Criminal Damage (Compensation) (Amendment) (Northern Ireland) Order 2009

My Lords, the Criminal Damages (Compensation) (Northern Ireland) Order 1977 provides a right to claim compensation from the Secretary of State for loss suffered to property as a result of damage caused in Northern Ireland by an unlawful assembly of three or more persons, by terrorist acts, or as a result of malicious or wanton damage to agricultural property. This amendment arises from concerns about an increase in attacks on community halls in 2007. This increase ran against the trend of a low and reducing number of such attacks in previous years. The increase in criminal attacks on community halls has highlighted both their general vulnerability and the difficulty that they may have in meeting the current criteria for eligibility for statutory compensation under the 1977 order. Their location and relative isolation has often affected claims for criminal damage compensation, where the PSNI has experienced difficulty in obtaining evidence on whether the damage was caused by either three or more people, or to certify that damage was the result of terrorist or paramilitary activity. The aim of the draft order is to create an additional route to compensation for community halls. There is no readily available definition of what constitutes a community hall, so it is proposed that buildings which are exempt from rates under Article 41(2)(e) or Article 41A of the Rates (Northern Ireland) Order 1977 should be eligible for statutory compensation. Article 41(2)(e) and Article 41A cover all properties that have been granted rates exemption on the basis that the rates authorities are satisfied that their use, or availability for use, is for charitable purposes as set out in the Recreational Charities Act (Northern Ireland) 1958. The 1958 Act defines as charitable the provision, or assisting in the provision, of facilities for recreation or other leisure-time occupation, if the facilities are provided in the interests of social welfare. I understand that a very wide range of facilities will benefit from the order. By way of illustration, it will cover facilities as diverse as the Ardoyne Youth Club in Belfast, the Loup Women’s Group in County Londonderry, the Indian Community Centre in north Belfast and Ballinderry Road Orange Hall in Lisburn. The Northern Ireland Office consulted widely on these proposals and also referred them to the Northern Ireland Assembly. Ministers also met the Orange Order, the Gaelic Athletic Association and the insurance industry in considering how to frame this proposal. Broadly, the draft legislation was welcomed by all respondents. The majority of responses—14 out of 21—called for a sunset clause to be removed. The SDLP expressed concerns that coverage was not wide enough, thought the measure had not been adequately equality-proofed and suggested that any approach should focus on the nature of the attack, not the status of the building. The Gaelic Athletic Association also called for the draft legislation to be amended to include the GAA and other sporting, cultural and heritage organisations. The Government noted the concerns that including a sunset clause might in some way limit the effectiveness of this legislation and, after careful consideration, removed the sunset clause from the draft order. An equality screening exercise on this proposal was carried out. It determined that there might be a higher uptake by the Protestant or unionist communities and men, reflecting the greater number of community halls owned by the Protestant or unionist communities and the fact that some of these properties have been specifically targeted for attacks. By linking with rates legislation relating to charitable usage, the Government are seeking to focus on the disadvantage that arises to users of community halls, not just those who own them. The proposed additional criterion applies equally to all claimants that will fall within the definition of community halls, regardless of their membership of Section 75 groups. The Government have concluded that the Northern Ireland Office has met its statutory obligations under Section 75 and that further assessment of the policy’s impact on the promotion of equality of opportunity is not required. In reaching this conclusion the Government have taken careful account of the screening exercise that was carried out, the purpose of the proposed legislation, which has the same policy intent that underlies the current rating legislation on which it relies for its definition of community hall, and further analysis of community halls that are currently exempt from rates under Articles 41(2)(e) and 41A of the rating legislation. The calls for the provisions to be extended to include sporting, cultural and heritage support organisations would widen the scope of the legislation far beyond its intention of being a focused measure. That would have far-reaching and indeterminate implications for criminal damage budgets, as it would move the Government into the position of being virtually the insurer of first resort and seriously distort the commercial insurance market. It would also take scarce resources from other priority areas. It is clear that the GAA and other cultural and heritage organisations provide valuable services and facilities to local communities, and I acknowledge that they have on occasion been subject to criminal attacks. However, where a GAA hall, or any hall, is exempt from rates under Article 41(2)(e) of the Rates (Northern Ireland) Order 1977 it will be eligible to claim compensation under this proposal. The Government’s conclusion is that the legislation should not be broadened to include properties that do not meet the proposed criterion. The Government have looked carefully at the SDLP’s suggestion that access to compensation should focus on the nature of the attack, not the status of the building. However, this would require a fundamental change in the Government’s approach and would offer a less certain mechanism by which to determine eligibility for compensation. The Government do not think this suggestion sufficiently addresses the practical difficulties in obtaining the necessary evidence regarding intent. On balance, the Government’s approach provides a surer approach to sustaining community infrastructure when it comes under criminal attack. The Northern Ireland Assembly’s ad hoc committee made recommendations on the sunset provisions, equality-proofing and publicising the new arrangements. I have already spoken about the sunset clause and equality impact assessment. In relation to publicising the new arrangements, the Government propose that the commencement of this legislation is publicised by means of a press campaign. Furthermore, the Compensation Agency will amend its forms and processes so that the rates exemption status of future claimants will be readily identified. Future costs will depend on the scale of attacks on community halls. However, based on historic levels of claims received and acceptance rates, the Government estimate that up to an additional £300,000 per year will be paid in criminal damage compensation relating to attacks on community halls. The Government’s intention is to provide an additional route to statutory criminal damage compensation to assist all eligible community halls where they are subject to criminal damage. This order will provide support and assurance to community halls, facilities that play a vital but often underappreciated role in maintaining and sustaining the social infrastructure in the areas they serve. I am pleased to bring forward these proposals. I consider the additional criterion to be timely, proportionate and welcome, and I commend the draft to the House.