The Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry has had a rocky history. With a huge remit, by June this year it had run up costs of £1.8 million, yet had still to hear from the vast majority of witnesses.
With key appointments concluded last October, by July it had lost two out of its three key panel members. The acrimonious resignation of the Chair Susan O'Brien QC followed within a week that of one of her deputies.
Separately, the Scottish Government has yet to legislate, as it has promised to do, to resolve legal issues that prevent many victims from pursuing civil claims against their abusers.
Despite claims of consultation, there is widespread unhappiness about the Survivor Scotland model being proposed for supporting people who may be traumatised by memories re-awoken during the inquiry process.
The inquiry has to satisfy diverse groups representing adult victims of abuse, many of whom have lasting difficulties as a result of what happened to them at children. It is fair to say that confidence in its ability to do so is at an all time low.
So the revelation that a key official in supporting adult abuse survivors, some of whom are involved in the inquiry, appears to have lost the confidence of many of those due to take part is a major problem. Jennifer McPherson is alleged to have made disparaging comments to some historic abuse victims, and been dismissive of their concerns.
The claims against Ms McPherson are just that at present - only claims. Any comments she is said to have made are unproven and that is far from immaterial.
However it is significant that John Swinney instructed officials to take action to remove Ms O'Brien as chair on the basis of two comments she made in a private meeting, reported by a single individual.
When Ms O'Brien quit before she could be ousted the deputy first minister said publicly he feared the impact on confidence in the inquiry which her comments might have, should they have been heard by survivors.
Why did Mr Swinney feel the need for urgent action in that instance, but not in this one, where a number of people claim equally sensitive comments were made directly to survivors of abuse? It leaves him in a difficult position.
The government says some of the comments in question, have been investigated and officials exonerated. It has not clarified the nature of the investigation, which appears not to have included interviewing the two workers at abuse charity Open Secret, who made the allegations.
The inquiry has important work to do, and Mr Swinney may well feel that further disruption is the last thing he needs. The Scottish Government says it has a duty of care to Ms McPherson.
But levels of confidence in the whole process are now so low, that it will not do to simply ignore these allegations. Any civil servant involved in piece of work so high profile and sensitive cannot be immune to scrutiny. A proper investigation of these claims needs to be carried out, it needs to be urgent and above all it needs to be transparent.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here