---

Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

I thank the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, for the amendment, which led to rather a broad discussion on the subject. I start by clarifying that Clause 33 is there to clarify that minutes of agreement for periodical child maintenance made on or after 3 March 2003 and registered in the Books of Council and Session or the sheriff court books are to have the same status as maintenance orders made on or after 3 March 2003 under Sections 4(10) and 7(10) of the Child Support Act 1991. In prior discussion there was some confusion over whether that was the case. The noble Lord said that court orders were imposed, but court orders for child maintenance are not imposed, because they are consent orders and represent agreement between the parents. That is the parallel that we seek to identify here. As we discussed in a pervious sitting, the existing 12-month rule applies when parents have a registered minute of agreement made on or after 3 March 2003. The 12-month rule has two purposes. When agreement between parents breaks down, it provides a swift and readily available route into the commission so that children are not left for considerable periods with either no maintenance or inadequate arrangements. It also encourages agreements that contain levels of child maintenance broadly consistent with the amount calculated under the statutory scheme. We do not wish to restrict any effective maintenance arrangements to any particular period. However, if things go wrong, or parents decide that another type of arrangement would be more suitable for their children, we believe that they need a readily available route into the commission. That is why we do not think that the first proposition of the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, about keeping it in the court is the right way. Children must not be left for periods of time with either no maintenance or inadequate arrangements, nor should we lock parents into agreements that are no longer working. It is true that registered minutes of agreement have many advantages but, if circumstances change and the original agreement needs adjustment, difficulties may arise. Some of those agreements can have change embedded in them, although that is not the case in every situation. If parents cannot agree, there are limited circumstances in which they may apply to the court to vary the financial arrangements and, in the case of parents who were never married or in a civil partnership, the opportunity for variation is often severely restricted. The 12-month rule gives time for agreements to bed in and work, which is why we think it the right period, but allows intervention by the commission to keep maintenance flowing to children if the agreement breaks down, and therefore puts parents with registered minutes of agreement on the same footing as any other separated parents. I hope that that has dealt with the kernel of the proposition and will help the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment. I shall reflect on some of the wider points that he raised and perhaps return to the matter in due course.