Bid to block ‘claw back’ under sex abuse redress scheme

Further changes to the $4 billion sex abuse redress scheme are expected to prevent some victims having claims “clawed back”.

The redress scheme aims to create a national system of redress and support that will include psychological counselling and apologies for wrongdoing.

Further changes to the federal government’s $4 billion sex abuse redress scheme are expected to prevent some victims having claims “clawed back” and to ­encourage more churches and ­institutions to join the scheme.

There is also growing pressure to further alter the draft legislation to ensure people named as abusers but not legally found to have committed offences are protected against public disclosure when redress payments are made.

Malcolm Turnbull has urged states, churches and affected institutions to sign up to the scheme, which will provide compensation payments of up to $150,000 for as many as 60,000 victims.

NSW and Victoria have ­already joined but there are concerns from smaller states, churches and institutions about how claims will be determined and whether they are covered by ­insurance.

Federal and state ­attorneys-general will meet today to discuss the scheme, which aims to create a national system of redress and support that will include psychological counselling and apologies for wrongdoing.

All states must pass legislation to enable churches and institutions to join. The Prime Minister has set a start date of July 1. “We must do everything within our power to honour those stories and to act, and to make sure that this national tragedy is never ­repeated,” he said.

The scheme will require participants to release offending institutions from civil liability for the abuse but in turn will enable them to receive a one-off payment or a top-up payment if any original ­redress were deemed inadequate.

The scheme would require a lower burden of proof in determining claims than required through normal court action, and payments could be made if there was a “reasonable” belief abuse occurred. But governments, institutions and churches fear the methodology could mean some compensation and damages claims already paid could be clawed back from victims, and ­insurance companies would not be liable to cover claims under the ­redress scheme.

The attorneys-general are being urged to amend draft legislation to include a clause on ­insurance ensuring the scheme is treated the same way as damages in criminal cases.

Institutions and smaller churches have been reluctant to sign up to the scheme because, ­although their insurance covers legal claims, there is doubt the redress scheme with its different methods would be covered.

The government is being urged to provide the protection so smaller groups can sign up without fear of uncovered claims.

The attorneys-general are also being asked to consider extra protection to those who have not been found guilty of abuse but may be the subject of claims.