Over the last few weeks we have provided updates on the publication of the IICSA’s first two investigation reports – Rochdale and Child Migration. This week the IICSA published their Interim Report (“the Report”) as required by their Terms of Reference. The Report brings together the IICSA’s work to date following the five public hearings held, two investigation reports and a series of seminars discussing issues relevant to child sexual abuse. Continue reading
The Survivors of Organised and Institutional Abuse (SOIA) group have today withdrawn its support for the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), with reports saying it has lost confidence in the process.
The Home Affairs Select Committee has today published a report in to the work of the IICSA. Its focus is on its independence and accountability; Dame Lowell Goddard; Counsel to the Inquiry; IICSA’s duty of care to those working on the Inquiry; the role of the Committee in scrutinising the work of the IICSA; and the future approach to the Inquiry’s work.
The Home Affairs Committee met yesterday to discuss the work of the IICSA. IICSA witnesses were: Professor Alexis Jay OBE – Chair, and Panel Members Ivor Frank and Drusilla Sharpling CBE.
The Committee sought to address three key areas:
- What was going on? Focusing on the departure of Dame Lowell Goddard and other key players;
- A synopsis of where the IICSA was now; and
- Where the Inquiry goes from here.
The IICSA witnesses provided a unified front and although at they were times unable to answer questions due to confidentiality/HR issues, or an understandable reluctance to engage in further personal criticism, they were able to explain:
- As Panel members they had had concerns about Goddard’s leadership – they considered she would have preferred to have sat without a Panel. Under her tenure they were kept at a distance from a lot of the Inquiry’s activities. Drusilla Sharpling reported concerns regarding Goddard’s leadership and the IICSA’s progress to the Home Office in April 2016 but made it very clear she gave no permission then for such concerns to be taken further; it was merely a notification of the situation to the Home Office.
- The witnesses refused to be drawn into media speculation, especially that relating to Ben Emmerson QC, but they confirmed Emmerson was retained by the Inquiry following his resignation to undertake a handover, however this period was coming to an end shortly. Professor Jay reiterated a number of times that the Inquiry is bigger than any individual, ego or personality.
- The Inquiry has made progress and there have been collective achievements as a result of the hard work of staff, who would continue to work hard moving forward. Professor Jay made it clear the review she initiated following her appointment was on-going and further details would be provided in due course and although the IICSA’s work was moving forward it would be tackled in a different way. Its scope however would not be reduced. The witnesses explained a plan was in place to progress and report with the intention that significant progress will have been made by 2020; with an interim report to be produced by 2018 and further reports to be provided as progress is made.
- When asked about the perceived lost confidence in the Inquiry, the IICSA witnesses said they felt the Inquiry had the confidence of many, they continued to engage with survivors and would be taking up more invitations to go and talk about the work of the Inquiry.
Ivor Frank and Drusilla Sharpling confirmed they had no issues with Jay’s leadership. Ivor Frank was keen to highlight to the Committee, that whilst he understood their interest and request for further information relating to the number of Home Office employees working for the IICSA, the IICSA guarded its independence. The IICSA witnesses also made it clear they were present as a matter of courtesy not compulsion.
Professor Jay said the Inquiry would welcome a period of time with no distractions and hopefully moving forward this can be achieved.
Mark Sedwill – Permanent Secretary, Home Office, was then interviewed. The questions put to him related to old territory: Goddard’s appointment; the relationship between the IICSA and the Home Office; allegations against Goddard. He was heavily criticised, along with Amber Rudd, in relation to the evidence they previously gave. Sedwell suggested his evidence was based on the line of questioning, previously the focus was on Goddard’s own motives for stepping down. He confirmed the concerns raised by Drusilla Sharpling were an early warning to the Home Office but it was understood the Panel were seeking to deal with concerns internally. If a formal complaint had been made, steps would have been taken. Sedwill also confirmed Goddard made no request to the Home Office to withdraw her resignation as suggested in the press.
The media might have been hoping or expecting more “gossip” to fuel the frenzy that has surrounded the IICSA in the last few months, but the IICSA – presented yesterday by its new Chair and two of its Panel members, refused to engage in such discussions instead seeking to focus public attention on the IICSA’s work – previous, current and on-going, and the purpose for which the IICSA was established.
Miriam Rahamim, Solicitor, BLM
The second chair of the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry has today published an update statement. Meanwhile interest in the IICSA remains high with a debate in the House of Commons today and due from Prof Jay and others tomorrow.
The IICSA again makes the headlines today with more “revelations” of a fractured organisation unable to cope with the task it has been set. The Times reports it has investigated in particular the work of the former chair Dame Lowell Goddard and it reports various allegations made against her. Meanwhile, in advance of the expected imminent publication of the review of the work of Operation Midland by the Metropolitan Police, it is also reported that Lord Bramall has received a personal apology from Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe. That was in connection with having been publically named in an investigation in to allegations of the sexual abuse of children.
Following the events of the last 48 hours it is no surprise that Ben Emmerson QC has now confirmed his resignation as counsel to the Inquiry. Earlier today his supporting counsel Elizabeth Prochaska announced she had resigned on 15 September.
Media reports yesterday somewhat surprisingly reported that Ben Emmerson QC was thinking of resigning, an unusual announcement and one which surely heralds his departure. By last night he had been suspended due to concerns it is reported about his leadership.
The IICSA has published details of the salary of Prof Jay and the cost of the Inquiry to date (£14.73m). As expected the salary is lower than that of Dame Goddard. More surprisingly the first year budget of £17.2m was not all spent and the surplus was returned to the Home Office. This surplus may be due to good financial housekeeping or possibly because progress was not made in certain previously anticipated areas. One such area may be the lack of a permanent location for the hearings to proceed or because it has taken longer to reach the current stage and so hearings have not yet been possible.
Prof Jay’s salary will be £185,000pa, just over half of the sum to Dame Goddard and without all the additional costs. The two largest cost elements of the Inquiry to date have been staffing and legal costs. These were followed by Estates and Information Technology. No details have been given of the budget for the next year but it is fair to assume that at least a similar sum will be spent as the case studies and hearings proceed.
Paula Jefferson, Partner
Today the Home Affairs Committee heard oral evidence from the Rt Hon Amber Rudd MP, Home Secretary, and Mark Sedwill, Permanent Secretary, Home Office regarding the work of the Home Secretary. Dame Lowell Goddard who had been invited to attend did not and sent a memo (reported on yesterday) specifying her reasons for her resignation.