Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Labor opposition I rise to speak on the Child Support Legislation Amendment (Reform of the Child Support Scheme—Initial Measures) Bill 2006. I am pleased to see so many government senators coming in to listen to my contribution; I am sure it is unrelated to the near start of question time! The Hawke Labor government established the Child Support Scheme in 1988. It was set up in response to the growth in child poverty since the early 1970s—a phenomenon due in part to the growth in the number of post-divorce sole parent households. There was community concern at the time at what was perceived to be the unfairness and ineffectiveness of the court based maintenance system and the fact that only 30 per cent of non-custodial parents were making regular maintenance payments.

Since 1988 Australia’s system has become an international model, and it has recently been the base for the scheme that was introduced into Britain. However, there are many concerns in the community about how our scheme operates, its fairness, the assessment formula and the issues of compliance. All MPs and senators are well aware of how sensitive this area is for many. The concerns and problems that many parents have with child support policy and implementation are part of the bread-and-butter work of electorate offices around the country.

Labor acknowledges that, despite its success, the Child Support Scheme is in need of reform. Labor’s approach to this policy area is guided by a set of core principles. Central to these is our belief that the interests and wellbeing of children must always come first. As far as possible, child support policy should serve to support the child in security and in economically sustainable and acceptable conditions. Policy should aim to ensure that both parents contribute to the wellbeing of the children and, as far as possible, maintain active and ongoing roles in their children’s lives. We believe that shared parenting is beneficial to both children and their parents and that there should be a fair balance between parents in meeting the costs of a child’s care and upbringing. To serve the interests of children and parents, the Child Support Agency needs to be competently administered and sufficiently resourced. We advocate strong enforcement and compliance measures so that the obligations of parents are met.

The process of child support reform has been a lengthy one. The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs delivered its report into family separation issues, Every picture tells a story, in December 2003. Among the committee’s bipartisan recommendations was the establishment of a ministerial task force to evaluate the Child Support Scheme. I pay tribute to all those members of the House of Representatives who served on that committee. They did good work and worked hard to find balanced outcomes.

The role of the evaluation would include establishing the costs of raising children after parental separation, recognising different income levels of households, and reflecting the costs for both parents of maintaining meaningful contact with their children. The report of the ministerial task force on child support, chaired by Professor Patrick Parkinson, was presented in May 2005 and was the first exhaustive and systemic evaluation of child support arrangements.

The task force recommended a new formula for the assessment of child support—a formula based on evidence of the actual costs of raising children, the principle of shared parental responsibility for those costs and a recognition of each parent’s level of care. It is this new formula which has attracted most attention and comment and lies at the heart of the changes. While Labor support the principles on which the new formula is based, its practical effects on low-income resident families make up the core of our concerns about the package—a subject I will return to in detail later.

In addition to the new payment formula, the changes include increased compliance activity, more use of courts to recover debts, a new approach to parents understating income to avoid the child support liability and access for administrative review for the SSAT. The reality is that only half of all child support obligations are currently met in full and on time. This is a level of noncompliance that is totally unacceptable. It points to both the need for reform of the scheme and the need for an increased focus on compliance. The 2006-07 budget measures indicate that $165.1 million over five years has been allocated for transitional and ongoing compliance activity. Labor also notes that over the last six months investigations into income minimisation have seen a $2.3 million increase in child support. We welcome that activity and urge more.

Debate interrupted.