THE 11 survivors of church-related abuse who were awaiting reviews from the Independent Safeguarding Board (ISB) when it was disbanded last 12 months (News, 23 June 2023) say that they aren’t any closer to receiving a review into their cases. This contradicts what members of the General Synod have been told.
In an announcement issued on Tuesday, the group, styling themselves the “ISB 11”, write: “Not one survivor is currently having their review progressed” by Kevin Crompton, who was appointed in September to take over the commissioning of independent reviews (News, 15 September 2023).
The statement disputes what’s written in a General Synod paper, GS 2336, released on 9 February on behalf of the House of Bishops and Archbishops’ Council. The paper says: “We are glad that several individuals are taking over this offer and dealing with Kevin to set in place reviews. We remain open to listening, to conversation, and to attempts to seek out resolution with all those affected.”
The group writes: “GS 2336 states that the ISB 11 have a method in place to proceed with their reviews — that is unfaithful. The crucial conditions comparable to data-sharing agreements aren’t in place. It can be inaccurate to imply that the group are happily working with Kevin Crompton.
“The ISB 11 have as a substitute expressed no confidence in his transient, role, or readiness to conduct our reviews on the identical basis as the previous ISB. Not one survivor is currently having their review progressed with/by him. We are deeply concerned that the General Synod has been fed misinformation which we assume is designed to appease Synod members. This has exacerbated the ‘significant harm’ to survivors as evidenced within the recent Glasgow Report.”
A spokesperson for Church House said: “We understand that numerous victims and survivors have been engaging with Kevin Crompton about reviews of cases although it could not be appropriate for us to present more details.”
Published in January, the Glasgow Report, published by the psychologist David Glasgow, suggested that the way by which the ISB was disbanded “had serious and hostile consequences” for many who had been awaiting reviews (News, 19 January).
One of the members of the group of survivors, Jane Chevous, says that she had requested to talk on the upcoming meeting of the Synod, to elucidate the group’s concerns in regards to the review process, but was told that this is able to not be possible, as there wouldn’t be time for the protocol on survivor engagement to be followed.
Speaking on Tuesday, she said that the situation with the reviews was a “stalemate”, and that concerns about data sharing and operational independence had been raised with the Archbishops’ Council but had not been fully addressed.
It was “shocking and indefensible”, she said, that her own review, which had been began under the aegis of the ISB before it was disbanded, was “further back” than it was in June last 12 months (News, 21 June 2023).
Ms Chevous made clear that the concerns weren’t about Mr Crompton’s professionalism, but related to questions on who could be the designated data controller for reviews, and whether he would have a remit to be sure that the recommendations of any report were followed up.
It is known that conversations on these questions are continuing, and involve survivors in addition to Mr Crompton.
The Synod paper was co-authored by the lead bishop for safeguarding, the Bishop of Stepney, Dr Joanne Grenfell, and Dr Jamie Harrison, who chairs the House of Laity and who’s a member of the Archbishops’ Council.
Mr Crompton was approached for comment for this text.
