Sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker. I assumed that they had all been grouped together.
Let me make a general point that links back to amendment 3 and the need to retain the grant. This is not just a matter of putting the £190 into people's pockets so that they can spend it either on improving their diets during pregnancy or on items that they might need when the child is born. We need to bring people in so that they access professional health advice at the 25th week of pregnancy or, as we have debated, earlier in pregnancy. That is really important and there is nothing to replace it. The Government seem to have no suggestion on how to bring people in through the door and ensure that we increase the number of women who access such advice if the health in pregnancy grant is not used as a trigger mechanism. If the Government will not accept amendment 3 or any of the other amendments that call for more time and a review of how the grant works, will the Minister at least tell us how we can ensure that more women access professional advice on their health and the health of their unborn child during pregnancy? The grant was designed to tackle a serious issue and it is being abolished in its early stages. It is a shame to abandon the project at this stage.
Savings Accounts and Health in Pregnancy Grant Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Kerry McCarthy
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 22 November 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Savings Accounts and Health in Pregnancy Grant Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
519 c105-6 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:48:48 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_683940
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_683940
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_683940