Frank Feighan (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following: "Dáil Éireann, while acknowledging the relevance of the Social Welfare (Payment Order) (Amendment) Bill 2021 in the context of the current conditions in the child maintenance system, resolves that the Bill be deemed to be read a second time this day six months to allow for consideration of the outcome of the Child Maintenance Review Group, as its terms of reference include an examination of the liable relative provisions which the Bill seeks to amend.".

I thank Deputy Kerrane for her remarks. I acknowledge the great she has put into this Bill and the intentions behind it. I know she has a keen interest in child maintenance issues and has discussed these matters with the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Humphreys, previously.

This amendment is not about opposing the Bill but, rather, acknowledging that the matters it covers are currently under review by the child maintenance review group, allowing time for group to conclude its work and allowing the Government time to consider the group's recommendations in their entirety rather than make piecemeal changes now.

Child maintenance is a hugely important issue for families where parents are not living together. We all know that people can experience difficulties under the current arrangements. That is why the Government set up a group to examine a number of aspects of the current system. The Bill aims to extend the liable relative provisions operated by the Department of Social Protection to the jobseeker's transitional payment. It is useful, therefore, to consider how those provisions operate currently.

One-parent family payment is means-tested for people who are parenting alone and whose youngest child is under seven years. Where a lone parent is in receipt of one-parent family payment, the liability to maintain the family provisions provide the Department of Social Protection with a legislative basis to carry out an assessment against the other parent and to issue a determination order for him or her to pay a contribution. A determination order is issued by post to the person notifying him or her of the contribution due. This also includes means assessment outlining basis of determination order. The liable relative can request reassessment on the production of additional information. This order can be appealed to the Social Welfare Appeals Office within 21 days.

Certain categories of liable relative are not pursued due to personal circumstances or because they have low incomes which would result in a nil liability following a means assessment. When the provisions were first introduced any moneys received as a result of this assessment were paid directly to the Department. However, as this function evolved it was decided that the liable relative could instead pay the agreed amount directly to the one-parent family payment recipient as maintenance.

Where the liable relative makes the payment directly to the recipient of the one-parent family payment, it will be assessed as income in the means test for the recipient's payment and the level of his or her payment may be adjusted as a result. However, it is important to note that there are disregards in the means test which apply in the treatment of maintenance payments. For most schemes, where a person has housing costs, the amount of those costs up to a level of €95.23 per week is disregarded in the means test. Thereafter, the balance of the maintenance payment is assessed at 50%. If there are no housing costs, 50% of the maintenance payments is assessed.

I know that the treatment of maintenance within the social welfare system is another issue of great interest to Deputy Kerrane and other Members. It is one of the other issues being examined by the child maintenance review group. Under the liable relative provisions, the Department is not arranging maintenance but ensuring, where possible, that where there is a one-parent family payment in place and the other parent makes a financial contribution towards the cost to the State of providing that support. The liable relative provisions do not extend to the jobseeker's transitional payment. This is also a means-tested payment for people parenting alone but in this case the person's youngest child must be aged between seven and 14 years. The fact that the liable relative provisions do not extend to the jobseeker's transitional payment has led some to suggest that the obligation of the non-resident parent to pay child maintenance ceases when the child turns seven and the other parent moves from one-parent family payment to jobseeker's transitional payment. This is not the case and the Department of Social Protection advises people of that when arrangements under the provisions cease at that juncture.

Under existing family law legislation, parents, certain categories of guardian or those acting in the place of parents, who may be liable under the Children and Family Relationships Act 2015, are obliged to maintain their children. In cases where the family unit has broken down, these obligations continue to apply. Child maintenance arrangements can be agreed directly between the parties themselves or with the assistance of their solicitors, private mediators, supports such as the Family Mediation Service and the Legal Aid Board or, ultimately, through the Courts.

It is important to note that the liability to maintain family provisions contained in social welfare legislation are separate from, and do not negate or supersede, parents' obligations under family law. Deputies will recall that several significant reforms of the one-parent family payment were provided for in budget 2012. The major change was the reduction in the age threshold of a child in respect of whom a person can receive one-parent family payment. Originally, a person could receive one-parent family payment until his or her youngest child was 18 years, or 22 years if the child remained in full-time education. The reduction in the age threshold of the youngest child was implemented on a phased basis for all recipients during the period 2013 to 2015. Since the reforms have been fully implemented, a lone parent's entitlement to the one-parent family payment continues until his or her youngest child's seventh birthday, subject to the recipient continuing to satisfy the other eligibility requirements.

The jobseeker's transitional payment was introduced in 2015. This payment has almost identical eligibility rules as the one-parent family payment but the Ione parent's youngest child must be aged over seven and under 14 to qualify for the payment.

Another difference between the two schemes is the subject of our debate this evening, that is, that the liable relative provisions do not apply to the jobseeker's transitional payment. There are no requirements for recipients of one-parent family payment or jobseeker's transitional payment to seek or engage in employment in order to qualify for the payments. Recipients are of course free to take up employment and there is an earnings disregard built into the means test for both schemes to facilitate that. The difference between the two schemes in this regard is that recipients of jobseeker's transitional payment are required to engage with the Department of Social Protection's Intreo service, whereas recipients of the one-parent family payment are not obliged to do so.

The Government established a child maintenance review group to examine certain issues in respect of child maintenance. The group is chaired by former Circuit Court Judge Catherine Murphy and includes legal, policy and academic professionals as well as officials from the Department of Social Protection and the Department of Justice. The establishment of this group is in line with the programme for Government which commits the Government to acting to reform our child maintenance system and address key issues such as calculations, facilitation and enforcement, guided by international best practice. The Government's actions in this regard are to be taken in light of the findings of the review. One of the terms of reference of the child maintenance review group is to examine the liable relative provisions operated by the Department of Social Protection. These are the very provisions which this Private Members' Bill is seeking to alter.

A public consultation process was undertaken in February and March last year. The submissions received are highly valued by the group and are informing its work. I am aware Deputy Kerrane made a submission that includes, amongst other things, a proposal to extend the liable relative provisions to jobseeker's transitional payment, as this Bill aims to do.

Submissions were received from a range of stakeholders, including other Members of the Oireachtas, NGOs and professional bodies. Although there were some common themes, not all raised the same issues and even where the same issues were raised it was sometimes from different perspectives. However, all were united in wanting to improve the current system. That is what we in Government want to do and what the Members of this House want to see happen.

It is the submissions from individual members of the public, many of whom wrote very openly about deeply personal issues, that really brought to life the difficulties people can experience within the current child maintenance system. Amongst the range of issues raised, people wrote about the difficulties they experienced in attending court, the hardship caused when expected payments do not materialise and the heartache caused by the intertwining of maintenance and access issues.

I understand the chair of the group has advised the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, that the report is expected to be submitted to her by Easter. I am conscious Deputy Kerrane and others are very keen to see the group's report but given the importance and complexity of the issues involved it is reasonable for the group to spend some additional time on its deliberations. It would be inappropriate to make changes to these provisions in advance of the group concluding its deliberations and reporting to the Minister. The Government considers that we should await the outcome of the review and consider its recommendations in their entirety before making any changes in this area. We cannot and should not pre-empt what those recommendations might be. That is why we have tabled this timed amendment, to allow time, as I have said, for the report to be completed and for the Government to consider its findings and recommendations.

Maintenance is a complex issue, even within the social welfare system. In addition to examining the liable relative provisions, the group is also tasked with examining the treatment of maintenance payments in the social welfare system and whether or not there is a case for a child maintenance agency in Ireland. As part of its work the group is also considering the international position. There are a variety of approaches in other jurisdictions. It is difficult to make comparisons because each country operates a system which operates within the parameters of its own social welfare and legal system and these vary greatly. Some jurisdictions, such as Northern Ireland, operate a child maintenance service. This is the model Deputy Kerrane and others would like to see replicated here. By contrast, in New Zealand, it is the Inland Revenue that is primarily involved in the determination, operation and enforcement of child support payments. Although we cannot expect it would simply be possible to replicate a system that operates in another country, it is useful to examine other systems and how they work.

The Government is committed to improving the entire family law system. That is of course much broader than child maintenance but any improvements in that system will nevertheless be of benefit to people who need to go to court over child maintenance issues. In September 2020 the Government set up the family justice oversight group. It has been tasked with driving progress on the development of a national family justice service. It also ran a public consultation process last year and its work is ongoing. The programme for Government contains a commitment to enact a Family Courts Bill to create a new dedicated family court within the existing court structure and provide for court procedures that support a less adversarial resolution of disputes. The overall aim is to change the culture so the focus of the family justice system meets the complex needs of people who need help with family justice issues. I understand the drafting of that Bill is well advanced.

As I said at the outset, child maintenance is a hugely important and complex issue. The Government is aware of the difficulties people can experience and we are committed to reforming the system. However, it is important we allow the child maintenance review group time to continue its work and allow the Government to consider its recommendations before making any changes in this regard. I look forward to hearing the contributions to this debate and again acknowledge the work Deputy Kerrane has put into the Bill and the intentions behind it. I am aware she has a keen interest in child maintenance issues and thank her for her remarks this evening.

See this speech in context