Mr. Damien Peelo:

She succeeded in the end but did not get backdated maintenance. She did not look for it. She just wanted to get rid of the case. She could have got more but she wanted to get rid of the case. The issue is that the partner of that person knew how to play and utilise the system. The many others who do not know how to do that are caught in the position to which Ms Bayliss referred whereby people do not turn up and bench warrants issue. Where the ultimate sanction is one of imprisonment, it is often the case that a mother will not choose that and will ask for it not to be enforced. Parents sometimes do not agree on an amount of maintenance and that is why we are saying an agency to deal with those issues is required. That way, those parents should not have to go to court because there is a statutory obligation to pay maintenance that we know is there. It should include a fixed minimum fee. There may be issues around one's personal public service, PPS, number and Revenue involvement. However, whatever way the agency may use that information, it is important that maintenance is immediately deducted so there are no long-term delays and people do not have to go through a court process. The person still maintains a right to bring matters to a court and have them judicially reviewed and appealed but that should not come at the cost of not paying the maintenance. The maintenance should start at the beginning of that process rather than leaving people waiting. We need to set a minimum statutory amount for situations in which parents do not agree and for that to be immediately enforced. That would help people immediately and protect families.