Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Baroness Pitkeathley Excerpts

Committee stage
Tuesday 20th May 2025 Lords Chamber

The Minister can be reassured that we absolutely support the family group decision-making approach, but we urge her to be as rigorous as possible in thinking through how it could be used earlier in the child protection process. I beg to move Amendment 2.

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Baroness Pitkeathley) (Lab)]

I should advise your Lordships that, if Amendment 2 is agreed to, I will be unable to call Amendment 3 for reasons of pre-emption.

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Con)]

My Lords, I rise to support Amendment 2 in the name of my noble friend Lady Barran. As we have just heard, it has a simple purpose: to allow families access to a family group decision-making meeting at the earliest possible opportunity in the child protection process. As I am sure noble Lords have seen, the Family Rights Group briefing, for instance, noted that, when a local authority issues parents with a pre-proceedings letter, concerns around a child’s welfare will already be serious and could mean that an intervention at this stage through a family group decision-making meeting is, unfortunately, already too late. The British Association of Social Workers and Coram have expressed similar worries that waiting could mean that opportunities to bring families together are lost, with difficulties having escalated too far to be addressed.

I believe that research on the ground shows that family group conferences can be effective whenever the time is right for the family—in most cases, that may well be the sooner the better. Indeed, some local authorities are already successfully offering family group conferences earlier on in the child protection process. As my noble friend outlined in her opening remarks, having a family group decision meeting earlier on would allow the wider family to more fully understand the local authority’s initial concerns, and it could— I am not saying it would—allow them to demonstrate that they were able to protect the child concerned.

I hope the Minister will look favourably on this proposal, which aims simply to ensure that families have the best possible chance of staying together if— I stress “if”—issues around a child’s welfare can be properly addressed at the earliest opportunity, or at the very least to ensure that the measures put into the Bill do not force this option to be totally closed off.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Baroness Pitkeathley Excerpts

Committee stage
Thursday 3rd July 2025 Lords Chamber

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Baroness Pitkeathley) (Lab)]

My Lords, I should inform your Lordships that if this amendment is agreed to I will be unable to call Amendments 195A to 197A for reason of pre-emption.

Clause 29: School uniforms: limits on branded items

Amendment 195

Moved by

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Baroness Pitkeathley Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 28th January 2026 Lords Chamber

Amendment 113 not moved.

[The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Pitkeathley) (Lab)]

I should tell the House that if Amendment 114 is agreed to then I cannot call Amendment 117 for reasons of pre-emption.

Clause 30: School uniforms: limits on branded items

Amendment 114

Moved by