Strong Local Voice, Strong Local Champion

Safeguarding Children (Sexual Exploitation) Westminster Hall.

Annette Brooke (Mid Dorset & North Poole, Liberal Democrat)

I congratulate Mr. Steen on securing the debate. He has considerable experience and knowledge of trafficking and has used it to great effect.

Many significant points have been made and the new Minister has many questions to answer. I welcome her to her new position officially. We have exchanged a few amicable words across the Floor of the House, but have not yet engaged in debate. This debate has highlighted how important it is for the Minister for Children to bring Departments together. We have discussed a number of issues that in the past may have been fobbed off as the responsibility of the Home Office. However, now that we have a Minister for Children, that should not be the case. On that basis, I anticipate that we will receive answers to all our questions.

The hon. Gentleman gave some statistics, which are always a great wake-up call. They were not pessimistic enough to suggest that our society is broken, but did show that it has many worrying and upsetting traits. He rightly drew our attention to this country's child abuse statistics, which remind us that child protection should be at the top of every citizen's agenda. We must be aware of what is going on.

In my brief contribution, I will look at the wider issue of exploitation, as well as at trafficking. The issue is important in relation to the new Government publication, "Safeguarding Children and Young People from Sexual Exploitation". I was pleased to work on the parliamentary panel on safeguarding children and young people who run away or go missing from home or care. An enormous number of children-140,000- run away each year. Fortunately, most of them return safely, but about 10,000 encounter harm or danger, which can involve sexual exploitation. Homeless children, regular absentees from education, those who are not receiving a suitable education and those in pupil referral units are vulnerable. A large proportion of runaways are children in care. A wide breadth of issues make children vulnerable.

Anthony Steen (Totnes, Conservative)

Does the hon. Lady agree that the phrase "children in care" is a misnomer? The one thing that they do not get is care. Although many of the workers involved are dedicated and hard-working, there is a horrible trend that children in care either disappear or are abused while in care.

Annette Brooke (Mid Dorset & North Poole, Liberal Democrat)

I accept that those are problems in the care system. There is no doubt that as a society we must do a lot better with children in care. Hard decisions must be taken about whether to leave children in abusive situations or put them into care. We must be sure that we are putting them into an improved situation. Much more must be done on that.

Many organisations work with vulnerable children, including the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, Barnardo's, the UK Human Trafficking Centre, ECPAT UK, UNICEF and the Children's Society. As Bob Spink mentioned, there are statutory bodies and those from the voluntary sector.

Sexual exploitation is all around us, as was clear from the recent arrest of a nursery worker in Plymouth, which astounded most people. At the weekend, we heard of primary school head teachers who had not done Criminal Records Bureau checks on staff.

Some years ago, I took part in the police parliamentary scheme and spent time with what was then called the child protection unit and the vice squad. Sadly, I learned of things that were happening to children that I had not imagined. I was also involved in the Home Secretary's task force for protecting children on the internet until it changed to its new format, which was when CEOP was set up. I commend CEOP's work, but I have been concerned to read about possible shortcomings in funding. We worked hard to set up that organisation, we examined experience in the United States before doing so, and it has strong support across the board. Will the Minister assure us that it will not be constrained in its vital and successful work because of a lack of funding?

The issues are prevention, identification of young people at risk, effective intervention at an early stage with avoidance of a crisis response, vital support as we pick up the pieces, prosecutions and convictions. Barnardo's defined sexual exploitation as:

"Any involvement of a child or a young person below 18 in a sexual activity for which remuneration of cash or in kind is given to the child or young person or a third party or person. The perpetrator will have power over the child by virtue of one or more of the following: age, emotional maturity, gender, physical strength and intellect",

and perhaps if a child is lost in a strange country. Barnardo's operates on the principle that no child can consent to their own abuse, so children and young people under 18 who are abused by sexual exploitation are victims. An important point was raised about criminalisation of victims, and I hope that the Minister will reply to that. Adults involved in sexual exploitation are child abusers.

As the hon. Member for Totnes said, Government figures suggest that around 330 children and young people are trafficked in the UK each year, although that is likely to be an underestimate. Problems continue to arise from the identification of child victims, which remains very low. We must make it a priority to increase identification. Authorities have not developed adequate procedures and guidelines to improve detection, and there is a general lack of awareness about child trafficking and its indicators among practitioners who come into daily contact with victims from abroad.

Some non-governmental organisations and other campaigners are worried that the immigration age assessment dispute process is used to divert young people into the adult system rather than to safeguard them. That is important, because there is much anecdotal evidence and many examples of disputes when someone is said to be under 18 but the judgment is swayed on the side of them being over 18. I do not know what criteria are used, but the issue is important because of what subsequently happens to those children and young people.

Anthony Steen (Totnes, Conservative)

Swaying on the side of a child being over 18 means that they are sent back, without regard to what will happen to them when they get back. Often, they are trafficked again. The advantage for someone under 18 is that they should be cared for, but the Border Agency is not the right agency to deal with them.

Annette Brooke (Mid Dorset & North Poole, Liberal Democrat)

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. I have met adult females who have been returned to their country and it was the most distressing situation that I can ever recall. They were put into a sanctuary for a short time, but so much support was needed that it was impossible to deliver it, because of the state that those young ladies were in-and they were young. I would not have known if they were all over 18.

Practitioners have stressed the need for child protection concerns to override concerns about the age or immigration status of children and young people who have been trafficked into the UK from abroad. Safeguarding the child must be paramount. Children trafficked from abroad might not receive the same rights and treatment as children born in the UK, even though they are entitled to by law. Multi-agency work between the UK Border Agency, police and children's services at the point of arrival, focused on securing the safety of the child, is essential in efforts to engage with the child and to prevent them from being abducted or going missing.

Good practice is to provide the child with a child protection key worker, who is supported through multi-agency work with police involvement, and accommodation in a place of safety, preferably in supported and supervised foster care. As an aside, I just mention that Tim Loughton and I have talked at great length about the need to register private foster carers. One concern that we all have is that if children enter this country and go into unregulated private foster care, none of us knows what their fate might be. I think that we both hope that the new Minister will look on our request in that area rather more favourably.

Safeguarding procedures are clearly not systematically followed for trafficked children. Immigration issues have generally taken priority. As there is inadequate safeguarding, high numbers of young people go missing. That is the consequence of inappropriate placement, young people not being placed safely and inadequate training of carers in trafficking issues. Poor risk assessment means that children are often defined as trafficked only in retrospect, providing little opportunity for police investigation or for recovery of the child. A patchy police response and lack of clarity about a co-ordinated working group have resulted in a national deficit of support services for children who may have been trafficked.

Many local authorities feel inadequately resourced to meet the additional care needs that those children present. Although it is the responsibility of local authorities, there is currently a lack of safe and appropriate accommodation for trafficked children, as the hon. Member for Totnes mentioned. There are very few specialised services for trafficked children. The trafficking of children and young people is child abuse. Therefore I think that the responsibility for protecting children in the UK rests with the local safeguarding children boards, but clearly practice there must improve.

Experience brings improved practice, and practitioners' awareness of the indicators of trafficking is improved through their experience of working with cases. As practitioners deal with cases and face the problems presented, they begin to recognise indicators and emerging patterns. Lessons can be learned by referring to the practitioners engaged in the work and building those lessons into initiatives. We often refer to the need to see good practice spread.

The important point is that every child matters, including trafficked children and other very vulnerable children, and everyone should be working towards achieving for every child the five outcomes specified in the Every Child Matters programme.

The NSPCC report "Breaking the wall of silence" focuses on the need for improved and more structured practices between agencies: police, health, social services and immigration. The role of LSCBs in facilitating multidisciplinary agencies must be strengthened and good practice learned. The overriding feature is that the safety and welfare of trafficked children should come above their immigration status.

At the time of a 2007 report, no national data were collected by the Department for Children, Schools and Families on runaway and missing children. Around the time of the report, a welcome announcement was made that children missing from home and care would be included as a national framework performance indicator for local authorities. That shows that raising issues continually at least gets them on the radar, but I wonder whether that is enough.

In September 2001, we needed a national plan to safeguard children from commercial and sexual exploitation. Have we made progress over time? Certainly a new report is needed in respect of changes in society, the growth of use of the internet, as has been said, and new structures in local authorities, but we have had so much guidance and so many documents. Do they really make a difference?

I have to confess that I have only skimmed at high speed through the Government's guidance. There were bits that I related to and thought were excellent-for example,

"every LSCB should assume that sexual exploitation occurs within its area unless there is clear evidence to the contrary."

That is an excellent starting point. I was recently at a conference about trafficking in Dorset. The local Soroptimists were highlighting the purple teardrop campaign, and there was amazement that there might be trafficked women in Dorset. We are so unaware of what is going on, and that is why it is important that we start with that premise.

The report states that LSCBs should

"put in place systems to monitor prevalence and responses to child sexual exploitation".

What monitoring will the Department do as a consequence of the guidance being put in place? We need a report on progress right across the board, because time is ticking on. Just producing papers and books of guidance year after year is not enough. This must not be just a paper exercise. I share the hon. Gentleman's concerns about cuts in funding to some important organisations, and I hope that the Minister will address that point.

Finally, something that I have been involved with throughout my time in Parliament is a campaign for making therapeutic treatment available to all children who have been abused. Provision is patchy across the country. As much as we are doing to safeguard children, we will not stamp out child abuse unless we provide therapeutic treatment, which is vital to breaking the cycle. Sadly, many abused children go on to exploit others in their adult life.