David Cameron says policies must pass 'family test'

 

David Cameron: "Where you can help people come together and stay together then surely the government should play its part in helping"

Related Stories

All government policies will have to pass a "family test", David Cameron has announced.

He argued that parents and children were too often overlooked and could be left worse off by reforms.

He said online music videos could be given age ratings, and more money would be put towards relationship counselling services.

But Labour said he did not understand families' needs, as more households were now dependent on food banks.

From October, every new domestic policy "will be examined for its impact on the family", the prime minister said.

Mr Cameron told BBC Breakfast that no politician wanted to be "accused of being judgemental" over people's personal relationships, but added that government would "help people who come together stay together".

'Excessive bureaucracy'

In his speech he said: "I want every government department to be held to account for the impact of their policies on the family."

Mr Cameron also announced:

  • Online music videos could be given age ratings, with YouTube and the British Board taking part in a pilot project
  • The doubling of the budget for relationship counselling through Relate, to £19.5m
  • The expansion of a programme of assistance for so-called "problem families" who struggle with unemployment and debt
  • An increase in funding for councils who want to speed up adoptions

Mr Cameron said: "Whether it's the benefits system incentivising couples to live apart or penalising those who go out to work or whether it's excessive bureaucracy preventing loving couples from adopting children with no family at all.

"We can't go on having government taking decisions like this which ignore the impact on the family."

He said: "Put simply that means every single domestic policy that government comes up with will be examined for its impact on the family."

line
Analysis By Sean Curran, political correspondent, BBC News
A parent and child holding hands

Families are important. And not just to you and me. They're one of the most important constituencies for politicians of all stripes.

That's why we hear so much about the virtues of "hard working families". And that's why you can expect to hear a lot about parents and children between now and the election.

Every party wants to be seen as the party of the family. But there are risks as well as benefits as the prime minister acknowledged when he said politicians often avoided talking about relationships because they did not want to appear judgmental.

The other, more obvious, danger is that opponents will suggest that many of your policies are not family friendly. Labour says David Cameron is out of touch and hasn't done enough to help households struggling to pay the bills.

line

The assessment will be carried out alongside other tests including for equality, cost-effectiveness and environmental impact.

Troubled families

BBC political correspondent Iain Watson said despite introducing policies on parental leave and to ease the burden of childcare costs, ministers recognised not enough voters saw the government as "family-friendly".

The Conservatives in particular were aware they needed to boost support among women, he said.

But, for Labour, shadow education secretary Tristram Hunt told the BBC News Channel: "It's all very well David Cameron saying he's in favour of the family, but his economic policies are undermining the viability of the family in Britain today."

Mr Cameron's speech comes as the government prepares to launch an extension of its programme to tackle troubled families, set up after the riots in London and other English cities in August 2011.

Up to 500,000 families are expected to be targeted - more than four times the number in the initial stage - with work due to begin first in the 50 local authorities where it has proved most successful.

The head of the programme, Louise Casey, said at the weekend that the families concerned were "off the barometer in the number of problems they have".

Health issues, both physical and mental, are expected to be at the forefront of the new push.

 

More on This Story

Related Stories

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    +3

    Comment number 1168.

    As someone about to start a family I'm very scared. Dave does't care about me or my husband in fact we would be better off if we lived apart as due to illness he can't work and due to ATOS he can't get any benefits. Then theres the child benefit and WTC if i were single i would get more of both. But why should it work out that way. Also as someone under 30 i am shafted for being young. Can't win!

  • rate this
    +19

    Comment number 892.

    As a man who was single until the age of 40 and who is now married with a 14 month old daughter, I guess I have seen both sides of the family vs. singles debate.

    It would seem to be that the Government (all of them!) plays us off against each another, then uses our cash (we paid the taxes) to bail out the bankers when they mess up.

    You could start with making child benefit universal again.

  • rate this
    +27

    Comment number 810.

    I seem to remember Cameron going on about helping families before the last general election, got elected and then cut child benefit. So I wonder why he is talking about the importance of families again now? Oh hang on a minute, what's happening next year?

  • rate this
    +13

    Comment number 772.

    First define 'family'. I have long felt that as a married couple with 2 children (now grown up) with our own house, having grown up in a similar situation we are rapidly becoming a minority. A large proportion of couples with children are not married and there are many more where the children are with one parent, usually the mother.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 461.

    Would families be less strained if they were taxed less, rather than being taxed more, along with everyone else, to pay for seemingly a government program for any adversity and ailment one may encounter in life?

 

Comments 5 of 11

 

More UK Politics stories

RSS

Features

Elsewhere on the BBC

  • HouseboatLife on the water

    Could a floating house be the home of the future? The BBC's Adam Shaw takes a look

Programmes

  • The Audi RS7Click Watch

    Tech news review of the week including a speed record for a self-driving car

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.