What cannot be denied however is that Ms Sanghera and Mr Reeves have brought bona fides to their task and devoted a lot of time to talking to Survivors, gaining their confidence. The effects of the imposition of the Archbishops’ Council ‘s choice of Chair into this difficult situation without any consultation with the very group that has been abused and ignored by the Church for far too long, is yet another example of the arrogance of power that taints so much that the Church does in this area. There are several known complaints against the Secretary General from survivor victims none of whose grievances appear to quite to fit within the parameters of those NCI complaint policies which have been ascertained. A new initiative focused on survivors of church-based abuse and those who support them has been launched today.

When Malcolm Brown was asked by the Church to respond to the IICSA recommendations (not the NST), survivors were given about two days to review his final draft report. I suggested that it shouldn’t take years to work out what would be required for independent oversight of safeguarding. All that was required was to set up a properly-resourced independent charitable foundation with a board of trustees to employ and supervise people with expertise in CofE safeguarding. And to give them authority to investigate allegations and to act against those abusing their positions within the Church. That being so, what I feel survivor’s groups need to do is to develop their own draft legislation and present it to some interested MPs. It might be worth engaging with a parliamentary agent (usually a Westminster law firm) to draft legislation. When the ISB Chair and Lead Bishop were insisting the ISB was “fully independent” they may well have been speaking in good faith, but did nobody know this was false or erroneous?”Prof.Percy had also urged that his complaints process against William Nye be widened to enable other victims, survivors, stakeholders and whistleblowers to be considered within the same process, not least in case common themes should emerge. He was informed that he would, alone, be required to collate such evidence and bring them within the terms of reference (drawn up by Church House). Just imagine, for a moment, any victim of abuse (e.g., involving a known perpetrator such as Jimmy Savile) being told by the BBC or the Police that as the complainant, they must co-ordinate the evidence of all the victims.

Meg Munn’s appointment as acting chairman of the ISB is irregular for a number of reasons, as I explained in my letter published in the Church Times on 28 April 2023: Work with survivors to increase understanding throughout the Church of the nature of abuse and its impact and reflect this learning through policy, procedure and training.One might be critical of the slow pace of change, and even perhaps of the naivety of the ISB members; sometimes they appeared to be talking a better game than they delivered within the complex and tangled institution that is the CofE. Part of the great bitterness of the dispute can therefore be attributed to ‘buyers’ remorse’ on the part of academics who, on reflection, did not undertake sufficient due diligence, and noted that it was their own mistake. That was due diligence which might once have been undertake by the patronage secretary and who would have advised the governing body. That said, it may be wondered what due diligence either party could have performed in 2014 which would have been adequate. However, as I have noted before, the main problem is the extreme paucity of eligible ordained candidates. If a large college has to resort to appointing people who have, or have had, connections with a seminary some miles from the University, then it is clear that the field is excessively narrow. This itself creates antipathy within the governing body: that they are forced to choose between candidates about which it is hard to undertake sufficient due diligence; it simply adds a further layer of resentment. Titus charitable trust was formed many years ago. Basically it was designed to assist leaving Iwerne’s baggage in the past as an insurance against John Smyth’s misdemeanours catching up with them in the future, and their having to pay for his crimes.