---

Work and Families Bill

had given notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 3A:"Page 2, line 10, at end insert—" ““(   )   For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) and (c), the relationship with the child must be that the employee has parental responsibility for the child and the relationship with the mother shall be that of co-habitor at the time the child is born and for the time when the additional paternity leave is taken and contributing directly or indirectly to the maintenance of the child or its mother.”” The noble Lord said: I am most grateful to the Minister. I could not entirely follow the considerable amount of detail that he gave, so I should like to look at it again and if possible come and talk to him about it before Report, if necessary. I entirely agree, of course, that the definition of ““father”” for ordinary and additional paternity leave should be the same, but that does not prevent us changing the definition for ordinary paternity leave. The Minister may have answered this question, but what is the definition of ““father”” for the purposes of his definition of the person who is entitled to the leave? It is perfectly open to any father who genuinely wants to make a long-term commitment to his child to sign the birth register—and any father who is not prepared to make such a commitment is, arguably, an unsuitable person to bond with a child. [Amendment No. 3A not moved.] [Amendment No. 4 not moved.]