Work and Families Bill

My Lords, as an advocate of some years’ standing for equal opportunities in the workplace, I am sure the House will not be surprised to learn that I very largely support the Government’s Work and Families Bill. This Bill, in tandem with the Childcare Bill, which we will no doubt see later, sets out the next steps towards creating the more genuinely equal-opportunity and family-friendly workplace that we saw developed in the Government’s 2004 report, Choice for parents, the best start for children: a ten year strategy for childcare. Thus, in addition to the laudable number of family-friendly measures already introduced by this Government, these Bills will help to provide the essential flexibility and encouragement that women, and increasingly men, must have if they are to balance successfully the equally important demands of family and career. It is, alas, all too self evident that women and mothers, much more than men and fathers, are still seen, and see themselves, as the primary carers of young children. By placing a duty on local authorities to see that there is sufficient and flexible childcare provision in each local area, it will at least initially be women—currently the substantially disadvantaged half of the working population—who will benefit from this legislation. By providing for an increase in the period of statutory maternity pay and leave to 39 weeks by April 2007 and to 52 weeks by the end of the Parliament, the Government’s provisions can be seen as especially important for improving the likelihood of women continuing their careers. In maintaining the inclusion of women in the workforce, we not only increase the potential overall productivity of the economy, we also reduce recruitment and training costs that would inevitably be incurred by employers if these women were to leave the workforce and had to be replaced. As your Lordships will know, these costs have increased considerably as women tend to have babies much later, having previously acquired skills and experience that is costly for employers to replace. Moreover, I would argue that introducing the opportunity for a transfer of a proportion of paid maternity leave to the father is also a step in the right direction for equal opportunities. As the EOC points out on this and other issues, the younger the parents, the more likely they are to support measures which recognise that women and men’s lives are becoming more alike in terms of their need to balance work and family. As the right reverend Prelate has pointed out, more and more fathers want to play a more active role in the family and have time to enjoy their children, as well as accepting their practical and financial responsibilities in helping to bring up the next generation as thoroughly responsible citizens. Of course, we have not yet reached what I would call an ideal situation, where availability of family leave or flexible working is seen as equally applicable to either sex and automatically built into the way in which employers organise work patterns. But, nevertheless, these steps, and the encouragement to employers to agree to keep-in-touch days with those on parental leave, are further steps in the right direction, for which the Government deserve considerable credit. There is another important reason to encourage women as well as men to remain in the workforce. The recent Turner report has drawn our attention to the impending pensions’ crisis that Britain will face with an increasing ageing population. In encouraging women to maintain their careers, they will be able to continue contributing to their pensions, rather than, as now, facing an inadequate pension on retirement due to an interrupted career from having taken time out to have children. However, much as I commend the thrust of this Bill, I have in mind, like other noble Lords, the CBI’s withdrawal of its initial support for the Bill and the quite substantial chorus of complaints, particularly from the SME’s, at the growing complexity of the law which appears to be necessary to spell out these benefits—for example, the provision for sharing between parents of a new-born child their rights to parental leave and parental pay. Your Lordships have already had the complexity of a number of the Bill’s clauses pointed out. The primary legislation for this single innovation, without providing for adoptions—an equally important and welcome provision but inevitably another complexity—occupies five pages of the Bill, spelt out in almost three dozen paragraphs. The regulations, yet to come, will need to be very extensive. We are glad to hear from the Minister that there will be plenty of consultation. That is no wonder, because not just two parents will be involved. In most cases, there will be two employers as well, both of whom will need to be satisfied on whether each parent is off work at the times claimed. They will also need to be satisfied on the legitimacy—even perhaps the existence—of the child. I hope that the Minister will be able to give the House some very positive reassurance on these matters. Will every effort be made to produce clear and intelligible regulations and, even more important, clear guidance notes for employers as well as employees? Lastly on this point, can the Minister assure us that small businesses in particular will be adequately supported and duly reimbursed for their efforts in administering the scheme? There seems to have been some backtracking on what was originally promised. I turn to my final points on carers. The Government are indeed to be congratulated on their decision to give all carers, those who take responsibility for disabled or elderly family members or friends, the right to ask their employers for flexible working. This is an enormously important step towards equal opportunities for a strongly disadvantaged group. Carers are an oft-forgotten sector of society, but by no means an insignificant one. I am glad to say that some employers are already offering flexible working to carers. Businesses such as BP, Centrica, Listawood and HSBC already appreciate and are acting upon the strong business case for giving carers this important option. Moreover, helping carers in this way produces positive returns for the economy in the form of reduced absenteeism and increased productivity, and from retaining carers’ knowledge and skills. Meanwhile, carers themselves are able to continue with their unpaid caring work. Employers will also benefit greatly from these cost savings by increasing staff loyalty and widening the skills available to them. Of the estimated 6 million carers in the UK, some 3 million are working. With an increasing ageing population, not only will Britain need 60 per cent more carers over the next 35 to 40 years, but also 2.5 million more people in the workforce over the next eight years. Evidence suggests that the right to request flexible working would encourage more carers to enter paid employment. Non-employed carers inevitably impose a substantial burden on the economy in terms of lost tax and national insurance revenue, and additional costs in terms of benefits and pension costs. But add to that what the cost would be to the state if carers were no longer willing or able to perform their caring role, the benefit of extending such a right to carers really becomes irresistible. It is estimated that the unpaid work undertaken by carers and parents is worth around £277 billion. Finally, for the reasons I have already advanced, I hope the Minister can reassure us that the definition of ““carer””, along with any other definition, will be clear and simple, and as inclusive as possible. Perhaps it could also include the parents of children eventually up to school leaving age so that all possible relationships that carers might have with the people they care for are covered. Further, caring responsibilities almost certainly become more onerous over time, and one request for flexible working per year may not in fact be adequate if circumstances change. The Work and Families Bill is a substantial step in the right direction for equal opportunities for both sexes, as well as opportunities for more continuous careers for women. For carers it provides, at last, some recognition of the invaluable role they play in all our lives. And for employers, whose co-operation will be essential if these blessings are to be sure to arrive, as simple a scheme as possible is absolutely essential.