Who pays Cafcass - Nation of Secrecy

Dear F Mason

Thank you for your request for information dated 4 October 2009, received by us on the same day, which is copied below.

We will endeavour to respond to your request promptly but in any case within 20 working days i.e on or before 30 October 2009.

If you have any queries about your request, please use the request number quoted in the subject line of this email.

Yours sincerely

Vanessa Cubillo
Freedom of Information Assistant

show quoted sections

Dear F Mason,

Thank you for your request for information which is annexed to this message. We can confirm that other than the general information provided below, the House of Commons holds no information relevant to your request. We hope you may find the following information useful.

Cafcass (Children and Family Court Advisory Support Service) was set up on 1st April 2001 under the provisions of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act which brought together the family court services previously provided by the Family Court Welfare Service, the Guardian ad Litem Service and the Children's Division of the Official Solicitor's Office. It is a non-departmental public body sponsored by, and accountable to, the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families in the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF).

As such it works within the strategic objectives agreed by the sponsoring department and contributes to wider government objectives relating to children. Cafcass is independent of the courts, social services, education and health authorities and all similar agencies. It operates within a legal framework set by Parliament and under the rules, directions and specific orders of the Family Court. Its role is to: safeguard and promote the welfare of children; give advice to the family courts; make provision for children to be represented; provide information, advice and support to children and their families. The main types of cases in which the courts ask Cafcass to play a role are when: parents or carers are separating or divorcing and have not reached agreement about arrangements for their children; social services have become involved and children may be removed from their parents' care for their safety; children could be adopted.

As a non-departmental public body of the DCSF, CAFCASS must make an annual report on the funding it has received and the use to which it has put this money (see www.cafcass.gov.uk/publications). The figures to which you make reference appear to represent the total costs of the family law system which involves considerable public resources from the legal aid budget, the budget for the HM Court Service and from local authority social services budgets alongside Cafcass expenditure.

For bulk of its work CAFCASS is under the scrutiny of the Children, Schools and Families Select Committee. In the course of the work of the Justice Select Committee, some matters relating to CAFCASS have come under scrutiny due to its close involvement with the work of the courts for which that committee is responsible. These committees have recently reported on matters related to CAFCASS in the following:

Session 2008-09
Justice: Eight Report, Family Legal Aid Reform, HC 714
Children etc.: Seventh Report, Training of Children and Families Social Workers, HC 527

Session 2003-04
Constitutional Affairs: Fourth Report of 2003-04, Civil legal aid: adequacy of provision, HC 391

Neither committee holds information on the matters you raise in your questions beside that which is included in those reports and the related published evidence.

The most recent reference to Cafcass relevant to one of the issues you raise during House of Commons business was an oral PQ to DCSF Ministers on 9 March 2009.

"Mr. Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk) (Con): When he next expects to meet representatives of the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service to discuss its work. [261299]

The Minister for Children, Young People and Families (Beverley Hughes): Baroness Delyth Morgan, the Under-Secretary responsible for the matter, holds regular quarterly meetings with CAFCASS to review the progress of its work. Her last meeting with the organisation was held on 10 February.

Mr. Bellingham: Does the Minister agree that, although the chief executive of CAFCASS, Mr. Anthony Douglas, is doing an excellent job, one of the biggest problems facing the organisation is the lack of a proper complaints procedure? What does she plan to do to tackle that problem?

Beverley Hughes: I greatly welcome the hon. Gentleman's comments about the chief executive, who is rigorously pursuing performance improvement at CAFCASS at every level. People can complain to CAFCASS, which is a non-departmental public body, with a board that monitors how it works and that will receive those complaints. If he has a specific case in mind or a suggestion for strengthening the process, I would welcome the opportunity to talk to him about it. I have not had any complaints, apart from his, about the lack of a complaints structure in CAFCASS, but if there is a widespread concern, we will clearly be happy to take it up with the organisation."

This and other such references are publicly available via the Official Report (Hansard) which can be searched online (http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/publi...) or at (larger) public libraries.

The best source of information on most of the matters you raise would probably be CAFCASS itself and/or the DCSF both of which publish annual reports and accounts and are covered by Freedom of Information obligations. It may also be worth mentioning that CAFCASS is covered by the general duty upon the providers of public services to supply clear information about its own system for receiving and dealing with complaints about its services and what further steps may be taken for those unsatisfied by the organisation's response to any such complaint (see www.cafcass.gov.uk/system_page/freedom_o...).

I hope this is helpful. You may, if dissatisfied with the treatment of your request, ask the House of Commons to conduct an internal review of the decisions leading to this reply. Requests for internal review should be addressed to: Freedom of Information Officer, Department of Resources, House of Commons London SW1 OAA or [House of Commons request email]<mailto:[House of Commons request email]>. Please ensure that you specify the nature of your complaint and any arguments or points that you wish to make.

If you remain dissatisfied after the conclusion of such a review, you may appeal to the Information Commissioner at Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Yours sincerely

Fergus Reid
Clerk of the Justice Committee

Annex - your request

Between April 2008 and March 2009, CAFCASS had 6,465 cases on its
books.
That's nearly 18 new cases a day or one new case every thirty
minutes of the working day.

Source: CAFCASS

Over the last four fiscal years, CAFCASS has dealt with 26,104
separate cases.
At a conservatively estimated cost of proceedings in Family Court
of £400,000 per case, that means CAFCASS has been instrumental in
spending £10.4 billion of public funds, minimum, over four years.

Source: CAFCASS

That's £2.6 billion a year, not counting rollover cases. Or to put
it another way;
Between 21 municipal areas which CAFCASS is divided into, £124.3
million per area per year.

Source:CAFCASS

Where does this money come from?
Who pays CAFCASS?

Funding is received in part from Central Government.
This does not answer the burning question; Where does the rest of
the money come from?

We're talking about litigation funding from Central Government
straight to CAFCASS that is equal to fully one tenth of the
Interest accrued on the Central Government (i.e. National) Debt
through 2008/09.

Where does this money come from?

We haven't even started talking about;

Salaries for CAFCASS, Social Services or their ancillary staff yet.

Who controls the money?
Who do CAFCASS answer to?
Who accounts for the actions of CAFCASS?
Who legislates for CAFCASS?
Who represents CAFCASS in Parliament?
Who do you complain to when CAFCASS goes bad?
To who do we turn to put right that which CAFCASS gets wrong so
often?

Local Government? Central Government? Corporate Interests? Civil
Liberties groups? Or each other?