Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 20 February 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill.


Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

I apologise for putting the amendment to the wrong clause. Like the noble Baroness and the Minister, I am 100 per cent in favour of netting off in the special examples given by the Minister and in the notes on the clauses. I think I must have private discussions with the Minister or, perhaps, his officials. It really depends on how the current one-seventh/half relationships work. If they work as they could, and as we were earlier told that it is possible to change a maintenance arrangement in a week, that is one thing; if they are annualised, as I think the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, suggested in her helpful critique of what I have just said, that is another. Perhaps there is a genuine point here, and there could usefully be further thought upon it.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
699 c8GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Compensation Absent parents Child Support Agency Credit reference agencies Liability Family courts Industrial diseases Maintenance Parents Payments Mesothelioma Scotland Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission
Legislation
Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk