§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. David Hunt.]
12.10 am§ Mr. Michael Colvin (Bristol, North-West)My purpose in this debate is to persuade the Government to act on the all-party call for the recognition of the importance of children's play and for the designation of an existing Minister to add children's play to his responsibilities and to assist in its promotion.
I begin by drawing the attention of the House to early-day motion 363, which reads:
That this House acknowledges that the welfare of Britain's Children is the nation's future, and that provision for their leisure time play is crucial to their healthy development; and accordingly calls on Her Majesty's Government to recognise the importance of children's play, particularly in inner city areas, and to accept overall responsibility for a service to promote it under the co-ordination of one designated Minister.That motion received 211 signatures from right hon. and hon. Members, and the two amendments to it, which were both supported, received a further 44 signatures, which makes 255 supporters across the House. That illustrates the measure of all-party support for what I shall propose.Before I develop my argument, may I welcome my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment and congratulate him on winning the game of pass the parcel that has resulted in his presence here this morning? Two days ago, there was welcome confusion among Ministers as to who should reply to the debate. I say "welcome", because it demonstrates an important point. "Pass the buck" has been the name of the game hitherto when one discusses children's play. Perhaps the presence of my hon. Friend, who is also the Minister with responsibility for sport, is a demonstration of the Government's thinking on ministerial responsibility for children's play. I hope so, because no one could be better suited for the job. The Department of the Environment encompasses the activities of local government, sport, education and housing—activities that have a bearing on children's play.
Why is children's play important? Play is not peculiar to the human species. It can be observed throughout the animal kingdom as that instructive activity through which the young prepare for adult life. Games such as cops and robbers and mothers and fathers are also an instinctive preparation for adult life. The way in which our children play and the circumstances in which they play tell us something about the future of society. As it is an instinctive need as well as a human right recognised formally by the United Nations "Declaration of the Rights of Children", children will play irrespective of what we provide for them. If there are not enough well-designed play facilities and not enough adult involvement, either from parents or from play leaders, we can expect what I 480 describe as "perverted play", in the form of vandalism, shoplifting and juvenile crime. The devil will indeed find work for idle hands. For some extraordinary reason, adults treat play as something trivial and unimportant. At best it occupies children—like the television child minder—at worst, it is a waste of time. Yet for children, play is not the opposite of work. It is a vital element in their healthy and happy development and a crucial form of communication with adults, especially their parents.
Society cannot afford to deprive children of play opportunities and leadership in their play any more than we can afford to deprive them of education. My view is that society is only just beginning to realise that the dividing line between play and education is tenuous. Central and local government ignore the play needs of children, spending hundreds of millions of pounds educating children for 260 days a year and a mere pittance when they leave school, in the afternoons or during the holidays.
This debate is about the leisure time, or out of school play and recreational needs of children, mainly—although not exclusively—in the 5 to 16 years of age bracket. The value of play to children and the community in which they live has never been put better than by Lloyd George in a message to the National Playing Fields Association when it was founded in 1925. He said:
The right to play is a child's first claim on the community. No community can infringe that right without doing deep and enduring harm to the minds and bodies of its citizens.Although I want central Government to accept overall responsibility for children's play and recreation, this does not necessarily mean higher Government spending. Instead, we should get wider use of existing resources and therefore a better return from the investment already made in leisure and sports facilities. We are past masters at locking out youngsters from recreational areas because of red tape. We have failed to recognise that the major problem facing play organisations is that no one Ministry accepts responsibility for children's play. Funding and policy, therefore, emanate from a variety of Departments and we are left with the unavoidable impression that cross-communication does not allow for the most effective use of resources—resources which today we must accept are limited.Ministerial responses to parliamentary questions that I have tabled illustrate the scope of this problem. No one really wants to know. It is lack of co-operation that hinders interested organisations seeking to work co-operatively. The result is that both in the Government and voluntary sectors, at national and local levels, the cause of children's play and recreation is inadequately represented. I shall cite just three examples.
First, housing projects almost always ignore play space or put it as a very low priority. "Keep off the grass" and "No ball games" notices proliferate everywhere. Secondly, latchkey childern are an increasing problem, as shown in the recent debate in Parliament. Thirdly, the Department of Education and Science is shortsighted in its disposal of playing fields when schools close. These should be retained for use by the local community. Hence my early-day motion. My rationale is simple. Only by such a step can resources available for play be protected and improved. Further, the lack of an appointed Minister carries implications for services and projects outside the immediate influence of central Government, because activities and spending at local governmet level are 481 directed, to a greater or lesser extent, by parliamentary enactment and policy thus influencing not only direct service delivery by local authorities but the release of voluntary resources and effort, and ultimately community development itself.
It is, of course, the voluntary agencies that are now bearing the brunt of work on children's play—notably the National Playing Fields Association, a charity under the chairmanship of Mr. Sandy Gilmour and the determined and effective direction of Lieutenant-Colonel Bob Satterthwaite. It is tragic to note that the NPFA service which costs about £¼ million a year is facing a £150,000 deficit this year and has had drastically to reduce its head office and regional staff. That £ ¼ million, largely raised through voluntary contributions, is in marked contrast to the £22 million Sports Council budget.
The NPFA, with other organisations involved in children's play, has been disappointed in the lack of recognition of the importance of children's play in Government reports such as the 1975 White Paper on sport and recreation. Children seem to be non-people, despite children of school age making up about one-fifth of our total population. The Sports Council, which in its Royal charter talks of fostering and promoting sport and physical recreation for the public at large, does not consider children's play to be within its remit. It caters only for the over-16-year-olds. Perhaps it, too, considers that children are not part of the public at large but are non-people.
I emphasise that the importance of play to children goes far beyond physical recreation. It is a basic element in their healthy development, not only physically, but mentally, emotionally and socially. It is literally learning for life—education in its fullest sense. Perhaps if nine years ago, when last there was a debate in the House on the subject, Parliament had heeded the call for greater recognition of the importance of children's play and the need for a Minister to accept overall responsibility for it, some of our inner city problems could have been avoided.
I ask the Government for three things. First, they should accept the importance of play to children as a essential part of their healthy development. Secondly, they should accept full responsibility for a service of advice and support for children's play, perhaps through the NPFA as agent, and, by whatever means, ensure that the service is properly financed. Thirdly, a Minister, among other responsibilities, should be made responsible for coordinating between all interested Departments the Government's response on children's play.
Only when a Ministry and a Minister are given responsibility for such functions will children's play in terms of resources and provision receive the priority that it deserves—a priority that is that of children by right.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Neil Macfarlane)I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, North-West (Mr. Colvin) for giving the House the opportunity to discuss this important subject. Over the past months my hon. Friend has been diligent in ensuring that everyone in the House understands the importance of children's play.
I agree with all that my hon. Friend has said about the importance of children's play in today's complex society. Of course, the Government agree that play is a crucial part of a child's development and that it is thus a major factor in the future welfare of the nation.
482 Over the years many public and voluntary organisations have undertaken a wide variety of tasks related to development through play. They are to be applauded. Local authorities, equally have been the main providers of play facilities. They have been supported in this by my Department's urban programme grants. The Department of Health and Social Security has been responsible for the needs of children in hospital. The Department of Education and Science is responsible for children in school. My Department has supported the physical recreational aspects of children's play through Sports Council grants towards the cost of the NlPFA's Administration; so, too, has the voluntary service unit of the Home Office which I understand has this year made over more than £80,000 to the NPFA alone.
In the voluntary sector, such organisations as Fair Play for Children and the NPFA have done much to meet children's needs.
Few would deny that the NPFA has been the major contributor in this area. I certainly echo my hon. Friend's comments and take the opportunity to pay tribute to the work of the association. Since its foundation in 1925 it has provided hundreds of facilities in every region of the country—football pitches, tennis courts, cricket pitches and dozens of other sports and recreational facilities. Most of us who are of that vintage will remember the great upsurge that the association gave to the provision of facilities in post-war Britain.
The association has concerned itself with the provision of playing fields, playgrounds and recreational space, particularly for children. It has invested more than £2 million in its 57-year history in acquiring, developing, improving and developing recreational facilities. The money has been raised mainly by public subscription. The association has also maintained a service of technical and practical advice to local authorities, clubs and other voluntary bodies through its regional organisations and county associations. Everyone will be concerned to hear what my hon. Friend said about the association's deficit and problems of organisation.
In recent years the NPFA has worked hard to encourage the training and appointment of play leaders and has been a driving force behind the provision of adventure playgrounds throughout the country. In my travels since May 1979, first at the Department of Education and Science, and more recently at the Department of the Environment, I have been totally and continually impressed by the enthusiasm of voluntary play leaders. Indeed, I visited a centre in Speke only last week.
As a nation we have much for which we have to thank the NPFA. On a personal note, I should like to thank Colonel Bob Satterthwaite for his efforts. I have had many fruitful discussions with Bob, both in Opposition and as a Minister. I have to be honest with my hon. Friend and say that it was with some regret and much dismay that 1 had to accept Bob's resignation from the Sports Council last year. I am convinced that he would have been able to further the aims of the NPFA by remaining at the conference table and the Sports Council table where his judgment was much valued.
My hon. Friend has suggested that the present arrangements under which different Government Departments look after those aspects of children's play for which they are generally and directly responsible should 483 be changed and that one Minister should take the lead on the overall subject. That is very much in line with the Government's own thinking.
The situation has become so complex that several years ago a division of my Department was forced to produce a guide for officials on which Department was responsible for the separate elements of children's play. Hon. Members will be pleased to know that the guide quickly became a Whitehall best seller. The need for a more coherent approach to this important subject was quickly evident to the Government and this view has been reinforced by the early-day motion tabled by my hon. Friend last March. It is a measure of the importance that the House attributes to the subject of children's play that more than 250 Members have signed that motion. The Government welcome that interest.
Children's play is, by its very nature, complex, and, rather than rush into a decision not based on a thorough appraisal of the social and administrative needs that the subject covers, the Government appointed a working party of officials from the involved Departments to examine the implications for the future and, in particular, to consider assigning a lead role to a specific Minister and his Department. The deliberations of that working party have now been completed and my colleagues and I will shortly be considering the various recommendations that have been made.
I know that both my hon. Friend and the NPFA have stated a preference for my Department to take the lead, but it may be that the best interests of children's play would be served if some degree of division of responsibility were to be maintained.
What we have to keep in mind is that the development and welfare of the younger generations must not become the victim of a reorganisation of responsibilities which is more apparent than real. I assure the House that the Government's decision will be made with a view to the best interests of the nation's children rather than any administrative expediency. I hope, therefore, that my hon. Friend will not take the view that my answering this debate is a sign that a lead Department has already been chosen.
Once a clearer focus of central Government responsibility has been established, my hon. Friend calls for the establishment of an independent advisory body and, quite naturally, nominates the NPFA for this role.
I have already paid tribute to the great service that the NPFA has given to this country in the past and the valuable contribution that it continues to make, but doubts have 484 been raised in some quarters—not least by the association itself—as to the suitability of the NPFA to carry out this task on a permanent basis.
I know that the association agrees with me that we are living through a period of rapid social change. The violence on our streets in recent years and the many other manifestations of youthful discontent to which my hon. Friend referred are all symptomatic of this rapid change. That these outbreaks of violence have occurred at all is, perhaps, a sad comment on the way in which the nation's institutions have failed to keep pace with that change. We need a new perspective. We need fresh ideas and insights into the root causes of the problems that beset us. The days of simple solutions for simple problems are long gone.
That is why the Government have consistently resisted the temptation simply to throw resources at problems as they arise. It is just this kind of response that has dragged this country inexorably down over the years. Instead, we have sought fresh solutions and new initiatives. This is particularly true of inner city problems. In Liverpool, for example, we have harnessed the resources and potential of the private and voluntary sectors in order to broaden the potential for employment, to improve the physical and economic environment and to make available a variety of recreational facilities. The recreational element of that programme specifically encourages the development of children's play schemes. That programme should not be devoted solely to Liverpool. It is the same in any major city, and my hon. Friend represents part of a city which has similar problems.
This is not to say that the Government are reluctant to allocate resources to an area as important as this. My hon. Friend referred to the fact that the Government gave more than £21 million to the Sports Council, but I should point out that local authorities also use my Department's urban aid programme for play-related projects and in 1981–82 these projects received the better part of £10 million in urban programme funding.
My main point here is that the whole issue of children's play will require a fresh approach, and it may be that to continue along the present path will not yield the best results. We must look at the issue very carefully. If an advisory body is the right approach, we shall most certainly take that path.
In closing, I repeat my thanks to my hon. Friend for raising this very important issue and reassure him not only of the Government's concern but of our determination to take early action. I can only ask him to remain patient just a little longer.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at twenty-eight minutes to One o' clock.