Website of the Department of Health

3.01  It is no exaggeration to say that the Social Services Departments of the new Clwyd and Gwynedd County Councils were in a state of turmoil when they took over responsibility for the former five county areas on 1 April 1974 under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1972.

The main factors relevant to the welfare of children contributing to this turmoil were:

(1)  The recommendations of the Seebohm Committee on Local Authority and Allied Personal Social Services (1968) as implemented in the Local Authority Social Services Act 1970;

(2)  The proposals set out in the Government's White Paper, entitled Children in Trouble (1968) as enacted in the Children and Young Persons Act 1969; and

(3)  The re-organisation of local government and administrative areas throughout North Wales pursuant to the Act of 1972

Report of the Seebohm Committee on Local Authority and Allied Personal Social Services

  3.02  The Seebohm Committee's report was presented shortly after the publication of Children in Trouble so that the Committee were able to comment upon the Government's proposals in the White Paper and to take into account, for example, the likely demise of approved schools in the near future. The report covered the whole field of social services and the Committee's conclusions were set out in 206 numbered paragraphs, many of which are not directly relevant for our purposes. Overall, however, the recommendations involved radical changes in the administration of social services, including social services for children. At their centre was the proposal that there should be a new local government department, to be called the social services department, providing "a community based and family oriented service, which will be available to all"[32]. This new department was to take over the services then provided by children's departments, welfare services under the National Assistance Act 1948, the home help service, mental health social work services, other social work services provided by health departments, day nurseries and certain social welfare work then undertaken by some housing departments. Its responsibilities were, however, to go beyond those of existing local authority departments: local authorities were to be required to review needs and services in their own areas to determine priorities; and it was envisaged that most authorities would be likely to feel that children under five and very old people called for special attention. It was recommended also that there should be one government department responsible for the relationship between central government and the social services departments and for the overall national planning of social services, social intelligence and social research.

  3.03  The Seebohm Committee's proposals involved radical alterations to the structure established by the Children Act 1948, following many of the recommendations of the Curtis Committee. There was no longer to be a children's department headed by a children's officer in each local authority; and child care services were no longer to be the responsibility of the Home Office. Instead, the head of all social services for a local authority area (usually a county or county borough) was to be a newly appointed Director of Social Services, acting with the Social Services Committee; and responsibility for child care services was to move, in Wales, from the Home Office to the Welsh Office, the transfer taking effect on 1 January 1971 (responsibility for other social services in Wales having been transferred from the Department of Health and Social Security to the Welsh Office in March 1969).

  3.04  It is relevant to refer briefly to a number of other specific recommendations made by the Seebohm Committee because of their significance in relation to the events that we have to review. Thus:

(1)  The Committee considered that central government had three essential functions to perform in relation to local government social services, namely:

(i) It must in planning for the future decide what the aims of the service are, and make sure that local authorities understand those decisions.

(ii) It must set and ensure minimum levels of service over the country as a whole.

(iii) It must collect and disseminate relevant and useful information about the services and the needs they ought to be trying to meet[33].

(2)  The Committee did not attempt to explore in detail the way in which the relationship between central and local government should develop in the running of the social services but they did emphasise that, in prescribing aims and standards for the personal services, the central government must also "take the primary responsibility for making sure that resources, and in particular trained manpower, will be available on a scale and timetable which will make the aims and standards realistic"[34].

(3)The central government department must have "a strong, accessible and well-respected inspectorate, to advise local authorities, to promote the achievement of aims and the maintenance of standards, and to act as two-way channels for information and consultation between central and local government. The role of the inspectorate would be not so much regulatory as promotional, educational and consultative. Its help would be particularly valuable in the early stages of the new service, and for that reason it is vital that early action be taken to set it up"[35].

(4)  They emphasised the high qualities required of a suitable Director of Social Services, the heavy responsibilities that would fall upon that person and the wisdom of considering the widest possible field of recruitment[36].

(5)  The committee envisaged that a single social worker with a comprehensive approach would be responsible for a family or an individual's needs and thought that narrow specialisation could have a detrimental effect on professional judgement. They proposed therefore that the pattern of specialisation should be radically altered and that social workers should be expected to undertake wider responsibilities at an early stage[37].

(6)  They considered it essential that the central government department responsible for personal social services, in co-operation with a proposed central advisory council, should be responsible for making estimates of the numbers of workers likely to be required by social services departments, for keeping them under continuous review and for planning training resources[38].

(7)  The Committee referred to the report of the Williams Committee on Staffing of Residential Homes (1967) and drew attention to the fact that the proportion of staff with no training designed to prepare them to have charge of a home varied from about 98 per cent in old people's homes to 82 per cent in children's homes. They endorsed the Williams Committee's proposals for training for such work and suggested that they deserved urgent consideration by government. They added "It seems to us essential that training for residential care should lead to a nationally recognised qualification and that in-service training should be developed rapidly, especially for those members of staff now in post who are unlikely to be released for full training"[39].

Local Authority Social Services Act 1970

  3.05  The main structural recommendations of the Seebohm Committee were embodied in the Local Authority Social Services Act 1970, which came into effect in the main on 1 January 1971. Having dealt in earlier sections with the establishment of social services committees and the appointment of directors of social services (with the demise of children's officers), section 7(1) of the Act provided that "Local authorities shall, in the exercise of their social services functions, including the exercise of any discretion conferred by any relevant enactment, act under the general guidance of the Secretary of State". This was made subject to certain specified exceptions listed in section 7, none of which are relevant for our purposes.

"Children in Trouble"

  3.06  As we have said earlier, the Government's White Paper, Children in Trouble, had been published shortly before the Seebohm Committee reported and its main proposals were embodied in the Children and Young Persons Act 1969. The White Paper's main proposals were based upon the view that child neglect and juvenile delinquency ought not to be dealt with differently because they were both symptoms of deprivation, which led to many children being received into care. At paragraph six of the document it was said "Juvenile delinquency has no single cause, manifestation or cure. Its origins are many, and the range of behaviour which it covers is equally wide. At some points it merges almost imperceptibly with behaviour which does not contravene the law. A child's behaviour is influenced by genetic, emotional and intellectual factors, his maturity and his family, school, neighbourhood and wider social setting. It is probably a minority of children who grow up without ever misbehaving in ways which may be contrary to the law".

  3.07  It was proposed, therefore, that the commission of an offence by a child aged between 10 and 14 years should cease to be, by itself, a sufficient ground for bringing him before a court. Instead, where proceedings were necessary, they were to be brought under the care, protection and control procedure by appropriate amendment of section 2 of the Children and Young Person Act 1963. Restrictions were also to be imposed on the prosecution of offenders aged between 14 and 17 years and care, protection and control proceedings considered as a potential alternative. Three main changes were to be made in the powers of the juvenile court, namely:

(a)  the approved school order was to be abolished;

(b)  new forms of treatment, between supervision in the home and committal to care, were to be developed; and

(c)  all supervision of children under 14 years was to be by the local authority.

  3.08  On the subject of residential care the White Paper said that local authorities would be responsible for developing a comprehensive system of residential care and treatment for the children received or committed into their care who were not boarded out with foster parents; and a considerable variety of provision was envisaged. Their basic duty towards the children would remain that of providing the care, protection and guidance or treatment which they considered appropriate in the interests of each child and that duty would include restoring the child to his home as soon as practicable and desirable, "having regard to the need to protect society while children and young persons whose behaviour is difficult to control are undergoing treatment". It was stated further that "The needs of the great majority of children will be met by homes which, as now, will care for them as nearly as possible in the same way as a good family, making use of the education, health and other services which are generally available". There would nevertheless be a continuing need for some establishments providing education and treatment on the premises and all the existing approved schools, including the senior schools, would probably be required for the accommodation of children and young persons in care: the schools would retain an important role in continuing to provide for the needs of both offenders and non-offenders.

  3.09  The White Paper outlined a proposed integrated system of community homes embracing existing local authority children's homes and hostels, remand homes, reception and remand centres, local authority and voluntary approved schools and some voluntary children's homes which regularly accommodated children in care. It recognised the importance of providing homes on a genuinely local basis to preserve links with each child's family and environment but proposed that specialist facilities should be planned nationally. Local authorities were to participate in joint planning committees covering areas approved by the Secretary of State in order to draw up comprehensive plans for developing the full range of residential, observation and assessment and intermediate treatment facilities required. Voluntary approved schools and voluntary children's homes on which local authorities relied were to be included within the public system (as local authority or controlled or assisted voluntary community homes) if and when agreement about the future role of the establishment was reached with the planning committee and the area plan had been approved by the Secretary of State. Moreover, voluntary organisations wishing to continue, or to establish children's homes operating outside the public system would remain free to do so, subject to existing statutory requirements as to registration, inspection etc. and would be known as registered voluntary children's homes.

Children and Young Persons Act 1969

  3.10  Detailed provisions implementing these proposals were enacted in the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 but responsibility for approved schools and remand homes was not transferred to the Secretary of State for Wales until 1973. In the interim period from 1 January 1971, when other child care responsibilities in Wales apart from adoption had been transferred from the Home Office to the Welsh Office, the Secretary of State for Social Services had borne the responsibility of overseeing the integration of approved schools and remand homes into the system of community homes throughout England and Wales; and it was in October 1973 that Bryn Estyn, in particular, became a community home with education on the premises instead of an approved school.

Community Homes Regulations 1972

  3.11  Regulations made under the Act of 1969 and governing the conduct of community homes, namely, the Community Homes Regulations 1972, came into effect on 1 April 1972. They did not apply to voluntary or private children's homes or to independent residential schools. The responsibility for arranging that proper provision was made in each local authority home for the care, treatment and control of the children accommodated therein was placed on the local authority and, in the case of controlled or assisted community homes, on the managers. The regulations also contained provisions for such matters as health, safety and religious observance. Regulation 3(2) required each home to be visited at least once a month and a report to be provided by the visitor: local authority homes were to be visited by such persons as the local authority considered appropriate whereas the visits to controlled or assisted homes were to be by a manager. Suitable facilities were to be provided also for visits by parents, guardians, relatives and friends of children accommodated. Section 24(5) of the Act of 1969 already required local authorities to appoint an "independent person" to be a visitor to a child accommodated in a home who had infrequent contact with his parent or guardian or none at all in the preceding 12 months and who did not leave the home to attend school or work: the duty of the independent person was to visit, advise and befriend the child.

  3.12  The regime of control of a community home was dealt with in Regulation 10 in the following way:

"(1)   The control of a community home shall be maintained on the basis of good personal and professional relationships between the staff and the children resident therein.

(2)  The responsible body in respect of a local authority home or controlled community home and the local authority specified in the instrument of management for an assisted community home may approve in respect of each home such additional measures as they consider necessary for the maintenance of control in the home, and the conditions under which such measures may be taken, and in approving such measures and conditions they shall have regard to the purpose and character of the home and the categories of children for which it is provided.

(3)  Any approval mentioned in the preceding paragraph shall be given in writing to the person in charge of the home, save that in the case of an assisted home the approval shall be given to the responsible organisation, and shall be reviewed every 12 months.

(4)   Full particulars of any of the measures mentioned in paragraph (2) of this regulation which are used and of the circumstances in which they are used shall be recorded in permanent form by the person in charge of the home and the record shall be kept in the home."

  3.13  The guidance issued by the Welsh Office with the Regulations pointed out that the precise type and degree of control which might normally be exercised through good personal and professional relationships could not easily be defined without reference to the circumstances of each individual case and that it would "invariably require the careful and sensitive consideration of the staff directly involved"[40]. The hope was expressed that in the great majority of community homes the need to have recourse to additional measures under Regulation 10(2) would rarely arise but, the guidance continued, "in any home where formal punishments are thought to be necessary for the maintenance of control it will plainly be desirable that advance approval should be sought for whatever measures are required so that they are available when needed".

  3.14  Commenting on corporal punishment under the heading of "Additional Measures" the guidance stated this:

"Regulation 10 differs most markedly from the previous regulations in making no mention of corporal punishment. There has in recent years been a marked decline in the use of corporal punishment in all types of children's establishments including approved schools for boys (in approved schools for girls it has disappeared entirely) and it is hoped that this trend will continue. At the same time, however, it is recognised that it would be impracticable at this stage to prohibit the use of all forms of corporal punishment in every home. The regulations thus formally leave the matter to the discretion of the parties directly concerned. For all practical purposes, the use of corporal punishment will be confined to the circumstances envisaged in regulation 10(2) that is, the measures and the conditions under which they are employed must be approved in advance for each home by the local authority (acting either as the responsible body or, in the case of an assisted home, as the authority principally responsible for the well-being of the children in the home) who will thus be publicly accountable both for the measures approved by them and for the conditions of their use. It is hoped that they will authorise the use of corporal punishment sparingly and as a last resort and will consider at each annual review, in the light of experience, whether it is still needed."[41]

  3.15  Stringent conditions were also imposed by Regulation 11 in respect of the provision and use of secure accommodation. Such accommodation could only be provided and used in a community home with the approval of the Secretary of State, who was empowered to attach to it such terms and conditions as he thought fit. Moreover, even when such approval had been given, detention on the authority of the person in charge of the home was limited to one maximum continuous period of 24 hours or 48 hours in any consecutive period of seven days if there was more than one period of admission.

The Children's Regional Planning Committee for Wales

  3.16  The Secretary of State for the Home Office issued a direction on 12 August 1970 that regional plans for community homes under the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 were to be submitted on or before 31 December 1971[42]. The Children's Regional Planning Committee for Wales (Region 12) (CRPC), set up under section 35 of the Act of 1969, met for the first time on 24 June 1970 and it continued in existence until early in 1984. Its initial plan was submitted to the Secretary of State for Wales on 31 December 1971 and came into operation on 1 April 1973. A revised plan requested by the Secretary of State was submitted in September 1979 and it was subsequently revised further at three yearly intervals until the statutory requirements for the committees and the production of plans were abolished on 1 January 1984[43]. The CRPC had been responsible also for the preparation of plans for intermediate treatment in Wales.

  3.17  This is not the place for a lengthy account of the work of the CRPC for Wales or of its successive regional plans. From 1974 onwards its membership was drawn mainly from the eight new county councils. The committee, its sub-committees and working groups met frequently and they did some useful work. They drew attention from time to time to such matters as the shortage of training facilities for social workers in North and West Wales and the poor educational facilities in the community homes with education on the premises. In England and Wales as a whole, however, the committees were soon thought to have outlived their usefulness because the number of children in residential care had declined appreciably and there was increasing emphasis on the desirability of local placements. Local authorities were opting increasingly for foster care and felt able to make their own arrangements for residential care in smaller units. As early as 1979, the Government announced, in a White Paper, "Central Government Controls over Local Authorities", its intention to remove the statutory basis of Children's Regional Planning as part of a policy of placing greater responsibility for local matters on local authorities and of increasing their freedom of action. Thus, after January 1984, a local authority could act on its own or could agree with other local authorities to form a group for planning purposes but there was no requirement to form a group or to submit plans to the Secretary of State.

Local Government Act 1972

  3.18  Whilst all these developments were taking place in the field of social services, and particularly in relation to the welfare of children in care, substantial reorganisation of the local authority administrative areas was also in train. The Local Government Act 1972 was to establish a radically altered structure in Wales for 22 years from 1 April 1974. The number of Welsh Counties was reduced from 13 to eight, despite the division of the former county of Glamorgan into three; and in North Wales the reduction was from five to two. Thus Gwynedd emerged to replace the previous administrative county areas of Anglesey, Caernarvon, Merioneth (less a former rural district) and a small part of Denbighshire, whilst Clwyd replaced Flintshire, most of Denbighshire and a former rural district of Merionethshire.

Appointment of senior officials to the Social Services Department of Clwyd County Council

  3.19  This reorganisation of local government areas following closely upon the establishment of new structures for the provision of social services, including responsibility for children in care, inevitably led to much disruption of newly established working teams, working practices and administrative systems. Inevitably also there was a scramble for appointments. The senior positions went, in the main, to former employees of the extinguished local authorities rather than to men and women from further afield who might have been expected to bring with them fresh ideas.

  3.20  Thus, Clwyd County Council appointed as its first Director of Social Services, (Joseph) Emlyn Evans, who was in his mid-fifties on 1 April 1974 and who remained in post until the end of 1979. His speciality was in mental health and he had become Chief Mental Welfare Officer for Denbighshire, after many years experience in that field, before being appointed Director of Social Services for Denbighshire in 1971. Dennis Hughes was appointed to the parallel post in Flintshire but he went off to Suffolk in 1973, whereupon Evans took over responsibility for Flintshire as well and in addition became "shadow" Director of Social Services for the emerging Clwyd.

  3.21  Under him, as Deputy Director of Social Services for Clwyd, was (Daniel) Gledwyn Jones, who was appointed on 1 December 1973, at the age of 47 years. He was an outside figure from South Wales with a dozen years experience of social services but mainly in a county welfare department and then as an Assistant Director for Community Services in Pembrokeshire. He had no specific experience in child care. Unusually, in Clwyd, no one in the senior management team had a specialist background in child care.

Appointment of senior officials to the Social Services Department of Gwynedd County Council

  3.22  In Gwynedd T E Jones was appointed Director of Social Services designate for Caernarvonshire with effect from 1 January 1971, after serving for over 18 years as County Welfare Officer of Merionethshire County Council. He was 48 years old at the date of his appointment and he graduated to the same post with Gwynedd with effect from 6 July 1973, remaining until 6 September 1982, when he retired on the ground of ill health, after being on sick leave for three months. He had no specific experience of child care work except as clerk to a county council committee in 1951/1952.

  3.23  His deputy was D A Parry, 14 years younger than him, who had been Deputy Children's Officer and then Children's Officer for Anglesey before being appointed Director of Social Services for that county from 1971. He was nominally Deputy Director for Gwynedd from 1974 until 1983 but he was then, in effect, demoted to the post of Assistant Director (Special Duties), in which he remained for four years before accepting voluntary redundancy on 31 March 1987, on the eve of his 51st birthday.