---

Child Poverty Bill

We on these Benches entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord Freud, when he says that the welfare of children is inextricably linked to their families. However, not for the first time, we prefer the solution of the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, to that of the noble Lord, Lord Freud. We support the call by the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, for the commission to have an obligation to consult parents because, as he rightly said, they, more than anyone else, have more influence on what happens to children, and rightly so. However, we cannot agree with the amendments of the noble Lord, Lord Freud, because the Bill is about children in poverty; his changes would make it a Bill about all families in poverty. Many groups of people who might legitimately call themselves families do not have children in the household. For example, a husband and wife, his elderly mother and her disabled sister may all be adults in the household. It would be inappropriate to insert the reference to "family" in the various places the noble Lord, Lord Freud, has suggested. That is not because we do not agree that families have an enormous influence on the welfare of children—of course they do—but because we feel that that wording is not appropriate in this Bill.