You are on page 1of 2


Subject: Parliamentary Warden of St Margaret's Church Westminster Abbey, Sir Peter Bottomley
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016
Dear Dean and Canons of Westminster Abbey,
I refer to the Parliamentary Warden of St Margaret's Church, Sir Peter Bottomley MP, whom I do not
suggest has been involved in wrongdoing.
In 1989 a Greenwich councillor wrote to Sir Peter accusing him of:
(a) Taking steps to protect a care worker who had, allegedly, sexually abused children's home
residents (the alleged paedophile is referred to herein as 'X'); and
(b) Taking steps to cover up the alleged abuse by 'X', including by (in the judgement of the
councillor) "intimidating" children's home residents who took part in a demonstration pleading that
officials, including Sir Peter, do more to protect them from sexual abuse and harm.
The councillor wrote:
"['X'] ... having abused children in one Children's Home [Green Lane] was transferred
to [Melanie Klein House] where he raped one girl, sexually abused others and
supplied children with dope. ['X'] was being protected by...yourself [Sir Peter
"I have been aware of your attempts to protect ['X'] and avoid a proper Inquiry into
Green Lane and Melanie Klein..." and I assume [your letter] to be a part of the
continuing intimidation of young people and attempts to cover up events at Melanie
(Original letter: Background information:
Sir Peter's conduct in the Melanie Klein affair came in for further criticism in 1994. A magazine
called 'Scallywag' published the following (issue 22):
"...[If] he had absolutely nothing to hide, why did he [Sir Peter] barrack (to the point of
dementia), the people holding a disciplinary hearing into serious child abuse at the
Melanie Klein children's home in Greenwich?

And why, when Thames television began an investigation into the situation at the
home, did he embark on an unprecedented screaming match not just with the
programme but with the hierarchy of the Thames board, to have the film
"[Sir Peter] argued at the time that ['X'] was one of his constituents and he felt the
man was being unfairly treated. He decided this without seeing any evidence, nor
even asking for it. ...[Sir Peter] was 'heavy-handed, bullying and reckless'."
(Original article:
In light of the special position that Sir Peter holds in St Margaret's Church Westminster Abbey, the
Dean and Cannons, and indeed child protection and safeguarding personnel, will wish urgently to
make inquiries with a view to establishing whether the above criticisms of Sir Peter were valid/fair.
Again, there is no suggestion by me that your Parliamentary Warden is guilty of any wrongdoing. I
simply wish to know, from a child protection standpoint, what the facts are.
I look forward to receiving a timely response.
Yours sincerely.