Childcare Bill [HL] — House of Lords, 2015-07-01
Topic: Social Welfare
Margaret Beryl Jones (Labour, Centre-left): My Lords, I also support Amendment 16, which has similar objectives. Two key findings of the report of the Parliamentary Inquiry into Childcare for Disabled Children in 2014 were that, "disabled children are denied the same opportunities for positive educational and social development", and that: "Parents are denied the same opportunities to choose to return to work" Here in 2015, the same conditions still exist but now we have a chance to change that with these amendments to the Bill At Second Reading, the Minister stated that where parents of disabled children would like to go out to work, the Government wish to make it easier for them to do so. We support this aim. We know that 88% of the parents of disabled children who do not work wish to return to work. However, we must bear it in mind that 83% of them cite the lack of suitable childcare as the main barrier to doing so. The Minister also said at Second Reading that, "parents with disabled children must have the same opportunities as other parents to access the entitlement".—[Official Report, 16/6/15; col. 1127.] That refers to the new entitlement to 30 hours. We obviously welcome this important commitment and will support him in achieving it. However, we have a long way to go to make this a reality. We know that parents of disabled children do not have the same opportunities to access the current entitlement. For example, only 21% of local authorities are now reporting that there is sufficient childcare for disabled children in their area. Simply adding a new legal entitlement on top of that entitlement, when we know that it is already not working for families with disabled children, will not be enough to secure equal access For disabled children and their families, business as usual will not be enough. This amendment would also require the review to make a calculation of the additional costs of funding and support required to meet the needs of providing childcare for disabled children. My noble friend Lord Touhig made it clear at Second Reading that one of the main barriers to the greater inclusion of disabled children was the lack of consistent funding to meet the additional cost. We were therefore pleased that the Minister stated at Second Reading that the funding review announced by his department would consider evidence on the funding issues for disabled children. However, given this commitment, why does the call for evidence for the funding review make absolutely no reference to funding the additional needs for disabled children? I hope that he will be able to reassure me on this point and can confirm that the funding review will explicitly take into consideration the additional cost of ensuring equal access to the new entitlement for the parents of disabled children I also request that the Minister asks his officials to work on the funding review with members of the Special Educational Consortium, who have expertise in this area. He and his team will benefit greatly if they do. They will produce better information by working closely with those who, on a day-to-day basis, help parents with these problems to solve them by giving them advice on where they can go for help Amendment 12 also identifies workforce issues, which are a recurring theme today. We supported the Government’s reforms to special educational needs and disability provision contained in the Children and Families Act 2014. This Act focuses on early identification and early intervention, and on achieving the best possible educational outcomes. We know that the earlier a child’s needs are correctly identified, the more effective the intervention will be. However, an early years workforce without proper training or qualifications will not be able to deliver the Government’s vision for children with special educational needs and disabilities The Parliamentary Inquiry into Childcare for Disabled Children found that the situation could be so bad that the lack of staff skills and confidence was often the reason for parents, "being subtly discouraged or simply turned away by a provider" This simply is not right. It is discriminatory and I urge the Government to address it. The review proposed in our amendment would be a vehicle for this, so I very much hope that your Lordships will support it.