Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Northbourne (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 25 April 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Work and Families Bill 2005-06.


Work and Families Bill

My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister. I am always sceptical about consultation, especially when I have not been consulted. I wonder whether the Minister could arrange for me to have the relevant documentation and I will express my views to the consultation, although I dare say it will not make much difference. The noble Lord omitted to comment on one of the points I made, which was that this proposal would increase the number of fathers who would take up parental responsibility. Different definitions can cut both ways. The definition of parental responsibility in the 1989 Act is the key definition of a father. It would be much better if the Government did not keep introducing in new legislation definitions of ““father”” different from those used in the Child Support Agency and Anti-social Behaviour Acts. We now have four or five different definitions of a father, which is helpful neither to us nor to fathers.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
681 c105 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Conditions of employment Childcare Carers Fraud Employment Foster care Leave Fathers Flexible working Parental leave Parents Pay Redundancy pay Public holidays Maternity pay Paternity leave Maternity leave Parental responsibility Working mothers
Legislation
Work and Families Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk