Search Results

1-20 of 22 results for subject:Separation

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the implications for the Department for Work and Pensions of the ruling by the Court of Appeal that a separated father on jobseekers allowance with a shared residence order for his children is entitled...

Asked by

Lord Willetts (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Work and Pensions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

7 April 2005

Reference

432 c1689-90W; 224666;224667

House

House of Commons

Dept for Education and Skills

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, how many parents have taken part in the Family Resolutions Pilot Project to date; and how many have accepted mediation services as part of the project.

Asked by

Baroness May of Maidenhead (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Education and Skills

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

23 March 2005

Reference

432 c853W; 221881

House

House of Commons

Family Proceedings (Amendment No 3) Rules 2005

SR 2005/559 (Negative instrument). Coming into force 1 April 2005 for rules 1, 3(b), 16 to 19, 25 and 26 and all others on 4 April 2005.

Department

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Statutory instruments

Notes

JCSI 12 JUL 2005 (HC 35-ii; HL 28 2005-06)

Date

10 March 2005

Reference

SI 2005/559

House

House of Commons; House of Lords

Untitled Debates on delegated legislation

Draft SI on data protection (subject access modification) (social work) (amendment). Lords debate on a motion to approve. Agreed to on question.

Lead member

Lord Triesman

Answering member

Earl Howe

Department

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Debates on delegated legislation

Date

3 March 2005

Reference

670 c464-70

House

House of Lords

Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) (Amendment No 2) Rules 2005

SI 2005/413 (Negative instrument). Coming into force 3 March 2005. (Replaces SI 2004/3376).

Department

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Statutory instruments

Date

2 March 2005

Reference

SI 2005/413

House

House of Commons; House of Lords

Untitled Debates on delegated legislation

Draft SI on data protection (subject access modification) (social work) (amendment). Considered by Standing Committee. (Minutes of proceedings at UP 7 2004/05).

Type

Debates on delegated legislation; Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings

Date

1 March 2005

Reference

4th SC on DL

House

House of Commons

Dept for Constitutional Affairs

(Pursuant to reply on 27.01.2005 at 430 c459W) To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs, what the reasons were for the decision not to make negotiation compulsory in disputes between divorced or separated parents. - Includes expanded information.

Asked by

Keith Vaz (Labour)

Answering body

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

9 February 2005

Reference

210230; 430 c1607-8W

House

House of Commons

Family Proceedings (Amendment) Rules 2005

SI 2005/264 (Negative instrument). Coming into force 9 February 2005.

Department

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Statutory instruments

Date

9 February 2005

Reference

SI 2005/264

House

House of Commons; House of Lords

European Communities (Jurisdiction and Judgments in Matrimonial and Parental Responsibility Matters) Regulations 2005

SI 2005/265 (Negative instrument). Coming into force 1 March 2005.

Department

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Statutory instruments

Date

9 February 2005

Reference

SI 2005/265

House

House of Commons; House of Lords

Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) (Amendment) Rules 2005

SI 2005/229 (Negative instrument). Coming into force 1 March 2005.

Department

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Statutory instruments

Date

8 February 2005

Reference

SI 2005/229

House

House of Commons; House of Lords

Draft Children (Contact) and Adoption Bill, with explanatory notes and a draft regulatory impact assessment.

Type

Command papers

Notes

Ruth Kelly written statement 02.02.2005; Received 02.02.05

Date

2 February 2005

Reference

Cm 6462

House

House of Commons

Dept for Constitutional Affairs

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs, what the reasons were for the decision not to make negotiation compulsory in disputes between divorced or separated parents. (Further information on 09.02.2005 at 430 c1607-8W) - Inc ref to 'Parental Separation: Children's Needs and Parents' Responsibilities, Next Steps', published 18...

Asked by

Keith Vaz (Labour)

Answering body

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

18 January 2005

For answer on

27 January 2005

Answered on

27 January 2005

Keith Vaz: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what the reasons were for the decision not to make negotiation compulsory in disputes between divorced or separated parents. [210230] Mr. Leslie: The Government published "Parental Separation: Children's Needs and Parents' Responsibilities, Next Steps" on 18 January, which sets out plans to implement a range of measures to help separating parents in dispute about future parenting arrangements, reach agreement. The Government's plans include improvements in the information available to parents and greater use of methods such as the Collaborative Law model, mediation, in-court conciliation and the Family Resolutions Pilot Project. The Government intend strongly to promote these methods as better ways to reach agreement than through contested court hearings. All publicly funded clients will have to show that they have considered mediation. Lawyers will not be funded by legal aid if out of court settlement is not reached under the collaborative law scheme. In addition, the Government, senior judiciary and Rules Committee plan to review court rules and practice directions so that the strongest possible encouragement is given to parties to participate in forms of dispute resolution. We do not plan to make these schemes compulsory in every case, as an essential part of the process is that people come to them voluntarily and are therefore willing to participate. Further, in some cases, including those where domestic violence has been an issue, it would not always be appropriate to impose mediation on separating parents.

Date

27 January 2005

Reference

210230; 430 c459W

House

House of Commons

Data Protection (Subject Access Modification) (Social Work) (Amendment) Order 2005

Draft SI on data protection (subject access modification) (social work) (amendment). (Affirmative instrument). Together with an explanatory memorandum from the Department for Constitutional Affairs. Laid before Parliament for approval by resolution of each House. Coming into force. (Vote)

Department

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Statutory instruments

Notes

DEBATE;SC (4TH) 01 MAR 2005;LH 03 MAR 2005

Date

26 January 2005

Reference

SI 2005/467

House

House of Commons; House of Lords

Parental separation: children's needs and parents' responsibilities: next steps - report of the responses to consultation and agenda for action.

Type

Command papers

Notes

Green paper is Cm 6273;Kelly/Ruth written statement 18.01.2005; Received 18.01.05

Date

18 January 2005

Reference

Cm 6452

House

House of Commons

Lords Written Statement on the publication of "Parental Separation: Children's Needs and Parents' Responsibilities: Next Steps" (Cm 6452), which sets out the Government's response to the consultation on the proposals set out in "Parental Separation: Children's Needs and Parents' Responsibilities"

Member

Lord Falconer of Thoroton (Labour)

Department

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Written statements

Date

18 January 2005

Reference

668 c19-20WS

House

House of Lords

Written Statement on the publication of "Parental Separation: Children's Needs and Parents' Responsibilities: Next Steps" (Cm 6452), which sets out the Government's response to the consultation on the proposals set out in "Parental Separation: Children's Needs and Parents' Responsibilities" (Cm 6273)

Member

Ruth Kelly (Labour)

Department

Department for Education and Skills

Type

Written statements

Date

18 January 2005

Reference

429 c30-1WS

House

House of Commons

Dept for Constitutional Affairs

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs, what the average length of time has been between the issuing of a contact order for parental rights under the Children Act 1989 and the case being listed for a first conciliation/direction appointment in the last 12 months; how many cases...

Asked by

Baroness May of Maidenhead (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Constitutional Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

21 December 2004

For answer on

12 January 2005

Answered on

12 January 2005

Mrs. May: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs (1) what the average length of time has been between the issuing of a contact order for parental rights under the Children Act 1989 and the case being listed for a first conciliation/ direction appointment in the last 12 months; [207311] (2) how many cases of disputed contact were dealt with by the family courts in (a) 2001, (b) 2002 and (c) 2003; [207463] (3) what guidance he has issued on whether women's refuges constitute adequate accommodation for children when considering awarding of custody in disputed custody cases. [207317] Mr. Lammy: Information on the average length of time between an application for a contact order under the Children Act 1989, and the case being listed for a first conciliation/direction appointment is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, work is under way to explore whether and how this information might be gathered in the future. Section 1 (2) of the Children Act 1989 states that "In any proceedings in which any question with respect to the upbringing of a child arises, the court shall have regard to the general principal that any delay in determining the question is likely to prejudice the child". The President of the Family Division has given guidance to family judges to aim for a first hearing dispute resolution appointment within four-six weeks of the application. The number of contact orders made in each year in all tiers of court (magistrates courts, county courts and High Court) were: _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Number (a) 2001 55,030 (b) 2002 61,356 (c) 2003 67,184 _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Information on how many of these cases were disputed is not collected. However, a substantial majority of contact orders are made in county courts and in 2002-03 approximately 30 per cent. of those contact orders were made with consent. No guidance has been issued by my Department to the courts on whether women's refuges constitute adequate accommodation for children when considering awarding of custody in disputed custody cases. Section 1 (3) of the Children Act 1989 lists the issues that must be considered in relation to the child's welfare. This includes "his physical, emotional and educational needs" and "how capable each of his parents, and any other person in relation to whom the court considers the question relevant of meeting his needs".

Date

12 January 2005

Reference

429 c568W;429 c566W; 207311;207463;207317

House

House of Commons

Dept for Education and Skills

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, whether the Government supports maximum contact for non-resident parents in shared parenting cases.

Asked by

Ashok Kumar (Labour)

Answering body

Department for Education and Skills

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

10 January 2005

Reference

201505; 429 c200-1W

House

House of Commons

Dept for Education and Skills

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, for what reasons the Early Interventions project was changed to Family Resolutions; what the differences are between the two; and what the mechanisms for the change were.

Asked by

Peter Bottomley (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Education and Skills

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

10 January 2005

Reference

203940; 429 c190-1W

House

House of Commons

Dept for Education and Skills

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, when CAFCASS first agreed the Family Resolutions project.

Asked by

Peter Bottomley (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Education and Skills

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

20 December 2004

Reference

203941; 428 c1367W;428 c1366-7W

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher