Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 29 January 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill.
Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill
I hope what I said was that, as originally proposed, there would be an executive NDPB. The amendments now propose that there should be a Crown NDPB, but we still end up with an NDPB that is as arm’s-length from government as was originally envisaged. There are some differences, particularly around employment and the civil servant status of staff as well as some concerning accounting and finance, and each of those means that the body is distinct from just being an agency of the department, such as the CSA is now.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 698 c295-6GC
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Child support Children Conditions of employment Debts Age Absent parents Child Support Agency ICT Maintenance Parents Staff Standards Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission
- Legislation
- Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:38:19 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440012
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440012
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440012