Work and Families Bill

I support the amendment, which seeks a statutory right to ask for flexible working hours where necessary for what I believe are good reasons. I hope not to be unduly repetitive of the cogent remarks made by the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley. I begin with a couple of reflections from where I sit as a bishop in the city of Nottingham and the county of Nottinghamshire. I have a lot of contact with families through 300 churches and 72 Church schools, through the organisation, Family Care, which is our adoptive agency, and through a very good director of education. I am in regular contact with the children’s adviser and with an active Mothers’ Union, which is involved intimately with family life. It is from that basis that I make these reflections. We talk about the importance of parenting, and on many occasions the Government have stressed—we are grateful to them—how important it is. If they accepted the amendment, that would signal to parents and employers how seriously they take parents’ responsibilities to their children up to the age of 18, even if they are working. In several surveys conducted by many organisations, such as the NFPI, again and again parents have indicated their concerns about managing work and family commitments. Giving the right to ask for flexible hours would give parents of all children the opportunity to choose to have time with their children and with each other, thus strengthening the marriage as well as the home and the family. It would also enable them to continue in employment and provide for the family, rather than depend increasingly on 24/7 childcare by others. If parents are to be held legally accountable for truancy, as is currently the case—for example, if a child is missing school regularly—they should have the right to renegotiate their hours with their employer so that they can go to work earlier or later to collect a child from school. Increasing numbers of children are now from single-parent homes, where there is no extra support from a partner, and that adds stress to the home environment and relationships. Again, flexible working hours are required to help single parents juggle the demands of parental, work and domestic requirements. Obviously, the hours would have to be agreed with the employer and would not be totally flexible—we realise that. Other employees would soon get pretty annoyed if single parents took off for any reason, substantial or insubstantial. Many children find themselves in step-families and can take time to readjust and settle. In that regard, the parents need time and space to help the children to settle into the new structure and life patterns. New extended schooling, which was referred to a moment ago, meets the needs not only of single parents but, increasingly, of two parents at work. In this case, creative measures of employment hours need to be established to enable such households to meet the needs of a growing family and to allow couples time to sustain their own relationships. We have heard of the focus on educational testing and, regardless of its merits, it has brought pressure into children’s lives. Again, parents need to help them through that. The worrying social phenomena have been alluded to. Increasingly, children suffering from stress and depression are having very early intervention medication. There are issues of obesity, the high rate of teenage pregnancy and the seduction of drugs and alcohol. In all those, parents need to give help at the time of need through a flexible right to negotiate. An overall statement is that no one can replace a ““good enough parent””. In others words, the provision of appropriate adults or in loco parentis figures is never quite the same as the parent who can most adequately meet a child’s biological, psychological, sociological, emotional and spiritual needs. As I alluded to earlier, flexible working hours for parents may seem to be another tack to the provision already being made available by extended schooling—that is, the current government initiative in schools to plug the gaps for families that need extended childcare. Personally, I feel that such initiatives need to be tempered, and the amendment attempts to do exactly that. It gives power and responsibility back where it belongs—with the parents. The Government are rightly concerned about the importance of parenthood, and we all applaud the government stance on that. I understand that they are soon to announce a campaign emphasising the importance of parental involvement with children’s education and one relating to family meal times. I believe that to give the right to ask for flexible hours, right up to a child reaching the age of 18, gives parents of all children the opportunity to choose to have time with their children and for each other, as well as continuing in employment and providing for the family, rather than depending increasingly on 24/7 childcare by others.