Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Federal Election and Child $upport Agency / System

Add Topic
Not sure if I have missed anything in the media about the current Federal Election campaign, and may stand corrected, however, I haven't heard much in the Federal Election campaign with regards to Family benefits, well a few things, however it seems to be all catered for "families" and not "separated families"

Maybe the run is a little too late, however it seems to me that this would be an ideal time to canvas (or petition) the politicians on what there action will be to address some of the shortfalls of the C$ System.

Do others have any views.

Is there an opportunity to get a common theme going and put towards the pollies..?

Wish I had the funding of the mining industry to run a public support campaign about the unjust C$ system.

(Oh, and before some start, Yes, I understand that it is all for the children. I am NOT a deadbeat Father. I am a payer… who pays well over a $1000.00 per month without fail (currently over 1500.00 per month) and in my view, cannot begin to comprehend the "unchecked" decision making power of CO'ers, SCO'ers and the C$A.)
I think Gillard announced that she would increase Family Tax Benefits for 16-18 year olds as long as they stay in school or training. Apart from this I have not heard anything else.
I agree Try Hard Dad.  I also have not heard much about separated families.  There are many of us in this situation, although we seem to have been forgotten about - again.  Dont know how you go about petitioning before the election but I definately would participate.

Note:  I too am a paying parent - one child = $1000 per month.  I have no outstanding arrears owing.

Note:  I realise I will probably get a lot of responses to this but YES, it is about the money. It is also about the emotional well being for the non caring parent and the child. For those out there who will be quick to respond put the shoe on the other foot.  Spend $50,000 to get your piece of paper stamped by the judge to say you can have the regularly awarded care (f/nightly and holidays) for the other parent to just say "Umm,  No".  You then have to provide a higher level of support and financially reward the parent for not allowing you to be able to see your own flesh and blood who you cherish and miss every minute of every day.  Is this fair?

Count me in Try Hard Dad
This was from news.com 11th August 2010:

Child support

Further changes have also been announced to child support income assessments, with the Government cracking down on parents who fail to lodge tax returns.

Incomes will be assessed based on wage growth from previously reported income, rather than a default income of $39,000. The change is expected to reap $58.8 million for the Government through reduced government expenditure on family payments.

Link:
http://www.news.com.au/features/federal-election/welfare-linked-to-health-of-children/story-e6frfllr-1225903842550


Count me in too. That expensive piece of paper from the court what a joke. That as a payer I am not entitled to quality of life as I have to prop up the payee. That CSA is all about saving tax dollars and not about the children as they claim. The whole system of Family Court, C$A, Family Assistance needs to be overhauled. Maybe we need someone to write a letter to send to our potential future local Pollies of what is currently wrong and what the system should be.

I am not a good letter writer otherwise I would do it.
Oz_mick said
Further changes have also been announced to child support income assessments, with the Government cracking down on parents who fail to lodge tax returns.

Incomes will be assessed based on wage growth from previously reported income, rather than a default income of $39,000. The change is expected to reap $58.8 million for the Government through reduced government expenditure on family payments.

Thanks for posting this. This is yet another example of the Labour Government introducing measures that will support systemic abuse of children, furthermore it would appear to be very much in tune with the trend of the Labour Government that is introducing measures with little, if any, thought of the ramifications, just thoughts about the monetary figure that can be reaped. Such a change would be a green card for those with low previous incomes to not supply tax returns and benefit from such a history. We have also seen the Labour Government introduce (re-introduce) legislation that rewards contravention of court orders and thus child abuse.
has everyone seen how that article was titled in the Australian today… seems Caroline Overington has a new sidekick (Patricia Karvelas).

"Labor to hit deadbeat dads for child support"

"Julia Gillard will target deadbeat dads who do not lodge tax returns and avoid paying child support"

good unbiased reporting on show!
havent seen it , but do they mention what happens if the so called deadbeat dads  do lodge and it is shown that despite these deadbeat dads constant advising CSA of massive overpayment due to CSO increasing payment amounts at COA and CSA's inaction That there is infact a massive overpayment running into 1000's of dollars or even what happens if the payer proves he is not the father or if CSA registered a case whilst the parents were still together etc.

I'm guessing they do not mention this nor do they mention that they constantly ask the payer to gift the monies to the person denying access so they can collect more CS

You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cant fool all of the people all of  the time unless they work for CSA and youre a Payee:)
I am on holidays and am about to go out to shopping centres where the candidates are stalking/touting for votes and going to ask a few pointed questions on some matters of public policy.    
Bigred said
I am on holidays and am about to go out to shopping centres where the candidates are stalking/touting for votes and going to ask a few pointed questions on some matters of public policy.    

Good idea, they only seem to come out of the woodwork at election time , post what they said.

I sought of feel it will be like beating your head against a brick wall.

If I spot one I will do the same.
I just read the whole article and gotta say that the child support emphasis on lodging tax returns is only one part of the story. I have concerns about the mandatory health checks they want to introduce.

I agree with what you are all saying however my advice to all is that you should be in control of your finances and informed on C$A etc… issues so there are no surprises come tax time. There is really no excuse to delay filing a tax return. Find a good accountant and pay them to help you sort everything out. It might cost a lot but will be one of your best investments.

We need to identify a number of issues that are causing much concern and are clearly unfair, propose solutions and make lots of noise about it.

Some of the Child Support issues that I think need to be addressed are:

* Majority carer paying child support.

* Changes in post separation circumstances (baby with new partner) incurring higher liabilities on paying parent.

* Not allowing step-children to be deemed dependants for payers.

* The idea that children's post separation lifestyle should be maintained (private school fees) despite that it is not viable for one income to support two households where it used to support one.

* C$A making decisions that should be made by a court or more rigid tribunal than the SSAT (change of assessment process) Especially when we have to deal with C$A's collection mentality and pay bonus scheme for greater collection results.

* For Family Assistance - Using biological parents income for calculating family benefits rather than the adults that happen to live under the same roof as the children.

I'm sure you can come up with more issues but I believe the issues I've listed are causing a lot of problems for people.
* Compulsory DNA testing at birth, so the correct father appears on the Birth Certificate.

*Compulsory DNA testing for any Child Support claim, not just based on what the Biological Mother claims.

* Basic cost of a child at a fixed rate not one based on incomes.

* Both parents have an equal responsibility to support there children. Not like we have now where the Payee is almost encouraged not to contribute and the Payer is propping up the other house.

* Fair and equal treatment by staff at CSA of the Payer.

* CSA Staff that are trained and actually have an understanding of what they are doing in respect to the law.

* That 50-50 care is in fact 50-50 care where each household is responsible for there half of the child.

* Remove the CSA bonus system for screwing the payer of every dollar.

* Remove the reduction to Family Assistance for every dollar from the Payer reduces FA by 50 cents thereby making it a true child support scheme not one that is seen as reducing cost to the taxpayer.

* That the Payer is entitled to have a life other than being a source of cash and that this is taken into account.

A fairer system will most likely result in children being better cared for, will result in the biological parents being held responsible. Imagine how I feel at age 50 that the last 16 years of your life was a lie, that there is little hope of having a life, that there is little hope of recovering those years lost financially. The emotional torment is horrible. That the harder I work to try and better my life the more I have to pay and the less there is for my future ie paying off my mortgage.  If you want to know what happened you can read my story here
 http://stepfamilyzone.com.au/forums/showthread.php?t=10705



oz_mick said

* Fair and equal treatment by staff at CSA of the Payer.

* CSA Staff that are trained and actually have an understanding of what they are doing in respect to the law.



And if we could just get these two points……

Yes I still believe in fairies  ;)

"Decide that you want it more than you are afraid of it."
Bill Cosby
 :thumbs:
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets