So, the last piece of the government’s plan to overhaul the child maintenance system has been put into place. On Monday the Department for Work and Pensions (‘DWP’) proudly announced that the system was now “fit for the 21st century”. But will the “radical changes” that the government has implemented really make any difference?
Under the new system there will be three options for parents to sort out their child maintenance arrangements: by agreement entirely between themselves, via the government’s ‘Direct Pay’ system (the latest innovation), or by the Child Maintenance Service (‘CMS’) ‘Collect and Pay’ system. I will look at each of these in turn.
The government is encouraging parents to agree child maintenance arrangements between themselves (this is called the ‘family-based arrangement’), thereby relieving the state of the burden of doing it for them. The main ‘carrot’ (or is it a ‘stick’?) to encourage parents to use this option is avoidance of the fees required to use the CMS, more of which in a moment.
Of course, there is nothing new in parents agreeing child maintenance arrangements between themselves – there has always been a large proportion of parents who have been able to do this. They, of course, are not and have never been the problem – the problem is with parents who won’t pay (again, more of which in a moment). Whether the new system will encourage significantly more parents to enter into a family-based arrangement only time will tell, but I can’t see it doing anything to persuade the serial non-payers to cough up.
As I said above, the Direct Pay system is the government’s latest innovation. To use it, parents will have to register with the ‘Government Gateway’, a free self-service website used to manage their child maintenance and keep track of payments. The site enables users to make and receive payments, send enquiries and see records of all communications with the CMS. The CMS calculates the amount for parents to pay and provides guidance on setting up regular payments. Payments are then arranged between parents and the CMS will then only intervene if necessary in the event of missed payments.
All of which sounds fine, but again doesn’t address the main issue: parents who won’t cooperate in the first place, and will do everything they can to avoid paying.
Which is where the Collect and Pay system comes in. The big change here, as mentioned above, is the introduction of fees. This innovation has already generated a considerable amount of criticism, for example from the single-parent charity Gingerbread, as it ultimately penalises children for the refusal of the non-resident parent to cooperate. I agree entirely.
I had to laugh when it read the DWP’s press release referred to at the beginning of this post. They say that the charges that the CMS will impose to enforce payment are “for the small minority of absent parents who try to evade their maintenance responsibilities”. “Small minority”? Someone seems to be living in a dream world. Over the years the Child Support Agency has written off billions of pounds of unpaid child support. The problem of non-payment is huge.
Again, only time will tell whether the CMS will be significantly more successful at chasing recalcitrant payers, but it isn’t really a question of a new system, or even new enforcement options. The issue is providing each case with sufficient resources so that it can be given the attention it deserves. Unless the CMS can do this, I can’t see how it will achieve greater success.
Having said that, I’m not going to write off the new system just yet. I do hope that it will be better than its infamous predecessors.
But I won’t be holding my breath.