@Mr_Al_Coates here's a quick tour from the exemption clauses to now (after @tom_perkins4 prompt - thanks!).
In May 2016, a Bill was introduced into Parliament which contained clauses allowing councils to opt out of any number of their children's social care statutory duties 1/
In May 2016, a Bill was introduced into Parliament which contained clauses allowing councils to opt out of any number of their children's social care statutory duties 1/
for up to six years. These were duties from 1933 to even those contained in the Children and Social Work Bill itself. The Secretary of State was to be empowered to force councils who were struggling to meet their statutory obligations to opt out of those obligations. There 2/
had been no Green or White Papers. This was a shocking attack on the legal framework for children's social care. Government called it innovation. In relation to adoption, Lord Nash told Parliament adoption panels "add little value" (see below). Fantastically, Peers deleted 3/ 
the clauses due to the huge risk to children and to our constitution. The challenge to the core infrastructure as advocated by the Chief Social Worker (in Community Care ⬇️) wasn't to happen. However, when the Bill got to the Commons, the exemption clauses were put back in - 4/
though this time several sections of the Children Acts 1989 and 2004 were protected from opt-outs. DfE called these "core legal duties" (hold that thought - we'll return to it). Opposition continued to grow, Prof Eileen Munro withdrew her support & a parliamentary delegation 5/
went to see the SoS. This led to the government supporting an opposition amendment to delete the clauses altogether (see below from CYP Now). Those of us who had worked night & day on this could relax. Children's law was safe. That was March 2017. In Feb 2018, a review of 6/
foster care by Martin Narey and Mark Owers was published. It contained recommendations which closely resembled areas of policy on the hit-list for the exemption clauses - threatened removal of fostering panels and IROs, for example. Those of us who had fought 7/
against the exemption clauses wrote to government. The recommendations were rejected. Phew. Then in July 2018, the DfE published a so-called 'myth busting' guide. It - you've guessed it - covered some of the same territory of the exemption clauses and the foster care review. 8/
The 'myth buster' was set out in Q&A format. It was supposed to be about statutory guidance but concerned regulations (law) too. On the DfE question as to whether guidance permits the merger of adoption and fostering panels, it said this ⬇️ 9/
The 'myth busting' guide was full of inaccuracies and was clearly intended as a deregulation tool. It was only withdrawn following legal action by Article 39. That was March 2019. Then in April 2020, Statutory Instrument 445 removed & diluted 65 safeguards overnight. 10/
This included the removal of the adoption panel, which was mandatory and is now discretionary ⬇️. (There are other overlaps with the deregulation sought by the exemption clauses). When SI445 came into force on 24 April 2020, the time period was uncertain. An expiry date of 11/
25 September was stated in the SI but this was subject to DfE review. A child rights impact assessment produced by the DfE said the SI could "be extended should the public health emergency or its impact last longer". The impact of COVID-19 could be very long indeed. Our 12/
legal challenge was successful in confirming that the government removed and diluted *safeguards* rather than administrative burdens, but the High Court found the SoS had acted lawfully. We are appealing. Just on the safeguards vs administrative burdens - you'll recall that 13/
the DfE narrative of 'core legal duties' materialised when a revised version of the exemption clauses was reinserted into the Children and Social Work Bill. & to continue another theme - the one on testing deregulation - the *day before SI445 was laid* before Parliament, the 14/
Children's Minister was asked about the DfE review of statutory duties (not in the public domain) & whether dispensing with statutory duties could free "people up to do more useful things in future". The Minister replied: "That is exactly the point...". 15/
#ScrapSI445
#ScrapSI445
If you are able, please donate to our crowdfunder for our appeal to the Court of Appeal, and please keep sharing crowdjustice.com/case/help-us-r… 16/
& if you are part of the children's social care sector and haven't yet signed up to support the #ScrapSI445 campaign, please do so here: article39.org.uk/scrapsi445/ #ScrapSI445 /END
