Maintenance (Hansard, 17 December 1990)

§ 7. Mr. Burns
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the average maintenance assessment under the current system; and what is the average cost of supporting a mother and child through the benefit system.

§ Mr. Jack
The White Paper, "Children Come First", confirmed that the average award for child maintenance under the current system was £25 a week. About £2 billion a year in income support is currently paid to lone-parent families. The average payment is just over £50 per week. That figure is higher than it would otherwise be, because less than one quarter of lone parents on income support are receiving the maintenance that is their due.

§ Mr. Burns
Does my hon. Friend agree that that answer is clear evidence that more must be done on assessment and enforcement, to ensure that more absent fathers contribute to the upkeep of their children? What hope or help can he offer to a mother of two in my constituency who cannot receive the child support that a court has granted to her because her former husband has absconded to Australia and refuses to pay any money? That mother cannot take her former husband to court in Australia because she cannot get hold of his home address.

§ Mr. Jack
I congratulate my hon. Friend on pursuing his interest in the subject. He was one of the hon. Members who contributed, on his constituents' behalf, to the response to our White Paper "Children Come First". He is absolutely right that we need to deal more effectively and consistently with child maintenance. That is precisely why the Child Support Agency will be made the subject of a Bill for which we shall seek all-party support.
My hon. Friend asked about his constituent. He will be aware that liable relative work is already undertaken within the social security system. I cannot comment specifically on the case that he raised with me, but, if he cares to write to me, we shall do our best to assess it and to give advice. Finally, the new Child Support Agency will have powers to pursue people for maintenance liability wherever they go.

§ Mr. Flynn
Did the Minister see the report at the weekend by Anne Searle, the Birmingham child employment officer, which stated that the epidemic of child employment throughout the country stems not from children working because they want to, but from having to as a result of the low incomes of their families? Does he recall the case of a 12-year-old child who was discovered working an 11-hour shift in a bakery and the 15-year-old who was killed returning from her job selling kitchen equipment door to door? Is he aware that in a school in my constituency, 75 per cent. of the sixth form work part time and that half of them have jobs both at the weekends and during the week? Is not he concerned that that will lead to a deterioration in their health and that it is also a threat to their education?

§ Mr. Jack
The hon. Gentleman highlights the point about "Children Come First", whose aim is to ensure that when families should be receiving income in the form of maintenance, that money is obtained and given to them. We are aware of the problems about family income. That is why the White Paper, which I hope the hon. Gentleman has had an opportunity to read, pays particular attention to improving the availability of family credit for women 10 who want to return to work and raise their income. That is why, in any maintenance payments that are obtained, the first £15 will be disregarded. We take the hon. Gentleman's points seriously, but I argue that "Children Come First" is a testament to the way in which we have approached the issue.

§ Mr. Kilfedder
Does the Minister agree that the present system for the enforcement of maintenance orders is totally inadequate and that it is important that maintenance arrears should not be allowed to accumulate in the magistrates courts? Does he also agree that everything must be done to pursue the absent parent to ensure that he looks after his children and is responsible for their maintenance?

§ Mr. Jack
The hon. Gentleman has put his finger on the point that led to the publication of the White Paper. The Government realised that the present position was inconsistent. The liable relative work carried out by the Department of Social Security also needs bolstering. To that end, we are not simply waiting until the House, we hope, approves the Bill on child maintenance; steps are already being taken to improve the liable relative work of the Department and to strengthen it through the legal enforcement Bill which is in the other place. We have also published in the White Paper a clear formula by which maintenance will be pursued and the amount of maintenance determined.

§ Ms. Short
I, too, welcome the hon. Gentleman to the Dispatch Box. Has he yet had time to read the National Audit Office report on lone parents which is very critical of his Department? Is he aware that the report shows that under this Government, the percentage of lone parents on means-tested benefits has grown from 38 per cent. to a shocking 72 per cent. and that the number of those receiving maintenance while on benefits has slumped from 50 to 23 per cent?
Will the Minister take a fresh look at the issue and drop his colleagues' outrageous proposal to punish, with a 20 per cent. fine, women who are too frightened to name the absent parent and pursue him for maintenance? Will he instead attend to his Department's deficiencies that have led to the enormous slump in the number of women on benefits claiming maintenance?

§ Mr. Jack
I thank the hon. Lady for her warm words of welcome and I look forward to our exchanges across the Dispatch Box. However, her final point illustrates why "Children Come First" was published and the need for the Bill that will follow. Only 30 per cent. of lone mothers and 3 per cent. of lone fathers receive maintenance and that is precisely why we want to take action in that area.
We are aware of the sensitivities raised by the central part of the hon. Lady's question. As she will know, the period of consultation on those elements in the White Paper on which comments were invited ended last Friday. A number of organisations have drawn our attention to that important point. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has made it clear that he understands the sensitivities. He also understands that rape will be allowed as a reason for not fining people. However, there will be other issues and officers will be trained to deal with them sensitively. We are also taking into account in framing legislation the comments that have arisen from the consultations.