---

Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

This has been an interesting, if short, debate on what is clearly an important issue. The Government are with the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, and my noble friend Lady Hollis, for the reasons that they have outlined. Getting more child maintenance to more children is central to the reforms introduced by the Bill and central to the commission’s objectives as drafted. The key DWP strategic objective is to contribute to the elimination of child poverty. The noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, referred to the PSA target. To the noble Lord, Lord Addington, I say that the whole issue has been dealt with across government. The Children's Plan in particular mapped out joint arrangements across government, led by the DCSF. Of course, the commission contributes to it by ensuring that we maximise the number of effective child maintenance arrangements that are in place. That is a contribution. It cannot reasonably have a broader contribution to touch on all the issues and levers which impact on child poverty, which have been mentioned: employment, the role of tax credits and the broader issues concerning decent housing and breaking broader cycles of deprivation. That is part of the whole but it is not more than that and we should be wary about building in a greater role. By working towards its main objective, to maximise the number of effective—that is, working—arrangements in place, the commission will already be making a significant contribution to the reduction of child poverty. It is difficult to see how, in regard to the payment of child maintenance, the proposed amendment would help to reduce poverty among children who live apart from one or both parents to any greater extent than the main objective. The noble Lord will be aware that this main objective is supported through two subsidiary objectives. These supporting objectives require the commission to encourage and support appropriate voluntary arrangements, as we have discussed, and to support applications to, and compliance of, the statutory maintenance service. All the functions and services for which the commission has responsibility will be shaped to meet the commission’s main and supporting objectives. As part of this, we would expect the commission to focus resources on those groups most in need of support, particularly those on benefits who will be taking their own decisions about child support matters for the first time. For example, while the information and support service will be available to all parents, we are working closely with Jobcentre Plus and HMRC, as I outlined earlier, to ensure that separating parents on low incomes can be identified and proactively referred to the information and support service. However, the commission does not have responsibility for the many other matters that have a bearing on child poverty. The level of the maintenance disregard, for example, is the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, as is the New Deal for Lone Parents, while the tax credit system is a matter for HMRC. As a result, we do not consider a wider objective on child poverty to be appropriate for the commission. Therefore, I urge the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment.