Login
Maurice Blackburn: More institutions must join redress scheme
National compensation and social justice firm Maurice Blackburn has welcomed the news that more major institutions are joining the redress scheme for survivors of institutional child sexual abuse, but notes there is still a way to go to ensure all victims are covered.
Jerome Doraisamy
The Anglican Church, Scouts, Salvation Army and YMCA have all joined the national redress scheme, and Maurice Blackburn abuse law principal Michelle James said the growing number of institutions opting-in to the scheme was an important step for survivors.
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
“While many survivors may ultimately choose to pursue claims directly against various institutions, it is important that they have a choice to also seek compensation via the redress scheme if they wish and that institutions ensure that option is available,” she said.
“It is pleasing to see that the number of institutions opting-in is now steadily growing, and it is critical that all relevant institutions declare their intention to follow suit as soon as possible so that survivors have certainty about what their options are when the redress scheme commences.”
But further steps are still needed, she argued.
State, territory and federal governments must be prepared to step up and take action if institutions refuse to support the scheme, including not hesitating to strip the charity tax deductibility status of any institutions that delay doing the right thing.
“Each year, charitable institutions reap multiple billions in state and federal concessions, with the federal government alone forgoing almost $2 billion in annual revenue to offer charity deductibility status on donations,” she noted.
“Many of these charitable institutions have failed to protect children in their care, yet they continue to benefit from generous tax concessions and those institutions need to be given a clear message that they must meet their responsibilities or lose their tax concessions.”
The proposed scheme as currently drafted continues to fall short of what is needed to appropriately meet the needs of survivors, Ms James argued, and the momentum for implementation of a redress scheme is growing with almost all states now signed on, as well as in increasing number of institutions.
“That’s a positive development, but we must also not lose sight of the fact that the scheme as it stands currently is at odds with the recommendations of the royal commission on a number of key aspects, including capped amounts proposed for compensation and time frames for deciding offers of redress,” she said.
“It’s also important that survivors are properly aware of their rights in joining the scheme, including understanding that they have a right to pursue their own claims — the redress scheme provides choice, but it is not the only choice and survivors need to be aware of this in making the best decision for them and their circumstances.”
It is a choice that all survivors must have, she concluded, irrespective of what institution or government has caused them harm.
