Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 July 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Welfare Reform Bill.

Welfare Reform Bill

I suppose that in the spirit of the past eight days that was a conflated response to a conflated set of amendments, and I suspect that neither the Minister nor I should apologise for that. As usual, I shall study carefully what she said. However, if the mother of the child goes to the registrar within the year that is now permitted and says, "I don’t know where he is living now, but he was living at 23 Acacia Avenue", is there any good reason why the registrar should not note that fact and try 23 Acacia Avenue when the mother wants nothing more to do with the father? Or is that not a realistic scenario? The Minister does not need to answer now but it would be useful if she did at some stage.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c153-4GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Council tax benefits Disability Child support Children Disclosure of information Devolved matters Curriculum Community care Absent parents Direct payments Jobseeker's allowance Finance Education Driving Disqualification Domestic abuse Exemptions Legislative competence Harassment Fathers Maintenance Pilot schemes Pensioners Parents Payments National Assembly for Wales Passports Lone parents Scotland Social security Social security benefits Registration Voluntary organisations Wales Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Travel restrictions Social services Take-up Unemployed people Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission Employment and support allowance Veterans
Legislation
Welfare Reform Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk