Day 3 IICSA Inquiry Anglican Church Investigation Hearing 25 July 2018
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Day 3 IICSA Inquiry Anglican Church Investigation Hearing 25 July 2018 1 Wednesday, 25 July 2018 1 A. Yes. 2 (10.00 am) 2 Q. In your witness statement at paragraph 1 you describe 3 Welcome and opening remarks by THE CHAIR 3 the role as Secretary for Public Affairs as being 4 THE CHAIR: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Day 3 of 4 essentially the archbishop's most senior adviser on 5 the Peter Ball case study. Today the inquiry will hear 5 things outside of the church? 6 witness evidence from Dr Purkis, from a former police 6 A. Correct. 7 officer and a serving police officer and the Reverend 7 Q. Am I right, broadly speaking, that the Bishop at 8 Dr Ros Hunt. 8 Lambeth, so at that point Bishop John Yates, was the 9 If there are no matters to deal with, Ms Bicarregui, 9 most senior person advising on matters to do with the 10 prior to hearing the witnesses? 10 church, so to do with ecclesiastical matters? 11 MS BICARREGUI: Thank you very much, chair. 11 A. Yes. 12 THE CHAIR: Please proceed. 12 Q. I believe you also worked very closely with 13 MS BICARREGUI: Dr Purkis's statement is in file 6. 13 Lesley Perry, who was the archbishop's press secretary 14 DR ANDREW PURKIS (sworn) 14 at that time? 15 Examination by MS BICARREGUI 15 A. Yes. 16 MS BICARREGUI: Dr Purkis, you should have a bundle of 16 Q. I think, if you look at your witness statement, or you 17 documents in front of you, and behind the first 17 may not need to, at paragraph 15.1, you say that a large 18 tab there should be a copy of your witness statement. 18 part of your role was advising on media coverage and the 19 A. Thank you. 19 public reputation of the mission of the church; is that 20 Q. Have you had a chance to remind yourself of the contents 20 right? 21 of that statement recently? 21 A. Yes. 22 A. Yes. 22 Q. Again, in your witness statement, you clarify that 23 Q. If you were to turn to the back page, which is page 10, 23 Lesley Perry was the key operator with the media, so in 24 you will see that it's dated and signed -- sorry, 24 contact with the media, but you would normally be 25 Dr Purkis. I see you are at the back. It is behind the 25 consulted by her on the wording of important press Page 1 Page 3 1 very first tab 1, at the beginning of the bundle. 1 releases and on media strategy, and certainly in 2 A. Yes. 2 relation to something as controversial as the Peter Ball 3 Q. Although your signature has been redacted -- 3 case; is that right? 4 A. Sorry, I seem to be in the middle of Lord Carey. But 4 A. Yes. 5 I have seen my statement and the redacted signature, and 5 Q. In fact, we know from contemporaneous documents that you 6 I know it is all well. Thank you. 6 helped, to an extent, draft the press releases that were 7 Q. The contents of that statement are still true, to the 7 issued following Peter Ball's resignation and caution 8 best of your knowledge and belief? 8 in March 1993; that's right, isn't it? 9 A. Yes, absolutely. 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Dr Purkis, we will see how we go. Documents which 10 Q. If we could turn to tab 2 of the bundle, and, Danny, if 11 I refer to will come up on the screen. If at any point 11 we could get up ACE002104. Dr Purkis, the provenance of 12 you want to refer to something in a bundle, just say and 12 this is a little bit shady, shall we say. 13 we will make sure you have the correct bundle. 13 A. Yes. 14 You also say, I think, that you would like this 14 Q. The version that we have got up on screen does have 15 statement to be read in conjunction with the interview 15 a Lambeth Palace stamp on it; the one in the bundle 16 you gave to Dame Moira Gibb; is that right? 16 doesn't. But the inquiry believes that this is the 17 A. Yes, please. 17 press release that was issued when Peter Ball was 18 Q. Dr Purkis, you were the Archbishop of Canterbury's 18 arrested in December 1992. If we could just have a look 19 Secretary for Public Affairs between 1992 and 1998? 19 at that statement, the first paragraph: 20 A. Correct. 20 "It must be emphasised that no charges have been 21 Q. Do you recall when you started in 1992? 21 brought against the bishop, and the allegations made 22 A. I'm sorry, I don't recall exactly. I could look it up, 22 about him are unsubstantiated. Moreover, the bishop has 23 but I don't really remember, sorry. 23 a proven record of outstanding pastoral work, 24 Q. Prior to that job, you had worked in the Civil Service, 24 particularly amongst young people." 25 in the charity sector? 25 Do you see that? The next paragraph goes on to say: Page 2 Page 4 1 (Pages 1 to 4) Epiq Europe Ltd www.epiqglobal.com 8th Floor, 165 Fleet Street (+44)207 4041400 [email protected] London EC4A 2DY Day 3 IICSA Inquiry Anglican Church Investigation Hearing 25 July 2018 1 "The Archbishop of Canterbury has been informed and 1 question: do you recall having any input into the 2 has been in touch with Bishop Peter." 2 drafting of this? 3 Appropriate enquiries will be conducted. Again, the 3 A. I don't. I don't remember being consulted about this 4 last paragraph, just going to that one: 4 one, although it was 24 years ago. 5 "The archbishop has Bishop Peter in his prayers at 5 Q. Indeed. Again, the same question, I suppose: would it 6 this difficult time." 6 be likely -- we know from later documents that 7 Do you see that? 7 Andy Radford and Lesley Perry and yourself were 8 A. Yes. 8 involved, for example, in the March press releases? 9 Q. Do you recall being involved in the drafting of this? 9 A. Yes. 10 A. I don't. 10 Q. Would it be likely that Andy Radford would have spoken 11 Q. Would it be likely that something that was issued from 11 to you or Lesley Perry about this press release? 12 Lambeth Palace, we believe, would have been looked at 12 A. I think -- I suppose it's likely that he spoke at least 13 either by you or by Lesley Perry? 13 to Lesley Perry, but I don't know that. 14 A. Yes, likely. 14 Q. Again, there are no circumstances -- I appreciate that 15 Q. Again, looking at this -- I know we are looking at it 15 you have said innocent until proven guilty, but the 16 with hindsight, Dr Purkis, but what do you think about 16 terms of this, where the focus is on the devastating 17 the way that this is drafted? 17 effect of accusations on the accused, that isn't 18 A. Well, with hindsight, it clearly is a major hostage to 18 something which would in any way be acceptable today, is 19 fortune. I think it reflects the archbishop's view that 19 it? 20 his bishop should be assumed to be innocent unless and 20 A. No, it's very one-sided. 21 until proved otherwise. 21 Q. Even at the time, Dr Purkis, this was an extremely 22 Q. Let's go to the next press release that we have, which 22 unwise message to be sending, wasn't it? 23 is at tab 3 of the bundle. Danny, if we could get up 23 A. Yes, it's a hostage to fortune, I agree. 24 ACE000255. 24 Q. Could we have, Danny, ACE000267 up on screen. This is 25 A. Yes. 25 tab 16 of the bundle. This is a memo which Lesley Perry Page 5 Page 7 1 Q. So this now looks more like a conventional press 1 sent to you, to Bishop John Yates and to the Archbishop 2 release, as you will see. 2 of Canterbury on 6 January. We see that from the first 3 A. Yes. 3 page. Danny, if we could go to page 3, and the top 4 Q. Albeit that it is issued by the Diocese of Gloucester, 4 paragraph of page 3: 5 rather than -- this isn't one that came from 5 "We have all heard rumours of people who have 6 Lambeth Palace directly. 6 written or telephoned here [Lambeth Palace] to describe 7 A. Right. 7 their own experiences with Bishop Peter -- some 8 Q. Again, if we could look at the terms of that press 8 positive, some not. There is a danger that if the 9 release, if we go to, I think -- just to give it some 9 result of this investigation is any permutation of the 10 context, this is a personal message which the Archbishop 10 No 1 scenario ..." 11 of Canterbury wanted to be read out because, of course, 11 We would have to look at the whole thing, but the 12 at this point, the Bishop of Gloucester was absent from 12 number 1 scenario I think is if Bishop Peter Ball is 13 his diocese, and so this was something which was to be 13 exonerated, so there are no charges brought: 14 read in the new year.