Vol. 430 No. 7
18 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Justice the number and value of outstanding awards by the Criminal Injuries Tribunal awaiting payment; whether the financial allocation for the year 1992-93 will permit all of these outstanding awards to be paid and also the payment of fresh awards as they come due; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
The position at the end of April this year was that 219 awards, having a total value of £2,590,896 were awaiting payment by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal.
As in the case of all public services, funding for criminal injuries compensation has to be allocated on the basis of requirement, competing demands for other services and the overall budgetary situation each year. The sum provided in this year's Estimates, having had full regard to the foregoing criteria, was £1 million which, regrettably, means of course that all payments now outstanding will not actually be made in the current year.
I am very conscious of the desirability of paying these arrears as soon as financial circumstances permit and will be keeping the funding for the tribunal under review in order to achieve this. It is worth mentioning in this context that over the five year period 1988 to 1992 provision was made for the payment of 2,362 awards by the tribunal amounting to £16.8 million.
Is it the intention of the Minister of State to update this scheme so that at some stage in the near future claims will be paid on a current year basis and people will not have to wait endlessly before such awards are made? In any given year it should be possible to estimate the amount to be paid. Will there always be a large backlog in this area?
It is a question of finance. I understand that there is a delay of 31 months. Claims settled in November 1991 are now being paid. We are conscious of this and, I stress, are sensitive to it. It is being kept under review by my Department. I wish we had a sufficient allocation to pay out all outstanding claims because I have had representations from constituents of mine about this. We hope to receive the necessary resources by way of the Estimates over the next few years to ensure that this is brought up-to-date; that is our intention and commitment.
Given that there is a 31-month delay can the Minister inform the House whether he has a target figure in mind, that is in terms of months, or a minimum delay period?
Of course, my target is to bring the matter right up to date, if at all possible, which will be dependent on the allocation we receive in the Estimates. I have to say I regret that there is a 31-month delay. I believe the position had improved somewhat in recent years but may have fallen back again recently. I reiterate that my target is to bring it right up to date. We shall be seeking the necessary resources to do so.
Bearing in mind that we are no longer dealing with penal suffering compensation but "out of pocket" expenses, would the Minister agree that effectively what is happening is that the State is borrowing for two and a half years — in fact now for longer than that — compulsorily from the victims of crime; that they have chosen this group of the community from whom to borrow money, use it, while withholding it from them? For example, why do they not do so in the case of pensions or in any other areas? What is it about victims of crime that renders them people from whom the State can borrow compulsorily?
Deputy Michael McDowell is right in saying that payment is no longer made for pain and suffering; that was abolished in April 1986. We regret the delay in payments. I wish I had money with which to pay all the competing demands being made on my Department, as I am sure does every other Minister. We are doing our best to bring it up to date. We are sensitive about it. The Minister will be making appropriate representations to her Cabinet colleagues when the Estimates are being prepared for next year.
That concludes questions for today.
