To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of (a) all parents with care and (b) all lone parents with care were receiving child support payments from the non resident parent in the latest period for which information is available. (146171)

The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 20 July 2007:

In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what proportion of (a) all parents with care and (b) all lone parents with care were receiving child support payments from the non-resident parent in the latest period for which information is available.

The information requested in part (a) can be obtained from table 7.2 of the March 2007 Child Support Agency Quarterly Summary Statistics. A copy of this is available in the House of Commons Library, it is also available on the Internet via the following link: www.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd1/child_support/csa_quarterly_mar07.asp.

Information on lone parents receiving child support cannot be provided, as the Agency does not hold information on whether a parent with care has a current partner.

The information is case based, and a parent with care may be involved in more than one case.

I hope you find this helpful.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will publish his Department’s research on the effects of (a) curfews and (b) naming and shaming on child maintenance compliance; and if he will make a statement. (146437)

In the case of curfews, it is intended that this form of enforcement is used where other lesser and direct attempts to recover the unpaid maintenance have been tried but some or all of the amount remains outstanding.

While research indicates that curfews do not tend to feature internationally, all major comparator countries that have a similar child maintenance system to the UK operate a range of enforcement options. Curfews will serve as an effective alternative to committal as such orders will create a strong incentive for the non-resident parent to pay, while not impeding his or her ability to do so by causing him or her to lose his job.

In the case of ‘naming and shaming’ (the publication of the names of non-resident parents who have been successfully prosecuted for information offences on the CSA website) the Department is aware that a similar approach is used in some other child maintenance systems internationally.

Both these policies need to be seen as part of the broader programme to build a stronger culture of compliance amongst non-resident parents. The intention is to promote the message that not paying for your children is unacceptable and brings consequences with it.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether it is his policy that under the new Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission, a person whose maintenance assessment is based on last year’s HM Revenue and Customs income data will have an entitlement to recovery of a child maintenance overpayment if in-year income falls by up to but not in excess of 25 per cent.; and if he will make a statement. (146690)

There are no plans for the Commission to have an entitlement to recover a child maintenance overpayment if in-year income falls up to but not in excess of 25 per cent.

Current plans are to amend a calculation based on HMRC latest tax year gross income if the current income differs by 25 per cent. or more. At the annual review, the latest available HMRC gross income will be used to set a new fixed term award.