Article 39 has published its response to the government’s consultation on establishing a Child Protection Authority (CPA) in England, warning that without fundamental changes, it risks becoming another layer of procedure rather than a genuine force for change in children’s lives.
The response, informed by consultation with independent advocates from Article 39’s Children and Young People’s Advocates Network working across England, sets out three urgent demands:
- Children in institutional settings,particularly those held under Deprivation of Liberty (DoL) orders, must be treated as a specific safeguarding priority.
- Independent advocates must be formally recognised as a critical source of system intelligence, with a direct route to raise concerns with the CPA.
- Government must address the structural realities of workforce shortages and chronic underfunding, rather thanassuming that oversight alone will fix a system under severe strain.
Advocates offer vital insight into how the system is working in practice
Advocates highlighted the unique role they play as professionals independent of statutory services, working alongside children to understand their experiences and ensure their voices are heard. From this position, they are often able to identify patterns of concern and gaps in provision.
However, despite statutory entitlements under the Children Act 1989, children are routinely denied access to independent advocacy. Advocates provided examples of children on DoL orders requesting advocacy support for over six months and being ignored, and of homeless 16 and 17-year-olds being turned away entirely.
Advocates described being “batted away” when raising these concerns with children’s services. They felt local authorities were “effectively left to police themselves” and emphasised that the CPA could play an important role in bridging this gap.
Advocates urged that the CPA establishes a direct and formal route for concerns and insights from advocacy to be recognised and acted upon. Through this mechanism, they could escalate concerns and drive system-wide improvements by supporting the CPA to identify patterns of harm, understand how practice is experienced by children on the ground, strengthen accountability, and provide clearer evidence of how wider pressures – including workforce shortages and chronic underfunding – are affecting children’s services and the children they support.
“Until children have that right to advocacy and that is absolutely guaranteed, and there is oversight in terms of ensuring every local authority is consistently providing that and giving children that option, I don’t know how children’s views are going to be captured, and how their rights will be upheld.” – advocate
Children in institutional settings and those on Deprivation of Liberty orders are being failed
Children in residential settings – and particularly those on Deprivation of Liberty orders – are inherently more vulnerable to abuse and face what advocates described as “weak oversight and diffuse accountability.” Advocates reported cases where safeguarding concerns about staff misconduct were inadequately investigated, where children were not spoken to following incidents of harm, and where action was only taken because an advocate repeatedly escalated the issue.
“I’ve had cases where we’ve reported over 10 safeguardings [sic] for the same child and nothing seems to change. There just doesn’t seem to be that oversight.” – advocate
Article 39 is calling on the CPA to establish dedicated workstreams focused on children in institutional settings, including ensuring all children in these settings have access to advocacy when they need it.
A warning on Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Article 39 has raised serious concerns about proposals to use AI and predictive tools within CPA operations, warning that such systems risk stigmatising children from marginalised groups – including those in care or in the criminal justice system – while simultaneously failing to identify at-risk children who fall beneath their thresholds. We urge that the CPA does not outsource critical thought and relationship-based practice to computerised models which are built upon bias.
Jodie Wickers, Executive Director of Article 39, said:
“Creating a new authority will not change things on its own. Without properly addressing chronic underfunding, workforce shortages and the pressures facing social workers, there is a real risk that the Child Protection Authority simply becomes another layer of protection rather than a force for change in children’s lives.
If it is to make a real difference, the new Authority must centre the voices of children and invest in independent advocates so they can amplify what children are experiencing across the system and help identify patterns of harm that too often go unseen.
Real protection for children will only come when their voices, experiences and rights are placed firmly at the centre of how safeguarding operates.”
Article 39’s full consultation response is available here.
