Minister of Children and Family Affairs Grete Berget

Family policy in Norway

Hague, 26 June 1996

First I will express my sincere thanks to you for the invitation. I feel very honoured to be the key-note speaker on this expert-meeting on family policy.

I wish to use this opportunity to share with you some Norwegian experiences relating to family policy. Family policy in Norway has to a great extent focused on enabling parents to combine caring for young children with having a job.

It is the present Government's view that family policy and gender equality are closely connected; good family policy is based on and strengthens gender equality.

The objective is to enable women and men to participate in working life on an equal footing and to share work in the home. Similarly it is an important political objective to ensure that our policy relating to gender equality supports a committed family life.

The old gender roles must give way to a new division of labour between women and men. It is my belief that future progress is now primarily dependent upon changes in the male role. Tomorrow's welfare society must be based on equality between women and men, in the family and in working life, and on children's need for time with both their parents.

The most common condition for a Norwegian family to day is that both parents are employed on the labour market. Approximately 50 per cent of the women and 10 per cent of the men are working part-time. Part-time work has in this manner become a female phenomen. The change in the role of fathers probably will affect the possibilities for women of working full-time.

One of the consequenses of linking together family policy and gender equality policy is that considerable attention is now being paid to the father's role, and efforts are being made on several fronts to promote father's participating in child care.

Reinforcing ambitious expansion in the period of paid parental leave, the paternity quota, a time account scheme for greater flexibility and the development of adequate child care facilities, are clear-cut measures to increase men's participation in child care both in the family and in public.

As Minister of Children, Family Affairs and Gender Equality, I move daily in an area of heated debate and conflicting opinions.

One conservative politician in Norway has stated that she wants the family to be a stateless space. The extent to which the state should move into the private sphere is a dilemma, but to me it is unthinkable that the modern family would be able to manage without official assistance and organisation, in the form of rights to leave of absence, systems for transferring funds and well-developed services. The family as a stateless space is therefore at best an oversimplified concept and at worst a blind alley - in the debate, in politics and in real life.

Let me first address the concept of time. Time has to do with structure, with regularity and rhythm, with control and the organisation of daily life, although we are also talking about lifetimes, life cycles. Time is important to every individual, but also to the family. Time also has different meanings according to the stage we have reached in life. In designing family policy, giving time to families with small children has been a crucial issue for me. Nevertheless, it is important to realise that families with small children still lack time. Full commitment at work and at home leads to a life under pressure.

This is where strong conflicts emerge between, on the one hand, those who believe that cash support will give families a less stressful dailylife, allowing one of the parents to choose to stay at home, and, on the other hand, those who believe that the family primarily needs services and the right to leave of absence from work. I belong to the latter category. I want to give more time to parents with small children without this resulting in women having to go back home.

Instead of cash support, we must involve the men. Exchange the kroner of cash supportfor the caring of men. Then we will achieve a better distribution of unpaid work. To me it is obvious that a combination of services and equal status at home will relieve the pressure of time. Women rapidly changed their social role from housewife to career woman - in large numbers. The life of a moderns woman consists of a job, child care and housework. Women have adapted rapidly to change, men far less so. Only a small proportion of a man's life consists of housework and child care. Men must take up the challenge.

I wish to point out the different forms of paternity leave and parental leave in Norway.

After the birth of a child, parents are entitled to 42 weeks' leave at 100 per cent pay or 52 weeks at 80 per cent pay.

High priority has been given to mobilizing fathers to participate more in the care of their children than they do today. Throughout my ministerial period, I have been trying to strenghten the ties between father and child. From April 1993 the fathers are obliged to take out at least 4 weeks of the cash benefit period. The so-called paternity quota only applies, however, if the father is entitled to parental benefits. With few exceptions, the family will loose these 4 weeks if the father does not utilize his right.

I usually refer to the paternity quota as "careful compulsion".

This new rule was introduced because although fathers for several years had an opportunity to take a certain portion of leave, very few of them have actually taken advantage of this. The paternity quota was expected to change attitudes. Our experience is that a compulsory paternity quota has made it normal and therefore more accepted - to fathers to take leave in connection with a birth. It is our impression that fathers seem to be more likely to take advantage of the right to a special paternity leave which can not be transferred to the mother.

Data shows that the paternity quota is having an effect. There has been a sharp increase in the proportion of fathers taking out paid parental leave.

In 1993 about 4 % of the fathers who were entitled to parental benefits utilized their right. The corresponding data from 1995 shows that approximately 70 % of fathers terminated a parental benefit case.

Mandatory leave for fathers was an attempt to encourage fathers to participate more actively in the care of their children. It was hoped that the paternity quota would promote a greater sense of joint responsibility and a more equitable sharing of care-related tasks between men and women. I find it very satisfying that about 2 000 fathers last year took more than the paternity quota.

We will be following developments closely to find out how many fathers make use of the paternity quota. We also wish to find out how many fathers take a longer leave than the

paternity quota and who these fathers are. It would be interesting to discover whether there are systematic differences between fathers at the top and bottom ends of the wage scale, with regard to use of their right to take parental leave. Another interesting question is what kind of attitude mothers have towards fathers taking a larger proportion of the leave period and to what extent the attitudes of mothers influence the amount of leave taken by fathers. There has been a conflict about the introduction of the father's quota. Certain sections of the women's movement were strongly opposed to it. It appears that when women have to give something in order to achieve what we all want, namely stronger involvement by men in child care, there is greater disagreement.

The most important reasons given for men not using their right to parental leave is attitudes and economy.

Negative attitudes towards the father's family responsibilities of employers and of other employees is given as a reason for low rates of father's use of their leave entitlements. The attitudes of the mother can also be important.

Parental benefit is generally calculated in the same way as sickness benefit. This means that income exceeding a maximum limit (NOK 235 380 a year) is not taken into account. Since a greater number of men than women exceed the maximum limit, they may more often be affected.

There are also some legislative barriers which may prevent fathers from taking leave. Fathers do not have an independent right to paid parental leave; their right is derived from the mother's right. This means that if the mother has not acquired the right to leave by having a job, the father will not be entitled to paid leave, even if he has a job.

A committee which included the social partners have recently examined the consequensesof introducing the wholly or partially independent rights of fathers to accrue paid parental leave. The suggestions are now being estimated.

There are trends to be seen towards a more family-friendly approach. There is an increasing awareness upon the possibilities of reconciling family life and working life in a flexible way, and the social partners seem to agree about that men's involvement in the care of children must be encouraged. Employers have a considerable responsibility for enabling male employees to also take responsibility for care of their children. We might imagine that, in the same way as people used to doubt whether women were sufficiently stable workers, there might be doubts about fathers of small children who are always at work and are unaffected by the fact that they are also fathers. An important measure of whether the policy is successful will be the degree to which men spend time at home.

As mentioned above family policy in Norway has to a great extent focused on enabling parents to reconcile family and working life. The "time-account scheme" which was introduced on 1 July 1994, makes it possible to combine part time work and partial parental benefits. The system can be used by both parents. Instead of making use of a total full-leave period of 42/52 weeks, one parent can, for example, take full leave for eight months and then combine 80 per cent work and 20 per cent leave over a period of almost 2 years. The time-account scheme is very flexible, giving parents the opportunity to organize their leave in innumerable different ways. The arrangements may in principle be made to the choice of the employee, unless it implies considerable disadventage to the employer. The scheme does not give parents more paid leave than they would have normally had, just a different way of taking leave. And the scheme is not compulsory, but merely available to those parents who wish to make use of it.

Yet we do not know how widely the time-account will be used. How the time-account is used will give som indication of the preference of modern families.

Both the father's quota and the time account scheme are expected to lead to more fathers taking their leave entitlement. It is believed that it will be easier to convince men to take out parental leave if it does not mean that they are completely loosing contact with the labour market. The new arrangements will force the families to discuss how they intend to share and organize their leave. This is an entirely new situation in comparison with the past when paid maternity leave was the mother's sole prerogative.

Besides the paternity quota fathers are entitled to 2 weeks of leave for caring purposes in connection with a birth. It can be laid down in collective agreements or other contracts of employment that such leave can be taken with pay. If the mother works at home and the father away from home, the father is entitled to leave without pay for up to one year.

The right of unpaid leave was extended as of 1 February 1995, so that each of the parents has the right to take one year's leave without pay in addition to their paid leave. This reform also has a clear gender equality profile. If the parents want to stay at home until the child is three years old, the father will have to take his share of the care.

If for important welfare reasons the need arises, both the mother and father are entitled to reduced working hours, provided the arrangement can be made without particularly inconvenience to the enterprise where they are employed. The desire and need of parents of small children to spend more time together with their children is considered an important welfare reason. The law does not entitle the parents to full pay when they have shorter working hours.

The enormous social upheaval that has taken place as a result of the entry of women to the labour market has also changed childhood. Most small children today attend day care centres. This is also a matter of political conflict. The lines are drawn between, on the one hand, those who believe that day care centres are an indisputable benefit and that children and parents have never before enjoyed such good, close, meaningful and continuous relationships as they do today; it is the children who are the nucleus of the adult's world - some say that it is the children who constitute the family. On the other hand there are those who believe that child care that is not provided in the home by the parents is less beneficial for children, and that we are in the process of institutionalising childhood.

The present government means that the day care centres are beneficial and does not support the cash transfer proposal. The government is giving priority to increasing the number of day care facilities. We are working hard to remove day care centre queues and complete the development of day care services by the end of the millennium. At the same time, we must take great care to adapt services to the needs of the family so that there is room for the smallest children at a reasonable cost and the time they spend there can be more flexible than it is today. Children belove the age of three have the poorest coverage. It has been decided to lower the age of starting school from 7 to 6 years of age. This will release places in day care centres for younger children.

The Nordic countries have the highest fertility rate in Europe. Far higher than countries where more traditional family values and gender roles prevail, such as Italy and Spain. Over time, a decline in fertility rates has a dramatic effect on the age structure of the population, which may be a serious threat to the welfare society of the future. This has caused considerable concern in many European countries, particularly in southern Europe.

The general birthrate in Norway is 1,9 at present. I regard the fact that we have managed to turn the negative trend around as proof that the Nordic welfare model has worked. The young people of today prize the opportunity they have been given to combine care and a career. Never before have so many women been educated. We know that, independent of educational levels, the majority of today's young women refute the idea that it is impossible to combine a career with children. They have confidence in the division of responsibility and labour between the family and the authorities. Maintaining the high fertility rate is an important goal, and we can see that the policy is working. But we can't rest on our laurels. We must follow developments closely and constantly search for instruments that will bring us forward.

I also wish to share with you some Norwegian experiences relating to the changing family patterns.

In my opinion it is important that family legislation is appropriate to current political realities.

According to the public statistics about 44 per cent of the children are born to unmarried mothers. This increase is not reflected in a corresponding proportion of children born to single mothers; almost all children are born to a family with two natural parents.

The Act relating to Children and Parents is now being extensively revised in response to the major changes in patterns of cohabitation.

The increase in divorce and the dissolution of consensual unions both add to the emergence of single parent families. The majority of the lone parent families are female-headed. Family dissolution implies that fathers split off from mother and children and meet the children on a visiting basis. In many cases the result is a low frequency at which fathers and children see each other. A crucial concern which should be evident throughout any legislation is that children have the right to two parents who are there for them and who feel responsible for them, whether the parents live together or not.

The Act relating to Children and Parents is also being revised with respect to the maintenance rules in the case of divorce. The debate concerns whether maintenance will continue to be based only the income of father (the person liable for maintenance), or whether women's new occupational patterns will also be taken into account when designing new models, so that the recipient's income will also be considered when the amount of maintenance is fixed. Many people who are liable for maintenance want to continue to take responsibility after a separation and still spend time with their children. But should time spent with the children be compensated by lower maintenance payments, or should we expect the fathers to pay the same regardless of how much time they spend with their children? In brief, how far are we to go in adapting legislation and transfer systems to new family patterns and changed gender roles? The proposal has given rise to heated debate. In this case, we find that the radical feminists are opposed while the conservative women welcome the changes.

A final point I wish to make is that familiy policy in Norway has been supplemented by a number of measures which are designed to support the family in relation to parenthood and living together. Among these are parental mediation, parental guidance, father's groups and courses on living together. Although these measures are largely a local/municipal responsibility, the Ministry has the role of initiator, provides course materials etc.

Parental mediation is compulsory for parents who wish to divorce and who have children under the age of 16 years. The aim of the mediation is to help parents to reach a satisfactory agreement as to where the children will live, access arrangements etc. This new mediation scheme is being assessed, and it will be interesting to find out what users think of it.

Parental guidance is a service which is primarily provided at public health clinics. Its aim is to support parents in the care and upbringing of their children. A national programme to support parents in raising their children is launched as a joint effort involving several Ministries. The main objective of the programme is to promote the mental health of children through supporting and guiding the parents. The aim is to support and strenghten the parents own resources and need for support in order to trust their own significance, feelings and solutions in their relationship to their own youngsters. The programme is called for to meet a new set of problems caused by changes in family structures and life styles. The programme will reach out to all parents with a special effort to involve the vulnerable families in need for extra support and guidance.

Father's groups is an idea we stole from Sweden. It must be viewed in the light of the general desire to mobilize fathers to participate more in child care. Birth and infancy are a challenge to men too, and father's groups may provide important fora for men to discuss their new role and to work through their feelings. It is expected that introducing paternal training will increase the father's use of the parental leave. The purpose also is to prevent divorces and break ups between cohabitants, and to promote equality between the sexes.

Courses on how to live together for couples, married or not, are mainly run by voluntary organizations. The Ministry administrates a subsidy programme for these courses.

Family policy in Norway is based on a growing recognition of the fact that teamwork between central government, local government and voluntary organizations is necessary in order to construct a good framework around the family life. Many familiy policy instruments apply at local government level. The Ministry will focus on sthrengthening its dialogue with local government on matters relating to family policy.

It is becoming more and more difficult to keep an overview of our target group, and our family policy must pick up on and incorporate rapid changes. In order to formulate accurate policies, knowledge about how people really live is essential. As a consequence, bureaucrats and decision-makers are entirely dependent on the production of research on the family and of a comprehensive body of accurate statistics. This is the only way we can ensure that our family policy is appropriate to the families not of yesterday, but of today.

In the conflict between the old and the new, the established political divisions are challenged. New conflicts and new alliances are created. It makes it difficult but also challenging to design policy in this area.

Thank you for your attention.