Reforming the Child Maintenance Service: Lords Public Services Committee report

Approximate read time: 10 minutes

On 8 June 2026 the House of Lords is scheduled to debate the Public Services Committee’s (PSC) report on ‘Reforming the Child Maintenance Service’ (14 October 2025, HL Paper 181 of session 2024–26) in Grand Committee.

1. Background

Child maintenance is a financial arrangement covering how a child’s living costs will be paid if one of the parents does not live with the child.^[1] It is made if the child’s parents are separated or if the parents were never in a relationship.

Child maintenance may be arranged privately between the parents. If the parents do not agree a private arrangement, child maintenance can be arranged through the Child Maintenance Service (CMS), which was introduced in December 2012 to replace the Child Support Agency (CSA).^[2] The CMS can work out the amount a parent should pay, arrange payments and take action if a parent does not pay.^[3] The CMS can also intervene where there are disagreements about parentage.

In the financial year ending 2025, it was estimated that there were 2.4 million separated families in Great Britain and 3.9 million children in those separated families.^[4] The CMS was the sole organiser of maintenance for 18% of separated families.^[5] 35% of separated families had no financial maintenance arrangement.^[6]

In the quarter ending December 2025, the CMS managed 800,000 arrangements covering 1.1 million children, an increase of 47,000 from a year earlier.^[7] These arrangements can be managed using either the ‘direct pay’ service or the ‘collect and pay’ service.^[8]

Payments managed using the ‘direct pay’ service are made directly from the paying parent to the receiving parent. £288mn of payments were arranged through ‘direct pay’ in the quarter ending December 2025.^[9] Payments managed using the ‘collect and pay’ service are collected and passed on by the CMS.^[10] There are fees for using the ‘collect and pay’ service. £110mn of payments were arranged through ‘collect and pay’ in the quarter ending December 2025, although not all of this money was paid.^[11]

2. Committee findings and recommendations

The House of Lords Public Services Committee launched its inquiry into child maintenance on 11 March 2025. It published its report ‘Reforming the Child Maintenance Service’ on 14 October 2025.^[12]

The report focused on child maintenance arrangements made through the CMS, rather than private ‘family-based’ or other forms of arrangement. The committee noted several key areas which it said must be improved to enable the CMS to work more effectively:

• Calculation: The committee said the calculation of agreements between parents is the aspect of the CMS that can have “the greatest impact on a child of separated parents”.^[13] It said the current calculation formula was “neither fair nor transparent”, saying it was based on “outdated legislation” and arguing that it “does not adequately reflect modern family structures nor account for shared care”.^[14] The committee said that, when reviewing and reforming the way child maintenance is calculated, the government should ensure the new approach to calculation is designed with three principles in mind—“mitigating the impact of separation on the child, fairly sharing the cost of the child between parents, and reflecting different family arrangements”.^[15] The committee also argued that the Family Court “provides a model for how separated families can decide and agree maintenance payments”.^[16]
• Communication: The committee said the CMS is “not adequately signposted to those who may need it”.^[17] It said “the government should improve the visibility and promotion of the CMS to reduce the number of children in families with no agreement” and this should be “linked to work to integrate child maintenance services into family hubs and other services”.^[18] The committee also recommended establishing a target maximum waiting time for calls made to the CMS, as well as appropriately resourcing the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) pilot of single named caseworkers “so that parents with experience of domestic abuse are able to access appropriate and specialist support”.^[19]
• Enforcement: The committee said it welcomed government steps to improve enforcement action but said, in many cases, the government was failing to enforce child maintenance arrangements. The committee said, when enforcement does happen, there can be “significant delays” and that “more could be done to swiftly recoup unpaid maintenance”.^[20] It said the government should introduce legislation enabling the use of administrative liability orders (ALOs) “as soon as possible”.^[21] The committee also recommended that the government should introduce a process to ensure parents receiving maintenance payments are kept better informed of the process and timeline of enforcement action.^[22]
• ‘Direct pay’ service and ‘collect and pay’: The committee said it was “not persuaded” by the government’s case for the removal of the ‘direct pay’ service.^[23] The committee said it was concerned that the transfer of all child maintenance cases to ‘collect and pay’ would result in poorer results. It recommended that the government should develop and publish clear evidence that the removal of direct pay would lead to greater compliance and more money reaching children in separated families.

3. Responses to the committee report

3.1 Government response to the report

The government published its response to the committee report on 9 January 2026.^[24] The document provided a response to each of the committee’s conclusions and recommendations.

The government said it wanted to deliver a “fair and trustworthy service that is more accessible to parents, particularly those who are vulnerable”.^[25] It said it wanted to “tackle non-compliance head on” and move to a “single streamlined service where we monitor payments”.^[26] It said “CMS reforms are a key part of DWP’s wider aim to reduce child poverty and are reflected in the child poverty strategy”.^[27] The government accepted the committee’s recommendation to “improve the visibility and promotion of the CMS” by linking to work that integrates child maintenance services into family hubs.^[28]

The government said its review of the maintenance calculation “aims to ensure that the calculation is reflective of the costs of raising children today, fair for both parents to encourage willing payment compliance, and fit for the future”.^[29] However, the government rejected the committee’s recommendation to draw on the Family Court model when reforming the CMS calculation, arguing that this would “introduce complexity and delays to the CMS”.^[30]

The government also rejected the committee’s recommendation to introduce legislation to enable parents who were the victims of domestic abuse from the other partner to move directly to a collect and pay arrangement. The government instead argued that this risked “re-traumatising customers who would be required to give evidence of their experiences”. As such the government said it would “concentrate our efforts on pressing ahead with full reform of direct pay”.^[31]

3.2 Committee chair’s reply to the government’s response

The chair of the PSC, Baroness Morris of Yardley, replied to the government’s response on 27 January 2026.^[32]

Her letter noted that the committee was “pleased that the government have included CMS reform in its child poverty strategy” and that the committee looked forward to “hearing more about how CMS will be promoted to separating parents and included in family hubs and other local support”.^[33]

However, Baroness Morris said the committee was “disappointed by the lack of progress that has been made in many areas where we raised concerns”.^[34] She asked the minister for further information and clarity in a number of areas. These included the proposed abolition of direct pay, support for victims and survivors of domestic abuse, ALOs, reform of the maintenance calculation and communication.

3.3 Government response to the committee chair

Minister of State in the Department for Work and Pensions Baroness Sherlock replied to Baroness Morris on 6 March 2026.^[35] The document provided a response to each of Baroness Morris’s questions.

Baroness Sherlock said she was “unable to provide more specific timelines in relation to some very important areas of reform”, saying that this reflected “the need to ensure that any changes are underpinned by the necessary legislation, and they are implemented in a way that is safe, effective, and that delivers the intended protections for parents and children”.^[36]

She said the government “plans to remove direct pay and transfer cases to the collect and pay service”, saying that this would be done “as soon as the legislative programme permits”. She said work was ongoing on the introduction of ALOs, and that legislation would be introduced “as soon as possible”.^[37]

4. Read more

• House of Commons Library, ‘Child maintenance service’, accessed 28 May 2026
• Westminster Hall debate on ‘Child maintenance service’, HC Hansard, 17 March 2026, cols 285–93WH

---

Image by Ratna Fitry from Pixabay