Measures unveiled by the UK government to protect children from sexual abuse have been described as deeply disappointing by the chair of the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse and “worse than useless” by abuse survivors. Alexis Jay said she was “deeply disappointed” by the new legislation. “The victims are upset and angry and I’m not surprised. It’s a fudge and an opportunity missed,” she told the BBC. “I am deeply disappointed in it and very much more so for the victims and survivors who had such high expectations that what the inquiry had recommended was going to be implemented,” she said. “They are upset. They are angry at this and it’s not surprising.” The long-awaited “duty to report” legislation, set out in an amendment to the criminal justice bill, was described as falling far below recommendations of the seven-year independent inquiry into child sexual abuse (IICSA) and has triggered outrage from campaigners and lawyers. The IICSA’s final report in 2022 said a new criminal offence should be created for people working in positions of trust who failed to report allegations of child sexual abuse. Michael Causton, of Voices Unbound, a support group for survivors of abuse at private schools, said: “The government’s ‘mandatory reporting’ amendment to the criminal justice bill is a confused and contradictory sham. It is worse than useless. This legislation will put back the cause of getting good law in place to protect children today in any institution, from schools and care homes to hospitals and sports clubs. Failure to report abuse of a child should be a criminal offence punishable through the court system.” Under the new law, those who fail to comply with the “duty to report” will be liable for sanctions from their professional regulator or the Disclosure and Barring Service. It will only be if someone deliberately tries to stop a report of child sexual abuse that criminal sanctions will apply, which could lead to up to seven years in prison. The Home Office contested the campaigners’ interpretation of the legislation, saying the measures would create a legal requirement for those taking part in regulated activities to report if they witness child sexual abuse or a child discloses sexual abuse. “We are also creating a new criminal offence which will apply where anyone deliberately tries to stop a report of child sexual abuse being made under the mandatory reporting duty,” a spokesperson said. “Anyone, including those who are not engaged in regulated professions, found guilty of this offence could face up to seven years’ imprisonment.” Campaigners argue that the government’s amendment means the potential seven-year sentence only applies to “officers of the crown” – diplomats and the armed forces, very few of whom ever work with children. They say headteachers, football club managers, scout leaders or care home executives can decide to delay reporting abuse until they think it is in the child’s best interests for them to do so. “The amendment states that ‘this section applies to persons in the service of the crown’, and the mention of ‘a person’ in the description of the offence must be read in that context,” said Jonathan West, the director of Mandate Now, a campaign group for the introduction of a law requiring staff who work in “regulated activities” to report all sexual abuse of children. “The formal definition of servant of the crown is a person holding an office or employment under the crown,” he said. “Broadly this means the armed forces, diplomats, etc. It does not mean all government employees and it most certainly does not mean the whole population. “Further, there is no limit in the wording to the duration of the delay in someone reporting abuse – it is for as long as the potential reporter believes it is in the child’s best interest to delay,” he added. “In effect this permits an indefinite delay since at any time the potential reporter is challenged over not having reported, they can say that they are merely delaying and that a moment when it is in the child’s best interest to report has not yet been reached.” Campaigners also say the bill does not mandate reporting of suspicions or indicators of abuse. It says that only hard evidence – seeing the abuse or photographs of it taking place, or disclosure by the child or the abuser – triggers that duty. “There’s no real punishment,” said Alex Renton, a survivor and campaigning author. “Evidence from other countries is that effective child safety needs to be backed by clear sanctions for failure to report. None are specified in this legislation, except for where someone intentionally prevents another from making a report.” West said the new duty to report “will not significantly change the behaviour of those responsible for the care of children and will make almost no difference to the number of child sexual abuse reports made, and the government knows and intends this”. He added: “The government’s own estimates of the effect of its legislation is a rise [of] in the range 1% to 3% in the number of reports, which is trivial in comparison to what it knows needs to be done.”