Hornchurch & Upminster MP Julia Lopez has sharply criticised the Government’s recent overhaul of a key support fund for adopted children, warning that Hvaering families are being left without the vital help they need.
The Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund (ASGSF), introduced by the Conservative Government in 2015, was designed to help children overcome the effects of early trauma, abuse, and neglect. It provides therapeutic services for families who have adopted children or care for them under special guardianship orders—arrangements where a child is permanently placed with someone other than their birth parents, often a relative or close family friend.
Despite the fund's critical role, Labour Ministers failed to outline its future until this month, when a hastily issued ministerial statement confirmed it would continue for another year. However, a later announcement revealed significant cuts to the support available and there is now a lengthy backlog of applications due to government dithering over the new approach.
Key changes include a 40% reduction in the annual therapy allowance per child—from £5,000 to £3,000—the scrapping of match funding for high-cost cases, and the end of multi-year funding arrangements.
Families and experts in the adoption and guardianship sector have voiced alarm over the cuts, warning they will disproportionately harm children with complex needs who rely on intensive and long-term therapy.
In Parliament, Mrs Lopez highlighted the plight of a local Havering constituent whose adopted son has been unable to access sensory therapy due to the funding suspension. She criticised the decision to cut targeted support while investing in universal initiatives like free breakfast clubs.
Commenting, Mrs Lopez said:
“Labour is making a political choice to remove this lifeline from the most vulnerable children in Havering, all while rolling out a universal breakfast scheme that will spend limited funds on children whose parents are happy to provide them food. Parents going down the adoption route accept that a child will often come to them with multiple complex needs. Those needs can be hard to navigate due to trauma and abuse, and it is on these families and children that public money should be spent. The Government’s decision to cut support without warning, consultation, or a clear long-term commitment to the fund will cause real distress to families. They deserve better.”
Adding to the disruption, a backlog of around 700 applications—prepared under the previous criteria—is now being returned to local authorities and agencies for resubmission, further delaying access to services.
While the Department for Education has defended the changes as necessary to meet growing demand and extend access to more families, critics argue that diluting the fund’s impact undermines its purpose. They warn that children most in need of specialist, consistent therapy will be left behind.
The fund has been allocated a flat £50 million budget for the 2025–26 financial year. However, no guarantees have been given about its continuation beyond that point, with future funding contingent on the next government spending review.
