The Press Complaints Commission addressed inaccuracies published by The Guardian regarding Martin Narey and the historical child abuse case involving Neville Husband. The letters in question falsely claimed Narey refused to apologize for the abuse and implied his tolerance of it, despite him being out of the prison service during the incidents. Narey clarified that he had expressed regret previously and that the Guardian failed to provide him a right of reply before publishing the letters.

1. The Press Complaints Commission publicstatement about The
Guardian, MartinNarey,and Medomsley Detention Centre:
[The Guardian]newspaper published tworeaders' letters which
claimed that[Martin Narey]had refused or declined to apologise
for child abuse that had taken place in the prison system at the
hands of Neville Husband.The newspaper had been aware that
the abuse had taken place long before the complainanthad even
joined the prison service, and that the victims had sued the Home
Office when he no longer was in the service and was not therefore
in a position to publicly apologise on its behalf. It had known that
there was no question of him declining toapologise to the families,
yet published the letters anyway.The complainanthad contacted
the newspaper in regardto each of these inaccuracies but it had
consistently failed to afford him a rightof reply.
And the letter from Martin Narey which the PCC compelled The
Guardian to publish:
“On April 14, EricAllison and Simon Hattenstone wrote an
importantpiece about the historicabuse of children in custody by
a Prison Officer, Neville Husband. Itook little issue with Eric's
moving account.
Subsequently however the Guardian published twoletters. The
first said that I had declined to apologise for the abuse (and
because of that had been unsuitable to lead Barnardo's as I did for
six years). The second implied that, as Director General of the
Prison Service I had tolerated the widespread rape and beating of
children.
Husband's offending began when I was thirteen years of age and
the offences for which he was subsequently convicted took place
in 1977 when I was still at University, five years before I joined the
Prison Service and twenty one years before I became Director
General. Later,when Husband's victims sued the Prison Service, I

2. had resigned from the Home Office and was in no position to
make a response. The Guardian knew from E mail exchanges
however, that I stood ready to make public my personal apology,
and that I had, many years ago, expressed regretabout the abuse.
I do not deny the appalling nature of Husband's crimes. Butit
should not have needed me to complain to the Press Complaints
Commission before this letter was published to make clear that the
abuse did not occur when I was in a position of authority, and that
I did not tolerate the abuse or fail to express my regretfor it.
I may have had many failings as Director General of the Prison
Service. But failing to address the abuse of prisoners of any age
was not one of them.”