Publication - Consultation analysis

Financial redress for historical child abuse in care: consultation analysis

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

177 page PDF

1.5 MB

177 page PDF

1.5 MB

Contents
Financial redress for historical child abuse in care: consultation analysis
Footnotes

177 page PDF

1.5 MB

Footnotes

1 Deputy First Minister John Swinney, statement to Parliament, 23 October 2018. https://news.gov.scot/speeches-and-briefings/response-to-recommendations-on-financial-redress-for-survivors-of-child-abuse-in-care

2 The Advance Payment Scheme, which opened on 25 April 2019, provides acknowledgement and recognition, by means of a financial payment and an apology, to those who suffered abuse in care in Scotland before December 2004, and who either have a terminal illness or are aged 70 or over.

3 The reference here is to Jimmy Savile, British media personality, and the criminal investigation launched one year after his death, which found that he had sexually abused hundreds of individuals, predominantly children – including children in hospitals – over a period of 50 years.

4 The UK government set up a payment scheme for former British child migrants, who were separated from their families and sent overseas as part of the UK government’s historical participation in child migration programmes. The scheme was set up after a recommendation made in the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) interim report and its report on child migration programmes, which were both published in spring 2018.

5 Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights (2005) Basic principles and guidelines on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law. Adopted by the UN General Assembly, resolution 60/147, 16 December 2005. See https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/RemedyAndReparation.aspx.

6 While a ‘yes’ response could be understood as indicating agreement with the proposition that time in care should be factored into the assessment process, respondents may also have said ‘yes’ simply to indicate that they had views on the issue. The comments made at Question 19 confirmed that respondents interpreted this question in these two different ways.

7 Note that, as at Question 19, some respondents referred to ‘length’ but did not specify if they were referring to the length of time in care or the duration of abuse.

8 The following document produced by the Council of Europe provides further information: https://www.coe.int/en/web/execution/article-41

9 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (2005) Basic principles and guidelines on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law. UN General Assembly resolution 60/147, 16 December 2005. See https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/remedyandreparation.aspx

10 It should be noted that the Scottish Government does not intend that redress payments will depend on organisations making contributions.

11 CNORIS: Clinical Negligence and Other Risks Indemnity Scheme.

12 Reference was made to UN Human Rights Committee (2004) General Comment no. 31. The nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States Parties to the Covenant. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add. 13.


Contact

Email: redress@gov.scot