10 Jan 2006 : Column 51
House of Lords
Tuesday, 10 January 2006.
The House met at half-past two of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Exeter.
Family Fund
Lord Elder asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will increase funding to the Family Fund to enable the fund to extend its existing remit and help families with severely disabled children who are 16 and over with grants directly related to their child's disability.
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, the DfES, Scottish Executive, Welsh Assembly and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety in Northern Ireland currently provide £29.7 million to the Family Fund and there are no additional funds available to immediately increase this. We will consider the Family Fund's request for an extension of its remit beyond the age of 16 as part of the next Comprehensive Spending Review in the light of other priorities.
Lord Elder: My Lords, I thank my noble friend the Minister for that response. Does she agree with me that the trustees of the Family Fund have done a remarkable job in fulfilling their remit, particularly in England where they have had to deal with the problem of no inflation adjustment in their funds since 2003–04? That is quite unlike the situation in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland where adjustment has been made. Does my noble friend agree with me that the best thing the Government could do would be, first, to deal with that anomaly and, secondly, to extend the remit to include families with children over 16?
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I very much agree with my noble friend that the Family Fund is doing a great job as the evidence of the recent triennial review of the fund indicated. On funding in England, my noble friend will know that the funding for the Family Fund is determined through the Comprehensive Spending Review. In the 2002 spending review the Government assessed the available evidence and agreed £22.8 million per annum for the Family Fund for 2003–04, 2004–05 and 2005–06. Of course, future funding will be determined when we look at the Comprehensive Spending Review in 2007. We will be working very much with the Family Fund to work up a business case so that we can look at an extension of its remit.
Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, does the Minister recognise that that is not an altogether unhelpful
10 Jan 2006 : Column 52
answer? Does she also recognise that it was my late noble friend Lord Joseph who invented the Family Fund when he was Secretary of State for Social Services, to which I as the then Chief Secretary was very pleased to give my assent? Is it not remarkable that in marked distinction to some more recent initiatives the Family Fund has stood the test of time—a third of a century—and perhaps it is time to have a look at its remit again? I hope that the review which the noble Baroness mentioned will do that with sympathy.
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I very much agree with the noble Lord, and I congratulate him on his part in setting up this fund in the 1970s after the thalidomide cases. The fund has indeed proved highly successful, and it has been doing a terrific job over the years as regards, for example, the turnaround time between an adviser going to meet a family or talking to a family over the phone and the grant getting to the family for the practical things that it needs, for example, a freezer, because going shopping on a daily basis with a disabled child can be a great trial for some families; or as regards funding a well earned holiday, and so on.
Lord Rix: My Lords, does the Minister agree that there is a need for short breaks for every family caring for a person with disabilities, whatever the age of that person?
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I very much agree with that. The stresses and strains on families with severely disabled children must be enormous, and of course holidays and short breaks are very necessary.
Lord Addington: My Lords, does the Minister agree that anything that deals with children that cuts off at 16 would not be considered in the current environment and would not go with any of the Government thinking of the moment or of the recent past? Surely that should be changed.
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, as I have said in a previous answer, we have asked the Family Fund to work up a business case with us throughout the United Kingdom, with civil servants from all countries of the United Kingdom, to look at how, if it is at all possible, we can extend the remit to beyond 16 when it comes to the next Comprehensive Spending Review. I cannot give any guarantees, but we are very positive about this and very supportive of the fund.
Lord Morris of Manchester: My Lords, in view of the clear success of the Government's Early Support Programme for children under three, will they consider with urgency a similar initiative for seriously ill and severely disabled young people of 16 and over, who are now trapped in the gap in social provision to which the
10 Jan 2006 : Column 53
Family Fund has drawn attention and, given appropriate funding, is eminently well qualified to tackle?
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, as my noble friend will know from his great experience and interest in these matters, the transitional arrangements for young people with statements of special educational needs are already based on a multi-agency approach. He knows that the school must invite social services, Connexions and other relevant services such as health to the year nine review of a young person's statement. However, he is right; despite all that activity we know that too many young people still receive unco-ordinated services, and we are addressing that through a number of ways including person-centred, individual budgets.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, is the Minister aware of a recent report from the Family Fund that says that people on average earnings have a shortfall in income over expenditure in caring for disabled children of some £5,000 a year? Further, is she aware that new claims for additional care allowance in respect of disabled children ceased in April 2003? Although child tax credit may be paid in addition to basic carers' allowance, one size fits all—both able-bodied and disabled—simply is not appropriate. Is it not time that the Government looked at dependent child allowances again?
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, my briefing has been centred round the Family Fund, and I am happy to correspond with the noble Lord on the wider issues that he has raised. As far as lifting children out of poverty is concerned, this Government's record stands.
The Earl of Listowel: My Lords—
Lord Carter: My Lords, have the Government made any estimate of the global cost of extending the remit of the Family Fund in the way that my noble friend has suggested?
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, as I have mentioned previously, we very much hope that we can work with the Family Fund to build up a case that we can then put to the Treasury when it comes to the next spending review.
Merchant Ships: Red Ensign
2.44 pm
Baroness O'Cathain asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is their response to the European Union's proposals that British merchant ships should fly the European Union flag in place of the Red Ensign.
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, there are no European proposals to replace the Red Ensign with
10 Jan 2006 : Column 54
the European Union flag and Her Majesty's Government remain firmly opposed to such a suggestion. The Red Ensign is rightly seen as a mark of compliance with high standards and we see neither need nor advantage in replacing it.
Baroness O'Cathain: My Lords, I am very grateful indeed to the noble Baroness. However, there have been such suggestions which have had wide publicity. Will she ensure that the Government make that statement very public?
Baroness O'Cathain: May I continue, my Lords?
At the same time, will the noble Baroness make sure that the Commission looks at the areas where it can do something that will not cause morale problems in our country? Instead of messing around with nation states it should, according to the report from the auditors committee, get its own house in order.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |