Cynical ? - Moi?

I declined the invitation from the Home Office to attend a meeting yesterday. It was billed as a meeting of "survivor groups" and the Home office regarding the overarching enquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.
They suggested that they would be "listening" to survivors regarding the appointment of a chairperson and "other issues".
Sounds really important doesn't it? Sounds even as if they are taking the plight of the survivors seriously? Sounds perhaps that they are considering doing the "right thing" after decades of burying their heads in the sand? I don't think so! Been to so many of these dangled carrots, never found one to be valuable. (Cynical? - Moi?)
I had real misgivings about it when it was first suggested. (I really should practice what  I preach and listen to my own warning voices!)
The way the  panel has been appointed has been ridiculous,  but the  whole organisation of the enquiry can best be described as badly handled, chaotic, dismissive and patronising.
I asked if this was a group meeting or an individual consultation? and I also wanted to know who else would be present?
They confirmed it would be a group of about 15 people, headed by a "chairperson' and would be for one hour!
ONE hour! What the hell use is that? and with fifteen interested parties all wanting a shout! utterly pointless, and actually really quite offensive.
They wouldn't tell me who else was invited "for reasons,  they hoped I understood,  of the sensitivity of the issue"!
WTF! As if I was not aware of the need for sensitivity and confidentiality!
What THEY were clearly not aware of is that it is quite inappropriate and extremely insensitive, not to mention unprofessional, to ask survivors to attend such an emotive  meeting without knowing who they might encounter!
No surprise to me really, this is the way that survivors of abuse have always been treated, disregarded, and  perennially sidelined. Wheeled in to give credence to these impotent bodies.
I certainly was not afraid to go,  my strategies are well in place for these occasions,  but that was not the point. The point was that they did NOT give this any real thought.
This  seems to me quite  indicative  of the government's attitude to this dreadful crime.  Let's not dress it up - they are not without blame, they have known about it for years and kept silent. In any other criminal matter this would have at best been seen as collusion.
Anything that is going to really make a difference has to start with respect and compassion.
This is not the arrival of the cavalry , nor will  it be a magic bullet. Unless they have been on Mars for decades, unaware of the world's media, they have been made well aware of these injustices.
Now that the spotlight is on them and other institutions there is a scramble to be seen to be acting. They have had years to show their integrity and horror at these crimes and have remained disinterested. (surely the impending general election can't have anything to do with this sudden interest? )
Other survivor groups are already walking away from any involvement with this enquiry, and the Home Secretary found time in her "oh so busy schedule" to suggest it was a "shame,"  and that "there is an opportunity here to change things" - setting it up for the "victim blame" that will be the next inevitability  when the bloody thing implodes! If we disapprove of their condescending tactics and say NO to them then we are accused of trying to "derail the enquiry!" - It was never"railed!"
But we are  quite used to that too!
It was ever thus!
I have been to so many of these meetings in the past, always worried to see  some survivors get so excited about the "hope" they are given, and then only to be  dumped on. 
Get on with your enquiry, no doubt for the next several years, and WE will get on with what really matters and that is looking out for each other!