Sadly Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his political cronies continue to wage war on the poor and vulnerable without exception.
This time it is victims of insitutional child sexual abuse they are trying to deny access to compensation and to unfairly limit the amount of compensation recommended by the Royal Commission into Insitutional Response to Child Sexual Abuse.
THE Federal Government
must explain how it capped National Redress Scheme payments to child sex
survivors at $150,000 rather than a recommended $200,000, said
a parliamentary committee left "deeply dissatisfied" when
it was unable to find an answer during a review of the scheme.
The $150,000 cap
was rammed into legislation after the Turnbull Government warned any push to
lift it would delay the scheme's implementation by 18 months.
But the committee's
unsuccessful attempts to solve the mystery has left survivors believing
$150,000 was chosen because it matched Anglican and Catholic maximum
payments, a joint select committee reviewing the scheme found.
"The committee is
deeply dissatisfied that the maximum payment amount has been reduced and that
no clear explanation has been provided about why this occurred or who advocated
for this reduction," the report released on Wednesday said.
"The committee has
tried to ascertain the reason for the reduction in the maximum payment and has
put this question to various witnesses, including Department of Social Services
and the Department of Human Services on numerous occasions.
However, apart
from acknowledging that $150,000 was the amount agreed to between the
Commonwealth, states, and territories, the committee has not received any
explanation or rationale about this discrepancy."
The committee, headed by
Senator Derryn Hinch with Newcastle MP Sharon Claydon as deputy chair, was
told more
than 3000 people had applied for redress by February 28 after its
launch on July 1, 2018, but only 88 cases were finalised, with fewer than 10
survivors paid between $100,000 and $150,000.
At least one person
received the maximum $150,000.
"The committee
recommends that the government clearly and openly explain how the maximum
payments came to be set at $150,000 rather than $200,000, and the rationale for
this decision," it said in
one of 29 recommendations. The committee recommended amending legislation
to lift the cap to $200,000.
The cross-party
committee made up of four Liberal members, three Labor, one Green and Senator
Hinch issued a damning assessment of parts of the redress scheme that
vary from recommendations by the Royal Commission into Institutional
Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in 2017.
They include an
assessment matrix that restricts maximum payments to penetrative child
sexual abuse, counselling capped at $5000 and excluding people with
serious criminal convictions or making applications from jail.
The criminal conviction
and jail exclusions would "disproportionately impact" Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples who made up almost one third of survivors
seen by royal commissioners during private sessions in jail.
"This is an
alarming statistic," the committee said.
Ms Claydon said the
Federal Government's deviation from royal commission recommendations without
sound evidence had been "to the detriment of the scheme and against the
interests of survivors".
BACKGROUND
On 20 June 2017 the House of Representatives
agreed to a Senate resolution that a joint select committee on oversight of the
implementation of redress related recommendations of the Royal Commission into
Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse be established following the
tabling of the final report of the Royal Commission.
Excerpts from Joint Committee's report:
Intrinsic to a
survivor's access to redress are the institutions responsible for the sexual
abuse and their decision to join the scheme. While all states and territories
are now participating in the scheme, there are no mechanisms to force private
institutions to join the scheme. Yet survivors will not be able to obtain
redress if the institution responsible for their abuse refuses to join the
scheme. This is both unfair and unacceptable. Plainly, more needs to be done to
pressure non-participating institutions to join the scheme, and provide survivors
with access to redress....
Central to the redress
scheme are the survivors. Wherever possible, the scheme should be an inclusive
scheme that does not exclude groups of survivors. Currently, certain groups of
survivors are either not eligible for redress or are subject to potentially
arbitrary decisions when seeking permission to apply for redress. The
government has suggested that some of these exclusions are necessary to protect
the scheme from particular risks, such as fraud, while others are necessary to
ensure the efficient administration of the scheme. These are not sufficient
justifications to unilaterally exclude large groups of survivors, who would
otherwise have a legitimate claim, from accessing redress.
Recommendation 14
8.94 The committee
recommends that the government clearly and openly explain how the maximum
payments came to be set at $150 000 rather than $200 000, and the rationale for
this decision.
Recommendation 15
8.95 In line with the
recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child
Sexual Abuse, the committee recommends that Commonwealth, state and territory
governments agree to increase the maximum redress payment from $150 000 to $200
000.
Recommendation 16
8.100 In line with the
recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child
Sexual Abuse, the committee recommends that Commonwealth, state and territory
governments implement a minimum payment of $10 000 for the monetary component
of redress, noting that in practice some offers may be lower than $10 000 after
relevant prior payments to the survivor by the responsible institution are
considered, or after calculating a non-participating institution's share of the
costs.
The full April 2019 Joint Standing Committee report can be read here.
NOTE:
The Anglican Diocese of Grafton on the NSW North Coast has now joined the National Redress Scheme.
No comments:
Post a Comment