Leading article: Honeyed words and difficult decisions

Westminster has been resounding again to the refrain of the importance of "the family". In this context, the Education Secretary, Alan Johnson, was right to warn yesterday of the dangers of the political classes stigmatising single mothers once again. We do not wish to return to an age when such conservative social mores dictated government policy. Nevertheless it is also true that few lone parents with a young child regard their situation as ideal. And it is recognised that children benefit from growing up in a stable social unit.

So what should be the role of the state when it comes to the family? A large part of the problem is with the word itself. In political parlance the term has been contaminated by John Major's absurd "Back to Basics" campaign. It has come to be associated with a narrowly defined, Christian-sanctioned relationship. It needs to be reclaimed as something that encompasses gay, as well as straight, relationships. Married or unmarried. And politicians need to stop viewing it as a rose-tinted ideal that leads to the castigation of those falling short.

Related articles

• Dysfunctional families face 'tough measures'
• Search the news archive for more stories

Families are the fundamental building blocks of a society. The recent Unicef report put Britain at the bottom of the league table for child well-being. There is, plainly, a connection between this and the high levels of family breakdown in the UK. But there are other issues that come into play: flexible working practices, poverty, poor housing, the work-life balance. And it is by no means just children who need strong families. New research by the London School of Economics and the Institute of Psychiatry shows that the number of people with dementia will increase as our society grows older. The bulk of the cost of caring for those afflicted is met by their close relations, putting an immense strain on them and their families. This, too, is a matter for family-friendly policies.

However, the case for a reintroduction of marriage tax incentives, as advocated by the Conservative leader, David Cameron, is unconvincing. New Labour abolished married couples allowance on the entirely reasonable grounds that it discriminated against the third of children whose parents were not married. Moreover, it is fanciful to assume that people will begin to opt for marriage simply because of new tax breaks.

There are many other ways that public policy can promote families. Flexible working ought to be encouraged. The high cost and inadequate supply of housing is clearly another cause of strain for many families. But there is a lack of joined-up thinking. Only last week, the Government grandly announced its "New Deal for Carers", promising a paltry £25m for emergency respite care - which works out somewhere in the region of £4 per carer per year. A few days later, a private member's Bill that sought to ensure there was adequate support for those looking after disabled children and the terminally ill was blocked. This will only lead to more family breakdown and a higher burden on the state.

There should be a general shift in the attitude of policymakers. In Sweden, every new law is tested for its impact on children. Why should every UK policy not be analysed through the prism of its impact on the family? The Government has certainly done some good work over the past decade. Maternity leave has been extended, paid paternity leave has been made a right, and free childcare has been made available in some of the poorest areas. But this is only the beginning.

Governments will always be treading a fine line in an area like this, where the personal rubs awkwardly against the political. And no single party or group has all the answers. But we welcome the firing up of this debate over the family, and hope that this time it leads to some fresh thinking and a radical new approach to policy.