CAMBRIDGE HOUSE, KNOWL VIEW AND ROCHDALE OPENING STATEMENT BY COUNSEL TO THE INQUIRY Check against delivery PREFACE 1) Chair and Panel members, the investigation into Cambridge House, Knowl View School and Rochdale (Rochdale for short) is but one part of the statutory Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse set up by the then Home Secretary in February 2015, offering an unprecedented opportunity to examine the extent to which institutions and organisations in England and Wales have taken seriously their responsibility to protect children. 2) The Rochdale investigation focuses on Cambridge House Boys’ Hostel and Knowl View School - two institutions that provided residential accommodation for boys in Rochdale. Neither institution exists any longer. Cambridge House was a hostel which took in lone, working young men and boys, the like of which will almost certainly never exist again. KVS was a residential school for boys with emotional and behavioural difficulties. 3) Some of the young men and boys who resided at both have since passed away. The laws, regulations and guidelines that applied to the institutions in which they lived have much changed in the years since they closed. The people involved in running them or who made decisions about them are mostly retired; some too have died. 4) Some of those accused of abuse, like Cyril Smith, are themselves long dead or in prison. There have been inquiries and investigations about child sexual abuse in Rochdale in the years following, and there was even a specific (albeit unfinished) review established by Rochdale Council which began to examine some of the same issues that fall for consideration in this investigation. 5) Society and culture may have changed, but many people whose lives were forever blighted by the abuse they suffered have understandably been unable to move on and they continue to seek justice. INTRODUCTION 1. So what then is the purpose of embarking upon this investigation within this inquiry? 2. First of all, these events did not happen so long ago as to consign them to history. You will hear evidence from core participants who lived in Cambridge House in the 1960s. This investigation and the willingness of the inquiry to consider their experiences is extremely important to them particularly because they have never been afforded an opportunity to give evidence in a public setting about those experiences. Cyril Smith, whose activities at Cambridge House are one focus of attention, remained a Member of Parliament until 1992; and there is evidence of his involvement in KVS until its closure. The examination of KVS considers events which were ongoing until 1994 (which is when it stopped admitting pupils). Some individuals who were affected by sexual abuse, whilst they were pupils at KVS, particularly in the late 1980s or early 1990s are now men in middle age to whom this inquiry is equally important. 1 3. The decision to embark upon this investigation was in part in response to the public concern that some politicians, including Cyril Smith, were involved in child sexual abuse, and able to abuse with impunity because they were protected by the establishment. It is only really because of Cyril Smith that the wider issue of child sexual abuse in Rochdale from the 1960s to 1990s garnered attention. 4. What the investigation was struck by, however, was the broader picture that emerged by shining a light on Cyril Smith. In other words, it illuminated the day to day experiences of children that would have gone unexamined. It is this experience that in many ways tells us more about responses to child sexual abuse than focusing on the politician whose conduct drew the inquiry's attention to Rochdale in the first instance. 5. An issue in this investigation is whether there a connection between the power wielded by Cyril Smith locally (and the risk he may have posed or did pose to children) and the wider picture about abuse which emerges from the evidence. It allows the panel to consider whether deference to individuals in a position of authority, not so very long ago, may have put children at risk of child sexual abuse. The wider issue is whether authorities in Rochdale were generally too accepting; too slow to interrogate information that ought to have given rise to acute concern; and too willing to accept the status quo? Those are obvious points to consider as the evidence unfolds. 6. Rochdale not only affords the Panel a rare opportunity to consider how local public authorities responded to a politician who may have posed a risk of sexual abuse to children, but also to consider other issues emerging from this investigation which remain relevant and will contribute to the Panel’s ability to put contemporary problems of child sexual abuse in context. 7. I emphasise that this is not an investigation into Cyril Smith. It is an investigation into allegations of the sexual abuse and exploitation of children residing at or attending Cambridge House Boys’ Hostel, KVS, and other institutions, where their placement was arranged or provided by Rochdale Borough Council. The wider issues raised by this investigation include: (i) Our attitudes to vulnerable children whose behaviours are regarded as challenging or as somehow inviting or bringin on themselves sexual abuse (in this case, young boys who frequented public. places around Rochdale and who were abused by paying adults); (ii) The particular risks from which vulnerable children may be from sexual abuse. (iii) The tendency to make children responsible for their sexual abuse instead of the adults around them. (iv) A tendency to let difficult issues drift rather than to confront them. (v) A tendency towards optimism that circumstances are improving without interrogating whether information or evidence bears that out. (vi) The failure to look at the whole picture, whether it be the whole picture of the child or the whole picture which a group of children presents. 9. The purpose of this opening statement is to introduce some of the materials that the investigation will ultimately ask the Panel to consider. We want to set the scene so 2 that when witnesses come to give evidence, it is understood why they are being asked certain questions or why they are being asked to deal with certain criticisms. 10. The need to go straight to the core issues really matters in this investigation. There is a wealth of documentary material; witnesses have often given very many accounts of their involvement in the events in statements and interviews; many have been asked to address documentary evidence already. The purpose of calling these witnesses is to ask them to address the most contentious points relevant to them. There will not be the opportunity to introduce every piece of documentary evidence which the Panel will, in due course, be invited to base their conclusions and recommendations upon. Indeed, witnesses may not even be asked about some of the documentary material to which I shall be referring in this statement but will in due course be posted on the website (subject to sensitivity). Brian then gives an explanation that documents will be referred to but will be placed on the website in due course]. One of the purposes of this opening statement is to draw attention to some of that material and to demonstrate where it fits in the chronology. We will endeavour to ensure that, during the course of the hearing, core participants’ attention is drawn to any other evidence upon which reliance may be placed. 11. The first part of this hearing will focus upon Cambridge House and the allegations which were made against Cyril Smith by boys who lived there; how those allegations unfolded and how they were to resurface in later years. 12. Cyril Smith was also involved in the setting up of KVS. He was a governor at the school for two distinct periods but, beyond that, his involvement with the school is less clear. There is evidence of allegations that relate to his also sexually abusing boys who attended KVS. 13. In September 1990 an intruder, who was well-known to Knowl View, known to have sexually assaulted boys from the school and had in 1984 pleaded guilty to indecent assault with a child, spent two nights in the school. It is known for certain that on the second night he sexually assaulted one boy. There may have sexual activity with other children. The coming to light of this incident proved to be the catalyst for enquiries into other serious issues related to child sexual abuse within KVS. The hearing will look at the information which had accumulated over the years that demonstrated knowledge on the part of Rochdale authorities that children (including pupils from KVS) were being exploited for money and that sexually abusive activities by pupils on other pupils were ongoing. 14. One thing you may find striking is that there is evidence of such problems affecting KVS from the 1970s onwards. Is that because residential institutions which care for vulnerable children will always be susceptible to these sorts of problems (is it in their very nature?) or was it because there was a particular culture in KVS that persisted over the years which led to a risk of sexual abuse? We hope that some witnesses with wider experience in education, social care and health will be able to assist in your consideration of this point. CAMBRIDGE HOUSE HOSTEL 15. I am going to begin with Cambridge House Hostel. 16. A committee was formed in 1960 by, amongst others, Bill Harding, a probation officer and Cyril Smith (then an Alderman), who became its secretary to set up a private hostel situated at Cambridge House.