Chairperson's Report 1999-2000 6. Joint Select Committee on Victims Compensation
 

(a) the effectiveness and efficiency of the New South Wales Victims Compensation scheme in providing assistance to genuine victims of crime;

(b) the current state of the provision of counselling and associated support services for victims of crime; and

(c) other relevant matters.

The Committee held its first meeting on 16 November 1999. Under the terms of the resolution passed by both Houses the Committee was to report by 29 February 2000.

In the Foreword to the report, the Chairman, Mr. Stewart MP said that in line with its predecessor, this Committee considers that the way forward is to focus on rehabilitation of victims of crime rather than on monetary compensation. For my part I echo those sentiments.

Mr. Stewart went on to say that that the victims compensation scheme must continue to reflect society’s commitment to assist the innocent victims of violent crimes at a reasonable and sustainable cost to the community.

Mr. Stewart went on to express concern at the delays in processing and paying claims and said that the Committee had heard evidence from members of the Homicide Victims Support Group, Vocal and Enough is Enough, about problems with accessing counselling, interim payments and awards.

The Committee made a number of recommendations some of which resulted in amendments to the Act and others which were dealt with administratively. In other respects matters raised had already been implemented by the Director.

Action which had already been taken by the Director or which has been taken as a result of the Committee’s recommendations includes:

1. Chairperson’s Guide to the Act are on the Tribunal’s Internet Website. The Guide includes the following topics:

• Psychological or psychiatric disorder
• Act of violence
• Entitlements to victims compensation and workers compensation
• Professional costs
• Persons ineligible to receive statutory compensation
• Time for lodging applications
• Appeals to the Tribunal
• Appeal to the District Court
• Matters affecting awards.

2. There are over 400 approved counsellors in New South Wales and of these over 40% work outside the metropolitan area. The Bureau has worked with members of the Professional Advisory Panel to ensure that the Scheme is advertised in professional journals and raised at professional forums.

3. Non identifying client feedback forms regarding the counselling received under the Scheme have been issued since July 1999. Responses have been overwhelmingly positive. Regular information sessions are held with Approved Counsellors both regionally and in metropolitan Sydney. Victims groups are encouraged to provide feedback regarding the Scheme.

4. An assessor has been allocated to process all homicide claims.

5. Liaison between Victims Services, a number of victim support groups and a variety of government and non government organisations occurs regularly. This is done via a variety of mechanisms including:

• Information sessions or forums initiated by Victims Services or by invitation;
• The Interagency Forum held every 3 months; and
• Victims Advisory Board Meetings held every two months.

The then Attorney General the Hon, J. Shaw, Q.C., M.L.C. responded to evidence which was given before the Committee. In his written submission he said in part:

Some of the criticism I have noted from the transcripts I consider to be unwarranted as they are the result of procedures adopted by Victims Services which are mandated by the legislation which governs the activities of the Victims Compensation Tribunal.

If one reads the chronology of events and correspondence concerning these claims which the Attorney General forwarded to the Committee, it clearly indicates that much of the criticism launched at the Bureau and Tribunal was unfounded and misplaced.

Another issue raised by the Attorney General related to the liaison between Victims Services and the critical victims support groups. As Mr. Shaw quite rightly pointed out:

Some of the criticism could and indeed should have been appropriately raised at one or other of the meetings of the Board or the Interagency Forum. They were not.

I voice my concern also at the attitude of smugness when the rejection rate of applications for compensation is discussed (by the Tribunal).

Claims are dismissed for a number of reasons -

(a) the applicant is unable to establish an act of violence

(b) the applicant is unable to establish a compensable injury

(c) the applicant is ineligible because of section 24

(d) the applicant is met with section 30 issues.

It is open to the applicant through his/her legal advisor to make appropriate submissions on any of these issues either to the compensation assessor or on appeal to the Tribunal.

The high rate of dismissals is likely to continue until solicitors acting for victims give appropriate consideration to these issues and that consideration is even more important following the amendments to the Act this year.