‘It’s impossible to say’ if Smyth victims will be compensated, says member of General Synod

Reverend Dr Ian Paul – a member of the General Synod – began by telling us  that John Smyth’s abuse did not happen within the Church of England.
Ian Paul: One of the things that’s a bit strange about this is that this is not abuse that happened in the Church of England. John Smyth had connections with the Church of England, but the abuse happened primarily in connection with Winchester, with a school there, and in his own home. So this is not a question about abuse that’s happened in the Church of England. It is a question about how Justin failed to take action when he was informed of abuse that had taken place. And he had a responsibility to deal with that.
But this historic abuse is not abuse in the Church of England. And one of the complications, of course, is that it is it is people who were ordained members of the Church of England who are participating in this very small, very elite, group in the Iwerne camps who were aware of this and who did the cover-up in the 1980s. And the response within the Church of England is to hold them to account as ministers in the Church of England. But this isn’t abuse that happened in the Church of England. And just being clear about that is not avoiding anything. I think the thing that I’m encouraged about in that phrase is recognising the significance of that harm. And that is absolutely key.
Cathy Newman: Let’s test just how much responsibility you and the church have taken because you’re on the Archbishops’ Council. So you sign off on this £150 million redress scheme. Will the Smyth victims be given access to that scheme?
Ian Paul: The reason it’s impossible to say blanketly, anyone affected by Smyth will receive funds from this, is we don’t know what their connections with the Church of England are. The abuse did not happen in the Church of England, but people may have connections with or reason from the Church of England why they’re going to be eligible for that.
Cathy Newman: But that scheme will only apply to people who were abused on church premises by church figures. Therefore, that would seem to rule out Smyth survivors.
Ian Paul: I don’t know. I can’t say, because, again, this is not about blanket criteria. It is about taking each person, each case, on its merits and taking that really, really seriously.
Cathy Newman: But if you insist on saying that Smyth was not of the Church of England, that scheme applies to people who are from the Church of England.
Ian Paul: It does. But the question is, where are the boundaries of responsibility? We want to draw the boundaries as broadly as we can, but we’re not in a position to say anybody who ever was abused by anybody in the country somehow is now the response of the Church of England. We’re not. And again, the difficulty is here that because we haven’t done the simple things that we could have done in the past, meet survivors, listen to them then, now the demands are escalating.
Cathy Newman: So isn’t the reality that you don’t want to open the floodgates to people who’ve been abused not on church premises, not by people who you in quite a sort of legalistic definition are not church figures. Is that right?
Ian Paul: It’s not about being legalistic. It’s about being appropriate in terms of the boundaries of our responsibility. We cannot feasibly compensate anyone who has experienced abuse in any context. But what we do want to do is fulfil our responsibility in partnership with survivors, advising and consulting all the way through the process to ensure that we can provide as much support as possible.
Cathy Newman: But that then absolves the church, does it not, of responsibility to compensate victims?
Ian Paul: It doesn’t. It doesn’t absolve us of anything for which we’re responsible. As I say, the redress scheme is for those who’ve been abused in the Church of England and for whom we have responsibility. We’ve been constantly in conversation with survivors so that the scheme is as generous as it possibly can be.
Cathy Newman: We’ve seen Justin Welby quit this week, but there are other resignations seemingly afoot. The Reverend Sue Colman and her husband stepped back from voluntary roles in the church this afternoon. Do you welcome that?
Ian Paul: Quite possibly. I haven’t seen those emails. I don’t think they’re part of Makin’s report.
Cathy Newman: They’re not, they’re emails from a victim.
Ian Paul: I think he has a case to answer.