CRYPTIC was the word chosen by one survivor to describe Lady Smith’s comments on the numbers taking part in the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry (SCAI). “I don’t understand why she was being so cryptic,” Dave Sharp told me. “But the numbers are important for survivors.”
Lady Smith said she was not willing to update the figure of 170 victims of historical child abuse who had come forward to take part in the inquiry which dates back to June last year, before she was even appointed, although she did say “many more” have since been in touch.
I’ve asked, and Lady Smith says the inquiry is asked regularly, for the latest figures. “The extent of our growing knowledge and understanding about what was happening to children in care cannot be measured simply by the number of people who have talked or are talking to us ... ” she said, adding: “We are not going to provide a running commentary,” and explained why not.
If the numbers are high, she argued, some might think the SCAI already has enough witnesses. Meanwhile, if there are smaller numbers, she pointed out, that doesn’t necessarily matter. Highlighting claims that in some children’s homes bed-wetting was punished by “appallingly cruel and humiliating treatment”, she said a single person’s account of abuse could represent the experiences of many.
That all seems fair enough but there is a feeling around among survivor groups that the inquiry is struggling to attract the high numbers of participants that were originally predicted; hence the launch of a publicity campaign to encourage more members of the public to get in touch.
It could become an embarrassment if the cost of the inquiry continues to escalate and there is not a significant increase in the witnesses coming forward. With 170 victims and a running total at present of £3.5 million, the SCAI is costing around £20,000 per participant at present. The 170 figure has risen and continues to rise, but then so does the cost of running the inquiry. I accept the calculation is pretty facile: the price of justice and accountability is not measurable in pounds and pence. Finding out what went wrong in so many children’s homes, acknowledging, finally, the misery and even horror many children had to endure through no fault of their own is worth spending money on. However, some adult survivors of abuse have questioned whether it might have been better to just divvy it up and distribute such cash among those who seek compensation for their suffering.
Redress will have to be dealt with soon by ministers. Lady Smith may make some observations but a final report is years away. John Swinney has been asked for more than a year whether compensation will be provided, as has been the case in other countries. Survivors would like to see a streamlined system so that inquiry participants can access it without having to go through the trauma of recounting their experiences yet again.
A spokesman for the Incas charity says the response has been frustrating. “We were asked by the Government for our suggestions and submitted a detailed plan 18 months ago,” he said. “But at the latest meeting they asked us ‘have you got any proposals?’.”
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 here