§ Mr. WebbTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) what is the average housing cost included in the protected income of absent parents under the current child support formula; [50712]
(2) what is the average amount of housing cost included in the protected income of absent parents with incomes under £200 per week. [50711]
§ Mr. Keith BradleyAs at 28 February 1998, the latest date for which information is available, the average amount of housing costs included in the protected income of a non-resident parent was £44.23 per week. For those cases where the net income of the non-resident parent is under £200 per week the amount was £36.66 per week.
Non-resident parents have a responsibility to support their children, including paying for their upkeep.
§ Mr. WebbTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if she will estimate how many, and what proportion of, absent parents would pay more maintenance under the formula for assessing maintenance proposed in the Green Paper on Child Support than they do currently broken down into those earning (i) £0 to £99, (ii) £100 to £149, (iii) £150 to £199, (iv) £200 to £249, (v) £250 to £299 and (vi) £300 to £400 per week. [50709]
§ Mr. Keith BradleyAll non-resident parents have a responsibility to support their children, including paying for their upkeep. We estimate that around 70 per cent. of non-resident parents will have a lower maintenance assessment under the proposals for a simpler formula set out in the Green Paper "Children First: a new approach" (Cm 3992).
The information requested on those facing a higher assessment is in the table.
Gross income(£/week) Numbers with higher assessed liability (000s) Percentage Under £100 0 0 £100–£149 20 5 £150–£199 25 7 £200–£249 20 6 £250–£299 10 3 £300–£400 10 3 Over £400 5 1 All 90 25 Notes:
1. Figures provided are for all those non-resident parents who are not in receipt of Income Support or income-based Jobseeker's Allowance. The percentage figures show these as a proportion of all these non benefit non-resident parents
2. Estimates are based on the 1997–98 caseload
3. Figures rounded to the nearest 5000 and therefore may not sum
These figures relate to assessed liability and not to amounts actually being paid. Changes in liability will be phased in.
The Green Paper also proposes that most of the current provisions for exemption from the minimum payment should be abolished. We estimate, in current terms, that this would result in an additional 60,000 non-resident parents becoming liable for the minimum payment.
596W
§ Mr. WinnickTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if letters to hon. Members in the name of the Chief Executive of the Child Support Agency are signed personally by her. [51568]
§ Mr. Keith BradleyThe administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mrs. Faith Boardman. She will write to my hon. Friend.
Letter from Faith Boardman to Mr. David Winnick, dated 21 July 1998:
I am replying to your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the letters from Honourable Members to the Chief Executive of the Child Support Agency.I should explain first that many Members prefer to write direct to the head of the local Business Unit directly responsible for the case in question, or to follow up questions through the dedicated MP help lines which we have set up in each of our Centres. That approach minimises delay where action is needed to resolve an individuals problem. I have asked for regular reports to be prepared for senior managers and for me, summarising main types and causes of such problems in order to ensure that, wherever possible, action is also taken over time to improve our general systems and training so as to minimise their re-occurrence.Where Members prefer to write to myself the Parliamentary Correspondence Unit handle all my Parliamentary post and ensure deadlines are observed or urgent cases identified to give a rapid response.In the majority of cases my Correspondence Unit will refer the letter to the relevant Business Unit or specialist central unit within the agency to provide the level of detail required to complete a response. Increasingly we expect the Unit to contact the Members office by telephone proactively where this may help to ensure that the problem is resolved as quickly as possible.Once a final response has been prepared, this and the supporting background information are checked by managers fully accountable to me to ensure all points raised are covered and the response is factually and legally correct. I personally check the quality of responses regularly and I recently instituted a formal review of them during which a sample of 48 Members were asked about their style and usefulness. As a result of that feedback we intend to undertake an exercise over the next year to make those replies more personalised, briefer and more in "Plain English", and to further review the arrangements for their signature. At present some of those letters are personally signed by myself. In order to avoid excessive delay (during my necessary absence on other business) others are signed on my behalf either electronically by my Correspondence Unit; or by senior members of my management Board under formal delegation.I hope this is helpful.