LORD Steel has said he was “relieved” an investigation launched after he gave evidence about child abuse allegations against former MP Sir Cyril Smith concluded there were “no grounds for action”.
The former Liberal leader had been suspended by the LibDems while the probe – sparked by evidence he gave to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) – was carried out.
The former Holyrood presiding officer said a conversation with Smith had left him “assuming” the allegations were correct, but that the party did not investigate them. An internal party investigation was carried out by the Scottish LibDems.
Party leader Willie Rennie said this had “determined, after careful consideration, that there are no grounds for action against David Steel”.
His suspension has now been lifted, with Lord Steel saying the party has “cleared my name”. He said: “I am naturally pleased and relieved the executive of the Scottish Liberal Democrats has completed their investigation and, after fully considering my responses to questions at IICSA, has lifted my suspension from the party and cleared my name.”
He said he had “offered open and honest answers [to the child abuse inquiry], some of which have been erroneously reported and taken out of context”.
He continued: “These inaccurate elements led some to question my own such commitment. Opinions and assumptions are not facts and those expressed in some quarters have caused me great personal distress ... I have always acted to uphold the highest standards. I look forward to contributing to the party’s cause and focusing on the shared commitment we have had for many years, which is to lead to improve the life opportunities of all young people, especially those who have had the toughest start.”
Rennie said it was important the party had carried out the investigation because “we take the issue of vigilance and safeguarding incredibly seriously”. But he stated: “The clarifications David Steel has provided to us state clearly that Cyril Smith did not confess to any criminality which is why he took no further action at the time.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here