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
Not for the first time, the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, has encouraged me to think. When I first saw this clause, I wrote by the side of it ““but not their children””. Although Section 1 of the original 1991 Act on child support deals very happily with the duty of each parent to support their child, the Act that we are talking about, the Social Security Administration Act 1992, goes very much wider than that. If it is, as I fear, an all embracing provision, it does not apply to this Act, this Bill or indeed the 2000 Act at all. It applies to other parts of the social security system. I hope that I am wrong and that the noble Lord will be able to satisfy me of that error.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 699 c17GC
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:39:12 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_445894
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_445894
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_445894