Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 6 Hansard (23 May) . . Page.. 1674 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Mr Speaker, in looking back at some of the payments made under the ACT criminal injuries compensation scheme to residents of the ACT, I think, to put it mildly, there could be a very generous element in the way in which many of those payments have been made. I give a few examples of some of the payments that have been made in recent days. One applicant was jeered and laughed at by the occupants of a car. The car driver abused the applicant. The abuse included words to the effect, "I am going to blow your [expletive deleted] head off". The applicant became frightened, had nightmares and occasional headaches and was awarded $5,500 for pain and suffering.

Mr De Domenico: Someone calls that out to me once a day. I could get lots of money.

MR HUMPHRIES: We would all have massive headaches in this place, Mr Speaker, if that were the case. Another applicant was at a nightclub and was intoxicated. He did not remember being assaulted but recalled waking up in Woden Valley Hospital with injuries to his jaw, mouth and face. He also suffered dizziness and drowsiness. He was unable to work for three days. He was awarded $3,500. An applicant involved in a game of touch football got into a brawl. A punch in the face left him with a small scar. He was awarded $3,000 for pain and suffering. I could go on, Mr Speaker, but the concern that I have had about the criminal injuries compensation scheme - I might say in fairness that it was also the concern of the previous Government, because the then Attorney-General spoke to me about it - is that a rising number of cases of injury for which compensation is being awarded are outside the original intention of the scheme.

I should say that the other side of that coin is that, when we make very large or significant payments to people who could be said to have trivial injuries or a trivial basis for application, we deny money in the scheme to those people who really do deserve it, those who have very serious injuries and who deserve more than the $50,000 which is the maximum amount allowed under the scheme.

Ms McRae: Why do you not fix it?

MR HUMPHRIES: Ms McRae wants me to fix it. That is exactly what the Government intends to start to do.

Ms McRae: Then why are you giving a ministerial statement about it? Just do it. It is an announcement of policy if you are going to fix it.

MR HUMPHRIES: I do not intend to announce how we are going to fix it. I do intend to indicate that the Government - - -

Ms McRae: Just carry on about dreadful lawyers.

MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Humphries has the floor.

MR HUMPHRIES: The Government does have a number of proposals which it believes ought to be examined. I will just run through them. Members opposite can perhaps give me their feedback in a more considered way than they are doing at the moment on whether they feel that these things will be worth exploring. One is to eliminate double dipping by persons who claim criminal injuries compensation as well as

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .