So Resolution opposes the government’s plans to extend family reporting (see [2009] Gazette, 10 December, 3). The government is quite right to be extending it; the public need to know what is being done in their name.

At a conference – under Chatham House rules – earlier this year, one speaker put forward a proposition that the most draconian order that a court could make within England and Wales, following the abolition of the death penalty, is a forced adoption order. There were three high court judges present, together with a number of other judges and district judges, and no one took issue with this. It is dangerous for these decisions to be made in secret.

Many children’s cases are far from black and white, yet expert witnesses have to give evidence for one side or the other. In public law proceedings, there is only the expert for the local authority.

Last week Mr Justice Hedley criticised Cambridgeshire County Council and Orkney Island Council. He was so upset at the conduct of the local authorities in that case that he had to leave court to ‘calm down’.

Our child care system is based on the assumption that local authorities proceed with probity; but they do not necessarily do so in every case.

Expert witnesses are sometimes paid very handsomely – one report can cost £30,000 – and we cannot assume that they will always proceed with probity either.

Secrecy leads to the wishes and feelings of children being ignored. Secrecy leads to a culture where local authorities can fail to engage with parents, can fail to engage with other professionals (including the guardians) and, worst of all, can fail to engage with the child.

The issues involved in child care are far too important to be dealt with in secret.

James Carter, Martin Tolhurst Solicitors, Gravesend