As we approach this opportunity to let our candidates know what is important to families, the Coalition for the Protection of Children has shared its 2017 Legislative and Policy Agenda. These 36 recommendations reflect what we hope all candidates will embrace. Contained are issues related to education, healthcare, employment, housing, family support, prison reform, law enforcement and the handling of child-abuse cases.

The recommendations are being published over three days. We hope you will talk to your potential Members of Parliament about the recommendations that you support.

This is our opportunity to have a voice to make sure our children have a chance to be the best that they can be.

Today we feature part two of the agenda.

Housing

10, Bermuda should recognise that adequate, affordable housing is a basic human right

The Bermuda Housing Corporation should increase the use of rent-geared-to-income housing. As many as 30 families are threatened with eviction from Bermuda Housing Corporation properties. We recognise the difficulty in dealing with families who accumulate large rental arrears. While there are bound to be a few who take advantage of the situation, our experience is that most of the families who have extensive arrears are single mothers who are either unemployed, or who have part-time or low-paying jobs. These mothers often have barely enough income to feed and clothe their children, and even the reduced rent in many of these dwellings proves to be too much.

Either the mandate of the BHC should be extended to house those without any means whatsoever or a separate programme should be created to house the homeless families that are about to be evicted. In short, there needs to be a recognition that despite the dour circumstances of any family or individual, we as a wealthy community must come together to protect our most vulnerable from life on the street.

Family support

11, Locate government agencies that are part of the “safety net” within the same ministry

A committee should be established to determine how the social services agencies, including the Department of Financial Assistance, the Bermuda Housing Corporation. the Department of Child and Family Services, and the Cross Ministry Intervention Team, can operate more co-operatively and more efficiently with one another. Ideally, these agencies should all be located in the same ministry.

12, Increase the use of mediation in child-welfare decisions

Child Protection Mediation and Family Group Conferencing requires all stakeholders to engage in a problem-solving process before children are removed from a home or before significant decisions are made by the courts about a child’s welfare or placement. Mediation should be the first choice in decision-making in child-welfare cases where disputes arise between the department and family members of the children in question.

13, Stop removing children because their parents are homeless

Stop the practice of placing children in foster care solely because a parent is homeless or poor. Instead, use the funds spent on foster care to provide financial support and keep the family intact. It is no surprise that a significant portion of the inmate population has spent its childhood moving from one foster home to another.

14, Use the existing provision in the protection of children legislation to provide a guardian ad litem for children in contentious cases involving child placement

The issue of a child’s right to representation either through a litigation guardian, a guardian ad litem or a lawyer assigned to the child in contentious cases has been a concern of the coalition since the Children’s Act provided for this in 1998. Every annual report that we have produced has continued to recommend that the courts avail themselves of this option for children. We have met with the relevant ministers as well as attorneys-general over the years and the recommendations have appeared in our legislative agenda since 2012.

The reluctance to use this legislation is twofold. First, since it is up to the court to call for a litigation guardian, there would need to be a fund allocated for this purpose. No such revenue stream exists. Further, there has been no policy developed to guide Family Court as to how this might operate. Generally speaking, judges and magistrates view the Department of Child and Family Services to be acting in the best interests of the child, and therefore they see no need for the child to be represented. This is indeed generally the case. Unfortunately, there are still cases where the desires of the child are not communicated to the court. Often children are very clear about who they want to live with, for example, but the department believes differently and since they are the only voice in the court, the child’s wishes are sometimes not taken into account.

Additionally, the Department of Child and Family Services would understandably not want to have another party involved who quite possibly does not support their recommendations to the judge. They view their role as acting in the child’s best interests, which is as it should be, but the system breaks down when you have parents in serious conflict who tend to use the children as pawns in a heated battle. The result is that matters are often debated by the lawyers of the two parents, while the child’s wishes are not taken into account.

The first step in resolving this would be the identification of a revenue stream attached to the appointment of a guardian. Additionally, there may be some procedural issues that need resolving, but neither of these hurdles should continue to deny children the right to representation.

As in many jurisdictions, this does not have to take the form of legal representation. This function can be performed by the appointment of a guardian ad litem, who can be a specially trained social worker who appears in court specifically to represent the child.

There was a reason why this provision was enshrined in law in the Children’s Act 2000. Continuing to ignore that provision is to deny many children the voice that they deserve.

15, Prevent parents who refuse to pay child support from relicensing vehicles, travelling abroad or renewing passports

While we recognise that the most important contributions that parents can make to their children’s welfare is their love, their time and their attention, when separated both parents carry a financial responsibility to their children. When one parent reneges on that responsibility, the children are often forced to live below the poverty line.

Although we encourage both parents to live up to this responsibility, it is clear that a very significant number are not always compliant in this regard. We do not believe that incarcerating individuals for non-payment of child support serves the best interests of either the noncompliant individual or the struggling family members. We do, however, believe that failure to comply with court-ordered child support ought to have associated consequences.

We recommend that Family Court exercises its power to prevent said individuals from travelling abroad or relicensing vehicles. It is also within the power of Family Court to repossess luxury goods such as jet skis, pleasure boats or other items that can be redeemed for money for child support.

16, Take a more humane approach towards the rules and regulations at the Bermuda Housing Corporation’s emergency housing facility at Gulfstream

These should include:

a, Removing the stipulation that women are not allowed to babysit each other’s children.

b, Removing the rule that BHC staff can enter residences at any time and without notice. These are paying tenants who have a right to privacy and at least 24 hours’ notice for inspection.

c, Install washers and dryers on the premises for the residents (the coalition has agreed to pay for these).

d, Reopen the children’s playrooms — they have been closed for a year and the children have no indoor play area).

17, The Government should help to subsidise food-assistance programmes such as the Coalition for the Protection of Children’s breakfast programme

Increasingly, children are arriving at school without breakfast and/or lunch. This contributes to students’ difficulty learning, as it is widely recognised that children must have sufficient nutrition to participate productively in school. As of this moment, the coalition serves breakfast every morning in 13 schools and, as the demand continues to increase, we believe the Government has a role to play in supporting financially this important programme.

Sheelagh Cooper is the chairwoman of the Coalition for the Protection of Children

• Comments are closed on political content from July 4 to 19 to stem the flow of purposefully inflammatory and litigious comments during the General Election cycle. Users who introduce extreme partisan comments into other news content will be banned.