CHILD SUPPORT OFFICERS (Hansard, 18 July 1991)

HC Deb 18 July 1991 vol 195 c543 543

§ Mr. Jack
I beg to move amendment No. 22, in page 9, line 9, leave out subsection (6).

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this, it will be convenient to take Government amendment No. 23.

§ Rev. Martin Smyth
May I take this opportunity to ask for clarification. As the Minister nodded when he sat down, I take that to mean that autistic children are included in the definition in Government amendment No. 101.
However, I should like some clarification. I appreciate the reason why Government amendment No. 22 has been tabled, but what is the thinking behind Government amendment No. 23? Does it refer to the child support officer for the United Kingdom, or will there be a separate officer for Northern Ireland? Why has the responsibility been placed specifically on the shoulders of the chief child support officer in Northern Ireland for any omissions or for any problems affecting child support officers there? I am not sure what it means and I should like some clarification.

§ Mr. Jack
Government amendment No. 23 is designed to ensure that proceedings such as those for judicial review are brought against the chief child support officer in Great Britain where the relevant child support officer who made the assessment or other relevant decision resides in Northern Ireland but is dealing with cases from Great Britain. Otherwise, there might be difficulties for clients of the Child Support Agency in bringing cases where their case had been dealt with by the child support centre in Belfast. I hope that that gives the hon. Gentleman the clarification that he requires.

§ Amendment agreed to.

§ Amendment made: No. 23, in page 9, line 12, at end insert— '(7) Any proceedings (other than for an offence) in respect of any act or omission of a child support officer which, apart from this subsection, would fall to be brought against a child support officer resident in Northern Ireland may instead be brought against the Chief Child Support Officer. (8) For the purposes of any proceedings brought by virtue of subsection (7), the acts or omissions of the child support officer shall be treated as the acts or omissions of the Chief Child Support Officer.'.—[Mr. Jack.]