Letter: CSA warnings were ignored
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.IT IS a convenient fiction, not least for the Government, that the Child Support Act had universal approval when it went through the Commons ('The palace of ineptitude', 7 November). On behalf of the Opposition, Joan Lestor said on 4 June 1991 that the Bill 'is putting the Treasury first, and children second'. She went on to point out 'the Bill will bring no improvement to the living standards of many of their children because maintenance will be deducted pound for pound from their income support'.
She pointed out that there were 'many separated or divorced women who have negotiated with their former partners, without rancour, an arrangement whereby they forego any maintenance, but are allowed to keep the family home for themselves and their children. The Bill could undermine that principle.' She also noted the problems of shared access and the dangers of 'a formal maintenance order . . . disrupting and undermining the understanding way in which the couple have dealt with separation or divorce?' Finally, she highlighted one of the main grievances arising from the Act: 'I fear we are in danger of impoverishing the second family to provide for the first.'
The problems were pointed out clearly but the Government chose not to listen.
John F Spellar MP
House of Commons
London SW1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments