---

Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers’ Compensation) (Payment of Claims) (Amendment) Regulations 2008

Again, I am grateful to my noble friend for those fascinating insights. It is a key bit of Labour history which some of us read about in books in the 1970s, and to hear directly from someone who was engaged in that and worked with a great Prime Minister as well is indeed fascinating. The noble Lord, Lord Lyell, asked which diseases were covered. I confirm that byssinosis is covered. He asked specifically whether the same rates were applicable to each of the diseases. As I explained, the rate of compensation is determined in part by the age of the sufferer and the degree of disability that the disease demonstrates, although mesothelioma is always compensable at the highest rate of 100 per cent. However, generally the same tables apply to all the five conditions that I listed. I hope that that deals with the noble Lord’s point. The noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, asked about indexation. I reiterate that there is no statutory requirement for this, although there is a government commitment to it. I think that that commitment is clearly on the record and we do not necessarily need to embody it in legislation. The change is driven by the RPI adjustment; there is no reassessment along the way in terms of medical issues and evidence. The noble Lord asked for an assurance that pressures on the department would not impact on the claims process. I reassure him that, whatever pressures the department is under, they will not impact on administrative effectiveness in delivering the benefit. I think that I dealt with the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, about the total number of claims. He also asked about pleural plaques. A House of Lords judgment was recently handed down which concluded that pleural plaques, per se, were not compensable. The Government obviously had to consider long and hard whether to seek to legislate to overturn the impact of that judgment, and they have determined not to do so. That is not to say that someone suffering from pleural plaques who then developed a disease could not be compensated for that, but with regard to the existence of pleural plaques, the Government have accepted the House of Lords judgment in that case.