Childcare Bill

I thank the Minister for his response and all those who have taken part in this very interesting, wide-ranging mini-debate. I am glad that the noble Baroness, Lady Morris, raised the issue of unpaid voluntary work, and was encouraged to hear confirmation on that from the Minister. I, too, recognise the value of unpaid voluntary work. I know of a village in Cheshire whose elderly people would certainly not manage without a couple there who help them out,. There are examples like that all over the country, are there not? The noble Baroness, Lady Morris, mentioned my Amendment No. 22. I can tell her that it does not mean what she thought it might mean. We are in danger here of a circular argument because, if its purpose was not to improve the well-being of young children in the area and to have childcare, it would not be happening. In response to the intervention of the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, about the word ““care””, I would rather use the phrase ““education and care””. I am a little worried that the phrase ““nursery education””, which we used previously, has gradually morphed into ““childcare”” or even ““babysitting””. That is an unfortunate tendency. In response to my amendments the Minister talked about the choice of parents to go into work, to go into training and so on. I am sure that most Members of the Committee would agree with me that a very important choice is to stay at home and look after your own child. That choice should have equal status with those other choices. That is why I am so keen to get workless families up the pecking order. I welcome the free places for three and four-year olds that the Government have introduced. It is a great step forward for parents and children. But I am focusing on young children, where the equal status of the choice to stay at home is most important, because the best interests of some of those children are served by the mother or father being able to stay at home. I have other comments, but I will not extend the debate. I thank the Minister for his response, which gave me some cause for encouragement and comfort. I still worry about the pecking order in the priorities of local authorities. I know that some things always have to have priority. Many speeches have been made in Committee already—and we are only on day 2—about the importance of supporting families who, for one reason or another, cannot or choose not to go to work but who still have an enormous need for good-quality childcare. In the interests of their children, I hope that those needs are not left forgotten at the bottom of the pecking order. By raising the issue of workless families, I hope that we have at least done something about that. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.