Parliamentary Search

Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Tuesday, 5 February 2008, in the House of Lords.

Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill. Lords Committee stage third day. Clauses 10 to 12, 14 to 17 agreed to, with clause 14 agreed to as amended. Clause 13 negatived. Schedules 2, 3, 4 agreed to. New clause under consideration. Grand Committee held in the Moses Room.

Secondary information

Type
Parliamentary proceeding
Reference
698 c495-560GC 
Session
2007-08
Department
Department for Work and Pensions
Legislative stage
Committee stage
Procedure
New clauses
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Related items
Deposited Paper DEP2008-0484
Wednesday, 20 February 2008
Deposited papers
House of Lords
Deposited Paper DEP2008-0359
Wednesday, 6 February 2008
Deposited papers
House of Lords
Proceeding contributions
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 698 c532GC (Link to this contribution) I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, because, particularly on the last amendment, some of...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c546GC (Link to this contribution) We are getting into a bit of a dialogue, but that information is routinely reportable to DWP for eve...
Show all contributions (103)
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c537-8GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 88: 88: Schedule 4, page 65, line 21, at end insert— ““(1A) Provide for a calc...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c536GC (Link to this contribution) Indeed, but I am talking about methods. There used to be a stripped down report in the annual report...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c512GC (Link to this contribution) I understand that and the point is well taken. But how is the parent with care able to make a judgme...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c512GC (Link to this contribution) On that basis, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment N...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c515GC (Link to this contribution) The amendments in this group, so ably moved by the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, again suggest some cau...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 698 c524-5GC (Link to this contribution) Could I explain my hesitations about the noble Lord’s amendment? As a probing amendment it is to be ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c501GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 68: 68: After Clause 10, insert the following new Clause— ““Review of the stat...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c527-8GC (Link to this contribution) The noble Lord raises a very good point. The evidence base for some of this is a bit thin on both si...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c528GC (Link to this contribution) That is very unfortunate. That is the real question that needs answering. As the Minister says, it i...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c528-32GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 86: 86: Schedule 4, page 64, line 23, at end insert— ““Accuracy of calculation...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c527GC (Link to this contribution) I thank the Minister for having another go at explaining his point. We shall have a resolution to th...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c533-4GC (Link to this contribution) I will deal with some of the individual questions, but will first deal with my prepared text. The am...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c532GC (Link to this contribution) The Minister is looking at me questioningly. This has been so well and extensively explained on both...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c534-5GC (Link to this contribution) We absolutely need to be sure that they are aggregated. I do not think that they would necessarily b...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c546-7GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 94: 94: Schedule 4, page 66, line 44, at end insert— ““( ) require the Commiss...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c546GC (Link to this contribution) That is extremely helpful. As I was saying, I will study not only the to-ing and fro-ing between the...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c546GC (Link to this contribution) I am surprised. I shall look at the Minister’s statement very carefully. Will the financial informat...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c544GC (Link to this contribution) I am obviously losing, so I shall stop. I still need to be reassured that the HMRC figure covers all...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c545GC (Link to this contribution) What I said, or what hope that I said—I shall have to look at Hansard tomorrow—was that everything l...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c545GC (Link to this contribution) The noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, very nearly used the expression ““quitting while you’re behind””, so ...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c538-9GC (Link to this contribution) I hope that I can rise to that challenge. This is an important group of amendments. I agree with the...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c543GC (Link to this contribution) I entirely take that second point. That will unfold, and we will watch it carefully. I also take the...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c515-7GC (Link to this contribution) The amendments taken together seek to link the repeal of Sections 6 and 46 of the Child Support Act ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c517GC (Link to this contribution) I think we should recognise that it may in some cases be seen as a limiting factor. It is a much hig...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c517GC (Link to this contribution) Is the Minister satisfied with that? Putting a limit, even in some cases, on the flow of maintenance...
Lord Addington | 698 c521GC (Link to this contribution) I thank the Minister for his response. On Amendment No. 82, his answer was, ““Don’t worry. We’ll get...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c520-1GC (Link to this contribution) It would need to be covered in regulations. The Bill provides for regulations to be made to facilita...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c522-4GC (Link to this contribution) Section 4 of the Child Support Act 1991, subsection (10) should be deleted and substituted as follow...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c522GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 84: 84: Clause 16, page 7, line 35, at end insert— ““( ) No application may be...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c527GC (Link to this contribution) Yes, of course. My point is that, if there is agreement between the lawyers about a capital split, t...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c495GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 67: 67: Clause 10, page 5, line 18, at end insert— ““( ) Any secondary legisla...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c508-9GC (Link to this contribution) I am grateful for these amendments being tabled because they give us an opportunity to talk about in...
Lord Faulkner of Worcester | 698 c506GC (Link to this contribution) For the avoidance of doubt, I advise the Committee that Amendments Nos. 73, 74 and 75 were not moved...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c504-6GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 76: 76: Before Clause 15, insert the following new Clause— ““Information to be...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c503GC (Link to this contribution) In the earlier debate, I made clear my intention to oppose the Question that Clause 13 shall stand p...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c501-2GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 69: 69: Clause 12, page 5, line 35, leave out ““section 46 (reduced benefit de...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c534GC (Link to this contribution) That is very helpful and it is a first step; we are getting there. Supposing someone has two part-ti...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c555-6GC (Link to this contribution) Of course. At this late hour, I am not going to take the Minister to task for saying, ““I think such...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c551GC (Link to this contribution) I concur with the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, and the way in which he has moved his amendment. We...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c555GC (Link to this contribution) That is not an unreasonable summary. If we did not have to have regard to realities, the constraints...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c557-8GC (Link to this contribution) I am sorry to raise a couple of questions at this late stage. This is obviously a welcome concession...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c546GC (Link to this contribution) As I was saying, I will study extremely carefully the interplay between the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwoo...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c546GC (Link to this contribution) My 61 per cent is by the end of June, not the end of May; I apologise. That is the percentage of dat...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c546GC (Link to this contribution) The intent is that it would be based on the year-end return that employers make to HMRC that then fi...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c548-9GC (Link to this contribution) These amendments mirror concerns raised in amendments debated in the other place that the new calcul...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c549GC (Link to this contribution) I perfectly understand what the Minister has said. I shall think about that a bit more clearly. I ce...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c543-4GC (Link to this contribution) I am most grateful to my noble friend for making exactly the same point as I was going make. If you ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c544GC (Link to this contribution) When I started on this amendment I suspected that I would be unwise to take on a former accountant, ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c545GC (Link to this contribution) The answer is that no, it would not be. I referred to investment income. That is one case in which y...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c535-6GC (Link to this contribution) To be as clear as I can on this, it depends on the specific circumstances. If there is data coming f...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c536GC (Link to this contribution) I think the latest accuracy data were included in the QSS that was published a few days ago.
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c539-42GC (Link to this contribution) I agree that this is a very important group of amendments. Taken together, they relate to the statut...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c558GC (Link to this contribution) It is really too late to do more than comment on what the Minister said on Thursday last: "““I want ...
Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall | 698 c560GC (Link to this contribution) The Committee stands adjourned until Thursday 7 February at 2 pm.
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c509-12GC (Link to this contribution) If statements are being produced, I see no reason why they should not encompass the obligations of t...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c512GC (Link to this contribution) That last sentence was helpful, because there is a danger that we will conflate these two issues. I ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c512GC (Link to this contribution) Yes, we will come on to that later, but the noble Lord is right in saying that when we look at HMRC ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c512GC (Link to this contribution) That is not the proposition. We are anticipating a debate that we shall come on to shortly.
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c517GC (Link to this contribution) Does the Minister accept the argument made by Gingerbread and others that the amount of disregard wi...
Lord Addington | 698 c518-9GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 82: 82: After Clause 15, insert the following new Clause— ““Shared care (1) Th...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c521-2GC (Link to this contribution) Of course, we would encourage that sort of contact when it was appropriate—and there may be cases wh...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c520GC (Link to this contribution) Before the Minister moves on, can he point to any place in the Bill where that interim arrangement i...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c525-6GC (Link to this contribution) Amendment No. 84 would prevent parents who have a maintenance order made by consent, or minutes of a...
Lord Addington | 698 c522GC (Link to this contribution) I thank the Minister for that clarification—I had forgotten to ask the question initially. I hear wh...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c522GC (Link to this contribution) Yes, although I think that I get the gist of it.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 698 c527GC (Link to this contribution) Of course, they will receive different amounts if their former partners have different incomes. The ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c527GC (Link to this contribution) In the example outlined by the noble Lord, would he accept that, inevitably, in relation to a settle...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c500-1GC (Link to this contribution) I am not surprised by any of that, but I am disappointed. Two things strike me about what the Minist...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c499-500GC (Link to this contribution) The Government are unable to accept the amendment for the reasons that I will outline. Perhaps I can...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c496-8GC (Link to this contribution) It may well be too long. People get frightened by the technicalities of these important subjects. I ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c503GC (Link to this contribution) I shall certainly withdraw the amendment, but I found the answer, rather like the question, extremel...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c535GC (Link to this contribution) But at whose hand? We are talking about circumstances in which the HMRC/DWP/CMEC nexus would identif...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c555GC (Link to this contribution) I think it operates symmetrically so that if somebody goes from work to benefits there is an immedia...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c555GC (Link to this contribution) I am glad that the Minister said that. Of course, in a perfect world there would be no people, so th...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c556-7GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 101: 101: After Clause 17, insert the following new Clause— ““Determination of...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c551-4GC (Link to this contribution) Members of the Committee will be aware of our proposals for the statutory maintenance service to int...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c555GC (Link to this contribution) I was just about to dream up a précis of what the Minister has been saying for the past seven or eig...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c549-51GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 96: 96: Clause 17, page 8, line 1, at end insert— ““( ) make provision that wh...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c547-8GC (Link to this contribution) As I understand it, these amendments give the commission powers to reconsider or investigate, depend...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c544GC (Link to this contribution) To be clear, we are not suggesting that the self-employed income as reported for tax purposes is its...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c544GC (Link to this contribution) If you got the answer that it would be, I did not explain the matter sufficiently clearly. HMRC migh...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c545GC (Link to this contribution) The noble Lord says ““inquire””. There is an automatic process by which data goes from employers to ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c545GC (Link to this contribution) CMEC might have to inquire, because HMRC does not know who CMEC has on its books. Only CMEC knows, s...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c536GC (Link to this contribution) I perfectly well understand that, and perhaps we are getting into too much difficulty. The Minister’...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 698 c543GC (Link to this contribution) I was not going to intervene on this because it is a difficult issue, but why does the noble Lord th...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c543GC (Link to this contribution) I am grateful for that response because it will repay careful study, but it is not safe to equate a ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c558-60GC (Link to this contribution) Picking up first on the points of the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, he asked what data we have on succe...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c560GC (Link to this contribution) This may be a convenient moment for the Committee to adjourn.
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c513-5GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 78: 78: Clause 15, page 7, line 23, at beginning insert— ““(1) Subject to subs...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c519-20GC (Link to this contribution) I thank the noble Lord, Lord Addington, for moving this amendment and for the manner in which he did...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c517GC (Link to this contribution) I shall share some current data with noble Lords: 87 per cent of the current case load—the total cas...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 698 c517-8GC (Link to this contribution) The noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, asked the Minister the apposite question about the cost. It is tr...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c526GC (Link to this contribution) I am certainly not going to press the amendment, but I wonder if the Minister has considered an even...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 698 c498-9GC (Link to this contribution) I have rather more sympathy with the push of the amendment. The SSAC does an extremely valuable job....
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c498GC (Link to this contribution) I do not know about other Members of the Committee, but ever since this Bill hit your Lordships' Hou...
Lord Faulkner of Worcester | 698 c495GC (Link to this contribution) I must advise the Committee that if there is a Division in the Chamber while it is sitting, the Comm...
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c509GC (Link to this contribution) The Minister talks about parents. Does he mean both parents?
Lord Skelmersdale | 698 c506-8GC (Link to this contribution) As the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, said, this group of amendments considers the use and publication—t...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c503GC (Link to this contribution) moved Amendments Nos. 71 to 72: 71: Clause 14, page 6, line 39, leave out subsection (2) 72: Cla...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 698 c502-3GC (Link to this contribution) I thank the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, for giving me the opportunity to explain why Clause 12 is...
Subjects
Child support Children Cooperation Arrears Child Support Agency Custody Liability Income Maintenance Parents Payments Overseas residence Self-employed Revenue and Customs Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission
Legislation
Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
Link
View this Parliamentary proceeding on www.publications.parliament.uk