Child support reforms 'unfair'
Commentary from Australian Men's Rights Asscoation:
Canberra Times article "Child support reforms 'unfair'"
DSS document - Policy & Legislation
Some of the child support reforms brought in last year, were supposed to relieve a little of the financial pressure on paying parents and ensure they had some input into how the maintenance was spent by allowing them to claim up to 25% of the periodic maintenance as direct payments to a third party for the benefit of their children.
These amounts claimed did not need the approval of the other parent.
The change was welcomed, but we are now seeing the unfair limitations that the Child Support Agency have imposed by regulation on the number of items that can be claimed.
According to their website at http://www.csa.gov.au/legal/page4.htm the list includes the following items:
One could be forgiven for thinking this regulation has become more of an effort to support the payee parent than the children directly.
We find it strange that the the Department of Social Security Policy and Legislation guidelines show a far more extensive list than that allowed under the CSA.
DSS uses the list to calculate non-cash payments given to a parent . The
monetary value is then used to reduce the amount the government
has to pay in 'family allowance'. So it is obviously acceptable to have a
large extensive list, when it saves the government money, but not so
when the paying parent might find some relief. Yet the same 'family allowance'
that is reduced under the DSS list is the same one that is reduced according
to the amount paid by the paying parent .
List of items that may be used as non-cash maintenance for the purpose of reducing family allowance payments, according to DSS.
You can view and download the scanned version of this DSS page. Click here and use your back button to return.
We have it on good authority that Robin Poke, the spokesperson for CSA, who was quoted in the Canberra Times article was quite put out and said that if he known "he was dealing with Australian Men's Rights Asscoation then he would have given different answers". Really!
We'll be fascinated to find out the answers he would have given and why!
Ed, Australian Men's Rights Asscoation
Return to CSA Intro page