asked the Minister for Justice if he will carry out a full review of the scheme for the compensation of victims of criminal injuries to ensure that the victims of crime receive adequate compensation and support.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Criminal Injury Compensation.
26.
As the Deputy is aware it was stated in the national plan Building on Reality 1985-87 that the conditions of the criminal injuries compensation scheme would be reviewed with a view to reducing the impact of the scheme on the Exchequer. That review was undertaken and, following it, the Government sanctioned changes in the conditions of the scheme. The revised scheme was laid before the House on 18 March 1986. I do not intend to undertake any further review of the conditions of the scheme at present or in the near future.
Is the Minister aware that the compensation for pain and suffering has been removed from this scheme? As Minister for Justice with responsibility for victims of crime, is he not anxious to ensure that this compensation would be available for the victims? Is the Minister also aware the victims' support groups depend very much on this compensation as the main remedy which they can offer to victims of crime, particularly where there is personal injury involved? Would the Minister not consider reviewing the scheme with a view to providing adequate compensation to the victims of crime?
The Deputy may take it that I am fully aware of the terms of the revised scheme that I laid before the House on 18 March last. I indicated briefly here, and at greater length on earlier occasions, the reasons why that review was carried out. I mentioned in my original response that one of the main concerns was the impact on the Exchequer. As I said, a review was carried out recently. A revised scheme was laid before the House and it is now in operation. I have no plans to review the scheme again so soon after the revised scheme came into operation. I differ with the groups that see this kind of compensation as the main support that they can offer to victims of crime. It is not. This type of compensation is offered to victims independently of victim support groups which have a completely different role to play in supporting the victims of crime in other ways.
The Minister might check with them again and he will find that it is one of the main introductions that they make for victims of crime to show them where the State cares about them. It is through this scheme that the State offers this care. The Minister has cut back the care which it offers. Is the Minister aware that in the North of Ireland people are still compensated for pain and suffering? I know that the Minister is always very conscious of maintaining equity between here and the North of Ireland. If a citizen goes to the aid of a member of the RUC in the North and is injured he will receive compensation under the scheme there. If he goes to the aid of a member of the Garda Síochána he will not now, since I April, receive compensation for pain and suffering, under the Minister's revised scheme? Does the Minister not think that this is a somewhat ridiculous situation? Would he review it and change that system?
I commend the Deputy's concern for equity as between this country and Northern Ireland, a concern which he did not show particularly well over the last eight weeks or so.
The Minister did not give a very satisfactory answer. Could he not show some concern for the victims of crime in the Twenty-six Counties for whom he is responsible?
Question Time is over. I am now moving on to item No. 26.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the unsatisfactory situation regarding bovine disease eradication.
I will communicate with the Deputy.