Child Poverty Bill

I thank the Minister and the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, very much for their responses. Frankly, my concern has been much reduced since the passing of Amendment 15, with its requirement to worry about the most vulnerable children. Combined with that, I acknowledge entirely—indeed I made the point—that the figures below 40 per cent are very unreliable; I hardly need to be reminded of the point, and I accept it. The amendment was driven by the sense of many commentators that there had been a lot of effort on nudging people just over a particular line. The reason I was keen to see an emphasis right the way through the poor was to ensure that neither this Government nor any future one resort to that kind of playing with figures, because what the public want to see is the very poorest children—genuinely poor children—taken out of poverty. As the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, said, it is not a target. This is information, and the trouble is that the HBAI, which is an excellent publication, has so much information that particular things are drowned out, so the value of having this in the statement which surrounds how we are progressing on poverty is that it pulls it out and pulls the significance out. My concerns in this area have been reduced by Amendment 15, and the arguments that have been presented have been very good and persuasive arguments—though I am not implying that other arguments on other amendments were not good as well. On that basis, I withdraw this amendment with genuine thanks. Amendment 33 withdrawn. Amendments 34 and 35 not moved. Clause 16 : Continuing effect of targets after target year Clause 16 : Continuing effect of targets after target year Amendment 36 not moved. Schedule 2 : Continuing effect of targets after target year Schedule 2 : Continuing effect of targets after target year Amendment 37 not moved. Amendments 37A and 37B Moved by