Proceeding contribution from Stuart C McDonald (Scottish National Party) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 24 March 2020. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Windrush Compensation Scheme (Expenditure) Bill.
Windrush Compensation Scheme (Expenditure) Bill
I ask the Minister to look at that again. I get the point that caseworkers have to be very careful and seek as much evidence as possible when it comes to certain types of losses, including loss of earnings, but to phrase it as “beyond reasonable doubt” seems pretty controversial. All I am asking is that he goes away and thinks about that and perhaps consults Home Office solicitors, because it seems very unusual to demand that standard of proof. I understand the need for evidence, but “beyond reasonable doubt” seems very strange.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 674 c309
- Session
- 2019-21
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Compensation Criminal records Appeals Applications Deportation Evidence Eligibility Recovery of costs Take-up Windrush generation
- Legislation
- Windrush Compensation Scheme (Expenditure) Bill 2019-21
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on hansard.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-26 21:21:53 +0100
- URI
- http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-03-24/20032448000122
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-03-24/20032448000122
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-03-24/20032448000122