Concerns about abuse inquiry leadership ‘reported months before Dame Lowell resigned’

Concerns about the leadership of the national child sexual abuse inquiry were reported to a Home Office figure months before Dame Lowell Goddard’s resignation as its head, MPs have heard.

Drusilla Sharpling, a member of the probe’s panel, said she reported concerns to a directer general at the department at the end of April.

Ms Sharpling (pictured) stressed she did not require any action to be taken, or give permission to “spread” the concerns.

Dame Lowell resigned as chairwoman in August, throwing the controversy-hit inquiry into fresh turmoil.

Ms Sharpling told the Commons Home Affairs committee that she would not engage in the “sort of character issues that have been published across the press”.

However, she confirmed the panel “had concerns about the qualities of leadership that were being evidenced throughout the course of the inquiry”.

She said: “That was our principal concern and that was the reason why we wanted to work with the inquiry to ensure these were overcome. Regrettably that was not the case in the end.”

She was asked about any reporting structure.

Ms Sharpling said: “At the end of April, with the panel’s knowledge, I reported my concerns about the leadership of the inquiry to the then director general of the Home Office, Mary Calam.

“I want to take the opportunity to make absolutely clear that I did not give anyone permission to spread these concerns amongst anybody else, that I did not, and neither did the panel, require any action to be taken.”

Ivor Frank, another member of the panel, said it was “fair to say” there were “challenges”.

Shortly before Dame Lowell’s departure, reports emerged that she had spent more than 70 days working abroad or on holiday during her time in charge.

Mr Frank said: “What I will say is the chair was not always present in the United Kingdom through that entire sixteen month period, so we were able to continue with our work for extensive periods without very much contact with the chair.”

He went on: “There were times when things were perfectly amicable and perfectly professional. There were other times when it was less the case.”

Asked what this meant, he said: “There are different working methods that people have and different experiences and backgrounds.

“It may be that as a judge working perhaps mostly on her own, it wasn’t easy for her to adapt to a situation where she was necessarily having to work in a more collegiate way.”

Professor Alexis Jay, who was previously on the inquiry’s panel, replaced Dame Lowell, a New Zealand high court judge, as chairwoman.

Prof Jay told the committee: “It was clear from the beginning that Lowell Goddard really would have preferred to sit on her own without the assistance of a panel.”

She added: “As a consequence of this view that was conveyed to us, we did feel that we were kept at a distance from a lot of the activities of the inquiry.”

Prof Jay added that “we did make every effort to make the arrangements work from the beginning”.

_{Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2016, All Rights Reserved. Picture (c) PA Wire.}