Welfare Reform Bill

This is a probing amendment. It concerns childcare for older children of parents who claim jobseeker’s allowance. Your Lordships will be well aware that we debated similar issues during the first day in Committee, but principally with respect to employment support allowance and the treatment of childcare for younger children. I do not want to rehearse the same issues here again, but ask for your Lordships’ patience while I explore a few points concerning JSA and older children where the Government’s position remains a little unclear. On younger children, on the first day in Committee the Minister gave a good assurance that the parent would be responsible for decisions as to whether a particular childcare facility was appropriate for her child. On older children, in the context of decision-making on a parent’s participation in the flexible New Deal, the impression from the Government is very different. The former Secretary of State told the Work and Pensions Committee: ""In the end it will be the personal adviser's decision with the possibility of appeal because if we did it the other way round that would clearly have the potential to drive the cart and horses through the conditionality regime"." "The cart and horses" is quite sweet, really. The Government’s response to the Work and Pensions Committee report on the commissioning strategy for the flexible New Deal said: ""Advisers will be required to consider the availability and suitability of childcare when they consider whether a parent's child care responsibilities made it unreasonable for them to stay in employment, to take up paid employment, or to carry out a jobseeker's direction"." This implies that personal advisers, who are unlikely to have any professional knowledge of and expertise in the childcare requirements of children, will be making decisions that will have a major impact upon a child’s development. I think that that quote can be interpreted in more than one way, so I am not saying that it is categorical. I would be grateful if the Minister could clarify the following points. First, will the right of the parent to decide whether a particular childcare facility is suitable for their child be the same for older children from the age of seven with respect to the flexible New Deal as we understood it to be for younger children under seven in the ESA context? Secondly, will the non-availability of suitable childcare be accepted as good cause for parents with older children? Thirdly, I understand from the Child Poverty Action Group that only 6 per cent of 14 year-olds uses out-of-school clubs. This figure is apparently well out of line with the Ofsted data. If an out-of-school club is the only option for a child, would the availability of an out-of-school club be taken as suitable childcare availability even if the parent explained that the child had made it clear that they would not attend it? Fourthly, the DWP is guaranteeing that all working parents will be able to access affordable childcare by 2015. What is the DWP’s definition of "affordable" in that context? I beg to move.