§ Mr. PikeTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on repayments of overpayments made to the Child Support Agency.
§ Mr. BurtI refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Doncaster, North (Mr. Hughes) on 25 October,Official Report, column 560.
§ Mr. PikeTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what factors cause alterations in Child Support366W Agency maintenance payments when the child being supported reaches the age of 16 years.
§ Mr. BurtAlterations in liability for child support maintenance when a child reaches the age of 16 depend on the circumstances of the case.
If the child ceases non-advanced full-time education, liability ceases unless the termination date for child benefit has not been reached.
The maintenance requirement—the amount calculated to represent the basic maintenance needs of a child—can be affected by two factors at age 16. First, the personal allowance for the child increases in line with income support allowances. Secondly, if the child is the youngest or only child to be maintained by the absent parent, then the carer element of the maintenance requirement is removed.
However, many absent parents cannot in any case meet the full amount of the maintenance requirement and their maintenance assessment is a lower amount. In these cases a change in the maintenance requirement will not necessarily lead to a change in the maintenance assessment.
§ Mr. Jim CunninghamTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans he has to appoint an ombudsman or inspectorate to oversee the Child Support Agency.
§ Mr. BurtComplaints about the handling of cases by the Child Support Agency already fall for investigation by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration.
The Government do not have any plans to establish a separate ombudsman or inspectorate with responsibility solely for the Child Support Agency.
§ Mr. Jim CunninghamTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what estimate he has made of the reduction in work for the Child Support Agency which would result if clean-break amicable arrangements were exempted from the scope of the agency.
§ Mr. BurtThe very limited data available about divorces involving a clean break settlement suggest that less than 10 per cent. of parents with care receiving income support, and up to 20 per cent. of parents with care not receiving income support, may have such a settlement. There is no information about the proportion of cases in which the parties regard the settlement as amicable.
If such cases were to be exempted from the scope of the Child Support Act, the conclusion is that well under 10 per cent. of benefit cases would be excluded. Non-benefit cases in this position are not due to be taken on by the Child Support Agency until 1996–97 and application will be voluntary ex-partners with an amicable settlement will therefore presumably not apply.