Downing Street Says » Adoption Law

Asked if Catholic adoption agencies only placed children with Catholic couples, the PMOS replied that it was his understanding that this was not the case but advised the journalist to speak to the Catholic agencies.

Asked if the Prime Minister started in a position of wanting an exemption for Catholic agencies, the PMOS replied that the Prime Minister’s starting point in all of this was not the device that should be used, but the outcome to be achieved. The outcome to be achieved was firstly an end to discrimination, and secondly not to dissipate or dilute the expertise that the Catholic agencies had developed in dealing with the most hard to place children. That expertise was not just about how to get hard to place children adopted, but the follow through aftercare to ensure that the adoption actually worked. As the Head of the British Adoption Agency had said this morning, this aftercare could last for some time. Those two objectives were at the heart of the Prime Minister’s approach. Anything else was simply a mechanism to achieve that end.

Asked if there had been any discussion between the Prime Minster and Cabinet with the Scottish Executive on this issue, the PMOS replied that discrimination policy was made on a UK wide basis. Further put to him that in December the Scottish Executive had passed an adoption bill, the PMOS replied that in terms of UK discrimination law, London made the laws. As for contacts between London and Scotland, it was not his habit to get into commenting on those matters either.

Asked to establish whether the Prime Minister went in to bat thinking that he wanted an exemption and had since changed his position, or did he go in to bat saying that the Catholics had a concern which we needed to look at, the PMOS replied that the Prime Minister went in to bat to end discrimination, but also in the process not to dilute the expertise available to children, or to those who adopted hard to place children. It was the end that was more important than the means.

Put to him that since one of the Prime Minister’s aims was not to dilute the expertise, did this not mean that this was something that would be used in the long term, not just during a transitional period, the PMOS replied that the question was a fair one but to answer it would mean getting into discussions that were going on in the background. That would not be helpful at this stage. The Prime Minister was more interested in getting a result.

Asked if there would be a free vote on this issue, the PMOS replied that there would not be a free vote as this was a Government matter and a Government piece of legislation.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Thursday, January 25, 2007

Adoption Law

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries