Introducing Sara's Law

In Parliament on the 17th of March 2025, Will Forster, MP for Woking, spoke passionately in support of amendment NC33, also known as Sara’s Law, which emerged from the findings of a recent report by the Children’s Commissioner.

Will began by thanking the NSPCC and other contributors who have suggested meaningful changes to the Bill. "When it comes to improving how we look after children in the UK, the list of needed reforms can feel unending," he stated, acknowledging the tireless work of many involved in advocating for the betterment of child protection.

The amendment, which was introduced in response to the tragic case of Sara Sharif, seeks to address the discrepancies in how children’s social care is handled across the country. Will highlighted the fundamental issue that, "The level of support a child receives too often depends not on their needs, but on where they live and the thresholds a council has for stepping in and saving that child from abuse or neglect."

He emphasised the existing inequality in how local authorities interpret thresholds for intervention under section 17 of the Children Act 1989, creating a "postcode lottery" where children in one area may receive timely help, while others are left at risk. "Every child in this country has entered a postcode lottery. And we are gambling with their lives by not attempting to repair this flaw," Will asserted.

Will pointed to Sara’s heartbreaking case as an example of the devastating consequences of inconsistent social care. "Sara was just ten years old when she was brutally murdered after enduring years of torture and slavery at the hands of those who were supposed to love her. She was known to social services, yet the response was not sufficient to protect her," he explained.

He raised the question, "Would clearer national guidance, with stronger thresholds for intervention, have made a difference? Would automatic referrals, such as those proposed in this clause, have ensured that professionals had the opportunity to intervene before it was too late?" These questions lie at the heart of the proposed amendment, which calls for the establishment of national standards for when and how children should receive help.

The amendment proposes clear triggers for automatic referral to children’s social care, such as when a primary caregiver enters custody, or when a child is arrested or experiences major instability in their life. According to Will, "These are moments of profound instability for a child, yet without clear national guidance, too many slip through the cracks. Sara slipped through the cracks."

In January, Will had called on the Prime Minister to instigate an inquiry into the failings surrounding Sara’s death, though he expressed his disappointment that an update had not yet been received. He also emphasised that the changes would ensure that children’s situations are reviewed regularly, as "it is not enough to assess a child once and then step away."

Will concluded his speech by underlining the moral responsibility that MPs have to protect vulnerable children. "We cannot continue to accept a system where a child's safety depends on geography and resource rather than need. I think that collectively, UK MPs have a moral duty to children like Sara."

He ended by expressing his disappointment that the amendment had not yet been incorporated into the Bill and urged the government to remedy this as soon as possible. "This clause would have helped prevent more torture and death like Sara experienced," Will said. "I find it deeply concerning that such a non-contentious clause, which was a recommendation by the Children’s Commissioner, has not been put through."

Will concluded by urging his colleagues to work together to get this much-needed amendment added, ensuring a more consistent and accountable system to protect children across the UK.