Skip to main content

0800 917 1000   Open weekdays 9am-5pm

IICSA Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse

The Roman Catholic Church Case Study: Archdiocese of Birmingham Investigation Report

D.5: Post publication of the 2018 reviews

23. When all three reviews are considered, common problems were identified, in particular, the amount of responsibility placed on the role of the safeguarding coordinator; the need for a more professional approach by the safeguarding team, including their recording systems; and the need for proper oversight of that team.

24. As a consequence of those reviews, in November 2018, the Archdiocese appointed Andrew Haley as the newly created Interim Director of Safeguarding. It was envisaged that Jane Jones would report to Andrew Haley and that he would work alongside her. This did not happen. Jane Jones tendered her resignation as she felt her position was “completely untenable”.[1] We concluded that Jane Jones did not modernise the safeguarding team and manage her numerous responsibilities effectively.

25. The Archdiocese’s action plan[2] categorised work into ‘urgent’ and ‘non‑urgent/ non‑immediate’ and Archbishop Longley said that he was going to remain a member of the working group which would report back to the Archdiocese’s trustees. He hoped that many of the actions on the action plan would be completed within six months, although he recognised that some work may take longer to complete.

26. All three reviews were commissioned after the Inquiry announced that the Archdiocese of Birmingham was to be included as a case study within the investigation into the Roman Catholic Church. The findings, in particular of the SCIE audit, highlighted important failings in respect of safeguarding within the Archdiocese. It is likely that these concerns would not have come to light without the inclusion of the Archdiocese of Birmingham as part of this investigation.

27. There was a disparity between the Archdiocese’s self‑audits in 2006 and 2009 and the CSAS audit in 2010. Some of the problems, for example with record keeping, were identified in the 2010 audit and do not seem to have been addressed to date. It is also unclear why, following the 2010 audit, the Archdiocese of Birmingham did not ensure that effective action was taken to address the ‘non‑compliant’ areas.

28. Subsequent to our hearings, in February 2019, the Charity Commission announced that it had opened a statutory inquiry into the Birmingham Diocesan Trust. The Inquiry is focussed on the charity’s safeguarding governance and the adequacy of its response to recent safeguarding reviews.

Back to top