This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/05/child-abuse-inquiry-lowell-goddard-mps

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Child abuse inquiry: Lowell Goddard is asked to appear before MPs Abuse victims' groups to be consulted before new inquiry chair appointed
(about 3 hours later)
The chair of the Commons home affairs committee has asked Dame Lowell Goddard to appear before MPs to explain her sudden resignation as chair of the public inquiry into institutional child abuse, the third person to quit the role in little over two years. The government has said it will consult victims’ groups before appointing a new chair of the public inquiry into child abuse, as MPs sought answers from Dame Lowell Goddard as to why she suddenly quit the job after little more than a year.
Keith Vaz said he had written to the New Zealand judge, who announced her resignation on Thursday night, to ask whether she would appear before the committee when parliament returns “to help us in determining what is going to happen in the future”. Goddard, a New Zealand judge, who stepped down without warning on Thursday night, was the third chair to depart in the chaotic two years of the inquiry, which aims to examine decades of allegations of institutionalised child abuse.
The Labour MP told Sky News: “She is someone with impeccable credentials, so this is a big shock that she chooses to resign now. I think what’s really important is that we find out the reasons why she has decided to take this course of action.” With some of the groups participating in the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) calling for it to be revamped for a second time, the home secretary, Amber Rudd, has promised to find a replacement for Goddard as soon as possible, while not setting out a timetable.
Vaz said he wanted to know more about the reasons behind the departure of Goddard, whose resignation statement said the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, set up in 2014, was beset with a “legacy of failure”. In an attempt to prevent another misjudged appointment, this recruitment process will see Rudd consult the two panels associated with the inquiry, a group of four experts, and seven people who represent survivors and victims of child abuse.
Vaz added: “Because although we’ve had ministers and parliament and others involved, she of course has been intimately concerned with establishing this very difficult inquiry, so what she has to say is extremely pertinent, and I don’t really think a resignation letter or a statement is enough.” For now, the reasons behind Goddard’s reasons for quitting, and even her whereabouts, remain unknown. A spokeswoman for the inquiry said Goddard was in the UK on Thursday, but it was not known if she had already returned to New Zealand.
Following a brief resignation letter to the home secretary, Amber Rudd, Goddard released a statement that indicated that the controversies and challenges of the inquiry were insurmountable. In a statement explaining her departure, Goddard said it had been “incredibly difficult” to leave her family in New Zealand, but also indicated that the sheer scale of the task had proved too daunting. The inquiry had a “legacy of failure which has been very hard to shake off”, she said, arguing that in retrospect the entire process should have started again when she took on the role.
Without fully explaining her reasons, Goddard said it had been “incredibly difficult” to take on the job, and leave behind her family in New Zealand. Earlier this week it was reported that the judge had taken three months’ holiday since being appointed in April last year. Keith Vaz, the Labour MP who chairs the home affairs select committee, said he had written to Goddard asking her to appear after the parliamentary recess to explain her actions, and how she thought the process could go on.
While she said there had been many achievements from the inquiry, Goddard said the scale of the task made it especially hard, adding: “Compounding the many difficulties was its legacy of failure which has been very hard to shake off and with hindsight it would have been better to have started completely afresh.” “I think what’s really important is that we find out the reasons why she has decided to take this course of action,” Vaz told Sky News. “What she has to say is extremely pertinent and I don’t really think a resignation letter or a statement is enough.”
In accepting her resignation, Rudd said that making a success of the inquiry “remains an absolute priority for this government”. Tom Watson, the Labour deputy leader who pushed for the inquiry to be established, called on Rudd to fully explain Goddard’s departure, and to “provide reassurance and a remedy to this very shortly”.
A subsequent statement from the inquiry team said its work would continue as scheduled, with Rudd taking the lead in selecting a new chair. Goddard’s resignation came hours after it was reported that the 67-year-old judge, who had a salary of £360,000, had spent more than 70 days working abroad or on holiday since officially opening the revamped inquiry in July last year.
The first two chairs, Elizabeth Butler-Sloss and Dame Fiona Woolf, both stood down amid questions over their links to establishment figures associated with the work of the inquiry. Hugh Davis QC, deputy counsel to the inquiry, also resigned at the end of the last year. A Home Office spokesman said the department was still working on Goddard’s terms of departure, including whether she would receive any payoff.
Experts and representatives of abuse victims said Goddard’s resignation meant the government should reconsider the scope and remit of the far-reaching inquiry. It is the latest in a string of high-profile departures for the inquiry, set up by Theresa May in July 2014 when she was still home secretary. By October that year the first two chairs, Elizabeth Butler-Sloss and Dame Fiona Woolf, had both quit amid questions over their links to establishment figures associated with the work of the inquiry.
Sue Berelowitz, the former deputy children’s commissioner, called for a review into the inquiry, which was established by Theresa May when she was home secretary. Goddard was elected in 2015 to head a refashioned statutory inquiry, with the power to compel witnesses to give evidence. But at the end of the year Hugh Davis QC, deputy counsel to the inquiry, also resigned.
“There should be a review of where it has got to and how it is doing,” Berelowitz said. “It seems to me the inquiry has lost its way. The real importance of learning lessons about institutional failings in the past is to stop children being abused today. News of Goddard’s departure was greeted with dismay by some participants in the inquiry. Andrew Lavery from White Flowers Alba, a group representing Scottish victims of abuse, said he and others had only learned the news from the media.
“I think there needs to be some reform of the inquiry. I don’t think it was right for it to have been set up as a quasi court for hearing individual cases. In a sense the inquiry has got too specific.” “I’m still ringing round very distressed individuals, telling them that Goddard has gone,” he said. Lavery said he had requested a meeting with Rudd to seek assurances about the continuation of the inquiry. “It’s not perfect, but it’s the best thing we have,” he said. “If we don’t have this there’s nothing.”
Graham Wilmer, who established the Lantern Project, which helps victims of sexual abuse, and was a member of the abuse inquiry panel under its second chair, Woolf, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the existing structure was “far too complicated”. Lucy Duckworth, who sits on the inquiry’s victims and survivors’ consultative panel and will thus help select the new chair, insisted the process would continue.
“It’s not called the Goddard inquiry; it’s the independent inquiry,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “There are many staff there that are working extremely hard to lay down the infrastructure, which they have done as a foundation.”
A spokeswoman for the inquiry said that even without a chair work would be “carrying on as usual”, led in the interim by the expert panel. Two of these, Alexis Jay, who led an inquiry into child abuse in Rotherham, south Yorkshire, and Drusilla Sharpling, a barrister and child protection expert, have been mentioned as potential new chairs.
The Home Office has, meanwhile, sought to play down the worries. Rudd “has been clear that the work will continue without delay and that the government’s commitment to the inquiry is undiminished,” a spokesman said. He added: “The inquiry will continue to challenge institutions and individuals without fear or favour, and get to the truth.”
Some experts, however, have wondered whether the focus of the inquiry should be redrawn. Sue Berelowitz, the former deputy children’s commissioner, called for a review. “I don’t think it was right for it to have been set up as a quasi court for hearing individual cases,” she said. “In a sense the inquiry has got too specific.”
Graham Wilmer, who established the Lantern Project which helps victims of sexual abuse and was a member of the abuse inquiry panel under Woolf, told Today that the existing structure was “far too complicated”.
He said: “There are just too many people involved trying to cause difficulties for this inquiry, and I think the best solution now would be not to have a chair but to appoint one of the very capable existing panel members. The infrastructure is superb. It’s a massive inquiry but it has got some massive resources. They just need to be allowed to get on with it.”He said: “There are just too many people involved trying to cause difficulties for this inquiry, and I think the best solution now would be not to have a chair but to appoint one of the very capable existing panel members. The infrastructure is superb. It’s a massive inquiry but it has got some massive resources. They just need to be allowed to get on with it.”
Lucy Duckworth, who sits on the inquiry’s victims and survivors’ consultative panel, insisted the process would continue despite Goddard’s departure.
“It’s not called the Goddard inquiry; it’s the independent inquiry. There are many staff there that are working extremely hard to lay down the infrastructure, which they have done as a foundation,” she told Today. “We need to make sure that, going forward, survivors that are encouraged to come and share their story with the inquiry are well supported and that is what is taking the time.”
Andrew Lavery from White Flowers Alba, a group representing Scottish victims of abuse, said he and other participants in the inquiry had only learned of Goddard’s departure via the media.
“I’m still ringing round very distressed individuals, telling them that Goddard has gone,” he said. Lavery said he had requested a meeting with Rudd, and was proposing the burden of leading the inquiry could be shared between more than one person.
“It’s not perfect, but it’s the best thing we have,” he said. “If we don’t have this there’s nothing.”
Phil Johnson, who has spent 20 years campaigning for justice for survivors and is acting chair of Macsas (Minister and Clergy Sexual Abuse Survivors), said his initial reaction to Goddard quitting was “complete shock, and I felt a bit betrayed”.
He added: “I’m seriously concerned about the future of the inquiry. Goddard was its third chair. In the public eye, the credibility of the inquiry is in tatters – so much public money is being spent, and it seems to be achieving so little.”
Goddard, who was on a remuneration package that included a salary of £360,000, had recently started sitting on the preliminary hearings into 13 public investigations into non-recent child abuse including within the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches, Westminster, Lambeth council and Medomsley detention centre, and allegations against Greville Janner and Cyril Smith.
But a year after the inquiry was set up no evidence has been taken, and an unprecedented project known as the Truth project, to catalogue thousands of individual testimonies of abuse, has only just begun.
As home secretary, May redrew the inquiry under Goddard in March 2015, responding to demands from victims’ groups that it be placed on a statutory footing, which meant it had the power to compel witnesses to give evidence.