HC Deb 23 March 1964 vol 692 cc32-5
The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Henry Brooke)

With permission, Sir, I would like to make a statement about compensation for victims of crimes of violence.

A White Paper setting out the Government's proposals is being published today; copies are in the Vote Office.

Briefly, the Secretary of State for Scotland and I propose to set up a Board composed of persons of appropriate legal experience, which will make ex gratia payments of compensation from moneys provided through a grant-in-aid. Compensation will take the form of lump sum payments and, subject to certain provisos, will be assessed on the basis of common law damages for personal injuries.

The White Paper sets out the procedure for making applications, and for enabling an applicant to claim a judicial hearing before three members of the Board if he is not satisfied with the initial decision. The Board will be expected to act in accordance with the principles and procedure laid down in the White Paper, if it is approved by Parliament, but subject to that will be fully responsible for deciding in each case whether compensation should rightly be paid, and, if so, what the amount should be.

When hon. Members have had time to study the White Paper, the House will no doubt wish to debate it. Then, if the scheme is approved, it will be brought into operation as speedily as possible. It will not require legislation.

This is an experimental scheme. It is also a pioneering one. Apart from New Zealand, no other country in the world has established arrangements for compensating the victims of crimes of violence, and, therefore, there is virtually no past experience to draw upon.

I believe that the scheme in the White Paper, while it includes essential safeguards against malicious abuse, will be found to fill a need which the public conscience has increasingly recognised.

Mr. G. Brown

May I, on behalf of not only this side of the House, but Members on both sides, welcome the Home Secretary's announcement that he has now overcome his previous feeling that the practical difficulties were too great to do this, but regret that it has taken him so long? Does he recall that my hon. Friends the Members for East Ham, North (Mr. Prentice) and Lewisham, South (Mr. C. Johnson) have introduced Private Members' Bills to deal with the very thing which the right hon. Gentleman felt could not be met? However, obviously, we cannot discuss the scheme until we see what is in the White Paper.

There is one very important question. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, or the Leader of the House, when it is proposed to put the necessary Motion before the House so that we may debate and approve the scheme? Is it intended to do this in the lifetime of this Parliament, or in the very near future; or is this another statement to be acted upon after the election?

Mr. Brooke

I can certainly say that it is intended to debate this scheme within the life of this Parliament.

The right hon. Gentleman has perhaps forgotten that very shortly after I became Home Secretary I said that I was in favour of a scheme of this kind and very much hoped that I should be the Home Secretary who would introduce it. There are great practical difficulties here, as evidenced by the fact that the four bodies which advised the Government on this all recommended different and contradictory schemes. I believe that we have worked out a better scheme than any of them.

Sir J. Langford-Holt

Does what my right hon. Friend has just said mean that no effort is to be made to recover either the full amount or any part of it from the responsible criminal? If so, why did he reject this point?

Mr. Brooke

The White Paper makes it clear, and I have made it clear elsewhere, that, until I achieve my object of securing that all prisoners who are fit to do so shall do a full week's work in prison, in is not practicable to apply a scheme of holding back part of their earnings for compensation to the victims. However, when my hon. Friend reads the White Paper he will see that that is a practical possibility in the future, as soon as we can build up the system of work in prisons.

Mr. Grimond

I welcome this scheme. I appreciate that we must wait for the White Paper for more details, but may I ask two Questions?

First, can the Secretary of State give an assurance that the procedure for applying for grant will be as simple as possible? I take it that this will not be required to be argued before the tribunal by lawyers.

Secondly, may I follow up the question which has already been asked? Considering that every weekend crimes of violence are perpetrated from which criminals salt away enormous sums of money, surely it should be possible to recover something from them. Is it impossible to devise a scheme by which, if necessary, prisoners are entitled to earn more in prison in cases where a grant of this kind is given? If a man is serving a long sentence, is it impossible to devise a scheme by which he should make some contribution?

Mr. Brooke

I hope that all the arrangements for applying will be kept as simple as possible. The right hon. Member will realise that there must be effective safeguards against abuse.

The scheme makes no difference what-ever to the right of the victim to bring an action against the criminal, and, if the criminal has salted away a lot of money, that may be very effective. But there is also a very large number of people, guilty of crimes of violence, who do not have a substantial amount of money behind them. We must put first things first, and I must first of all build up the system of work in prisons.

Sir Knox Cunningham

Is there any machinery for appeal under this scheme if the Board decides adversely against a victim who wishes to get an ex gratin payment?

Mr. Brooke

There is no system of appeal from the Board, but when my hon. and learned Friend reads the White Paper he will see that if the initial decision is not satisfactory to the applicant he will be entitled to a judicial hearing before three members of the Board.

Mr. Fletcher

Will the right hon. Gentleman clear up two points? Is it clear from what he has said that this scheme will apply to victims of crimes of violence against property as well as against the person? Can claims be made whether or not the criminal is ever brought to justice?

Mr. Brooke

The scheme does not cover compensation for loss of property. All those who have expressed views in public on this have agreed that the need is for compensation for personal suffering.

The criminal does not need to be brought to justice or identified. The claim can be made, and, if it is genuine, it will be accepted.