10/02/2016 Scotland 2016

The Government's child abuse inquiry under fire.

Should it hear from a broader range of survivors?

The Scottish Government's Child Abuse Inquiry won't understand

the scale of the problem without a broader remit,

A revolution in New Hampshire as the two outsiders each

And the Prime Minister warns the Scottish Government to give

ground on a deal on future Scottish funding.

No one is keen on agreement than me. I want is Scottish National Party

here and in Holyrood to start making decisions.

The man who headed a recent review into abuse in

the Scottish Catholic Church has waded into the row over

the Scottish Government's Abuse Inquiry.

The Right Reverend Andrew McLellan has told Scotland 2016

that the "pain and humiliation of survivors will be repeated"

and the Government will be "quite unable to understand the scale

"of the problem" if it doesn't extend the scope of its inquiry.

His intervention comes on the eve of a meeting between child abuse

survivors and the Education Secretary, Angela Constance.

As abused children they had no voice. They had no want to cry out

on their behalf at the appalling injustices that they suffered while

growing up. This was the beginning. In December 2014, Angela Constance

announced what has become a the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. It's a

remake, she said, was to investigate the nature and extent of abuse of

children whilst in care. But survivors groups are unhappy, saying

it is too narrow. We specifically pointed out a number of those

institutions, namely the Catholic church and Boy Scouts, where we were

very disappointed that they weren't included. We wondered why they

hadn't been included and that is what we are asking and we are asking

that again for the Education Secretary to include those

particular agencies. If they are saying no, why are these Catholic

children being discriminated against? Are they not worthy of the

inquiry? It is focusing on the sexual, physical and emotional abuse

of children in homeless, Young Offenders' Institutes and schools.

It is not looking at abuse suffered in parishes, sports and youth clubs.

Those working daily with abuse victims say this inquiry will not

include the vast majority of them. I would say 80% of our clients have

been excluded from this inquiry, because that is the number of

clients not been abused in a care setting. The care settings have been

categorised as part of the inquiry. Abuse is abuse and it has a

significant effect on the whole of somebody's life. For survivor to

feel that it is maybe being considered by the inquiry that might

abuse is not as important as somebody else's abuse is extremely

damaging. It is a national disgrace, what has happened to survivors in

Scotland. I think we have a moral obligation to ensure that is done

correct. The Education Secretary has given the Scottish Government. She

says the inquiry is the widest ever held and are working closely with

survivors. We are determined to shine a light on past injustice. If

what many survivors were saying to me is what -- is that they want an

inquiry Baqubah is all important issues that will also report bike in

a reasonable timescale with practical suggestions that will

address past injustice. This man, Paul Smith, said he was abused by

Catholic priest while on a day out at the beach. It is people like Paul

who will be covered by this inquiry. This is not the first inquiry

Scotland has seen, the McLellan Commission report last year on the

way abuse was handled in the Catholic church in the wake of

allegations at the Fort Augustus School and elsewhere. They described

how the church covered up crimes to try and save its reputation. Church

leaders apologised and said it would change. Today, Andrew McLellan told

the BBC... Ireland has had three enquirer is,

focused on archdiocese and diocese, and a fourth looking into abuse in

Catholic run industrial schools and orphanages. There is a view in

Ireland that these narrow investigations were better and

faster. There's also a wide-ranging investigation in England and Wales

that will cover institutional sexual abuse as well as offering survivors

of financial help. The Education Secretary will meet with

organisations representing abuse survivors at Holyrood tomorrow.

Just before we came on air, I spoke to the Education Secretary Angela

I started by asking for her response to the Right Reverend Andrew

McLellan's call for the inquiry remit to be widened.

No Government has done more for survivors than this Government.

Within weeks of taking office as the Cabinet Secretary for education, one

of my first tasks was to announce the establishment of a public

inquiry, an independent inquiry. And the purpose of this, in short, was

to examine the institutional and systemic failures of the state when

the state had assumed the primary care and responsibility for

children. And I undertook a very personal commitment to survivors, I

remain deeply committed to them. That is understood, but what he is

saying and if you are survivors are now saying is that if you don't

listen to their stories, too, you're not going to get the full picture.

Well, prior to going into Parliament to inform Parliament of the remit of

the public inquiry, I and other ministers and Government officials

undertook extensive consultation with survivors and we have to

recognise that there are many voices in the survivors community and I was

really struck by the fact that those survivors, who wanted the inquiry to

be established, they had campaigned long time for this. And they want

the inquiry not to let the state of the hook to ensure that we do indeed

shine a light on injustice, but they warn that inquiry to be able to

report bike in a reasonable timescale. Bought by people who

don't want institutions like the Catholic Church to be let off the

hook? You have to take the word seriously of the man who headed a

review into abuse in the Scottish Catholic Church? Of course, we take

all views and opinions on this very serious matter. He saying you need

to extend the remit. Well, we looked at this really, really closely and

many survivors were saying to the Government prior to the setup of the

inquiry that they wanted to ensure that the inquiry focused on the

abuse of those who were were in care as children. And we actually did

widen the scope of the inquiry as a result of that very extensive

consultation. So what we need -- mean by Invacare is very broad and

it does include -- indeed include religious organisations and orders

where they have exercised the care or not the care of children. Where

religious organisations have provided residential care, we have

also included foster carers, boarding schools, situations where

children were boarded out, that used to be a practice common in Scotland

decades ago. So this inquiry is very broad, it is far reaching, we listen

that carefully to all survivors who needed representations to the

Government and indeed we continue to listen to all the voices in the

survivor community who want a public inquiry that is focused on the

institutional systemic abuse of children in care. And you say this

is about being focused and delivering within four years. The

inquiry in England has a much broader remit in that it is

promising to report back in five years. It is possible if you have

the will to do it. The inquiry in England of course has a different

background and a different history. The history of this inquiry in

Scotland was the result of a petition to the Scottish Parliament

many years ago. It requested a statutory independent public inquiry

into the experiences of children who were abused whilst in care and

whilst in care of the state. As I said, we have broadened out the

remit of the inquiry already and as a result of the extensive

consultation... Digicam salt the Catholic Church when deciding on the

remit? Did you Catholic Church when deciding on the

believe they were not. And they are involved in this inquiry where any

religious institution has had primary responsibilities for caring

for children, so religious organisations and churches who have

had children in their residential care, where the church has assumed

parental responsibility for children, they will indeed be

included in this inquiry. We were very clear about this and I was very

clear about that when I made my statement to Parliament. So if

you're going to stick with the remit as it is, will you, if you are

serious about listening as it is, will you, if you are

this Government and I'm deeply committed to all those actions to

ensure that we get justice for survivors. Thank you, Angela

Constance. Well, listening to that

here in the studio was the Labour MSP Graeme Pearson, who's been

arguing for a broader inquiry remit Good evening. It doesn't sound like

Angela Constance is going to budge on the remit. Why do you think she

should? It is not important why I think she should, it is important

why the survivors think she should. From the outset, they were as

promised they would be at the centre of this whole process and they found

it very difficult to get access to the Government to be involved in

open discussions with them. And at key times when they thought they

would feed into the process, there are kept out of it. And as a result,

have come to me in order to try and find out what is going, and

certainly I have not been invited into the process. It is a closed

shop. To be fed, it was originally set up to look at abuse of children

in care. If, as she says, they want to produce really clear, focused

recommendations on that issue, isn't she correct parts to stick to her

guns? The process is moving so quickly that a year on -- we are a

year on we still don't know how the evidence is going to be taken. We

still don't have the first day for commencement and the survivors have

virtually forced the meeting tomorrow with the Cabinet Secretary

and have insisted that I and others should be there in order to give

them some confidence and be heard. Do you think there is no reason to

differentiate in this inquiry between abuse and residential care

and abuse in other areas? No. We have gone about this thing for more

than a decade now. It started in December 2000 14. The political

journey that was taking place here began with someone a decade ago and

he promised the next move. We have now waited nine years to get to

where we are. We do not see movement. And that is what the

survivors need to see before they die. The trouble is that, if you

further broaden this inquiry they will have to wait a lot longer. This

will be heard, because the current setup seems to say there is a

certain number of people that we value and wants to listen to and by

implication, those are exempted -- who are exempted will feel

second-class and in importance. The authorities have let these people

down. There were given in to a range of local authorities, religious

organisations, scouts and so forth, and they were trusted to look after

them. And they failed them terribly. They have waited decades to be heard

and here is the last opportunity and it has been snatched away from them

by bureaucracy and pen pushers. Briefly, what are you hoping

locomotive of tomorrow's meeting? Angela Constance was forced into the

next stage. I would like to think they would be more open and grabbed

the opportunity to clean this up as best can be done at this very late

stage, and get a chance for people to be heard properly. Thank you.

Now, the billionaire Republican Donald Trump

and the left-wing Democrat Senator Bernie Sanders last night won

the backing of voters in New Hampshire in the contest

to become candidates in the US presidential election in November.

New Hampshire is the second state to vote.

Our Washington correspondent Gary Donoghue was in there.

Coming in first is no great surprise, but it is a relief for

team Trump after their shock defeat in Iowa. We are going to start

winning again and we will win so much, you will be so happy. We are

going to make America is so great again, maybe greater than ever

before. And the great party outsider, Ernie Sanders, also

confirmed predictions, meaning his insurgent campaign for Democratic

nomination at rolls on. It is a political revolution that will bring

tens of billions of our people together. We will all come together

to say loudly and clearly that the Government of our great nation

belongs to all of us, not just a fair few wealthy campaign

contributors. Hillary Clinton's campaign has been managing down

expectations, with her staff look into those states in the coming

weeks where black and collating all voters will be significant, it

groups in which the former first lady polls strongly. A man that

disappointed with his performance night was Marco Rubio. He had become

the big hope of the Republican establishment to stop Donald Trump,

but despite their cheers, these supporters know he has not

distinguished himself from the pack. New Hampshire will mean the end for

some Republican candidates, but the field is still crowded and party

leaders are just as far from working out how to stop Donald Trump as the

wearer before this contest. Gary Donoghue in

New Hampshire there. And we can go live now

to our Washington bureau and speak Good evening. How are you? Hello. It

was quite an upset for the establishment last night. What has

been the reaction? First of all, the reaction has been that two have left

the race, so it is not quite a crowded Republican race as it was

before. We have Chris Christie and businesswoman Carly the arena has

also left. She did not perhaps make the dent she would have liked to,

but certainly Chris Christie was a real hopeful. He was the kind of

candidate that revelled in the skeleton like it is, but Donald

Trump has taken about Mantle and run with it. When it comes to stopping

the Donald Trump, it might be difficult to know. It might take the

Republican party to figure out which candidate they want to go forward.

Embers this leave Hillary Clinton's campaign? She is facing an enormous

challenge in the face of Bernie Sanders. There are several things

she can take away from New Hampshire. Yes, the loss was

expected, but when you look at the polling numbers, she really

struggling in attracting women and young voters. 69% of women under the

age of 45 voted for Bernie Sanders in New Hampshire. She has to go away

and think about this. These are women who are looking at potentially

the first female president and are still choosing Bernie Sanders. So

she has to figure out a way to attract those people. South Carolina

may be an easier target, the next primary. But that is because it has

a large Hispanic and black vote and they seem to like her. And how about

the Republicans? Donald Trump certainly seems to have the wind in

his sales? Donald Trump is certainly a head in the polls for the next

primary in South Carolina. The others are looking around one

another and trying to figure out which one will come forward. You've

got or hire Governor John Kasich, you got Jeb Bush and Senator Marco

Rubio. These are the three Republican candidates. Problem is,

they are taking votes of one another. At some point, one has to

stop and say it is me, I am the one candidate people want to coalesce

around and that is what everyone is waiting for. The problem is, months

ago, everyone said Donald Trump would not happen. Here we are, it is

happening. The polls might be wrong, but it doesn't look the eye that far

wrong now. Thanks. The prime minister upped the ante

today on the deadlocked talks on future Scottish funding,

with a letter to the First Minister. David Cameron warned Nicola Sturgeon

that the Scottish Government must give ground if there's to be a deal

on the fiscal framework. In the letter, Mr Cameron says

he finds it "surprising" that Scottish Ministers apparently lack

confidence in attracting people Here's our political editor,

Brian Taylor. A letter responding to Nicola

Sturgeon's earlier request to sort this out. On the one hand, key

stresses his personal commitment to sorting this out and says he

believes the Scottish Government has to move in the direction of the UK

Government. Scottish ministers say if they do that, they give ground on

Scotland's money and are not prepared to do that. He also says in

terms of population growth, which might be lower in Scotland, he finds

that is disappointing that Scottish ministers apparently lack the

confidence in their ability to attract people to come to Scotland

and enhance the economy and thus to enhance the tax take. So you have a

dual approach here and still no sign of a deal. Next steps, I expect John

Swinney to publish a revised offer to the Treasury. Whether it is

enough, that remains to be seen. There is a report out tomorrow from

the Scottish Affairs committee. There is some expectation that

perhaps they might seek to broker a compromise.

Joining me now to discuss some of the day's other news are a couple

of journalists, Anna Burnside and Magnus Gardham.

Good evening to you both. Just picking up on what Brian was talking

about, what do you think of the Prime Minister's intervention? I

think it is really interesting. For the past couple of weeks, I have

been convinced there would be no deal, but there have been a couple

of things in the last 48 hours which to me have that a lot more hopeful.

The Prime Minister getting involved is one of those things. It shows

that he is alive to the politics behind this. It's not going to look

good for either side if we do not get a deal, but it will look worse

for the UK Government. John Swinney has made a strong case and if it all

falls apart, he will win the argument in the court of public

opinion. Added to that, I think Nicola Sturgeon has demonstrated

beyond any doubt her commitment to getting these powers. Over the last

couple of days, it looks more hopeful. It is still delicately

poised. There is still work to do. I'm inclined to think there is more

than a 50-50 chance now. A deal before the recess? Yes. How do you

think it is plain in the Court of public opinion's what you think

voters make of all this? I think when the queue the word fiscal

framework they go to Bermuda in their heads. What about Wendy here

for example Angus Robertson say these plans could cost an extra ?3

billion? Do you think that resonates? I do not. I think it is

so technical and full of figures. It seems to have been going on for so

long, I think most people... Apart from Magnus, they have tuned out.

People have tuned out. I have just been rereading Little Direct and it

reminds me of either Clement's battles with the Department of

circumlocution. It just seems huge and enormous and you do not see

where it will end. OK, let's move on to our top story tonight. You heard

Angela Constance earlier refusing to budge on the growing pressure to

widen the remit on the Scottish town and abuse enquiry. She says they

have to keep the enquiry focused. Do you think she's getting that right?

I can understand the Scottish Government's argument. I think there

is a danger that an unmanageable enquiry could be created, and

remember, this one is due to run until something like 2019. It is

important to remember the spirit in which this enquiry was set up, and

that was one very much to do with giving victims a voice and ensuring

that victims are heard. People want justice, but they also want to be

heard. If people at the outset are questioning whether that is going to

happen, I think that places a big? Over the enquiry. I think serious

consideration should now be placed over widen it. Does it make it

difficult when we concede there is another enquiry going on in south of

the border with a much wider remit's it is actually promising to report

back not that much longer than the Scottish enquiry. If you were

reminded to feel that way, it would give you the impression that the

Scottish Government have made these decisions and given it this

framework for slightly bureaucratic reasons, for themselves, to make it

easy, manageable, containable. The provided good practical reasons, and

the survivors here," You do not care about us." It plays badly with them

and is exacerbated by the fact the enquiry in England is doing much

more what they would like to be doing up here. Do you think Andrew

McLellan's intervention is significant? Yes, I think he is a

powerful voice. He is coming at it very much from the victims'

perspective. I cannot think of anybody better placed to intervene

and possibly cause a rethink. What do you think the consequences would

be if they did broaden the enquiry? Because we have seen in other

countries that it just goes on and on for years. In the end, would that

be satisfying for a lot of the survivors who are concerned about

this? If the enquiry in England can put a five-year cap on it with the

broader remit, I do not see why we could not do something like that

here. I completely understand there must be limits or it grows arms and

legs and goes on forever, but I think there has to be some way that

you can widen it without letting it just flop into a big mess. Finally,

the Scottish campaign to keep the UK in the EU was launched. Scotland

Stronger In Europe is headed by podcast Mona Siddiqui. Polls showed

the Scots generally pro-stain in the EU, but we cannot be complacent. --

in favour of staying in the EU. All of these things matter. We may feel

we have had the best of so many things, but we have to leave a good

legacy for future generations. What was the tone? I brought you a

souvenir. This very discreet lapel badge is about as exciting as it

got. That is very discreet. It is so discreet to be almost invisible. If

you cast your mind about the start of the independence referendum, both

sides had glitzy launches it almost seemed as though the in campaign,

and I think this will be the official one, it looked as though

they return to keep it low key, as nonparty political. The people

behind it are academics and business people. There are key message seems

to be that we are not better together. Do you think it will be

project cheer? There was nothing there to really set a heart on fire,

was there a? We might have to wait for a bit of glamour. Thanks for

coming in this evening. That's it for this evening.

Thanks for watching. I'll be back same

time tomorrow night. I've had a message from China,

from my birth mother. How far would you go to save

the family who gave you up? She's too ashamed

to look at you, Mei. 'Sister, help me. If no-one

speak for me, I will die.'