For a Government already facing criticism on several fronts, with recent areas of focus including the rocketing household bills, rising employer costs and policy announcements that will lead to freezing or withdrawal of support for people unable to work due to disability, there has been one recent decision expected from those in power for which it was difficult to make a mess of – and yet Labour still managed to oblige spectacularly in doing just that.

The Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund (ASGSF) is a relatively small pot of money which is available for supporting some of the most vulnerable children in the country. Formerly budgeted on a year-by-year basis, following its introduction in 2015 by the Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition, the most recent funding arrangement, announced in 2022 by Education Secretary Gavin Williamson, covered a three-year period and was set to end on March 31, 2025.

Keen to secure a commitment to the continuation of the fund, campaigners and politicians alike have, for several months, questioned senior members of the Labour Government concerning the renewal of the fund – only to be met with continued refusals to express commitment.

Time after time, a sentiment of ‘we can’t tell you anything yet, but will try to get back to you soon’ has been the response from the Department for Education, with the issue becoming ever more critical as the final date covered by the previous funding package drew closer.

New applications for support could not be processed. Organisations who exist to provide highly specialist support, tailored to children with trauma, have been left with uncertainty over whether they would even be able to retain staff and continue in operation. And the children at the heart of the matter have been left in limbo, with no knowledge of when, or even if, the vital support was to continue.

For children whose very background involves life-changing disruption, and whose early years experiences cause far greater struggle in dealing with change or uncertainty, the lack of clarity from Labour has been disappointing.

The matter has been raised vocally enough for it to have been addressed in sufficient time, and even if there were changes planned that required extra time to implement, there could, at the very least, have been assurances that the fund would continue, ideally with a minimum commitment of matching the existing funding – worth £48m per year.

With so many failures to explicitly express support in continuation of the fund when quizzed by fellow MPs, including an Education Committee appearance on March 18 by Minister for Children and Families Janet Daby, and a direct question to the Prime Minister at Prime Minister’s Questions on March 26, it is reasonable to suggest that the Government weren’t committed to it at all.

At best, those in charge have not taken the issue as seriously as they should have done.

Kier Starmer’s answer did nothing to provide reassurances for families waiting for an answer.

The Education Secretary, Bridget Phillipson, has had even less to say on the matter, despite also being urged to confirm funding by campaigners, including an open letter from Adoption UK last month, highlighting the urgency of the situation and warning of family breakdown.

If always intending to continue with the ASGSF, then it says much about the view held of adopted children by ministers that they would leave it so late to confirm renewal of funding, and that the announcement would be a hastily-delivered statement in response to an Urgent Question by Munira Wilson of the Liberal Democrats in the Commons last Tuesday – a day after the existing funding expired.

Since its national introduction in 2015 following a successful trial, the ASGSF has helped to cover costs of a wide range of support and therapies for adopted children, addressing challenges associated with early years trauma, abuse, neglect or loss.

In some cases, the support can help children thrive, while in others, it can be critical to simply keep a family from reaching crisis point – and possibly be the difference between a placement surviving.

But in the overwhelming majority of instances, research and feedback by adoption charities or the APPG has consistently shown that interventions have had a positive impact on the children and families benefiting from the various support.

Although a fair access limit of £5,000 was introduced in the early years of the fund, the average cost of funding services for each child accessing the fund over the past several years is less than half of that amount.

Withdrawing what amounts to a tiny proportion of the £89bn DfE budget would not only be cruelly felt by many thousands of families, but would risk actually costing the government far more. This would be felt both directly, in the form of higher cost support services for adopted children facing severe and ongoing difficulties, and also by the impact that an absence in post-adoption support would have on the willingness of prospective adopters to proceed.

With the recruitment of suitable adoptive parents already a challenging task for local authorities, any further barriers to adopting would simply lead to more children remaining in care for longer periods, adding to the total cost of funding fostering services – which in 2023-24 topped £2.1bn – and prolonging uncertainty for children who need a permanent, secure home.

The consequences of children being in care for longer than necessary is understood by the Department for Education, with recently-published annual reports identifying the difficulties of appropriate placements for children in care as one of the department’s most critical risks, highlighting the increase in costs faced by local authorities responsible for sourcing placements for children in their care.

Whilst only a small percentage of children in care have a placement order (the court order granted only when every other option of a secure permanent home for the child has been explored), the number of children in need of matching with approved prospective adopters remains higher than the number of approved adopters waiting to be matched with children. This leads to children remaining in the care system for longer, and therefore adding to the costs for national or local government.

Politicians often talk of the “difficult decisions” they continually have to wrestle with, particularly when concerning policies that will negatively impact specific groups within society.

But whether considering both what is morally right, and what is in the interests of the public finances, the renewal of the ASGSF should have been one of the easiest decisions they will ever need to make.