Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Freud (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 21 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Child Poverty Bill.


Child Poverty Bill

My Lords, as the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, notes, her Amendment 18 has been overtaken by the later amendments that have been accepted by the Minister. Notwithstanding my criticism of the drafting of these paragraphs when we debated the last group of amendments, I agree entirely that children and children's groups should be consulted in the drawing up of the strategy. As I hope I made clear on Tuesday, one of my primary concerns with the Bill is that it focuses attention on the income of a household in place of the experience of the child within that household. Consultation is an important part of ensuring that the material deprivation criteria used to measure the second target are appropriate. It is also critical in assessing whether a measure is achieving its desired purpose or is failing to make a difference on the ground. I would be interested in hearing a little more from the Minister about the methods used by the Government to consult children directly rather than through the organisations that represent them. Does direct consultation happen now, or does the Minister anticipate the commission developing new methods of collecting views?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
716 c223-4GC 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Disability Children Children in care Accountability Disadvantaged Costs Fraud Employment Families Education Households Low incomes Ministerial responsibility Public appointments Poverty Public bodies Public consultation Lone parents Statistics Social security benefits Welfare tax credits Training Travellers Tax evasion Self-employed Child Poverty Commission
Legislation
Child Poverty Bill 2008-09 to 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk