Just scanned through it and, as might be expected, it's all very generalised. There is absolutely nothing that would hold Celtic FC or the SFA to account.
One recommendation, though, suggests that sponsors contribute to a fund that would offer 'support and assistance' to those who have experienced abuse in Scottish football.
This should surely be the responsibility of the club or organisation in question.
RECOMMENDATION 94
The Independent Review recommends that the Scottish FA and clubs and organisations in Scottish football consider the establishment of a permanent testimonial to the experiences of and impact on those affected including consideration of the creation of a fund which might underwrite support and assistance for those who have been personally affected by sexual abuse in Scottish football and indeed those in Scottish football who are experiencing other mental health challenges and issues. The Review sees no reason why this might not also be contributed to or underwritten by commercial donation and sponsorship.
I thought these points might be important.
1.10 Consequently, the Review cannot, for the purposes of this Interim Report, answer the specific questions set by the Terms of Reference
“Who in Scottish Football knew of these alleged instances of sexual abuse at the time or subsequently?; what did they know? and what was done?”. Our findings in relation to these questions are now reserved for the Final Report. Essentially these questions and our conclusions concern issues of direct accountability and responsibility which we still strongly believe must still be aired to ensure lessons are learned and the serious concerns of those affected and those of the wider public are addressed.
1.16 In the process of our consideration of allegations of non-recent sexual abuse we requested access to records relating to these alleged events or any other relevant information held. No football Club was able to furnish the Review with records pertaining to either individuals or to decisions made or knowledge held at the Club at that time. This therefore creates gaps in our wider understanding of how concerns were dealt with and the outcomes of any attempt to address these. These issues are dealt with directly in the Final Report and not within this Interim Report.
However, one senior club, following an internal review in 2016, did provide the Review with information concerning their findings and records of this internal review.
2.49
The ‘bystander’ effect has been a significant and prominent issue related to how sexual abuse has been viewed and dealt with according to the accounts of those who have come forward.
2.50 It is clear from many accounts provided that other people had observations, information or direct experiences leading them to have some level of suspicion – sometimes considerable – about behaviours which constituted potential risk to young people within a club. This included young players being ‘warned’ by older boys to avoid certain adults or accounts of other adults being present when clearly inappropriate and concerning sexual language and behaviour was used by other adults with young players. Commonly when this was the case such circumstances were ‘neutralised’ by ‘humorous’ banter having the effect of further adding to the determination of the young player concerned to remain silent. Additionally, it had the effect of ‘normalising’ this conduct within the club context and desensitising all young players further. Young players apparently had no recourse to question or to ‘check out’ their concerns with each other or with adults burdening young people with a sense of responsibility and complicity.
2.51
Where silence persists the conduct of those who pose a risk to young people is emboldened since this is taken as implying that such behaviour can continue with impunity and with little possibility of detection or challenge.
Decisions to leave football
2.54 Sadly, many who have made allegations of sexual abuse in football eventually made the decision to leave the game as a direct consequence of the experiences they described to the Review. However, the Review has also learned of situations where young players were apparently still pursued with the alleged abuser continuing to exploit relationships with parents and family as a means to continuing abusive activity with a young player.
2.55 It has been noted with particular concern by the Review that a number of talented young footballers inexplicably and suddenly stopped playing at the time yet no-one from the coaching or managerial staff of the club made any attempt to establish with them the reasons for this. Had this been done, it is not to say that the young player would have been any more likely to have spoken out about their experiences, but it certainly would have provided an opportunity for them to do so and indicated a clear and ongoing duty of care on the part of the club.
2.56 It was a feature of the information provided to the Review that young players considered themselves viewed primarily as 'potential assets' rather than individual young people with different needs, hopes and aspirations. Where one young player left a club, they were simply replaced with another equally talented player. It is evident that this would be strikingly apparent to other young players remaining at the club and again would contribute to ensuring a culture of silence for those who may have been experiencing abuse themselves.
For those with continuing aspirations to a career in professional football the message was apparent ….. they either had to endure what was happening or leave. If they chose to leave this was not sufficiently important for anyone at the club to care or to listen.