People
The New Party News

News from the New Party

Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Cameron's dad-bashing campaign

David Cameron has been making noises about the family again, and of course we agree with his general contention that the family must be supported. We are more sceptical than Melanie Phillips, however, when it comes to some aspects of the Cameron campaign.

There is a limit to how far you can go in supporting families by bashing fathers. Of course much of Cameron's time is spent in media opportunities by demonstrating how important fatherhood is to him personally, and we don't doubt he is a good father. We do wonder, however, whether by equating the breakdown of the family with absent or "feckless" fathers, he is missing rather more than half the point. And it seems we are not alone in this.

The campaigning group Families Need Fathers has spoken out about its concerns regarding Cameron's dad-bashing. John Baker, FNF Chair, said:

"[P]oliticians in all parties need to stop resorting to simple knee-jerk condemnation of absent fathers, and accept that the system they preside over is actually preventing men from being parents."

"We are seeing yet again this week how young people, and boys in particular, are harder to discipline when their fathers are absent. Families Need Fathers believe that Shared Parenting is the best way to promote fathers' involvement post separation and has issued a position paper to reinforce this view."

We have to agree with this. It is a huge mistake to assume that the problem of family breakdown is due solely, or even principally, to an army of men fathering children and then somehow wandering off. Of course some fathers (and some mothers) desert their offspring, but the reasons why fathers become separated from their children need to be addressed - and these are many and varied.

Melanie Phillips makes the key point that government policy over the past ten years has actually incentivised lone parenthood:

"[Education Secretary] Mr Johnson - who was largely brought up by his sister from the age of 12 and whose daughter is a lone parent - says it is wrong for Mr Cameron to suggest that politicians can 'make relationships'. But the Labour Government has powerfully helped unmake relationships, by kicking away the props that once supported marriage and providing incentives for unmarried parenthood.

No one is attacking lone parents - least of all David Cameron, who is at pains to say they do 'the hardest job in the world'. Indeed, many do a fine job in difficult circumstances. But that's just it. The circumstances are difficult for - children and parents. Responsible politicians surely should not increase such difficulties but seek instead to reduce them.

They could do this by a concerted effort to present marriage unequivocally as a preferable option, to make it financially attractive and to help people stick at it - as some American states have done - by setting up support systems to teach people how to surmount the obstacles that cause so many to fall at the first hurdle."

Although we agree that married couples should not be penalised through the tax system, we do not agree that tax breaks for married couples would be helpful either, for two reasons: firstly we disapprove of tax breaks in principle, preferring a flat tax regime with low tax for all and no tax for those on lower incomes (including most lone parents, incidentally); and secondly, we do not believe that tax breaks would be an effective solution to the problem - if too small, they would be merely tokenistic, and if too large they might incite couples to marry at leisure only later to divorce in haste. There are reasons why divorce rates remain high, and they are (at present, at least) nothing to do with the tax system.

Family breakdown is a symptom, as well as a cause, of a long-term social and cultural malaise - and one which is beyond the ability of the Treasury to fix. Support for the family needs to be a consistent theme running through government policy in all areas, and needs to be prioritised above politically correct posturing and social engineering. This is why we cannot share Melanie Phillips' enthusiasm for Cameron's apparent conversion to the cause of marriage and the family. Regardless of Cameron's own beliefs and qualities as a father, the Conservative position on the family as on everything else during the Cameron leadership owes more to political positioning than principle.