Critical Analysis of the Public Law Outline

The Public Law Outline (PLO) is used in care proceedings brought under Section 31 of The Children’s

Act 1989. Introduced in April 2008 it was intended to reduce the time taken to complete the proceedings

with a target date of 26 weeks (Judiciary of England and Wales 2008). This essay analyses some of the

main concerns facing the profession since its introduction.

Under previous legislation care proceedings could take a year or more with children uncertain of their

future and often moved between numerous temporary placements (Blacklaws and Quinn, 2010) but, by

ensuring that assessments were completed and evidence gathered prior to applying for the court order,

potential delays would be reduced by the PLO (Harris & White 2013). Research around care proceedings

is often both complex and limited (Brophy, 2006) however a council would not act unless the subject was

suffering or likely to suffer significant harm (Children’s Act, 1989). Therefore it can be assumed that

these cases have a complex history and previous attempts to the support the family, enabling the child to

remain at home safely, have failed.

To achieve savings in both time and costs, the PLO introduced 3 main elements in pre-proceedings

(Masson, 2010). Firstly, when the threshold for initiating S31 proceedings was reached it required a

legal planning meeting to identify concerns and review other opportunities to reduce the risk for the child

(Downs et al, 2008). If proceedings still appear necessary then stage 2 requires local authorities to issue

a Pre- Proceedings Letter (Harris & White, 2013) to parents/carers setting out the changes required to

prevent proceedings and a timescale within which they can demonstrate their ability to meet the needs of

the child and reduce the risk. If this is unsuccessful then stage 3 of the PLO introduces a pre-

proceedings meeting between social services and the parents/carers, plus the legal representatives of

both. If concerns remain heightened proceedings are issued with an aim to reach a resolution within 26

weeks.

1
Lord Laming’s report (2009) touched on the potential impact on social workers that increased workloads

could have and the existence of conflicting evidence regarding the impact of the PLO on timescale.

Social work professionals criticised the impact on already stretched teams and claim that they are being

set up to fail thus increasing the risk for children rather than providing the increased protection intended.

They also cite the Munro report that promotes the abolition of unnecessary targets (Community Care,

2012).

The 3216% increase in fees that local authorities pay to issue court proceedings from £150 to £4825 and

the subsequent decrease in the number of proceedings issued post PLO and recommended a review,

feeling that unconscious concern over budgetary may be a factor (Laming 2009). The review (Plowden,

2009) was inconclusive as to whether or not the increased fees had impacted on the number of cases

taken to court but it did identify a concern from a local authority (cited in Plowden, 2009) that local

authorities “have to pay court fees.....in order to fulfil our statutory duties ....” while “other public

authorities are not penalised......such as the CPS”. Given the statutory duty of safeguarding children, it is

unsurprising that local authorities would not admit that costs may influence decisions on taking court

proceedings or not. Linking back to Laming (2009) abolishing these fees would ensure that the needs of

the child cannot become secondary to budgetary concerns, even unconsciously.

Within Plowden’s report (2009) concern was expressed that the increase in fees would prevent non-

essential cases from being taken to court although there was limited evidence to support this. Research

from Cafcass shows that care applications have risen by 70% and children subject to care proceedings

by 64% since 2008-2009 (Cafcass, 2013). This is in line with fugues showing an 11% increase in overall

referrals to social work teams March 2013-2014 (Cooper, 2014). An increase of 17% in care applications

from December 2014 to December 2015 suggests that the increase is not just the result of outside

influences such as the media hype surrounding P in 2008 (Cafcass, 2015). The continued rise in the

number of care proceedings does seem to refute the view that increased costs would reduce

unnecessary proceedings.

2
Plowden (2009) also noted the potential for the increased fees to cause councils to seek other, cheaper

forms of looking after children, such as Section 20 agreements, thus increasing risk. Since 2013 the

number of section 20 care arrangements has continued to rise (Stevenson, 2015), raising concerns that

this is being abused against the costs, workloads and time implications of initiating proceedings under

PLO. Given the time limiting process, s.20 may be being used as an extension of time to allow social

workers to gather more evidence without failing to meet the timescales under PLO (Gomersall, 2015).

Another development has been the rise of private fostering or family arrangements, where the child is not

living with their immediate family but has not formally become a looked after child, whereby in all but

name, it is a s.20 agreement (Gomersall, 2015). Gomersall (2015) links this back to the financial

implications of the looked after child, whether this be the court process or through special guardianship

orders or fostering allowances. Woolgar (2016) offered an example whereby a child was on a s.20

agreement and the parent was told that if they withdrew consent, the local authority would apply for a full

care order. In this instance it appears to back up claims by Sir James Munby (cited in Stevenson, 2015)

whereby Councils are reluctant to return children to parents where consent is withdrawn which leads to a

fundamental abuse of S.20 and is used as a veiled threat.

To conclude, against the changing landscape of social work, with new legislation such as the PLO, and

the Children & Families Bill, together with a continued rise in number of referrals, and the subsequent

care proceedings, and the continuing government austerity measures, it is clear that the PLO is just one

aspect of a multifaceted picture. It seems impossible to accurately separate the individual issues

impacting on the PLO since its inception and further research and evidence into the care proceedings

arena is needed to fully analyse and evaluate the impact of the PLO on the outcomes for children and

young people as well as the impact on social workers.

Word Count: 1054

3
References:

Blacklaws, C. and Quinn, K. L. (2010) Available at http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed65153

(Accessed 16 January 2016).

Brophy, J. (2006) Research Review: Child Care Proceedings under the Children Act 1989. Department

for Constitutional Affairs.

Cafcass (2013) National Picture of Care Applications in England since Baby P. Available at

https://www.cafcass.gov.uk/news/2013/may-/national-picture-of-care-applications-in-england.aspx

(Accessed 16 January 2016).

Cafcass (2015) Care Applications in December 2015. Available at https://www.cafcass.gov.uk/leaflets-

resources/organisational-material/care-and-private-law-demand-statistics/care-demand-statistics.aspx

(Accessed 16 January 2016).

Children Act 1989 (c.4) Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ ukpga/1989/41/part/IV (Accessed: 16

January 2016).

Cooper, J. (2014) Social workers hit with 11% increase in referrals to children’s services. Available at:

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2014/10/30/social-workers-hit-11-increase-referrals-childrens-services/

(Accessed 19th January 2016).

Downs, M., Ager, R. and Smith, A. (2008) Public Law Outline: A Summary. Crown Office Row: Brighton.

Gomersall, H. (2015) Section 20: Abused, or just not used? Available at:

http://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/section-20-abused-or-just-not-used#.VpqGDCqLSUk
4
(Accessed 16 January 2015).

Harris, J. and White, V. (2013) A Dictionary of Social Work and Social Care, Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Judiciary of England and Wales (2008) The Public Law Outline. Ministry of Justice. London.

Laming, H. B. (2009) The Protection of children in England: a progress report. London. The Stationary

Office

Masson, J. (2010) ‘A New Approach to care proceedings’. Child and Family Social Work, 15, 369-379.

Pemberton, C. (2012) Governments “nonsensical” family justice plans will set social workers up to fail.

Available at: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/blogs/childrens-services-blog/2012/02/nushra-

mansuri/#.VpqOyllpEsJ (Accessed 16 January 2016).

Plowden, F (2009) Review of Court Fees in Child Care Proceedings. Ministry of Justice, London.

Stevenson, L. (2015) Social workers given new guidance for section 20 arrangements amid ‘misuse and

abuse’. Available at: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/ 2015/11/10/social-workers-given-new-guidance-

section-20-orders-amid-misuse-abuse/ (Accessed 16 January 2016).

Woolgar, B. (2016) Conversation with Alex Woolgar, 17th January.