C-MEC: Substance or Spin?

Spin Doctor?Further to my last post, the White Paper "A new system of child maintenance" can now be found here. I notice that the acronym for the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission is given as "C-MEC", although I don't know where the hyphen comes from.

The White Paper emphasises the "new focus" of encouraging parents to make their own arrangements - see chapter 2 - but parents who agree support/maintenance for their children were never the problem. The primary problem is those parents who refuse to pay.

As I mentioned previously the arrears of the CSA are not to be written off, but I wasn't sure who would have the job of seeking to recover those arrears. Paragraph 19 of the 'Executive Summary' makes it clear that this is to be the responsibility of C-MEC. Won't this enormous burden drag it down and tar it with the same brush as the CSA? Paragraph 44 states that: "Following legislation in 2007–08, the Government will move quickly to establish C-MEC" - this does not leave the CSA much time to make much of a dent in it's £3.5 billion arrears. If C-MEC is to be a smaller body than the CSA, how will it have the resources to recover what the CSA cannot? Much is made of the new enforcement provisions, but I hardly think that they are going to be a panacea. If the arrears don't decrease (or worse, increase), then C-MEC will soon be regarded as much as a failure as the CSA.

I hope my pessimism turns out to be misplaced, but the more I look at the proposals the more I think "government spin".

Comments

  1. Alan Johnson gave it and couldn't make it work and nor will it work for John Hutton....o to have 20 minutes with this man, i would certainly give him a run for his money!!!!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.