Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of the merits of making existing deduction of earnings orders by the Child Support Agency automatically transferable to new employers; and if he will make a statement. [44780]
Mr. Plaskitt: It is not feasible to make deduction from earnings orders (DEO) automatically transferable to new employers. There is however a requirement on the individual and a new employer, who is aware a DEO exists, to report a change of employment within seven days and an old employer within 10 days of employment ending.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) for what reason non-resident parents are not required to inform the Child Support Agency of a change in (a) job, (b) address and (c) income; and if he will make a statement; [37942]
(2) if he will make it a statutory obligation for non-resident parents who have been assessed for Child Support Agency maintenance to inform the Agency of changes of (a) address and (b) job; and if he will make a statement. [44762]
Mr. Plaskitt:
The non-resident parent must provide all the relevant information to allow the initial child support liability to be established. Thereafter, he must provide further information to the Agency when a specific request is made, except in cases where he is paying maintenance via Deduction from Earnings Order as he must notify the Agency himself if he has a change of employer. It is a criminal offence to fail to
27 Feb 2006 : Column 232W
provide information to the Agency when requested to do so or by knowingly providing false information and is punishable by a fine of up to £1,000.
We have not sought to make it a legal requirement for a non-resident parent to report changes of circumstance. We consider it important to provide stability of the amount to be paid and as such a legal duty may not deter someone determined to evade paying.
Following the announcement of the Operational Improvement Plan, the Agency intends to improve their ability to trace non-resident parents who move jobs or address, to try and evade their responsibility to pay. This will include using information held by Credit Reference Agencies.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer of 30 November 2005, Official Report, column 608W, on the Child Support Agency, what estimate he has made of the proportion of time staff at the agency spent assessing (a) levels of maintenance and (b) enforcement and compliance activity in 1998. [37945]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is the matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
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, pursuant to the Answer of 17th November 2005 Official Report column 608W on the Child Support Agency what estimate he has made of the proportion of time staff at the Agency spent assessing (a) levels of maintenance and (b) enforcement and compliance activity in 1998.
The Agency does not collect information concerning the amount of time spent on assessing levels of maintenance compared with time spent on enforcement and compliance activities.
However, the Agency does collect information on the number of staff working on assessing levels of maintenance compared with enforcement and compliance activities. The earliest figures available date from September 1999 and are a best estimate. In September 1999 around 73% of staff were involved in activities that contributed to assessing levels of maintenance, and around 27% of staff were involved in enforcement and compliance work. It is important to recognise that these percentages relate to old scheme activities when working practices were significantly different.
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in how many child support cases a reduced benefit decision was administered where a parent with care refused to undergo a scientific test under section 46 of the Child Support Act 1991 in each year since 2001. [52728]
Mr. Plaskitt: The information requested is not available.
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many penalty payments were (a) issued by the Child Support Agency and (b) paid by non-resident parents under section 41A of the Child Support Act 1991 in each year since 2001. [52730]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to my right hon. Friend with the information requested.
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 how many penalty payments were (a) issued by the Child Support Agency and (b) paid by non-resident parents under section 41A of the Child Support Act 1991 in each year since 2001.
This power to impose a one-off penalty when clients miss a payment by the time the next payment is due is a discretionary power of the Agency. The Agency has not routinely used this power as an enforcement measure. We are currently in the process of developing guidance on when it might be reasonable to use this power.
Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will bring forward proposals to make Child Support Agency records reportable at constituency level. [53737]
Mr. Plaskitt: Administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
You asked the Secretary of State if he will bring forward proposals to make Child Support Agency records reportable at constituency level.
Management information from the old computer system will support the production of constituency level estimates of the number of child support cases with an assessment in each constituency. However, it is not possible to provide more detailed breakdowns at this level (such as compliance) because management information for this system is drawn from a 5 per cent. sample of cases, which does not provide a large enough sample size to allow the production of sufficiently robust estimates.
Whilst it is theoretically possible to provide information on a much greater range of statistics for old and new scheme cases on the new computer system at constituent level (as they are based on a 100 per cent. scan of the system), code details, which allow the identification of geographical areas below national level, have yet to be successfully loaded into the system accessed by CSA analysts. This means it is not currently possible to provide such figures.
This issue is currently being addressed as part of a management information improvement project, which has already begun to deliver more robust statistics in relation to cases on the new computer system. It is envisaged that the Agency will be in a position to provide constituency (and other sub-national) level figures for cases on the new computer system within the next few months, at which point they will be made available on the Department's website alongside the CSA quarterly summary of statistics.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many Child Support Agency cases have been dealt with as clerical cases in each month since March 2003. [21451]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
In reply to your 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 how many Child Support Agency cases have been dealt with as clerical cases in each month since March 2003.
The information available is set out in the following table and provides the clerical caseload for each month:
The Agency is currently working with EDS to rectify the IT problems that necessitate cases being worked clerically in order to progress them. Whilst this work is ongoing, the volume of cases being progressed clerically will continue to rise.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what compensation (a) has been paid by and (b) has been sought from EDS for problems with the Child Support Agency computer system since 200102. [21452]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
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 compensation (a) has been paid by and (b) has been sought from EDS for problems with the Child Support Agency computer system since 200102.
Through the general contract realignment with EDS announced in August 2005, the Department addressed issues around the CS2 computer system. As a result EDS will deliver to current specifications and correct all agreed defects at no extra cost; in addition the Department expects to save around £65m (net present value) in current projected spend on child support IT over the remaining period of the deal with EDS (to August 2010).
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average time between receipt of an application to the Child Support Agency and the granting of a warrant from a magistrate was in each of the last five years. [29999]
Mr. Plaskitt: 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.
In reply to your 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 the average time between receipt of an application to the Child Support Agency and the granting of a warrant from a magistrate was in each of the last five years.
The Secretary of State can seek to enforce recovery of an outstanding amount of child support maintenance through the court process. If that amount or any part of it remains unpaid he may apply to the Magistrates Court under section 39A of the 1991 Act for the issue of a warrant committing the liable person to prison or for an order to disqualify him/her from holding or obtaining a driving licence.
The crucial trigger for commencing enforcement action is the start of non compliance. There is no clear relationship between an application for maintenance and the granting of a committal warrant or order to withdraw a driving licence as any of these cases could include periods of compliance.
We have provided the information you have requested in the table below. The data provided has been calculated based on the cases where the Non Resident Parent has been committed to prison or disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence and represents sentences made in England & Wales as well as Scotland.
When a Non Resident Parent has become non-compliant their case is referred to the Enforcement Directorate. The table below provides the average length of time it has taken between receipt of a case into the Enforcement Directorate and the issue of a warrant by a magistrate in England & Wales or a sheriff in Scotland.
This table shows that in the past year the average time taken for a warrant to be issued after a case has been received into the Enforcement Directorate is significantly less than in previous years.
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total cost of staff time in managing the EDS contract at the Child Support Agency has been in each year for which figures are available. [30017]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
In reply to your 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 the total cost of staff time in managing the EDS contract at the Child Support Agency has been in each year for which figures are available.
It is not possible to break down the specific costs for staff involved in managing the child support contract with EDS. However, the cost of maintaining the commercial/contract management team that deals with child support specific issued including EDS is in the table attached:
£ | |
---|---|
200001 | 82,488 |
200102 | 145,902 |
200203 | 211,393 |
200304 | 433,138 |
200405 | 412,422 |
200505 | (69)232,000 |
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what average amount was paid in each month since the Child Support Agency new scheme came into effect to parents whose cases are (a) on the old scheme and (b) on the new scheme. [30593]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is the matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
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 average amount was paid in each month since the new scheme came into effect to parents whose cases are (a) on the old scheme and (b) on the new scheme.
Information regarding the average amount of total maintenance paid to parents with care on the new scheme each month can be found in the attached table. The same information for those parents with care whose cases are being administered on the old scheme is not available.
Whilst new scheme compliance has increased from 57 per cent. in April 2004 to 65 per cent. in December 2005, the average payment to parents with care on the new scheme has fallen over time.
This is due to a similar fall in the average maintenance liability of non-resident parents who made payments to the Agency over the period which, in turn, is likely to be driven by a steady increase over time in the proportion of compliant cases in which the £5 flat rate of maintenance was deducted directly from the non resident parent's benefit, as the Agency has become progressively more effective at implementing these arrangements.
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average time was between the Child Support Agency notifying the Job Centreplus to deduct the £5 flat rate in maintenance from a non-resident parent's benefit and the maintenance deduction made in the last period for which figures are available. [39537]
Mr. Plaskitt: I will let the hon. Member have such information as is available as soon as possible.
Substantive answer from James Plaskitt to Frank Field:
The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the right hon. Member with the requested information.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average time was between the Child Support Agency notifying the Job Centre Plus to deduct the five pound flat rate in maintenance from a non-resident parent's benefit and the maintenance deduction being made in the last period for which figures are available.
Information regarding the time between the Agency requesting Jobcentre Plus to set up deductions from a non-resident parent's benefit and maintenance being deducted is not available.
We are, however, able to provide indicative information using the difference between the date on which Jobcentre Plus notified the Agency that a collection schedule had been set up, and the date on which maintenance was received by the Agency. This is available for cases where:
the case's original collection schedule was a deduction from benefit and was still in place at the time of first payment, i.e. excluding cases were there was a subsequent change of circumstance.
December 2005 figures show that for all new-scheme cases received since the inception of the scheme, the average time between Jobcentre Plus notifying the Agency that a collection schedule had been set up and payment being received by the Agency was 28 days.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many Child Support Agency assessments have arrived at a nil assessment in each month since 1 January 2004; and if he will make a statement. [41372]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is the matter for the Chief Executive, will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
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, how many Child Support Agency assessments have arrived at a nil assessment in each month since 1 January 2004; and if he will make a statement.
pays flat rate maintenance because they are on benefit and share care of any qualifying child for a minimum of 52 nights per year.
has been in hospital for at least 52 weeks and receives a benefit where entitlement is reduced after a stay in hospital of this duration.
is in a care home or independent hospital, is entitled to benefit, and receives assistance from a local authority with some or all of the care home's or hospital's accommodation costs.
Currently available management information, does not allow me to answer your question in full. The number of new scheme calculations that initially resulted in a nil liability each month from February 2005, the date from which information is available, is in the table below.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the debt arrears reduction target is for the Child Support Agency for (a) 200506 and (b) 200607; and what the outstanding debt was in each month since 1 January 2004. [41546]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
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 the debt arrears reduction target is for the Child Support Agency for (a) 200506 and (b) 200607; and what the outstanding debt was in each month since 1st January 2004.
The Agency has a Secretary of State target to collect arrears equivalent to 30% of the amount of arrears over regular maintenance accrued for the 200506 reporting year, against which performance as at December 2005 stood at 37%. The package of targets for the reporting year 200607 are still in the process of being finalised, the details of which will be published later this year.
The outstanding debt in each month since 1 January 2004 is in the table below:
27 Feb 2006 : Column 240W
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on how many occasions the Child Support Agency has paid compensation of amounts of over £1,000 for errors by the agency to parents (a) with and (b) without custody in each of the last five years. [44230]
Mr. Plaskitt: 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.
In reply to your 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, on how many occasions the Child Support Agency has paid compensation of amounts of over £1,000 for errors by the agency to parents (a) with and (b) without custody in each of the last five years.
The Agency's Special Payments database does not hold information which differentiates between payments made to parents with care or non-resident parents. To provide this information would require clerical examination of individual cases.
The Agency does not hold sufficiently robust information for dates before 1 December 2001. I apologise for this but can give you information on the umber of cases where a financial redress payment in excess of £1,000 has been paid between the period 1 December 2001 and 31 December 2005.
The 846 cases paid over £1,000 in financial redress between April 04 and March 05 represented 0.06% of our total caseload of around 1.4m for that year.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the evidential basis was for the decision to pass some of the debt collection for outstanding Child Support Agency cases to private companies. [45043]
Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 25 January 2006]: The administration of the Child Support Agency is the matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the evidential basis was for the decision to pass some of the debt collection for outstanding Child Support Agency cases to private companies.
On 9 February Secretary of State announced that he will be making £30 million available to contract out some of the Child Support Agency's debt recovery. We expect this to result in a substantially increased recovery of the current debt owed to parents with care.
We have carried out a market test and are encouraged that there is a market for this work. Since August 2005 the Agency has also been involved in a small scale Departmental pilot using two private debt collection companies to assess the feasibility of involving the private sector to recover Agency debt.
Mr. Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many formal complaints his Department has received regarding the Child Support Agency from people in Tamworth constituency in each year since it was created. [48651]
Mr. Plaskitt: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to the hon. Members for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (Mr. Moore) and Hornsey and Wood Green (Lynne Featherstone) on 25 October 2005, Official Report, column 279W.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many Child Support Agency cases in (a) Cambridgeshire and (b) Peterborough were in arrears in each year between 1997 and 2005. [48663]
Mr. Plaskitt: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Bone) on 14 December 2005, Official Report, column 1985W.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions for what average length of time employees have worked for the Child Support Agency since 1 January 1998. [50243]
Mr. Plaskitt: 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.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions for what average length of time employees have worked for the Child Support Agency since 1 January 1998.
I cannot provide precisely the information you have requested as it is not possible to disaggregate all periods of employment within DWP to individual Agencies, or provide an average period from 1 January 1998. I am able to advise you that as at 31 December 2005 the Child Support Agency employed 10,649 Full Time Equivalent staff, with the average length of time worked for DWP being 11 years and 5 months.
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what settlement has been reached with the Child Support Agency IT system contractor in respect of the delivery of the CS2 System. [51878]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
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 settlement has been reached with the Child Support Agency IT system contractor in respect of the delivery of the CS2 System.
Through the general contract realignment with EDS announced in August 2005, the Department addressed issued around the CS2 computer system. As a result EDS will deliver to current specifications and correct all agreed defects at no extra cost; in addition the Department expects to save around £65 million (net present value) in current projected spend on child support IT over the remaining period of the deal with EDS (August 2010).
Julie Morgan: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on how many occasions the Child Support Agency breached an order by the Independent Case Examiner to perform a named task by a certain date in (a) 2003, (b) 2004, (c) 2005 and (d) 2006; and what powers the Independent Case Examiner has to enforce its orders to the Agency. [51951]
Mr. Plaskitt: Following an investigation into a complaint, the Independent Case Examiner (ICE) will prepare a report of her findings for the complainant and the Child Support Agency (CSA). The report may include recommendations for redress to be given by the Agency, such as;
The Agency will ensure that all recommendations are implemented in accordance with the implementation plans. In circumstances where the CSA is unable to agree recommendations, a full written explanation for
27 Feb 2006 : Column 243W
the decision will be provided, and an opportunity given for the ICE to discuss the case with the CSA Board should she require.
The following table shows the number of recommendations made by ICE, and how many the Agency cleared during the same period. No figures are available for pre-August 2004.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when the decision was first made to use private debt collectors for Child Support Agency cases; and if he will make a statement. [45581]
Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 30 January 2006]: The Secretary of State agreed as part of the Operational Improvement Plan to commit £30 million over the next three years, for private debt collection.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many and what proportion of child support new scheme cases concern (a) parents with care on income support or income-related jobseeker's allowance, (b) parents with care not on income support or income-related jobseeker's allowance. [18786]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member.
In reply to your 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, how many and what proportion of child support new scheme cases concern (a) parents with care on income support or income related jobseeker's allowance (b) parents with care not on income support or income-related jobseeker's allowance.
In May 2005, there were 106,000 (46%) new scheme cases with a calculation where the parent with care (PWC) was currently on income support or income-related jobseeker's allowance, with 124,000 (54%) not on these benefits. This information is obtained through linking Child Support administrative data with that from the benefits system (for which May 2005 is the latest data available).
The management information currently available does not enable me to provide the benefit status of those new scheme cases which have yet to reach a calculation (of which there were 232,000 in total in December 2005).
Next Section | Index | Home Page |