Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Mike Weir (Scottish National Party) in the House of Commons on Monday, 3 December 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill.


Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. Clapham). He could not get the name of the Scottish Parliament right, but I will forgive him for that. This is a serious matter. The judgment of the Law Lords overturned a situation that had existed for at least 20 years in which pleural plaques were recognised as a compensatable condition. Although pleural plaques do not necessarily lead to mesothelioma, they show that someone has been exposed to asbestos and may well develop a more serious condition. It is serious enough for people to know of their exposure to asbestos, and of what may happen thereafter. The current position reflects the long struggle of people suffering from asbestosis to obtain compensation, and the way in which some companies have tried to get out of paying it. I think that that is a disgrace. The hon. Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire, North (Jim Sheridan) mentioned the Scottish Parliament and the fact that this was a United Kingdom-wide decision. It is a United Kingdom-wide decision because the ultimate court of appeal in civil cases from Scotland is the House of Lords, and the lower courts in Scotland are bound by the decisions of the House of Lords. This problem can be dealt with only if the law is changed, and that is what the Scottish Parliament intends to do. On 29 November the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill, said:"““Following careful consideration of the 17 October 2007 House of Lords Judgment on pleural plaques and having listened to the views of representatives of asbestos campaign groups and of the insurance industry, the Scottish Government has decided to introduce a Bill to reverse the Judgment so that those negligently exposed to asbestos who have been diagnosed with pleural plaques will continue to be able to raise and pursue actions for damages in Scotland. We will prepare a Bill which would take effect from the date of the Judgment.””" That means that the legislation will be retrospective, becoming effective from the date on which the House of Lords ca'd the feet from under those who were bringing their cases. I understand that it is possible for a Bill to be introduced in the Scottish Parliament because civil law and the law on damages are devolved. The hon. Member for Rochdale (Paul Rowen) made an important point. We should bear it in mind that when we speak of compensation for pleural plaques, we are speaking of relatively small sums. Most of those who received compensation received very modest amounts, not in the range of the amounts received by people suffering from mesothelioma. We are not talking about vast sums. We are talking about justice: justice for people who have been exposed to asbestos in the past through no fault of their own.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
468 c614-5 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Child support Children Compensation Appeals Crime Civil service Advisory services Asbestos Child Support Agency Fees and charges Information Industrial diseases Maintenance Parents Payments Parliamentary scrutiny Non-departmental public bodies Overseas residence Scotland Respiratory system Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission
Legislation
Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk