Jersey Child Abuse Inquiry (Costs).

There seems to be a sudden interest in the costs of the Jersey Child Abuse Inquiry now that the alleged Chief Minister, Senator Ian Gorst, has lodged a PROPOSITION requesting another £14m funding. 

VFC has had concerns about the Inquiry's expenditure for quite some time and back in September 2014 e-mailed (below) the States Greffe in an attempt to allay these concerns by requesting a break-down of certain costs.

Readers will come to their own conclusions as to whether the questions were answered adequately.

E-mail to States Greffe September 2014

“I have become increasingly concerned over the performance of the Jersey Care Inquiry and am starting to question if the taxpayer is getting value for money. I am also questioning the "equality of arms" concerning the representation of the victims/survivors and the States of Jersey and, what appears to be,a lack of media involvement from the (four strong) media team employed by the Inquiry Panel.

With this (costs) in mind I bring to your attention from the Care Inquiry's website http://www.jerseycareinquiry.org/about-us/cost and in particular paragraph five.

"At agreed intervals, the Inquiry will account to the States Greffe for its spending, within the parameters set."

1) Could you please tell me how often the "agreed intervals" are and how/when these interval were agreed?

2) Have you received any sets of accounts, to date, from the Inquiry Team, if so how many, if not why not?

3) What is the hourly rate for accredited Lawyers, for Interested Parties?

4) Are all accredited Lawyers on the same hourly rate, if not why not?

5) How much money have the accredited Lawyers, either been paid, or billed for?

6) Could I have the individual bills/payments for Carey Oslen (SOJP Lawyers) Beverley Lacey (Chief Ministers Department) Allan Collins (JCLA Lawyers) Lewis Hymanson Small LLP (Mick Gradwell's Lawyers)?

7) Is the hourly rate any different from time spent working at the office to time spent attending the public hearings?

8) Is the four strong Media Team paid on an hourly rate, if so, what is that rate?

9) How much money has the Inquiry's Media Team been paid, or billed for, to date?

10) Could I please have a breakdown of the costs incurred by the Media Team?

11) Could I please have a copy of the documentation where the costs' "agreed intervals" were agreed?

12) Could I please have the set of accounts you have received from the Inquiry Team if you have received any?

Thank you, in advance, for your assistance with this matter and I'm sure you can appreciate, in such austere times, £6m is a lot of money and the Inquiry's spending will need to be monitored and kept under control in order to best serve the taxpayer.”(END)

Reply from States Greffe.

“Apologies for the delay in replying but you will hopefully have received my out of office reply when you sent your email and seen that I am currently out of the Island.

I think it is important at the outset to make it clear that the decisions on expenditure by the Committee of Inquiry are decisions for the inquiry itself to make and it is an important principle of the total independence of the inquiry that the States of Jersey are not able to interfere with those decisions. I am sure that you and others would quite rightly be very concerned if you heard, for example, that I or anyone else in the States administration was trying to dictate how the inquiry operated, how it spent its funds or how much it could spend. The principle of independence also, of course, means that the inquiry itself is accountable for the decisions it makes about expenditure in the areas where it has responsibility.

The inquiry does, as its website states, report expenditure on matters over which it has jurisdiction on a regular basis to the States Greffe/ Treasury and that is being done on a monthly basis so that I can monitor at the end of every month how much has been spent and how much of the allocated £6m remains. I also understand that, as stated on its website, the inquiry will publish details of its expenditure when a mechanism is agreed with with the States (I have made enquiries today to ascertain what needs to be done to enable the publication to happen).

I am advised that the inquiry has sought to control costs by setting fees for the services it is responsible for in accordance with established UK rates and through careful stewardship of its resources. All legal services procured by the inquiry have been been contracted at the most recent (2008) UK Treasury Solicitor rates. Identical rates are used for Interested Parties legal fees for which the Inquiry has responsibility. There are some Interested Parties, most notably the States Police and the States departments represented by Advocate Lacey, where the inquiry has no involvement in the setting of rates as it is not funding these costs and they do not form part of those that are reported to me regularly. The costs of legal representation for the States Departments and the States of Jersey Police are not matters that either the inquiry or I have any involvement in and is a matter for those parties.

I am advised by the inquiry that it has decided to use part time services of a UK media company. Two of its staff are employed on a part time rota basis at current NUJ rates. A student intern is also employed intermittently for a nominal fee. The inquiry had previously been assisted by local media services provided through an arrangement negotiated by the States Greffe but that contract has now been terminated.

You will appreciate that I do of course know many of the rates that you are asking about below through the financial reporting that the inquiry makes to me but for the reasons given above I believe it is a matter for the inquiry itself to decide when, and it what extent, it intends to publish information about the costs it is incurring as responsibility for those decisions rests with the inquiry and not with me. Totals of expenditure incurred in 2014 will, of course, be published in the States accounts after the year end.

I would simply conclude by saying that the States have allocated a budget of £6m to the inquiry - I agree with you that it is a lot of money but the inquiry is an extremely important one for the island and experience elsewhere has shown that such public inquiries, if they are to be done properly and comprehensively, will cost a considerable amount.”(END)

All that said, there is no question this Inquiry MUST proceed, and the local State Media MUST NOT be allowed (as it did with Operation Rectangle) to turn this into a story about the price of a prawn cocktail in a London Restaurant.

It's about decades of covered up Child Abuse and wrecked lives and the Inquiry needs to get to the bottom of how this was able to go on for so long and make sure it can't happen again. The Victims/Survivors stories need to be told/heard and although the expenditure needs to be monitored costs should not be used as an excuse to shut the inquiry down.

Those wishing to give evidence to the Inquiry can do so HERE.

Response from State Greffier Michael De La Haye.

Further to our previous posting where we published the PRESS RELEASE concerning the nomination of the Chairman for the Committee Of Inquiry into the decades of Child Abuse Frances Oldham QC. We publish a response from States Greffe Michael De La Haye.

In our previous posting we told readers that we were in contact (and still are) with Mr. De La Haye, all through the weekend. Before we published our previous posting, the relevant part was sent to Mr. De La Haye in order to give him a right of reply before publication.

Yesterday we received an e-mail from Mr. De La Haye, in response to the Blog Posting, and e-mail exchanges, which was considered for publication in the comments section of that posting. However, in the interest of fairness and balance, it has been decided that it should be a stand alone Blog Posting.

State Greffier Michael De La Haye. 

"I am writing in connection with our exchanges of emails over the weekend and today and in particular in relation to your request to be interviewed for your blog. I should mention at the outset that I have not given any media interviews about the nomination of Frances Oldham QC and the reports in today's media have all been simply based on the media release that I forwarded to you under embargo as requested at the weekend.

As I mentioned at the weekend I do not believe it would appropriate for me to be interviewed by you. As Greffier of the States I have to be scrupulous in everything that I do to ensure that I am never seen to do anything in my work that could be perceived as political or politically controversial. I hope all members of the States would confirm that I endeavor in everything I do to comply with this requirement so that no-one can ever claim that I am not at all times a totally impartial and independent officer of the States.

Although there are a range of political views about blog sites in Jersey I know you would not disagree if I say that it is clear that there are some States members who consider blogs are important and some of these are willing to engage actively with you and other bloggers to give interviews etc whereas there are other States members who do not wish to engage at all with you. It is not for me to comment on these varying views as to do so would be to be entering the political debate that will no doubt continue on this issue for the foreseeable future as the media landscape and the influence of the internet continues to evolve.

The immediate problem for me is that if I agreed to be interviewed on this issue my decision would be seen by some as a political statement on my part by those States members who feel it is inappropriate. These members could then be critical of my decision to be interviewed. I simply cannot, in my position, unilaterally decide that engaging with a blog site is a correct thing for the Greffier of the States to do. I'd stress most strongly that in taking this decision I'm not, as a result, 'siding' with those who think that engaging is incorrect but until there is general political agreement on what is appropriate I simply cannot be seen to be expressing a view either way.

I hope all who know me would agree that it is not in my nature to be awkward or obstructive and I am more than happy to explain briefly for you some of the steps that we followed in identifying Mrs Oldham so that you can be satisfied that she is a suitable person to chair the inquiry.

After the sad news about Sally Bradley QC's ill health the selection panel of Belinda Smith,Ed Marsden and myself met urgently to discuss how we could identify a new chairman. I should stress most strongly that we have never, at any time, sought any advice or guidance from anyone in Jersey about the appointment of a chairman and I can also confirm that luckily no one in Jersey has ever actually tried to tell me how I should go about the task of finding a Chairman. I have not, in fact, discussed the appointment process with anyone in Jersey until we had concluded it and even my own staff might say that I have been unusually secretive about what I have been doing! To avoid any 'Jersey' connection all the practical arrangements to contact people and arrange meetings etc were made through Ed Marsden's office.

We relied on a number of sources such as legal directories and enquiries with organisations in the UK to identify a number of potentially suitable QCs to chair the inquiry and Ed Marsden and I then met them for an initial discussion to explain what would be involved and to hear from them about their experience. We made extensive inquiries before and during the informal meetings that those we were seeing had absolutely no contacts at all with anyone in Jersey who was in any way involved with the issues to be covered in the inquiry and we made sure that they did not know anyone in Jersey who was in any way connected with the inquiry. A number of people were excluded because of connections and I think it is fair to say that we erred significantly on the side of caution when assessing any possible conflict.

When we saw potential chairmen we were keen to assess their proposed approach to the inquiry and ensure that they were aware of the importance of engaging in a sympathetic way with all who wanted to give evidence. We also wanted to hear what practical experience they had of dealing with victims of abuse and how they would ensure that appropriate arrangements were in place to handle all witnesses sensitively. We made sure that they appreciated how important the inquiry was for Jersey and wanted to know what experience they had of hearing potentially conflicting evidence and reaching an accurate conclusion. We were particularly keen to talk to QCs who had experience sitting as judges in the Family Division or the Crown Court as presiding in these courts and dealing with witnesses and lawyers for both sides would give very relevant experience for presiding over a public inquiry.

We shortlisted down to 3 QCs and the full selection panel then conducted a formal interview with these 3. We were unanimous at the end that Mrs Oldham had all the right experience to chair the inquiry. She has many years experience dealing with abuse cases and she explained to us that a huge proportion of the cases she deals with involve some form of physical or sexual abuse. She is determined to ensure that the inquiry allows people to tell their stories so that the inquiry finally brings closure and establishes exactly what happened over the period covered by the inquiry terms of reference. She has absolutely no connections at all with Jersey and has never met or come into contact with anyone connected in any way with the issues to be covered by the inquiry. She had never been to the island before coming for the interview we held. She convinced us that she will be fearless in getting to the truth to the best of her ability. She has sat as a judge for several years and in this capacity has to hear evidence and come to a reasoned conclusion. Importantly she has an extremely engaging and pleasant personal manner and we were convinced that she will be seen as a very suitable person to chair the inquiry by all who come into contact with her in the coming months.

Having been charged by the States to lead the selection process for a chairman I have done everything I can to ensure that the most suitable person possible (who was available to commit to work for some 12 months on this) was found. I recognize fully how important the inquiry is for the Island and was determined to do all I could to the best of my ability throughout the selection process to find the best person I could.

I hope this helps. For the avoidance of doubt I would mention that although I do not feel it would be appropriate for me to be interviewed I have no objection if you wish to publish this email on your blog site.

Michael de la Haye
Greffier of the States"(END)

It should be noted that in all our dealings with Mr. De La Haye we have found him to be extremely helpful, professional and impartial,willing to engage and answer any questions. If only some (most) of our politicians could take a leaf out of his book then maybe we could all work together in doing what is right for the Abuse Victims/Survivors and the Island as a whole......

APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY INTO HISTORIC ABUSE.

Being the responsible and trusted media that we are we have adhered to the strict embargo placed on the Press Release issued by States Greffe Michael De La Haye (below) which is 00.01 Monday 21st October 2013.

This however didn't stop Jersey's ONLY "News"paper breaching the embargo by publishing information from it on Saturday 19th October.........Because they CAN breach embargoes being the ONLY "News"paper on the Island. If we Bloggers (Jersey's only independent media) were to act so defiantly/irresponsibly we would never be given another embargoed Press Release. Thankfully, as mentioned above, we are more responsible than that and won't lower our standards to that of the discredited, and disgraced JEP.

As regular readers would expect, Team Voice will be reporting extensively on the (possibly controversial) appointment of Frances Oldham QC, and indeed the whole Committee of Inquiry and related issues.

But for now, at least, we give our readers the official Press Release (embargo respected).

"A senior UK lawyer with 36 years experience of family and criminal law matters is being nominated to chair the Committee of Inquiry into Historical Abuse.

Frances Oldham QC was first called to the Bar in 1977 and was appointed as Queen’s Counsel in 1994. She is regularly instructed in high profile cases in both criminal and family matters and has considerable experience dealing with cases involving sexual and physical abuse. She was appointed as a Crown Court Recorder in 1994 and is authorised to try serious cases involving rape and serious sexual offences. She has been a Deputy High Court Judge in the Family Division for over 10 years and she spends several weeks each year sitting as a judge in the criminal and family courts. She is also a judge for the Mental Health Restricted Patients Panel Tribunal and in 2012 she was appointed as a member of the QC Appointments Panel. She was leader of the Midland Circuit between 2002 and 2005 and Head of her Chambers for 7 years.

Mrs. Oldham’s nomination comes after the lawyer initially appointed to chair the inquiry, Mrs. Sally Bradley QC, became unwell in July and was unable to take up the position. The recruitment process for the replacement chairman has been undertaken by the same selection panel comprising Michael de la Haye, Greffier of the States, Belinda Smith, Senior Legal Counsel – Child Protection at the NSPCC and Ed Marsden, the Managing Partner of Verita. Informal discussions were held in the United Kingdom with 9 potential chairmen before 3 people were invited for a formal interview.

Mr. de la Haye said “The selection panel is unanimous in recommending Frances Oldham QC for this position. She has very extensive experience in many high profile cases in the UK and her combination of criminal and family law experience at the highest levels makes her eminently suitable to chair the inquiry in Jersey. She sits regularly as a judge in both the Crown Court and the Family Division of the High Court and she has vast experience of dealing with some of the most vulnerable members of society. Frances started her working career as a management trainee in the NHS before qualifying as a barrister and she was keen to point out to us that she
did not come from a privileged background which undoubtedly, in our view, helps her to relate well to people from all walks of life. The selection panel is convinced that she has exactly the right combination of empathy and firmness to chair the inquiry successfully in a totally independent and objective way.”

Following the selection of Mrs. Oldham to chair the inquiry the selection panel is now working with her to finalise the appointment of 2 committee members from the United Kingdom for the inquiry. The selection process for the members was already well underway before the summer but had to be placed on hold following the news of the previous chairman’s ill health. The selection panel is hopeful that the recruitment of 2 committee members can be concluded by the end of October so that the Chairman and members can begin to make plans for the inquiry to start.

Mrs. Oldham said “I am very pleased to have been nominated to chair this important inquiry and I am keen to ensure that the inquiry starts in early 2014. I am determined to run the inquiry in a way that will encourage all those who want to come forward to speak to us to do so. It is essential that the inquiry is able to establish exactly what happened in the care system in Jersey during the period covered by our terms of reference and I will ensure that everything possible is done to achieve that aim”.

The nominations of Mrs. Oldham and the 2 committee members will need to be approved by the States and the Chief Minister will be lodging the necessary proposition in due course so that the appointments can be considered by the Assembly in December."(END)

FRANCES OLDHAM QC

Team Voice, as regular readers would expect, have a number of REAL probing questions to ask that won't be asked by the State Media concerning the nomination of Frances Oldham QC.

Unfortunately, after repeated requests, we have been refused an interview with/by Mr. De La Haye (States Greffe) although he has been extremely helpful with supplying us with the embargoed Press Release (breached by the JEP) and has been in constant contact with us over the weekend.

We are still hopeful that we can reach some kind of a compromise on the interview front and Mr. De La Haye has said he is willing to answer our questions, it's just what format they take that is the sticking point right now, and hope to bring readers an update on that front as soon as we can.

Our argument is that we ARE the trusted media on the Island and the State Media stands accused of complicity in the whole cover-up of the Child Abuse and it's not us who breached the embargo or are accused of covering up any Child Abuse.

We believe the Committee of Inquiry will gain more credibility by engaging with those of us who have been at the forefront of investigative journalism on the island for the last 5 years or so and have campaigned heavily for the Abuse Victims/Survivors and indeed for the COI itself, for which we have been praised by a number of national/international journalists and local politicians.

The myth that surrounds the State Media being the trusted local news source, is just that,......a myth. If the State Media is granted an interview and Bloggers (Jersey's only independent media) are refused, then it won't be our reputation/credibility that suffers, it will be that of the Committee of Inquiry itself.

This IS NOT a good beginning.