HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

CHILDREN, SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES

SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

WEDNESDAY 12 DECEMBER 2007 AT 10.00AM

CONSIDERATION OF MOTION TO COUNTY COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF THE Children are Unbeatable! Alliance

Report of the Director of Children, Schools & Families

Author: John Harris, Director of Children, Schools & Families

Tel: 01992 555700

Executive Member: Jane Pitman

  1. Purpose of report

1.1At the meeting of the County Council on 20 November 2007, County Councillor John Metcalf submitted a motion in support of the Children are Unbeatable!Alliance. A copy of the motion is attached is provided at Appendix A. Consideration of the motion was referred to the next meeting of the CSF Scrutiny Committee. This report provides background information to enable Members to consider the motion.

  1. Background

2.1The motion from Councillor Metcalf relates to the Government’s recent review of Section 58 of the Children Act 2004. The Act put in place arrangements that strengthened the capacity of all agencies to safeguard children and promote their welfare. Section 58 of the Act seeks to protect children and provide greater legal certainty by clarifying the legal framework protecting children from parental violence and abuse. The section removes the defence of reasonable punishment for acts of actual bodily harm, grievous bodily harm, and cruelty. In 2005, the Director of Public Prosecutions revised the Crown Prosecution Service’s charging standards to specify the effect of aggravating factors in cases of common assault. One such aggravating factor is by an adult on a child.

2.2During the passage of the Children Bill, concerns were raised about the currency of the law in this area and the belief, expressed by some, that the defence of reasonable punishment was being used to evade the law by parents who were harming their children. The Government allowed the passage, on free votes in both the Lords and the Commons, of an amendment to the Children Bill tabled by Lord Lester. As a result, section 58 was strengthened, but crucially Parliament maintained that it would be unacceptable to criminalise all physical punishment of a child by a parent.

2.3In responding, however, to MPs’ and Peers’ concerns about the operation of Section 58, the then Minister for Children, Margaret Hodge, gave a commitment to review the practical effects of Section 58 two years after it came into effect and to seek parents’ views about smacking. In line with this ministerial commitment, the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) undertook a review of Section 58 in June 2007, inviting consultation responses from parents and professionals. (A copy of the review document is provided at Appendix B).

2.4DCSF published the findings from the consultation in October 2007 and Ministers determined that there would be no change to the existing provisions in Section 58 of the Children Act. (A copy of the review of consultation responses is provided at Appendix C).

2.5Although Ministers have ruled out any change to Section 58 the associated issues for debate are likely to continue with a public profile for some time, given that proponents of change include national organisations such as the National Association for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), the Children’s Society and the National Children’s Bureau. The Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) is expected to state its position before the end of the year. A campaign to give the same protection for children as adults under the lawon assault is being spearheaded by the Children are Unbeatable! Alliance. Information about this organisation and its arguments in favour of removing the ‘reasonable punishment’ defence can be found at

2.6In debating their response to the motion, Members will need to consider the implications for the overall approach to safeguarding in Hertfordshire, in particular the implications for:

  • Safeguarding policy and practice across agencies, as defined by the Hertfordshire Safeguarding Children Board in line with the revised Working Together national guidance;
  • Safeguarding practice in partner organisations
  • Advice to and support for parents and carers

3Conclusion

3.1In the light of the background information about Section 58 of the Children Act, the key issues and findings from the recent DCSF consultation on its review, and the views of national campaigners in favour of removal of the ‘reasonable punishment’ defence, Members are invited to consider their response to the motion put by Councillor John Metcalf.

Appendix A

Motion for the County Council

Support for the Children are Unbeatable! Alliance

That the Council:

  1. Considers that the law (section 58 of the Children Act 2004) allowing “reasonable punishment” is unjust and unsafe;
  1. Considers that children should have equal protection from assault and that the law should send the clear message that hitting children is as unacceptable as hitting anyone else;
  1. Welcomes the fact that the County Council when consulting on the Hertfordshire Children's Charter said that it would be based on the United Nations Convention on The Rights of The Child and, in this context, notes that in June 2006, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child said that giving children equal protection from assault is "an immediate and unqualified obligation" under the United Nations Convention on The Rights of The Child;
  1. Supports the aims of the Children are Unbeatable! Alliance (set out below);
  1. Wishes to add its name to the list of organisations which support the aims of the Alliance which already includes:
  • Association of Directors of Social Services
  • British Association of Social Workers
  • Catholic Children’s Society (Westminster)
  • Local Government Association (Social Affairs and Health Committee)
  • The MethodistChurch
  • National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders
  • National Association of Probation Officers
  • National Childminding Association
  • National Children’s Bureau
  • National Association for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC)
  • Relate
  • Religious Society of Friends
  • RoyalCollege of General Practitioners
  • RoyalCollege of Midwives
  • Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health
  • Save the Children UK
  • The Children’s Society
  • UK Youth Parliament
  • United ReformChurch
  • British Humanist Association

Councillor John Metcalf

Aims of the Children are Unbeatable! Alliance

We believe that the traditional defence of “reasonable punishment” works against the aims which we and the Government of a modern UK share: the encouragement of positive parental discipline in all families, and assurance of effective child protection in the few cases where it is needed.

We believe it is both wrong and impracticable to seek to define acceptable forms of corporal punishment of children. Such an exercise is unjust. Hitting children is a lesson in bad behaviour. Removing the defence of “reasonable punishment” and thus giving children in their homes and in all other settings equal protection under the law on assault is the only just, moral and safe way to clarify the law. While technically this would criminalize any assault of a child, trivial assaults, like trivial assaults between adults, would not be prosecuted. There already exist adequate means to prevent unwarranted or unhelpful prosecutions. It would on the other hand ease prosecution in serious cases. It would eliminate the current dangerous confusion over what is acceptable and provide a clear basis for child protection.

There is ample evidence from other countries to show that full legal reform, coupled with the promotion of effective means of positive discipline, works rapidly to reduce reliance on corporal punishment and reduces the need for prosecutions and other formal interventions in families. Using positive forms of discipline reduces stress and improves relationships between children, their parents and other carers.

1

071207 02 Agenda Item 2 Children are Unbeatable