The deaths of Victoria Climbi and Toni-Ann Byfield have fuelled calls for a children's commissioner.

Grania Langdon-Down gauges mixed reaction within the legal profession

The horrifying death of eight-year-old Victoria Climbi haunts the country's child protection services, while her name will echo down the years as the reforms proposed in the government's Green Paper 'Every Child Matters' take shape.

Nine months after the Laming inquiry into Victoria's murder recommended better co-operation and vigilance among local authorities and agencies working with children, seven year-old Toni-Ann Byfield - in the care of Birmingham social services and a ward of court - was murdered with her crack-dealer father in a London shooting.

While no reform can absolutely guarantee that a child will never again suffer abuse or violence within the family, practitioners working with children are deeply concerned that the Green Paper, which claims to cover 'all children in England', leaves whole areas affecting vulnerable young people untouched.

Their support for some of the proposals, such as the introduction of a children's commissioner for England, is tempered by concern that the consultation document hardly mentions funding.

It also does not mention private law cases, even though intractable contact disputes are devastating families, or private or kinship fostering, of the kind that brought Victoria to England and Toni-Ann to Birmingham.

The Green Paper says Victoria's death exposed shameful failings in the ability to protect the most vulnerable children.

The threads linking her death to a long list of tragic cases, dating back 30 years to Maria Colwell, involve a failure to intervene early enough because of poor co-ordination, a failure to share information, no accountable lead figure, and poorly managed and trained frontline workers.

The consultation paper focuses on four areas - supporting parents and carers, early intervention and effective protection, accountability and integration, and workforce reform.

Margaret Hodge has already been appointed as the first Minister for Children.

The paper says the government will legislate to create a local authority post of director of children's services, who will be accountable for both education and children's social services.

The government also promises to remove legislative barriers to information sharing, while tracking children's progress by giving them a unique identity number.

The Law Society's children's sub-committee is meeting later this month to formulate its response to the Green Paper before the consultation period ends on 1 December .

While it welcomes the idea of a children's commissioner, it stresses the key to the proposal's success will be in how the post is implemented and resourced.

Karen Mackay, chief executive of the Solicitors' Family Law Association, agrees: 'We like the idea of an independent children's commissioner which will give children a champion, though the Green Paper doesn't give much detail on how it will work.

'What we are concerned about is that the paper's emphasis is solely on public law children's cases.

Private law cases, some involving very bitter contact disputes, have become the Cinderella of the services.

Proposals in another report - called Making Contact Work - seem to have stalled, which has given rise to increasing militancy from fathers.

While we may disagree with their tactics, there is sympathy for the fact that these issues are not getting the resources or attention they need.'

Laura Paton is editor of childRIGHT, the journal on law and policy affecting children and young people in England and Wales, published by the Children's Legal Centre, based at the University of Essex.

She is also concerned at the areas missing from the Green Paper.

'It is supposed to be an overall vision for children but it doesn't address private law issues,' she points out, adding: 'There is also absolutely no mention of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which should underpin any new strategy.

The government looks at children as in need of protection and in relation to other people but it doesn't think of them as citizens with rights of their own.

'There is also no mention of unregulated private fostering, which is surprising given Victoria was privately fostered.

There are also no mentions of traveller or gypsy children, which, given the focus is on services delivered through schools, is worrying for those who don't attend.'

When it comes to information sharing, she accepts issues of privacy have to be overridden by safety concerns for children.

However, she says they have been told by IT companies setting up the databases that there are fears about security.

She says: 'The information has to be accessible to all the many agencies involved but it would be very alarming if there was any unauthorised access.'

Overall, she says she likes the paper's universal feel, coupled with targeted services for children in particular need.

'But it is going to require heavy investment - and the paper hardly mentions resources.

We just have to hope that it is a priority in the next spending review.

We also just have to hope that the government really does take the concerns raised during the consultation period into account and doesn't already have legislation ready to go.'

Liz Goldthorpe, chairwoman of the Association of Lawyers for Children, points to the paper's foreword by Paul Boateng, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, as a possible sign that resources will be forthcoming.

'He talks about it being a long road and that no one can flinch from the challenges ahead, which sounds like genuine commitment.

But the government will have to put its money where its mouth is because many of these proposals are long overdue.'

She says the children's commissioner is an excellent idea.

'It would just be nice to have "rights" somewhere in the title.

While the Green Paper looks like a genuine attempt to pull a number of strands together, unless the statutory obstacles to joint working are considered carefully and removed, it is not going to happen.

'There should be more information sharing.

There are notable examples where there has been a reluctance to do that but some of that comes from a lack of clarity over what people are legally entitled to do.

We have to grasp the nettle - do children really come first or does the protection of adults' civil liberties come first?'

While she welcomes the proposal for a common assessment framework, so core information follows the child between services to reduce duplication, she is concerned that it will not include children caught up in the youth justice system.

She also highlights the paper's pledge to value those working with children.

'We are losing good people in droves at the moment,' she warns.

June Venters, solicitor-advocate and managing partner of Venters Solicitors in London, is a public law child-care specialist.

She is also deeply concerned at the loss of experienced specialists, including lawyers, social workers and guardians.

She explains: 'I have been in practice for 20 years and for the first time ever, we are having to operate a waiting list of two to three weeks for a lot of Children Act cases.

I rang Cafcass (the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service) two weeks ago because I have a major baby-injury case and wanted to know when a guardian would be appointed.

I was told they had 100 cases on their priority list - and that means very young children and very serious cases - waiting for allocation.

I have to say I got on their nerves so much, and had a guardian with me at the time who I bullied into accepting the case, so I was fortunate not to have to wait.'

One area that Martin Davis, a partner with Battens Solicitors in Sherborne, Dorset, maintains the government should tackle is the loophole that someone can be found by the family courts to have physically or sexually abused a child but this will not show up on a criminal records check.

For Elena Fowler, chief executive of the National Youth Advocacy Service, there are significant threats to the rights of children and their ability to access services when possible risk factors come to be seen as 'predictors' of outcomes.

Yet, she says: 'The Green Paper refers specifically to mental health alongside other negative circumstances such as imprisonment, domestic violence or substance misuse - a good example of the existing prejudice already faced by children grappling with mental health problems.'

These sorts of issues are among the reasons why a children's commissioner is so desperately needed, according to Lee Moore, president of the Association of Child Abuse Lawyers (ACAL).

'We need someone independent from government to look after children's interests.

We need someone with the courage to speak out rather than toe the party line - someone inspirational and visionary who would bolster professional, charitable and public confidence that children's rights are being respected.

She says that to ignore today's victims is to pay the costs in the future.

'The commissioner needs to monitor and oversee the operation of complaints and whistleblowing procedures and ensure arrangements for children's advocacy - if a child makes a complaint, who is going to speak on their behalf?'

Peter Garsden, ACAL's vice-president, is the senior partner of Cheshire-based Abney Garsden McDonald, a leading child abuse compensation specialist law firm that is dealing with about 800 care-home cases and 20 group actions.

He also welcomes the children's commissioner and maintains that, although it sounds 'awesome', children in care who have no one independent to complain to may turn to the commissioner if he or she is accessible enough.

One person who is watching the outcome of the Green Paper proposals with interest is Peter Clarke, the Children's Commissioner for Wales for the past two-and-a-half years.

He has received more than 500 individual complaints ranging from allegations concerning pocket money to serious child abuse.

Where he does not have strong powers is over probation, criminal justice and Home Office issues.

He says: 'The proposal for a Children's Commissioner for England means those matters will have to be examined to see whether they should come under the commissioner's jurisdiction and this will mean revisiting my jurisdiction.

I want those powers, especially over juvenile justice because otherwise there is the anomaly that I have strong powers to intervene on behalf of a child in a children's home but if they are moved to a secure unit, I have very few powers.

Yet, arguably, they are even more vulnerable in the secure unit.'

So, the Green Paper has produced a mixture of support and concern.

But will it produce the changes that are needed so desperately? For June Venters, there is one plea that she is wants to make 'loudly and clearly' to the government.

'Whatever happens, the Green Paper mustn't just lead to additional layers of bureaucracy for us to get through.'

Grania Langdon-Down is a freelance journalist