HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-11-30 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

VICTIMS OF CRIME (COMPENSATION LIMITS) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 28 September 2011.)

The Hon. S.G. WADE (20:35): I rise to speak on the Victims of Crime (Compensation Limits) Amendment Bill 2011 and indicate that the Liberal Party will be proposing some amendments to this bill. It has been widely acknowledged in the community and the media that the current victims' compensation scheme has become woefully out of date.

I am on the public record, together with a number of other honourable members of this place, highlighting that fact. The payments to victims of crime from the fund are not intended to be a form of reparation or actual compensation for suffering but instead are an acknowledgement of suffering a loss experienced by victims of crime.

The stated objectives of the act are to give statutory recognition to victims of crime and the harm they suffer from criminal offending, to establish principles governing how victims of crime are to be treated by public agencies and officials, to help victims of crime recover from the effects of criminal offending and to advance their welfare in other ways, and to provide from public funds limited monetary compensation to the victims most directly affected by criminal offending.

All of these objectives are furthered by the collection of the victims of crime levy which has been increased on three separate occasions under this government in 2007, 2009 and 2011. The last increase actually doubled the previous levy amount, yet there has not been any increase in the amount allocated to victim support.

It can be difficult for victims of crime to recover from their traumatic experience of criminal behaviour. Indeed, sometimes the additional stress and heartache of reliving the experience through the courts or investigations is beyond the level of suffering that victims can endure. Hence, the victims of crime compensation scheme aims to be a less confronting way to provide some additional support in facing the future as a victim of crime.

The predecessor scheme to the Victims of Crime Fund—the criminal injuries compensation scheme—was first introduced in 1970. The maximum payable was increased from $1,000 in 1970 to $2,000 in 1974, to $10,000 in 1978, to $20,000 in 1987 and to $50,000 in 1990. After a series of five increases over 20 years, we are now in a situation where it has been static for 21 years. The $50,000 maximum award has not increased since September 1990.

If this maximum payment level had been increased with inflation, it would have reached $85,000 over the two decades to 2011. Comparing the maximum payouts with comparable schemes in other states and territories does South Australia no pride. Queensland and Western Australia have maximum thresholds of $75,000; Victoria has $60,000; and South Australia is on par with New South Wales, Tasmania and the ACT.

The trauma experienced by individuals is not as easily quantifiable as financial loss. Some people who have suffered financial loss as a result of crime are able to readily access compensation up to $50,000. However, it is rare for a person to receive more than a few thousand dollars for non-financial loss or suffering. Quantifying this loss has always been a difficult venture and, as such, the courts have tried to apply a sliding scale through a points system. Unfortunately, the effect of this points system has been to limit compensation to amounts between $1,000 to $12,000 for non-financial suffering. The average payment from the fund across all categories is $10,500.

Victims of crime levies are collected solely for the purpose of supporting victims of crime through either compensation payments or grants to organisations like the Victim Support Service. According to the government's own estimates, the balance of the victims of crime fund is expected to grow from $79 million to $181 million by 2013-14. This is a staggering amount, due largely to the increase in victims of crime levies I noted previously. It is astonishing that this government has remained silent as to its plans for the future of the fund and is willing to deprive victims of crime of support when such a significant amount has been amassed.

In contrast with this rapid growth, the expenditure from the fund remains relatively constant. The fund currently expends close to $19 million per year, with $18.5 million being expended in the 2010-11 financial year and $18.9 million being budgeted for the 2011-12 financial year. According to government estimates, only mild increases are anticipated each year in the forward estimates.

Based on my calculations, if we doubled the maximum payment, as proposed by this bill, the additional strain on the fund would be $11.9 million per year. That takes into account the following assumptions: firstly, that the half of victims' compensation payments spent above the average is all paid at the maximum payment and that those claims will receive the maximum at the higher threshold and, secondly, that the average payment doubles. I consider that those are quite prudent assumptions and there is a strong a chance that less than that amount would need to be expended per year.

The fund itself is highly unlikely to have any problems, with moderate increases in expenditure within the foreseeable future, unless the government decides at some stage to use the money allocated for another purpose or there is a sudden and significant increase in victims of serious crime at higher than normal rates. The fund will continue to grow and be replenished by victims of crime levies.

One element of the bill that the opposition cannot support is the retrospective application of the proposed increased payments to victims of crime committed before the commencement of the provisions in this bill, or even before the commencement of the Victims of Crimes Act's predecessor, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1978. It is a matter of basic legislative principle that you do not apply laws retrospectively, essentially rewriting the historical conditions of the time. I understand the purpose of including this in the bill is to capture some South Australians seeking compensation under a statutory redress scheme. We do not think this is appropriate in this instance.

The Liberal opposition will also be seeking to amend the maximum payment outlined in the bill from $100,000 to $85,000. As I indicated, based on our calculations of inflation and CPI, the real value of the payment has not doubled from the time it was introduced in 1990, but would be worth approximately $85,000. We are happy to have our calculations reviewed. We do, however, support the regular indexing of this payment in line with CPI and will be supporting that change.

If the government opposes the increase of payments from the fund, it must answer one simple question: what does it intend to do with $181 million in the fund, given that by the point it reaches that amount only $19.8 million will be spent each year? Why has the government persistently increased the fines in the name of victims but given nothing back to victims? These are the questions confronting the government, and I await the government's justification for why victims in South Australia have faced almost a decade of neglect regarding compensation from the fund.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M. Gazzola.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT