Home Office's chaotic approach to abuse inquiry ..., by Keith Vaz, Mail Sunday (November 2, 2014)

Fiona Woolf’s resignation on Friday was more a reflection on the chaotic appointment process than her own integrity or judgement.

The Home Office failed miserably to perform the basic tasks of due diligence; to check carefully and check again the history of her knowledge of, and association with, key individuals whose names have been associated with the inquiry.

It was history repeating itself, not years, but weeks after the resignation of Lady Butler-Sloss.

Many factors in Mrs Woolf’s suitability for the post could have been ascertained earlier. Her role as Lord Mayor of London meant she could not start work until mid-November; her knowledge of child abuse issues is negligible; she had also not met the Home Secretary until the day she appeared before the Home Affairs Select Committee; and she never met the inquiry panel, the very people she was to lead.

To be fair to Mrs Woolf, she admitted all of these matters when she gave evidence to the Committee. If that was not enough, the final blow came with the release of seven drafts of her letter to the Home Secretary which had been co-written by Theresa May’s own staff, and finally, the declaration of ‘no confidence’ from victims.

We should not accuse the Home Office of deliberately attempting to undermine the processes of this important inquiry because if there was even a hint of this it would be shameful, but they have adopted a reckless approach.

It makes one wonder as to how the Home Office conducts its other core business in areas such as immigration, policing and counter-terrorism. Perhaps, for the moment, we should not go there. We should be thankful that those involved do not have control of the nuclear button.

This extraordinary series of events marks an early start to the pantomime season; not so much Little Red Riding Hood meeting the wolf but probably Snow White and the Seven Drafts.

Mrs Woolf has said that you would need to have a 'hermit' as inquiry chair if you want someone with no connections. On an island of 64 million people, I am sure we can find one person who has the time, the skills and the expertise to lead this inquiry effectively.

The fatal flaw has been the failure to consult the victims from the start. These are the people who should have been put at the centre of the entire process. I have not seen one letter to victims groups in contrast to the stream of paperwork between Home Office officials and their two lost chairs. Mrs Woolf should have met the victims with the Home Secretary before her appointment. Their views should have been used to form the terms of reference itself.

This episode represents a rare setback for Theresa May. She is now the longest serving Conservative Home Secretary since Rab Butler, is a big beast in the Government, beyond doubt one of its stars, and we thought that she ran the civil servants in Marsham Street with a rod of iron.

Her political instincts which are regularly on display in the Commons appear to have deserted her. She should never have left others to do what a seasoned and accomplished politician should have done. She needs to play catch up, fast.

The proposal presented to me by Mrs May on Friday should have been adopted from the very start - namely that the Home Affairs Select Committee should conduct a confirmation hearing.

We will hear from the victims before we examine the Home Secretary’s nominees. Stakeholders, parliament and victims must have a say in process that may last half a decade.

This is a look at terrible historical cases of abuse and is fashioned to uncover inconvenient truths. We must make urgent progress in this inquiry. If we fail to do so, this will be the ultimate betrayal of the victims. We allow this to happen at our peril.