---

Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

Let me begin by talking about the important government amendments within this group. As I made clear at Second Reading, it is the Government’s intention that the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission be given Crown status. This group of amendments will give effect to this. The staff of the Child Support Agency are essential to the success of our reforms and are supportive of the changes we are introducing. However, it has become increasingly clear that they have deep-seated concerns about the loss of their Civil Service status. Under the current draft of the Bill this would be lost as, on transfer to the new commission, they would become public servants. As I made clear at Second Reading, we want the agency’s staff to look forward to, not to worry about, the launch of the commission. As a result, we have decided to make a relatively simple change and turn CMEC into a Crown NDPB, ensuring that staff will continue to be civil servants. There are also some accounting and financial advantages to that move. The noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, asked about VAT. It is certainly true that a Crown NDPB has the prospect of VAT recoveries, which an executive NDPB would not. For government, it is a net nil, if one looks at it in aggregate. I make it clear that this is not a substantive change to the governance arrangements for the commission. The new organisation remains a non-departmental public body led by an independent board and operating at arm’s length from Ministers. The new status is provided for by the amendment to paragraph 22 of Schedule 1. The amendment stipulates that the functions of the commission are to be carried out on behalf of the Crown. It is similar to legislation for other Crown bodies such as the Health and Safety Executive. A number of other amendments are consequential to this change. For example, as staff will remain civil servants and their employer remains the Crown, there is no need to apply the TUPE regulations to protect terms and conditions and continuity of employment. As a result, we no longer need Clause 13 and propose its removal, which matches the proposal from the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, and the noble Baroness, Lady Verma. Instead, we have brought forward a minor amendment to Clause 14, which will enable any employment rights and liabilities that need to transfer to the commission as the body with day-to-day responsibility for the staff to do so under a transfer scheme. Amendment 70, also to Clause 13 and tabled by the noble Lords, Lord Kirkwood and Lord Addington, would ensure that professional staff in the commission continued to have access to vacancies and promotions across the Civil Service. As the commission’s staff will now be civil servants, I hope that noble Lords will agree that the amendment is unnecessary: staff will continue to have the same rights as now. I return to the government amendments. We have also made a number of consequential changes to Schedule 1, which are needed to recognise that staff of the commission will now be civil servants and that there is a role for the Minister responsible for the Civil Service in approving future terms and conditions. We have also removed the paragraph that provides staff with exemption from liability. As is standard practice in Crown bodies, including the CSA, staff will be indemnified by the Crown. It is possible that, after a period of time, the advantages of Crown status will begin to recede. Given this, we intend to review the status of the commission after three years. Government amendments contain a new clause that would make it a legislative requirement. If such a review concludes that Crown status is no longer necessary, the clause provides an order-making power to make this change, including any necessary consequential amendments. We also make the relevant consequential amendments to Clause 52, making it clear that this will be subject to the affirmative procedure. I urge noble Lords to accept the amendments that would introduce Crown status and those that are consequential. I was about to turn to the amendments of the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, but I think that the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, may want to speak before I respond to them.