Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I always wonder why the Government continues to target lone parents as if they had wronged State in some way. Why are there no support services or State agencies to intervene when child maintenance is not paid, even when it is one of the strongest determinants of child poverty and even when child poverty persists despite is the so-called economic upturn? The only conclusion I can come to is that the State has not come to terms with its shame in respect of lone parents, shame that lingers from the time of the Magdalen laundries, from when divorce was illegal and from when children outside marriage were shunned. We should now address our sense of shame about nearly 250,000 people in this country once and for all. Not only would lone parents be worthy of this but so too would the children in their families. Responding to the calls in the motion would be a good starting point.

I wish to refer a One Family survey carried out this summer. It found that more than half of parents must pursue child maintenance payments through an adversaries court system while 42% of primary carers are raising children without a financial contribution from the other parent. A resulting 58% of parents end up resorting to a court order to agree to child maintenance. The Department puts them under pressure and threatens to reduce their payments, which is an absolute disgrace. What struck me most about the survey’s findings was that a child’s needs do not determine the amount paid in 91% of cases included in the study. That is an incredible figure considering that child poverty remains persistent, with over 230,000 children at risk of poverty today. Many of those come from lone parent families. According to a report of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, entitled Working, Parenting and Struggling, the rate of in-work poverty among lone parents more than doubled between 2012 and 2017. In fact, in 2012, one in 11 working lone parents was living below the poverty line. By 2017, this increased to one in five. That working lone parents are living below the poverty line is a sad indictment of the Government.

Let us not forget how targeted lone parents were when the Labour Party was in government and introduced the so-called reforms to the one-parent family payment. These were subject to much criticism, particularly as they were introduced during a period of recession and high unemployment. What has occurred has been in the absence of good-quality, affordable childcare and without recognising the additional practical and financial challenges of parenting alone, not to mention the fact that lone parents are obliged to seek maintenance from a non-custodial parent as a condition of receiving the one-parent family payment and jobseeker's conditional payment. The effects of the cuts during the recession will now affect an entire generation of children. It is a shameful history we must face up to. Addressing the high rate of non-payment of child maintenance would be a good start, as would proceeding from a children’s rights perspective and establishing an agency to adjudicate on child maintenance cases, especially adjudicating on the child's behalf.

We also need what One Family has called for, namely, a future-proofed, independent, child-maintenance service reflecting the fact that families and work patterns are changing rapidly. According to One Family, the independent agency would integrate all the requirements of families and children accessing family law courts and social services.

The statutory child maintenance agency needs to form part of a wider comprehensive court welfare service that could determine the appropriate levels to be paid in a child-centred way. We need to move away from an adversarial court system towards one that would still ensure children and families actually receive the maintenance. I agree profoundly with One Family that child maintenance should be seen as an independent, ring-fenced form of security directly for children.

Just as with the Government's approach to child benefit, child maintenance should not be taxed or means tested, as is the case in the UK.

Having the State adjudicate on child maintenance payments is not about so-called interference with the private domain of families. Rather, it is about protecting and advocating for a child's right to an income that supports and protects him or her while offering equal opportunities in his or her life ahead. It is time to act to end this child poverty.

See this speech in context