It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Dissolution.

The number of passports revoked by Child maintenance Service is 4. This is clerically derived data, and therefore as with all clerically derived data, is subject to caveat.

We do recognise the needs of male prisoners with children, dependent or otherwise, as well as those of women. Information in this regard is vital in informing policy and practice in this area. Where male or female offenders choose to disclose such information, data is collected, although it is not corroborated. As noted in our previous answer this data does not provide detailed information of the child’s age or whether they are dependents. The data is therefore not suitable for publication.

All clients, regardless of their role within the scheme, have the right to request a decision be reconsidered by the Child Maintenance Service (CMS). Mandatory reconsideration rights only apply to decisions relating to child maintenance liability. The standard timescale in which a revision may be requested is within 30 days of the date of notification of the decision. Our policy is that a mandatory reconsideration will only happen once in respect of any particular decision, after which a client accrues the right to appeal to an independent tribunal.

If a client requests a mandatory reconsideration, their child maintenance liability will remain in place as usual until a decision is made. Where a mandatory reconsideration or appeal is ongoing, the Service will continue to attempt collection of any debt that is not covered by the appeal. The CMS may make a decision to suspend enforcement action on debt which is subject to an appeal, as this may result in reimbursement for the amount collected.

Less than 1.7% of the total number of registered parents were affected by this issue.

Of the total 6,537 payments affected, 879 of these were payments made from parents’ TFC accounts to Childcare Providers.

NS&I data for payments to each, specific parents or the number of Childcare Providers affected is not readily available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

The Government is committed to supporting parents with moving into work and, as part of this, we increased the level of support for childcare costs from 70 per cent in legacy benefits to up to 85 per cent in Universal Credit (UC). The UC childcare policy aligns with the wider government childcare offer, which includes free childcare hours and tax free childcare and UC claimants can utilise both the free childcare entitlement and UC childcare costs in conjunction with each other for relevant hours. This offer means that reasonable childcare costs should not form a barrier to work.

The UC childcare policy aligns with the wider government childcare offer, which includes free childcare hours and tax free childcare and UC claimants can utilise both the free childcare entitlement and UC childcare costs in conjunction with each other for relevant hours. This offer means that reasonable childcare costs should not form a barrier to work.

Beyond the UC childcare element, claimants can be considered for two additional methods of funding childcare costs: the Flexible Support Fund (FSF) and Budgeting Advances.

Work Coaches can support individual claimants with barriers that may prevent them from moving into employment. Each case is considered carefully on its own merits with financial help available to eligible claimants in advance for childcare. Where agreed, FSF will pay 100% of the upfront childcare costs up to the payment limits set that the claimant incurs between starting work and receiving their first wage.

A budgeting advance is available for one-off urgent financial events for eligible UC claimants, such as upfront childcare, and is repayable over a period of up to 12 monthly instalments. Only one Budgeting Advance will be paid at a time and further advances will be unavailable until the balance of the previous Budgeting Advance is cleared.

The Government is committed to supporting parents with moving into work and, as part of this, we increased the level of support for childcare costs from 70 per cent in legacy benefits to up to 85 per cent in Universal Credit (UC). The UC childcare policy aligns with the wider government childcare offer, which includes free childcare hours and tax free childcare and UC claimants can utilise both the free childcare entitlement and UC childcare costs in conjunction with each other for relevant hours. This offer means that reasonable childcare costs should not form a barrier to work.

The UC childcare policy aligns with the wider government childcare offer, which includes free childcare hours and tax free childcare and UC claimants can utilise both the free childcare entitlement and UC childcare costs in conjunction with each other for relevant hours. This offer means that reasonable childcare costs should not form a barrier to work.

Beyond the UC childcare element, claimants can be considered for two additional methods of funding childcare costs: the Flexible Support Fund (FSF) and Budgeting Advances.

Work Coaches can support individual claimants with barriers that may prevent them from moving into employment. Each case is considered carefully on its own merits with financial help available to eligible claimants in advance for childcare. Where agreed, FSF will pay 100% of the upfront childcare costs up to the payment limits set that the claimant incurs between starting work and receiving their first wage.

A budgeting advance is available for one-off urgent financial events for eligible UC claimants, such as upfront childcare, and is repayable over a period of up to 12 monthly instalments. Only one Budgeting Advance will be paid at a time and further advances will be unavailable until the balance of the previous Budgeting Advance is cleared.

The government recognises that early access to language is essential to help children to learn and to thrive and it is vital that parents and carers are supported to communicate with the deaf and hearing-impaired children and young people that they care for.

The government currently provides funding for adult learners aged 19 and over to undertake British Sign Language (BSL) qualifications through the Adult Education Budget, up to and including level 2. BSL forms part of the local flexibility offer (non-statutory) and qualifications are either fully funded (if the learner is unemployed or participating in the low wage trial) or co-funded depending on the age, prior achievement and employment status of the learner. BSL qualifications at level 3 and above can be funded through an Advanced Learner Loan.

In addition, the government has funded the development of a family sign language programme, through the I-sign programme, which is freely available at the National Deaf Children’s Society family sign language website, which can be found at the following link: https://www.ndcs.org.uk/information-and-support/language-and-communication/sign-language/family-sign-language/.

The Children Act 1989 (as amended by the Children and Families Act 2014) requires local authorities to assess whether a parent carer within their area has need for social care support and, if so, what those needs are.

In relation to the assessment of the cost of learning British Sign Language on take-up of those courses among parents of deaf children, I refer the hon. Member to the answer the former Minister for Children and Families (Kemi Badenoch), my hon. Friend for Saffron Walden gave on 2 August 2019 to Question 280364.

The government recognises that early access to language is essential to help children to learn and to thrive and it is vital that parents and carers are supported to communicate with the deaf and hearing-impaired children and young people that they care for.

The government currently provides funding for adult learners aged 19 and over to undertake British Sign Language (BSL) qualifications through the Adult Education Budget, up to and including level 2. BSL forms part of the local flexibility offer (non-statutory) and qualifications are either fully funded (if the learner is unemployed or participating in the low wage trial) or co-funded depending on the age, prior achievement and employment status of the learner. BSL qualifications at level 3 and above can be funded through an Advanced Learner Loan.

In addition, the government has funded the development of a family sign language programme, through the I-sign programme, which is freely available at the National Deaf Children’s Society family sign language website, which can be found at the following link: https://www.ndcs.org.uk/information-and-support/language-and-communication/sign-language/family-sign-language/.

The Children Act 1989 (as amended by the Children and Families Act 2014) requires local authorities to assess whether a parent carer within their area has need for social care support and, if so, what those needs are.

In relation to the assessment of the cost of learning British Sign Language on take-up of those courses among parents of deaf children, I refer the hon. Member to the answer the former Minister for Children and Families (Kemi Badenoch), my hon. Friend for Saffron Walden gave on 2 August 2019 to Question 280364.

The government recognises that early access to language is essential to help children to learn and to thrive and it is vital that parents and carers are supported to communicate with the deaf and hearing-impaired children and young people that they care for.

The government currently provides funding for adult learners aged 19 and over to undertake British Sign Language (BSL) qualifications through the Adult Education Budget, up to and including level 2. BSL forms part of the local flexibility offer (non-statutory) and qualifications are either fully funded (if the learner is unemployed or participating in the low wage trial) or co-funded depending on the age, prior achievement and employment status of the learner. BSL qualifications at level 3 and above can be funded through an Advanced Learner Loan.

In addition, the government has funded the development of a family sign language programme, through the I-sign programme, which is freely available at the National Deaf Children’s Society family sign language website, which can be found at the following link: https://www.ndcs.org.uk/information-and-support/language-and-communication/sign-language/family-sign-language/.

The Children Act 1989 (as amended by the Children and Families Act 2014) requires local authorities to assess whether a parent carer within their area has need for social care support and, if so, what those needs are.

In relation to the assessment of the cost of learning British Sign Language on take-up of those courses among parents of deaf children, I refer the hon. Member to the answer the former Minister for Children and Families (Kemi Badenoch), my hon. Friend for Saffron Walden gave on 2 August 2019 to Question 280364.

Only cases with CSA debt that haven’t made payments for the last three months are in scope for selection as part of the Compliance & Arrears Strategy. Cases with a paying Deduction from Earnings Order in Place will not be selected.

Writing off some historic Child Support Agency (CSA) arrears was not a quick or easy decision, and involved exhausting other approaches to deal with the debt, including using debt collection agencies without success. Much of the debt that accrued under the CSA is now old and generally uncollectable, and most parents accept this.

It is a long-established principle of the child maintenance system that where non-resident parents do not pay the maintenance they are legally required to pay, the obligation on the government is to do its best to ensure collection – not for the taxpayer to pay the maintenance.

We are making one last attempt to collect the debt, where it is cost effective to do so and there is a reasonable chance of collection. Debts of smaller amounts may be written off as part of the process.

Attempting to collect would have cost around £1.5bn, and would have recovered between £0.1bn and £0.6bn. Had we not written off we would have needed to maintain the debt indefinitely at a cost of £30 million per year.

Addressing these cases will enable us to close the CSA completely and focus on collecting money that will benefit today’s children, and avoid the build-up of arrears in the Child Maintenance Service.

Writing off some historic Child Support Agency (CSA) arrears was not a quick or easy decision, and involved exhausting other approaches to deal with the debt, including using debt collection agencies without success. Much of the debt that accrued under the CSA is now old and generally uncollectable, and most parents accept this.

It is a long-established principle of the child maintenance system that where non-resident parents do not pay the maintenance they are legally required to pay, the obligation on the government is to do its best to ensure collection – not for the taxpayer to pay the maintenance.

We are making one last attempt to collect the debt, where it is cost effective to do so and there is a reasonable chance of collection. Debts of smaller amounts may be written off as part of the process.

Attempting to collect would have cost around £1.5bn, and would have recovered between £0.1bn and £0.6bn. Had we not written off we would have needed to maintain the debt indefinitely at a cost of £30 million per year.

Addressing these cases will enable us to close the CSA completely and focus on collecting money that will benefit today’s children, and avoid the build-up of arrears in the Child Maintenance Service.

The number of unrepresented parents in private law Children Act cases is shown in the table below.

Since 2015, we have invested almost £8 million in a support strategy for unrepresented parties. This provides practical support and information as well as routes to free or more affordable legal advice. Public funding remains available for parents in public law Children Act proceedings where a local authority seeks an order to place a child in care or under its supervision, and in private law Children Act cases where there is evidence of domestic or child abuse.

Additionally, we announced in the Legal Support Action Plan in February 2019 that we are providing a further £3m of funding over the next two years to enhance support for litigants in person, ensuring those representing themselves in court understand the process and are better supported through it.

6) The central data system FamilyMan was fully rolled out by the end of 2010 and so any data prior to this in FamilyMan is not complete and not shown in this table

In the Legal Support Action plan published in February 2019 the Government committed to increase the scope for legal aid in family law cases to cover all Special Guardianship Orders in private family law cases; and removing the means test for those with parental responsibility to oppose placement or adoption orders in family law proceedings.

To support those with family law problems who are not in scope for Legal Aid the government is doubling the funding for the Litigants in Person Support Strategy to £3m for the next two years, to ensure those representing themselves in court understand the process and are better supported through it.

As of June 2019, for Glasgow East constituency there were:

(a) 100 parents with care with a Child Support Agency case located in Glasgow East constituency

(b) 100 non-resident parents associated with a Child Support Agency case located in Glasgow East constituency

These figures have been rounded to the nearest hundred.

As the Child Support Agency cases have been allocated to parliamentary constituencies based on the postcode of the parent with care, the figure for (b) might not include all non-resident parents residing in Glasgow East constituency as some may be associated with a parent with care who reside in another constituency.

The Government is committed to providing targeted support for young people. We aim to ensure that everyone, no matter what their start in life, is given the very best chance of getting into work. To support this, the Department delivers the Youth Obligation Support Programme, Jobcentre Plus Support for Schools and the recently introduced Mentoring Circles for young people.

Universal Credit is designed to replicate the world of work through the introduction of a range of measures such as monthly assessment periods. Setting a clear benefit rate for claimants under the age of 25 reflects the lower wages that younger workers typically receive. This is intended to maintain the incentive for younger people to find work.

The lower rates for younger claimants who are under the age of 25 years reflects the fact that they are more likely to live in someone else's household and have lower living costs and lower earnings expectations. It also reinforces the stronger work incentives that Universal Credit creates for this age group. Universal Credit also includes separate elements to provide support for housing costs, children and childcare costs and support for disabled people and carers.

Those who naturally migrate to Universal Credit will do so because they will have had a significant change in their circumstances which previously would have led to a new claim to another existing benefit. In these situations, it has always been the case that the assessment of their new benefit will be based on their new circumstances and under the rules of their new benefit without regard to their previous entitlement. As their circumstances will have changed it is not possible to make a meaningful comparison between their previous entitlement to their existing benefit and their new entitlement to Universal Credit.

The information as requested is not collected or held centrally and cannot be verified. We acknowledge the importance of data collection to illuminate the prevalence and needs of those women prisoners with children, dependent or otherwise, as well as pregnancy, and to inform policy and practice in this area. Where an offender does choose to disclose, data is collected, although this data does not provide detailed information of the child’s age or whether they are dependents. However, the current system of safeguarding should capture children most at risk, including children for whom safe, alternative care arrangements have not yet been put in place.

The government also recognises that the children of offenders can be disadvantaged, and we continue to explore ways in which to improve their lives and to adequately support their needs. We remain committed to ensuring that all children get the help and support they need to live fulfilled and happy lives.