UNITED KINGDOM
The Guardian
Suzanne Moore
Child abuse used to happen in the past. It is terrible. We should investigate it. But we can’t find anyone to be in charge of such an investigation who doesn’t know some of the people who could be possibly be accused of it.
Does this make sense to anyone? It is neither true, nor justifiable in any way whatsoever, but this is the nub of what Theresa May told the House of Commons this week. May appears to have a massive deflection shield. She escaped much criticism for the fact that the passport office was in a complete mess, though she had been warned about it. And now, having announced in July an inquiry into the allegations of historic sex abuse, both of those chosen to lead the inquiry have had to resign: Elizabeth Butler-Sloss and Fiona Woolf.
Butler–Sloss is the sister of Sir Michael Havers, who was the attorney general at the time both the police and CPS failed to investigate allegations of serious abuse. Fiona Woolf (pictured) was then appointed – but she hangs out with Leon Brittan, who it is said did not act when given the dossier about alleged child abuse.
So the inquiry, which is wide-reaching, is as useful as a headless chicken while survivors complain they are still not being listened to.
The key thing May said in her “apology” is that the public is concerned that in the 1980s, the Home Office did not act on allegations of sexual abuse. How concerned are we if nothing is happening? We are talking about institutional failure on a grand scale here, and what we are witnessing is the establishment telling us it is virtually impossible to find one person, professionally qualified, to lead an inquiry who is not already connected to the institution or individuals being investigated.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.