Confidential- Check against delivery
RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS INVESTIGATION
MUSIC AND SPECIAL SCHOOLS OPENING STATEMENT BY COUNSEL TO THE INQUIRY
30 September 2019 at 10am
1. Good Morning. I am Ms. Fiona Scolding and I am lead counsel to this investigation into the institutional response to child sexual abuse in residential schools in England and Wales of which this is the first substantive hearing due to last for the next two weeks . Next to me sit the other counsel to this investigation: Ms. Zoe Nield, Ms. Anna Bicarregui and Ms. Mary Robertson.
2. Chair, there are a large number of individuals and I will introduce them.
To my right : (1)Representing victims and survivors RS-A1-A5 in respect of Chethams School of Music, representing RSA6 in respect of Appletree which is a special school , RS-A7 in respect of Stony Dean, which again is a special school - Mr. Richard Scorer and Ms. Kim Harrison of Slater and Gordon Solicitors (2)Representing Southlands School, which is a residential special school - Ms. Fahrina Maharaj, Solicitor.
1 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
(3)Representing the Seashell Trust, which operates the Royal School for the Deaf, Manchester, a residential special school, Ms. Kate Gallafent QC. (4)Representing Purcell School, Ms. Reka Hollos of counsel. (5)Yehudi Menuhin School and Wells Cathedral School, Ms Genevieve Woods of counsel. These are all specialist residential music schools or residential schools with a choral foundation. (6)Representing Chethams School of Music, a specialist residential music school, Stephen Ford QC . (7)Representing the Ecclesiastical Insurance Office, which insures many of these institutions, Ms. Anna Senter, Eversheds Sutherland solicitors (8)Representing the Independent Schools Inspectorate, which inspects the music schools - Mr. David Wolfe QC. (9)Representing the Office for Standards in Education, more commonly known as OFSTED, Ms. Sarah Hannett, Counsel. (10) Representing the Secretary of State for Education, Ms. Cathryn McGahey QC. (11) Representing the National Police Chiefs Council, Mr. Stephen Morley
3. The focus of this hearing concerns two types of residential schools – specialist schools for those who are gifted in music, and residential schools for children with special educational needs and disabilities. In some of these schools allegations have been made of child sexual abuse by staff. In other cases, there are criminal convictions of staff. And in yet others, there have been concerns
2 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
about harmful sexual behaviour between children. In all of them, the complexities of trying to keep children safe in the light of 21st century technology is a large concern. In all of them, the complexities of trying to manage burgeoning sexual development is a nuanced and sensitive balancing process.
4. Where we are considering allegations, we will be using these hearings examine the nature of the allegations, how they arose and what was done about them by schools, local authorities, the criminal justice system and those who inspect and regulate schools to look to see: a. Have lessons been learnt? b. Has change occurred, and c. Most importantly in these hearings, what does the current system look like and where are its strengths and weaknesses?
5. Many of the issues we are raising are ubiquitous and can help tell us about managing safeguarding across all school settings whether day or boarding . I will refer generally to those who have made allegations of sexual abuse as “complainants”, except where there has been a criminal trial which has resulted in a conviction, or where the fact of abuse has otherwise been formally established, in which case the description “victim” and/or “survivor” will be applied.
3 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
Background and introduction 6. School should be a place where children are protected, and where they learn, as the great 1944 Education Act identified - “instruction for life”. It is more than a place where you learn to undertake quadratic equations. It transmits and reinforces the values and ethics of our society: It is where one learns to think.
7. It is also where one learns social skills- how to interact with one’s peers. It is where one learns to play, how to debate, how to disagree, how to share, and to see that one’s actions have consequences upon others.
8. Teachers and school leaders create and sustain the environment in which children can thrive. They are role models and have the capacity to transform lives, to inspire and to nurture. The need for a school environment which is safe and caring is an essential prerequisite to the learning of children.
9. Countless studies show that children turn to teachers to tell them their worries and fears if they can’t (or don’t want to) confide in their family. Schools often spot the signs of familial abuse, and provide a safe haven from homes where neglect, violence, addiction and sexual degradation has taken place.
10. In the next two weeks we will see examples of good practice in safeguarding and examples which go beyond statutory minimums in an attempt to create safe organisations. Southlands school will
4 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
give evidence on the complexities that arise when managing sexualised behaviour between teenagers with ASD. New challenges are emerging for schools in an era of social media and easy access to the internet.
11. However, these next two weeks will also consider a number of examples where institutions failed to protect children whilst they were at school. In some cases, this was by omission, by a failure to heed warnings or by not noticing what the children had seen – children often being much acuter observers of the failings of adults than we like to recognise. Sometimes, this was by wilful blindness – by shutting one’s eyes to the truth standing before them. And sometimes, those responsible for caring for children perpetrated abuse.
12. Until 2001, it was legal for a teacher to have sex with a pupil over the age of consent, with their consent, even if the pupil was under the age of 18. In the case study concerning music schools, we see numerous examples of the school either not knowing of the relationships between sixth form students and their teachers or other staff , or not taking steps to know. These relationships, although not illegal, certainly violated staff/pupil boundaries. We want to explore how far such relationships set a culture or tone of permissiveness for other sorts of sexual activity which was criminal.
5 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
13. Whilst sex with children, or between children has been a criminal offence, it has often been ignored, or swept under the carpet, or excused. It has been seen as a minor blemish on someone’s character – just something that they do. It has not always been reported to the police or civil institutions. Distasteful, but not something which always leads to admonishment, let alone justice for those subject to it. We have submitted to you, Chair and Panel, numerous examples of this in the closed schools narrative which shows a culture at some schools in the past where brutality, sadism and sexual violence was routine.
14. We will hear from men and women who were the subject of sexual abuse at the schools covered by this investigation: we thank them for coming to speak to us and recognise the pain and anguish that this may cause them. They are using their experience as a way for us to learn. The more that these matters can be spoken about openly and honestly, the more that society as a whole can change and understand the life-long difficulties and problems that can be caused by such abuse. We also thank family members who have come forward – again, the ripple effect of sexual abuse has an impact far beyond the victim and can disrupt families and their lives for many years. In particular we remember the family and friends of Ms. Andrade, a former student at Chetham’s School of Music, and all those others who have found the pain of sexual abuse too much to bear; and we hold them in our thoughts today.
6 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
15. There have been a number of reviews of the actions of such schools . There have been prosecutions, and civil claims, and disciplinary tribunals. We will use the material from these, but our focus is not upon the finding of fact, or the apportionment of legal liability. Our focus is to examine the themes and issues which emerge from them, to synthesize them and to examine the extent to which individual schools, and the sector as a whole, has been able to change the deep rooted governance and cultural problems which have been identified by those reviews.
16. This is just the first phase of our investigation into residential schools and, as I have said, will be focusing upon special and music schools. Nonetheless many of the issues raised in this hearing may apply to all residential institutions. Whilst there are particular features of music and special schools that make the protection of children within them more complex on occasions, many of the failures acknowledged by some of these schools could have happened in any institution. There is nothing particularly awful, or atypical, about these institutions. They replicate the failings of schools as a whole.
17. We will be examining a further three schools in phase 2 and the issues raised by them. At that stage, we will be also be hearing for the first time, or further from a number of organisations, including OFSTED, the ISI, the Department for Education and other governmental bodies, as well as the teaching unions about issues concerning safeguarding in this sector more generally. We will
7 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
also be examining the processes in Wales, where legislation is different, as is the system of education and the manner of inspection and supervision.
18. The government has both domestic and international responsibilities to uphold a child’s right to education and to protect children against sexual abuse in schools. The Convention on the Rights of the Child enshrines the right of a child to education and to be protected from sexual abuse. The responsibility to protect children is that of central government, local government, schools themselves, the organisations which may run and manage such schools and the community as a whole. This is reflected by a raft of legislation and policies. At present, this includes: (a)Statutes which make it compulsory for schools to have regard to the welfare and health of children when making decisions about them.
(b)Statutory guidance issued by the Department of Education to which all schools, both state and independent, must have regard when carrying out their duties to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.
(c)Compulsory inspection and the requirement that all schools meet basic standards in respect of safeguarding.
8 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
(d)Having a particular individual within school - a designated safeguarding lead - to act as a point of contact for statutory authorities.
(e)Legal and administrative requirements for school and teacher registration.
(f) Vetting requirements for those who work with children in schools.
(g)A system for stopping individuals, even if they have not been convicted of sexual offending against children, from working with them if they are found to be a risk to children.
(h)From September 2020, having compulsory relationship education in all schools, and compulsory sex education in secondary schools.
We wish to discover whether these requirements and obligations are being fully observed and implemented in schools, and whether those legal requirements have enabled schools to develop a culture of putting the welfare of children, rather than the reputation of the institutions, as their first priority.
The prevalence of child sexual abuse in schools.
9 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
19. There is not a great deal of data available about sexual abuse in schools as a whole, and very little data about the prevalence of child sexual abuse in residential schools in particular.
20. The inquiry published a literature review in November 2018 which included a reviews of documents from Operation Hydrant (the police umbrella organisation which collates information and provides guidance in cases of non-recent child sexual abuse). Operation Hydrant recorded that 39.5% of the 2,750 institutions which have been the subject of allegations of non-recent child sexual abuse are schools, making schools the most common location for this form of abuse. The Department for Education in 2009 and 2010 undertook research which showed that 38% of all allegations where the Local Authority Designated Officer was involved - which is an individual employed to investigate abuse within schools and other voluntary settings and provide advice , involved school staff.
21. 27% of those who shared their experience to the Truth project between June 2016 - December 2017 said that they were abused in a school setting, and a quarter of these reported that they were abused by teaching or educational staff. This sample may not be representative.
22. We asked the NSPCC, which runs a helpline both for adults who have concerns about children and provides counselling
10 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
sessions to children, how many of their calls concern child sexual abuse within schools. They are careful to tell us that they do not extrapolate these figures, because the children who call Childline are not a representative sample of children in the UK and the level of information provided by children varies. However, even with those limitations, of the nearly 500,000 children whom Childline dealt with between June 2017 – March 2019 , 10,083 raised child sexual abuse as their “location of main concern”. Of those, 1,077 had an educational setting as their locus of main concern.
23. For the adult helpline, of the 75,617 contacts, 7,451 had sexual abuse as the main cause for concern, with 437 of those identifying an educational setting as the location of the risk or incident.
24. We asked for information from the Teaching Regulation Agency, the organisation which has responsibility for taking regulatory disciplinary action against individual staff for serious misconduct. It should be noted that the only penalty available to them under the current legislation is prohibition from teaching for life. The TRA said that of the 505 teachers prohibited from teaching between 2004 – 2019, 268 (or 53%) of them were prohibited for sexual misconduct, or breach of boundaries 1. This is not always sexual abuse of children, but could be a wide variety of misconduct relating to inappropriate behaviours for a teacher.
1 (Alan Meyrick, TRA, p7) 11 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
25. We asked the Charity Commission to provide us with details of any regulatory action taken against schools in the recent past. Because of the way that they hold data and information, they could not identify which of the charities they regulate provide school services. However, they have identified 8 schools where a statutory inquiry has been undertaken within “institutional memory”, of which 6 involved allegations of failures of governance in respect of safeguarding.
Boarding Schools and the risk of abuse 26. All the schools we are examining in this phase have an element of residential education – even if the majority of children attend on a day basis.
27. Residential education, usually known as “boarding”, is very much a minority choice for children in England and Wales in 2018 and its occurrence has decreased rapidly over the past 50 years – although the numbers have now been fairly steady for the past decade.
28. The DFE has provided us with the relevant figures up to 2018: at that point, in England there were 77,372 students who boarded in England. The vast majority of those were educated in the independent sector – some 69,806 in total.
12 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
29. This compares to 4.727 million children who were educated in state funded primary schools, and to 3.327 million children who were educated in state funded secondary schools. There are approximately 580,480 pupils who attend independent schools, of whom 194,952 were between 5-10, and 317,333 were between 10-19. Data from Wales shows that 467,112 pupils attended maintained schools of some description.
30. The figures also show that in 2018 there were 16,766 state funded primary schools in England and 3,436 state funded secondary schools. There were 1,617 schools in Wales. There are around 2,297 independent schools in England, and 70 independent schools in Wales. Approximately 7% of pupils overall attend independent schools, but this depends on age - with over 18% of the school population attending an independent school between 16 - 18.
31. The number of boarding schools as a proportion of state and independent education is small: according to the Independent Schools Council 693 independent, mainstream boarding schools in the UK as at September 2018. 11% are for boys only, and 8% are solely for girls. There are 35 state funded schools which have some element of residential accommodation. In 75% of boarding schools, half the pupils board. Only 3% of schools are exclusively boarding, with slightly more boys than girls boarding overall. .
13 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
32. Boarding schools are often analysed as “total institutions”; that is, they are places of residence and work where a large number of like-situated individuals, cut off from wider society for an appreciable period of time, together lead an enclosed, formally administered life. Delyth Lynch, who has worked in a boarding setting for much of her professional life, produced a research paper as a result of a fellowship bestowed by the Boarding Schools Association in February 2019 which examines in some detail and provides in which she comments that boarding schools are a different environment from the norm that prevails in society at large, where individuals tend to sleep, play and work in different places and under different authorities.
33. In a boarding school, a pupil’s life is conducted in the same place, alongside a large number of others, all of whom are treated alike and are expected to do the same thing at the same time. Boarding schools are usually tightly scheduled and highly structured, with the sequence of activities being arranged by from above by a body of staff.
34. Such institutions may be a riskier place for children. They are places where children may be more likely to be open to abuse, as the adults around them have lots of opportunities to groom them. The child’s loyalty to the institution may well mean that they do not say anything. Boarding schools provide multiple opportunities for individuals to be alone with children without it giving rise to
14 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
suspicion. In residential special schools, children often require 1:1 round the clock care and attention.
35. Boarding schools are also places where there are high expectations of the children. Music schools in particular are places where the children have very high expectations of themselves and the organisation had very high expectations of their success in music. The level of extra tuition, rehearsals and training can lead to an environment which is even more hierarchical than other sorts of residential environment, and it can be competitive - giving rise, as the phrase sometimes used to a “hothouse” culture.
36. What may seem important to some of the children and their families (and sometimes the staff ) at these schools is success – and the cost to the wellbeing of the individual may be overlooked. Some of our victims and survivors of these schools talk of eating disorders, other mental health difficulties and physical ill health as a result of over-practice and a culture of competition and “backstabbing” amongst pupils for preferment and favour.
37. Professor Joy Schaverein is a psychotherapist who has undertaken extensive academic work into what she calls “boarding school syndrome”. We publish her witness statement within the closed school investigation . She considers that the difference between boarding schools and many other institutions where children reside is that their parents have chosen to send their children there, and that their attendance is perceived as a sign of
15 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
social success as well as privilege and luck. This, alongside the idiosyncracies of boarding school life (such as clothes, nicknames and sports) all of which creates a “world apart” can lead to children finding it difficult to say anything negative or to speak out for fear of seeming to be being disrespectful of their parents.
38. What we are interested in is the particular characteristics of institutions which make them more susceptible or likely to house abusers, and what steps can and should be taken by schools to seek to minimize these risks. We have sought expert evidence from Marcus Erooga2 who has provided us with a report setting out characteristics of institutions which make them more susceptible to grooming and abuse, and also describing the different characteristics of abusers. He has also provided some ideas about the introduction of a system of “neutral notification”: mandatory reporting of “low level”concerns to try and spot and nip in the bud behaviours which can then become transgressive or are indicative of abuse. We will be hearing from him in phase 2 of the inquiry, but will be using his work as the basis of some of our lines of inquiry in this investigation.
39. Mr. Erooga tells us that an archetype of an institutional abuser is the charismatic, well networked, caring professional who is usually part of the leadership of the institution.3 Research shows that those who sexually abuse students are often amongst the
2 [EWN000471] 3 (see Doran and Brannan (1996)) 16 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
most competent and popular staff.4 They build close relationships with children, obtaining their trust– usually by giving attention and flattery.5 They slowly increase the amount of touch or other sexual behaviours, to desensitise them to physical contact and also to learn more about them to seek to buy their silence.6 The witness evidence of the victim and survivor core participants to this investigation speaks of this process – increasing the touch from non sexual to sexual, changing the conversation to sexual topics, giving them attention and telling them they could be brilliant if only they do what he or she says , asking them about personal and deeply private issues in their lives. Some of the offenders we will be discussing were perceived as father figures, or peers, or rescuers. They give special attention, gifts, praise, and time, building up a close relationship. This therefore enables them to have intimate knowledge about a child’s home and person life, which can then be used for manipulation and control.
40. As the work of Eileen Munro demonstrates in the context of the Australian Royal Commission of Sexual Abuse , where adults have known each other for a long time and the relationship is positive, confirmation bias may be very strong, and evidence can be explained away. For example, in the case of Michael Brewer, the Director of Music at Chetham’s troubling examples of his having young girls alone in his room were brushed away. In Stony Dean
4 (see Delyth Lynch, BSA000008) 5 (paragraph 3.21 of Erooga) 6 (paragraphs 3.22 – 3.24) 17 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
school, inappropriate behaviours by the Head of Care were disregarded on the basis that he was a senior leader and respected individual. Individuals working together in schools often have a strong sense of group allegiance to each other which provides a psychological motivation to disbelieve sexual abuse allegations.
41. Schools with a close knit group of teachers who have long relationships with each other could also make it more difficult for young people to disclose abuse. Staff will be seen by their pupils socialising with each other in a way which may make it difficult to know who could be trusted to listen to their concerns.
42. Mr. Erooga identifies a number of features of institutions which can contribute to the risk of abuse within a school setting. Some of these features are present in a number of the schools which we examine. These are:
(a)Inflexible hierarchies – so that junior members of staff and pupils find it difficult to report issues involving senior staff.
(b)Not having appropriate or any safeguarding policies and procedures, or having them but routinely ignoring them without consequence. (c)Not having relevant training
18 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
(d)Not having clarity about who was responsible for safeguarding, and not having clarity about the fact that it was everyone’s responsibility. (e)A culture of not listening to and respecting children – where children are not listened to, they will not come forward, (f) An organisation which has a lack of focus on children’s welfare – so that the reputation of the school, the reputation of the staff or their welfare is seen as more important than that of children. (g)A very strong sense of close knit allegiances and longstanding relationships. (h)An aura of respectability that makes it difficult for parents to believe disclosures. (i) A deference to the rules that govern the organisation – so that disclosures are not reported, but dealt with internally, and the internal processes are not adequate. (j) A culture which minimises the significance of the impact of child sexual abuse.
43. Other research undertaken by the Child Exploitation abd Online Protection Command, part of the National Crime Agency identifies in a thematic assessment about the risks of child abuse by adults in institutions (2013 – mentioned in Children’s Commissioner w/s) identifies the centrality of the culture of the institution as to whether or not abuse is likely to occur. Failure in leadership underlie or are found in almost all of the inquiry reports which look at abuse in
19 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
institutional settings. Poor leadership, closed structures, ineffective policies and procedures can facilitate a malign climate.
44. The Office of Children’s Commissioner, in the reports it undertook in 2012 and 2013 identified good practice in schools and some principles for policy and practice development, and the NSPCC have identified in their evidence to us what frameworks are required to create positive safeguarding in schools. This includes: (a)That child protection needs to be given priority within schools and local authorities. (b)Safeguarding is a shared responsibility for all those working in the school and all staff need to understand how their role contributes to the overall work of the school. (c)Strong communication networks between schools and local authorities assist with recognising risk, and there should be centralised advisory services with dedicated safeguarding roles. (d)There should be systems for ongoing training and support for staff who identify child protection concerns. (e)Staff should know their students well. (f) Student’s welfare should be looked after in the broadest sense, and those involved should have the language and education to understand risks. (g)A student centred and participatory approach is needed.
20 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
45. Every boarding school now, and since 2002, has had to have an Independent Listener – that is someone who is not a member of staff at the school whom the children can approach with concerns. The Children’s Commissioner also runs a free helpline for all those who live away from home, but they say that uptake of this amongst residential school pupils, whether special or mainstream, is low. We wish to examine if the current system provides adequate opportunity for children to be able to confide in an adult about what is happening to them at school and whether there need to be more regular visits and a more organised cadre of individuals who operate as befrienders in these settings.
The recent past and current system of regulation 46. The Department of Education regulates the independent and state sector, and has done so since the 1944 Education Act, one of the pillars of the welfare state. Despite the plethora of legislation in this area, little deals directly in statute with safeguarding duties , What I am about to say now applies to all schools, but I will deal with specific legislation about special schools a little later on.
47. State maintained schools have always had standards set by the Department of Education, or local authorities, and since 1988 there has been a national curriculum in England which identifies the subjects which have to be taught, and the topics to be covered in those subjects whilst at school. Local authorities, which are bodies elected by us at local elections, were largely responsible for maintaining, organising, checking and monitoring schools in their
21 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
area until 2000. Three quarters of secondary schools and a significant minority of primary schools are now Academies and so are regulated by the Department of Education through the Education and Schools Funding Agency or Regional Schools Commissioners who act on behalf of the Department.
48. Independent schools have to be registered with the Department of Education which acts as their regulator. The Department for Education accepts that its regulation of boarding schools was very loose before 2002 with few if any set standards against which their quality could be judged and they have not kept records from this time to be able to tell us how often and when they intervened in schools at that time (para 194 of Kate Dixon no 9). We will be examining whether or not the Department’s recent past and current activity shows that it acts as an effective regulator of this sector and whether further steps need to be taken to improve its enforcement action.. It is also the case that whilst the DFE is the regulator, they do not have individuals who undertake spot checks themselves – all “investigation” of concerns operates largely through inspection by OFSTED on an emergency basis if a concern is raised, and the DFE then also asks OFSTED to check through action plans. ISI performs the same role as OFSTED but inspects schools which are allied to bodies under the Independent Schools Council umbrella - which is around half of all independent schools. Like OFSTED, they have no intervention role and cannot issue directions to schools to act in particular ways. The DFE tells us that 8 independent schools have been removed from the
22 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
register since 2002 for failing to meet standards relating to safeguarding although these were not the only failures of those schools.
49. We will also be examining governance. Maintained schools have governors: academies have trustees who perform the same role. There is no requirement for an independent school to have a board of directors or governors, but many do. Governors (or the proprietor if they are no governors) are required under statutory guidance to have overall responsibility for safeguarding policies in their schools and to have a “safeguarding” governor who holds the school to account for its policies and practices . Many governors come from historic organisations linked with schools and some victims and survivors have told us that they consider that it is more of a “cosy club” rather than a body which seriously scrutinises the processes of the school. In this investigation, we want to explore how far these individuals or this type of organisation can be effective in holding schools to account in respect of safeguarding issues, or whether this style of management is inimical to being able to understand or deal with problems within the school setting.
50. The DFE and the National Governors Association, both tell us that there is no statutory requirement for governors to have training to be able to hold leaders to account for the educational performance of the school, and no compulsory safeguarding training for governors or trustees (see paragraphs 6 and 7 of the NGA w/s). However, there is guidance which suggests that to have
23 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
such training is best practice. There is no standardised course for governors about safeguarding.
Standards in schools 51. From 1992, when the Children Act 1989 introduced s87 into law, but not before then, boarding schools became under a duty to promote the welfare of their boarders, and the local authority had from that date, to examine special schools annually and other schools on a 2-3 year basis to check the boarding accommodation. Before that, the inspections that we have found (which are limited) tended to focus upon educational standards, and if reference is made to boarding accommodation, it is focussed more upon the drains or physical accommodation rather than the wellbeing of pupils more broadly. This is the role now performed by OFSTED or the ISI.
52. From 2002 onwards, the government introduced “Independent School Standards” by way of the Independent School Regulations 2002. It would appear from information the investigation has been given by OFSTED, the DFE and the ISI that the impetus, at least in part, behind this change was concern over the management of certain schools in respect of child protection and safeguarding. The standards contained in these regulations are the standards against which the schools are examined when they are inspected.
24 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
53. Alongside the standards contained in the Independent Schools Regulations, there are what is known as the National Minimum Standards - one set for boarding schools and one for residential special schools. Some of the individuals who have experience in examining these standards, such as Dame Christine Lenehan, identify that at present schools only have to do the “minimum”, whereas if one runs a children’s home, one has to comply with “quality” standards. The National Association of Special Schools in their witness evidence to us (para 21 of their w/s) say that the National Minimum Standards do not have sufficient focus upon the experiences of, and outcomes for , children and young people – and the focus is upon what should be provided, rather than the impact on how these services are received. The DFE tell us that they are currently working on a new set of standards which will seek to ‘raise the bar’ but there is no intention to replace minimum standards with quality standards as to do so would require primary legislation (see paragraph 509 of Kate Dixon’s 9th statement - DFE002073).
54. Alongside regulations, since 2006, the Government has published and then reissued statutory guidance about safeguarding in schools, which is now Keeping Children Safe in Education, Reading part of this document is compulsory for all staff working in schools; and all schools, whether state or independent have to have regard to its guidance. We want to ask if this guidance is adequate, in particular for those with disabilities and SEN , and whether the teaching of sex and relationship
25 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
education will take proper account of the needs of children with disabilities, who may well require more intensive and specialist teaching and reinforcement. Moreover, several organisations, including NASS and the teaching unions (para 18 of NASS) have identified how much they valued previous longer versions of the guidance which provided more exploration of issues. We also want to ask whether or not the guidance must be followed, rather than should be followed and if that would make any difference?
55. All schools are meant to provide training for all staff in safeguarding, but the nature and type of such training is not specified, which concerns the teaching unions. Furthermore, there is no power to require staff in schools to receive such training – which the NASUWT see as inadequate (paragraph 14) . All schools also have to have a Designated Safeguarding Lead – known as a DSL – who should be a member of the senior management team and who deals with safeguarding concerns and makes reports to the local authority in cases of concern. All schools have to have a safeguarding policy but no template policy is available, so local authorities and schools have to seek their own.
56. Teaching Unions, special schools and the Association of Directors of Children’s services have all provided us with concerns about the current guidance indicating that it has been reduced in size and therefore in helpfulness so that practical advice and guidance is now less present. The NASUWT describes it as “too
26 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
simplistic” (p2, para 7 of NASUWT) and also vague as to the language used so that it is not clear what must be done.
57. Alongside this statutory guidance is Working Together to Safeguard Children. This guidance has been published every three – five years since 1993 and which provides general advice about child protection and how the system works in England. Aspects of the statutory guidance is of direct relevance to schools, and again it should be looked at by them.
58. Alongside this guidance, the government published in 2018 something called “Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment between children in schools and colleges”. Whilst most organisations which have contributed to this investigation see it as a helpful document, some, in particular the unions, have concerns that it has not been circulated widely amongst education professionals and that the government’s message on what to do about such behaviour is not consistent.
59. Everyone who has given evidence to this investigation on this topic has welcomed the introduction of compulsory sex and relationship education in all secondary schools, whether state or independent and also the teaching of relationship education in primary schools. However, many have expressed concern about the lack of specialist teacher training in this area – the NEU and the NSPCC carried out a survey in 2019 where half of staff did not feel confident about teaching these subjects, or teaching pupils
27 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
with Special Educational Needs about these subjects. We wish to ask the DFE about the resources, training and guidance which is going to be provided and whether or not there may need to be specialist training and resources for those with SEN and more generally.
Inspection of schools 60. Until the creation of Office for Standards in Education in 1992 – known as OFSTED, inspection of all schools, whether state or independent was undertaken by Her Majesty’s Inspector of Schools, which office first came into being in the middle of the nineteenth century. However, their aim was not to inspect all schools regularly; inspection of any school only took place around once a decade. Their focus would not have been upon child protection or welfare.
61. From 1992 – 2002, OFSTED was responsible for inspecting all schools, whether state or independent. From 2002 onwards, the Independent Schools Inspectorate signed a memorandum of understanding with the Department of Education and was permitted to inspect schools which were members of organisations allied to the Independent Schools Council. Their inspections operate on a different framework from that of OFSTED, most obviously because they do not provide overall “grades” for a school. At first, their inspections dealt solely with education, and
28 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
not with boarding welfare, but from 2012 they have combined both roles. There were also other inspectorates examining a small number of independent schools until this year.
62. Roughly half of all independent schools are inspected by OFSTED, and the other half by the ISI. The ISI inspect very few special residential schools. We will be obtaining oral evidence from both OFSTED and the ISI during the course of this hearing and asking them questions about:
(a)How far an inspection can provide an accurate exploration of child protection issues which may be present ?
(b)How far an inspection can discover safeguarding failures, rather than simply interrogate failures already known about?
(c)Whether the current framework for inspections is sufficiently robust in examining child protection?
(d)Whether the current system of regulation by the DFE works in practice?
(e)Whether there needs to be changes in inspection practices or procedures to improve the safeguarding of children?
63. Ofsted and the ISI have both identified that the breadth and depth of their inspections has been reduced over the past decade
29 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
because of the significant cut in resources allocated to OFSTED: the National Audit Office produced a report in 2018 which identified an over 50% cut in real terms in their monies since 2000. ISI has reduced its inspection level because independent schools considered that it was unfair that their regime was more onerous than that for maintained schools. This has raised concerns from the unions and others, and even the organisations themselves that the breadth and depth of inspection has been reduced because of a policy choice to create a thinner “veneer of assurance” (see Amanda S w/s). Secondly, mainstream schools which are judged outstanding have been exempt from routine inspection until last month , so that over 1,600 schools as at May 2018 had not been inspected for six years. The investigation will be examining this during the course of Phase 2, the impact this may have had upon assurance.
Investigation of allegations 64. From 2006 onwards, each local authority has something called a “LADO” – a Local authority designated officer. This person is meant to deal with allegations made about abuse in institutions (whether schools or voluntary settings) co-ordinate with other agencies and provide training, workshops and general advice. Schools have given us varying accounts of their experience of them, with some praising them and their thoroughness. Others, however, identify that they often lack specialist knowledge and understanding, particularly of special schools and the needs of children with disabilities. (NASS paragraphs 23 – 26) . This is not
30 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
surprising given the range and type of institutions they have to cover, but it is an issue as to whether or not there needs to be more specialist expertise for those with responsibility for special schools. We have witness statements from six local authorities about the role of their LADO, in investigating particular child protection concerns and the work they do overall – a number of them run regular meetings to discuss concerns from all schools and all run training of some form or another. We also have written evidence from the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (paragraph 14 of the ADCS w/s). NASS and schools have told us about the differing criteria for referrals to children’s social care – sometimes called “thresholds” – and how they can vary significantly across local authorities. The Association of Directors of Children’s Services tell us that this is intentional as each local authority has to have written local criteria but there is no national “threshold”.
65. Another issue raised by several schools and those that represent them is the variation in thresholds as to what should or should not be reported to the LADO and when a local authority will intervene , as well as issues as to who should investigate if the child lives somewhere during term time but somewhere else during the holidays.
66. Prior to September this year, every area had something called a Local Children’s Safeguarding Board, which was a collection of
31 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
statutory agencies which organised and provided training, advice and strategy about safeguarding in the context of all statutory organisations in their area and under which the LADO operates. Some of the schools and other organisations have told us that their work on disabled children has been limited (paragraph 24 of NASS) and very few of them provided targeted training at working with disabled children , and some independent schools have told us that they do not always feel part of the LCSB. As non statutory organisations, independent schools are not compulsory relevant partners under the new scheme or arrangements.
67. Every local authority has a Director of Children’s Services. Their umbrella organisation, the ADCS has raised concerns with us that despite the statutory responsibility of the Director of Children’s Services to promote the welfare of children and ensure fair access to services, and to promote educational excellence for all , they do not necessarily have a clear (or any) role in relation to schools which are not maintained. ADCS has also identified that there is an absence of a single, overarching strategy which knits together the government’s myriad of education reforms, reviews and developments. By contrast, they say that there is a clear vision for the multiple strands of work that also take place in respect of children’s social care and they have a firm and focussed vision (see paragraph 32 of the ADCS – ADS000016). They raise concerns that there is a lack of a holistic accountability system and that there are a disparate number of organisations which the
32 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
performance of schools has to be raised with, for example the local authority, the DFE, the Education and Schools Funding Agency, OFSTED, the Regional Schools Commissioners and their boards, individuals headteachers, the Designated Safeguarding Lead, school governors, trustees and multi academy trust boards (see paragraph 38). This causes confusion and difficulty, we are told, in deciding who is meant to be doing what. This is something we will wish to return to in Phase 2 and is something which has also been raised by independent reviews commissioned by the DFE and by OFSTED.
68. Most, but not all independent schools are charities registered with the Charity Commission because of the significant financial advantages this gives them. The Charity Commission can exercise powers over schools which are charities where its trustees have acted contrary to their obligations and fiduciary responsibilities. The focus of any regulation in respect of child protection in schools would therefore be on whether or not the trustees, who are responsible for the charity have acted appropriately. The Charity Commission do not therefore undertake particular investigations about allegations of sexual abuse in a school, but only consider whether there are governance issues. They accept that the Commission’s role in examining failures of safeguarding has developed over the past five years, and that their view about what they should investigate has become more robust over that period of time.
33 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
After this brief canter through background, I now turn to the particular schools this investigation is examining.
Music school
Background 69. It would , however, be useful at this stage to explain briefly what these schools are, how they came into being and what they do.
70. Mrs. Thatcher, a passionate classical music and opera enthusiast, whilst Education Secretary in the 1970’s, created the specialist Music and Dance scheme which continues to this day. Kate Dixon, of the Department of Education sets out the genesis of the scheme in her witness statements. The scheme has a £30 million pound budget which provides grants and fee exemptions for those aged 8-19 to access specialist education and training on a means tested basis (see para 518 – 523 of the w/s of Kate Dixon). It funds all four of the music schools we are going to discuss alongside 4 specialist dance schools. Up to 85% of the students at these schools receive some funding through the scheme. Furthermore, some £200,000 is given every year to bursaries for children to attend choir schools in England. Whilst the government funds these schemes, their administration is through the schools and there are no checks on safeguarding and child protection that we have been told about other than those which exist for other schools. No bursaries or funding have ever been withdrawn because of concerns about child protection. There is no specific
34 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
safeguarding guidance of this scheme and no element of oversight by the Department for Education (paragraphs 527- 534).
71. The specialist music school started with Purcell School in 1962, followed by the Yehudi Menuhin School in 1963, Chethams in 1969 and Wells Cathedral School in 1970. The Yehudi Menuhin School, or YMS as I will now call it was the brainchild of Sir Yehudi who had seen the specialist music schools in the Soviet Union and wanted to create an education which could rival them and produce world class musicians – not just soloists, but also those who could perform in orchestras and chamber music. Individuals were sent to the Soviet Union to study how the children were taught.
Problems 72. The regime in these schools is demanding. Three hours worth of practice is required on top of a full academic curriculum plus lessons in the theoretical side of music – harmony, musicianship, theory of music , plus the communal making of music, competitions and concerts. The children who attend them want to be professional musicians. The pupils are competitive and the parents and teachers want them to excel. As Alistair Tighe, the current head of Wells Cathedral School says: “…We do appreciate that there are additional and potential risks to pupils in residential music schools, including the risks arising from the specific and often intense nature of relationships between music teachers and their pupils, from the boarding environment”
35 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
73. The music teacher is described by all the victims and survivors and the majority of staff who have worked in such schools as holding considerable power and sway, and pupils want to do anything to please them. The word “reverence” has been used as a term to describe the relationship between pupil and teacher. Furthermore, these teachers are seen by their students as the most important people at their schools - so that their power is often much more than the academic staff or senior management of the school. The power of the charismatic and acclaimed individual has long been recognised as being capable of being used to nefarious ends - since the late 19th century with George Du Maurier’s Trilby - with the invention of Dr. Svengali - whose hypnotic power held young women in thrall.
74. To give two examples, a. Michael Brewer, the head of Chetham’s at Music was seen as a brilliant figure in choral and voice work , and so his relationships with students were not examined with care. b. Ryszard Bakst, a world famous piano teacher who taught at Chetham’s allegedly made girls touch his penis and went on to masturbate in the middle of lessons according to a significant number of women that he taught as teenagers. His prestige meant that nothing came to light during his lifetime.
36 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
75. Young people who have ambitions to succeed within the relatively small world of classical music may perceive that to make an allegation or complaint against a distinguished and influential tutor could negatively impact upon their career chances.
76. In the music schools setting, there is evidence of relationships between adults and children which were not appropriate, and that this may have had a distorting effect on judgements as to what was right and wrong. Dr. Ian Pace, (a musicologist and musician who has written extensively about abuse in schools and who has also been sent hundreds of accounts of such abuse) described a culture at some of these schools of relationships or sexual contact between some male staff and female students. This may not have at the time constituted a criminal offence but it does seem that this behaviour went unremarked and the young women concerned attained a certain status within the school. However, it went beyond that. Dr. Pace identifies that the world of classical music embodies a degree of sexualised content , and tacit assumptions that development of someone’s sexual self would enable more sophisticated or nuanced musicianship. We are hearing from Dr. Pace on Tuesday.
77. Music schools attract international students who come to study. They also attract a number of very high calibre international musicians to teach and provide workshops. Former-students from these schools make up the opera companies, choirs, chamber
37 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
groups, orchestras, conductors and virtuosos not just in England, but worldwide.
78. These schools, like most other schools which offer individual music tuition, employ large numbers of staff on a part time, often known as a “peripatetic” basis. There is no register of musicians who undertake this type of work, and they are usually professional musicians who teach to supplement their income or to give something back rather than because they wish to teach. They do not have any teaching qualifications. We have now been told by all four specialist music schools that they treat these individuals as employees, rather than self employed and so they have to attend regular safeguarding training and sign up to a code of conduct about their behaviour and teaching methods - but that this can be difficult to organise, as they are often away with their own professional engagements. This was not always the case, and at the time when were are looking at, when allegations were made, they were self employed and would have had no safeguarding or child protection training or guidance. Some of them taught at all four schools or at schools and adult music conservatoires. They are still often semi detached from the school, and their vision and view of pastoral matters, so we have been told by one former headteacher, can be radically different from the ethos that the school is seeking to inculcated.
79. Prior to the introduction of criminal records bureau checks in the late 1990’s , there would have been no reliable way for staff at the
38 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
school to be checked for any convictions (see Suzanne Smith) , and given that many individuals who taught music would not have been teachers, they may not have been placed upon the DFE or Department of Health lists of those unsuitable to work with children.. Now they would be put on the DBS list if allegations were made and it was considered that the risk of harm was such that they should not work with children, even if no conviction had been made.
80. Schools should now adopt safer recruitment practices for any staff they employ with a range of checks including taking up of references, checking gaps in career history (as identified in keeping children safe in education): but this sort of guidance has only been in place since 2006 . Before that time, there have been incidents of staff moving on without adequate disclosure of what has taken place .
81. The Incorporated Society of Musicians tells us that it has had since 2008 a code of practice for musicians, which offers practical advice on how to report child safeguarding concerns. All ISM members have to comply with these practices, and failing to adhere to the code of practice could result in disciplinary action. They also have a Registered private teacher scheme which is voluntary. This tells pupils that the teacher has been reference checked and undergone an enhanced disclosure check with the DBS , and that they have signed up to the code of practice, and
39 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
child protection declaration. This investigation wishes to know whether such a register should be compulsory.
82. One of the other common concerns of all four of these music schools at present is with the system of what are called “educational guardians”. These are individuals who take responsibility for children whose parents are not based in the UK. The Independent Schools Council census says there are around 29,000 such children boarding in the UK. If anyone requires an immigration visa to come to the UK, they will also require an educational guardian. The vast majority of schools do not appoint educational guardians for these children, but require their parents to find them. At present, there is no system of oversight, registration, training, vetting or standards for these individuals. If they are not a close relative, they should register themselves as providing private foster care if they look after a child for more than 28 days in a row; but it is unclear whether this happens. The organisation which represents and provides training, advice and registration for guardians on a voluntary basis – AEGBIS – are coming to give evidence and to tell us of their concerns about this. The DFE in their witness evidence have identified that they are planning to introduce a new standard about guardianship, amd to require schools to refer matters to the local authority in cases of concern.
83. I have already mentioned the report of Marcus Erooga. One of the recommendations he makes is to implement a system of what
40 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
is called “neutral notification” - i.e. a system of flagging issues, even if minor, to create a reliable record which could show patterns of concern. It is neutral as it is not intended to be seen as making an allegation, or imputing a nefarious motive Mr. Erooga developed this suggestion given how frequently he identified that sexual abuse was not necessarily planned, but a slippery slope of boundary violations leading to a time and place where it could happen. We have asked all schools and organisations about the benefits or drawbacks of such a system. Most have been broadly positive , even the teaching unions. We wish to spend some time over the next two weeks examining the practicability of implementing such a system.
84. In respect of the particular schools, I will now spend a little time identifying the particular issues which gave rise to convictions or concerns.
Chetham’s School of Music 85. Undoubtedly the most high profile of the difficulties with the music schools took place at Chetham’s School for Music . Chetham’s was a boy’s grammar school which eduacted the choristers of Manchester Cathedral from the 17th century to 1969, when it became a mixed sex specialist music school with a large number of boarders. It is the largest specialist music school in the country, with approximately 300 students on its roll. It educates children between the ages of 8-18, although its junior branch is made up of only 20-30 students and about half its intake are sixth
41 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
form students who then go on to specialist music colleges. The gender split is even. Children are admitted based upon their music ability alone, and based upon audition.
86. In 2013, the school became the subject of international press reporting during the trial of Mr. Michael Brewer and his wife for sexual assaults against a young woman called Frances Andrade, which took place in the late 1970s and early 1980s when she was a boarder at Chethams, and began when she was just 14. . Ms. Andrade took her own life after giving evidence at the trial. Mr. Brewer was convicted of five sample counts of sexual assault and sentenced to six years imprisonment and his wife was convicted of one count of indecent assault when Mrs Andrade was 18, and was sentenced to 21 months imprisonment. [The following is taken from w/s of Martin Bottomley the SIO for the Andrade case.] Ms. Andrade at trial described a series of sexual assaults which took place in Mr. Brewer’s home, as she babysit for his children and also in his office at school and which developed into penetrative sex. Ms. Andrade had emotional issues before this abuse had started and her behaviour became more concerning. In an ironic decision by the school, her mental health was seen as so fragile that she was sent to live with Mr. and Mrs. Brewer as “respite care”. The judge in his sentencing remarks described Mr. Brewer as a predatory sexual offender, whose position meant that there was little, if any prospect of anyone challenging his behaviour (CSM000308, p2).
42 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
87. Mr. Brewer had been the Director of Music at the school from the start of the school until 1994, when he retired. He was a distinguished voice coach and choral director, who subsequent to his resignation from CHetham’s led the National Youth Choir. His sudden departure from the School in 1994 followed concerns raised by the headteacher about Mr. Brewer’s sexual relationship with another girl, a sixth former who gave evidence at trial.
88. We will be asking the headteacher from the time of Mr. Brewer’s departure about the investigation into his relationship with that sixth former, and the decision to announce publicly that Mr Brewer had retired on grounds of ill health. We will also ask whether adequate steps were taken by the school in 1994 to identify whether inappropriate relationships had taken place, and whether the institutional response to these concerns demonstrated the school putting their reputation and that of a “great man” above the need to find out if an abuse of power had taken place. We will be asking the head in place at the time of the offences committed against Frances Andrade if there is evidence of “wilful blindness” at the time of the offences, given that other students remember the sexual activity between Ms. Andrade and Mr. Brewer as being common knowledge, and that other advances were made to other teenage girls at the time.
89. The conviction of Mr. Brewer and the attendant publicity led to a large number of individuals coming forward to tell the police about concerns they had about the school or abuse in the past. We have
43 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
written evidence from DCI Jamie Daniels who provides us with a detailed note about the large scale police inquiry, called Operation Kiso which was then launched. 47 alleged perpetrators were reported to the police during this investigation, of which 35 were related to Chetham’s school of music in some way.
90. Mr. Christopher Ling taught strings at the Chetham’s school of Music from 1983 – 1990 when he moved to America. We will be hearing from 2 young women who were allegedly sexually abused by him. Three other young women are core participants who were also allegedly sexually abused by him. He is described as having a leather jacket, unbuttoned shirts and a medallion, crocodile shoes and a sports car. To an adult, these may seem the signs of a cheap lothario, but at fourteen such things may seem sophisticated and worldly.. He operated a system of punishment and reward, lowering the children’s self esteem and confidence and making them totally in his thrall, then engaging in sexual activity with them either whilst teaching them, or in his house during the holidays. Pupils accompanied him to the US when he left to teach there. The school allegedly knew of the visits to his home, and his teaching of children during school holidays , and at school various people have identified that the children knew of his assaults on young women, with them being knowns as “Ling’s Flings” .
91. Christopher Ling was not arrested or prosecuted for sexual offending in 1990, when these incidents came to light after a girl
44 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
told her parents who then told the police. 12 girls were interviewed, a number of whom made similar complaints about sexual touching, sexualised behaviours and sexual assaults. To give two examples, he would tell the girls that they could not play music passionately until they had experienced physical passion and so in between renditions of a piece he would fondle their breast (para 19, RS A1); or he would dress 14 or 15 year old girls up in grown up underwear. Most of them were under 16 at the time. They young women tell us that their housemistress, Anne Rhind, would or ought to have known what was going on with Mr. Ling at the time but turned a blind eye. The original police file has been lost, but we know that the CPS gave categorically incorrect advice that Mr. Ling could not be extradited from the US where he then lived. Gregor McGill of the CPS has provided us with an unequivocal view that this was a wrong decision and he could and should have been extradited.
92. Following the Brewer trial, the police reinvestigated and Christopher Ling was the subject of an extradition notice from the US to the UK.. He was charged with seventy seven offences of unlawful sexual activity and indecent assault. He shot himself on 1st September 2015 on the day that he was due to be taken to the UK by US marshals to stand trial.
93. Another teacher had charges authorised by the CPS against him for rape which were then dropped. Another individual, Malcolm Layfield who had worked for Chetham’s between 1980 –
45 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
1997 was tried in 2015 for a rape of a student. He claimed the sexual activity was consensual and was acquitted of the charge, but admitted in the course of the trial that he had conducted a number of inappropriate sexual relationships with students at Chetham’s during the time that he worked there. All these students were, however, over sixteen and so at the time this would not have been a criminal offence. He said that these relationships were consensual but that he deeply regretted his behaviour, which he described as “shameful”.
94. In addition to those two cases, a teacher at the RNCM, Mr. Duncan McTier pleaded guilty to two counts of indecent assault and one count of attempted indecent assault in November 2014. The offences were committed in the 1980s and 1990s, and one of the three women he indecently assaulted was then his student at the Purcell School, whom he assaulted during a private lesson at his home. Yet another individual, Mr. Nicholas Smith, conducted the Chamber Orchestra at Chetham’s. He pleaded guilty in 2014 to one count of indecent assault on a fifteen year old pupil whom he had invited to his home in 1978.
95. Operation Kiso also looked at 6 other individuals, one of whom had been investigated by the police in 2000 without charges being brought and another being world famous pianist called Ryzard Bakst. A “compelling” file of evidence was provided of physical and sexual abuse. 36 other individuals were complained about. In at least two of those cases, the teacher concerned accepted that they
46 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
had consensual relationships in the 1980’s with sixth form female students.
96. The publicity around the Brewer trial and the focus on the School drew the attention of Manchester Children’s Services, who were concerned to ensure that the current safeguarding regime was robust and effective - they had been concerned by what they perceived as an inadequate reactions by the school to non recent abuse allegations. They therefore undertook a joint inspection of safeguarding at the School, with the Independent Schools Inspectorate. The conclusions of these inspections were that the policies of the school lacked clarity in some areas and that practice was inconsistent with the School’s written procedures. They also found that the governing body had not held the senior leaders of the school to account and that the monitoring and oversight of the school by them was inadequate. They also found that there were 7 incidents which should have been reported to the local authority from 2000 but were not. Following these findings, the school developed a separate safeguarding sub-committee of the governors which independently reviewed safeguarding policies and practices, and new policies were implemented by the school. An independent safeguarding commission was also set up (see w/s of Clare Moreland) which was completely independent of the school which met termly to review the work of the governors. We wish to examine how effective this system has been in changing the culture and leadership of the school.
47 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
Wells Cathedral School 97. Wells Cathedral school has existed since the 10th century – and has always educated the choristers of Wells Cathedral. It is now a fully co -educational day and boarding school with around 760 pupils from nursery to 6th form. It is an academic school - only around a quarter of its pupils participate in the specialist music programme- and we want to probe if that makes a cultural difference to how safeguarding is managed. 80 places a year are funded by the DFE, and the choristers are funded by the Cathedral and the Chorister Trust with 150 places in total for musicians. Just to give an idea of the size of the school, there are 128 members of academic staff and 233 members of support staff. There are 63 visiting music staff.. The school is mixed with most pupils in the senior school..
98. Julien Bertrand was a music assistant who started at Wells Cathedral School in 2002.. His job was to supervise the practice of specialist musicians.. He quickly volunteered for another role as a French assistant. Not long after he started at the school, allegations were made that he engaged in inappropriate behaviour with a female pupil. The next year another concern was raised , and another in 2004. In September 2004, he began training as a student teacher of music. Further concerns were raised in the 2004/2005 academic hear about his inability to understand appropriate boundaries with young adults. In April 2005, a disclosure of sexual abuse was made by a student against Mr. Bertrand. He was arrested the same day, suspended and banned
48 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
from the school. He pleaded guilty to fifteen offences against two boys including indecent assault on persons both over and under 16 and taking indecent photographs of boys engaged in sexual activities. He was sentenced to six years imprisonment in April 2007.
99. Helen Bennett, who became DSL at Wells in 2005 tells us that Mr. Bertrand’s behaviour showed the hallmarks of grooming - something which the school did not fully recognise at the time , and that these events “sharpened” the practices of the schools.
100. In another incident which shows why it is important to empower and train all staff, cleaning staff at the school noticed what they considered to be inappropriate horseplay between an adult supervisor (and member of the cathedral choir) and a child chorister in 2004. They reported it to the DSL ; the DSL investigated further and found that other staff reported low level concerns about this individual being in the dormitories late at night, and that boys made childish remarks to indicate that this individual was “bottom friends” with one of the children at the school. The person was suspended but he was given a final warning , on the basis that his behaviour was seen as being immature rather than dangerous. Further concerns were raised by the DSL in 2005 – 2007 including him larking around with the choristers, having the boys visit him outside school and overstepping the mark. At this time, he was not teaching in the school but was still a member of the choir. Further concerns were raised by the DSL from 2007 –
49 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
2009 about similar incidents – but no firm steps were taken and this case raises the issue of the relationship between the school and the cathedral in relation to these sorts of safeguarding issues.. We have received witness statements from the Cathedral safeguarding adviser and the Diocesan safeguarding advisor, Jackie Croft and Glenys Armstrong about the fact that the relationship between church and school has been informal and that protocols are now being formalised, and that policies have been put in place since January 2016 so that all adult choir members receive child protection training, and they are not allowed to be with the child choristers alone .
101. We will be hearing substantial evidence from the current head and the DSL concerning policies, practices and procedures and the complexities of safeguarding in a boarding school and music school setting. We also have details from the LADO of Somerset who considers that the school has behaved constructively towards him and the local authority, and that it follows advice appropriately. He also says that the number of allegations against this school is no greater or smaller than it is for any other school. We will also have evidence from the police about their investigations into this school.
Yehudi Menuhin 102. The Yehudi Menuhin school was founded by the virtuoso violinist as a school to educate string players and pianists from
50 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
across the world: it was designed as a truly international establishment . It currently has 86 pupils, but for much of its life had between 40-60 pupils. Its size means that all the headteachers who have given us evidence about it describe it as seeking to have a “family atmosphere”. Ms. Lynch has identified how sometimes a family atmosphere can prevent disclosure of abuse - because of the long standing strong bonds between the adults in control making pupils fearful of reprisals if they were to speak out.
103. In common with the two schools I have already talked about, the Yehudi Menuhin school has dismissed music teachers for their inappropriate bullying of students – this happened even in the 1970’s (although no referral was made to the DFE in relation to this member of staff). Nicholas Chisholm, who was headmaster from 1988 – 2010 told us that music staff came to YMS from all over the world, and that some of them may have been overly critical in their approach to children, lacking in the patience and empathy which those with teaching qualifications would have known were a necessity. Joanne Field, the current DSL who had previously worked as a nurse in a number of other boarding schools tells us that the relationship between pupils and music teachers is different from the staff/student relationships at other schools. She describes pupils as “revering” their music teachers, and the relationship means more to the pupil than any relationship with a non music member of staff. Richard Hillier , a previous headmaster, has said that the “family” atmosphere of informality
51 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
means that communication between staff and pupils can become more informal than it should be, so that the use of private emails or texts between staff and pupils can be normal.. One of the difficulties with such enmeshed relationships is that when and if they break down, the impact upon the student, and their career, can be profound.
104. YMS, like the other schools, has also had allegations of teachers developing inappropriate relationships with students , or failing to observe appropriate boundaries. We have asked the headteachers of the school at the times that reports were made to them what they did and how they acted. With the benefit of hindsight, they now accept that their actions when dealing with these concerns may have discouraged young people from raising concerns. We will be exploring their responses to these incidents and considering whether they showed an adequate understanding of the issues, and looking at how the primacy of the music department and a culture of deference towards highly esteemed instrumental teachers may have pastoral concerns were not prioritised We will also be looking at how this school dealt with concerns about non recent abuse brought to their attention in 2009 and 2013. We will have evidence from four former headteachers, the current DSL and the current vice-chair of governors.
105. The investigation also has written evidence from the LADO to the effect that before 2017, the Headteacher was “slow” to report concerns, and that referrals had not been brought to the local
52 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
authority’s attention in a timely fashion. The LADO considers that in recent years the school has demonstrated greater awareness of safeguarding processes (4.1 of the w/s of the LADO, p4).
Purcell school 106. The Purcell School for Young Musicians is another of the specialist music schools and currently has 180 students. It takes students from 10-18. Again entry is upon musical ability and potential, and the majority of students have some form of bursary or are subsidised by the government’s Music and Dance scheme. Again, there have been allegations made and referred to the LADO and to the police about inappropriate relationships between staff and students – . We have asked the school about whether or not it was correct in the steps it took when such allegations were made, and in the steps taken where inappropriate conduct had been established, but falling short of criminal conduct or a substantiated safeguarding allegation; whether it was sufficiently vigilant of inappropriate relationships developing;, and whether the relevant vetting authorities were contacted (in particular as there is a mandatory obligation to refer allegations in some circumstances to the DBS as it now is – something which seems to be unclear to those who have to use the scheme at present). We have also asked the LADO about how the school dealt with these incidents.
107. We are also looking at how the governing body of Purcell School managed issues to do with concerns raised by staff and parents in 2009 and 2010 relating to the then Headteacher’s
53 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
language in conversation with children at the School, and in particular concerns raised about how he dealt with an incident of sexualised bullying in the boys boarding house in May 2009, where it had been alleged that two boys had ejaculated onto the duvet of a third boy. Rather than following safeguarding and anti-bullying policy, the response of the headteacher at the time , Peter Crook, was to hold with the Head of Boarding what he told the boys was a Personal, Social and Health Education lesson for a group of Year 9 boys. This took place at his home on the school campus, at nine in the evening, and crisps and lemonade were served. The teaching in this lesson involved the use of a Channel 4 television programme on issues around puberty, interspersed with many inappropriate comments from the Headmaster (DFE0001039), including , a statement from the headmaster that if he walked into a room with boys masturbating each other he would ignore it, and a statement that fantasising about having sex with your father was normal. The headmaster told the boys that he accepted that in the boarding house there would be large amounts of pornography, although this was forbidden by the school rules .
108. Other teaching staff at the School were concerned about the circumstances in which the PSHE lesson had been held, although they did not at that time know the content of the Headmaster’s remarks, and they raised concerns at a staff meeting, which were brushed aside by the Headmaster. Members of staff then wrote anonymously to the Chair of Governors with their concerns, and then, fearing that no action would be taken, contacted Ofsted, who
54 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
referred the concerns to the local authority to investigate from a safeguarding perspective.
109. The local authority were concerned about the timing and location of the PSHE lesson, and also that the bullying incident which had triggered it had not been responded to appropriately, and social workers visited the school to ascertain the welfare of the boy who had been the victim of bullying. Whilst there were concerns that the Headmaster’s practice had been unsafe, and the anti-bullying policy had not been followed, the local authority took the view that the safeguarding concern was unfounded - that is no child had been harmed or put at risk of harm, and that Mr Crook did not pose a risk of harm to children.
110. The Chair of Governors attended the local authority strategy meetings during the investigation, and deplored the fact that staff had circumvented reporting channels within the School and involved external bodies. He suggested that some staff resented the additional demands made on them by the Headmaster and were making malicious allegations in an attempt to oust him.
111. The Chair of Governors commissioned what was called an Independent Review (and there have been questions as to how independent the Review was in fact) by two boarding school heads to look into the reasons why staff had referred their concerns about the Head directly to outside agencies - it concurred with the Chair’s view that allegations against the Head had been motivated
55 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
principally by staff dissatisfaction with pay and conditions rather than genuine Child Protection concerns. However, it also found that that the Headmaster had “used totally inappropriate language with pupils and taken a dangerous personal interest in their sexual conduct” (PUR000563, p12), and recommended that he should receive a formal warning from the governors through the School’s disciplinary procedure. Given this, was the response of the school adequate?. Should there have been a different disciplinary approach? Mr. Crook was invited to attend a disciplinary meeting in which his inappropriate language was apparently discussed, but no formal disciplinary action was taken.
112. There were further allegations regarding the Head which were referred directly by parents or staff members to the Local Authority, who investigated and found substantiated an allegation that that he had asked a young person whether or not he had “fucked” his girlfriend who was also at the school or put “his cock in her mouth” (PUR000456). It was the view of the Local Authority that the Head should receive a management warning for his use of inappropriate language with students.
113. Following this, and some months after the PSHE lesson, a recording made secretly by one of the boys came to the attention of a parent who was alarmed by the remarks of the headmaster to the boys. He circulated the recording to the governors and around the School, and also contacted the Local Authority directly. Again the Local Authority found that the safeguarding allegation was
56 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
unfounded, as children had not been harmed or put at risk, but they made clear that they were concerned that the Headmaster’s remarks had been very inappropriate. They asked the Chair of Governors to ensure that the governing body assessed the recording to determine whether further action need to be taken with the Head .They were assured that disciplinary action had been taken, and that the Independent Review, together with an appraisal of the Head, had dealt with the issue of unsuitable language.
114. How should a governing body approach such a situation? How should it hold a headteacher to account for inappropriate conduct or language which is not considered by the LA to indicate a risk of harm to children, , far less abuse? We will be speaking to Mr. Crook and the Chair of Governors about how they managed the concerns, and whether it was handled appropriately. We will also have evidence from the LADO and the DSL from the school at the time and from another former Headmaster .
115. Alongside these individuals, we will be hearing from a member of staff at the school, Margaret Moore, who provided information to the chair of governors and to OFSTED and the local authority to raise her concerns about this incident. She says that her concerns were brushed aside by the Chair of Governors and that she was isolated as a result of expressing her concerns to the Local Authority.
57 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
116. Following on from Ms Moore expressing her concerns to OFSTED, they undertook an inspection in November 2009. Ms Moore expresses her concern that this OFSTED report failed to examine all material but just accepted what the governing body said at face value (para 99, Margaret Moore). She also felt that some of the conclusions were erroneous , and in particular that OFSTED did not engage with the concern she had flagged up of a “boys will be boys” attitude with girls being treated differently from boys. She also felt that policies were not being implemented appropriately. We will be speaking to OFSTED about this.
117. We will be considering to which the safeguarding culture of a school may be set by the approach of the Headmaster, and how the awareness and understanding of safeguarding issues at the level of management and governance impacts on safeguarding awareness and practice across the school.
118. The current headteacher, Paul Bamborough , has said that when he became headteacher in 2018, that there were many aspects of safeguarding which could be better managed, and he has initiated a safeguarding review, which has been critical of the previous safeguarding culture at the school, and has led to an action plan and a detailed strategy for improving safeguarding at Purcell School.
Special Schools
58 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
119. In our second week, we will be examining institutional responses to child sexual abuse in the special schools sector. This investigation focuses upon the children at these schools because they are some of the most vulnerable children in our society, and for those with the most complex needs, residential schooling is often the only feasible option because of the complexity of need, or of the difficulty in finding adequate provision local to their homes. It is therefore not a choice but a necessity.
120. What do we mean by a special school? Quite simply, a special school is a school which provides education for children who have special educational needs or disabilities according to statute. But what does that mean? The legislation says that it is those with a learning difficulty or disability – i.e. a more than minor or trivial impairment that lasts longer than a year – which requires provision which is additional to, or different from, that provision made for those educated in a maintained mainstream school.
121. The vast majority of children with special educational needs are educated in mainstream maintained schools. Department for education statistics (Kate Dixon w/s p33, paragraph 127) show 1.318 million children with special educational needs in all state funded schools – so around 14.75% of the total number of students educated in English schools. Approximately 125,410 attend state funded special schools in England.
59 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
122. Of the children with special educational needs, 253,680 have an Education, Health and Care Plan - known as an EHC plan - which is a detailed statutory document identifying the nature of someone’s special educational needs, the provision to meet them and the placement where they should be educated - which is required for those with the most complex and significant special educational needs. Children educated in special school settings nearly always have such plans - which were previously known as “Statements”.
123. The needs of those with SEN or disabilities are diverse and wide-ranging: every child is unique, and the labels given to children only seek to identify in a very broad manner their types and the manner of their difficulties. Government statistics identify that the primary type of need for those with an EHC plan is a need arising from an autistic spectrum disorder - people on the ASD spectrum making up 28.2% of all pupils with such plans. But those individuals are not homogenous as a group - those with autism, or ASD or ASC depending upon what one wishes to call it - range from the mathematically and scientifically gifted, to those with no speech, limited ability to communicate and severe learning difficulties.
124. Other sorts of difficulty which require an EHC plan include moderate and severe cognitive impairments, complex physical and cognitive difficulties, speech and language impairments, social, emotional and mental health problems, specific learning difficulties
60 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
(commonly known as dyslexia or dyspraxia), visual , hearing or multi sensory impairments or physical disabilities. Again, we use labels which are imprecise and crude.
125. 44% of all pupils with EHC plans attend state funded special schools. Approximately 8% of pupils with EHC plans attend schools in the independent, or non maintained sector (i.e. schools which are not within the state sector but which are non profit making). Of those children with SEN but without EHC plans, approximately 7.1% attended independent schools . There is a significant difference between the numbers of boys and numbers of girls with special educational needs. 4.2% of boys within the school-aged population had an EHC plan, compared with only 1.6% of girls.
126. The number of children who attend residential special schools are very small in number. As at January 2019, the Department of Education estimates that 3,800 pupils aged 0-25 attended residential special schools or colleges (para 128 , Kate Dixon dfe002073 - 33)
127. . Whilst small in number, the numbers are significantly greater than those in custody (which is now a number less than 1,000), and as Dame Christine Lenehan has noted, their vulnerability stems from a mixture of what she calls “impairment and distance” (para 7 of her w/s). Dame Christine produced a report for the Government about the residential special school sector in 2017
61 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
and she will be coming to give evidence to this investigation. NASS is a membership organisation for independent and non maintained special schools (non maintained special schools are schools which charge fees but do not make a profit, have to follow the national curriculum and are inspected like maintained schools by OFSTED (PARA 9 OF NASS W/S) ). Nas reports that there are a small number of schools who make residential provision – 136 in total, of which 79 are registered special schools and 57 are children’s homes.
128. Sometimes there is no alternative to their living away from home, and it is the best option for all. But as the NAS notes, often children with complex needs are perceived as “challenging” and become placed in residential schools not because a positive decision has been made that this is the best option, but because everything else available locally has failed or is not available (paragraph 34, NAS). 129. NASS, along with some of the schools and charities , have noted that identifying who is responsible by way of a local authority for managing safeguarding issues has been problematic (paragraph 11 of NASS).. There are also concerns that more data should be gathered on a termly basis from independent special schools to ensure that information is available about this uniquely vulnerable group of young people.
62 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
130. Local authorities are responsible for ensuring that those with EHC plans receive the education set out in their plan,and health authorities are responsible for ensuring that the health provision is provided - this usually means that their boarding placements are paid for by the local authority . The National Association of Special Schools, Dame Christine Lenehan and others who have provided evidence to us have expressed concerns about the oversight of local authorities of such placements – whilst there can be contractual monitoring on an annual basis this is not done by people who have expertise in working with children, and local authorities sometimes do not attend the annual reviews for the children so have little sense of the effectiveness of the placement. The government has recognised this as a problem and has required all local authorities to visit all disabled children placed in residential placement every six months under the Visits to Children in Long Term Residential Care Regulations 2011; but the experience on the ground is that neither notifications nor visits are happening (paragraph 31 of the witness statement of NASS). Moreover, NASS tells us that local authorities often do not seek general safeguarding information at the point of placement, and there is sometimes not the frank exchange of information to enable the school to know a child’s individuals strengths and weaknesses (paragraphs 35 – 38).
131. Many children living in these settings have significant communication impairments – whether that is because of an inability to communicate verbally at all or effectively, or because of
63 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
pervasive social communication disorders so that their understanding of our social cues and norms is limited.
132. We have two examples of these sorts of schools in this investigation – we have the Royal School Manchester, which deals with children with profound and complex neurodisabilities (para 5.5 of the w/s of Jolanta McCall) – including multi sensory impairment (i.e. being both blind and deaf), autism, sensory processing difficulties (i.e having problems with the way one experiences the environment, for example finding loud noises, certain textures and experiences impossible to tolerate) challenging behaviour, and severe or profound learning difficulties, often with accompanying medical needs.
133. We will also be hearing evidence from Karen Gaster, the executive principal of Southlands School, who deals with children on the autistic spectrum . Whilst most people are now more familiar with this condition, it is diagnosed when a young person has significant difficulties in communicating and interacting with the world. This can include an inability to speak, delays in processing information or difficulties holding conversations and making friends (paragraph 8 of Carol Povey, NAS). People with the condition often engage in repetitive and sometimes restrictive behaviours, such as flapping hands, rocking or repeating sounds. They can experience intense anxiety and extreme uneasy around unexpected change – which can be as small as being seated in a different position, or having a different colour pen. Many autistic
64 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
people have sensory processing issues as described above which can be painful and distressing. Autistic people can find the world both frightening and baffling – and their anxiety and befuddlement can cause a “meltdown” where they can lash out emotionally or physically or shut down (paragraphs 8-11 of the w/s of Carol Povey, p2)
134. The children and young people at Southlands often have good abilities in some academic areas – often those where systematic or very logical and deductive skills are required. However, they have often very limited social communication abilities. They find the world difficult to understand, and in particular, find it difficult to relate to individuals about their personal and emotional lives. They often also have difficulties other than autism – for example, ADHD, anxiety disorders, Tourette’s, Depression, Psychosis, dyslexia , OCD and a number of other psychiatric conditions.
135. We are also examining aspects of three other special schools: Appletree, Stony Dean and Stanbridge Earls. Again, these three schools focus or focussed upon different sorts of difficulties in the lives of their pupils.
136. Appletree is a specialist residential school which also has children’s homes. We will be hearing evidence from Clair Davies, the current principal . Most children are looked after – and in this case, this means that the court has decided that parental responsibility should be shared between them and the local
65 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
authority because there is a risk or has been significant harm to these children to remain within the family . They are children who in public parlance are “in care”. Appletree provides a therapeutic environment – by which I mean education, care, psychotherapy and other clinical interventions for those between 6 – 12 who have been traumatised through abuse and neglect. They have often had multiple placement breakdowns elsewhere. They have all experienced or witnessed violence or neglect and have often been abused themselves. They have social, emotional and educational delays. The aim of Appletree is to try and heal the children enough so that they are able to return to mainstream school placements or return to foster homes (precis of paragraphs 1-6 of the Appletree w/s) . We will hear the evidence of a complainant of peer on peer sexually harmful behaviour whilst at the school.
137. Stony Dean is a special school maintained by Buckinghamshire County Council. In 2019 , it is a day school but until the mid 2000’s it was a boarding and day school. In 2007 it was a school for children with what is known as moderate learning difficulties and communication difficulties, principally autism [ofs010501]. A proportion of those children had emotional and behavioural difficulties emanating from their learning or communication needs [ofs010499]. It took children from the age of 11 – 18. We will hear from the local authority about failures of safeguarding in the school and we will be considering failings of a multi agency meeting in 2002. Two consecutive Heads of Care at the school were convicted of child sexual abuse. We will also be hearing from a
66 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
victim/survivor who attended the school as a child and who was abused by Anthony Bulley, Head of Care at the school.
138. The last school we are looking at is Stanbridge Earls. This described itself as a “specialist” school for children with a range of learning disabilities – largely dyslexia, dyscalculia (which is difficulty with numbers) and dyspraxia (which is a developmental co-ordination difficulty which affects someone’s ability to plan and organise their body in space). These conditions are often badged as “specific learning difficulties”. Stanbridge Earls also had a cohort of pupils with autism who required a small school environment (4.1.1. of the SCR, paragraph 14 of Derek Benson w/s, p4). The school catered for both boarding and day pupils and closed in 2013 as a result of a series of critical inspection reports following on from events which I will describe in more detail in a moment. We will hear from a representative of the body that commissioned serious case review following on from the closure of the school. The focus of the Inquiry’s interest in this school is the efficacy of the inspection and monitoring regime.
139. In four of these schools, all the children would have had a Statement of Special Educational needs or EHC plan and the vast majority of children would be paid for by the state. In contrast to the other schools, Stanbridge Earls accommodated a number of pupils who may have had special needs but did not have Statements and were paid for privately by their parents.
67 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
140. Whilst we cannot hope to provide anything other than a snapshot, and we can make no claims that these schools are truly representative of the sector, we have sought to identify a range of different schools reflecting different needs and different sorts of education in order to examine the institutional response to sexually harmful behaviours and allegations in each case.
141. We have evidence from a number of eminent organisations and individuals who work with, or provide services for, children and young people with SEN and disabilities. These organisations have provided us with very helpful background information about the particular vulnerabilities of these children to sexual abuse and the particular problems which arise in this sector. Synthesising the thoughtful evidence of the National Autistic Society, MENCAP, Ambito Care, the National Organisation for Specialist Schools and Colleges , NSPCC , Triangle, the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, the National Association for Special Schools and the Children’s Commissioner and the Association of Director of Children’s Services, as well as all the major teaching unions. The consensus of views they reach are:
The vulnerability of children .
142. Disabled children are also more likely to experience sexual abuse – they are nearly 3 times more likely to experience sexual violence than non disabled children (paragraph 4, James Robinson).
68 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
143. Children with autism can have obsessive and narrow interests , including being obsessionally interested in another person. They don’t understand social cues, appropriate space, or understanding what is right or wrong and often miss the implicit and subtle cues learned from interactions (paragraph 42 of Karen Gaster, p10 and Carol Povey, para 45 , p9). They cannot read others, and they follow their own impulses. They can find forming relationships difficult if not impossible. They can lack the difficulty to know what abuse looks like. They may believe that the person is simply being friendly, and may be coerced into sexual acts they did not feel comfortable with. Often, they will believe that they had been in a loving relationship and be devastated to find that they have been sexually exploited (paragraph 97 of Almudena Lara).
144. Young people with disabilities have additional barriers in the disclosure of abuse. They are more vulnerable, and are also often reliant upon the service being provided to them to not just educate them, but enable them to undertake basic activities in their lives. They may only be able to communicate with very few people, and often lack confidence (paragraph 95 of Almudena Lara, NSPCC, p21).
145. They may not be able to communicate verbally at all. Triangle, which is a specialist organisation working which children with communication disorders, has said that this does not mean that such children cannot provide information if asked in the right way
69 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
(paragraph 4) or if their behaviour is observed in a careful and objective manner. However, often the non verbal communication systems they use do not include concepts or language associated with abuse. They are often also not given the tools and experience to speak for themselves and to give their opinions and views about their lives, although the right to do this has become more prominent over the past twenty years (see triangle para 13 p6). This can make the disclosure of abuse impossible for such children, and the prosecution of offenders nigh on impossible given that our criminal justice system, even with the presence of intermediaries, would find it difficult to cope with someone whose communication system was an eye gaze computer or symbolic language, such as holding up pictures. Our legal system is almost wholly reliant upon individuals being able to express themselves verbally, even if not fluently.
146. There is also the question of whether or not they can make contact with anyone outside the institution where they live. The Children’s Commissioner runs a service, Help at Hand, for children who are living away from home, but they say that they have not seen an uptake in enquiries from residential schools (paragraph 8 of the w/s of the Children’s Commissioner, 2019).
147. Even where individuals live at home, they may be more socially isolated as often the sorts of clubs and activities open to others, particularly at secondary school age, may not be as welcoming or inclusive as one would hope.
70 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
148. For those children with complex physical disabilities or cognitive disabilities, their reliance upon adults is sometimes total. They require round the clock care and support, and someone to interpret what they want and to enable them to make choices. The sexual development of children with disabilities may also be out of step with their emotional and wider social development.
149. NSPCC research also shows that children with SEN and disabilities were less knowledgeable about how to keep safe (paragraph 98, Almudena Lara). Research by Mencap (James Robinson, paragraph 19) amongst those working with young adults with learning disabilities found that 79% of those professionals felt that young people with learning disabilities were not given the skills and knowledge to form healthy relationships and sexual relationships if they wanted to. Only 13% think that children are given the skills and knowledge to fulfil their sexual rights.
150. Not only are they more likely to be the subject of abuse, they are also more likely to be seen as perpetrators of harmful sexual behaviours . In research undertaken by Professor Simon Hackett, Professor of Abuse at Durham University - which we will be discussing with him in his evidence next week, he found that 38% of the 700 people referred to intervention services because of their sexual behaviour were described as having some form of learning disability (para 11.6 of the report of Hackett). The research is careful not to reach or jump to many conclusions because of this:
71 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
there is, as Professor Hackett identifies, a careful balance to be stuck between the role that disability may have played in a child’s presentation and responding to the harmful sexual behaviour on an individual basis, ensuring that in each case the risks and needs are addressed (paragraph 11.3 Prof Hackett). Professor Hackett identifies that the reason for this is not likely to be because disabled children in fact offend at a much higher rate, but that they are much more likely to be subject to scrutiny by adults than non disabled children. It is also the case that some forms of learning disability inhibit impulse control or the ability to understand normative sexual behaviours – as I have explained above. Professor Hackett also identifies that the sexually abuse beahviours of young people with learning disabilities can also be less sophisticated and so are more obvious and public and therefore more likely to come to the attention of the criminal justice system(paragraph 11.6 and 11.7 of his report).
151. Professor Hackett identifies three particular reasons why children with disabilities may engage in harmful sexual behaviour (paragraphs 11.10 – 11.12). First, many children with disabilities are more socially isolated than their non disabled peers, both because their disability reduces peer group contact and social activities, and also because they live away from home or are rejected by their peers because of the stigma of disability. Second, young people with disabilities have often been denied sex education, because of a lack of understanding on the part of carers or professionals, or because the rules on sex and relationsnhips in
72 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
special educational needs and residential contexts may be more restrictive than those in place for non disabled children. Third, children with disabilities who present with harmful sexual behaviours, could be perceived to have had those behaviours driven by the disability, and that perception may cause professionals to miss the possibility that the child has been inappropriately sexualised through abuse.
152. For children in residential special schools the situation can be even more acute. Such children often live a considerable distance from their parental home, as residential special schools are few in number. Their parents and other family members who know them well are therefore not around to interpret their communication needs, and understand when their behaviour is connected to pain, distress or unhappiness. Dame Christine Lenehan, in her review of the special school sector also found that if family did not visit, or had become disengaged, the children would have no outside visits during the year. There are also considerable struggles in attracting a stable and well qualified workforce with the particular expertise to meet the needs of these children (paragraph 12 of Dame C).
153. Given this background, this Investigation wanted to examine the particular challenges of this sector using the schools above to identify particular issues.
73 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
154. First, in respect of harmful sexual behaviours between peers, we want to look at:
(a)How schools determine, in the context of those with disabilities, what is usual, or developmentally appropriate, and what is harmful, and how that boundary is drawn. Is it drawn effectively? What are the complexities of doing this?
(b)Secondly, we want to examine how schools for children with disabilities educate children with SEN about sex and relationships, and they promote their sexuality and independence. What are the challenges of this? In particular, we want to examine :
○ The complexities of doing this. ○ How this will feed into the sex and relationship education which becomes compulsory in all schools from next September. ○ What specialist training and support is available at present, and is it enough? ○ Whether the government is proposing a specialist training package or service for schools and specific guidance for special schools about this. ○ What further resources, materials or personnel are required to assist with this, and should the government be proposing to do anything about this?
74 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
○ In particular, given that the vast majority of those with SEN are educated in a mainstream setting, what specific training is going to be given to mainstream staff, who may well have significantly less understanding of the complexities of social interactions than those in special schools?
(c)Third we want to examine the question of the interaction of disabled children with the internet and social media – and the particular issues that interaction brings to managing things. We want to ask if specific advice or practical recommendations are needed to try and make social media a world which takes account of those with disabilities. It can be a fantastic tool for those who are socially isolated – but can also be very dangerous.
(d)Fourth, we want to look at how those who have been the subject of sexual abuse are supported and educated – and what sort of specialist help is available or should be available to them, and whether or not they should be educated together or separately.
(e)Fifth, when children have displayed sexually harmful behaviour to others, what should the reaction be? Is it something which is dealt with appropriately by social services and criminal justice system?
75 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
(f) Last, is the current statutory guidance issued by the DFE adequate? Does it give schools the right tools to judge and manage these situations?
155. We have witnesses from Appletree, Southlands, from the NAS, MENCAP and the NSPCC and Professor Hackett to talk about these issues.
156. We will be hearing evidence from Ms. Davies (the current Principal of Appletree) and also examining a case where sexually harmful behaviour took place at Appletree involving young people. We will be hearing from a young man, giving evidence anonymously. His life before arriving at Appletree was extremely distressing. His behaviour was violent and aggressive because of abuse by his family – and he raises the question whether or not somewhere like Appletree was the appropriate place for him.
157. After being placed at Appletree at the age of six, he was the subject of sexually harmful acts between him and other children. We will examine one particular incident which occurred when he was 9 years old. He and two other children who were aged 11 and 12 ran away from school to a place near the railway tracks. Various sexual acts took place including anal penetration of the 9 year old by the 12 year old. He talks of other sexualised behaviours at that age. He also talks of running away on multiple occasions.
76 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
158. We will be asking the social service department which placed the older 12 year old child at the school how this process worked, whether this was the right placement from him and how the care system managed the placement of such children. This involves examining whether or not the local authority had understood the extent of the young person’s seuxalised behaviours, and how such children with harmful sexualised behaviours were and are managed within the care system.
159. We also have a witness statement from Cumbria County Council, the local authority where Appletree is situated. They tell us of incidents they investigated involving sexually harmful behaviour between children and disclosures of abuse. They also provide evidence of the investigation they undertook into the incident described by the victim and survivor coming to give evidence, and which included the police. They describe concerns about Appletree and the school’s approach to the disclosures of abuse, identifying that the staff interviewing the children before contacting social services had caused problems (see paragraph 64 of Ros Dean, Cumbria CC).
160. Cumbria’s investigation of events at the school led to CumbriaPolice carrying out an investigation as to whether a criminal offence had been committed. The Police were part of the section 47 investigation but decided that they would not take any further action. This was because the individual concerned had admitted the actions, and because there were discrepancies in the
77 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
children’s account of the actions, because also of the ages of the children and because the children were “damaged” – which is their word. They thought also that the evidence had been contaminated so that the court would have “thrown it out” (para 56 of Cumbria SS). This was in 2006.
161. Lastly, we will be examining how the police treated the allegations of the 12 year old involved in this sexual incident that he had been sexually abused by his father. This was investigated by West Yorkshire police. We will be asking West Yorkshire police about their policies in 2006 about managing the disclosures of children, and whether they acted in line with relevant police guidance at that time. The Inquiry will consider how and on what basis the police decided that the young person was not competent and should not be interviewed. This is relevant to the question of how the criminal justice system looked at children with disabilities.
Peer on Peer abuse 162. Issues of harmful sexual behaviour arose in Stanbridge Earls. The issue came to light when the first Tier Tribunal heard a case of sex discrimination in early 2013 involving a young woman who was alleged raped by another pupil at the school. The Tribunal’s conclusions about Stanbridge Earls were damning. It stated that the school had not taken reasonable steps to keep the girl safe. Following on from this, the DFE asked OFSTED to undertake an emergency inspection, which identified safeguarding deficiencies. A further ISI and OFSTED inspection took place in April 2013 and
78 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
again in June 2013 following on from widespread publicity after pupils at the school were photographed abseiling naked whilst on a school trip. The DFE informed the school in July 2013 that it could not continue in its current form, and enforcement proceedings were started. School numbers fell during this period and the trustees decided to close the school from August 2013 as it was not financially viable.
163. The police undertook a detailed operation called Operation Flamborough which did not lead to any convictions. The LADO was involved as were numerous other agencies, such as the Children’s Commissioner and the NSPCC. A serious case review was commissioned and reported in October 2015. We will be hearing evidence from the Chair of the Local Children’s Safeguarding Board which commissioned the review . The key findings were: a. Vulnerable girls were not adequately protected and the school was not adequately alert to their needs. Many children did benefit greatly from going to the school but there were some established patterns of conduct in the culture of the school which had potential to cause harm (paragraph 8.3). b. The school had a lack of alertness to safeguarding issues and failed to keep parents properly informed, possibly because of not realizing the seriousness of what was going on: in particular, a failure to recognise that sexual activity between children may be a safeguarding concern, and
79 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
confusion about confidentiality. There were also weaknesses in record keeping.
164. We will also be hearing from OFSTED on this issue. They undertook an internal review in January 2013 to review the inspection history of the school from 2011 – 2013 and to examine the school’s processes.. OFSTED found in its review that the inspectors had failed to get “underneath” the serious safeguarding concerns raised and complaints made by parents were not followed up. The systems available to allow inspectors to examine what information was held about the school was not optimal. Importantly, the review found that there was not a clear protocol of boundaries and responsibilities between OFSTED, the DFE , the local authority and the police. There was a gap in protection.
165. We will be asking OFSTED about what changes have been made to its processes following on from this, the processes of inspection of Stanbridge Earls and whether that now means that safeguarding is better inspected.
166. We also have a statement from the Independent Schools Inspectorate which suggests that there were failings in the vetting system at the school which were not picked up by Ofsted in 2010/2011.
167. The Charity Commission currently has a statutory inquiry ongoing against Stanbridge Earls. This has been ongoing since
80 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
2015 but has not as yet been published. [check - has anything arrived about it?]
Safer Recruitment and responses to allegations against carers 168. We will also look at safer recruitment and the response to allegations of abuse made by young people against those who care from them. In 2005, Nigel Anthony Bulley pleaded guilty to six offences of rape and sexual assault against four boys aged 11-14. He was banned from working with children for life and put on licence for at least 15 years, and was sentenced to 10 years in prison. 11 counts involving 3 other boys remained on the file. He committed these offences whilst the Head of Care at Stony Dean, a post he occupied between 1998 – 2005. The boarding unit for children at Stony Dean closed in February 2005, largely as a result of the concerns which emerged following Mr. Bulley’s arrest. It may be that Mr. Bulley’s offending was more prolific than even his convictions demonstrate. We will hear the account of a person we are calling RS-A7 who was one of the boys whom Nigel Bulley sexually assaulted. He tells us that he did not tell the police everything that happened to him because he was very embarrassed and because his father could see and hear the police interview (paragraph 45 of the w/s of R/S A7).
169. Mr. Bulley was brought to justice in 2005, but he had previously been temporarily suspended from school in 2002 because of an allegation made by a child at that time. The local authority accepts in their witness statement that the local authority investigative
81 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
process was flawed and did not make the right decisions about Mr. Bulley at the time. The Serious Case Review published in 2009 took the same view. The local authority has reflected on the domineering and dominating nature of the then head and the role those characteristics played in undermining the investigations at the time. The Serious case review called attention to the need for senior managers in the local authority to provide critical challenge as well as support in relation to the child protection practices in the school. There is a distinct possibility that had appropriate steps been taken in 2002, the abuse of children including R/S A7 who will give evidence to this inquiry may not have occurred.
170. This conviction was not the only one against staff at the school. Mr. Bulley replaced Mr. Stride, the previous head of care who was convicted in 2002 of abusing young people at the previous school he had worked at before he moved to Stony Dean.
171. We will hear from Buckinghamshire County Council who maintained the school and who commissioned the serious case review. The concerns raised in this case are: a. The standards, in practice, of vetting of staff in 1998 and in 2002. Mr. Bulley had had previous concerns raised about him which were recorded on the police intelligence database. Had human resources staff from the local authority checked his DBS (then CRB) against not just his current name, but also his former name (which they knew), they would have
82 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
found those concerns in 2002 which could have made a difference to the investigation which took place then. b. Had a reference which referred to concerns in a previous school been followed up, would Mr Bulley still have been employed. c. The response by the Head to the allegations being made. Instead of seeking to investigate them, he failed to pass on crucial information, in particular a reference he had received when recruiting Bulley in 1995 which mentioned him leaving a previous school over a “child protection matter” . This investigation considers that this is a paradigmatic exemplar of the issues raised earlier in this opening about a refusal to believe that individuals can abuse.
172. Questions about allegations made against staff and the processes undertaken by schools and the government will be dealt with during Phase Two, when we will hear from the teaching unions and the Teaching Regulation Agency . However, so that those at this hearing understand the current position, from 2018, the Teaching Regulation Agency took over the functioning of what had previously been called the Teaching Agency. They have the power to prohibit staff from teaching. THere used to be a range of powers that the teaching agency could use when disciplining staff. Now there is only the power to prohibit, the effect of which , according to the TRA, is that only “the most serious cases” which would lead to a “lifetime prohibition” now come before the TRA. All
83 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
lesser cases are now dealt with by the employers of teachers. (paragraphs 1-5 of Alan Meyrick) .
Safer Recruitment: Royal School, Manchester 173. Following on from this, we want to look at how the barring system works in practice. The focus of the investigation into the Royal School Manchester is how it, and the Department for Education, dealt with concerns raised about three members of staff which led to their dismissal. Following dismissal, they were not placed on the register of individuals who should not work with children or vulnerable adults either by the Department for Education or by the Department of Health. We wish to examine how the assessment of risk in such cases takes place and crucially what the position is now.
DBS checks: Music and special schools generally 174. We will look at the Disclosure and Barring Service and whether their current system, which focuses upon the examination of the backgrounds of those who undertake “regulated activity”, is sufficiently robust to keep children safe. This is an issue raised in both music and special schools. We will hear from the Home Office, who are responsible for this piece of legislation and from the Disclosure and Barring Service. We will also hear from the DFE, who although they do not run the DBS, provide advice to the Home Office about policy issues which affect children. The NSPCC and the Independent Schools Inspectorate have both raised concerns about the scope of the scheme as it currently
84 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
operates. In its present form, in applies to those who participate in a “regulated activity”, for example if they work in a school. The NSPCC and the ISI have raised the following concerns about the current system: a. Firstly, because someone is undertaking regulated activity with children only if they are teaching, training, instructing, caring for or supervising children and do this more than three days in thirty. (paragraph 6.2). So, peripatetic staff who work only occasionally would not be checked. Moreover, adults who are alongside children (such as adult choir members in a choir including adults and children) would not be engaged in a regulated activity despite spending significant amounts of time with the children. (paragraph 6.2 of the DBS w/s of Suzanne Smith). The ISI identifies that those who own schools unless they teach in them as well would also not be considered to be undertaking regulated activity. Whilst governors in the state sector are required by statute to have an enhanced DBS check, Governors in the independent sector are not. The central issue is that these individuals have considerable power over children, and will be seen as trusted figures of authority by them – but they do not need checks. b. There is also a concern about those who volunteer in schools - they only require a check of their barred list status if they are unsupervised (if supervised, they require in schools a criminal records check). So, for example, if a teacher was dismissed for gross misconduct for having sex
85 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
with a teenage pupil prior to it becoming a criminal offence, he could volunteer in schools to read in a class without the school knowing that he had been so dismissed, as no barred list check would be undertaken. c. A second concern is the workings of the Update service. This is a service which organisations subscribe to which can tell them if individuals who work for them have been convicted of offences. It is updated every month. Police intelligence – i.e. information that does not amount to a conviction - is only updated every 9 months, something which the NSPCC consider is not frequent enough (DBS response to this at para 6.7 of the w/s of Suzanne Smith) .
175. The DBS have told this Inquiry in previous investigations that the definition of regulated activity can be complicated for individuals “on the ground” to understand. It relies upon “quantity” of time rather than “quality” of relationship .
Conclusion 176. A wealth of information has been gathered - over 204,902 pages of documentation have been received, and 87 witness statements will be used in one way or another through the hearing, with many more having been provided. From this, the ultimate issues appear to be:
86 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
a. One: How those who disclosed abuse were treated by school, and whether or not the practices and procedures have improved over time b. Two: Whether the systems of recruitment are adequate to identify those who may be a risk to children, to assess that risk, and to take steps to ensure that , as far as is possible, those who are a risk do not get to work with children c. Three: Whether or not training and implementation in relation to safeguarding and recruitment was adequate at various points in time; and if not, whether they should have been; and if it is accepted that these systems were deficient, what is now being done to rectify those deficiencies. d. Four: Even if the policies and practices are now considered to be acceptable, whether they are in fact used and implemented in practice e. Five: How far schools promoted and now promote a culture of safeguarding, f. Six: Whether and to what extent reputational risk got in the way of adequate transparency of safeguarding g. Seven: Whether the government should seek to create standardised systems of training and resources in respect of safeguarding ? h. Eight: Was there, or is there now, a system for effective auditing and monitoring of safeguarding practice , and a system for ensuring that the lessons to be learnt from past reviews are put into practice?
87 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
i. Nine: is the disjointed and overlapping nature of oversight and supervision of schools inimical to effective safeguarding management? j. Ten: Whether schools co-operated with local authorities and the police to ensure swift resolution of safeguarding cases in the past and whether it does at present. k. Eleven: Where matters were reported to the Police, whether they and the prosecuting authorities undertook adequate investigations; and if their investigations were inadequate, what is now happening to improve and learn from the past. l. Twelve: How far institutional responses to victims, survivors and complainants have been adequate; whether appropriate reparations were offered; and what steps are now being taken to work with victims and survivors to improve practices m. Thirteen: how living far away from home, particularly for those with disabilities can make a child “fall between many stools” if there are concerns about safeguarding.
177. This is an ambitious list of questions. Most of them are not capable of easy answers. We hope that at the end of this hearing there has been a frank exchange of views and opinions by those who have the best knowledge and understanding of the issues facing the sector: both those within it, and those who have had experience of it.
PROCEDURE
88 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
178. I turn now to the conduct of this hearing. Each of the counsel for the core participants will now have an opportunity to make a short statement. The evidence will begin tomorrow and will be structured in as logical way as is possible given the time constraints and witness availability.
WITNESSES - A REMINDER 179. For everyone’s understanding, may I explain how live witnesses who have not waived anonymity will appear in person. Live witnesses who are anonymous will have special measures in place to protect their identities. Before anonymous witnesses testify, the hearing room will need to be cleared of press and members of the public, who will be able to listen to audio of the witness in a separate room. I shall invite the Chair and the Panel to rise while these arrangements are being made, and, in the case of those who are to give their evidence by video-link, while the video-link is being set up for those witnesses.
180. I would remind everyone that the Chair has previously made an order confirming that these proceedings will be livestreamed, subject to a three-minute delay. If something is said inadvertently in evidence during these proceedings which risks identifying someone whose identity has been protected by the Inquiry, we will invite the Chair to halt proceedings temporarily whist the livestream is cut. The Chair has already made a Restriction Order dated 27 September 2019 preventing the publication or onward disclosure of
89 Footnotes for internal use only Confidential- Check against delivery
any details which may be capable of identifying anyone whose identity should be protected.
Any other business
181. We will now hear from the following representatives: (a)Mr. Scorer on behalf of victims and survivors of Chetham’s, Appletree and Stony Dean (b)Ms. Hollos on behalf of Purcell School (c)Ms. Woods on behalf of Yehudi Menuhin School and Wells Cathedral School (d)Mr. Ford on behalf of Chetham’s School of Music (e)Ms. Gallafent on behalf of the Seashell Trust, the Royal School Manchester
Fiona Scolding QC Anna Bicarregui Zoe Nield Mary Robertson 29 September 2019
90 Footnotes for internal use only