Sir, this Bill will improve family Court proceedings by reducing acrimony in divorce proceedings, enhancing the judge-led approach and facilitating enforcement of maintenance orders. I have three points to make.
My first point is on the enhanced maintenance enforcement process (MEP), which simplifies the enforcement of maintenance orders.
First, the new section 86 allows the Maintenance Enforcement Officer (MEO) to seek Court orders for banks or prescribed third parties to provide information. Can the Minister share who these prescribed third parties may be?
Second, can the Minister share what are the contemplated timelines that the MEO will seek from the Court for banks and prescribed third parties? Family lawyers have shared with me that banks take time to respond to their requests for information. Can the Minister share if the banks have been consulted on their ability to respond within the contemplated timelines?
Third, the new section 88 allows an MEO to conduct conciliation sessions to help both parties agree on maintenance. Given that conciliation sessions could be used by a party to delay proceedings, can the Minister share whether there is a limit on the number of conciliation sessions that the MEO can conduct? Can the Minister share what are the consequences for a party if they fail to attend or are clearly not participating in good faith on the conciliation?
Fourth, MEOs will be empowered to obtain information from parties and to submit a report to the Court. Can the Minister share what training will be provided to the MEOs to make discovery of the relevant documents and assess the parties’ actual financial positions? Can the Minister elaborate on what the MEO’s report is supposed to set out and whether it will be provided to both parties? Can the Minister also share whether there will be a standard rubric for MEOs to assess parties’ financial positions in preparing the report?
Fifth, the Court may vary the original maintenance orders in the MEP. Applicants may think twice before applying under the MEP if their application may lead to their original maintenance orders being varied. Can the Minister clarify if it is only under exceptional circumstances that the Court will vary the original maintenance orders in the MEP? If so, can the Minister share what factors a Court should take into account before varying the original maintenance orders in the MEP?
My second point is on the attachment of earnings Court orders. These Court orders direct a party’s employer to deduct a portion of maintenance from their salary to make direct payment to the other party. The new section 91H allows the Court to determine what payments to a person are earnings that can be directed for the payment of maintenance. The relevant sections set out obligations relating to the respondent’s employer and employment when an attachment of earnings order is made. Can the Minister clarify whether earnings from freelance or gig economy work can be deemed earnings? If such earnings can be subject to an attachment of earnings order, can the Minister clarify how the obligations relating to traditional employers or employment apply where the respondent is engaged in gig work?
My third point is on financial counselling for couples undergoing divorce. In the public consultation for the RERF Committee’s recommendations, members of the public asked to build up capabilities in financial counselling to help divorcees better manage their new finances. The new section 91(b) makes progress in this area. It provides the Court with powers to order a party to undergo financial counselling as part of maintenance enforcement proceedings.
But counselling works best when it starts earlier, long before divorce applications are even filed. Indeed, the RERF Committee said in its 2019 report that sorting out finances early when a marriage has broken down is important to avoid disputes and distress later.
MSF may be able to identify families at high-risk of divorce through the various social service agencies and FSCs. Can the Minister share how MinLaw and MSF are working together at an upstream stage to help families access financial counselling even before the divorce application is filed?
Also, given that parents with children under 21 years old must undergo the Mandatory Co-Parenting Programme (CPP) before filing for divorce, can Minister of State Sun Xueling share if there are plans to incorporate mandatory financial counselling and planning as part of the CPP?
Can the Minister also clarify where an MEO refers parties for financial assistance after reviewing documents submitted by the parties, will the matter still proceed on to conciliation and hearing? Notwithstanding these clarifications, Sir, I stand in support of the Bill.
Watch the speech here.