My Lords, I thank the Minister for introducing these regulations. We on these Benches understand why the Government have brought them forward. My honourable friend Mr Andrew Selous supported them in another place, and they have our support here.
These measures might be sensed to have a draconian feel about them, but the estimate of £2 million raised in the first year is mere drop in the ocean compared to the £3.8 billion owed by non-resident parents—a figure growing by £10 million a month. It would be of interest if the Minister could tell us how many parents caring for their child do not get any of the money to which they are entitled from the non-resident parent.
Electronic tagging in extremis to impose a curfew or the ability to remove travel documents or passports, should that come about, represent considerable powers, although, of course, the latter would be effective only where UK citizens are concerned. Perhaps the most significant move is to put for the first time into law the power to access directly a citizen’s bank account and to remove money to give it to that person’s child or children. I think I understand the process by which accounts of individuals and sole traders will be accessed, but not individuals trading as companies and partnerships, or anyone with joint accounts. Does not the Minister expect that this loophole—or gaping chasm, one might think—will be quickly discovered and that partners will soon be appearing on bank accounts to render them out of reach? I understand that accounts held on behalf of clients by solicitors are also protected. The rationale may be right but it is another way out for recalcitrant parents.
I also note that an administration fee will be charged. The Minister talked of this. How will the department calculate this and will it be charged irrespective of circumstances and the amount involved? Meanwhile, the cost to the banks and building societies of providing information requests and delivering money will be considerable. Has this been properly estimated by the Government and are the deposit takers satisfied?
This operation to address the huge shortfall of recovering overdue moneys will in future be in the hands of the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission. How will CMEC go about sequencing deduction orders and what will be its priority?
I hope that the Minister will endeavour to address my concerns. If they are not covered in his response, perhaps he will give noble Lords the answers in writing. He might also tell noble Lords how the review promised for 2010 will be analysed, shared and debated. At the beginning of my remarks I indicated my support for these regulations. I hope that the Government have got it right and that a future Government will not be forced to return to this issue.
Child Support Collection and Enforcement (Deduction Orders) Amendment Regulations 2009
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Taylor of Holbeach
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 1 July 2009.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Child Support Collection and Enforcement (Deduction Orders) Amendment Regulations 2009.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c290-1 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:27:58 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572606
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572606
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572606