I remain completely baffled. What seems to be going on is that part of the time the noble Lord seems to accept that there is a difference between targets—which are about income and are tight, precise, quantifiable, measurable and, we hope, deliverable—and strategies, which deal with the much broader issues of the child’s well-being, which we all want to see ensured. This goes back to a much earlier debate when the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, and I said that we can all add to the list. The noble Lord cannot turn strategies into targets and then think you are actually doing something useful. All you can probably do is say that the number of teenage pregnancies has gone down, or the amount of addiction has gone down, or the incidence of mental ill health has gone down. The noble Lord seems to spend his time moving between the vocabulary of targets and the vocabulary of strategies and trying to turn strategies, which are much more holistic—that is why they are treated separately under the scrutiny of the commission—into targets. You cannot quantify, measure or deliver strategies in the way he wishes. That is why they are not targets.
Child Poverty Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hollis of Heigham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 21 January 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Child Poverty Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
716 c221GC 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:53:15 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_613222
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_613222
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_613222