What Happens When the National Redress Scheme Expires?
The National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse was established in July 2018 as one of the central responses to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. It promised a framework for recognition and healing where the civil system had too often failed.
But built into the legislation was an expiry clause. Under section 193 of the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018 (Cth), the scheme is set to “sunset” on 30 June 2028, with applications closing a year earlier, on 30 June 2027.
More than 50,000 people are estimated to be eligible. Still, the Department of Social Services’ 2025 data shows that thousands of applications remain unresolved, and the average wait time has extended well beyond six months.
A “Crunch Point” for Survivors
In late 2024, the Joint Standing Committee on Implementation of the National Redress Scheme released its report, Redress: Journey to Justice. It warned of a “dangerous crunch point,” predicting that the scheme’s resources would not keep pace with demand before the statutory sunset. Without legislative change, many survivors could be “effectively denied justice by delay.”
Advocates report that trauma, mental health challenges, and the complexity of the application process make it difficult for survivors to come forward. Legal support services note that many applicants require extensive assistance to gather evidence and identify responsible institutions — a process that can take years.
The Law Society of NSW has publicly called for a five-year extension, arguing that the current timeframe “risks closing the door on survivors who, through no fault of their own, cannot meet the deadline.” The Society’s June 2025 letter to the Law Council emphasised that access to justice should not be constrained by administrative expiry dates.
Delays, Complexity, and Administrative Strain
By mid-2025, the Redress Scheme had received more than 29,000 applications, but thousands remained in progress. The Department attributed delays to the increasing complexity of cases and the need for institutional responses. Each application requires confirmation from the responsible institution, assessment of harm, and determination of payment.
Although the scheme was designed to be survivor-centred, critics argue it has become the opposite. The process is paper-heavy, slow, and emotionally taxing. Some applicants receive determinations years after applying, and the average payment (around $87,000) falls short of many survivors’ expectations.
If this pace continues, the scheme could enter 2027 with a significant backlog — forcing officials either to rush assessments or to let applications lapse.
What Happens After 2028?
The legislation provides for specific “transitional” measures. These may include ongoing access to counselling or continued processing of lodged applications. However, the law is largely silent on post-sunset support.
This raises serious questions for survivors who apply late or whose institutions are only now joining the scheme. Some faith-based and private entities delayed participation; others entered only under public pressure. If the scheme closes while relevant institutions remain unaccountable, survivors may be left without a pathway to redress.
Toward a More Enduring Model
The approaching sunset invites reflection on the design of redress itself. Should justice for survivors of institutional abuse be treated as a temporary administrative program or as an ongoing national responsibility?
International practice increasingly favours the latter. Continuing therapeutic support, truth-telling processes, and public education are all essential parts of redress. Extending or transforming the National Redress Scheme into a permanent restorative justice institution would align Australia with global best practice and the recommendations of its own Royal Commission.
Koffels Solicitors & Barristers continues to act for survivors of institutional abuse and advocates for the ongoing accessibility of justice mechanisms. Our firm supports reforms that ensure no survivor is left behind when the National Redress Scheme sunsets.
