities should pay half the cost of training courses for child care. The noble Lord then raised the question of representation of local authorities. I would point out to him that persons representing the local authority interest will be appointed to the Central Training Council in Child Care. Therefore in that respect the intention of the noble Lord's Amendment is met to some little extent. I am sorry to be unable to go further, particularly as I notice that this is the last Amendment appearing on the Order Paper in his name. I am afraid that he has not had a very profitable afternoon, and I should have liked to finish by unreservedly accepting his last Amendment. But the fates decree otherwise, and I regret I am unable to do so.

LORD HENLEY

Not even on the question of voluntary bodies? That seems to me the unkindest cut of all. I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

4.33 p.m.

Clause 50:

Provisions as to places of safety.

(3) Where under any of the enactments mentioned in subsection (1) of this section a child is removed to a place of safety not being a home provided by a local authority under Part II of this Act and not being a hospital vested in the Minister of Health or the Secretary of State, the local authority within whose area the child was immediately before his removal may defray the expenses of his maintenance there.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, the next Amendment is consequential. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 31, line 29, leave out from beginning to ("required") and insert ("separate accommodation for the temporary reception of children as is").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD ADDINGTON moved, in subsection (3), to delete all words after "State" and to insert: the expenses of the child's maintenance there shall be recoverable from the local authority within whose area the child was immediately before his removal. The noble Lord said: My Lords, on the last stage of this Bill I sought to delete the word "may" from line 37, and insert "shall." That was not thought proper to meet the case, but some other words have been drafted which I hope are suitable. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 31, line 35, leave out from ("State") to end of line 37 and insert the said new words.—(Lord Addington.)

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, without going into details I am prepared to accept the noble Lord's Amendment.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 54 [Prosecution of offences]:

LORD MORRISON moved to add to subsection (1): the provisions of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933, other than the provisions of Parts I and II thereof, or the provisions relating to child life protection of Part VII of the Public Health Act, 1936, or Part XIII of the Public Health (London) Act, 1936. The noble Lord said: My Lords, the effect of this Amendment will be that offences under Parts I and II of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933, which deal with matters not directly relating to the care of deprived children will, as at present, be prosecuted by the local education authority and all other offences by the local authority as children's authority; that is, by the children's committee. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 33, line 29, at end insert the said words.—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 58 [Transitional provisions, minor amendments and repeals]:

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment is consequential. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 36, line 16, at end insert (" Provided that the repeal of the enactments specified in Part II of that Schedule shall take effect only on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and forty-nine.")—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 60 [Short title, commencement and extent]:

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment is also consequential. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 36, line 23, leave out from ("Act") to ("shall") in line 24.—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

moved to insert as a new First Schedule:

" FIRST SCHEDULE

PART I.

CONSTITUTION OF APPEAL TRIBUNALS FOR ENGLAND AND WALES.

1. For the purpose of enabling appeal tribunals to be constituted as occasion may require, there shall be appointed two panels, that is to say—

1. (a) a panel (hereinafter referred to as the ' legal panel ') appointed by the Lord Chancellor, of persons who will be available to act when required as chairman of any such tribunal; and
2. (b) a panel (hereinafter referred to as the ' welfare panel ') appointed by the Lord President of the Council, of persons who will be available to act when required as members of any such tribunal.

2.—(1) No person shall be qualified to be appointed to the legal panel unless he possesses such legal qualifications as the Lord Chancellor considers suitable, and no person shall be qualified to be appointed to the welfare panel unless he has had such experience in children's welfare work as the Lord President of the Council considers suitable.

(2) An officer of any Government department shall be disqualified from being appointed to either of the said panels.

3. Any person appointed to be a member of either of the said panels shall hold office as such subject to such conditions as to the period of his membership and otherwise as may be determined by the Lord Chancellor or the Lord President of the Council, as the case may be.

4. Where any appeal is required to be determined by a tribunal constituted in accordance with this Part of this Schedule, the tribunal shall consist of a chairman being a member of the legal panel and two other members being members of the welfare panel, and the chairman and other members of the tribunal shall be impartial persons appointed from those panels by the Lord Chancellor and the Lord President of the Council respectively.

PART II.

CONSTITUTION OF APPEAL TRIBUNALS FOR SCOTLAND.

5.For the purpose of enabling appeal tribunals to be constituted as occasion may require, there shall be appointed by the Secretary of State a panel (hereinafter referred to as the ' welfare panel ') of persons to act when required as members of any such tribunal.

6. No officer of any Government Department shall be qualified to be appointed to the welfare panel.

7. Any person appointed to be a member of the welfare panel shall hold office for such period and subject to such conditions as may be determined by the Secretary of State.

8.Where any appeal is required to be determined by a tribunal constituted in accordance with this Schedule, the tribunal shall consist of a sheriff (or, if he is unable to act, a person qualified for appointment as sheriff nominated by the Lord President of the Court of Session), who shall be chairman, and two other members being impartial persons who shall be appointed from the welfare panel by the Secretary of State.

9. In this Part of this Schedule the expression ' sheriff ' does not include sheriff-substitute, and means the sheriff of the county in which the voluntary home to which the appeal relates is situated."

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this new Schedule provides for the constitution of the appeal tribunal dealt with in the new clause to be inserted after Clause 29. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 37, line 1, at end, insert the said new Schedule.—(Lord Morrison.)

LORD CLYDESMUIR

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord a question? I know there is a difference between the procedure in Scotland and England. In Scotland the sheriff of the county is automatically the chairman of the tribunal, whereas in England a panel is formed, and rather more latitude is allowed. The sheriff is probably a suitable officer but I wonder whether the noble Lord could say what was in the Secretary of State's mind in making this difference in procedure?

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, the Secretary of State follows the ordinary procedure. In Scotland the tribunal, as the noble Lord said, will consist of the sheriff, with two other members, impartial members, appointed from a panel by the Secretary of State. In England and Wales the tribunal will consist of a chairman appointed by the Lord Chancellor from a local panel appointed by him, and two other members appointed by the Lord President of the Council from a welfare panel appointed by him. So far as Scotland is concerned, the Schedule is modelled on the Fifth Schedule to the Education (Scotland) Act, 1946, providing for the constitution of the independent schools tribunal.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

First Schedule [Transitional Provisions]:

LORD MORRISON moved, after paragraph 2, to insert as a new paragraph: 3.—(1) Where immediately before the commencement of this Act an order made under subsection (1) of Section sixty-one or subsection (2) of Section sixty-six of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act, 1937, or subsection (2) of Section thirty-eight of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1946, was in force committing a child to the care of an education authority as a fit person, that order shall as from the commencement of this Act be deemed to be an order committing him to the care of the council of the county, or county of a city comprised in the area of that education authority. (2) Subsection (4) of Section one of this Act shall apply to any such child as aforesaid in like manner as it applies to a child received by a local authority into their care.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the effect of sub-paragraph (1) of this Amendment is to transfer the responsibility for a child, who is already in the care of an education authority at the time the Bill becomes operative, to the council of the same county or county of a city in their capacity as local authority under the Bill. In Scotland, the education authorities are the councils of counties and of counties of a city, and the areas of the education authorities and the councils coincide. To those not acquainted with Scotland, may I point out that a similar Amendment with regard to England is unnecessary, as children are committed under The Children and Young Persons Act, 1933, to the local authority, whereas in Scotland under the Act of 1937 children are committed to the education authority. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 37, line 28, at end insert the said new paragraph.—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, the next Amendment is consequential on alterations made in Committee to Clause 26 of the Bill. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 38, line 13, leave out paragraph 4.—(Lord Morrison).

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment and the next are little more than drafting Amendments. If noble Lords desire I will give details, but perhaps they will accept my assurance that they are practically drafting. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 39, line 7, after ("where") insert ("an approved school order has been made on the application of a poor law authority and"),—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 39, line 8, leave out (" in the approved school order") and insert ("therein").—(Lord Morrison).

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON moved, in paragraph 8 to leave out "the approval of the Minister of Health" and insert: or Section one hundred and sixty-three of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1947, the approval of the Minister of Health or the Secretary of State, as the case may be,".

The noble Lord said: My Lords in its present form paragraph 8 of the First Schedule applies only to England and Wales. The Amendment extends to local authorities in Scotland, the power which the paragraph already gives to local authorities in England and Wales, to appropriate, without the consent of the Secretary of State, any of their existing children's homes for the purposes of a home provided under this Bill. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 39, line 21, leave out ("the approval of the Minister of Health") and insert the slid words.—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this is a consequential Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 39, line 22, leave out ("either") and insert ("any").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

4.41 p.m.

Second Schedule [Minor and Consequential Amendments]:

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment is consequential. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 42, line 17, leave out from ("under") to end of line 21 and insert ("Part I or Part II of this Act").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, the paragraph in the Schedule with which the next Amendment deals provides as drafted for the omission of the words "on the application of a Poor Law authority in their capacity as such" from subsection (2) of Section 74 of the Children and Young Persons' (Scotland) Act, 1937. These words, however, have already been repealed by the entry in the Third Schedule, page 46, line 16, and it is therefore unnecessary to provide in the Second Schedule for their omission. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 44, line 1, leave out from ("in Section seventy-four") to ("for") in line 3 and insert ("in proviso (a) to subsection (2)").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 44, line 19, leave out ("an") and insert ("the").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment is a drafting one. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 44, line 20, leave out ("a") and insert ("the").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this also is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 44, line 31, leave out ("where the expression first occurs").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this is another drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 44, line 33, leave out ("in the second place where they occur").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment corrects a drafting error. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 44, line 35, leave out ("the contributions shall be payable to").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment corrects a printing error. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 44, line 37, leave out (" meet") and insert ("make").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Third Schedule [Enactments Repealed]:

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 46, line 16, after (" seventy-four,") insert ("in").—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MORRISON

My Lords, this Amendment is consequential. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 46, line 21, leave out ("and ' if any '") and insert ("in subsection (7) the words from the beginning of the subsection to ' that authority, and '")—(Lord Morrison.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, this Amendment, together with the Amendment to Clause 58, page 36, line 16, is consequential on the provisions of subsection (9) of the new clause substituted for Clause 29. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 46, line 57, at end, insert:

(" PART II.

ENACTMENTS REPEALED AS FROM IST JANUARY, 1949.

23 & 24 Geo. 5. c. 12.	The Children and Young Persons Act, 1933.	Section ninety-five.
1 Edw. 8 and 1 Geo. 6. c. 37.	The Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act, 1937.	Section ninety-nine").

—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.