Inquiry and Panels

The original panel had just two 'survivors ' on it, Wilmer and Evans.
They didn't get on the panel through some open competition, that much is clear
They got on because of connections.
Its called you scratch my back.....

Governments acting through the relevant minister appoint chairs and panels
quite often it seems to their own advantage
Both are  likely to be appointed on a form of patronage system, panel members more conventionally so but lower down the scale of importance
Current panels were appointed by public application, not via nod and a wank
and no, you dont get to know exact details, same as with any application


The public don't really get a say in the matter
The CSAi was unusual, in that 2 chairs were effectively vetoed out by sections of the public and media
This isn't usual, but I don't think Gvt or May had any real interest in the Inquiry, so were not too bothered apart from PR implications
May was more interested in a possible upcoming leadership election, than an Inquiry that had little top level interest
That said, having lost 2 chairs ( the latter having managed a gong for going ) she was unlikely to want to lose a third - that would be a chair too far.She was highly likely to route her search abroad to avoid the contamination issue that had removed the previous 2
Note here Exaro named some local as the next chair - obviously hot tippers

Public dont get to choose the chair, or panel or many other aspects of an Inquiry, whether for good or bad
Lesser positions like panel members might be awarded on the back scratching principle by third parties for a range of reasons
A backbench MP who may be associated with the campaign for the Inquiry may be offered inducements, or sweetners eg to nominate a few associates, on a nod and a wink
That placates them and goes some way to ensuring their complicity in approving the Inquiry.
His mates who get appointed, owe him one.
This may also help said MP, in his parliamentry career, to be first to report stories he's known to campaign on. The same stories may be routed through odd intenet news agencies, who will make money by selling them on to larger media. This relationship helps politician and media, and who knows where the cash goes to, brown envelope time
It also helps survivor panel members who not only have their daily  panel fee, but also a nose in the funding trough.This in turn will ensure they groom other survivors into 'coming out' via same internet news agency, meaning even more money. What might have been their secret, is now an asset with a price tag.
Who knows how accounts may be 'sexed up' to use the Iraq terminology, by including known MP's names from other sources, suddenly suggested to a survivor in such a way that it would mean their story would be news.
Some may be able to resist the lure, whilst others may not, or may have been attracted by the prospect to begin with

real journalism???

no, money and power, same as the rest

Reflections is just a small part of that seedy process, setup by a few seedy individuals themselves, and non too bright at that, including Wanking Wilmer, the batshit crazy psycho

If anyone trusts any of that lot, don't say you weren't warned.