Welfare Reform Bill

I suppose that in the spirit of the past eight days that was a conflated response to a conflated set of amendments, and I suspect that neither the Minister nor I should apologise for that. As usual, I shall study carefully what she said. However, if the mother of the child goes to the registrar within the year that is now permitted and says, "I don’t know where he is living now, but he was living at 23 Acacia Avenue", is there any good reason why the registrar should not note that fact and try 23 Acacia Avenue when the mother wants nothing more to do with the father? Or is that not a realistic scenario? The Minister does not need to answer now but it would be useful if she did at some stage.