Modern Slavery Bill — House of Lords, 2015-02-25
Topic: Law and Crime
Elspeth Howe (Crossbench, Unknown): My Lords, I wish to speak to my Amendment 59A in this group. First, however, I would like to commend the noble Lord, Lord McColl, for his perseverance in bringing this issue before the House over so many years. I hope your Lordships would agree that his work and that of the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, have been recognised in the amendments to Clause 48 that we are discussing today In Committee, I said that I was disappointed that the Government would not "be bolder" in their statements of the principles that would underpin the role of the advocates. I am glad to see that today they have gone some way towards meeting my concerns. At Second Reading, I said that we needed, "a proper definition of child trafficking advocates".—[Official Report, 17/11/14; col. 307.] Again, I am glad to see that the Government have put forward some helpful clarifications in the series of amendments tabled by the Minister. In particular, I welcome the addition of the word "independent" in eight of his amendments However, as was said about the anti-slavery commissioner, adding the word "independent" does not mean that the role really is independent. I am grateful that the Government have recognised the strength of the argument in the case of the commissioner and amended the Bill to ensure that there really is independence with budgets and staff. I feel the same way about the use of the word "independent" in relation to child trafficking advocates Clause 48(2) currently says that the Secretary of State, "must have regard to the principle that, so far as practicable, a child should be represented and supported by someone who is independent of any person who will be responsible for making decisions about the child" I know that the Minister said in Committee: "Our provision sets out key principles in the Bill, such as that the advocate must be independent" He also said that, "we are very clear that these advocates need to be independent in order to support and protect the child effectively".—[Official Report, 8/12/14; cols. 1683-84] The noble Lord said that the principle of independence was set out in subsection (2), so it was therefore unnecessary to include the word "independent" in the title of the clause or the title of the role I welcome the Minister’s change of heart on the use of the word "independent", but there are so many new references to "independent" included in this clause that Clause 48(2) remains unamended. I am left perplexed about what "independence" might actually look like if it was only to be "so far as practicable". It is for that reason that I tabled Amendment 59A, which would amend Clause 48(2) and clarify what "independent" means in this subsection, thereby removing the uncertainty that the words "so far as practicable" engender. The need for an independent person was recognised in the 2013 report, Still at Risk, produced by the Children’s Society and the Refugee Council. That report recommended that, "a system of protection needs to be developed which includes an independent trusted adult appointed to a separated child as soon as they come to an authority’s attention" The handbook on child trafficking advocates published last year by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights has independence and impartiality as one of its six fundamental principles, saying that advocates must, "be in a position to make independent and impartial decisions, assessments, actions and representations guided by the best interests of the child".