Not just a national crisis, but a global one

On 20 October the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse published its final report following seven years of investigation into 15 areas. Those investigations covered a wide variety of institutions, including the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church and other faiths. Various children’s homes were also investigated, including Nottinghamshire and Lambeth councils. In the case of Lambeth, the inquiry identified a ‘politicised’ culture in ‘turmoil’, which effectively distracted the council from providing children’s social care. 

Current estimates indicate that one in six girls and one in 20 boys experience child sexual abuse before the age of 16. The inquiry states that ‘this is not just a national crisis, but a global one’ and it refers to the economic cost – over £10bn in one year according to a recent Home Office study.

• The inquiry’s report is comprised of two parts: the voices of victims and survivors (over 6,200 people contributed to the inquiry’s Truth Project); and its 20 recommendations for change. It identifies three of these as the centre piece of its work.
• The government should legislate to introduce ‘mandatory reporting’. This requires individuals in certain jobs and professions to report allegations of child sexual abuse to the relevant authorities. Failure to do so could lead to the commission of a new criminal offence of ‘failure to report an allegation of child sexual abuse when required to do so’.
• There should be a national redress scheme for England and Wales, to provide some monetary redress for child sexual abuse for those who have been let down by institutions in the past. The inquiry recommends a ‘fixed-term scheme’ with straightforward processes to be funded by contributions from the institutions affected.
• There should be a ‘Child Protection Authority’ established to secure the long-term spotlight on child sexual abuse. This will have powers to inspect any institution associated with children, but will not replace the inspectorates set up by existing child care legislation. Over time, the authority will become a centre of expertise and may extend its functions to other forms of harm experienced by children.

Other recommendations include a single set of core data relating to abuse, the creation of a Cabinet-level minister for children and a ban on the use of pain compliance techniques on children in custody.

The inquiry recommends an amendment to the Children Act 1989 to give children in care the right to bring their own application to court. At present, only local authorities can make decisions about children who are in their care.

There are also recommendations designed to address gaps identified by the inquiry in child protection. These include the registration of staff looking after children in residential care and custody. The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) regime, which operates to prevent those deemed to be unsuitable to work with children, from obtaining employment in ‘regulated activity’, is to be strengthened. At present an employer is required to determine whether a role falls within the definition of ‘regulated activity’, which is complex to define. The definition was also narrowed in 2012. The inquiry recommends that the legislation be amended so as to allow any person engaging an individual to work or volunteer with children on a frequent basis to check whether or not they have been barred by the DBS.

As a response to the recent scandals of aid workers abusing children in foreign countries, the inquiry proposes extending the DBS regime to those working with children overseas. In relation to the internet, the inquiry proposes more robust age-verification as well as mandatory online pre-screening for sexual images of children. Finally, it proposes removing the three-year limitation period for personal injury claims brought by victims of abuse and changes to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme.  

In relation to mandatory reporting, this recommendation was expected. I would expect resistance from teachers and social workers who are likely to be subject to new criminal sanctions, but this is probably the most important step forward in terms of advancing the cause of child protection, particularly given the long and sad history, identified in tragic detail, of institutions repeatedly failing to act in cases of abuse.

A national redress scheme is welcome, but identifying contributing organisations (including financially pressed local authorities) and effectively levying a further tax on them, will be very difficult. Moreover, the creation of government compensation schemes has a mixed history, as the debacle surrounding the Windrush Compensation Scheme shows.

The establishment of a Child Protection Authority is laudable and the Inquiry rightly pointed out the historic failure of existing inspectorates to address safeguarding failures as well as their limitations. I would only comment that adding another authority may not improve the existing system.

The removal of the three-year time limit in child abuse compensation claims has a rider attached to it – namely that the Defendant should have ‘the express protection of the right to a fair trial’. That is a problem because commonly that is the very point advanced by Defendants under the Limitation Act 1980, and case law shows that it frequently succeeds. Moreover any changes would not be retrospective.

It is a pity that the Inquiry was restricted in its terms to child sexual abuse, when abuse can be emotional and physical as well as being equally damaging. Nonetheless, the recommendations are to be welcomed, and the inquiry’s tireless work over the years should be applauded. This was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to confront the many different forms of child sexual abuse and the inquiry stepped up to that task. Its central recommendations are bound to run into resistance, not least from a government which is at present dysfunctional. Therefore, I hope that a future administration will grasp the nettle and implement the Inquiry’s recommendations in full.

Malcolm Johnson is legal director and head of child abuse compensation claims at Lime Solicitors, London