We use cookies to collect anonymous data to help us improve your site browsing experience.

Click 'Accept all cookies' to agree to all cookies that collect anonymous data. To only allow the cookies that make the site work, click 'Use essential cookies only.' Visit 'Set cookie preferences' to control specific cookies.

Set cookie preferences

Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Publication - Consultation analysis

Financial redress for historical child abuse in care: consultation analysis

Published
23 March 2020
From
Deputy First Minister
Directorate
Children and Families Directorate, +1 more … Justice Directorate
Part of
Children and families, Equality and rights, Law and order
ISBN
9781839605727

Analysis of responses to the pre-legislative consultation on the detailed design of a statutory redress scheme for historical child abuse in care.

View supporting documents Supporting documents

Annex 2: Number of responses to individual questions

Question Individuals Organisations
n % of total 229 n % of total 51
Part 1 Design of the redress scheme
Part 1.1: Purpose and principles of the financial redress scheme
Purpose
1 We are considering the following wording to describe the purpose of financial redress: 'to acknowledge and respond to the harm that was done to children who were abused in care in the past in residential settings in Scotland where institutions and bodies had long-term responsibility for the care of the child in place of the parent'. What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree? [Yes / No] 219 96% 40 78%
If no, what are your thoughts on purpose? 94 41% 39 76%
Principles
2 We are considering the following as guiding principles:
• To ensure that redress is delivered with honesty, decency, trust and integrity
• To treat applicants with fairness and respect and to offer them choice wherever possible
• To ensure that the assessment and award process is robust and credible
• To make every effort to minimise the potential for further harm through the process of applying for redress.

Do you agree with these guiding principles? [Yes / No / Unsure]		 223 97% 43 84%
Would you suggest any additions or amendments to the proposed principles? 79 34% 36 71%
Part 1.2: Eligibility for the financial redress scheme
Defining 'in care'
3 Do you agree with the proposed approach in relation to institutions and bodies having long term responsibility for the child in place of the parent? [Yes / No / Unsure] 227 99% 39 76%
Please explain your answer 104 45% 35 69%
4 Subject to the institution or body having long term responsibility for the child, do you agree that the list of residential settings should be the same as used in the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry’s Terms of Reference? [Yes / No / Unsure] 222 97% 40 78%
Please explain your answer. 91 40% 27 53%
Question Individuals Organisations
n % of total 229 n % of total 51
5 Where parents chose to send children to a fee paying boarding school for the primary purpose of education, the institution did not have long-term responsibility in place of the parent. Given the purpose of this redress scheme, applicants who were abused in such circumstances would not be eligible to apply to this scheme. Do you agree? [Yes / No / Unsure] 221 97% 40 78%
Please explain your answer. 149 65% 34 67%
6 Where children spent time in hospital primarily for the purpose of medical or surgical treatment, parents retained the long-term responsibility for them. Given the purpose of this redress scheme, applicants who were abused in such circumstances would not be eligible to apply to this scheme. Do you agree? 222 97% 40 78%
Please explain your answer. 132 58% 36 71%
Defining 'abuse'
7 We intend to use the same definition of abuse as the Limitation (Childhood Abuse) (Scotland) Act 2017 for the purpose of the financial redress scheme. This includes sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse and abuse that takes the form of neglect. Do you agree? [Yes / No / Unsure] 228 100% 43 84%
Please explain your answer. 117 51% 30 59%
Defining 'historical' abuse
8 In our view, 1 December 2004 represents an appropriate date to define ‘historical’ abuse for this financial redress scheme. Do you agree? [Yes / No / Unsure] 220 96% 41 80%
Please explain your answer. 116 51% 36 71%
Child migrants
9 Do you have any comments you would like to make in relation to child migrants who also meet the eligibility requirements of this redress scheme? 154 67% 38 75%
Those with a criminal conviction
10 Do you have any comments about the eligibility of those with a criminal conviction? 197 86% 40 78%
Other
11 Do you have any other comments on eligibility for the financial redress scheme? 144 63% 35 69%
Question Individuals Organisations
n % of total 229 n % of total 51
Part 1.3: Payment structure, evidence and assessment
Evidence requirements
12 What options might be available for someone who has been unable to obtain a supporting document which shows they spent time in care in Scotland? 168 73% 39 76%
13 Do you think the redress scheme should have the power, subject to certain criteria, to require that bodies or organisations holding documentation which would support an application are required to make that available? [Yes / No] 221 97% 43 84%
Please explain your answer. 139 61% 41 80%
14 For Stage One, what evidence do you think should be required about the abuse suffered?
A signed declaration by the applicant that they suffered abuse, but no other supporting evidence [Yes / No] 189 83% 32 63%
A short written description of the abuse and its impact [Yes / No] 192 84% 31 61%
Any existing written statement from another source which details the abuse in care [Yes / No] 182 79% 26 51%
15 Do you have any additional comments on evidence requirements for a Stage One payment? 150 66% 45 88%
16 For Stage Two, what additional evidence of the abuse and of its impact, should be required for the individual assessment?
  • Any existing written statement from another source which details the abuse [Yes / No]
 174 76% 30 59%
  • Oral testimony of abuse and its impact [Yes / No]
 179 78% 31 61%
  • Short written description of the abuse and its impact [Yes / No]
 174 76% 29 57%
  • Detailed written description of abuse suffered and its impact [Yes / No]
 183 80% 31 61%
  • Documentary evidence of impact of the abuse (from existing medical and / or psychological records) [Yes / No]
 171 75% 36 71%
  • Documentary evidence of impact of the abuse (from new medical and/or psychological assessment) [Yes / No]
 169 74% 35 69%
  • Supporting evidence of the abuse / impact from a third party. [Yes / No]
 173 76% 31 61%
17 Do you have any comments on evidence requirements for a Stage Two payment? 152 66% 41 80%
Provision for oral testimony
18 Do you think applicants should be able to give oral evidence to support their application? [Yes / No] 221 97% 39 76%
If yes, under what circumstances might it be available? 164 72% 40 78%
Question Individuals Organisations
n % of total 229 n % of total 51
Stage Two assessment
19 Do you have any views on whether the length of time in care should be factored into the Stage Two assessment? [Yes / No] 212 93% 34 67%
If so, how? 150 66% 41 80%
20 Do you have any views on the balance the assessment should give to different types of abuse (physical, emotional, sexual, neglect)? 193 84% 42 82%
21 What are your views on which factors in relation to the abuse and its impact might lead to higher levels of payment? 170 74% 40 78%
22 Do you think:
  • The redress payment is primarily for the abuse suffered [Yes / No]
 117 51% 18 35%
  • The redress payment is primarily for the impact the abuse has had [Yes / No]
 121 53% 20 39%
  • Both the abuse suffered and the impact it has had should be treated equally [Yes / No
 216 94% 34 67%
Please explain your answer. 158 69% 40 78%
23 How do you think the scheme should ensure all parties are treated fairly and that the assessment and award process is sufficiently robust? 161 70% 43 84%
Consideration of other payments
24 Do you agree that anyone who has received a payment from another source for the abuse they suffered in care in Scotland should still be eligible to apply to the redress scheme? [Yes / No] 210 92% 37 73%
Please explain your answer. 163 71% 39 76%
25 Do you agree that any previous payments received by an applicant should be taken into account in assessing the amount of the redress payment from this scheme? [Yes / No] 212 93% 37 73%
Please explain your answer. 144 63% 38 75%
Choosing between accepting a redress payment and seeking a payment from another source
26 Do you agree applicants should choose between accepting a redress payment or pursuing a civil court action? [Yes / No] 205 90% 40 78%
Please explain your answer. 155 68% 40 78%
Question Individuals Organisations
n % of total 229 n % of total 51
Part 1.4: Making an application
Time period for making an application
27 We are proposing that the redress scheme will be open for applications for a period of five years. Do you agree this is a reasonable timescale? [Yes / No] 214 93% 41 80%
Please explain your answer. 137 60% 41 80%
Practical help making an application
28 Should provision be made by the redress scheme administrators to assist survivors obtain documentary records required for the application process? [Yes / No] 215 94% 44 86%
Please explain your answer. 145 63% 40 78%
Legal advice
29 In your view, which parts of the redress process might require independent legal advice? Please tick all that apply. 0% 0%
* In making the decision to apply 68 30% 21 41%
* During the application process 98 43% 25 49%
* At the point of accepting a redress payment and signing a waiver? 182 79% 39 76%
30 How do you think the costs of independent legal advice could best be managed? 183 80% 39 76%
Part 1.5: Next-of-kin
31 What are your views on our proposed approach to allow surviving spouses and children to apply for a next-of-kin payment? 189 83% 41 80%
32 We are considering three options for the cut-off date for next-of-kin applications (meaning that a survivor would have had to have died after that date in order for a next-of-kin application to be made). Our proposal is to use 17 November 2016.
  • 17 December 2014 – the announcement of the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. [Yes / No]
 127 55% 19 37%
  • 17 November 2016 – the announcement of the earlier consultation and engagement work on the potential provision of financial redress [Yes / No]
 113 49% 13 25%
  • 23 October 2018 – the announcement that there would be a statutory financial redress scheme in Scotland [Yes / No]
 120 52% 18 35%
What are your views on which date would be the most appropriate? 141 62% 33 65%
Question Individuals Organisations
n % of total 229 n % of total 51
33 We propose that to apply for a next-of-kin payment, surviving spouses or children would have to provide supporting documentation to show that their family member met all the eligibility criteria. What forms of evidence of abuse should next-of-kin be able to submit to support their application? 160 70% 35 69%
34 What are your views on the proportion of the next-of-kin payment in relation to the level at which the redress Stage One payment will be set in due course? [25% / 50% / 75% / 100%] 167 73% 22 43%
Please explain your answer. 145 63% 30 59%
Part 1.6: Financial contributions
Contributions to the redress scheme
35 We think those bearing responsibility for the abuse should be expected to provide financial contributions to the costs of redress. Do you agree? [Yes / No] 215 94% 37 73%
Please explain your answer. 154 67% 39 76%
36 Please tell us about how you think contributions by those responsible should work. Should those responsible make:
* An upfront contribution to the scheme [Yes / No] 140 61% 19 37%
* A contribution based on the number of applicants who come forward from their institution or service [Yes / No] 144 63% 23 45%
* Another approach to making a financial contribution to the redress scheme costs? [Yes / No] 106 46% 23 45%
Please explain your answer. 123 54% 34 67%
Any other comments? 65 28% 9 18%
37 Are there any barriers to providing contributions, and if so how might these be overcome? 132 58% 39 76%
38 Should the impact of making financial contributions on current services be taken into account and if so how? [Yes / No] 161 70% 38 75%
Please explain your answer. 117 51% 38 75%
39 What other impacts might there be and how could those be addressed? 101 44% 30 59%
40 How should circumstances where a responsible organisation no longer exists in the form it did at the time of the abuse, or where an organisation has no assets, be treated? 157 69% 36 71%
41 What is fair and meaningful contribution from those bearing responsibility for the abuse? 158 69% 37 73%
42 What would be the most effective way of encouraging those responsible to make fair and meaningful contributions to the scheme? 158 69% 38 75%
43 Should there be consequences for those responsible who do not make a fair and meaningful financial contribution? [Yes / No] 191 83% 25 49%
If yes, what might these be? 163 71% 34 67%
Question Individuals Organisations
n % of total 229 n % of total 51
Contributions to wider reparations
44 In addition to their financial contributions to the redress scheme, what other contributions should those responsible for abuse make to wider reparations? 149 65% 43 84%
Part 2: Scheme administration and wider reparations
Part 2.1: Decision-making panel for redress
45 Do you agree that the decision making panel should consist of three members? [Yes / No] 199 87% 33 65%
Please explain your answer. 144 63% 32 63%
46 Do you agree that the key skills and knowledge for panel members should be an understanding of human rights, legal knowledge, and knowledge of complex trauma and its impact? [Yes / No] 209 91% 41 80%
Are there any other specific professional backgrounds or skills you feel are essential for the decision-making panel? 116 51% 36 71%
47 We propose that a Survivor Panel be established to advise and inform the redress scheme governance and administration, ensuring survivor experience of the application process is considered as part of a culture of continuous improvement. Do you agree? [Yes / No] 201 88% 37 73%
Please explain your answer. 125 55% 37 73%
How do you think survivors should be recruited and selected for this panel? 144 63% 31 61%
Part 2.2: Public body
48 Do you agree that the financial redress scheme administration should be located in a new public body? [Yes / No] 182 79% 36 71%
Please explain your answer. 132 58% 37 73%
49 Do you have any views as to where the public body should be located and what it should be called? 150 66% 36 71%
What factors should be taken into account when deciding where the public body should be? 135 59% 31 61%
50 How can survivors be involved in the recruitment process for these posts? 143 62% 34 67%
How should survivors be selected to take part in this process? 143 62% 24 47%
Part 2.3: Wider reparations
51 What are your views on bringing together the administration of other elements of a reparation package such as support and acknowledgement with financial redress? 146 64% 42 82%
What would be the advantages? 130 57% 25 49%
Would there be any disadvantages, and if so, how might these be addressed? 111 48% 22 43%
Question Individuals Organisations
n % of total 229 n % of total 51
52 Do you agree that it would be beneficial if the administration of these elements were located in the same physical building? 160 70% 38 75%
What would be the advantages? 129 56% 23 45%
Would there be any disadvantages, and if so, how might these be addressed? 109 48% 18 35%
53 Should wider reparation be available to everyone who meets the eligibility criteria for the financial redress scheme? [Yes / No] 166 72% 31 61%
Please explain your answer. 104 45% 31 61%
54 Should there be priority access to wider reparation for certain groups, for example elderly and ill? [Yes / No] 197 86% 33 65%
Please explain your answer. 127 55% 33 65%
55 If a person is eligible for redress, should they have the same or comparable access to other elements of reparation whether they live in Scotland or elsewhere? [Yes / No] 185 81% 31 61%
Please explain your answer. 131 57% 33 65%
Acknowledgement and apology
56 To allow us more flexibility in considering how acknowledgment is delivered in the future, we intend to include provision in the redress legislation to repeal the sections of the Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014 which established the National Confidential Forum. Do you have any views on this? 141 62% 36 71%
57 Do you have any views on how acknowledgment should be provided in the future? 128 56% 34 67%
58 Do you think a personal apology should be given alongside a redress payment? [Yes / No] 194 85% 29 57%
Please explain your answer. 157 69% 33 65%
If so, who should give the apology? 150 66% 24 47%
Support
59 Do you think there is a need for a dedicated support service for in care survivors once the financial redress scheme is in place? [Yes / No] 203 89% 33 65%
Please explain your answer. 155 68% 37 73%
60 Do you have any initial views on how support for in care survivors might be delivered in Scotland, alongside a redress scheme? 154 67% 39 76%

Contact

Email: redress@gov.scot

Back to top