Policies would fail 'family test'

All government policies will be tested from next month to see if they are family friendly, with policies that fail to support family life being scrapped.

Under the plans, announced by Prime Minister David Cameron, the "family test" will be formally introduced into impact assessments for proposed government policies.

But how do existing government polices fare? We ask leading children's charities to assess whether existing government policies would pass the test.

Immigration

Anita Hurrell, legal and policy officer at Coram Children's Legal Centre, says immigration policy is probably "the least family-friendly area of policy". She points to the fact the government changed family visas in 2012 to introduce a new minimum income requirement of £18,600 when a British, or settled, person wishes to sponsor their spouse or partner to join them in the UK from outside the EU.

"It has been estimated that 47 per cent of working British citizens would not be able to meet this requirement," Hurrell says.

The requirement increases to £22,400 if the UK-based person is seeking to sponsor a dependent child, and by an additional £2,400 for each further child.

"The policy has divided hundreds of families, splitting up parents and children, some of whom know only their 'Skype mummy' or 'Skype daddy'," Hurrell says.

She adds that the government is also seeking to restrict Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights - the right to respect for family and private life - in the context of immigration.

"With the Immigration Act 2014, the government sought to create new tests for Article 8 that go against established law on family life and children's best interests," she says. "Under new law on deportation cases, a UK child could be deprived of their parent forever before there has even been any scrutiny by the courts of the Home Office's decision to deport the parent. This goes against very important recent legal developments on children's rights and the need to properly consider the impact on the lives of affected children."

Bereavement support

Support provided to widows and widowers with dependent children is also set to change. They are currently supported through the one-off bereavement payment and weekly widowed parent's allowance, payable until the youngest child leaves full-time education. But the Pensions Act 2014 replaces this ongoing support with a bereavement support payment, likely to be a £5,000 lump sum and monthly instalments of £400 each, payable for one year.

The National Children's Bureau says that for 75 per cent of widowed parents, the changes will mean support effectively being cut. It estimates that 88 per cent of working families will be worse off than under current policies, and 57 per cent of those out of work. And 96 per cent of newly widowed parents will be supported for a shorter time than currently.

"Those with younger children will be disproportionately badly affected, as they can currently claim for longer," the NCB spokesman says. "The benefit will be withdrawn around the first anniversary of the death - already a hugely challenging time."

Families' longer term support needs will be met through Universal Credit, but if children are aged over four, their parent will have to be available for work six months after the death.

"Most return to work within 12 to 18 months anyway, but requiring them to do so is unnecessary and may be counterproductive, adding to their stress," the spokesman says.

"After a parent dies, additional changes and stresses worsen children's outcomes. They need their surviving parent to be available to them."

The NCB says the policy will only become family friendly if the duration of payments is extended, or the conditionality requirements of claiming Universal Credit for longer are relaxed for parents of bereaved children.

"We need to give families time to find their feet again after a parent dies," the spokesman says.

Welfare assistance

Peter Grigg, director of campaigns, policy and research at The Children's Society, says the government's decision to abolish its local welfare assistance programme fails the family-friendly policy test.

"Its gradual abolition removes the last line of support for many vulnerable families," he says.

"Local welfare assistance provides crucial crisis loans for living expenses and community care grants for families facing emergencies.

"But from April 2013, responsibility for this programme, including its funding, was devolved to local authorities. This followed a huge cut that almost halved its budget.

"Then, in December 2013, the government announced that from April 2015, funding would be stopped all together."

Grigg says the "slow and largely overlooked" abolition of vital support for families in need of emergency support was decided without consultation, review and "any consideration of its effect".

According to latest data, more than half of all community care grants were given to families that were under exceptional pressure.

Grigg says the £73m provided helped families in crisis buy food for their children, made it possible for struggling parents to visit a sick child in hospital and provided them with emergency support to heat homes that would otherwise be cold and damp.

"Since the scheme was localised, each area has set up its own scheme to help families cope in an emergency and provide a safe environment for their children," Grigg says.

"But abolishing the national grant has meant that local authorities, already under huge financial pressure, will struggle to continue to provide this critical last line of support."