The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission is responsible for the child maintenance system. I have therefore asked the Child Maintenance Commissioner to write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Child Maintenance Commissioner. The Child Support Agency is now the responsibility of the Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what mechanism is in place for the recovery of child maintenance payments from British national absent parents who are resident overseas. [281844]
The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission retains the power to pursue a non-resident parent who moves overseas, but only where the non-resident is regarded as being habitually resident in the UK. The criteria for establishing jurisdiction when a non-resident parent leaves the United Kingdom is described at Section 44 of the Child Support Act. There is no distinction made between an EU state and a non-EU state.
There are certain cases where the nature of employment will bring the non-resident parent under the jurisdiction of the Commission, for example those employed in the Civil Service or a member of the naval, military or air forces. The Commission may also have jurisdiction where a non-resident parent is employed by a company that is prescribed in Child Support (Maintenance Arrangement and Jurisdiction Regulations) 1992, Regulation 7A(2).
The Ministry of Justice, however operates a system for administering international child and spousal maintenance cases where the non-resident parent can not be treated as habitually resident in the UK; this is known as the Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orders (REMO).
Where a parent with care applies to their local magistrates’ court or family proceedings court, details of the maintenance liability can be referred to the foreign jurisdiction - where the non-resident parent now resides - whom will be able to apply their domestic collection and enforcement mechanisms in order to recover the amount due. They will then refer this money back to the UK REMO administrators.
The UK has reciprocal maintenance agreements with over 100 states and territories.
I hope you find this answer helpful.
[holding answer 8 July 2009]: The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission is responsible for the child maintenance system. I have therefore asked the Child Maintenance Commissioner to write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Child Maintenance Commissioner as the Child Support Agency is now the responsibility of the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many parents making payments to the Child Support Agency have their full liability reduced because they have responsibility for the care of their child for more than one night per week. [283211]
The Agency estimates that at the end of March 2009, there were around 180,000 cases across both schemes where the maintenance liability has been reduced to take into account a shared care arrangement between the non resident parent and parent with care.
It should be noted that the current statutory maintenance scheme defines a shared care arrangement as one where a qualifying child spends at least 52 nights per year with the non-resident parent. However the original statutory maintenance scheme defined a shared care arrangement as one where the qualifying child spends two days or more per week with the non resident parent. The figure quoted above is based on these definitions.
I hope you find this answer helpful.