Ms Louise Bayliss:

I would like to add a few thoughts about access and sanctions. I do not think sanctions are working. There needs to be better enforcement than having to go in and out of court. I say that as somebody who has been in and out of court, and it is draining, destroying and really upsetting emotionally. The idea of attaching it to a PPS number and going through Revenue is a simple solution. If we look at the property tax, for instance, Revenue has the right to go directly to your employers, they have your PPS number and they will take whatever is owed. If we can do that for a property tax, why can we not do it with child benefit or for the rights of a child? Children have more need than property does. That is an important point to make.

With regard to access, no woman wants to deprive her child of access in a safe environment, although that is not to say it does not happen; it does. From years of talking to women in SPARK who are going through this, if someone is in a powerless situation and they feel powerless going in and out of the courts, their only weapon - it should not be a weapon but that is what happens in an adversarial court system - is to withdraw access if he has not paid maintenance. It is unfair and it is wrong on the children, but it does happen. If we guarantee the payment to a child through Revenue, then we take all of that out and there is no reason for a woman to deny access.

All of the international research has shown that when a parent pays maintenance, they will keep in contact with the child. Again, the Deputy said she does not think it should be totally decoupled. The proof is that when they pay maintenance, they will see the child. I am not advocating one way or the other for a statutory maintenance agency or for Revenue, but something needs to happen urgently because children are suffering in the meantime, and they are suffering because of access issues and poverty. If we sort out the revenue coming into the family, a lot of the access issues will be sorted.