The
Committee consisted of the following
Members:
Chair:
Mr Philip
Hollobone
†
Barwell,
Gavin (Croydon Central)
(Con)
†
de
Bois, Nick (Enfield North)
(Con)
Donaldson,
Mr Jeffrey M. (Lagan Valley)
(DUP)
†
Ellwood,
Mr Tobias (Bournemouth East)
(Con)
†
Francois,
Mr Mark (Vice-Chamberlain of Her Majesty's
Household)
Gardiner,
Barry (Brent North)
(Lab)
†
Gilbert,
Stephen (St Austell and Newquay)
(LD)
†
Hemming,
John (Birmingham, Yardley)
(LD)
†
Jones,
Mr Kevan (North Durham)
(Lab)
†
Lord,
Jonathan (Woking)
(Con)
†
Lumley,
Karen (Redditch)
(Con)
Raynsford,
Mr Nick (Greenwich and Woolwich)
(Lab)
†
Robathan,
Mr Andrew (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
Defence)
†
Ruddock,
Joan (Lewisham, Deptford)
(Lab)
†
Smith,
Mr Andrew (Oxford East)
(Lab)
†
Tredinnick,
David (Bosworth)
(Con)
†
Whitehead,
Dr Alan (Southampton, Test)
(Lab)
†
Wright,
David (Telford) (Lab)
Alison
Groves, Committee Clerk
†
attended the Committee
First
Delegated Legislation
Committee
Tuesday 3 May
2011
[Mr
Philip Hollobone
in the
Chair]
Draft
Pensions Appeal Tribunals Act 1943 (Time Limit for Appeals) (Amendment)
Regulations
2011
10.30
am
The
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Andrew
Robathan):
I beg to
move,
That
the Committee has considered the draft Pensions Appeal Tribunals Act
1943 (Time Limit for Appeals) (Amendment) Regulations
2011.
The
Chair:
With this it will be convenient to consider the
draft Pensions Appeal Tribunals Act 1943 (Armed Forces and Reserve
Forces Compensation Scheme) (Rights of Appeal) Regulations
2011.
Mr
Robathan:
May I offer you my congratulations, Mr
Hollobone—belated by about a year—on your elevation to
the Panel of
Chairs?
On
10 February 2010, the previous Government announced the outcome of the
review of the armed forces compensation scheme, conducted under the
independent chairmanship of Admiral Lord Boyce. I am grateful to the
noble and gallant lord for the thorough way he conducted the review and
for producing such a meticulous
report.
The
Ministry of Defence committed to implementing all Lord Boyce’s
recommendations within a year. The more straightforward changes were
put in revised legislation in July 2010. The more detailed
recommendations were laid in new legislation on 28 February 2011. The
two affirmative instruments being debated today complete the
legislative changes required to implement the full package of
changes.
The
armed forces compensation scheme came into force on 6 April 2005 to pay
compensation for injury, illness or death caused by service. That
provided lump-sum payments and, for the more seriously injured, a
guaranteed income for life. It replaced the compensation arrangements
provided by the war pensions scheme and the attributable elements of
the armed forces pensions
scheme.
The
new scheme is a significant improvement—rightly—on
previous arrangements. Injured servicemen are now able to claim
compensation while they are still in service, and the previous
Government should be commended for introducing the scheme in 2005, as
well as for initiating a review of the armed forces compensation scheme
in 2009 to ensure that it continues to support the needs of the armed
forces.
The
brave men and women of our armed forces deserve our admiration. More
than that, they deserve to be treated with respect, and they rightly
expect the nation to honour their commitment. We have a duty—a
moral duty—to those injured due to service to provide a just and
fair compensation scheme for them.
The
first statutory instrument relates to the subject of time limits for
appeals if an individual is not happy with the decision made on a
compensation claim. The intent is to extend the time limit for
appealing decisions made under the armed forces compensation scheme
from six months to 12. That recognises that the nature of service life
may prevent claimants from picking up their mail and making an appeal
within the current time limit of six
months.
For
appeals heard in Scotland and Northern Ireland, that requires section 8
of the Pensions Appeal Tribunals Act 1943 to be amended. The first
affirmative statutory instrument makes the required amendments to that
Act. The time limits governing appeals on armed forces compensation
scheme awards heard in England and Wales are provided in the Tribunal
Procedure Rules. Those rules have been amended to increase the time
limit for appealing to 12 months, with the changes coming into force
from 9
May.
To
ensure consistency and fairness, that affirmative instrument also
increases the time limit for bringing appeals in respect of all other
types of decision capable of appeal under the 1943 Act, including
decisions made in relation to the war pensions
scheme.
The
second statutory instrument is on the subject of rights of appeal. The
intent is to make it clear that two types of new decision under the
scheme do not carry appeal rights. The first relates to claims for a
fast payment. The fast payment is a new provision introduced to enable
those who have a serious injury due to service to receive an early
payment before going through the full compensation claim process. That
will help to provide them and their families with some early financial
support and reassurance during what can be a very difficult time. If
the final award is less than the value of the fast payment, no money
will be recovered. Where additional money is payable, the balance is
transferred to the
claimant.
The
decision on the final award carries appeal rights. As the fast payment
decision is not a final decision, so the instrument excludes fast
payment decisions from the list of decisions capable of being appealed.
Not to make that change would result in a rather confusing system for
claimants.
The
second new type of payment is one for medical expenses incurred abroad
by seriously injured personnel who decide to live permanently outside
the UK within a year of leaving the armed forces. That power broadens
the scope of the scheme. As Lord Boyce recognised in his report, the
new power is discretionary, so it would not be appropriate for it to
have external appeal rights, but
rather
“an
individual would be able to request the MOD to reconsider its
decision”.
That
remains open to the individual if they are not content with the
decision made on their
claim.
The
two statutory instruments are the next step in ensuring that the armed
forces compensation scheme remains fit for
purpose.
10.35
am
Mr
Kevan Jones (North Durham) (Lab):
I start by welcoming you
to the Chair, Mr Hollobone. This is my first time serving under your
chairmanship, and I join the Minister in belatedly congratulating you
on being appointed to the Panel of Chairs.
As the
Minister said, the statutory instruments result from the review of the
armed forces compensation scheme. Perhaps few things that we do as
Ministers get recognised at the time, but it is nice to see them being
put into practice ultimately. I appreciate the Minister’s warm
words about the improvements that have been made to the scheme,
although at the time there was some press criticism and some hyperbole
from those on the Conservative Benches—criticism was levelled at
the scheme, which is, in essence, a good scheme that has been improved
upon by Lord Boyce’s
recommendations.
I
also pay tribute to Lord Boyce and to the independent group of experts.
He had medical experts available to him, as well as members of
COBSEO—the Confederation of British Service and Ex-Service
Organisations—the Royal British Legion and others. I pay
tribute, too, to the civil service team under Peter Davies, which
worked hard to act as a secretariat and to ensure that the
recommendations were not only practical, but would be affordable in
terms of implementation by the previous Government and by the coalition
Government. These are sensible recommendations that we
support.
10.36
am
John
Hemming (Birmingham, Yardley) (LD):
I apologise to the
Committee for being late and congratulate you,
Mr Hollobone, on your appointment to the Panel of Chairs. I am pleased
to serve under you for the first
time.
I
am pleased that the statutory instruments are being debated. I
recognise the difficulty that people have at times in hitting deadlines
for appeals. Although at some stage there has to be a deadline, I am
happy to support these
measures.
10.37
am
Mr
Robathan:
I have nothing further to say, save to wish the
statutory instruments
well.
Question
put and agreed
to.
Resolved,
That
the Committee has considered the draft Pensions Appeal Tribunals Act
1943 (Armed Forces and Reserve Forces Compensation Scheme) (Rights of
Appeal) Regulations 2011.—(Mr
Robathan.)
10.38
am
Committee
rose.
