Clause 1
Compensation Bill [Lords]
5:00 pm
Julian Brazier (Shadow Minister, Transport; Canterbury, Conservative)
The hon. Gentleman makes a good point, but the fact is that America, which has the worst compensation culture in the world with more than five times our level of litigation, has a much higher barrier in most states to protect sport and adventure training than would be created even by a clause 1 strengthened in the way the amendment proposes. In most American states, reckless disregard must be proved, which means in practice that intent must be proved, and my concern is with those areas. My hon. Friend the Member for Upminster (Angela Watkinson) made a powerful case by saying that the courts should take the circumstances into account rather than having the option to do so.
It would be burdensome to repeat the case from a court in Manchester that I described in detail on Second Reading, as almost everybody here was present. However, I ask hon. Members to consider whether the judge in that case, which took place while the matter was being debated in another place, would have bothered to use his discretion in the way the clause advocates. Hon. Members will remember that he awarded £15,000 against the Scouts for allowing a Brownie to cut herself by sitting on a seat in an auditorium that had been doubly inspected before a pantomime that the Scouts were performing for the Brownies.
Ian Lewis, the director of Campaign for Adventure, which brings together most of the adventure training organisations in this country, commented:
“The British Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association and the British Horse Society...are being forced to close centres because the insurance is becoming unaffordable. This is because the judiciary fail to realise the implications of their decisions and perceptions related to them.”
The question is not about the wider compensation culture but whether the activities of youth, adventure training and sporting groups are being affected by the kind of decision that was not made 15 years ago.
I mentioned on Second Reading that I have submitted a string of cases to the Government. When the all-party group submitted them, we were told that they did not have law reports and so could not be taken into account, even though we provided dates, locations and the names of the judges concerned. There were cases against the Scouts, a case against a yacht club and a case against a rugby club; there was a whole string of them. In only one case, that of the rugby club, was there a fair degree of argument on both sides. In every other case, the ordinary layperson would have agreed that it was completely unreasonable, if we want people to operate voluntary organisations for the benefit of young people and others who want those opportunities, to make such decisions.
I shall quote a new ally. The website of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents says:
“Exciting and stimulating play areas not only contribute to the physical and psychological development of the child but also discourage children from playing in dangerous locations such as railway lines, canals and river banks and alongside roads.”
Indeed, on the “Today” programme on 15 June, David Yearley of ROSPA said that in his view, play areas were simply becoming “boring”. TheDaily Telegraph also reported that he told an international play safety conference at Loughborough, Leicestershire, that playgrounds should be
“as safe as necessary, not as safe as possible”.
That is not the mentality of modern judges, and the cases that I have quoted illustrate that.
The Girl Guides, who have a waiting list of 50,000 girls and are 8,000 volunteers short, have stated:
“We want the Bill to renew the recognition by the public at large that there is an acceptable degree of risk in worthwhile activities for children and young adults...The perception that anyone working with other people’s children risks being sued for even the most minor accident is hugely detrimental to children’s freedom to partake”
in adventure activities
“by discouraging existing volunteers to run activities”.