Agenda item

To note the terms of reference  for this Committee  agreed by Cabinet on 18^th June 2013.

The Committee considered the report on its terms of reference, as agreed by Cabinet on 18^th June 2013.

New members of the Committee sought clarification about the nature of the work of the Committee as from initial observations the functions of the Committee were similar to scrutiny.

The Chair explained the work of the Committee which was assisted by the independent member Hilary Corrick’s contribution, advice and qualitative audits.  The Children’s Safeguarding Policy and Practice Committee was constructed to work  in parallel to the Corporate Parenting Advisory Committee  and had duties  for overseeing the Council’s responsibility for children in need, particularly focussing  on safeguarding. This included children who would come into contact with safeguarding policies. The Committee would examine areas of safeguarding practice, consider issues arising from the performance reports and identify issues which required further investigation and attention. The Committee would commission the Independent Member to complete qualitative audits into specific safeguarding practices and areas where they had concerns. For example, Hilary had completed an audit on how contacts received by the First Response team (Following the Judicial Review) are screened.  The Committee had also examined the findings of audit to understand how expediently referrals had progressed through safeguarding and support services, looked in particular at cases where domestic violence was a factor.

 Comment was made about the Committee’s prior knowledge of the complaint   made against Children and Young People’s Service  in 2011  which culminated in  the recent  Judicial Review  and subsequent  judgement against the council for  completing an unlawful  section 47  investigation. It was noted that, this was a complaint that had been made against the Children and Young People’s Service in 2011 and it was not usually practice, for the Committee, to be kept updated on complaints against the service .However, the judgement had implications for how contacts made with the First Response team, concerning the welfare of children, are screened and how permissions are sought for information to be shared in the MASH (Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub). This concerns the Committee’s remit, as information sharing is a  vital part of the safeguarding process  because it enables a crucial  understanding of the risks that the child could be subject to, in turn ,  informing  the level of action to be taken by partners to help the family/child.

Since March, the Committee had been kept informed of the changes to the information sharing protocol between partners in the MASH. The Committee had commissioned the  Independent Member to  complete an audit of the  contacts received by the  First Response to understand if the updated information sharing protocols were being applied and appropriate  parental consent was being sought( a  criticism was that parental consent  had not been obtained to seek information from partners in the judgement) when required to  share information. They would also monitor if the  information sharing protocols  had  an impact on safeguarding activity as the Committee were clear that there was a need to ensure that  social workers  and  local stakeholders that are in contact with children/families  are  kept fully aware of their  safeguarding responsibilities  . It was agreed to supply Cllr Browne and Cllr Hare with the previous papers and minutes relating to the discussion on the Judicial Review and impact on the information sharing protocols between partners.

The Committee would further consider an exempt report on the advice of the QC on information sharing in the private part of the meeting.

The Committee noted the terms of reference.