Labour's duty to support the family

SUPPORT FOR family life rests at the heart of the Government's programme of reform and modernisation. The Government believes the family is the fundamental social unit in our society. We are working to strengthen and support it.

None of us wants to live in a "nanny state". It is not for the Government to dictate how people should build their families.We recognise, for example, that a third of children are born to couples who are not married. For the Government, the primary issue is not whether parents are, or are not, married, although we strongly support the institution of marriage. Our concern here is for the welfare of children.

Our duty to protect the interests of children transcends legal constructs. That is why the Government wants to encourage unmarried fathers to acquire parental responsibility for their children under the Children Act of 1989.

We should not assume that most unmarried fathers do not want this responsibility. Following consultation earlier this year, we have concluded that parental responsibility should be conferred on unmarried fathers who sign the birth register jointly with the mother. Most unmarried fathers already do this. It is surely right to recognise their commitment to the family unit by giving them the legal status of parents.

Let me move on now to concentrate on another area of my responsibilities for family law: namely, the support of marriage and, for those marriages which break down irretrievably, finding ways to end them as amicably as possible.

I have four main goals: a system underpinned by fairness for all; greater certainty of process and outcome; a reduction in the scope for acrimony if a damaged marriage cannot be repaired; and a lowering of costs for both the individual and the taxpayer.

People entering and leaving marriage need to know their rights and obligations. They need to know where they stand. Those people whose relationship has begun to fall apart also need to know what steps they can take to save their marriage, if that is possible; and how to end their marriage, if it is not.

In an ideal world, all couples would live together in complete peace and harmony. But we have to face facts. Some marriages seem doomed to failure from the outset. Others go bad. There will always be broken marriages that cannot be repaired.

In those circumstances, it is in the interests of everyone - spouses and children - for all the legal, financial, and domestic issues to be settled calmly and cleanly. The system should be designed to limit opportunities and causes for disputes wherever possible. It is also in everyone's interests to reduce the costs of using the family justice system to save or to end marriages.

The Government believes it has a duty to be active in support of marriage. If a marriage can be repaired and saved, it is in the interests of us all to work with the couple to save it.

Let me say at once that it is not for the state to compel couples either to marry or to stay together in an unhappy marriage, even if it could. That would be an unacceptable intrusion into individual freedom.

But marriage is the one tried and tested means of delivering the stability children crave. The Government believes that, if couples choose to marry in order to offer their children security, then we should offer them our support.

One aspect of marriage preparation could involve drawing up pre-nuptial agreements. The Government is considering whether pre-nuptial agreements should be legally binding where they exist. This proposal has its attractions. Pre-nuptial agreements would give couples a greater degree of certainty about the ownership of property if a marriage should end; and could help to remove some of the grounds for conflict as well as contribute to our objectives of certainty, clarity, and the reduction of costs

The other side of the coin is how we can help people whose marriages have become so broken that they are thinking of divorce. Let me take this opportunity to lay to rest a piece of speculation: that the Government sees no future for mediation in divorce. Not true. We are committed to using mediation as a way of reducing the bitterness of conflicts over property, money and children between couples who have already decided to divorce.

If the family is the fundamental building-block of society, then it is equally true that failure of the family unit is a major contributor to social exclusion.

For the sake of our young people and our country, we have a duty to support the family.