Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 31 January 2008. It occurred during Committee proceeding and Debate on bill on Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill.


Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

The noble Lord got up rather too early; I acknowledged that it was improving, so we should leave it at that. Last but not least, however it is provided, whether from a central office in Rotherham—not Sheffield—through the telephone, through computers or through different organisations at a much more local level, it is important that a comprehensive service should be provided for both parents. I certainly agree with the noble Lord on that. This group of amendments was far too large for what the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, might have described as my ““dense brain””. He referred to the word ““dense”” earlier—I hope that he was not referring to my mental capacity, but to the group of amendments. Be that as it may, I shall read with great interest what he, the noble Baroness and the Minister have said. I may need to come back to it at the next stage. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment No. 40 not moved.] Clause 4 agreed to. Clause 5 [Provision of information and guidance]: [Amendments Nos. 41 to 46 not moved.]


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c419GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
ICT Poverty Complaints Children Contracts Contact orders Absent parents Contracts for services Child Support Agency Fees and charges Families Information Maintenance Parents Parliamentary scrutiny Welfare tax credits Voluntary organisations Separation Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission Children's centres
Legislation
Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk