HC Deb 25 July 1946 vol 426 cc193-5
17. Mr. Janner

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department by what authority a boy aged 13, who had been committed on 2nd September, 1942 to the care of the Kent County Council for boarding out with foster parents, was placed in a remand home in January, 1946, and retained there for five months; whether the Kent County Council made any application to his Department under the Children and Young Persons Boarding-out Rules, 1933, for special arrangements to be made; and, if so, on what date the application was made.

Mr. Ede

When the Kent County Council accepted the care of this boy in September, 1942, they arranged to place him with a suitable foster parent with whom he remained for over three years. In January last he was moved at the request of the foster parent, and he was placed in the Council's remand home for younger boys, as a place of safety, until other arrangements could be made. In spite of every effort, including advertisements in the Press, the council were not able to find a new foster parent, and the boy remained in the home until June. My hon. Friend is right in suggesting that in view of this delay it was the duty of the council to obtain my consent to the boy's continued stay in the home. In a letter written on 13th June the council expressed regret for the omission.

Mr. Janner

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is an extremely serious infringement of the liberty of the person, and would he say whether this letter, which was sent to his Department, was sent after the child's parents had applied to the juvenile court for a reduction of the order; and can he say whether there have been any similar cases elsewhere in the country?

Mr. Ede

I agree that this is a very serious lapse on the part of a county council that is normally most efficient. I do not think that anyone would contend that, in its ordinary administration, the Kent County Council is other than efficient. I have received this expression of regret, but with regard to the precise details for which my hon. Friend asks, cannot answer them without notice. I have no reason to think that the rule which was infringed on this occasion is not usually obeyed by the authority.

Mr. Hogg

Ought it not to be the case that, having regard to the fact that the original order for custody is made by a juvenile court in most cases, where the transfer is proposed from the foster parent into whose care the child has been placed by the court, the court should be consulted just as much as the right hon. Gentleman, and is it not wholly unsuitable that such a transfer should take place solely at the instance of the foster parents, without informing the real parents?

Mr. Ede

That is an indictment of the existing law and not of my Department or of the Kent County Council.

Mr. Janner

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to inform the various authorities to whom children are sent, as being fit persons to receive them, that this is a terrible infringement of the liberty of the person of the child and that they should be very careful not to make a lapse of that sort?

Mr. Ede

I am taking steps to see that the attention of the authorities is drawn to these requirements, and I hope that the expression of opinion made in the House today, with which I agree, will emphasise the representations which I am making.