That is the most unutterable rubbish that I have ever heard in this Chamber. The investment in children’s centres is a recognition that we have to do something about disadvantage from an early age. Providing a general duty to address inequalities will lead to the development at a local level of policies that take particular account of helping the most disadvantaged because of the way in which that service provision will then be developed.
For example, extra cash for improving school meals may make a local authority consider giving a subsidy to parents who are just above the level for qualification for free school meals. That would encourage parents to let their children have school meals instead of lunchboxes. As part of that initiative, parents might be encouraged to come in and talk about diet. That might help to reduce inequalities in outcomes in the long term. Without a duty to address inequalities, there will not be the same kind of pressure for innovative thinking at a local level to ensure that in every policy area thought is given to ensuring that outcomes for the most disadvantaged are improved.
Childcare Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Ann Coffey
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 9 March 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Childcare Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
443 c1011-2 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-01-26 17:38:01 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_306510
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_306510
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_306510