Child Poverty Bill

I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, for that, but I am slightly taken aback. Last time she accused me of social engineering, and she is now saying that I am assisting in the prevention of stepfathers by having a couple penalty. That slightly surprises me. The figures that I quoted earlier showed that the lone parent with one child is now only 4 per cent below the poverty level. As the best relative performer of all the people dependent on benefits, the lone parent is better off remaining separate than moving in with someone who may be the biological father. It is often a question of couple formation as much as couple break-up, but that is just not a tradition in some parts of our community. The important argument being made here is made not on moral grounds but on genuine grounds. We have a system that discourages couple formation among lower-income groups and there is a very high level of break-up. Accordingly, many children under the age of five in that group are being thrown—at least, initially—into poverty. That is the well-being issue at the heart of this matter. I know that there is a difference between us here but some would argue, as would researchers, that there is a causative effect and not just a correlation. The Minister has been arguing that there is a correlation but others, including the Centre for Social Justice, believe there is a causative relationship. I wanted to have a debate on this amendment because the well-being issue is vital. I shall go back to it and think very hard about how to encourage—