Schedule 4
Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill
5:00 pm
Paul Rowen (Shadow Minister, Work & Pensions; Rochdale, Liberal Democrat)
Yes, and 15 per cent. for three; I thank the Minister for that. We tabled the amendment because we would like him to explain why that reduction is necessary above the £800 threshold. We do not see why the wealth of a high-earning, non-resident parent cannot be shared with his children. In proportional terms, the relevant amounts are small to the non-resident parent, but could make a considerable difference to the welfare of the child.
The Bill is largely about creating a more equitable framework, but the reduced rate for higher earners is likely to be a bone of contention between the parent with care and the non-resident parent, particularly if the parent with care has a considerably lower income than the non-resident parent. I know from personal experience that it is a bone of contention when a mother is struggling and sees that the non-resident parent is quite wealthy but is not sharing that wealth with their children. Will the Minister explain how the figures for the £800 threshold and the reduced percentages were chosen? The rationale behind them certainly is not clear to us.
What will happen if there is a change in the non-resident parent’s circumstances halfway through the year and he starts to earn considerably more? Will there be a reassessment? We are talking about issues of principle, fairness and equity.