Proceeding contribution from Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 7 February 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill.
Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill
A few minutes ago, I was quite rightly prevented from speaking to my Amendment No. 186, which I hope that I can now do. It was tabled to ensure that, before taking a decision under new Section 41E(1) in Clause 31 to extinguish liability in respect of arrears of child support maintenance, the commission will take into consideration the welfare of the child or children in respect of whom the arrears of child support maintenance are due to. I can envisage occasions where it would be quite appropriate to write off the arrears, but reckon that they would be well after the child—who is of course no longer a child—had left university. It should be quite a long time. They may, of course, not be going to university. None the less that gives an age range of 23 to 25 when it might be appropriate in most cases to write off the arrears. This is clearly a probing amendment intended to explore the scope of the commission's power in this respect. I am rather nervous about Clause 31 in that it appears to go too far too quickly. It would be helpful if the Minister explained a little further how it would work. It is a considerable power that could have a considerable impact on a child. Can the Minister therefore tell me now, and not during consideration of secondary legislation, what might be the circumstances to nullify parental liability and when it would be unfair or otherwise inappropriate to enforce liability in respect of arrears? To my mind, the Bill gives the commission the power to be both judge and jury in its own case. We need some hard and fast ground rules, decided by Parliament and written into the legislation, rather than decisions left to the discretion of CMEC on this occasion. The noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, mentioned Clause 32. It would be useful to know how the power that has already been attracted by the CSA to outsource debt collection has been utilised until now, and what the success rate has been. One knows the money figures of course, because they are published quite regularly, but one does not know the case figures involved. There are occasions when debt collectors leave a lot to be desired in their operations. I have a friend who is a solicitor in Leytonstone, who from time to time tells me horrible stories about fierce dogs going with the debt collector and that sort of thing. I most certainly would not condone that, and nor, I am sure, would the Minister.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 698 c677-8GC
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Child support Children Debts Bank services Deductions Absent parents Custodial treatment Arrears Child Support Agency ICT Identity cards Interest charges Maintenance Personal income Parents Payments Passports Overseas residence Travel Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission Driving licences Administrative liability orders
- 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 02:34:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_444593
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_444593
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_444593