Alexander Marc: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Alexander Marc: Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Bill — In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:20964] 
MARC ALEXANDER (United Future) 
: 
 It was refreshing to hear the Hon Rick Barker speak some while ago. [ 
Interruption 
] Well it was for one reason. He held truth in the same regard as one would hold a duck during duck-shooting season. One would not buy it any insurance whatsoever. He was a bit disingenuous when he talked about how all the moneys were earmarked for victims and everybody else who came second and third because clause 17 clearly contradicts that. Clause 17 talks about the secretary deducting money for legal aid reparation and earlier orders and then paying the surplus into an account. Clause 17(1)(a) states: “first pay out of that money any sum necessary to satisfy fully any relevant charge­­­­—”—then it lists three—“(i) in favour of the Legal Services Agency; and (ii) on proceeds of proceedings relating to the specified claim and to which a grant of legal aid relates; and (iii) arising by operation of section 32 of the Legal Services Act 2000; ”. Then the clause moves on to the second category. Subclause (1) states: “(b) secondly pay out of that money any sum necessary to satisfy fully any amounts of reparation …; and (c) thirdly pay out of that money any sum necessary to satisfy fully any amounts owed by the accused or the offender under any relevant order made under section 43 …; and (d) fourthly pay any surplus remaining into the account.” 
This is a sinister attempt at the Government being able to recoup some of the money that has been allocated on the premise of human rights for these offenders. The victims actually come off second best. It is a way of putting the Government’s grubby fingers all over the compensation that it is forced to pay out by the courts ahead of the interests of victims everywhere. It is a perversity it is utterly wrong and it is incomprehensible that any Government—or the Greens for that matter who pretend to put the interests of victims first—can support a bill that does exactly the opposite. 
Another interesting fall-out from the bill as one sees if one reads through it are two things that I think are perverse. The first is that prisoners will be able to bargain their proceedings for privileges. One can imagine a situation whereby a bunch of prisoners who state that they have claims for one thing and another will then be able to bargain that off within the prison system in order to gain privileges so that they do not pursue the claims. The reason the Department of Corrections might accept that is that first it does not want the embarrassment and second it does not want the additional costs of the legal proceedings in pursuit of it. So there is a very real danger that we will end up with prisoners being able to bargain away their proceedings for personal privileges within the prison system. 
The second perversity and it is the one that really bothers me is that victims will be rewarded or not rewarded depending on whether their offenders pursue a legal claim. The bill will actually set up two categories of victims: those whose offenders are liable for a compensation claim and those whose offenders are not. The interesting thing is that we heard testimony after testimony through the select committee process that victims do not actually want the money. They do not want to have anything to do with their offender. They want to heal and get on with their lives but they cannot rest or heal their lives knowing that their offender is able to access any compensation at all. So they are forced by necessity into an arrangement to try to get it off them. That is an utter perversity because in pursuit of the so-called human rights of these offenders we are necessarily undermining the human rights of the victims they offended against—and those offenders because of their actions chose to go to prison in the first place. It is an utter perversity but that is what this legislation will do. 
This bill will set up victim against victim. Even if another agency is authorised to go after the compensation such as Victim Support or the Sensible Sentencing Trust they will still have to partake of the process and be part of it. Obviously they will be watching it. They will not sit back and just pretend that it never happened. Unfortunately they will be dragged into it and it will halt the whole process of healing on behalf of victims. I do not know how many members have spent much time with those victims who have to go to parole hearings time and time again to ensure that their offender stays in prison. It breaks them up. It rips those victims apart because they have to relive the crime all over again. This legislation will do the same thing.