Interpretation (Hansard, 16 March 1984)

§ Mr. Wood

I feel a little like the batsman who has been watching an excellent and successful innings corning out to bat shortly before the end of the parliamentary day. However, my intentions are also to ensure the protection of children and the Bill, once enacted, will be widely welcomed by many parents.

The amendments seek to divide the Bill into three parts. The first part will consist of clauses 1 to 4 and will deal with England and Wales. The second part will consist of the new clauses 1 to 3, and will deal with Scotland. The third part, consisting of clauses 5 to the end, will deal generally with miscellaneous matters affecting England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It is helpful to make that clear at the outset, because although the Bill was not amended in Committee, some important points were made on two or three aspects which will be covered by the amendments.

These amendments relate to children in care. The position of children who are in the custody of one parent or another is, in terms of the law, not so complicated, but, as one can see from the substantial new schedule, there are a number of technical considerations.

In Committee reference was made to local authorities and voluntary organisations which had care of a child but out of whose care that child was taken. The hope was expressed that proposals could be made to provide suitable 677 protection for that group of children. These proposals are contained in the amendments that are now being considered.

The amendments cover children in care, those committed to a place of safety and those who are at certain stages in adoption and custodianship proceedings. They will ensure that appropriate consent to the taking or sending of a child out of the United Kingdom will come from a local authority or voluntary organisation where the child is in their care; or from any magistrates' court in the area where the child is committed to a place of safety; or from, first an adoption agency which made an application for a freeing for adoption order where an order has been made, or another agency holding transferred parental rights as a result of an order, secondly a court to which an application has been made for a freeing for adoption order or custodianship order, and, thirdly, a court which has made an order relating to adoption abroad or to which an application for such an order has been made. Those are some of the technicalities of the amendments before the House.

Following the precedent of the previous debate, I should like to be allowed a little latitude to emphasise the importance of the matters that we are considering. Many children have been taken out of the country, frequently following a separation of the parents. It has then been exceedingly difficult for a parent to obtain the return of that child. Indeed, in many instances it has proved impossible. Often the parent from whom the child has been taken does not even know whether the child is still alive. It is a tragic situation for many and much distress has been caused.

I am delighted to see that my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Mr. Rhodes James) is present. He attempted to introduce a similar Bill in the previous Parliament, but its passage was halted by the election. The Bill and the amendments that we are considering are an important step towards removing much suffering that is presently encountered. When children are taken from parents, the existing civil remedies do not allow those children to be recovered easily through courts abroad. With the introduction of these proposals the criminal law can be invoked, the police, in the first instance, can act on behalf of the parent from whom the child has been taken, and if the child is taken out of the country, extradition arrangements can apply.

The second amendment——