Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for International Development

Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse

Lord Campbell-Savours Excerpts
Thursday 4th July 2019

(4 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Asked by
Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours
- Hansard - -

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions officials from the Home Office have had with the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse in the last month.

Baroness Williams of Trafford Portrait The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Williams of Trafford) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, as sponsors to the inquiry, Home Office officials have a responsibility to protect the inquiry’s independence and ensure that it has the resources it needs to deliver its terms of reference, as set out in the IICSA management statement. Regular discussions have taken place in the last month regarding such sponsorship.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, is it not ironic that, while so-called complainants with substantial criminal records are accorded anonymity as witnesses before IICSA, those who stand accused, such as Harvey Proctor and Lord Janner, still have no anonymity, no right to cross-examine witnesses and no right of defence, and can still be freely attacked, even when they are dead? IICSA is not listening to Parliament. Is this not precisely what Sir Cliff Richard was referring to yesterday when launching the FAIR campaign, a petition for pre-charge anonymity now being supported by thousands every day? The law is an ass and should be reformed. I ask noble Lords to listen to the excellent episode of “The Moral Maze” broadcast last night on BBC Radio 4, in which these matters were dealt with beautifully.

Baroness Williams of Trafford Portrait Baroness Williams of Trafford
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, on the first point, the hearings are inquisitorial and enable the inquiry to test witnesses and their evidence. All core participants are provided with the evidence; their legal teams are permitted to propose questions for the witnesses and apply to the chair for permission to put them. Regarding the point that the noble Lord made yesterday, I cannot comment on the handling of specific investigations but, as I said then, current police guidance is very clear and adopts a similar approach to that advanced by the petition to which the noble Lord refers. Suspects’ identities should not be released before charge, save in exceptional circumstances and with proper oversight. I am not aware of evidence to suggest that the police are not following that guidance.