Child Sex Abuse: Australian Government to Work on National Redress Scheme

By Melissa Davey
The Guardian
January 29, 2016

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jan/29/child-sex-abuse-australian-government-to-work-on-national-redress-scheme

A former Brisbane Grammar student, who cannot be identified, outside the Magistrates Court in Brisbane for a child sexual abuse hearing. The Australian government says it recognises the importance of implementing a national approach to redress as soon as possible. Photograph: Dan Peled/AAP

The federal government will work with the state and territory governments to implement and fund a redress scheme for victims of child sexual abuse by July next year.

While individual states and territories will be responsible for redress that applies to institutions within their jurisdiction, the federal government will work with the jurisdictions to ensure the redress is consistent across the country, according to a statement from the department of the attorney general, George Brandis.

The royal commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse made its final recommendations for victim compensation through a national redress scheme in September, saying it was essential to ensure justice for survivors of abuse within religious organisations, sporting clubs, schools and other institutions.

The commission said the government should announce its willingness to adopt such a scheme by the end of 2015, but victims had been left waiting.

In a statement released on Friday by Brandis and the social services minister, Christian Porter, the government said it recognised the importance of implementing a national approach to redress “as quickly as possible”.

“Survivors want redress to assist with the healing process,” the statement said.

“We will soon commence discussions with the states and territories to carefully work through the many complex issues to achieve an outcome for survivors as soon as possible.

“The Commonwealth’s starting point for these discussions is that governments and non-government institutions should take essential responsibility for the wrongs committed under their care.

“The Commonwealth’s general view – to be advised by the impending negotiations – is that, while substantial responsibility for the operation of the redress process will reside with the jurisdiction in which the offending institution was or is located, it is essential all governments commit to core principles and processes for the assessment and payment of redress.”

But Victoria’s attorney-general, Martin Pakula, said in a statement that he had expected a more substantial response from Brandis than what was issued on Friday. There appeared to have been no advancement on the position on redress foreshadowed by the Commonwealth government at the Law Crime and Community Safety Council in November, his statement said.

“Given that almost three months have passed since that meeting, state and territory governments had a legitimate expectation that the Commonwealth was preparing a more substantial response than what is apparent from today’s correspondence,” Pakula said.

“Victoria remains prepared to work cooperatively with the Commonwealth on this important issue. However, we recognise that timely progress on this issue is a high priority for survivors of institutional child sexual abuse.”

Pakula called on the government to “spell-out” its role in delivering the national redress scheme.

Guardian Australia understands the government is working towards the commission’s recommendation that any scheme be implemented no later than 1 July 2017.

Leonie Sheedy is head of the Care Leavers Australia Network, a support and advocacy group for those abused in children’s homes, foster care and other institutions.

She said she was pleased the government had agreed that a redress scheme was necessary, but was cautious about responding until the details were made clear about how it would be implemented and how compensation would be applied.

“There needs to be retrospective redress included in the scheme for the families of those victims who die waiting for it,” Sheedy said.

“We need to find out how any scheme would translate to people who are victims before we can say how we feel about it.”

The CEO of the Catholic church’s Truth, Justice and Healing Council, Francis Sullivan, said he was disappointed the redress scheme was not in a later stage of development. The lack of details announced on Friday also made it difficult for victims to respond, he said.

Advertisement

“This is, at best, a tentative start to what has been a very long wait for child sexual abuse survivors,” Sullivan said.

“The Commonwealth and the states have had Commissioner [Justice Peter] McClellan’s recommendations on redress for many months and I think survivors could have expected a bit more from today’s statement.

“Despite the lack of detail and the delays, it is good news that a process, driven by the Commonwealth, is now in place and survivors can expect something soon. What will be important is that the relevant ministers in each government take direct responsibility for their state’s response to the process.

“It cannot be left to bureaucrats and treasury officials to decide how, as a nation, we provide redress to victims of child sexual abuse.”

Abuse claim expert with Shine Lawyers, Adair Donaldson, said a well-planned and executed redress scheme would provide an effective fall-back position for abuse survivors who would be unlikely to succeed in a common law claim, or who could not bear to put themselves through the litigation process.

“Without the option of a redress scheme available to abuse survivors, some individuals would lose all opportunities to be compensated for what they’ve been through,” Donaldson said.

“We believe that a redress scheme would be a less invasive, cost effective and more time-effective solution for those individuals who deserve recompense. It’s important that survivors are given both options.”