ESTABLISHMENT OF ADOPTION SERVICES (Hansard, 28 October 1975)

§ Mr. Hooson
I beg to move Amendment No. 245, in page 1, line 9, leave out 'within their area'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With that amendment we are to take Amendment No. 246, in page 1, line 9, after 'needs' insert 'within their area'.

§ Mr. Hooson
These are small drafting amendments which are nevertheless important within a narrow sphere. Clause 1 reads: It is the duty of every local authority to establish and maintain within their area a service designed to meet the needs in relation to adoption…". The amendments propose to move the words "within their area" so that they qualify not the words "establish and maintain" but the word "needs".
As the wording stands, it is the duty of an authority to meet the needs within its area. On a strict interpretation of the present wording, an authority must establish and maintain a service within its area—that is, the service must be provided within the area.
There are certain areas—mine is one—which are sparsely populated and where it would be more economical if the authority were able to share the service with adjoining authorities. The present wording would preclude an authority from sharing a service with adjoining counties.
Great complaints are made about the enormous enlargement of local government services and the building up of small empires where they are not necessary. The present wording of the clause invites that process.
This is a small amendment. It would cost the Government nothing to adopt it. It makes it clear that the service to be established and maintained need not necessarily be located in the local authority's own area.

§ Dr. Owen
There is no difference of intention between the hon. and learned Gentleman and the Government. I made it clear on a number of occasions that 1444 it is possible for local authorities to provide services for adoption by, for instance, collaborating with voluntary adoption agencies, although going outside their boundaries. However, there must be a responsibility on them to co-ordinate the facilities of the full service. I believe that they should have the responsibility to ensure that people in their area benefit from this service. The restriction which the hon. and learned Gentleman feels is placed on local authorities does not exist. Local authorities are able to go wider than their own areas. That is important, but I do not want there to be any misapprehension. No local authority can get out of its responsibility to provide an adoption service.
The existing wording carries out the hon. and learned Gentleman's intention. I do not think that there is any need to make the amendment which he suggests. His wording might act in a slightly more restrictive way on the local authority. I advise the House not to carry this amendment.

§ Mr. Hooson
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

§ Mr. Norman Fowler
I beg to move Amendment No. 230, in page 2, line 15, at end insert— '(5) The service maintained by each local authority under subsection (1) of this section shall be subject to approval by the Secretary of State; and the Secretary of State shall not give his approval unless he is satisfied that that service is of equal standard to those provided by adoption societies approved under section 4 below. (6) When determining whether or not to approve a local authority adoption service the Secretary of State shall have regard to the same criteria as are set out in section 4(3) below'. We support an adoption service covering the whole country and partnership between local authorities and voluntary organisations. The amendment seeks to ensure that the service should be of an equal standard and subject to an equal check.
The Secretary of State is responsible for approving voluntary adoption societies and for seeing that they are efficient and have adequate staff. We propose that he should oversee all adoption agencies and that the same standards should apply to the service throughout the nation.
1445 We do not seek to criticise local authorities or their staff. We seek to ensure that there is no double standard in the Bill. I should like to give one example. In Committee the Minister spoke of the danger of the Department speaking with two voices, of imposing a tough, inspectorial standard and at the same time not giving the resources to the local authorities to enable those standards to be met. However, the same general consideration applies to the voluntary societies. The Government face a crisis of resources. So do the voluntary agencies. Voluntary organisations now face one of the most acute crises in their history. It is nevertheless still proposed by the Government that inspection should continue and that standards should be enforced. Therefore I urge the Government urgently to examine this question and to see whether it would not be better for the Department to oversee operations throughout the nation and to apply the same basis to voluntary societies and local authorities. The suggestion is put forward in a constructive spirit and with the aim of ensuring that similar standards are applied to local authorities and the voluntary agencies.

§ Dr. Owen
This matter was discussed in Committee. There is no difference between the two sides about high standards required of local authorities as of voluntary organisations. The issue in this respect arises periodically in many other areas of local government activity. All local authority functions are carried out under the general guidance of the Secretary of State but local authorities, in the light of competing priorities, must judge how best to use resources. They are directly accountable to the public for the service they provide. That is the difference between local authorities and voluntary organisations. We expect the same high standards in local authorities as we do from voluntary organisations. I do not think there should be any double standards.
We already have social work service offices located in the regions and they keep the Department and the Secretary of State informed of progress. I believe that the overseeing rôle which the hon. Gentleman seeks already exists. Indeed, the service that already exists is a proven and effective method of raising standards in local authorities. In most cases we 1446 shall have to ensure that the same high standards apply. Because I believe the social services already undertake an overseeing rôle, I ask the House to resist the amendment.

§ Mr. Fowler
We wish to make progress. We shall see how the system works. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.