Author: Pulse Assent

The Justice Secretary has today announced a full review of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme to ensure it reflects the changing nature of crime and can better support victims. The plans are set out in the first ever cross-government Victims Strategy, which will be launched tomorrow (10 September). The strategy will coordinate the already extensive government support for victims of crime to focus support and services around the individual.

Ministers have ordered this review of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (CICS) to improve access to compensation, and to consider how the scheme might better serve victims – especially victims of child sexual abuse and terrorism. The review will begin immediately and is expected to report in 2019 with recommendations for reform.

The CICS awards taxpayer-funded payments to victims injured as a result violent crime, and paid out more than £150 million to victims in 2017/18. This scheme is just one way in which victims are supported, with other ways including rehabilitation, psychological care, and outreach support.

More victims of violent crime will be able to receive the compensation to which they are entitled and ministers also committed to abolishing the pre-1979 ‘same-roof’ rule of the CICS. This is especially relevant for victims of historic child abuse.

Justice Secretary David Gauke said:

Whilst no amount of compensation can make up for the immense suffering endured by victims of violent crime, it is vital they receive the help and support needed to rebuild their lives.

Today I’m announcing that we will review the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme to ensure it reflects the changing nature of crime and can better support victims, especially of historic and current child abuse. Over the years we’ve seen more prosecutions for sexual offences and sadly experienced the horror of terrorism. We need to make sure these victims get the awards they’re due so we will be looking to ensure the criteria are appropriate.

We will also scrap the pre-1979 ‘same roof rule’ which unfairly blocked some victims from compensation.

These two measures will ensure that victims of violent crime will get the compensation to which they are entitled.

The review will look at concerns around the eligibility rules of the scheme, the sustainability of the scheme and the affordability of any changes to be made.

The review will also enable the government to take full account of recommendations made by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.

The review will look at issues in CICS, including:

• time limits for applications – the scheme’s time limit requires that applications be made by a person over 18 as soon as practicable and no later than 2 years after the date of the incident. It is suggested that victims of child sex abuse disproportionately delay reporting such crimes and applications for compensation, and therefore miss out on compensation.
• the ‘same roof’ rule – we will remove the pre-1979 rule and we will consider further changes to the remaining ‘same roof’ rule and previous failed applications. In July 2018, the Court of Appeal decided that the pre-1979 ‘same roof’ rule had unfairly denied a claimant who was abused as a child by her stepfather the right to compensation. The government agreed with the judgement and has decided to abolish the pre-1979 ‘same roof’ rule and will not appeal the decision.
• unspent convictions – the scheme automatically excludes an award if the applicant has an unspent conviction which resulted in a specified sentence (custodial sentence, community order or youth rehabilitation order). It is suggested the rules disproportionately impact vulnerable victims of child sex abuse who may have offended in response to being abused/exploited/groomed.
• crime of violence– the scheme sets out what constitutes a crime of violence for the purposes of assessing entitlement to compensation. It is suggested that this definition should be broadened to include sexual exploitative behaviour, such as grooming.
• terrorism – the terrorist attacks of last year left people with serious life changing injuries and brought to light questions about the suitability of the scheme in providing support to victims of terrorism. The review will consider and clarify the eligibility, entitlement and amount of compensation to be awarded. This will build on the roll-out of the ground-breaking Victims of Terrorism Unit last year, to help ensure the best possible support.

Notes to editors

‘Same roof rule’

• The so-called ‘same roof rule’ was part of the original (non-statutory) compensation scheme introduced in 1964.
• The rule was changed in 1979, but was not made retrospective.
• The pre-1979 same roof rule applies to adults and children. Under the rule applicants are not entitled to compensation if they were living with their assailant as members of the same family at the time of the incident.
  • The reasons for the rule were, broadly, difficulties with evidence in such cases, and a wish to ensure that offenders did not benefit from compensation paid to the victim who they were living with.
  • The rule applies to all victims of abuse inflicted by a family member living under the same roof; this includes physical as well as sexual abuse.
• The rule was amended in 1979 to apply to adults only. Under the rule applicants can still be refused compensation if at the time of the incident they were adults living with the assailant as members of the same family, unless they no longer live together and are unlikely to do so again.
  • The amended rule gives CICA discretion to consider what has happened post the incident taking place, which has significantly reduced the number of applicants who are refused under this amended rule.
• In July the Court of Appeal found that the pre-1979 rule unlawfully discriminated against the applicant. The government decided to not appeal this ruling and confirmed it would consult on changes to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme.
• Abolishing the rule will require secondary legislation. Further details on this and the review of the scheme will be announced in due course.

Britain and New Zealand are set to work together more closely and deeply than ever before as the UK government establishes a greater diplomatic presence in the Pacific region and opens diplomatic missions in Samoa, Tonga, and Vanuatu.

As well as enhancing existing joint-working on climate security which was the focus of the recent Pacific Islands Forum, Britain and New Zealand are working on tackling threats to international security and championing free trade. Preparatory work is also underway to lay the groundwork for a UK-NZ Free Trade Agreement (FTA).

Speaking while on his visit to New Zealand today, Minister for Asia and the Pacific Mark Field said:

New Zealand is an obvious partner of choice for us in our work with the Pacific islands to tackle climate change and marine plastic pollution. But our co-operation goes far beyond these issues as we share common values and both believe the international rules-based system affords the best opportunity for security, growth and sustainability.

Our posts in the Pacific region are a concrete demonstration of Britain’s commitment to the region, and will allow us to engage with New Zealand in particular to tackle the effects of climate change, and bolster resilience in Pacific Island communities.

As well as opening posts in Tonga, Samoa and Vanuatu, the UK is also expanding its presence in Fiji.

The Department for International Trade (DIT) is currently consulting on Free Trade Agreements with New Zealand, as well as Australia, and the US, and also on accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), of which New Zealand is a member.

• Follow Foreign Office Minister Mark Field @MarkFieldUK
• Follow the Foreign Office on Twitter @foreignoffice and Facebook
• Follow the Foreign Office on Instagram, YouTube and LinkedIn

Daniel Hackland, wife Jenna and his brother Matthew Hackland pleaded guilty to 7 counts between them of producing and supplying unlicensed class C drugs, unlicensed medicines and money laundering. Daniel and Matthew were given 4.5 and 3 years custodial sentence respectively. Jenna Hackland received 18 months in custody (suspended for 2 years) and 100 hours of unpaid work.

The defendants ran an online business that sold supplements to the body building community, however, many of these products included powerful drugs used to treat conditions ranging from severe acne to cancer.

In addition to importing medicines and supplements illegally, they also produced home-made drugs in a cement mixer which were then sold to unwitting and potentially desperate customers who were unaware of the poor conditions in which these drugs were made.

More than 112,090 tablets and 1,884 bottles of injectable liquids were seized from a rented office where MHRA enforcement officials found pill pressing equipment and dyes imported from China.

Suspicions arose when it was apparent that the Hacklands had unexplained wealth. Despite Daniel Hackland declaring no employment with HRMC between 2008 and 2013, watches worth £17k and cars worth more than £60k were owned by the family and approximately £49,000 was hidden in a safe in the loft.

Daniel showed no remorse when arrested by officers, simply stating ‘I knew this was going to happen eventually”.

Alastair Jeffrey, MHRA Head of Enforcement, said:

This is an example of how criminals are willing to put the health of others at risk to make money. Selling medicines outside of the regulated supply chain is a serious criminal offence and we continue to work with other regulatory and law enforcement colleagues to identify and prosecute those involved in this type of activity.

If you purchase medicines outside of the regulated supply chain you may well be buying products that have been made and stored in unsanitary conditions and which could cause significant harm.

MHRA is currently running the #FakeMeds campaign to warn people against buying potentially dangerous or useless unlicensed medicines sold by illegal online suppliers. Visit www.gov.uk/fakemeds for tips on buying medicines safely online and how to avoid unscrupulous sites.

The Commission is today giving public notice of its intention to issue an order to direct the winding up of Console Suicide Prevention Limited.

In July 2016 the Commission opened a statutory inquiry into the charity due to concerns that the assets of the charity may be at serious and significant risk of harm.

On 20 July 2017 the trustees of the charity advised the Commission of their decision to wind up the charity, however the Commission is not satisfied that they have taken sufficient steps to do so.

Section 84B of the Charities Act 2011 gives the Commission the power to issue an order to direct the winding up of a charity if it is satisfied that a charity does not operate, or its purposes can be promoted more effectively if it ceases to operate; and exercising the power is expedient in the public interest.

The Commission’s summary of reasons is set out in the Public Notice of Intention to Exercise Powers: Console Suicide Prevention Limited.

In accordance with section 84B(4) of the Act the Commission is inviting representations to be made in relation to its intention to make the Order. Representations must be made to the Commission within 30 days of the date of this notice.

Further information is available here.
Representations can be emailed to IAEInvestigationsCRM@charitycommission.gsi.gov.uk marking it ‘Representations to the Public Notice – Console Suicide Prevention Limited – 1153096’.

The Commission will consider any representations received within 30 days of this notice. The Commission may (without further public notice) issue the order (with or without modifications) on 2 November 2018, 60 days after the 1st day of this notice.

The Commission’s inquiry is ongoing. It is our intention to publish a report setting out our findings on conclusion of the inquiry.

Reports of previous inquiries are available on GOV.UK.

The governments of the UK and Argentina today signed an agreement that will facilitate academic cooperation through the mutual recognition of university degrees awarded by the universities of both countries.

The document states that, as of now, a Master´s degree awarded by an Argentine university “will allow direct access to doctoral programmes in higher education institutions of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, respecting the admission regulations of the Doctoral degree programme of the chosen institution”. In turn, a Master´s degree granted in the United Kingdom “will allow direct access to doctoral programmes in universities of the Argentine Republic, respecting the admission regulations of the doctoral programme of the chosen institution”. In addition, the agreement states that Doctoral degrees of both countries shall be considered academically comparable.

The agreement was signed by the Argentine Minister of Education, Culture, Science and Technology Alejandro Finocchiaro and by Lord Agnew Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the UK Department for Education, during a meeting held in the margins of the G-20 Education Ministerial Meeting in the city of Mendoza. The agreement was drafted with the participation of technical staff from the Secretariat of University Policies of the Argentine Ministry of Education and UK NARIC, the national agency for the recognition and comparison of international qualifications and skills. The British Council, the UK´s international organisation for cultural relations and educational opportunities, has supported the process.

Furthermore, both governments committed to explore, in the future, mechanisms to recognise undergraduate degrees and professional degrees, including those qualifying for the practice of regulated professions.

This agreement will enable Argentine graduates to pursue advanced training in one of the most prestigious university systems in the world, according to the latest edition of QS World University rankings. London was also chosen as the best destination in the world for international students, and the UK has four universities in the world’s top 10, and 18 in the top 100.

Your Royal Highness, your Excellency, distinguished guests.

Thank you, Your Royal Highness, for hosting this terrific event.

And thank you, for that kind introduction Denis Woulfe, co-leader of Men as Change Agents Group.

I would also like to thank Emer Timmons, co-leader of Men as Change Agents Group.

We have heard much about the gender pay gap in recent months.

We’ve heard some things about the phenomena that sit behind it; career choices that young girls make, unconscious bias in selection and promotion, a lack of confidence or a lack of assertiveness, the practical challenges and sacrifices made to care for another and the propensity of women to assume that responsibility, good old-fashioned discrimination and more.

And we’ve heard a little bit about how to tackle those challenges.

But we’ve heard practically nothing in the media about why it matters.

Why should we be worried about a lack of diversity in our institutions and our organisations?

What harm is done if we fail to include different perspectives and ideas?

I am obviously preaching to the choir but when I speak to less enlightened audiences I like to conduct a little experiment to make a point.

I want you all to think back to when you last hired a car.

When you went to pick the car up from the lease company what did you do?

Ladies, did you check the location and function of the lights, find where they horn was, work out how to tune the radio, double check the fuel and find out which side the petrol cap was on?

This is ringing bells I can tell.

Did you adjust the seat, check any accompanying passengers were comfortable?

Fellas, you didn’t do any of that did you? Did you get in, seatbelt up and drive?

Yes.

I am generalising, but we think differently.

And consequentially this is an issue which has real practical implications beyond the very evident issues of fairness and justice.

If we want our organisations or projects to succeed we had better include women.

If we do not then they won’t thrive.

When women are part of peace negotiations, the resulting treaties are a third more likely to last at least 15 years.

Once solely male organisations that have now opened up their ranks to women have become substantially more operationally effective.

Companies in the top quartile for gender diversity are 15% more likely to have profits above their industry averages.

And the world benefits.

Work by McKinsey estimates that bridging gender gaps in employment could add £150 billion to the UK economy by 2025.

For every human endeavour depends upon inclusion.

The fortunes of mankind depend on the talents of womankind.

So it matters to us all that nearly eight out of ten big UK employers pay men more than they pay women, and only a quarter of FTSE 350 board positions are occupied by women.

Given the challenges facing us today I don’t think we can wait for gender equality in the boardroom until 2043 or as the World Economic Forum predicts, more than two centuries to close the global gender pay gap.

We need women’s ideas, voices, perspectives, empathy, communication skills, talents and leadership on those challenges now.

I’m very proud that Britain has led the world by being the first country to require all businesses with 250 or more employees to publish their gender pay gaps. People from all sectors are showing leadership to close that gap, many of them men.

I want to thank the Women’s Business Council for the Men As Change Agents initiative and all of you fellas for your personal commitment to this agenda.

I want to congratulate you for your seeing how critical it is for understanding why this agenda is about an environment in which their partner, daughter, sister, mother can reach their full potential and for understanding that it is also about every sector, community and our nation being strong, fit for purpose and the best it can be.

Thank you for knowing that it is both right and smart.

I hope you will grow in number.

We need to change workplace culture and promote shared parental leave, encouraging fathers to take their share, and so our businesses and services reflect our nation.

It is in all our interests that this is so.

So, ladies, and gentlemen, thanks very much.

More information about the speech can be found on the everyone will benefit if men include more women in top roles press release.