Last week, peers backed an amendment to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill that would include local authorities in the tendering process to run secure academies.
Article 39 and the National Association of Youth Justice (NAYJ) said the move would ensure vulnerable children being looked after in these settings - formerly known as secure schools - would receive the specialist care they needed.
The charities had warned peers that excluding local authorities from running this new type of secure children’s home risked repeating “mistakes of the past”, which saw private providers contracted to operate secure training centres despite no previous experience of caring for vulnerable children.
They lobbied the House of Lords to support an amendment to the controversial bill in a bid to avoid another generation of children “suffering great harm”.
In the wake of two high profile cases in which children died following restraint in secure training centres run by G4S and Serco in 2004, the High Court found an unlawful restraint regime had persisted at the sites for at least a decade.
Only in 2020 and 2021 did inspectors activate an urgent notification process, used in response to grave concerns over children’s safety and wellbeing, in respect of the remaining two secure training centres run by MTC and G4S, the charities said.
The vote, by 193 to 168, in favour of an amendment to the bill was a “small but important step” in ensuring that these 16 to 19 academies could function in a similar way to other secure children’s homes, they added.
Carolyne Willow, Article 39 director, said the vote meant peers had recognised the highly skilled work undertaken in local authority-run secure children’s homes and called on the government to support the clause through the next stages of the bill.
“We hope this move will, over time, help to build back specialised care for teenagers in desperate need,” she said.
NAYJ chair Tim Bateman said preventing local authorities from running these provisions was “illogical” and only served to make it harder to integrate services for children while they were in custody and when they returned to the community.
“It is hard to understand why the government, if it is committed to safeguarding the welfare of some of the most vulnerable children in society, would oppose such a measure,” he said.
The Local Government Association criticised the government for excluding local authorities from the legislation after it gave evidence to the justice committee in 2019.
The 16 to 19 academies, which will be registered with Ofsted as secure children’s homes, are intended to replace child prisons which the government committed to phase out in 2016.
Councillor Anntoinette Bramble, chair of the LGA’s children and young people board, said councils had significant experience in running secure children’s homes as well as partnership working to support young people in the youth justice system.
“It is extremely positive that the Lords has passed an amendment ensuring councils can bid to run secure schools should they wish to do so, recognising the experience and track record of councils in providing similar provision.
“We urge the government to retain this amendment as the bill concludes its journey through parliament, to ensure that we place children’s welfare at the centre of the secure schools model,” she said.
The government will decide whether to accept the amendment when the bill returns to the House of Commons.
