asked the Minister for Justice if he proposes to reintroduce the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal; if not, the proposals, if any, he has to help, aid or compensate victims of violent crime; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal.
1.
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal are fully operational. They were set up in 1974 to administer the scheme of compensation for personal injuries criminally inflicted and a provision of £3,200,000 has been made in the 1987 Estimates to enable them to make compensation awards to persons who have suffered personal injury as a direct result of violent crime.
There was an element of discussion close by me and I did not hear fully the Minister's reply but I took him to say that the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal are currently fully operational and have been given an allowance of £3.2 million for this year. I am sorry to have to deal with it in this way, but is that what the Minister said?
I will read the answer again.
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal are fully operational. They were set up in 1974 to administer the scheme of compensation for personal injuries criminally inflicted and a provision of £3,200,000 has been made in the 1987 Estimates to enable them to make compensation awards to persons who have suffered personal injury as a direct result of violent crime.
I am sorry I had to ask for the reply to be repeated because I could not believe my ears at what I thought I heard. Indeed, I heard correctly the suggestion that they are fully operational. The Minister knows ——
Ceist, a Theachta.
—— that the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal have been effectively rendered at nought to deal with injuries that arose as a result of crime since March 1986. For that reason I ask the Minister if that is why the Minister's party undertook in their manifesto in the last election to review legislation in regard to support for victims of crime. With regard to the question, will the Minister address himself as to what plans he and his Department have to restore the terms of reference of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal so that victims of current crime and crime that has occurred since March 1986 will be compensated? It is totally disingenuous of the Minister who knows that they are dealing with a backlog ——
I appeal for the co-operation of the Deputy and of other Deputies, too, for brevity.
In brief, then, the question was tabled by Deputy Mac Giolla and is directed towards the Government's plans to deal with currently inflicted injuries to victims of crime. What do they propose to do about that?
My reply was in direct response to the wording of the question tabled by Deputy Mac Giolla which suggests that he is under the impression that the tribunal had been abolished.
They have been, almost.
Order, please. Let us hear the Minister's reply.
It would appear that the Deputy is confusing the abolition with the change in the scheme which was introduced last year. The previous Government considered that the scheme's compensation for personal injuries criminally inflicted was proving very costly to the Exchequer and decided that the Minister for Justice should review the conditions of the scheme with a view to reducing its impact on the Exchequer. Following consideration of the review of the scheme, the Government approved the revised scheme in January 1986 and in the revised scheme compensation may not be paid in respect of pain and suffering attributable to injuries sustained on or after 1 April 1986. Compensation in respect of injuries sustained before that date is paid in accordance with the terms of the original scheme. There is a substantial backlog of claims for pre-1986 injuries awaiting attention at present. Approximately £23 million has been paid in compensation since the inception of the scheme, but the provision in the Estimates in recent years has been below the estimated real cost of the applications involved. This year, there is a provision, as I said, of £3.2 million for 1987.
In the Programme for National Recovery mentioned by Deputy McCartan there is a proposal to review legislation in regard to support for victims of crime. However, in the present financial climate there would appear to be no hope, this year certainly, of reverting to the scheme as it was prior to 1 April 1986.
The Minister will recall the great hoo-ha and hue and cry that his party made in this House when the previous Government varied the terms of the original scheme and that his party's then spokesman on Justice, Deputy Michael Woods, gave a firm commitment which is recorded in the Official Report during the debate on that amending legislation to restore the status quo on the question of providing compensation for victims. Does he intend to stand by that commitment given by Deputy Woods on the occasion which is recorded in the Official Report? Will Fianna Fáil stand by it?
Of course, the answer to the Deputy's question is "yes". I recall the comments made at the time the scheme was revised. Equally I recall the support given to the scheme by Deputy Taylor as a loyal backbench supporter of the Government of the day who revised the scheme.
The Minister's party are there now.
Would the Minister agree that the effect on the present scheme in operation is that the persons who is raped, mutilated, loses an arm or a limb or the use of any faculty of their body or whatever can recover nothing unless they can show they are at the loss of out of pocket expenses such as medical fees or loss of earnings? Would the Minister agree that that is a scandal in circumstances in which society compensates personal injuries victims of road traffic accidents involving uninsured vehicles out of the fund especially created for that purpose? Will the Minister agree that this is a scandal when gardaí in the course of their duty are compensated for pain and suffering but ordinary individuals who through no fault of their own are set upon by criminals receive nothing unless they can show that they have lost wages or incurred medical expenses? Is the Minister really willing to stand over that and say that budgetary restraints require that that should carry on?
There is a proposal in the Programme for National Recovery to review legislation in regard to support for victims of crime but the Deputy must have regard to the present financial climate. Until such time as this improves I cannot hold out much hope for reverting to the scheme as it was prior to 1 April 1986.
(Interruptions.)
Order. I cannot allow this matter to develop into a debate. I am calling Deputy Sean Barrett and then Deputy McCartan for a very brief supplementary question.
Can we expect the new legislation by the end of this year so that it will be available in 1988?
The situation, as I see it, is that until such time as the financial climate improves I will not be in a position to reinstate the scheme as it was prior to April 1986.
There is no commitment then.
I am giving the reality.
Of course in 1986 it was different.
In 1986 Deputy Taylor supported the situation. Now he wants it reversed. At least Deputy McDowell was arguing genuinely in a straightforward manner.
The Minister told the Irish people he would reinstate it.
It is on the record of the House. That was the Minister's commitment.
(Interruptions.)
Would the Minister agree in principle that it is desirable that the scheme should be restored at least to its previous level of operation and that the expenditure on the part of this State of £2 million, on average, annually since its inception is a small price to pay in discharging the social obligation of this or any Government to the innocent victims of crime?
The figure of £2 million on average a year mentioned by Deputy McCartan is inaccurate. If the Deputy wants the figures for the last seven or eight years, which I have, I will convey them to him in due course.
It is the Minister's own figure.
I am talking about the past ten years.
£20 million over ten years is £2 million per annum.
I am telling the Deputy what is the present expenditure. This year it is £3.2 million——
A small price to pay.
Order, please, Deputy.
And for the benefit of other Deputies, last year it was £2.6 million, so there has been an increase. I might repeat, for the benefit of Deputy McCartan, that it is my intention to review the legislation in regard to support for victims of crime when the financial climate allows.