John Penrose

Conservative Party | Weston-super-Mare

Full Employment

John Penrose (Weston-super-Mare) (Con): May I press the Secretary of State a little further on his proposal to end the entitlement to income support of lone parents with a youngest child aged 12 or over simply because they are lone parents? I suspect many people understand that there is a natural change of gear when a child enters secondary school that may provide more time for parents to find jobs, but why do the Government propose to lower the age to seven, when there is no such natural change of gear? What is the thinking behind the age of seven, rather than six, eight or some other age?

Mr. Hain: This is an opportunity programme, not a “big stick” programme. As I have said, under this Government there are over 300,000 more lone parents in work than in the past. They are doing better than ever before, and they have been able to lift their children out of poverty as well as taking for themselves all the advantages and dignity that come with work.

In our judgment, moving the age to seven—given the correct child support arrangements, along with support for parents that enables them to work in a way that protects their own interests and those of their children—presents a big opportunity. The point is that most of those people want to work. I think that provided that the circumstances are right, and—as we made clear in the Green Paper—provided that child care support is available, from 8 am pre-school to 6 pm post-school, lone parents who wish to work when their children reach the age of seven should be given the opportunity to do so. They should then move not from income support to nothing, but from income support to jobseeker’s allowance. That will give them a chance to make progress in a work-based environment, with regular interviews and all the opportunities that that brings.