mankind.org.uk/openletter.htm Family Law Reform - Legal Presumption of Contact 2nd December 2004 Parliamentary democracy and accountability has long been under scrutiny due to the unacceptable behaviour of Ministers or MPs who mislead parliament and the people. This has resulted in low turnouts at elections, mistrust of politicians and direct action by Fathers Groups, the Countryside Alliance or Lorry Drivers when they feel that they have not been listened to. In October of last year, the ManKind Initiative along with other members of the Coalition for Equal Parenting attended parliament in order to press for the reform of the Children Act 1989. We did this through Early Day Motion 1755 and earlier this year it was resurrected as EDM 299. Both EDMs were seeking a Legal Presumption of Contact where it was safe for children. We naively believed that by working through the democratic processes we could achieve the cross party support that our objectives deserve. We managed to obtain the signatures of around 200 MPs, including amendments, for the EDM. We anticipated the support of all parliamentary parties as the welfare of children should not be a party political issue and we felt that we were making headway when Theresa May, Shadow Minister for Children, proposed an amendment to the Children Act 1989 asking for a Legal Presumption of Contact. The amendment attracted the support of many MPs, but to our dismay, many of those who had supported our EDM, actually voted against the amendment. Their opportunity to live up to the expectations of their constituents (many of whom had travelled to Westminster to lobby for support) was thrown away for the sake of party politics. The welfare of children, which they had pledged to support by signing the EDM, came second to their own political ambitions. It is noticeable that the vast majority of those MPS who failed our children were Labour. Those who refused to sign the EDM and subsequently voted against the amendment clearly have an ideological motive in the continuation of a system which is failing children. We condemn them for this and we are disgusted with those, who for political expedience, signed the EDM and then voted against the amendment. We have enclosed a list of shamed MPs who have let down the thousands of children who would have benefited from reform. They have let down their constituents who trusted them and they have further undermined the public’s trust of parliament. Their names will be publicised on our websites and sent to the media. We will also ask their constituents to directly question their duplicity and we will publicise their answers on our website – Frank Field MP has already replied and will head the list. We will continue to press for justice and reform through the parliamentary system as this is the only way to bring about change in a democracy. The Conservative Party clearly support reform and we are requesting a meeting with Charles Kennedy in order to lobby for the support of the Liberal Democrats. We now appeal to all Labour MPs and MPs of other parties to give your earnest support for a Legal Presumption of Contact for both parents with their children after divorce or separation where it is safe for children. It makes sense and it is fair to all. Stephen Fitzgerald – National Organiser (The ManKind Initiative) Direct Line – 01643 863352 [email protected] December 2004 List of shamed MPs who have signed EDM 299 + amendments and EDM 1755. PARENTING TIME PRESUMPTION That this House believes that separated parents should each have a legal presumption of contact with their children, so that both parents can continue to parent their children and that any children are able to benefit from being parented by both their parents, as well as from contact with any grandparents and extended family members able and willing to play a role in their upbringing; and urges the Government to replace the legal term ‘contact’ with ‘parenting time’ and to ensure that parenting time orders can be and are made and enforced by the courts, save where a child’s safety would be at risk. EDM 299 Candy Atherton Harry Barnes Kevin Barron John Battle Hugh Bayley Harold Best Bob Blizzard Keith Bradley Colin Burgon Ronnie Campbell Martin Caton Helen Clark Tony Colman John Cummings Jim Cunningham Denzil Davies Janet Dean Brian H Donohoe Jim Dowd David Drew Huw Edwards Jeff Ennis Barbara Follett Mike Gapes Roger Godsiff John Grogan David Hamilton Fabian Hamilton Doug Henderson Mark Hendrick Kate Hoey Alan Howarth Dr Brian Iddon Eric Illsley Helen Jackson Kevan Jones Lynne Jones Sir Gerald Kaufman Peter Kilfoyle Tony Lloyd Alice Mahon Rob Marris Eric Martlew Chris McCafferty John McDonnell Tony McWalter John McWilliam Austin Mitchell Dr Doug Naysmith Martin O’Neill Diana Organ Linda Perham Peter L Pike Joyce Quin Syd Rapson Phil Sawford Jim Sheridan Alan Simpson Marsha Singh Paul Stinchcombe Graham Stringer David Taylor Paul Truswell Dr Rudi Vis Brian White Betty Williams David Wright EDM 299A1 Karen Buck Valerie Davey Andrew Dismore Bill Etherington Kevin Hughes Christine Russell Simon Thomas Joan Walley Anthony D Wright (Gt Yarmouth) EDM 299A1A1 Diane Abbott John Austin Michael Clapham Jeremy Corbyn Jim Cunningham Hilton Dawson Ian Gibson Kelvin Hopkins Lynne Jones Robert N Wareing EDM 1755 Roger Berry Jim Dobbin Rt Hon Frank Field Win Griffiths Bill Tynan Elfin Llwyd All of these MPs signed the above EDMs or amendments but voted ‘NO’ when Theresa May MP, Conservative Shadow Secretary of State for the Family, tabled an amendment to the Children’s Bill calling for a change in the law to allow ‘co-parenting’. ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 2:36 PM Subject: Presumption of Equal Parenting Dear Mr. Mortimer, I have had a chance to speak with Mr. Field, and the simpler reason for his voting against the amendment regarding the presumption of equal parenting is that it would not be a political astute move to continuously vote against the government on every issue. To vote against the government on every measure would be to reduce the value of him voting at all. The issue of equal parenting is something Mr. Field is interested in pursuing further, however in light of the rebellion which he co-orchestrated on Monday over Gambling, yesterday was not a suitable time to pursue his interest. I hope this answers your query. Oliver Blaiklock Research Assistant to Rt Hon Frank Field MP Tel: 020 7219 6636 Fax: 020 7219 0276
Posted on: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 15:08:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015