Proceeding contribution from Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 19 July 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Compensation Bill [HL].
Compensation Bill [HL]
My Lords, I am grateful to noble Lords who have participated in this short but important debate. As my noble friend Lord Dixon was speaking, I was aware that the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, had described this issue as ““attracting emulsion””. I think that the noble Lord will agree with me that the strength of feeling displayed by my noble friend is precisely the reason why—and I think that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, was alluding to this—it is so important that we have brought forward the measure in this way. The noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, is right in saying that the Appellate Committee made the right decision. We looked at the practical consequences of that decision, and decided that they warranted us to think how we might deal with what were clearly going to be intolerable conditions for people suffering from this terrible disease. It is right, too, that the DTI joined in with the case. It wanted clarification of whether liability should be joint and several. The consequences of the case were entirely appropriate for us to bring forward this amendment to the Bill. It is important, and the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, put it very well, that those who suffer from this disease are able to get the compensation they need as quickly as possible. I stress again that this amendment is but part of the work that will continue to be done by my department and by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. Retrospectivity is something we thought about extremely carefully, for all the reasons indicated by those who have spoken. This is exceptional. It is not about setting a precedent. However, as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, indicated, from time to time—but only very occasionally—there may be circumstances where that is appropriate. The noble and learned Lord referred to another situation where that was the case.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 684 c1322-3
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Compensation Courts Damages Asbestos Employment Liability Payments Negligence Mesothelioma Victims Industrial injuries disablement benefit Claims management services
- Legislation
- Compensation Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:50:02 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_339314
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_339314
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_339314