In true British fashion, this means a public inquiry. And this is where it all starts to go wrong. So pervasive is the tint of corruption, so deep do the links between child abuse and those in power apparently go, it's proving an absolute nightmare to find anyone to actually head the inquiry.
The first chair, Baroness Butler-Sloss, seemed a good choice. An extremely senior female judge, she had previously headed the Family Division at the High Courts of Justice. About as independent as you're going to get, with experience of dealing with those who have suffered personal trauma. Great. But then it transpired her brother had been Attorney General in the 1980s, when a dossier naming politicians allegedly involved in child abuse had been 'lost' by the Home Office. So that ruled her out.
Next in line was Fiona Woolf, the Lord Mayor of London. Less experience of dealing with shattered lives, but in terms of independence, still pretty good; the Lord Mayor of London is a non-partisan job, and the workings of the Corporation of the City of London rarely trespass onto normal life. But again, it's not easy. Woolf has been to dinner parties with the Home Secretary at the time of the missing dossier, Leon Brittan.
What this all boils down to is a fear of a cover up by 'the Establishment.' The idea that those in positions of influence and places of power will ensure that they look after their own, and that the truth shall never out. And you can see where this fear comes from. For all her professions of innocence, Fiona Woolf doesn't exactly look the part of the man on the street; it's the gold chain of office which tends to give it away.
In Britain we have a long history of public inquiries, and they're normally pretty good at shining a light in places where previously there had been darkness. But if we've suddenly decided now we don't want a member of 'the Establishment' to conduct the inquiry, we really have to decide who we do want. Those qualified to lead investigations such as these tend to be judges, retired senior police officers, senior lawyers with peerages... all of whom are textbook 'Establishment.'
So, what instead? Either we quite literally grab people off of the streets. The chances of getting someone independent is very high. Unfortunately, the chances of getting someone qualified for the job is very, very low.
No, instead someone else is required. What we ideally need is someone who has been in public life, knows the way that the corridors of power in the UK, but has few if any ties to 'the Establishment,' or any of the major political parties. They'd have to not be in power any more, maybe recently vacated a position of responsibility, but still with the right qualifications to head a major public body...
I'm sure an idea will come to me eventually...
