The Scottish Government was guided by a “regrettable degree of paternalism” towards child abuse survivors when deciding against establishing an inquiry, it has been heard.
Closing submissions were being given to the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry in Edinburgh on Friday, which examined ministers’ actions surrounding the issue between 2002 and 2014.
It was heard officials believed they knew what was better for survivors than campaigners who had been calling for an inquiry – which had been done consistently until a decision was made under Nicola Sturgeon in 2014.
READ MORE: Inadequate information delayed child abuse investigation, inquiry told
Christine O’Neill QC, representing Scottish Ministers, said: “There are a number of reasons why the government did not effectively listen.
“They had an approach to policymaking that didn’t seek out the view of survivors of abuse.
“More fundamentally, Scottish Government engagement was informed by an attitude of paternalism – and an assumption that the needs of survivors would be better met by measures which were therapeutic.”
Stuart Gale QC, for survivors group FBGA, added: “The officials are saying ‘we know what’s best for you’.”
“One could look at it as a regrettable degree of paternalism,” said chairwoman of the inquiry judge Lady Smith.
It was heard the decision not to hold an inquiry by Jack McConnell’s executive and Alex Salmond’s government was not because of a belief that abuse had not happened.
Ms O’Neill added that the consequences of not holding an inquiry earlier were a matter of “profound” regret.
Meanwhile, inadequate and inaccurate information was given to the Scottish Government, which resulted in the delay of a child abuse inquiry being held, it has been heard.
It was heard that ministers and civil servants would have been aware of some form of systemic issues as early as 2002.
However, a decision to hold an inquiry was not made until late 2014 – despite pressure from campaigners – after those in the Scottish Cabinet heard first-hand evidence.
John Scott QC, representing survivor group Incas, claimed an inquiry into mistreatment of children in care was only made possible due to the efforts of abuse survivors.
READ MORE: John Swinney says Alex Salmond was against child abuse inquiry being held
He criticised an apology given in 2004 from then first minister Mr McConnell, which omitted the responsibility of the Scottish Government after receiving late legal advice.
It was heard this was done to avoid letting other institutions “off the hook”.
The lawyer told the inquiry that misrepresentations about the scale of abuse and justification to hold an inquiry were always to the detriment of one taking place, although it was also heard this was not done in “bad faith”.
Mr Scott said: “The government record-keeping and advice on this subject was inaccurate and inadequate.
“Conversations on this subject were inadequate, communication with survivors was inadequate.
“Advice from officials emphasised reasons for not having an inquiry, rather than having one.
“Policy decisions changed when ministers personally met with survivors.”
Lady Smith then asked whether civil servants should have advised serious consideration of holding an inquiry at an earlier stage, to which he said they should have.
James Peoples, senior counsel to the inquiry, said it would be “open to say yes” to there being an ability to hold the investigation earlier.
The latest phase of the inquiry has now concluded.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel