Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


Earl Russell: My Lords, I offer a general welcome to the orders. I enjoyed the voice of experience which came across in Regulation 4. That regulation states that the work will be done for payment or in expectation of payment. I enjoyed that, first, because that will be of real help to people whose employers suffer bankruptcy and, secondly, simply because I like that note. It goes right back to Magna Carta. One could levy a feudal aid when the king married his eldest daughter, but Magna Carta specified that it could be done when he married his eldest daughter "once". There is a wealth of suspicion in that.

I also offer a very warm welcome to the 50-plus element in the tax credit order. The number of people between the ages of 50 and 65 who are not working represent a fearsome potential burden on the pension system, which, God knows, is carrying enough burdens already. Therefore, anything that may increase the appetite and opportunity to work for people between the ages of 50 and 65 is to be welcomed, and I am happy to do so.

I am also happy to welcome the provision for maternity leave. I am a little disappointed not to see in the wording of that regulation any provision for paternity leave. I thought for a moment that I heard the Minister speak the words "paternity allowance" but I could not find them in the regulation. I believe that, as we move towards gender equality, men will become more and more involved in childcare. Getting them involved in the very first few weeks is vital in setting habits. I say that only with the reservation expressed in the Committee stage of the Adoption and Children Bill by the noble Baronesses, Lady Gould and Lady Thornton, and by myself in cases where there is danger in contact with a violent or abusive father. With that reservation only, I believe that paternity leave might be included.

I welcome warmly Regulation 6 concerning the continuation of the tax credit during periods of statutory sick pay. For many people, such periods represent an abrupt journey. Occasionally, in moments when one thinks one is dying but is better two days later, I have wondered what it would be like to go suddenly on to statutory sick pay. It is not an attractive prospect.

Regulation 7 provides for school holidays and vacations. I accept the principle and the fact of what is done. But I wish that it had not contained the words—the Minister knows as well as I do that it is wrong—


29 Jul 2002 : Column 761

Any serious sixth-form teacher who does not work during the holidays is not doing his job. I wish it were possible to persuade those inside sanctuary buildings that that is not an accurate way of describing what is done.

In relation to that matter, another interface problem arises which needs to be addressed. The substance has been addressed but the thinking behind it has not. As I am sure the noble Baroness knows very well, the vacation is the time when one begins to do some work because one's teaching is over.

I am happy with the provisions relating to childcare in Regulation 14. I am also happy with the allowance in primary legislation for future progress towards shared care. But I am sorry that at present there is still the idea that one person always has overall responsibility for a child. That does not accord with practice, and it causes trouble when one tries to apply what is not in accord with practice.

I am very pleased with the extension of tax credit to children up to the age of 19 who are still in education. However, I should like to repeat a point first made with great eloquence in this Chamber by the noble Baroness, Lady David. Some people—one of my sons who is dyslexic is such an example, and therefore I should declare an interest—remain at school beyond the age of 19. I wonder whether it would have cost very much now or in future regulations to make the measure read,


    "Up to the age of 19 or school leaving, whichever is the later".

To cut off the credit half-way through a school term, possibly with exams coming up, could be a very grave shock and one which I do not believe this Government want to inflict.

I believe that the rates are generous and welcome and will do a great deal of good. I want to congratulate the Minister and her advisers on a job of work which has been well done and which, I believe, will do a great deal more good than the measure we discussed earlier this afternoon. I thank the Minister.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, I am very pleased that the final two sets of regulations have been so warmly welcomed. I shall be as quick as I can be in responding to the points raised. The first question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Higgins, concerned slippage. That simply means that the slip rule allows printing errors to be corrected when they are finally printed, but it does not in any way touch on the substance of the regulations. In other words, it allows for typos to be eradicated.

With regard to the issue of custodial sentences, I suspect that the matter is mentioned because one is dealing with children. One can think of cases such as this where the children could otherwise be in a hospital or detained until it is thought appropriate for them to be released. I suspect that, in some cases, that could be in less than four months. That is the reason that different categories are set out.

29 Jul 2002 : Column 762

With regard to seasonal workers, which the noble Lord, Lord Higgins, asked me about—

Lord Higgins: My Lords, if the period is to be less than four months, that raises a separate issue. Other than that, if the period is a minimum of four months, then all the earlier qualifications in that paragraph seem to be completely unnecessary. If it is less than four months, perhaps one should consider that point.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, I am advised that the measure is included for the purpose of clarity and to ensure that, even though no period is specified so far as concerns the example that I gave to the noble Lord, it is made clear to claimants that certain types of custodial sentence which are handed down are still included as custody, which prevents the continuation of support. I believe that we both had in mind certain cases where youngsters have been under care and control or in custody for considerable periods and, while that is the case, their parents are not entitled to support, even though they may not come within the formal language of imprisonment. The intention of the measure is to specify that there are other ways to detain young people, which may not be classified as imprisonment, but which would deny their parents the ability to receive child tax credits. A hospital may be one such place.

On seasonal workers, notes accompanying the claim form—a point raised by the noble Earl, Lord Russell—will give clear guidance on this matter. People will be asked to state the number of hours per week that they normally work at the time that they claim tax credits. They will not be expected to work out their average working hours over a year. As a result, I believe we should be able to respond to their situation more helpfully.

The noble Earl also asked about disability tests. In the new tax credits we are continuing the existing arrangements for DPTC and WFTC. The main difference is that they are not disaggregated as they are at present, thus reducing any possibility of stigma in terms of payment to the disabled person.

The noble Earl, Lord Russell, welcomed the 50-plus element and asked about young people who stay on at school receiving benefit until their nineteenth birthday or until the end of the academic year. He will understand that that would bring about huge implications relating to child benefit and the like, but I take on board his comments and his criticism. We shall reflect on those but I do not believe that I can offer him any help.

However, where the noble Earl and the noble Lord, Lord Higgins, may rejoice is on the pertinent issue of paternity leave and adoption. We intend to extend Regulation 5 to cover statutory paternity pay and statutory adoption pay. At the time that the working tax credit regulations were drafted the Employment Bill had not received Royal Assent. Now that it has, we intend to amend the working tax credit regulations. I hope that your Lordships will find those regulations acceptable.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

29 Jul 2002 : Column 763

Tax Credits (Income Thresholds and Determination of Rates) Regulations 2002

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 9th July be approved [35th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Baroness Hollis of Heigham.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Child Tax Credit Regulations 2002

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 9th July be approved [35th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Baroness Hollis of Heigham.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Enterprise Bill

8.32 p.m.

House again in Committee

Schedule 15 agreed to.

Clause 237 [Criminal proceedings]:

[Amendment No. 256 not moved.]

Clause 237 agreed to.

Clause 238 [Overseas disclosures]:

[Amendments Nos. 257 and 258 not moved.]

Lord Sainsbury of Turville moved Amendment No. 259:


    Page 168, line 44, leave out from "must" to end of line and insert "have regard in particular to the following considerations—


(a) whether the matter in respect of which the disclosure is sought is sufficiently serious to justify making the disclosure;
(b) whether the law of the country or territory to whose authority the disclosure would be made provides appropriate protection against self-incrimination in criminal proceedings;
(c) whether the law of that country or territory provides appropriate protection in relation to the storage and disclosure of personal data;
(d) whether there are arrangements in place for the provision of mutual assistance as between the United Kingdom and that country or territory in relation to the disclosure of information of the kind to which section 232 applies.
(6A) Protection is appropriate if it provides protection in relation to the matter in question which corresponds to that so provided in any part of the United Kingdom.
(6B) The Secretary of State may by order—
(a) modify the list of considerations in subsection (6);
(b) add to those considerations;
(c) remove any of those considerations.
(6C) An order under subsection (6B) must be made by statutory instrument subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament."

On Question, amendment agreed to.

29 Jul 2002 : Column 764

[Amendment No. 260 not moved.]

Clause 238, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 239 [Overseas disclosures: criteria]:

On Question, Whether Clause 239 shall stand part of the Bill?


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page