Work and Families Bill

My Lords, it is a privilege to welcome the overarching aim of the Bill—to ensure that care givers in our society can better balance their home and work commitments. As a report of the Church of England on the family in 1995 states:"““The modern view of the family is sometimes dominated by economic concerns, according to which the home is either an escape from work or a base from which people do other work or go out to work. The Christian understanding””—" indeed, the Judaeo-Christian understanding—"““is different. The role of the family is not, in the first instance, to produce workers. Rather the role of the family is to produce healthy, mature and creative human beings””." Parents and carers play a fundamental role in society through the nurturing of family members—a role that should be valued and actively affirmed. The Bill makes strides to do exactly that. Provisions that must be especially applauded include the extension of maternity leave to one year, as noble Lords have mentioned, and the possibility for fathers to take additional paternity leave if their partner returns to work. This recognition that fathers, like mothers, need time to bond with their baby will reinforce the growing understanding that child rearing is not solely the responsibility of the mother. By enabling mothers and fathers to balance their work and caring responsibilities between them, they, their children and, indeed, wider society, will undoubtedly benefit. I strongly support the Government’s intention to extend that right to carers. Many of the approximately 4 million carers of working age in the United Kingdom struggle to balance their work and caring roles. Some are forced to give up work altogether. The new right will make it possible for carers—for whom I urge as wide a definition as possible to be applied—to spend the time that they need to do with people who rely on them for care, and also to stay in work. However, I must take the opportunity to express my concerns that despite these generous leave extensions, many parents may be unable to take them up. It is important when discussing work and families to consider the real choices that people have. A female home worker living on little money is unlikely to be able to make a real choice about whether to take time off when her income is all that keeps the family from living in poverty. A man who is in an unstable position at work, say in an area of high unemployment, is unlikely to ask for time off to look after a new child in case his job is threatened. The Bill needs to address the concerns of families at all income levels. As the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, pointed out, the low level of statutory pay currently stands at £106 a week—much lower than a week’s pay on the national minimum wage. Research shows that seven in 10 mothers returned to work during their leave period for financial reasons. Yet only one of them would say that she was ready or wanted to do so. In addition, fathers whose partners do not work before pregnancy or who do not want to go back to work will not be entitled to additional paternity leave. Statistics show that four in 10 new mothers are not in paid work before the birth of their child. These two factors limit the choice of families and could undermine the commendable provisions for new parents that the Government are introducing in the Bill. Taking into consideration the overwhelming support for the right to request for carers, it seems to me that the scope of such a right has the potential to go much further. Many people have been disappointed that the Bill does not extend the right to request to parents of older children and teenagers. Indeed, the Mothers’ Union, which has a constituency of 120,000 people in the United Kingdom who were widely consulted on the Bill, particularly supports this idea. One Mothers’ Union member wrote:"““All children are in need of support from and quality time with their parents. Older children warrant their parents’ support as much as small children and babies, if not more. Whereas a baby or a small child tends to adapt easily to being cared for by new people, the same cannot be said for teenagers who are experiencing transitional difficulties such as puberty, changing from childhood to adulthood, changing from primary to secondary schools, trying to find out and understand their own identity””." It strikes me that to extend the right to request flexible working to parents of teenagers would, to echo a previous speaker, be in keeping with the recently published Respect Action Plan, particularly in the light of the new obligation on parents to take more responsibility for the behaviour of their children and to act in a supervisory capacity for a defined period during an exclusion from school. Parents should have the option to change their working lives in favour of their children’s welfare if the need arises. I would argue that the right to request flexible working arrangements for parents of children and young people up to 18 is essential for this. Again, I echo what the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, said in support of this. In conclusion, if one thing could be done to enhance this imaginative and innovative Bill, I would urge that all parents, regardless of the age of their children, should be able to request flexible working hours if this is what their family needs.