---

Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

Perhaps the noble Lord will forgive me for interrupting, but I am trying to follow the line of his argument, specifically in relation to his example of someone having a voluntary arrangement that was not broken for three years, leaving a big gap. If that situation arose, there would be no reason why the parent with care must wait for three years. If a voluntary arrangement is not working, there can be immediate recourse to the statutory system. The issue with regard to tax credits is not that they feature in the calculations, but that when it is clear that an applicant for tax credit is a parent with care, there is a route down which they can be referred to the information and support service on a direct or indirect basis. It is a means of capturing those individuals so that information and support can be provided. Is the noble Lord suggesting that we should not allow everyone the choice of a voluntary arrangement, but that we should continue to have a category of people who will be forced to use the statutory system? Ultimately, that is the nub of the issue. If we are going to say that there is a category of people who must use the system, what are the criteria for that? Whatever the challenges of allowing people the choice—and I accept that there are some—if we do not do so, we in part stick with the current system. How would the noble Lord respond to that?