Ryan chairman in row over cost of child abuse inquiry

Starlady vroeg het al bij de berichtgeving in Trouw, waarom kan de situatie in Nederland niet boven water komen?

Zoals ik die vraag ook lees van in internetontmoetingen in Frankrijk, inmiddels zelfs in Belgie. Het meer dan tijd wordt dat die vraag in de betreffende Duitse -25 miljoen - fora gesteld wordt.

Het antwoord was: geld... héél veel geld. En omdat in Nederland de kerk en de Staat dezelfde belangen hebben.

Dat was maar een deel van het antwoord realiseer ik me.
In Ierland heeft de Kerk gewonnen. Nog vóór het Dublinmisbruikrapport van volgende week er ligt.
Daartoe een gigantische donatie gekregen van de belastingbetaler.

Ten koste van?
Cynisch genoeg zouden dat opnieuw wel eens kinderen en jongeren kunnen zijn.
Zoals een van die zusters al zei.
En Ierse belastingbetalers, die betalen mee aan die vraag in de rest van W-Europa van vroegere tehuisbewoners en hun (klein)kinderen.

Ja, Diarmuid Martin, ik hoop dat je inderdaad gelovig bent.
Want Here God, wat stinkt het!

Je was een wijs man, Bram Grandia.


The chairman of the Ryan Commission into institutional abuse has criticised the state’s independent spending watchdog over an unpublished report examining its work.

Mr Justice Sean Ryan took the unusual step of writing to John Buckley, the Comptroller & Auditor General (C&AG), to reject many of the findings of Buckley’s confidential report into the cost and timescale of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse.

The report, submitted to government in recent weeks, said the Ryan Commission had consistently failed to inform the government that ‘‘contingent liability’’ in abuse cases could cost tens of millions of euro.

The C&AG report said the commission failed to establish a financial management system capable of assessing the legal and non-legal costs arising during the nine years it sat.

The abuse inquiry refused to pass on confidential information sought by Buckley’s audit team during its work, citing ‘‘the commercial sensitivity of the inquiry’s negotiations’’ with lawyers.The move led to tensions between the commission and the audit team.

The C&AG report also said the commission’s estimates of its final costs did not receive the attention that they deserved from the seven members of the Ryan Commission, including the chairman.The comptroller submitted a draft report to the Department of Education on June 29, and the department forwarded a copy of the findings to Ryan. The High Court judge did not receive a copy directly from the C&AG.

In his letter, Ryan complained that the C&AG’s auditor s had ‘ ‘ thoroughly misunderstood’’ how the commission worked.

They had no expertise as legal cost accountants and therefore were ill equipped to assess the workings of the inquiry’s cost-assessment system.

In relation to contingent liability, the commission complained that the C&AG had effectively criticised it for failing to say how long a piece of string was.
He also criticised the C&AG for failing to put his claims directly to the commission so it could clarify matters and correct any mistakes.