Is the UK government trafficking children for profit at the hands of Clegg's Liberal Democrats?
Liberal Democrat MP Sarah Teaser is the Minister for Children and Families and is responsible for around 14 areas listed on the government's education website. These include child care, children's centres, health issues, children with school feeding disabilities, etc. One of her key responsibilities is “commissioning and market development for children’s services”.
For most people, this phrase smells of commercial activity, money, profits, yes, the conclusion of contracts and the development of the market. Is the UK government really involved in making money by protecting and caring for children and families? The answer is definitely, they don't like to talk about it.
Sarah Teaser recently received a quick email from the British column.
I would like to point out that your responsibilities as Minister for Children and Families include responsibility for 'commissioning and market development for children's services'. Can you please explain exactly what this responsibility entails, particularly how children and related services are commercial enterprises that require “market development”?
Surprisingly, or perhaps not, Mr. Teaser was slow to respond. So UK Column emailed the Liberal Democrat press corps, led by James Holt. Eventually, a response came not from Holt, but from Sarah Derwent, chief spokeswoman for the Department of Children and Families. She responded by copying an email to Matt Saunders from the Cabinet Office:
Local authorities are responsible for commissioning services for children and young people. As part of the commissioning process, markets must be effectively managed to ensure that provision (public, voluntary or private) meets needs in order to improve outcomes for children and young people.
Her response was, of course, waffles. The UK column responded directly to Teaser himself:
Sarah (Derwent)'s response is woefully inadequate and written in Nu language. I spoke to Sarah and she either doesn't have the necessary insight, is completely unaware of the huge growth in commercial activity around children and children's services, or just doesn't know her subject. Therefore, I return to the original question directed to your personal question. It is the role of the Minister, not the local government.
Councilor Teeser shied away from his ministerial and personal responsibility and accountability and once again turned to Sarah Derwent to provide a better response.
A DfE spokesperson said: “Children's health is our top priority and the Department for Education wants to ensure all children are safe and receive the best possible services. ” he said. Across the country, the statutory, voluntary and private sectors all provide a wide variety of high quality children's services. The decision on who to entrust with the provision of services is a matter for local authorities.
The UK column would like to point out that Ms Teaser has yet to answer the simple question of what her actual ministerial responsibilities are. There was also no response from Frances Maude's Cabinet Office, the part of the government that should be as transparent as possible. Is the anxiety over this question due to the Memorandum of Understanding between the Family Law Office and the Caucasus, or is it due to the memorandum of understanding between the Family Law Office and the Caucasus, or the amount paid to judges, courts, barristers, solicitors, psychiatrists, psychologists, care centres, contact centers and charities? Is this due to the huge fees estimated at 20 billion pounds? Per year?
Or is it because British children are being trafficked into the “care” of foreign parents around the world under a new “child protection” procedure in partnership with Cara India? Kent County Council alone spent £104,748 in 2010/11 on adoption issues in Nigeria, Colombia, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Sierra Leone and Thailand. Child commissioning and the market – Why on earth is the UK government engaging in child trafficking with Teeser?
