Long road ahead to improve children's social care, MPs warn
Shortages of care placements led to 45% of looked-after children being placed outside of their local authority last year, and 22% moved more than 20 miles from home, MPs said, with 'distressing impacts' felt as a result.
The committee's report also noted almost four in 10 (39%) care leavers aged 19–21 are not in education, training or employment, compared to 13% of all young people in that age group, while a third of care leavers become homeless within two years of leaving care.
Committee chairwoman Helen Hayes branded the situation a 'moral failure'.
She said: 'It is unacceptable that thousands of young people leaving care are being left to face homelessness, unemployment or barriers to education – it is a moral failure.
'The system that should be supporting our most vulnerable children is far too often abandoning them at a critical moment in their lives. Urgent action is needed to fix this broken system and give all of our young people the futures they deserve.
'Throughout this inquiry we heard that a false economy of cuts over the past decade has led to postcode lotteries in provision across different areas of the country, and has instead caused some parts of the system to become more expensive.'
The report called for Government funding to be directed back into early intervention services, which Ms Hayes said 'reduce both children's suffering and costs in the long run', and to provide a so-called National Care Offer covering a guaranteed level of support for those leaving care as opposed to a 'cliff edge as they approach adulthood'.
She added: 'There is a long road ahead to improve the children's social care sector, but doing so will reduce children's suffering and produce a system that helps give young people the best chance to live happily and independently.'
The report's publication on Thursday coincided with changes coming into effect which the Government said will give care leavers greater access to social housing.
The requirement for vulnerable groups including care leavers to have a connection to the local area has been lifted, meaning they will 'no longer be unfairly penalised', the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said.
Also on Thursday, the Department for Education (DfE) announced more than £53 million would be invested in creating 200 new placements in high-quality council-run homes for the most vulnerable children including those who need to be prevented from running away or from harming themselves and others.
The Government said this was the first time it had specifically targeted funding at children with complex needs who are at risk of being deprived of their liberty.
The DfE said the investment is part of its reform plan for the sector, moving away from a crisis intervention approach to earlier prevention help, with more than £2 billion investment over the course of this parliament.
The committee cited a number of reasons for the rise in the number of looked-after children, including less support for early intervention, greater poverty and cost-of-living pressures and an increase in the number of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.
The MPs said: 'The Government must address the factors outside the care system which are contributing to the rise in need and take action in its forthcoming Child Poverty Strategy to significantly reduce the number of children growing up in financial hardship.'
The strategy is expected to be published in autumn, having been initially expected in spring.
Among the committee's other recommendations were development of a new strategy to recruit foster carers and offer more support to kinship carers, and improved availability and quality of residential placements.
The MPs also called for the DfE to issue a 'comprehensive response' to the 2022 Independent Review of Children's Social Care, which called for a 'radical reset' to improve the lives of children in care and their families by breaking the 'cycle of escalating need and crisis intervention'.
The committee said national eligibility criteria for disabled children's social care should be introduced, noting there is currently a 'confusing 'postcode lottery' of support between local authorities'.
Stephen Kingdom, campaign manager for the Disabled Children's Partnership, said the report shows disabled children, young people and their families 'are being failed by children's social care'.
He added: 'Too often, families find that a system that should be supporting them is instead treating parents with suspicion. As a result, their needs are de-prioritised; they find themselves blamed and stigmatised; and what little help they do get only comes when they hit crisis point.'
Care charity Become welcomed the committee's 'commitment to driving meaningful change' and putting young people's voices 'at the heart of these recommendations'.
Harriet Edwards, from national disability charity Sense, backed the report's recommendations 'so all disabled children are treated fairly, no matter where they live', stating that 'for too long disabled children have been failed by a confusing social care system that is not fit for purpose'.
Children and families minister Janet Daby said the children's social care system had 'faced years of drift and neglect, leading to a vicious cycle of late intervention and children falling through the cracks'.
The Government had previously announced a pledge from Government for a 'backstop' law, which would limit the profit children's social care providers can make, to be brought in if providers do not voluntarily put an end to profiteering.
Ms Daby: 'Through our Plan for Change and our Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, this Government is enabling every child to achieve and thrive by investing in the places children need, cracking down on profiteering with new laws, and rebuilding family support services so parents and carers get the help they need to keep their children happy and safe in loving homes.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Sir Ben Wallace doesn't know why Afghan superinjunction was imposed
Sir Ben Wallace said his government did not initially apply for a superinjunction to block reporting of a massive data leak relating to Afghan soldiers and he did not know why it had been granted. The then defence secretary said the original application from the Tory government was for a four-month injunction to stop the media from disclosing the details of the leak. But he said that this regular injunction was subsequently upgraded to a superinjunction but he was unaware of the reasons why. He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: 'We went to court seeking a four month injunction to be placed on the reporting of this leak. 'Many of these injunctions are constantly having to be refreshed and between now and back then on numerous occasions government lawyers would have been going back to the court justifying the reason for this. 'I am afraid I was not in court on the 1st of September, I had actually handed over. I don't know why Justice Knowles at the time converted that to a superinjunction. It wasn't what our application was.' The original application for the injunction was made in August 2023 after the Ministry of Defence became aware of the leak. It was revealed yesterday when the superinjunction was lifted that a dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. That prompted the government to set up a secret Afghan relocation scheme to help the victims amid fears they could have been targeted by the Taliban.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
French PM may scrap two public holidays to reduce country's crippling debt
France's prime minister, François Bayrou, has proposed scrapping two public holidays as part of radical measures aimed at reducing the country's ballooning deficit, boosting its economy and preventing it being 'crushed' by debt. Outlining the 2026 budget on Tuesday, Bayrou suggested Easter Monday and 8 May, when France commemorates Victory Day, marking the end of the second world war, although he said he was open to other options. The centrist prime minister said: 'The entire nation has to work more so that the activity of the country as a whole increases, and so that France's situation improves. Everyone will have to contribute to the effort.' France is under pressure to bring its public deficit, running at 5.8% of GDP, under the 3% figure required by EU rules, and to rein in €3.3tn of public debt – on which the annual interest, of €60bn, could soon become its biggest budget outlay. The debt mountain represented a 'mortal danger' for a country 'on a cliff edge' and 'still addicted to public spending', Bayrou said, outlining steps he said would cut €43.8bn from the budget, reducing the deficit to 4.6% next year and 3% by 2029. Other measures would include an across-the-board freeze on government spending except for debt servicing and the defence sector, which President Emmanuel Macron demanded should be increased by €3.5bn next year and more in 2027. The budget squeeze will also entail keeping pensions at their 2025 level, capping welfare spending and reducing healthcare expenditure by €5bn. Civil service and government agency salaries would be frozen and public sector job numbers cut. The move to scrap public holidays is likely to meet strong resistance, although France has previously discussed combining VE Day with Armistice Day on 11 November, creating a single memorial day for the victims of the first and second world wars. 'Cancelling two holidays is a direct attack on our history, our roots and on working France,' said Jordan Bardella of the far-right National Rally (RN), the largest single party in parliament. 'No RN MP will accept a measure that amounts to provocation.' Other party leaders were equally damning. The proposals were 'an organised hold-up', said Fabien Roussel of the French Communist party. Jean-Luc Mélenchon of the radical left LFI said it was 'time to expel Bayrou' and 'end this destruction, these injustices'. A Socialist party MP, Boris Vallaud, condemned it as 'a brutal and unacceptable budget'. He added: 'Asking always more from those who have little, and so little from those who have much, is neither serious, effective, nor just.' Macron's decision to call a snap election last year delivered a hung parliament in which Bayrou does not have enough votes to pass a budget without the support of the left or the right, both of which oppose his proposals for different reasons. Without an agreement, the veteran prime minister could face a no-confidence motion similar to the one that toppled his predecessor, Michel Barnier, as early as October, when his detailed budget bill is due to go before to parliament.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Defence Secretary John Healey 'deeply uncomfortable' with government using super-injunction after Afghanistan data breach
The defence secretary has told Sky News he is "deeply uncomfortable" with the government using a super-injunction to keep a massive data breach hidden. Almost 7,000 Afghan nationals are being relocated to the UK as a result of the breach by the British military, with the personal information of close to 20,000 individuals who helped or worked with UK forces being exposed. John Healey told Matt Barbet on Breakfast: "I'm really deeply uncomfortable with the idea that a government applies for a super-injunction. "If there are any [other] super-injunctions in place, I just have to tell you - I don't know about them. I haven't been read into them. "The important thing here now is that we've closed the scheme." Mr Healey defended the government's decision to keep secret a huge data leak that put thousands of lives at risk. The defence secretary said when he first came into government, "we had to sort out a situation which we'd not had access to dealing with before". "That meant getting on top of the risks, the intelligence assessments, the policy complexities, the court papers and the range of Afghan relocation schemes the previous government had put in place," he said. "And it also meant taking decisions that no one takes lightly because lives may be at stake." Mr Healey added that an independent review he launched says that it is now "highly unlikely that being a name on this data set that was lost three-and-a-half years ago increases the risk of being targeted", which is why the whole leak can be revealed. Ministers have to account for applying for a super-injunction Challenged on why it could not be revealed earlier if those on the list are no longer at risk, Mr Healey said the super-injunction "was a matter for the court". He said ministers needed to provide judges with a "fresh assessment" in order to have the super-injunction lifted. Mr Healey also refused to criticise the former Conservative defence minister Ben Wallace for initially applying for the super-injunction, saying he did not know what information the minister had when he took the decision. "But the important thing is they now have to account for those decisions," he added. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
