Browse content similar to Louis Blom-Cooper. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Line | From | To | |
---|---|---|---|
The speaker is required to have remarkable qualities. | :00:00. | :00:17. | |
Welcome to the programme. The saddle enquiries into the bloody Sunday | :00:18. | :00:26. | |
shootings in 1972 to 12 years, interviewed 500 witnesses and cost | :00:27. | :00:35. | |
?100 million. This could accomplish faster according to my guest, and he | :00:36. | :00:40. | |
has also looked into the public enquiries which are in danger of | :00:41. | :00:53. | |
being hijacked by lawyers. He has chaired an enquiry all to himself. | :00:54. | :00:58. | |
What are they expected to do, how are they different to a trial? Very | :00:59. | :01:04. | |
simple indeed. They are inquisitions, not adversarial. They | :01:05. | :01:12. | |
are to explain why it happened, how it happened and what, if anything | :01:13. | :01:15. | |
went wrong with the system that was being employed, and the services | :01:16. | :01:19. | |
that are there to support the system. No prosecutor, no defending | :01:20. | :01:27. | |
counsel or anything like that? Absolutely not. Lord Bingham said | :01:28. | :01:34. | |
they are akin to anything unlike the court of law. They are not intended | :01:35. | :01:42. | |
to have witnesses. They are to enquire into the circumstances and | :01:43. | :01:48. | |
are part of public administration and very important too. The idea is | :01:49. | :01:52. | |
to tell the public and the Government what went wrong, take | :01:53. | :01:57. | |
apart how it happened rather than say, he is to blame? Absolutely. The | :01:58. | :02:02. | |
question of who is to blame and who is to be liable for it is a format | :02:03. | :02:07. | |
for the ordinary courts, the civil and criminal courts. But these | :02:08. | :02:15. | |
enquiries are not about that. Our recent political history is dotted | :02:16. | :02:21. | |
with big public enquiries. There has been the Chilcot Inquiry, the Hutton | :02:22. | :02:26. | |
enquiry, dealing with aspects of Iraq. If we look back there was a | :02:27. | :02:30. | |
Scot enquiry in the arms to Iraq affair. There have been various | :02:31. | :02:36. | |
enquiries into child abuse cases over the years. DD successfully to | :02:37. | :02:41. | |
the public what happened in the end? Do they work? I think the answer | :02:42. | :02:47. | |
lies in what Sir Edward Heath said in 1992 when they were setting up | :02:48. | :02:53. | |
the Falklands Islands enquiry. He said we have never been able to find | :02:54. | :02:58. | |
a satisfactory way with dealing with national scandals and public | :02:59. | :03:06. | |
disasters. That was in 1982. The problem is people like me. I have to | :03:07. | :03:11. | |
confess I'm a convert. When I first did public enquiries in the 1980s, | :03:12. | :03:21. | |
Beckford, Carlisle, the cases of people who died, children who | :03:22. | :03:29. | |
died... The Salmon commission demands that witnesses should be | :03:30. | :03:36. | |
represented by lawyers and that they should first make their statements | :03:37. | :03:39. | |
before making their evidence. I was one of the people who thought that | :03:40. | :03:46. | |
was the right system until I did my own enquiries and I began to think | :03:47. | :03:52. | |
they were not the right way, and of course, ultimately, in the 1990s, | :03:53. | :04:01. | |
Lord Scott did the arms to Iraq Inquiry and he had no legal | :04:02. | :04:07. | |
representatives at all. All the questioning of witnesses were done | :04:08. | :04:11. | |
by him and his own counsel. You trace the history of how we got | :04:12. | :04:17. | |
here, and the wrong route involving bloody Sunday. If you go back a | :04:18. | :04:25. | |
century, David Lloyd George, then the Chancellor of the Exchequer got | :04:26. | :04:28. | |
into trouble with shares dealing, the so-called Marconi scandal, but | :04:29. | :04:38. | |
it didn't work very well? Because these enquiries were dealt with by | :04:39. | :04:44. | |
Parliament, there were party lines. Whichever party was in Government, | :04:45. | :04:49. | |
they determined the results of the enquiry which was very | :04:50. | :04:55. | |
unsatisfactory, but the principles set up the modern system worked for | :04:56. | :04:59. | |
different reasons. At that time, they were more concerned about the | :05:00. | :05:08. | |
proper enquiry getting the evidence or the documents it needed to see | :05:09. | :05:11. | |
and the oral evidence of the witnesses. It was about the right | :05:12. | :05:19. | |
procedure, and it adopted that of which the court adopted. One of the | :05:20. | :05:24. | |
things that happened was that they would be a judge residing over them, | :05:25. | :05:28. | |
but it isn't the same thing residing over an enquiry like this compare to | :05:29. | :05:30. | |
a court case? the 20th century were dominated | :05:31. | :05:48. | |
reason for that is nothing to do reason for that is nothing to do | :05:49. | :05:54. | |
with the status of the judge, it is because lawyers are familiar with | :05:55. | :06:25. | |
see whether it is credible, see whether it is | :06:26. | :06:25. | |
reliable, and they are very good for reliable, and they are very good | :06:26. | :06:26. | |
sifting out the factual material, sifting out the factual | :06:27. | :06:27. | |
and that is why very often they do cheer enquiries, although I think | :06:28. | :06:27. | |
now, Sir John Chilcot did the now, Sir John | :06:28. | :06:28. | |
that was done without any lawyers that was done without any | :06:29. | :06:28. | |
being involved. In fact, he did not being involved. In fact, he did not | :06:29. | :06:32. | |
even have his own lawyer to appear to ask questions. He and his panel | :06:33. | :06:41. | |
members did all the questioning. Lawyers seem to become dominant in a | :06:42. | :06:47. | |
lot of these enquiries, and is that partly because if you're a witness | :06:48. | :06:51. | |
in an enquiry and that enquiry might end up accusing you of incompetence | :06:52. | :06:57. | |
that led to people being killed or being a spy or complicit in child | :06:58. | :07:02. | |
abuse or even of killing someone unlawfully, don't you rather need a | :07:03. | :07:08. | |
lawyer, aren't you entitled to protection in those circumstances? | :07:09. | :07:12. | |
Well, it is rather like a comments made about lawyers, I express it by | :07:13. | :07:18. | |
saying they should always be on tap and another on top. They should | :07:19. | :07:22. | |
always be available to advise you and help you, but lawyers tend to | :07:23. | :07:36. | |
dominate, and they have done in the past in relation to enquiries. They | :07:37. | :07:42. | |
are not judicial enquiries, the government ministers, who are | :07:43. | :07:47. | |
responsible for the event, for example Bloody Sunday, the Ministry | :07:48. | :07:52. | |
of Defence was responsible for the Army and Northern Ireland in the | :07:53. | :08:02. | |
1970s, but... They were responsible for everything they did, but it is | :08:03. | :08:06. | |
not a question of finding guilt or innocence. That is a matter for the | :08:07. | :08:13. | |
courts of law, an enquiry is an inquisition into why and how it | :08:14. | :08:16. | |
happened, and to make sure it does not happen again. If individuals are | :08:17. | :08:26. | |
not criticised over an enquiry into something, whatever that is, should | :08:27. | :08:34. | |
you take that on the chin? But fearless is still an important | :08:35. | :08:37. | |
the should be able to give evidence the should be able to give evidence | :08:38. | :08:42. | |
in the enquiry and answer any alleged criticism against them, the | :08:43. | :08:50. | |
enquiries act of 2005, which is now the law, and as a satisfactory piece | :08:51. | :08:58. | |
of legislation, has moved. -- has moved the question of fearless from | :08:59. | :09:04. | |
that stage, from allegations against the person that fearless demands | :09:05. | :09:09. | |
that when the person who chairs the enquiry has drafted his report, if | :09:10. | :09:21. | |
he is criticises him, there is a general duty as a matter of | :09:22. | :09:29. | |
discretion, to tell that person, this is what I think I have to say | :09:30. | :09:33. | |
about your activity. What answer do you have? That is why Sir John | :09:34. | :09:41. | |
Chilcot took nearly two years after he drafted his report asking | :09:42. | :09:46. | |
questions to people who he might have criticised. This is the | :09:47. | :09:57. | |
so-called Maxwellisation process? It is an ugly word. It is simply | :09:58. | :10:02. | |
justice, you're entitled to be told about it if you are to be | :10:03. | :10:08. | |
criticised. Is one law just said years ago, it is like being stated | :10:09. | :10:12. | |
in Parliament that you have misbehaved yourself. You have to | :10:13. | :10:22. | |
suffer the damnation of it but it does not lead to any injury. Let us | :10:23. | :10:30. | |
apply all this to the case of the Jimmy Savile entirely. Why did | :10:31. | :10:46. | |
They came to the conclusion that there should be all these | :10:47. | :11:10. | |
principles, and it became the law as far as practitioners were concerned. | :11:11. | :11:12. | |
I was one of the people who did it, but we became converted very | :11:13. | :11:15. | |
quickly, but it was a great mistake that that was treating these | :11:16. | :11:19. | |
enquiries as if there were some -- they were some offshoot of the legal | :11:20. | :11:26. | |
system, whereas the not akin to any court of law. You did having these | :11:27. | :11:33. | |
enquiries throngs of very expensive lawyers mostly being paid for by the | :11:34. | :11:40. | |
public? There is that to it, but apart from paying for the lawyers, | :11:41. | :11:46. | |
because a lot of expense, a lot of enquiries are conducted in that way. | :11:47. | :11:52. | |
The is just a tonnage of paperwork that is automatically generated? | :11:53. | :12:01. | |
Absolutely, the automation was extremely good in the enquiry, and | :12:02. | :12:05. | |
the evidence was accumulated, and huge amounts of it, but I think most | :12:06. | :12:12. | |
people reckon it would have taken two or three years, not 12 and a | :12:13. | :12:21. | |
half. One of the things about the enquiry was you were going over old | :12:22. | :12:26. | |
ground, there had been an enquiry into Bloody Sunday which was | :12:27. | :12:30. | |
condemned by a lot of people as a whitewash but got the evidence | :12:31. | :12:33. | |
together at the time. So did that enquiry need to read collect the | :12:34. | :12:38. | |
evidence and revisit the whole thing, or could it have taken the | :12:39. | :12:46. | |
evidence and examined it again? Bloody Sunday was unique. The | :12:47. | :12:58. | |
killing took place in 15 minutes after a civil march of three and a | :12:59. | :13:05. | |
half hours, every Tom Dick and Harry of the media was there, journalists | :13:06. | :13:11. | |
galore, television cameras, there was a huge amount of documented the | :13:12. | :13:19. | |
material available, and one of the things I want to see very strongly | :13:20. | :13:25. | |
in the book is we do not pay enough attention to memory. It is quite | :13:26. | :13:31. | |
great that what you saw with your eyes and ears and nose at any time | :13:32. | :13:40. | |
is very important, but as time goes by, it gets distorted. Evidence | :13:41. | :13:49. | |
tends to show, forensic psychologists have shown, that after | :13:50. | :13:53. | |
time it becomes distorted. You hear facts about the event, years later, | :13:54. | :13:57. | |
and Bloody Sunday must've been talked about constantly on the | :13:58. | :14:05. | |
streets of Londonderry in the 1980s and 90s. So giving evidence 40 years | :14:06. | :14:16. | |
after the event, there is a great danger of the evidence being | :14:17. | :14:29. | |
unreliable, you cannot act upon it, and there was evidence from soldiers | :14:30. | :14:32. | |
who were on the march that day, so there was no need to go over all | :14:33. | :14:37. | |
that again and ask those people to give evidence which had been given | :14:38. | :14:52. | |
or not given 30 years ago. If it had been done quicker and more | :14:53. | :14:56. | |
effectively, is there a lesson there for future enquiries? There will be | :14:57. | :14:59. | |
disastrous, miscarriages of justice, scandals, more public enquiries in | :15:00. | :15:01. | |
the future, what should they learn from this? I do hope there is | :15:02. | :15:11. | |
something. One lesson I gather that is very important that the Minister | :15:12. | :15:16. | |
who sets up the enquiry says specifically what he wants. The | :15:17. | :15:27. | |
terms of reference and important. In the Bloody Sunday one, they were | :15:28. | :15:30. | |
asked to look at events and circumstances that took place on the | :15:31. | :15:34. | |
streets of Londonderry that they. They were very unspecific. That is | :15:35. | :15:41. | |
why I think Lord Saville's was minded to do was scurrilous, I think | :15:42. | :15:53. | |
it was a great mistake. In terms of reference -- terms of reference and | :15:54. | :15:58. | |
important, and while Hillsborough is very important, the enquiry held in | :15:59. | :16:07. | |
1989 for four or five months, was extremely good, and that is because | :16:08. | :16:11. | |
Lord Taylor who did the enquiry has given very specific terms of | :16:12. | :16:16. | |
reference concentrating on the control by the police of the crowds | :16:17. | :16:27. | |
at the Sheffield ground. But it did not get to the forged evidence? | :16:28. | :16:32. | |
Interestingly, he reported the failure of the police to control the | :16:33. | :16:36. | |
crowd, then he made one observation, that the police had behaved very | :16:37. | :16:41. | |
badly, and indicated there should be a further examination of police | :16:42. | :16:47. | |
behaviour, but there was some confusion about the notes he wrote, | :16:48. | :16:54. | |
the Home Secretary wrote to Margaret Thatcher and said, why should we | :16:55. | :16:58. | |
welcome the report? There was nothing done about it for 27 years. | :16:59. | :17:06. | |
Some fascinating lessons from the protracted enquiry in the bloody | :17:07. | :17:13. | |
Sandy Case. Thank you again. We will be backs -- in the Bloody Sunday | :17:14. | :17:24. | |
enquiry. We will be back again soon. Thank you again. | :17:25. | :17:42. | |
It is what happens when the Speaker needs MPs to vote on something, a | :17:43. | :17:49. | |
know. Let us just say I was an MP. know. Let us just say I was an MP. | :17:50. | :17:58. | |
If I wanted to vote against whatever was being proposed, I would head to | :17:59. | :18:05. | |
the no lobby. Or that we have I wanted to vote | :18:06. | :18:11. |