UK Parliament / Open data

Welfare Reform Bill

Proceeding contribution from Lord Freud (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 26 October 2011. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Welfare Reform Bill.
I am laughing at the memory of my own children’s disapproval of their minders. Jobcentre Plus does not dictate to parents the type of childcare or which provider they should use, or make any presumption that a childcare provider is suitable for the parent and child in question. The noble Baroness, Lady Hayter, asked whether childcare costs would be taken as good reason. This goes back to my previous response: there is no blanket rule. We will consider each case and look at all the benefits of work. Clearly, we will elaborate the detail on that in due course. Advisers will continue to have an important role in both challenging and supporting parents who may have preconceived ideas about childcare, who may have had previous experiences or who have not used the services before. The circumstances of all parents and the needs of their children vary, and advisers will continue to take this into account. Several noble Lords raised the question of the availability of childcare. We should bear in mind that local authorities have a duty under the Childcare Act 2006 to secure, as far as is reasonably practicable, sufficient childcare for working parents of children aged from birth to 14, and from birth to 18 in the case of disabled children. They must formally assess sufficiency in their area every three years. Local authority decisions on what they regard as ““reasonably practicable”” should be documented and published to allow scrutiny and challenge. Parents who feel that their needs have not been met can complain to the local authority. In the event that they are not satisfied with the way that their complaint has been dealt with, they may make a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman. I will borrow the claim of the noble Baroness, Lady Hayter, about the perfection of all things under the previous Government. This is after all the system that they put in place, so I am sure that she is absolutely satisfied with the arrangements. A parent who considers that childcare is not available will need to demonstrate to the adviser that they have taken reasonable steps to secure such care. If childcare is available but the parent considers that it is not appropriate, he or she will need to provide information indicating that they have discussed their concerns with the service provider and give reasons why they do not consider the provision to be appropriate. Parents will need to demonstrate that there are no alternative arrangements that it would be reasonable for them to make. Where the adviser considers that the parent has not taken reasonable steps to identify or access appropriate childcare they will refer the question to a decision-maker. The sanction will only be imposed if the claimant does not have a good reason. In considering whether there is good reason, we will consider all relevant matters raised by the claimant, which would include the individual circumstances of the parent and children, and the availability of suitable childcare. Of course, any sanction decision can be appealed to an independent appeals tribunal for review. Ultimately, we believe that in the vast majority of cases it is best for children if their parents are in work. Research into child poverty and workless households highlighted that: "““Parental employment is the key route out of poverty and disadvantage. Growing up in a workless household and/or in poverty can have a significant negative effect on a child’s development.””" That is from the 2004 Treasury document, Choice for Parents, The Best Start for Children. A recent evaluation of lone parents’ experiences of moving into work also found that working had a direct positive effect on their children, with both direct and indirect benefits. That research was based over here and did not incorporate some of the findings that have been quoted about US research with its differentiation between younger and older children. I am not sure that we have that evidence locally. However, other research studies have shown that work seemed to have a positive effect on parental relationships with their children. This was because time spent together was more appreciated and valued by both the parent and the child even though the amount of time had generally reduced as a result of the mother being in work. That finding is actually supportive of the pioneering work of my great aunt, Anna Freud. She would be relieved to see that I am not trashing her concepts. We believe that these provisions strike a fair balance. They allow parents to find the childcare that is right for them and to meet their work-related requirements. I also add my thanks to the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, for raising this important issue. He made a powerful speech which reminded us of the importance of this area. I hope that I have reassured him that the position is actually improving and that we have the protections in place. On that basis, I urge him and other noble Lords to withdraw their amendments.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
731 c326-8GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top