THE REALIZATION OF A NEW COMPENSATION SCHEME (ILSE MAAS, SENIOR POLICY OFFICER AT THE MINISTRY OF HOUSING, SPATIAL PLANNING AND THE ENVIRONMENT)

Guest editorial by Ilse Maas, senior policy officer at the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment. She writes about the realization of the TNS scheme, the new scheme for a financial compensation for mesothelioma victims without an employment contract.
Ilse Maas, senior policy officer at the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, was the project leader in 2007 for the so-called TNS scheme, the new scheme for a financial compensation for mesothelioma victims without an employment contract. She writes about the realization.
On November 10, 2006, the government also decided to give people who had been mesothelioma by giving asbestos exposure in, for example, the environment a financial compensation. A desired decision, based on three basic principles. And in one year time, through the necessary procedures and the elaboration of criteria, has been implemented.

Three important starting points for the decision

In view of both the interests of the victims and the responsible use of public funds, efficient implementation was the first starting point. This meant that as much as possible had to be connected to the already existing TAS scheme (for victims whose illness can be traced back to asbestos exposure in an employment contract). The same executors were chosen: the Social Insurance Bank (SVB) as the decision-maker and the Asbestos Victims Institute (IAS) as the entrance for the victims. Furthermore, among other things, the amount of the amount corresponds to the TAS.

A second point of departure was that the government does not take responsibility for this arrangement that belongs to someone else. The compensation is not a substitute for compensation by a liable party. Each applicant grants the SVB a power of attorney to recover the amount provided where possible.

Finally, it was not the intention to open the door to government provisions for other cases of damage through the environment. The Cabinet decision is limited to the special case of mesothelioma: a disease that is 1-to-1 related to asbestos and that is progressing rapidly, so that victims often no longer experience the outcome of a civil trial.

Three important elements in the realization:
procedures, criteria and implementation

In the first place, procedures had to be followed. A (new) power of a minister needs a legal basis; this had to be created here for the Minister of VROM. Fortunately, the new cabinet made the desired construction of execution by the SVB on behalf of VROM possible; the regulation could then be accelerated. The follow-up steps, including an implementation test by the SVB, were taken with extra speed.

A second element was drawing up criteria for who is eligible. These amount to 1) that a contribution to the suffering may not have been received by any other means and 2) that the victim must have a connection with the Netherlands. The first means: no right to the TAS, no compensation by a liable party, no amount on the basis of a (government) provision abroad. The second criterion would ideally distinguish the victims who became ill because of asbestos exposure in the Netherlands. Since this can never be determined exactly, it has been decided to use conditions under which it is plausible that the exposure (in any case also) has taken place in the Netherlands. When a victim had lived in the Netherlands for at least ten good years,

In view of the time involved in elaborating the regulation, a transitional period was chosen from the time of the Cabinet's decision in principle. For victims who have already died since that date, their next of kin can submit an application. Possibly survivors have hoped for a more extensive "retroactive effect". That is always a difficult point: when you decide to improve something for the future, to what extent are you going to straighten it for the past? Since the concession is in principle intended for the victim himself, the current choice has been made.
The Asbestos Victims Association Netherlands and the Asbestos Victims Committee were consulted and were satisfied with the regulation as required.

Last but not least: a good regulation stands or falls with good execution. That is why the SVB and the IAS have been involved from the very beginning. With their experience in the implementation of the TAS scheme, they have put all work processes in order in a short time. With the commitment of their directors, extra priority has been given over the past few months, which means it will be ready as of this month. All people with mesothelioma can apply to the IAS for a reimbursement under one of the two government regulations. Although the victims do not get their health back, this is expected to be a welcome sign of social involvement in their suffering.

Ilse Maas, December 2007