This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30002908
The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| 'No cover-up found' in abuse review by Peter Wanless | |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| A review of the handling of allegations of child abuse by prominent figures has found no evidence that records were deliberately removed or destroyed. | A review of the handling of allegations of child abuse by prominent figures has found no evidence that records were deliberately removed or destroyed. |
| Ministers asked the head of the NSPCC to examine how the Home Office dealt with files alleging abuse from 1979-99. | Ministers asked the head of the NSPCC to examine how the Home Office dealt with files alleging abuse from 1979-99. |
| Peter Wanless's report said it was impossible to say whether files were removed to cover up abuse - but found nothing to support such a claim. | |
| The government said it had accepted the report's three recommendations. | The government said it had accepted the report's three recommendations. |
| The report's authors, Mr Wanless and Richard Whittam QC, concluded that they had "found nothing to support a concern that files had been deliberately or systematically removed or destroyed to cover up organised child abuse". | The report's authors, Mr Wanless and Richard Whittam QC, concluded that they had "found nothing to support a concern that files had been deliberately or systematically removed or destroyed to cover up organised child abuse". |
| The report also found no evidence that the Home Office ever funded the Paedophile Information Exchange. | The report also found no evidence that the Home Office ever funded the Paedophile Information Exchange. |
| 'Significant limitations' | 'Significant limitations' |
| But it makes clear that the "records management convention" across police forces was that records relating to allegations that didn't lead to a charge were destroyed after two years. | But it makes clear that the "records management convention" across police forces was that records relating to allegations that didn't lead to a charge were destroyed after two years. |
| And it states that Home Office procedures placed "significant limitations" on the ability to establish a perfect record of what was known at the time. | And it states that Home Office procedures placed "significant limitations" on the ability to establish a perfect record of what was known at the time. |
| The report said: "It is, therefore, not possible to say whether files were ever removed or destroyed to cover up or hide allegations of organised or systematic child abuse by particular individuals because of the systems then in place. | |
| "It follows that we cannot say that no file was removed or destroyed for that reason. By making those observations they should not be misinterpreted. | |
| "We do not conclude that there is any basis for thinking that anything happened to files that should not have happened to them, but identify that limitation in our review. | |
| "Further, and with the same caveat, our review cannot be taken to have concluded one way or the other whether there was organised child abuse that has yet to be fully uncovered - indeed it is public knowledge that active police investigations examining allegations of historic child abuse are under way." | |
| Responding to the report, Home Secretary Theresa May said she had written to its authors "seeking further reassurance". | Responding to the report, Home Secretary Theresa May said she had written to its authors "seeking further reassurance". |
| She said she wanted "their consideration of how the police and prosecution authorities" handled any files they received, and whether any material was passed to MI5 - and if so what action was taken. | She said she wanted "their consideration of how the police and prosecution authorities" handled any files they received, and whether any material was passed to MI5 - and if so what action was taken. |
| The report endorses the findings of an initial review, published last year, regarding a dossier presented to a senior cabinet minister by former Conservative MP Geoffrey Dickens in 1983. | |
| Mr Dickens, who died in 1995, gave the dossier - naming MPs and police officers he suspected of child abuse - to the then Home Secretary Leon Brittan in 1983. | |
| The review by the Home Office's top civil servant, Mark Sedwill, found that copies of Mr Dickens's material had "not been retained" but that Lord Brittan had acted appropriately in dealing with the allegations. | |
| Mr Wanless's findings will be used by a wider inquiry into paedophile activity linked to public bodies and institutions. |