top of page
< Back

Macur review (Child abuse_

The Macur Review was a non-statutory investigation that concluded there was no evidence the original Waterhouse Inquiry had ignored or covered up the involvement of "establishment" figures in the North Wales child abuse scandal, though it heavily criticized the government’s poor archiving and destruction of key inquiry records.

The Macur Review (officially The Report of the Macur Review) was an independent review commissioned by the UK government in November 2012 and published in March 2016.


It was led by Lady Justice Macur, a High Court judge, to re-examine the original Waterhouse Inquiry (Lost in Care, 2000). The review was prompted by renewed public concern—heightened by the Jimmy Savile scandal—that the original inquiry had been too narrow and had potentially ignored or covered up the involvement of "establishment figures" or high-profile politicians.


1. Purpose and Scope

The review had a very specific, limited remit:

  • Review the scope of the original Waterhouse Inquiry.

  • Determine if any specific allegations of abuse were not investigated by Waterhouse.

  • Evaluate if the Waterhouse Inquiry was "properly constituted" and did its job effectively.


2. Key Findings

After examining over one million pages of documentation, Lady Justice Macur reached several significant conclusions:

  • No Evidence of High-Profile Cover-up: The review found no evidence that nationally prominent individuals (politicians, celebrities, or businessmen) were involved in the abuse of children in care in North Wales during the period (1974–1996).

  • Waterhouse Upheld: It concluded that there was "no reason to undermine the conclusions" of the Waterhouse Inquiry regarding the nature and scale of the abuse that occurred.

  • Terms of Reference: It found that the original terms of reference were not designed to protect anyone and were interpreted fairly by the tribunal.

  • Data Mismanagement: One of the most critical findings was the "shambolic" state of the records. A crucial computer database from the original inquiry was found to have been destroyed in 2008 after being declared "corrupted," which the review called an "innocent mistake" but a significant failure in record-keeping.


3. Recommendations

The Macur Review made six primary recommendations, focusing largely on the logistics of future inquiries rather than the abuse itself:


  1. Transparency: Inquiries must be objectively seen as "above reproach."

  2. Archiving: Strict rules for the preservation and archiving of inquiry materials are essential.

  3. Databases: All government departments should maintain accurate databases of the materials they hold.

  4. Criminal Process: Due criminal process (police investigation) is better suited to resolving new or unresolved complaints than a public inquiry.

  5. Caution on Re-opening: She advised caution before establishing further reviews of previous inquiries unless new, compelling evidence emerges.


4. Reception and Controversy

The report was met with a mixed response:

  • Government: The government accepted the findings and the criticisms regarding document storage.

  • Victims and Survivors: Many survivors expressed profound disappointment. They felt the review was "bland" and focused more on process and paperwork than on the human element. Some groups, like the NSPCC, were surprised by the lack of substantial new recommendations for child protection.

  • Redactions: There was criticism regarding the heavy redactions in the public version of the report, which the Children's Commissioner for Wales argued could lead people to continue suspecting a cover-up.


Summary Table: Waterhouse vs. Macur

Feature

Waterhouse Inquiry (2000)

Macur Review (2016)

Type

Statutory Tribunal of Inquiry

Independent (Non-statutory) Review

Focus

Direct abuse in care homes

The integrity of the previous inquiry

Main Finding

Widespread abuse and systemic failure

No evidence of "establishment" cover-up

Key Legacy

Created Children's Commissioner

Highlighted critical archiving failures


It was run in parallel to the police investigation Operation Pallial 

Key numbers at a glance

6

Recommendations

​

Months to complete

2.5

Cost in millions      (if known)

​

Deaths (direct)

Recommendations

The Macur Review (2016) was less about social reform and more about the integrity of the legal process. Because it found no evidence of a high-level cover-up, its recommendations were technical and administrative rather than sweeping changes to child protection law.


The UK Government accepted all six recommendations in full.


Summary of Macur Review Recommendations

The recommendations were primarily aimed at ensuring future inquiries do not repeat the administrative failures found in the North Wales investigation.

#

Recommendation

Focus

1

Inquiry Integrity

Future inquiries must be "above reproach" in their establishment to ensure public trust from the start.

2

Evidence Preservation

Strict protocols must be in place for the preservation and correct archiving of all inquiry materials.

3

Data Management

Every government department must maintain an accurate database of the documents and materials they hold.

4

Criminal Priority

Due criminal process (police investigation) is the best way to handle unresolved allegations, not new public inquiries.

5

Police Referral

Specific unresolved allegations identified during the review should be referred to the police (Operation Pallial).

6

Hindsight Bias

Caution should be exercised when using "hindsight" to judge past decisions made by authorities.


Podcasts by Inquests and Inquiries

Podcasts by other providers

Downloadable files


Select videos

Some useful videos  (if available)

Video slider

Useful playlist (if available)

bottom of page