§ Mr. AllenTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many representations he has received regarding officers of his Department threatening or actually cutting off income support from single mothers who refuse to name the father of their child, in advance of the operation of the Child Support Act 1991 in April.
§ Mr. JackWe have received seven representations in which this allegation has been made. We take such allegations very seriously, and we have made clear at all times that, while our current policy is to encourage single mothers to co-operate with the Department in obtaining32W maintenance for their children, nothing must be said or done to suggest that income support can be reduced or not paid if they refuse to co-operate. Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency, shares our concern that the current procedures must be followed in all cases and is happy to investigate any case referred through to him. Steps have been taken to ensure that the correct procedures are followed, and these include sending a bulletin to all offices which sets out again how officers should deal with these sensitive matters. While it is clearly wrong to give a misleading impression to single parents about the possible consequences of not providing information, nevertheless it is right to expect single mothers to co-operate in obtaining maintenance where there is no good reason not to do so, and liable relative officers are advised to proceed in that expectation.