§ 23. Ms HoeyTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what further representations he has received on the workings of the Child Support Agency.
§ Mr. BurtFrom 20 January to 16 January the Department of Social Security and the Child Support Agency headquarters have received 2,954 written representations covering a range of views about child support policy and Child Support Agency operations.
The cost of establishing the number of written representations made to the Child Support Agency centres and field offices would be disproportionately high. The number of representations made in person or by telephone is not recorded.
§ 28. Ms LynneTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what timetable he has drawn up for a further review of the Child Support Agency.
§ Mr. BurtThe child support system will continue to be kept under close scrutiny, as it has been since its introduction. The recent changes are testament to that fact. This is a continual process and therefore not one which should be subject to a specific timetable.
§ Mr. Jon Owen JonesTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he intends to charge the collection fee for child support maintenance to the absent parent when the Child Support Agency takes on all maintenance agreements in 1996 where the parent with care is not on income support and where the parents are not using the collection service.
§ Mr. BurtWhere payments are being made direct to the parent with care but she has requested the Child Support 613W Agency's collection service, which includes enforcement, the fee will be payable by both parents. Otherwise, no fee will be charged where payments are made direct.
§ Mr. Jim CunninghamTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what proposals he has for the protection of mothers who may know the whereabouts of the absentee father, but may be reluctant to divulge it.
§ Mr. BurtA parent with care receiving income support, family credit or disability working allowance is required to authorise the Child Support Agency to obtain maintenance, unless the pursuit of maintenance would risk harm or undue distress to her or any child living with her. Where there is such a risk, the parent with care is not required to give authority.
In all cases the agency will act as a buffer between the parent with care and the absent parent, and will not divulge her address to him.
§ Mr. DewarTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) in what proportion of cases the Child Support Agency is currently meeting the performance target it has set itself by writing to parents with an assessment within five working days of receiving all the information needed by both parents.
(2) what steps the Child Support Agency is taking to fulfil the promise in its customer charter to let customers know as a matter of course if there has been undue delay.
§ Mr. BurtThe administration of the Child Support Agency is the responsibility of its chief executive, Ros Hepplewhite. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Donald Dewar, dated 24 February 1994:
I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Questions asking the steps being taken by the Child Support Agency to fulfil its commitments to write to clients with an assessment within five working days; and to let clients know as a matter of course if there is an undue delay in processing their application.
The Agency is currently monitoring its performance against Charter Standards. At the end of its first year of operation, it will be in a position to determine case clearance times, and to advise clients how long on average the process is likely to take. The Agency will also be in a position to advise clients if there has been undue delay.
I hope you find this reply useful.
§ Mr. Frank FieldTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the current backlog for second tier review applications arising out of disputes with the Child Support Agency; at what rate second tier review applications are being lodged each month; how many second tier review applications are being cleared each month; how many post-second tier applications are being sent on to appeal each month; and what is the average length of time that applicants then wait for an appeal to be heard.
§ Mr. BurtThe administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Derek Brown to Mr. Frank Field, dated 25 February 1994:
In her absence, the Chief Executive Mrs. Hepplewhite has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question to the 614W Secretary of State for Social Security, asking about the average times taken to process reviews and appeals in the Child Support Agency.
You asked about the position on requests for second tier reviews. At 31 January the Agency had received and cleared the following:
Month Received Cleared April to November 8,000 1,500 December 3,700 800 January 4,900 3,500 Total 16,600 5,800 The number of reviews requested has increased over the last three months. This is as expected, and reflects the significant increases in the number of assessments now being processed by the Agency.
Requests that had been received but not processed are being actioned. The Agency has increased the number of staff undertaking this work, and significant progress is being made. During January four times as many cases were processed as in the preceding month.
Finally you asked about appeals. Appeals are primarily a matter for the Independent Tribunal Service which is an Independent Statutory Authority. I understand that, to the end of January 1994, a total of 611 appeals had been lodged, of which 82 cases had been heard by the Child Support Appeal Tribunal. Figures are not currently available on the proportion of these that had already been subject to a second tier review. Given, however, that the only category of client who has a right of appeal direct to the Tribunal are those appealing against a decision to impose a reduced benefit direction, it is likely that a large majority of appeals had already been subject to a second tier review.
The President of the Independent Tribunal Service informs me that information on the average length of time applicants wait for an appeal to be heard is not available. The average length of time from receipt of an appeal to the date the tribunal decision is, however, 17 weeks.
I hope this reply is helpful.
§ 26. Mr. MorganTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what representations he has had in relation to the operations of the Child Support Agency.
§ Mr. BurtBetween April 1993 and 16 February 1994 the Department of Social Security and the Child Support Agency headquarters received 13,715 written representations covering a range of views about child support policy and Child Support Agency operations.
The cost of establishing the number of written representations made to Child Support Agency centres and field offices would be disproportionately high. The number of representations made in person or by telephone is not recorded.