← Back to Westminster Hall Debates

Windrush Compensation Scheme

03 March 2022

Lead MP

Diana R. Johnson
Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham
Lab

Responding Minister

Kevin Foster

Tags

TaxationEmploymentForeign AffairsBenefits & Welfare
Word Count: 12889
Other Contributors: 3

At a Glance

Diana R. Johnson raised concerns about windrush compensation scheme in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key Requests to Government:

The lead MP asks the Minister to provide an update on progress with campaigns targeting non-Caribbean Commonwealth communities, confirm when the first data release will occur, announce the date of the next face-to-face engagement event, reconsider transferring the scheme to an independent organisation if distrust persists, and address concerns about compensation for impact on life, loss of employment, and pension. The Labour party calls for the compensation scheme to be placed in the hands of an independent body away from the Home Office to restore faith in the process and ensure quick delivery of compensation. I ask the Minister to provide updated figures on applications and explain what is being done to encourage more victims to come forward.

How the Debate Unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:

Lead Contributor

Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham
Opened the debate
The vast majority of people who have applied for compensation from the Windrush scheme have yet to receive a penny, leading some to experience further trauma rather than redress. Only 3,387 applications were received by the end of December 2021, with only 940 claims receiving payment. Two heartbreaking accounts are highlighted: Anthony Williams was wrongly classed as an illegal immigrant and sacked in 2013; Glenda Caesar was incorrectly dismissed from her job in 2009 and denied unemployment benefits for a decade. Despite some positive recommendations on outreach, the Home Office's response is criticised for its inadequacies and lack of engagement. The Windrush generation have been failed by the Conservative Government's hostile environment programme and subsequent delays in delivering compensation. The National Audit Office has criticised the scheme, with only about 20% of eligible individuals having applied for compensation by January 2023, and fewer than 10% receiving any compensation at all. Some victims have died before receiving their due, highlighting the need for an overhaul.

Government Response

Kevin Foster
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve under the chairship of Dame Angela Eagle. The Government are determined to ensure that everyone who suffered due to their inability to demonstrate lawful status in the UK receives every penny of compensation to which they are entitled, and we have paid more than £43 million in total. The minister acknowledged the constructive challenges raised by other Members and welcomed the Home Affairs Committee's report on the scheme. They highlighted significant progress with changes made last year that resulted in higher awards being made, including a single award of over £260,000 recently. Additionally, the Government are rapidly increasing the size of their casework team to 120 by spring and continue to look closely at further improvements to the design of the scheme. The minister mentioned efforts to promote new applications through community engagement, national communications campaigns, and relaunching face-to-face work imminently. He confirmed that individuals who were left without a home or suffered due to poor standards of accommodation will receive full compensation. The Government are also reviewing rules on mitigation of loss and working with independent experts to ensure applicants have access to free assistance in making claims.
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy

About Westminster Hall Debates

Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.