CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
OPENING NOTE FOR FIONA SCOLDING QC
ANGLICAN INVESTIGATION- WIDER CHURCH HEARING 1 - 12 JULY 2019
1. Chair and Panel, I am Fiona Scolding Q.C. , senior counsel to this Anglican investigation. Seated to my right are Ms. Nikita McNeill and Ms. Lara McCaffrey, junior counsel to this investigation.
2. Having introduced the Inquiry representatives, I now turn to other core participants.
To my right: (a)Representatives for the complainants, victims and survivors represented by Slater and Gordon – Mr. Richard Scorer of Slater and Gordon, and Mr. Iain O’Donnell of counsel (b)Counsel for the Complainants, victims and survivors represented by Switalskis – Mr David Greenwood, and Mr. William Chapman of counsel. (c)Mr. Chapman also represents the Ministry and Clergy Sexual Abuse Survivors organisation, known as MACSAS.
Turning behind me, (d) representing the Archbishop’s Council – Mr. Nigel Giffin Q.C (e) To my rear and right, Counsel for the Ecclesiastical Insurance Office, Mr. Rory Philips Q.C
1 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
(f) On the left hand benches, Counsel for the Church in Wales, Mr. Mark Powell QC (g) Counsel for the National Police Chiefs Council, Mr James Berry. (h)Counsel for the Department of Education, Ms Emily Wilsdon (1-9 July 2019). We understand that Mr Benjamin Seifert will attend for the DFE for some of next week also (10-11 July 2019).
3. There are no preliminary matters which the core participants wish to raise.
Introductory remarks 4. The aim of these hearings is to examine whether the Church of England is currently giving sufficient priority to ensuring that churches are places are entirely safe and the voices of those who have difficult things to say are heard and acted upon.
5. The Inquiry has already heard a significant amount of evidence and received written statements and documentation about the Church of England during the course of both the Chichester and Peter Ball case study hearings, which will be used during this hearing where relevant and informative. We seek in this hearing to build upon that which we have already learnt. To remind everyone, when I talk about the Church in these opening remarks, I mean the Church of England, or the Church in Wales, and sometimes both Churches.
2 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
6. I will spend the first part of this opening dealing with issues which predominantly relate to the Church of England. I will then provide an explanation and some background about the Church in Wales and the issues they have faced in respect of child sexual abuse.
7. The themes we will be examining during this hearing are: a. The views of victims and survivors as to the failures of the Church currently and what steps they consider should be taken to improve safeguarding practice.
b. An examination of the appropriateness of reparations made by the Church, and the role of insurers in civil claims.
c. The Current safeguarding practices and policies of the Church of England and the Church in Wales, and steps to be taken in the near future.
d. Whether the current structure for safeguarding in both Churches are adequate to keep children safe.
e. The handling of non recent allegations of abuse, and of posthumous allegations.
3 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
f. The current system for auditing and providing external scrutiny and whether it is capable of highlighting deficiciences in policies or practices.
g. Safeguarding in practice.
8. Behind all these specific areas of inquiry lies the largest question - which is whether the culture of the Church as it was and is, is capable of dealing appropriately with safeguarding. Culture, as the Bishop of Blackburn’s letter of 17 June 2019 to his clergy says, is made up of structures, decisions and appointments. Part of this hearing will be spent examining casework recently carried out in dioceses across England and Wales to see if the culture has changed to one where the protection of children, rather than the reputation of the Church and those within it, is paramount.
9. Most of you in this room are familiar with the language and terminology associated with both the Church of England and Church in Wales. For the benefit of those not familiar with it, when I mention the word clergy, I mean someone who is a vicar, priest, rector or curate – i.e. someone who the church has granted “holy orders”. They are usually office holders – i.e. neither employed nor self employed. By Bishop I mean someone who has been appointed by the Church to be the chief pastor in a Diocese- the “cure of souls” to use the language of the Church. When we refer to a clerical title, or term of art during
4 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
this hearing, I will seek to explain it in ordinary language, or ask the witness to do so.
Complainants, victims and survivors 10. As at previous hearings, we refer to those where abuse has been proven, either by way of criminal conviction, civil findings or findings in the context of disciplinary proceedings as victims or survivors. In circumstances where there have been no such findings, individuals are referred to as complainants.
11. We will spend part of these hearings listening to the voices of complainants, victims and survivors. We thank all of those who have contributed to this investigation and pay tribute to their courage in providing us with their accounts, recognising the emotional distress that this hearing may cause to them. We also recognise there will be others who may not have told anyone about their abuse, or wish to keep such private. As I have said before, the scars of sexual abuse in childhood are often indelible.
12. We will hear about abuse alleged to have been perpetrated by senior members of the clergy, including Bishops. We will hear of the reluctance or failure to report known abuse: we will hear of a lack of curiosity about or outright indifference to allegations when disclosed, and the grant of permission to officiate in cases where abuse was known to have occurred. We will also hear more about failures in record keeping – something
5 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
which seems trivial until one realises how far it can hamper an effective response to safeguarding as vital information is missing or placed out of reach.
13. We will hear about the abuse of power: about clergy who considered themselves to be able to operate by different rules: about the sense of entitlement that can come with a clerical collar and how that has made others unduly deferential or unwilling to criticise figures of authority in their lives.
Data about the Church of England
14. The Church of England has provided us with information about all known cases of convictions for sexual offending involving children in the recent past. We have a list of 390 individuals who are either clergy, or in positions of trust in respect of the Church of England – for example, choirmasters, and where the acts of abuse were carried out in circumstances where those individuals were ostensibly performing their Church of England role. This includes individuals who offended in a domestic or educational setting. A significant amount of this offending involves the downloading of, or possession of, indecent images of children.
15. We also have a list of claims brought against dioceses in the Church of England in the recent past, which amount to some 330 in total, although it should be noted that some of the claims
6 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
involve the same offender. The vast majority of these claims relate to sexual offending carried out before 1990, with significant numbers in the 1960’s and 1970’s.
16. The Church of England has provided us with some statistics about the number of safeguarding concerns which were reported to dioceses from 2015 onwards about children or vulnerable adults. In 2015, some 1,052 concerns were reported. In 2017, this had increased to 1,257. 53% of the total number of safeguarding reports in 2017 related to sexual abuse. The proportion of those concerns which were then referred to statutory authorities has remained at around a third throughout this period.
17. Of the allegations set out above, 736 allegations were made about church officers in 2017 – so around a quarter of the total allegations made about children and vulnerable adults. Of those allegations around 43% were about clergy. The majority of allegations made against clergy concerned sexual abuse – some 62% in 2017. 21% of all allegations concerned those in voluntary positions. Around half of all cases referred to dioceses both about children and vulnerable adults involving clerics were reported to statutory agencies.
18. Disciplinary measures were taken in 72 cases in 2017 – with 39 cases being brought under the Clergy Discipline Measure and 33 under lay disciplinary procedures. 36 individuals were
7 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
referred to the Disclosure and Barring Service in 2017, to determine whether they need to be placed upon the list they maintain for those unsuitable to work with children or vulnerable adults.
Responding to abuse 19. The culture and clericalism of the Church of England in the past, as we have seen in the case studies involving both the Diocese of Chichester and the late Peter Ball, may have lent themselves to being places where those who wished to abuse children could hide, often in plain sight. The Church of England did not have compulsory training on child protection or child abuse until relatively recently. Guidance was available, but was sometimes not followed or ignored. When disclosures came to light, individuals were forgiven, or moved, or seen to be elderly or frail, and therefore no action was taken.
20. The respect for authority, taboos surrounding sexuality and lack of a supportive environment were all present in the Diocese of Chichester and within the wider Church of England. We will hear further evidence about similar failures in other Dioceses, and at other times.
21. It is particularly important that the Church, meaning both the the Church of England and the Church in Wales, alongside other religious institutions has strong, transparent and straightforward systems for responding to allegations of child sexual abuse.
8 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
22. The Inquiry’s Truth Project analysis shows that of those individuals who provided their testimony to the Truth Project, almost half disclosed abuse contemporaneously to a member of the clergy or safeguarding officer. It is therefore of vital practical importance that clerics and staff have a good understanding and knowledge of what to do in these circumstances.
Illustrative Examples 23. The Church of England has accepted that the problems seen in the Diocese of Chichester were not unique to it. This hearing will examine a cross section of concerns and current practice of the Church of England and the Church in Wales. We also asked the Church of England to provide more detailed explanations of the response to abuse in a number of illustrative cases which have been brought to the Inquiry’s attention. I will spend a few moments setting out some details of these cases to remind us all of the issues in the past.
24. Tim Storey a. Tim Storey worked as a youth leader. He undertook some ordination training and held administrative posts within the Diocese of London and Southwark. He used his youth work role to groom teenage girls using texts, instant messenger and facebook. He is currently serving 15 years in prison for three offences of rape and one offence of assault by penetration. These assaults related to a 17 year old young woman and a 16 year old.
9 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
b. The Church of England carried out two reviews of this case, one undertaken by Justin Humphreys of Thirty One: Eight, from whom we will hear. The other review was undertaken by a retired Detective Chief Inspector, David Marshall. c. Both reports identified that there was a failure to implement policies and practices in place at the time Disclosures were made in April, October and December 2008 which should have led individuals to refer the matter to Social Services or the police. Instead, Mr. Storey was confronted with the allegations. He made a partial admission of the sexual activity but denied the coercion. Individuals from the Church then did make referrals in 2009 to statutory bodies, but these were partial and did not provide sufficient detail - so the statutory agencies took no further action. d. It was only in 2014 that the London Diocesan Safeguarding Advisor took action which led to Tim Storey’s conviction for sexual offences which may not have been committed had steps been taken by the Church in 2008 and 2009. e. Clergy Discipline was considered but rejected for two clerics even though they had acted in a way that was characterised in the reviews as “naïve, inappropriate and at times plain stupid”. This was in part, because of the length of such proceedings, and the fact that it would not provide an appropriate resolution for survivors. We will be hearing from Rosemary Lain-Priestley, Archdeacon of the Two Cities, about the use of the Clergy Discipline Measure.
10 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
25. Revd Canon Derek Buckley a. Reverend Buckley died in 1999. In 2015, Derbyshire police received allegations from two men about abuse dating from the 1980’s. Both men alleged that they had been invited to help Reverend Buckley with his hobby of photography. They were invited to the dark room in his house, when they were then sexually assaulted by him, whilst in their early teens. One complainant also alleged abuse when taken on holiday with Reverend Buckley. b. The Diocese of Derby did not carry out a review because of the changes that had been made to policies since then. This case provides an example of the issues which occur when the alleged perpetrator is deceased - how can reparation take place? What sort of investigation is adequate or sufficient, or even capable of taking place? Are there lessons to be learnt even at a distance of thirty years?
26. Canon John Roberts a. In 1989, whilst the rural dean - i.e. someone who has administrative responsibility for supervising on behalf of the Bishop and providing information about a group of parishes and a rector of a church in Liverpool, John Roberts was found guilty of 2 counts of indecent assault on a male under 16. He was given a fine and was made to sign the Sex Offenders Register. The then Bishop of Liverpool, David Sheppard, was of the view that this conviction was been a miscariage of justice and despite his conviction John Roberts
11 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
remained in his parish, and became a Canon of LIverpool Cathedral in 1995. In 2002 he retired and was granted Permission to officiate - this is the system for the licensing of clergy who no longer hold full time office but wish to carry on undertaking services. b. When in 2003, an application for a CRB check was made as part of the process for his PTO to be renewed, it came back without the conviction upon it. The then Bishop of Liverpool, James Jones was so concerned by this that he wrote to the Home Secretary to ask about why this could be the case. Further inquiries showed that no information about the case was held upon any police or central records. This shows the limits in the CRB system - it relied upon records being transferred from police forces to a central system, and as with anything else, defective original records make the system imperfect and fallible. c. In 2003, a risk assessment was undertaken by the DIocese of LIverpool in the light of his conviction. This stated unequivocally that the case would have been handled differently, and that the relevant national guidance from the House of Bishops would militate against the grant of permission to officiate. However, there had been no concerns raised since 1989 and it was “not unreasonable” for him to have a Ministry, and so he was granted permission to officiate with a condition that he should not minister to children. This case raises the obvious problem of how to manage cases which had been handled contrary to current
12 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
mores in the past. It also raises the question of how feasible it is to impose conditions on permission to officiate. d. In 2007 it was found that he had ministered at services at which children were present. His ministry was not stopped but he was asked to give certain written assurances that he would not do this again. Concerns were also raised in 2012 and 2013 about his work 1:1 at Liverpool Cathedral. e. Only in 2015 was PTO withdrawn, following concerns from the Dean of Liverpool that despite his trying to set out boundaries for his ministry, these had been consistently crossed or blurred. Even after this point in time, there were allegations that Mr. Roberts sought to hold himself out as working on behalf of the Cathedral.
27. Robert Waddington a. Robert Waddington was the Dean of Manchester Cathedral from 1984 – 1993, following which he continued to have permission to officiate in the Diocese of York. This was only withdrawn in 2004. He died in 2007. b. Allegations were made about his sexual abuse of young people in 1999, 2003, 2004 and 2005 to different members of the Church, including the former Archbishop of York, Lord Hope in 1999. The Church of England has accepted that it acted inappropriately in response to those allegations. c. The Church Commissioned an internal review headed by HHJ Sally Cahill QC, who has provided us with a witness statement. It identified failures by the Bishop of Manchester,
13 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
for not keeping records of the disclosure made and criticised Lord Hope for : i. Failing to take advice from his Child Protection advisor: ii. Failing to consider the current risk to children: iii. Failing to consider if Permission to Officiate should be suspended or stopped. d. HHJ Cahill made a number of recommendations, including the need for national policies in respect of child protection, to cover both current and non recent cases, and a full time national safeguarding officer. We will be asking the Church of England about these recommendations.
28. AN-F15 a. We will be hearing evidence from AN-A4 who has alleged that he was raped by AN-F15, who was a cleric in his flat in 1976 when he was 16 and that he disclosed this abuse to a number of clerics over a number of years. b. As a result of the concerns he raised, the Church of England commissioned the Elliott Review in 2016. Mr. Ian Elliott, the author of that review, will give evidence and will be telling us about his conclusions and concerns. We will ask in particular about: i. Why he considers that there was poor practice in the responses to disclosures of abuse by AN-A4: ii. Why he reached the view that a lack of awareness of this case at the national level was caused because of
14 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
an absence of internal reviews and/or oversight within the Church itself. iii. Why he reached the view that the relationship between the Church of England and its insurers needed to be clarified in dividing the human response from the legal response when child sexual abuse cases with civil claims present themselves to the Church.
29. Victor Whitsey, Bishop of Chester a. The Right Reverend Victor Whitsey was Bishop of Chester from 1974-1982. He died in 1987. Thirteen people have made complaints of child sexual abuse to Chester police and the Church of England is aware of 6 more. The allegations are that he sexually assaulted both teenage boys and teenage girls, as well as young adults during his tenure as the Bishop of Chester. b. In 2016 the Church convened a core group and commenced the process of an independent review. Cheshire Police wrote to the Church in March 2019 with concerns about the actions of Bishop Dr Peter Forster, as a result of which an application for Clergy Discipline Measure has been brought against Bishop Forster. c. We will be hearing from an individual who alleges abuse by Victor Whitsey on Wednesday and from the current Bishop of Chester, Dr Peter Forster.
30. Reverend Trevor Devanamanikkam
15 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
a. Reverend Devanamanikkam was a priest in the Dioceses of Ripon, Bradford, Wales and the Diocese of Europe until his retirement in 1996. He had permission to officiate in the Diocese of Lincoln between 2002–2009. b. In 2017 Rev. Devanamanikkam was charged with three counts of buggery and three counts of indecent assault. These were alleged to have taken place in 1984 and 1985 against the Reverend Matthew Ineson, who was a child at the time. Reverend Ineson had been sent by his parish priest to live with Reverend Devanamanikkam during his teenage years because of his turbulent relationship with his family. Revd Devanamanikkam was meant to be providing respite care and pastoral support. c. The day before his court appearance, Rev Devanamanikkam took his own life. d. We will hear evidence from Reverend Ineson, who has waived his right to anonymity, about his abuse and about the Church of England’s response to his subsequent disclosures. e. The Reverend made a number of disclosures to individuals within the Church from 2012 onwards but the Church only made a formal response to his disclosures in 2016, and is in the process of commissioning an independent review into its handling of the disclosures made by Reverend Ineson in the past.
31. These examples may show that some of the failings already identified by this investigation have been repeated in different
16 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
dioceses, at different times, and not just in the distant past. We will be asking whether the work done, and being done, by the Church of England adequately addresses the failures which they cases illustrate.
The experience of victims and survivors: 32. The recently published analysis of accounts provided to the Truth Project from those who were abused in a religious context identified a number of notable characteristics that make the experiences of victims and survivors of religious abuse different to those in other contexts in which abuse took place. In particular :
a. The abuse took place in the context of a family life that was often orientated around religion and the church. The religious institution often permeated their lives and perpetrators therefore had access to all aspects of the lives of a child – including their homes and schools.
b. The perpetrators of abuse were held in high esteem by their families and others around them, whether or not they occupied official religious offices. They garnered privilege, respect and reverence by the nature of their role within the church. They often went on to have long and distinguished careers within the religious institutions – sometimes despite disclosures being made against them.
17 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
c. Because perpetrators were held in such high esteem, they were able to spend time alone with children without query or question.
d. The perpetrators sometimes groomed the children, by showing them kindness, attention and encouragement but also by building strong relationships with the family.
e. Most described the abuse as starting slowly and escalating.
f. The reputation of the religious community was seen as paramount: individuals who came forward were sometimes discredited :the congregation and other members of the community also wished to protect the Church, belittling the disclosures or abuse or seeking to minimize them: or not believing the accounts given.
33. Analysis shows that a consequence of the abuse for many Truth Project participants has been considerable mental health difficulties which have lasted a lifetime. It has also caused fractured and disconnected relationships with their parents, which fed into a cycle of poor emotional health.
34. Furthermore, for those brought up or steeped in faith, the loss of faith is sometimes a devastating consequence of such abuse. Victims cannot reconcile their religious beliefs with being sexually abused by someone seen as a representative of God.
18 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
This has led to a profound sense of loss which is difficult to quantify or express
Past Cases Review 35. In 2007-2009 the Church of England undertook a Past Cases Review in an attempt to identify and resolve any safeguarding incidents from the past. The Inquiry has already heard evidence, during the Diocese of Chichester case study, about the significant deficiencies in this review; both in its methodology and its findings. Subsequent convictions have flowed from information which was or should have been identified during the Past Cases review.
36. Sir Roger Singleton, who was one of the team examining the original review, will be giving evidence about his team’s review of the information available both then and more recently, and the rationale behind the decision made to conduct a Past Case Review - Part 2 as it is called. Mark Sowerby, Bishop of Horsham who is involved in the Past Cases Review working group will also be providing us with evidence in this regard.
37. The Inquiry has received a witness statement from Lincolnshire Police who have carried out an extensive police investigation, Operation Redstone, following referrals by the Diocesan Safeguarding Advisor for Lincoln in 2015. As with Chichester, a number of the files examined during the original past cases review did not, at that time, result in referral to the
19 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
police for criminal investigation despite disclosing criminal offences. Of the 59 cases referred from the Diocesan Safeguarding Advisor to the police in 2015, 23 have resulted in further investigations. There have been 3 convictions and one individual, Reverend Devananamannikam died prior to his trial. The convictions to date are:
a. The Reverend Stephen Crabtree, who had admitted the offending when questioned by the then Bishop of Grimsby in 2001. This was recording in his personnel file at that time, yet it was not passed to the police and he continued in active ministry. He was convicted of 6 counts of indecent assault in March 2016. b. The Reverend Stephen Bayley was convicted in 2017 of 25 offences of indecent assault which took place between 1955 – 1982, for which he was sentenced to 6 years in prison. Previous bishops had known of allegations against him yet he kept his role as Diocesan Director of Education. c. Roy Griffiths pleaded guilty to sexual assaults on six former pupils whilst he was Housemaster of Lincoln Cathedral School between 1960 – 71. He was given a sentence of 6 years and 7 months at the age of 82.
The themes for this hearing 38. I will explain a little about each of the themes, why they have been chosen and what evidence we have gathered to assist our investigation.
20 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Dealing with victims and survivors of abuse within the Church of England. 39. The Church of England has already accepted in the course of this investigation that it has failed victims and survivors, and has stated that it is acutely aware of its historic failings in this area. Alana Lawrence, of MACSAS, from whom we heard during the Chichester hearing, wrote to Archbishop Justin Welby in 2014 identifying that those who have disclosed abuse have been dismissed, vilified or told to get over it1. Jo Kind, also of MACSAS, for this hearing has told us that complainants, victims and survivors continue to be met with polite obstinacy and an unwillingness to acknowledge the scale of the problem or the structural inadequacies of the safeguarding system.
40. Witnesses from the Church of England will be giving evidence about its current policies and practices. The Church commissioned the Social Care Institute of Excellence, to complete a piece of work about the responses to and the Church’s dealings with victims and survivors. We will hear from Dr. Sheila Fish who authored this work. We will hear about the practices that emerged, but also the work that the Church needs to undertake, in particular to2: a. Own mistakes; b. Provide long term support;
1 ACE009775 2 SCI000006 21 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
c. Design responses so that they were person centred; d. Be willing to listen to feedback about the service provided.
41. The Church of England has informed the Inquiry that they are going to co-design a ‘Survivors Charter’ along with victim and survivor groups setting out a series of expectations as to what the Church will do when an allegation of child sexual abuse is received .
42. MACSAS were involved in the design of the Survivors Survey with SCIE. They have also been consulted about the development of a survivor-led strategic framework for Church-wide engagement with survivors, and the establishment of a survivors reference group. They have told the Inquiry about their concerns over the genesis and workings of the Safe Spaces project, which is envisaged to provide short term crisis support to those who disclose abuse: the adequacy of the current system of clergy discipline: whether the Church structures for managing safeguarding can ever be effective if it is solely an internal process. We will be asking witnesses from the Church of England about these issues in this hearing.
43. The Inquiry will ask what steps are being taken to improve the Church’s relationship with victims and survivors and what services will be put in place. We will examine how complainants, victims and survivors can be put at the centre of
22 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
any responses about, and work concerning child sexual abuse. The work with victim and survivors is multi faceted and includes:
a. How the Church manages disclosures of abuse and how it responds to those who make such disclosures.
b. How it then reports such abuse to the appropriate statutory authorities and what investigation or other disciplinary measures it undertakes.
c. The provision of support for counselling and therapy.
d. How it uses the experience and expertise of victims and survivors to help to deliver services in the future.
44. The Church of England has critics from within its own ranks. Bishop Alan Wilson, Suffragan Bishop of Buckingham considers that the Church’s response to complainants, victims and survivors are not good and that the painful memories need to be acknowledged and owned by the whole Church community.
45. He says – picking up the phone and saying “How can I help?” is often what people want to hear and often what is missing, in particular from senior clerics. We will ask him about what he thinks is working well and what he thinks needs to change.
23 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
46. We will hear from the lead bishop on safeguarding, Peter Hancock, from Graham Tilby, safeguarding director of the National Safeguarding Team, from John Sentamu, Archbishop of York and from Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury.
Insurers 47. There has been criticism of the approach of the Church to those who seek to use the civil justice system to bring claims for damages, and of the approach taken by insurers in particular cases. We heard evidence from Professor Julie Macfarlane at the last hearing expressing her concerns about the way that the process was conducted when she brought a claim for damages.We also heard from Phil Johnson, a survivor of abuse in the Church of England, and Alana Lawrence, former Chair of MACSAS as well as other victims and survivors about their experience of seeking to bring a civil claim. Professor Macfarlane engaged with the Ecclesiastical Insurance Office in the light of her concerns and experience to seek to develop a set of principles for responding to claims.
48. This inquiry has an entirely separate investigation into redress and reparations which will deal with the civil and criminal justice system as a whole: the focus of this investigation is about the approaches made to claims involving the Church of England and the Church in Wales.
24 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
49. We have several witness statements from the Ecclesiastical Insurance Office, which I shall refer to as the EIO. It insures the vast majority of Church of England parishes and Dioceses, as well as other Church of England organisations. The Inquiry has received witness statements from Daivd Bonehill and Michael Angell about the EIO as an organisation and its claims management process. We will be asking Mr. Bonehill about the approach to claims.
50. There are a number of issues raised with us by victims and survivors and others that we wish to explore at this hearing. These include:
a. The way that the EIO has approached cases of child sexual abuse, why it has adopted guiding principles and how it implements them.
b. Whether the EIO has, on occasion, told the Church of England not to have direct contact with complainants, victims and survivors including providing counselling and other services. Ian Elliott, who undertook an independent review of the actions of the Church of England into their handling of the allegations by AN-A4 has provided us with evidence that he was informed that the EIO had told the Church of England not to provide counselling services to this individual once he had launched a civil claim. We wish to explore with the EIO if this was their position, and if it was not, how the Church
25 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
could have got this wrong. The EIO have told us that this was not, and never has been their position.
c. The way that the Church of England has approached individuals when they have commenced a claim and whether those approaches have been fundamentally flawed. We have sought evidence from Stephen Slack, the former head of the Church of England’s Legal Office about advice he gave in 2007 on whether and when Bishops should give apologies to victims and survivors and how such advice came about. He has told us that the advice has been taken out of context and was not meant to be policy for the Church of England and was not meant to prevent apologies being given in such cases.
d. The interrelationship between the Church of England and the EIO. Some victims and survivors, as well as clerics, have raised questions about the approach of the EIO to claims given their interrelationship with the Church. The Inquiry has received witness statements from Rachel Hall, the Company Secretary for the EIO and Sir Philip Mawer, the Chair of the All Churches Trust.
51. The EIO is a subsidiary organisation of the Ecclesiastical Insurance Group and its main trading arm. It insurers the majority of Church of England properties and organisations, but this is only part of its business - it is well known for its insurance
26 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
of schools and heritage properties. It is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority to carry out insurance business. The EIG also has separate companies which provide investment management advice. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of the All Churches Trust Ltd (the ATL). This is a charity established in 1972, seeking to promote the Christian religion.
52. Profits therefore made by EIG are given to the ATL, which then gives grants to the Church of England and other religious organisations. ATL has ten trustees, three of whom are senior Office holders in the Church of England3. Between 2014 – 2017, EIG gave just over 100 million pounds to the ATL. It provided grants between 2004 – 2017 to various institutions of £48 million, the vast majority of which went to the Church of England – anywhere between 55% - 82% of the money is spent annually on the Church of England. It provides funds to individual churches, dioceses and cathedrals.
53. The Inquiry asked the ATL what money has been directly given to fund or develop projects concerning child sexual abuse since 2014: their evidence is that they are funding the Safe Spaces Project with the sum of £292,0000.
54. The Inquiry also asked what guidance ATL has provided to the EIO in relation to sexual abuse claims, and what steps they have taken to discuss any issues concerning child sexual abuse
3 para 21 of Sir Philip Mawer, ASCT00002 27 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
within the Church of England with victims and survivors. ATL says that it operates as a separate company to EIG and to EIO and cannot “for regulatory” reasons be involved on a day to day basis. It does not manage the operations of EIG or the EIO. The management and settlement of all claims is a matter for the EIO. It states that it welcomes the development of the Statement of Guiding principles.
55. Some survivors have been concerned that an organisation which ultimately funds the Church, and over which there is significant clerical presence does not act in a way which is consistent with the Church’s values and statements in respect of child protection and safeguarding.
Recruitment, training and professional development 56. In order to create a safe culture and a “Safe Church”, the Inquiry wishes to explore how and in what ways the need to understand safeguarding has been promoted and emphasised during the process of selection for clergy, during their ordination and training, and then during the course of clerical careers in the Church of England and the Church in Wales. Given the growth of lay ministry within the Church, it also wants to know how and what training these individuals receive.
57. We have received extensive evidence from Julian Hubbard, who is the Director of Ministry for the Archbishops’ Council and also Hannah Foster, who was the Director of Human Resources
28 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
for the National Church Institutions of the Church in England about these issues. We will be hearing oral evidence from Bishop Mark Tanner on these issues. We also have evidence from the Church in Wales about their training.
58. Written evidence has been obtained from Mr. Michael Highton of Durham University, who is responsible for setting and monitoring the academic standards at all institutions which provide theological education under a contract with the Church of England. Safeguarding courses are not part of the current academic curriculum for those training to be clerics, licensed lay readers or other forms of lay ministry, and are not a requirement set out in any theological training course and not the primary subject matter of any module. We will hear oral evidence from Alistair Oatey, the Chief Operating Officer of the Cambridge Theological Federation, which is a collaboration between a number of colleges and institutions who teach theology in Cambridge. We will be asking him about the nature of training, vetting and teaching during the years leading at theological colleges and the issues raised by them.
59. The Church of England introduced compulsory training for clerics and lay individuals in late 2016. We will hear from Graham Tilby as to how this has been implemented. Figures given to us by the Church show that 69,000 people have completed basic training, with 68,000 completing Foundation training as at March 2019, and 16,178 completing the
29 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Leadership module, with 1,600 having completed the senior leadership module. These are impressive numbers for a relatively short period of time, but there are still 56,000 people who need to complete the Foundation stage of training.
60. We will also hear about the review undertaken by an independent reviewer, Dr. Stobart, which identified simplifications and changes to the training programme.
61. The questions about recruitment and training which the Inquiry will explore at this hearing are: a. The nature of the current recruitment and training processes; b. How they are changing and what difference this will make in respect of safeguarding; c. Issues which arise during recruitment and training; d. How individuals are promoted within the Church and how much that involves an assessment of someone’s ability to manage issues around safeguarding.
Vetting and barring 62. In relation to the current system operated by the Disclosure and Barring Service, during previous hearings the Inquiry adduced evidence from Adele Downey from the DBS, as well as hearing evidence from individuals that the current system of regulation is not necessarily fit for purpose when deciding who within the context of Church activities should undergo a check. The current system has four levels of checks – two of them,
30 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
known as enhanced and enhanced certificates with barred list checks4 are relevant for those who work with children or vulnerable adults.
63. An organisation can only ask for such enhanced checks to be carried out if the either the role or the activities that will be undertaken is set out in the legislation and is therefore considered to be “regulated activity” - the term of art used by the DBS to explain when someone requires a check. There is no entitlement to an employer or organiser of a voluntary activity to carry out such a check unless it is regulated activity.
64. What constitutes regulated activity is therefore crucial. In broad and imprecise terms, “regulated activity” includes: a. any form of teaching, training, instruction and caring for children if that activity is unsupervised, or providing guidance on physical, educational or emotional wellbeing, again if unsupervised. b. work in a limited number of establishments – including schools, but not including work done by supervised volunteers in those settings.
65. The work also has to be undertaken either frequently, or on more than three days in any period of 30 days. Some individuals and organisations have told us that this definition is
4 paragraph 10 of Susan Young 31 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
complex and not easy to work in practice - particularly in the context of a religious organisation.
66. It should also be noted that there is no definition of what is considered to be supervision – this is the subject of further guidance which has been issued in the last year5 and the Charity Commission has also published its own guidance about safeguarding in a charity context6.
67. This definition does not always fit comfortably with the way that a church may operate its religious or social activities. Clerics, for example, who minister largely to elderly parishes, may come into contact with children infrequently, but when they do, will be people with significant pastoral or spiritual authority.
68. The Inquiry has asked the Department for Education, and the Home Office about the concerns expressed in various quarters and for their own views on the current definition of “regulated activity”. Susan Young from the Home Office, the government department with partial policy responsibility for vetting and barring has set out the policy rationale behind the scheme, which was to “scale it back to common sense levels” so that it removed some roles from regulated activity, such as supervised volunteers, and school governors, and that regulated activity should include activities which provide “the highest levels of
5 HOM003285 6 HOM003291 32 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
risk”. The Home Office says that regulated activity does not include groups that have minimal, or limited access to vulnerable groups.
69. Four examples of people who would not be subject to an enhanced check under the current scheme but where they may be able to exercise considerable spiritual authority are: a. Bishops who administer confirmation - for example the late Peter Ball did this frequently even after his caution for sexual offending; b. Clerical visitors to schools who do not visit every week. c. Clerics who only see children when supervised by the child’s parents. d. Adults singing with children if they are supervised by an adult who does have a DBS check. e. Individuals working with children in Cathedrals if they are supervised, for example organists, choir masters, other members of the Cathedral community - for example, Terrence Banks who was convicted of sexual offending against children connected with Chichester Cathedral.
Capability and discipline 70. At the last hearing, we heard evidence form Graham Tilby, Colin Perkins, Bishop Peter Hancock, Bishop Martin Warner, and the Archbishop of Canterbury about how the Church of England manages and deals with clergy, and other office holders if it considers that their approaches to child protection have been
33 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
wrong in some way – by ignorance, wilful blindness, or active cover up.
71. As was explored at the previous hearings, and was shown by some of the examples in the Diocese of Chichester, the Church did not have, until recently, any kind of formal capability process for situations where individuals could be the subject, not of censure, but of advice and additional supervision if they have demonstrated a lack of understanding as to safeguarding practices and processes.
72. Being a parish priest cannot be an easy job, and to struggle with the role is neither surprising nor unexpected. Not everyone will be as careful and able to manage safeguarding as others. We want to know what support and advice the church has put or will put in place.
The Clergy Discipline Measure 73. The Church of England’s previous approach to disciplining clerics when there were concerns about safeguarding in the past was the subject of examination in the Chichester and Peter Ball hearing, and led to changes brought about by a measure - which is a term meaning a piece of legislation passed by the Church and affecting all of those who hold office in the Church of England in 2016 which: a. Enabled suspension of a bishop or archbishop in cases where there is a risk of harm to a child or vulnerable adult:
34 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
b. Extended the time frame for bringing complaints about the management of allegations concerning child sexual abuse so that they can be considered more than 12 months after the act complained about: c. Permitted compulsory risk assessments of clerics and other office holders where a risk of harm existed.
74. There have been two very high profile exercises of this power by the Church of England. a. In May 2019, the Bishop of Lincoln, Christopher Lowson – who was leading the review into Clergy Discipline Measure was suspended from his duties by the Archbishop of Canterbury due to alleged failures of safeguarding. The precise details of such failures are not in the public domain and relate to Operation Redstone, which do not form part of the scope of this hearing. To be clear, It does not relate to allegations that the Bishop himself was involved in any child sexual abuse or safeguarding concerns himself.
b. In April 2019, Sir Roger Singleton, Interim Director of Safeguarding, made a complaint under the clergy discipline measure about Bishop Peter Forster, Bishop of Chester concerning action or inaction against Gordon Dickenson, a cleric convicted of sexual offending in 2018 but against whom some information about his offending may have been known in 2009. We shall hear from Bishop Forster in oral evidence.
35 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
c. We will also be asking the Church about the clerical complaints made by Reverend Ineson about a number of senior individuals in the Church.
d. Online commentators have raised concerns as to whether or not the CDM has been used appropriately in these cases if there are no allegations of child sexual abuse themselves.
75. The Tim Storey case also demonstrates the limits of CDM. As I previously identified, CDM was seen to be disproportionate in Tim Storey’s case and not to provide the outcome which the survivors would wish, given that the individual concerned wanted to challenge the conclusions reached within the independent reviews within the CDM.
76. We shall also examine whether the current CDM is fit for purpose in dealing with complaints concerning child protection and safeguarding, even after the changes I have just identified. The Church has recognised that this may be the case and has undertaken three recent consultations which we will ask about: a. A consultation on the workings of CDM to all diocesan bishops; b. A consultation by the National Safeguarding Team about the efficacy of the CDM process;
36 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
c. A consultation with lawyers – known as Diocesan registrars – who handle such complaints on the issue of delay in disciplinary proceedings.
77. We want to hear about the possible proposals for amending CDM and how they are to be taken forward and will be asking questions about the proposals to both Mr. Iles and Mr. Tilby. In particular, we are interested in:
a. How effective CDM is as a process of risk management for current concerns and if a different sort of process needs to be devised; b. If the process currently builds in adequate processes to meet the needs of complainants; c. If staff who undertake CDM work have suitable experience in managing the needs of vulnerable witnesses.
78. The Church seems to recognise that CDM is not a means of protecting against risk in a safeguarding context, and is not an appropriate vehicle for those who do not manage safeguarding well, but whose conduct would not meet the test for the bringing of misconduct proceedings. The capability procedure introduced for certain clerics who have a status known as ‘common tenure’ (only in place since 2009 and which provides some measure of quasi employee status) is deemed by the Church not to be an appropriate mechanism and unlikely to be of assistance.
37 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Permission to officiate 79. We heard a great deal in the Chichester and also at the Peter Ball hearings about past systems of permission to officiate. To remind those unfamiliar with the terminology, this is a licence granted by the local Diocesan Bishop to those who still want to be able to take clerical services. It is largely given to clerics who are retired and who are essential to keep the Church of England running if clerics are on sabbatical, unwell or have several parish jobs. There are often 400 or 500 individuals in each Diocese with permission to officiate, and its grant has been problematic in the past, with abusers being allowed to officiate despite known concerns.
80. We wish to hear about how the system works across England and Wales for the grant of permission to officiate, how this is monitored and enforced by the Diocese or any National Church Institutions and any proposals for change.
Seal of the confessional 81. Although described by Bishop John Hind during the course of the Chichester hearings as a “minority practice”, the issue of whether or not the seal of the confessional should be set aside if information is provided during the confession about child sexual abuse is one of totemic significance both in the Church of England, but also in the worldwide Anglican communion.
38 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
82. We will be asking Dr. Canon Rupert Bursell QC, a distinguished criminal and canon lawyer about the seal of the confessional in order to explore his view that it can and should be set aside in certain situations: and will also ask Bishop Mark Sowerby, who was a member of the Working Group which has just published its work on the subject to give evidence about:
a. What steps need to be taken to clarify and provide guidance to members of the clergy about what the seal of the confessional is and why it should be used. b. Why the working party does not agree that the seal of the confessional should or could be set aside in cases of child sexual abuse, and in particular, why the postion in England and Wales is different from that in Australia where the Anglican Church has made such changes.
83. The Inquiry has sought evidence from both the Charity Commission and the Department of Education about the issue of mandatory reporting in this sector, something which many victims and survivors consider is required, along with an independent safeguarding service. The Department of Education held a consultation on this subject, the results of which were published in March 2018 and did not recommend its introduction. The Charity Commission in its witness evidence raises concerns 7 that mandatory reporting could lead to additional administration, and would possibly lead to an increase
7 cyc000386 - 10, paragraph 32
39 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
in referrals which could divert attention from the most serious cases, and that it would not improve the judgement of trustees, professional or practitioners. The Charity Commission does, however, identify that it would be supportive of a new offence of deliberately concealing abuse as identified as required by the NSPCC and the Children’s Commissioner. 8
Cultural Change 84. The Inquiry’s report on the Chichester and Peter Ball case studies identified that cultural attitudes within the Church of England towards child protection and safeguarding have been a significant barrier to change. The Inquiry identified examples of where, even very recently, individauls were ostracised from a parish when they disclosed serious sexual abuse, and many individuals refused to believe that their vicar could be responsible for such actions. We heard examples of people refusing to undergo DBS checks because they felt it put them under suspicion. We heard of clerics refusing to go to safeguarding training because they believed they knew all about it or would not need it.
85. The Church of England’s evidence recognised cultural change as a central issues which needed to be addressed. As Sir Roger Singleton, an individual with a distinguished career in child protection who has been Interim National Director of
8 cyc000377
40 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Safeguarding, said to us in evidence last March when asked what the most significant currently are regarding safeguarding within the Church9: “…..without doubt…..the need to do further work on cultural change within the church.”
86. As he, and other senior members of the church identified, cultural change involves having a whole Church approach to safeguarding: it involves actions as well as words. This hearing, is in part, a chance to scrutinise whether the words spoken in March 2018 have been translated into action, and what further steps need to be taken to effect such change. As we heard repeatedly at previous hearings, the Church is a decentralised body with diverse sources of informal power, but not formal systems of control – how can one make effective change in this context?
87. We will hear from Sir Roger again during this hearing, along with Meg Munn, the new Independent Chair of the Safeguarding about her initial thoughts about how such change can be effected.
88. The Inquiry identified in the Chichester and Peter Ball report that cultural approaches to sexuality and sexual orientation hampered effective action being taken when concerns about child sexual abuse have arisen. We heard evidence from senior
9 Day 10, 16/3/2019, p141 41 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
clerics, including Lord Williams, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, about the need for open, honest and transparent dialogue about these issues. Bishop Christine Hardman, who leads the oversight group tasked with providing individual advice and a set of principles and teaching guides, provides us with evidence about the long discussion within the Church about sexual oridentation and same sex relationships, which are both “difficult and divisive” for the Church in a way that they are not in other sections of civil society10. Bishop Hardman recognises that some of those who held strong views on certain issues, including same sex issues, have tended to band together leading to groups based upon close personal ties, and that some clergy and others within the Church have not felt able to openly acknowledge their sexuality – which has impacted upon the extent to which a culture of openness and honesty has developed11.
89. In 2017, in a debate in Synod about any alterations to the current guidance of the Church, the proposal of the House of Bishops to welcome gay and lesbian people within the Church and provide updated guidance and teaching to replace that currently in existence was narrowly defeated, largely by those who wanted to see the Church undertake a more radical approach to the blessing of same sex partnership by recognising it or permitting it within the Church.
10 ACE026868 11 p11 42 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
90. As a result of this, the Church has sought to establish an oversight group to advise dioceses in respect of their approach to human sexuality and to provide a teaching document. Pastoral principles were published in January 2019 which seek to “see difference as a gift rather than a problem, and that builds trust and models generosity.” Part of those principles requires the Church to recognise that inequalities of power have led to abuses in the past. All those who hold and exercise pastoral care are asked reflect continuously on the power that they hold, and note that they : “…...need to learn to become more aware of our own power, and our vulnerability to the perceived power of others and to notice and call out when power is exercised inappropriately.”
91. The Inquiry understands that the oversight group is also developing a set of resources, which will include exploration of the power dynamics which can influence the Church’s polity and how sexual behaviour can become destructive and cause profound harm. Cathedrals 92. As has been explored in the report published by this Inquiry into the Diocese of Chichester and Peter Ball, an area of concern as to the effectiveness of safeguarding by the Church of England has focussed upon the separate and distinct organisational structures of cathedrals, and the fact that until recently, they often were not obliged to be part of Diocesan
43 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
safeguarding structures. We will hear evidence from Graham Tilby a member of the National Safeguarding Team about changes to safeguarding in a cathedral setting and also from Bishop Peter Hancock the lead Bishop on Safeguarding.
93. Some of the concerns this Inquiry has expressed about the rather self-contained structures of Cathedrals to date arise because they are often places where children will visit in groups and which often have particular importance in the city in which they are situated as places of history, learning or as a focal point of community activities. They are also places where children sing, often on a daily basis as part of a choir.
94. To assist this Inquiry as to the picture more generally, we have sought evidence about practices in some Cathedrals. We have received evidence from Neil Chippington, the Chair of the Choir Schools Association12. He identifies: a. the need for consistency of approach in safeguarding between Cathedral and school, which has not always been the case, b. to have clear lines of accountability of who is responsible for the children at any one time and which identifies the distinction between a school (which is the subject of inspection) and a cathedral, which until very recently has not been.
12 CHO000007 44 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
95. The Choir Schools Association highlights the difficulties identified in a number of quarters about who in a cathedral environment should be subject to DBS checks, and, in particular, if adult choristers who sing with the children are to be considered to undertake regulated activity.
96. The Inquiry has also received evidence from the Diocesan Safeguarding Advisor in the Diocese of Bath and Wells and the Cathedral Administrator of Wells Cathedral, which is the Cathedral of the lead bishop on safeguarding. They provide evidence about the particular protocols and practices they have put in place.
97. SCIE has also begun to audit the work of Cathedrals. It has identified that work in respect of choristers is much further advanced and established than other safeguarding arrangements in the Cathedral with evidence of good practice seen in the audits undertaken to date13.
98. The Inquiry has received a statement from Stephen Lake, the Dean of Gloucester Cathedral who is the Lead Dean on Safeguarding, sitting on the National Safeguarding steering group and is the key point of contact for cathedrals on safeguarding matters14. As a result of concerns raised about governance and management of Cathedrals generally, a
13 paragraph 18 14 ACE027555 45 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Cathedrals working group was set up by the Church in 2017 and reported in June 201815. Of note in respect of safeguarding, the Working Party identified that whilst much work had been done, the nature of cathedrals and the range of activities they undertook meant that they were places which were open to all, and so subject to especially complex issues in respect of safeguarding. They identified that safeguarding should not be left to chance or voluntary compliance and identified the following concerns16:
a. There was no uniform approach to safeguarding across all Cathedrals. b. Cathedrals were sometimes not able to access specialist expertise available in the Dioceses and sometimes the financial resources or time or personnel were not available to gather such expertise. c. There was not always a joint approach between the Diocese and the Cathedral.
99. The Church has taken steps, according to Dean Lake, to amend legislation so that office holders who are not clerics are subject to the same safeguarding responsibilities set out in the 2016 safeguarding measure, namely to have “due regard” to the House of Bishops Safeguarding Guidance in the same way as it
15 ACE026362 16 p86 46 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
currently applies to those on the parochial church council or Diocesan employees or office holders.
100. We will also hear evidence from Sheila Fish17, the head of the safeguarding case review and audit work at the Social Care Institute for Excellence. She and Dean Lake set out information about the cathedral audit programme undertaken by the organisation and the findings. Seven cathedrals have been audited to date. Dr. Fish identifies three challenges identified across the audits: a. That there is little independent oversight of the safeguarding management undertaken by Cathedrals; b. That key safeguarding roles are often run by volunteers with the limits on expectations that this can cause; c. Cathedrals are places, and not networks. They have more engagement with vulnerable adults, and the boundary between pastoral care and safeguarding can be difficult to navigate.
101. The Inquiry understands that auditing will not be complete until 2021.
Allegations made once the perpetrator is deceased. 102. We will be hearing evidence about how the Church of England manages allegations against clerics who are deceased. This Inquiry has already heard evidence from Mr. Perkins and
17 SCI000006 47 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Mr. Tilby about the allegations made about George Bell and the report of Lord Carlile which was critical of some of the processes and conclusions reached by the core group. Lord Carlile has provided us with a witness statement in which he responds to some of the issues raised by Mr. Perkins and Mr. Tilby, in particular in respect of his conclusions about: a. The use of confidentiality clauses in cases involving child sexual abuse and if they are a useful tool; b. The seeking of advice from a senior criminal lawyer when investigating allegations; c. Discretion when seeking private statements.
103. As I have said before, the Inquiry cannot determine the truth or otherwise of these allegations. What it can do, however, is to examine the processes which are put in place where allegations are made against those who are deceased and to identify how one strikes a balance between appropriate redress for the complainant as against the complexities of making assessments when one party is no longer able to act for themselves. This issue is particularly acute in matters involving sexual offending, as there are often no witnesses, nor other physical material available after a long period of time.
104. The Church of England has, since the Chichester hearing, dealt with further allegations made against George Bell. The Inquiry has received evidence from Graham Tilby and also from Colin Perkins about the second “core group” process and how it
48 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
has been amended in the light of the issues raised by the Carlile report. The Church has also dealt with a number of allegations made by individuals against Victor Whitsey, Bishop of Chester.
105. These allegations resulted in a police investigation - Operation Coverage18, which identified that had Bishop Whitsey been alive, they would have interviewed him in respect of 10 out of the 13 complainants, the other three complainants not having provided sufficient evidence. Allegations were made by 8 women and 5 men of sexual assault or impropriety during the periods 1974 – 1982 or shortly therafter, whilst he was Bishop of Chester.
106. The National Police Chiefs Council, under the auspices of Operation Hydrant, has, in consultation with the College of Policing provided specific advice about investigating suspects who are deceased19 and providing guidance to the senior investigating officer in such circumstances20. In particular, it should be noted that: a. As the process cannot lead to conviction, the focus is upon examining any potential safeguarding risks, the public interest, the nature of the offences and whether specialist resources are available.
18 ANG000208 19 OHY007105 20 OHY007106 49 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
b. The focus cannot be upon determining the truth or otherwise of the allegations, but to establish facts, if possible, to identify the potential offenders and to prevent further safeguarding breaches.
107. In this hearing, the Inquiry intends to explore: a. How the Church of England manages such allegations, and whether the current core group process is adequate? b. The various factors which have to be balanced when deciding when to carry out or convene a core group and the purposes it is to serve; c. How this interrelates with any remedies sought under the civil justice system; d. Publicity and confidentiality in the context of these allegations.
Current and future steps 108. The Inquiry has recently received a very comprehensive witness statement from Graham Tilby, as well as others, about current and future work in the Church and what steps are being taken. The information provided within the statement identifies a lot of activity – Inquiry wishes to probe whether that activity has borne fruit, or changed underlying attitudes, or whether it is “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”.
109. Mr. Tilby has provided us with information about the current picture which identifies, as at 2018 that:
50 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
a. 90% of all parishes had parish safeguarding officers; b. 38 Dioceses out of 42 have Diocesan Safeguarding Advisory Panels which include sufficient independent representations; c. 33 dioceses out of 42 have formal safeguarding arrangements in place with their Cathedral; d. 41 out of 42 Dioceses employed safeguarding advisors.; e. All dioceses now have a safeguarding strategy in place; f. All Diocesan synods have adopted the guidance issued on safeguarding; g. 39 Dioceses monitor safeguarding in parishes. In 2017, 47 learning lessons reviews were carried out.
110. In respect of finances, the central funding of safeguarding by the Archbishops’ Council has increased from £168,000 in 2014 to £1.963 million. Combined funding by Diocesan Boards of Finance has altered from £895,000 in 2014 to £5,896 in 2018.
111. In particular, we will consider: a. The structures for managing safeguarding – and if there is sufficient external oversight and review. b. The possible creation of an Ombudsperson scheme and what that would look like. c. The priorities for the Church over the next 2-3 years. d. Casework and record keeping e. Creating a single register of all clergy on a national basis f. Creation of senior leadership courses and training.
51 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
g. Engagement with statutory agencies h. Budgeting and financing of safeguarding in the short and longer term.
112. The ultimate questions are: a. Who creates policy? b. How is that policy translated into practice? c. Do individuals within the Church then practice what is said? d. How is this audited and examined?
Case work on the ground- Sampling 113. The Inquiry spent a long time examining the past actions of the Church of England during its 2018 Anglican Church hearings. In order to assess whether past deficiencies in safeguarding have since been rectified, and to examine what happens on a day to day basis, the Inquiry has undertaken a case sampling exercise across the Church of England and Church in Wales as part of this overarching hearing. 114. As part of this sampling exercise, the Inquiry identified four dioceses in England and the six dioceses in Wales and asked the Churches to provide a list of all safeguarding casework undertaken in these dioceses by the relevant Diocesan Safeguarding Advisor between April 2017 – April 2018. Those dioceses are London, York, Sheffield and Worcester, and Bangor, Monmouth, St David’s, Llandaff, St Asaph and Swansea & Brecon. The Inquiry then selected a small number of cases
52 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
from each diocese which appeared to reflect the different issues arising across the dioceses. These included: a. Putting in place risk assessments and safeguarding agreements with known sex offenders within parishes. b. Managing allegations made about parishioners and/or others of potential sexual misconduct. c. Dealing with the police, probation and social services.
115. The Inquiry has instructed Ms. Edina Carmi, Independent Social Worker to review these sample cases and provide her expert opinion about whether the dioceses’ practices were in line with the relevant guidance and whether the steps taken were adequate. She has produced a report, and will be giving evidence, as will some of the individuals involved in particular sampling cases.
116. Interestingly, since 2007, the Charity Commission has told the Inquiry that it has not received any serious incident reports for the Dioceses of London, York, Sheffield or Worcester. The Commission told us, however, that it has worked with the Church of England to produce new guidance for parochial church councils, diocesan boards of finance (who would be the body within a diocese likely to report serious incidents to the commission and religious communities. This was issued in January 2019. 21
21 paragraph 15 of cyc000386 - 4 and cyc000375
53 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
117. The Social Care Institute for Excellence finalised its work on auditing Dioceses and produced a final overview report in April 2019. This report identifies what it describes as a “major improvement” in the provision of resources, policies and training and notes that the overhaul of all national policies has been a significant achievement. However, SCIE has concerns that the ultimate responsiblity for safeguarding lies with Diocesan Bishop: who is not a safeguarding professional. It also raises concerns that the current guidance must clearly differentiate between what is obligatory, and what is good practice.
118. Having considered 16 sample cases in the Church of England and 6 in the Church of Wales, Ms Carmi has concluded:
“[The exercise] does, in [her] mind, question whether the current system, or even the suggestion in the SCIE overview report, of a national safeguarding service, is capable of resolving the underlying obstacles in providing a safer Church. This would need:
● The safeguarding service to be able to make decisions, as opposed to recommendations to clergy; ● Senior clergy to have a managerial relationship with incumbents; ● A disciplinary process, better able to deal with clergy who in effect place obstacles in the delivery of a safer service and a culture which uses the process in such cases.”
The Church in Wales
54 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
119. This hearing will also encompass the Inquiry’s investigation into the Church in Wales. Whilst we have heard significant evidence about the structures and governance of the Church of England, the Church in Wales has separate and distinct forms of organisation. We will be hearing evidence this week from the current Archbishop of Wales, the Most Reverend John Davies, and also from Simon Lloyd, the Provincial Secretary to the Church, who is the chief administrator for the organisation and oversees the administration of the legislative bodies which make decisions on behalf of the Church in Wales.
120. I am sure that this explanation will be imperfect, and I am already poised for the twitter barbs, but I will spend a few moments explaining the Church and its structure. The witness statements of Archbishop Davies and Simon Lloyd set this information out in more detail and I cannot do justice to them in this opening speech.
121. The Church in Wales is not an established Church: it is not under the control of or part of the Church of England and nor has it been since 1920. It is a province of the worldwide Anglican Communion. It has its own constitution and systems of governance and administration which are distinct from those of the Church of England.
122. The Church in Wales had an average Sunday attendance in 2017 (the latest figures which are available) of around 27,500
55 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
worshippers. It has just under 600 clerics, the majority of whom are paid for their services. There are 146 Church in Wales schools, over 95% of which are primary schools. They make up a much smaller number of schools per head of the population than in England – only educating around 6% of the school population. The Church owns school buildings and has a right to appoint some governors to the governing body.
123. There is no oversight of safeguarding within Church in Wales schools by a diocese, and there is no requirement for the school to inform a diocese if a safeguarding incident takes place. There is an overall Director of Education in the Church, as well as Diocesan directors of education in each diocese.
124. As I have already mentioned, The Church in Wales has six dioceses: these all have a Diocesan Bishop, and their own Board of Finance and Administration, run by a Diocesan Secretary (who is the nearest equivalent to a chief operating officer). Bishops have particular responsibility for issues of faith and ministry – i.e. how worship is to be conducted, and how Christianity is to be taught and spread to those who live in the area. Collectively they are known as a “bench” of Bishops and meet 4-6 times a year to discuss a wide range of matters.
125. From one of the Diocesan Bishops, an Archbishop of Wales is elected. Like in England, the Archbishop has no control or jurisdiction over the other Diocesan Bishops but is considered to
56 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
be “first amongst equals”. The Archbishop continues as a Diocesan bishop whilst undertaking his role as Archbishop. There are six Cathedrals, all of whom have a Dean who is the chief cleric of the Cathedral. Bishops do not have direct command and control of cathedrals. Like English cathedrals, alongside the Dean there are a number of Canons - clergy who work full time or for part of the time in the cathedral, who make up the governing body of the Cathedral, known as a chapter. The Inquiry understands that the governance of Cathedrals in Wales is going to be altered, for similar reasons to those already identified with the Church of England but also because of the significant disparity in financial resources between them.
126. The Church in Wales has a written constitution, and decision making takes place through an organisation called the Governing Body. This is a body of elected lay members i.e. people who worship in a parish or cathedral, elected clerics and the Diocesan bishops and is the equivalent to its Parliament. It meets twice a year. The governing body appoints a standing committee which organises and implements the work of the governing body.
127. The Church’s administration is managed and run by the representative body of the Church in Wales, which has central control of policies and procedures for the Church in Wales. The body is made up of 26 clerics and lay people, some of whom are appointed, but half of whom are elected – one lay person and
57 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
one cleric from each diocese. It looks after the assets of the Church, it owns the buildings and provides accommodation where appropriate for clerics. It is insured along with each parish, so any claims for child sexual abuse would be brought against the Representative Body. This body meets three times a year.
128. There is now only one teaching establishment in Wales - St. Padarns which provides all theological and practical training for those who wish to become clerics and also provides all the continuing professional development for clerics.
Safeguarding in the Church in Wales 129. From 1995 onwards, the Church in Wales had a policy which recognised the principles under the Children Act 1989 and the Home Office document called “safe from harm” issued in 1993. This Home Office document prompted a number of voluntary organisations to reflect upon and develop adequate policies and practices to manage concerns about child sexual abuse.
130. The first Church in Wales safeguarding policy was put in place in 2000. At that time, each parish was to have a child protection co-ordinator and each Diocese had a Child Protection Officer.
131. In 2009 the Church undertook a Historic Cases Review, organised and run by an individual who was seconded from the
58 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Children’s Commissioner of Wales to examine old personnel files and child protection documentation to see if there were cases from the past which had not been dealt with properly. This individual, Ms. Elaine Cloke then became the Provincial Safeguarding Advisor in Wales from 2010 onwards. We have evidence from Keith Towler, the then Children’s Commissioner for Wales and Sally Holland22, the current Children’s Commissioner for Wales. They have provided the Inquiry with evidence about the involvement of the Commissioner’s office with the provision of independent expert advice and guidance to assist in the review.
132. Despite the fact that there is no statutory remit for the Commissioner to look at safeguarding in religious communities, both Mr. Towler and Ms. Holland describe how they have met with the Church in Wales on a regular basis since 2011. The Inquiry understands that Church has on several occasions provided information to the Children’s Commissioner about how the recommendations from the Historic Cases Review had been implemented, and that the Children’s Commissioner has in turn provided informal advice as to how to implement such recommendations and about child protection issues. From 2018, the Church in Wales has offered to send a formal safeguarding report to the Commissioner on an annual basis23.
22 INQ004213 23 3.11 of INQ004213 59 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
133. The Historic Cases Review found that the policies and practices of the Church in Wales were outdated and not comprehensive. Up to to date policies were drafted by an Independent Consultant and implemented in 2016.
134. 36 recommendations were made as a result of the review. We will be asking the Church in Wales about this review and what it found in evidence.
135. The Church in Wales introduced national compulsory safeguarding training from 2015 which was run by the NSPCC. All clerics are expected to attend. Training was also recently implemented for all lay members who work with children and young people.
136. The work of the provincial safeguarding officer and decisions about safeguarding issues are made by the Officers but also by previously the safeguarding committee, now the people committee. This is made up of provincial safeguarding advisors and lay members who have expertise in child protection with an independent chair.
Clerical discipline and PTO 137. The Church in Wales has a process of licensing clergy who are retired and/or not in full time clerical office. This is known as Permission to Officiate, and involves an application to a Bishop.
60 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Applicants for PTO also have to undergo safeguarding training. The system of checking and vetting these clergy will be explored at this hearing as well as the recruitment of clerics more generally.
138. Clergy in Wales are office holders, but are subject to standard terms of service. Their current terms of services identify that all clergy should all have training in child protection and all relevant guidelines issued by the Church in Wales must be observed. Their guidelines also require them to refer disclosed allegations of abuse to social services, and also to the Provincial Safeguarding Officer. Clerics also have to undergo ministerial development review. All clerics are paid by the Church in Wales, rather than via a variety of sources as is the case of the Church in England. The Inquiry wishes to explore how the implementation of policies and practices can be embedded in the context of this autonomy.
139. The Church in Wales has a disciplinary tribunal separate to the Church structures and which has been in place since 2000. Serving members of the judiciary or lawyers preside over the tribunal. The Church has provided us with details of 6 individuals who have been subject to clerical discipline since that date, including: a. The Reverend Lawrence Davies who was convicted of sexually assaulting 2 boys in his parish over a number of
61 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
years. He was deposed from holy orders and banned for life in 2003. b. The Reverend Darryl Gibbs who was prevented from being in Holy orders for 8 years, and had resigned from his position as a cleric after having accessed pornographic websites involving teenage boys. c. An individual who was the subject of disciplinary proceedings even though the CPS did not bring a prosecution : The Church prevented him from being given a permission to officiate without a risk assessment in 2006. In 2015 he was deposed from Holy orders, something which can happen in Wales, but not in England for breaches of the clergy discipline measure.
140. We have also been told that since 2000, the Church in Wales has been the subject of 11 civil claims brought against it by individuals alleging child sexual abuse.
Other evidence about Wales 141. Child protection is a devolved issue – so this means that the relevant legislation and bodies responsible for investigating child sexual abuse are different to those in England and legislation is made by the Welsh Assembly, not the Parliament at Westminster. We have sought evidence from certain statutory bodies about their involvement with the Church in Wales and child protection.
62 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
142. The Director of Social Services of the Welsh Government, Albert Heaney, has provided us with a witness statement. He provides us with information that legislation in Wales is separate to that in England. Whilst Wales maintains some common pieces of legislation with England – such as the Children Act 1989 – it also has bespoke legislation. In the area of child protection, the most recent iteration of safeguarding practices is set out in the Social Services and Wellbeing Act of 2014. In particular, under s130 of that Act, there is a duty upon statutory bodies to report to a local authority where there is a “reasonable cause to suspect” abuse of a child.
143. In Wales, investigations of child protection concerns take place at a local authority level, as do decisions whether or not a child requires protection by way of a care order. There are six regional safeguarding children’s boards, overseen by a National Independent Safeguarding Board which is currently chaired by Mr. Towler who has provided a witness statement about its general operation. There is no obligation at present for any faith organisation to be a member of the relevant Regional Safeguarding Board but they can be co-opted on to such if they so wish.
144. The Welsh Government does not regulate, audit, inspect or have any oversight of the safeguarding policies or practices of the Church in Wales. Concerns about such practice and policy
63 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
could be reported to safeguarding boards who could make enquiries, but they have no statutory powers to intervene.
145. Statutory guidance is provided in the document ‘Keeping Learners Safe’24 which is in force in all school settings. The All Wales Child Protection Procedures of 2008 provide guidance to social care bodies and authorities. These are due to be updated and altered in Autumn 2019, this investigation is told.
146. Like in England, there is no expectation that Welsh voluntary organisations have to operate in line with the safeguarding requirements of the relevant statutory bodies, but there is an expectation by the Welsh Government identified in their evidence that they will operate in a similar manner25.
147. Inspections of statutory services in Wales are carried out as follows: a. The Care Inspectorate and Social Care Wales, along with the Health Inspector for Wales inspect social care and health provision; b. ESTYN inspects all school provision including all independent schools. c. There is a National Curriculum in Wales but it is different to that in England. Sexuality and relationships are being made a statutory part of the National curriculum in Wales and
24 WGT000440 25 paragraph 2.7 of WGT000441 64 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
relationship lessons are delivered via a charity in schools across Wales.
148. The Inquiry asked the Welsh Government if it considered that there should be specific guidance for the Church in Wales, and other faith organisations, about their safeguarding duties. The Inquiry understands the Welsh Government’s position to be that it has not identified any deficiencies in the current guidance and does not consider that there is a need for separate guidance for the religious sector26.
Procedure 149. Turning now to practical matters. Over the next two weeks, more than 30 witnesses will give us evidence in person. Their evidence will be simultaneously live-streamed on the internet, subject to the usual three-minute time delay. Some witness statements will, at appropriate points, be summarised by counsel and formally adduced into evidence. Documents (or parts of them) that are referred to in oral evidence, or adduced formally, will be published on the Inquiry’s website at a convenient moment.
150. We have been fortunate in the detailed and comprehensive witness evidence we have received. It will not be possible, and is not necessary, to go through every passage of witnesses’ statements during this hearing. Save in the case of victims
26 paragraph 12.1 – 12.3 of the WGT000441 65 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
survivors or complainants, most other witness statements will be published in full on the Inquiry website at a convenient point. The questioning will therefore focus upon the central issues in hand.
Redaction and publication of names 151. Chair, as part of this phase of the investigation the Inquiry has received evdience about both recent and non-recent allegations of child sexual abuse. The Inquiry has adopted its usual Redaction Protocol when preparing evidence for disclosure during the course of this investigation. Where names have been redacted in accordance with that protocol, or ciphers have been allocated to individuals, their names will not be used during this hearing.
152. Pursuant to the restriction order of 23 March 2018, two of our complainant core participants have been granted anonymity and will be giving evidence under their allocated ciphers. Whilst one complainant has waived his right to anonymity, the Inquiry asks that the media and public respect his right to privacy and do not seek to contact him in respect of his evidence to this Inquiry, unless the witness himself initiates that contact.
153. In addition, Chair, you made a restriction order dated 13 June 2019 in relation to 8 of the witnesses included within the sampling exercise. The safeguarding cases considered in the sampling exercise are sensitive and, in some cases ongoing.
66 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
You determined that to name those witnesses, and through them identify the parishes in which they are based, would create a real risk of identifying those individuals that have been ciphered or redacted in accordance with your redaction protocol, including the complainants, victims and survivors.
154. As a result, three of sampling witnesses will give live evidence anonymously using a cipher. Other statements may be published in due course under their allocated cipher.
155. Where witness have been granted anonymity, the following special measures will be in place: a. Witnesses will give their evidence in the hearing room without a screen; b. They will not be filmed during their testimony and the camera will be directed at the Panel or lawyers, and not them; c. Members of the public and press will be excluded from the hearing room during the course of testimony. They would be able to watch the proceedings in the annex subject to a 5 minute delay; d. Transcripts of their evidence will be available on the Inquiry website at the end of the day on which they gave their evidence.
156. Each counsel for the core participants wishing to make an opening statement will now have their opportunity to do so. Due to the time constraints, each representative has been allotted a
67 Footnotes for internal reference only CONFIDENTIAL- CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
maximum of 15 minutes, and opening statements will be made in the following order:
a. Victims and Survivors represented by Slater & Gordon b. Victims and Survivors represented by Switalskis c. The Archbishops’ Council d. The Church in Wales e. The Ecclesiastical Insurance Office
157. This afternoon we will turn to start to hear the witness evidence, commencing with AN- A4. 158. Thank you.
68 Footnotes for internal reference only