Skip to main content

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

Just to make it absolutely clear, as I tried to before: it was one of the issues that caused the change of view. The noble Lord has visited the CSA, talked to staff and engaged them regarding the future—and that has been helpful and productive. I have done the same and everywhere that one has visited, almost the first question that came from staff concerned the loss of civil servant status. That was a concern around the department and whatever assurances might be given about access to job vacancies in the DWP and more widely within the Civil Service, and on access to the pension scheme and so on, there was a continuing concern by staff. Part of the deliberations was to make sure that that concern would not make it more difficult to launch the commission successfully. Yes, the VAT was one of the issues, but, frankly, a Crown NDPB was not the only route for dealing with that issue. Again I say: across government it was a net nil.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c303-4GC 
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