Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 10 November 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Welfare Reform Bill.


Welfare Reform Bill

In many ways, that misses the point. We are talking about work-related activity, not work. There is no requirement for parents whose youngest children are under the age of seven to take up employment. We are talking about work-related activities and receiving support such as that which lone parents receive in the new deal for lone parents. I do not know what the hon. Gentleman's party's position is on that, although I know that the official Opposition want to get rid of it. Lords amendment 2 amends the Bill so that financial sanctions could not be imposed upon a "single" parent in receipt of income support with a child under five if they failed to undertake work-related activity. The amendment would not achieve the purpose that I believe it was intended to achieve. "Single" is not defined in social security legislation, so there is a risk that it could be interpreted to mean a non-resident parent, rather than the lone parent who has caring responsibility for the child. We must therefore amend the Bill today or risk an absent parent using the measure as an excuse to avoid getting back to work. Nevertheless, to set that drafting error to one side, in both Houses there has been vigorous debate—we hear some echoes of it now—about when, based on the age of the youngest child, we should start requiring lone parents to undertake work-related activity. Based on those debates, and on the changes we have made to put the safeguards that I have described on the face of the Bill, we still believe that starting the process when a lone parent's youngest child is aged three is right, not only because there is normally a strong foundation of child care provision available for children in this age range, but because it will allow them gradually to build their confidence and skills at a pace that suits them over four years, rather than being expected to cram in the work-related activity that they need to undertake when their youngest child is five to six. Some 76 per cent. of non-working lone parents use the free child care offered for three and four-year-olds that was developed by this Government. Most schools now have reception classes for four-year-olds. Surely it is reasonable to ask parents to use a fraction of that time to start to get ready for work? For example, 74 per cent. of non-working lone parents do not hold any qualifications. Three quarters use the free child care; three quarters have no qualifications. Why would not we ask them to take up the offer of free education to get a basic literacy and numeracy qualification in some of the time when their children are receiving an early years education? The Conservatives, according to what their leader said today, think that""the first step is to redistribute power and control form the central state and its agencies to individuals and local communities. That way we can create the opportunity for people to take responsibility."" If that is what they truly believe—if this is to be a new fresh start for the Tories on poverty—they have to support the Government amendment today. Work-related activity for lone parents of children aged three to five is precisely what the right hon. Member for Witney (Mr. Cameron) is talking about; it is creating""the opportunity for people to take responsibility.""


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
499 c172-3 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Poverty Council tax benefits Disability Disability living allowance Childcare Alcoholic drinks Community care Jobseeker's allowance Income support Domestic abuse Drugs Interviews Rehabilitation Employment schemes Medical treatments Pensioners Misuse Lone parents Reform Social security benefits Social security Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Travel requirements Sanctions Uprating Birth certificates
Legislation
Welfare Reform Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk