find the latest legal job
Monash University Director Workplace Relations
Category: Industrial Relations and Employment Law | Location: All Melbourne VIC
· Exceptional senior leadership role
View details
Personal Injury Lawyer - Melbourne Eastern Suburbs - 2-5 years PAE
Category: Personal Injury Law | Location: Lilydale VIC 3140
· Fulfilling role as part of a small team in a positive workplace
View details
Legal Counsel
Category: Banking and Finance Law | Location: Sydney CBD, Inner West & Eastern Suburbs Sydney NSW
· In-house opportunity · Be part of our engine for success in a high growth business
View details
Trainer/Assessor Diploma of Legal Services
Category: Other | Location: Liverpool NSW 2170
· 3 Days Per Week · 9am - 4pm
View details
Corporate and Commercial Partner
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: Adelaide SA 5000
· Adelaide CBD · Join a leading Adelaide commercial law firm
View details
ALA ‘extremely disappointed’ by child abuse compo rejection

ALA ‘extremely disappointed’ by child abuse compo rejection

Andrew MORRISON

The federal government is failing victims of institutional child abuse by saying ‘no’ to a national compensation scheme, says the Australian Lawyers Alliance.

Dr Andrew Morrison SC (pictured), spokesperson for the ALA, said the government’s apparent abdication of responsibility was “very troubling”.

“The federal government took the responsibility for setting up a Royal Commission to investigate this issue of institutional child sexual abuse, yet it won’t support the provisional recommendations of its own inquiry,” Dr Morrison said.

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse released a paper in January recommending a $4.37 billion scheme over 10 years, with the government covering about $2 billion.

Out of this contribution, $582 million would be used to cover compensation that institutions could not afford. Private institutions would be required to contribute $2.4 billion.

The scheme assumed victims would receive on average $65,000 each, although this has been viewed as an underestimate of costs by some advocate groups.

In its blunt, two-page submission, prepared by the Australian Government Solicitor, the government claimed the scheme was too expensive and difficult to implement.

The submission argues that “the institutions in which child sexual abuse occurred should bear responsibility for providing redress”, rather than the government.

It suggested that the time a national scheme would take to negotiate would frustrate abuse victims and rejected the idea that the federal government should be a "funder of last resort".

Chief royal commissioner Justice Peter McClellan said the commissioners were disappointed that a structural approach, which would “ensure a just, fair and consistent outcome for all victims”, was not favoured by the government.

The commission also received submissions from state governments, with the South Australian and Tasmanian governments siding with the federal government in opposition and the NSW and Victorian governments offering support.

The ALA has criticised the federal government’s submission for not addressing the issue of limitation periods.

“One step that the Commonwealth could take is in negotiating a harmonisation of retrospective abolition of limitation periods for survivors of abuse across the country,” Dr Morrison said.

“This would be an important first step in securing justice for victims, enabling access to sue at common law.”

The Victorian Government recently moved to abolish time limits on child abuse cases, making it easier for victims to seek legal redress.

 

 

Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network