SURVIVORS have accused the Scottish Government of “becoming complicit in the cover-up of abuse” as a row over the remit of the inquiry into the historical child abuse intensifies.

In an angry email to Education Secretary Angela Constance, Alan Draper, parliamentary liaison officer for In Care Abuse Survivors, claimed many institutions would escape public scrutiny if the Government did not include non-residential settings such as church parishes, schools and children’s and youth organisations within the inquiry’s scope.

“When we made our submission to Government we asked that the inquiry should cover all organisations and institutions which had a duty of care for young people. Your Government, however, limited the remit primarily to residential institutions,” he wrote in his email sent on Monday night.

“This decision resulted in many victims, who had suffered grievous abuse, being excluded from the inquiry. We are of the view that this decision has enabled institutions and organisations, who have covered up criminal activity, to escape public scrutiny, and possible prosecution. The failure to extend the remit of the inquiry has effectively resulted in the Government becoming complicit in a cover-up of abuse.”

Draper's intervention comes a week after it emerged court action is being threatened to force the Government to widen the inquiry. Another survivors' group, White Flowers Alba, said it was seeking a judicial review because the inquiry will not look at all cases it was concerned about.

It also wants the inquiry to extend its examination of abuse to include incidents involving priests in local parishes, in day schools such as council nurseries or primaries, and in movements such as Scouts or Army cadets.

Draper raised concerns in his email about whether any extra funding would be given to Police Scotland to take on possible historical abuse cases referred to them by the inquiry.

He also hit out over what he claimed was the Government’s failure to properly address the issue of compensation payments.

“At meetings with officials about redress, it became clear that they had instructions to shut down any discussions about compensation or interim payments for sick and elderly survivors. This has caused considerable distress amongst survivors as they feel that they had been failed yet again by the establishment,” he wrote. “Instead, the Government offered victims a support scheme; whilst having some positives, it did not meet the aspirations, or reasonable expectations of survivors.

“What survivors want is for the damage to be repaired, for ongoing support to be put in place, and for reasonable compensation, not just for the damage caused but for the lost opportunities.”

The inquiry formally began on October 1 with chair Susan O’Brien QC calling for those who believe they have information to share to make initial contact. A spokeswoman said at the time the inquiry would “focus on an explicit remit within a set timeframe”.

Constance said consultations were also completed on plans to lift the three-year time bar for civil action in cases of historical child abuse since September 1964.

The inquiry, which could take up to four years and is Scotland’s biggest public inquiry to date, will cover allegations of abuse of children in formal institutional care including faith-based organisations, children’s homes and secure care as well as those in foster care, long-term hospital care and boarding schools.

It covers the period “within living memory’’ up to December 17 last year and will have the power to compel witnesses to attend and give evidence.

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “This is one of the most wide-ranging public inquiries Scotland has ever seen and part of a range of measures we are taking to support survivors of abuse. The initial call was for an inquiry into the abuse of children in institutional care. We have listened carefully to survivors of abuse and responded to their request for the scope to be widened. There are a wide range of survivors with differing views but many told us they did not want a scope that was so wide that it would never report in a reasonable timescale."