§ Mr. IngramTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many parents with care at each Child Support Agency reporting centre have(a) claimed exemption because of fears of undue harm or distress, (b) been unable to give information about the whereabouts of a non-custodial parent and (c) been unable to name the non-custodial parent;
(2) how many parents with care at each Child Support Agency reporting centre have (a) had a claim for exemption accepted, (b) had a claim for exemption refused and (c) withdrawn a claim for exemption.
§ Mr. BurtThe administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Miss Ann Chant, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member shortly.
Requirement to co-operate waived—April to September 1994* CSAC Fear of violence Other† Total good cause accepted Good cause not accepted Claim for Good cause withdrawn Belfast‡ 2,235 1,276 3,529 2,654 1,225 Birkenhead 2,387 1,508 3,895 3,232 1,339 Dudley 2,313 1,212 3,525 3,023 800 Falkirk 2,537 1,267 3,804 2,310 856 Hastings 2,386 1,091 3,459 2,832 942 Plymouth 2,291 1,270 3,561 3,311 902 * Since April 1994, the Agency has not collected data on cases where the identity of the AP is unknown. This is because such cases are no longer considered under the retirement to co-operate. † Includes cases where it is considered that not to accept good cause would be detrimental to the welfare of the child. ‡ GB cases only. You also asked about the number of PaWCs unable to give information about the whereabouts of the AP. During 1993/94, 33,000
Specialist traces completed April to September 1994 CSAC Specialist traces cleared Successful traces Work on hand at 30 September 1994 Belfast*1 2,004 1,664 3,526 Birkenhead 5,672 3,620 4,839 Dudley 5,154 4,500 2,819 Falkirk 3,665 2,997 4,165 Hastings 4,882 2,445 3,082 Plymouth 7,137 5,502 2,845 1 GB cases. I hope this reply is helpful.
§ Mr. IngramTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many parents with care at each reporting centre(a) have asked for maintenance payments to be paid via the Child Support Agency, (b) are having their maintenance payments paid via the Child Support Agency and (c) have been refused the option of having their maintenance payments paid via the Child Support Agency.
§ Mr. BurtThe administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Miss Ann Chant, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member shortly.
Letter from Ann Chant to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 20 December 1994:
1024WI am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the number of parents with care who have asked for child maintenance to be paid via theLetter from Ann Chant to Mr. Adam Ingram, dated 20 December 1994:
I am replying to your Parliamentary Questions to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the number of cases the Child Support Agency has considered under the requirement to co-operate, and the number of cases in which the whereabouts of the absent parent (AP) was unknown.Figures for 1993/94 are available only for the whole Agency, and cannot be broken down by Agency Centre (CSAC).During 1993/94, 64,812 claims by parents with care (PaWC) were subject to investigation into the requirement to co-operate. Of those, the requirement was waived in 31,749 cases and not waived in 18,857. In a further 14,206 cases the PaWC named the AP.Information is collected on the reasons why the requirement to co-operate is waived, rather than on the reasons why PaWCs claim that they have good cause not to co-operate in naming the AP. In 1993/94, the requirement was accepted in 15,823 cases due to the possible threat of violence, in 8,424 cases where the AP was unknown, and in 7,502 other cases.
cases were subject to specialist tracing action because the whereabouts of the AP was unknown. The AP was traced in over 28,000 of cases.
Child Support Agency; are having maintenance paid via the Agency; and have been refused the option of having maintenance paid via the Agency.As the Agency makes no distinction between parents with care and absent parents information is not available in the precise form requested, but I can confirm that at 30 September accounts for maintenance to be paid via the Agency had been set up in around 150,000 cases.Clients would not be refused the option of having child maintenance paid via the Agency.Information broken down by Agency Centre is currently under evaluation, and will not be available until the new year.I am sorry I cannot be more helpful.
§ Mr. DevlinTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer of 7 December,Official Report column 244, if he will investigate the circumstances in which Peter Stevenson, Ref. 1025W 7000102373, was sent two CSA assessments of £53.45 and £42.09 per week by the same office on 2 December; and by what amount his income had changed since his assessment of March 1994.
§ Mr. ChidgeyTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the absenteeism rate for the Child Support Agency in 1993.
§ Mr. BurtThe administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Miss Ann Chant, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ann Chant to Mr. David Chidgey, dated 20 December 1994:
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about staff absences in the Child Support Agency.The number of working days lost through sick absence in the Child Support Agency in 1993 was 9.8 days per staff year. This compares with a Civil Service average of 10.1 days per staff year.I hope this is helpful.
§ Mr. PikeTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) what plans he has to propose changes in the system of recovery of overpayments of child support maintenance arising from error by the Child Support Agency or the receipt of incorrect information; and if he will make a statement;
(2) what representations he has received regarding cases involving the Child Support Agency where overpayments have been made in payment of child support maintenance; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. BurtThe Child Support Agency has received a number of representations in cases where the amount at which an overpayment of child support maintenance is being recovered does not reflect the size of that overpayment or have regard to the remaining period of liability.
We are currently looking at the application of regulation 10 of the Child Support (Arrears, Interest and Adjustment of Maintenace Assessments) Regulations 1992 and if changes are required an announcement will be made.
§ Mr. WorthingtonTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether children's national savings accounts are taken into account in calculating a father's liability under the Child Support Act 1991.
§ Mr. BurtInterest on children's national savings accounts is taken into account as an income available to the parent with whom they live, subject to limits in certain prescribed circumstances.
§ Sir John StanleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he expects to make a further statement on improvements to the present system of child support.
§ Mr. BurtThe Government have been keeping the operation of the Child Support Act under close review for some time. We are now considering carefully the recent report of the Social Security Select Committee and expect to respond to the Committee by the end of January 1995.nb
§ Mr. CarringtonTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans he has to relocate the headquarters of the Child Support Agency away from London.
1026W
§ Mr. BurtIt has always been the intention that the Child Support Agency's headquarters would move out of London when it became fully established. The agency's headquarters is now ready to relocate and it will move to Dudley by April 1996.
Following a relocation study, Dudley has been chosen because it offers value for money. The headquarters will be located in premises already held by the agency. Location alongside operations will also enhance staff development opportunities for both headquarters and operations staff and ease the exchange of business skills.
I am satisfied that the new headquarters will attract good quality staff. Appointments will be made from existing headquarters staff who wish to transfer and from existing managers and staff and new recruits from the Dudley and surrounding areas.
§ Mr. CarringtonTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what action the Child Support Agency will take in order to manage the backlog of cases and to improve the quality of service from the agency.
§ Mr. BurtThe Child Support Agency will delay the take-on of the remaining cases where the parent with care was already receiving income support before April 1993 until it is in a position to tackle them promptly and to a high standard. The agency will, however, continue to provide sympathetic consideration to requests by individual parents who wish their application to be dealt with early. In addition, the agency will not pursue, for the time being, cases where it issued a maintenance application form over six months ago which either has not been returned or has been returned with insufficient information to progress it. By prioritising cases in this way, the agency will get the existing backlog cleared and allow proper attention to be paid to accuracy and customer service.