THE Government is considering a statute of limitations on historic child abuse cases.

This could mean that, in cases that occurred ten years and more ago, the offenders will not be brought to justice.

The argument is that evidence can be unreliable, the deployment of resources to investigate allegations could be disproportionate and consequently the verdicts could be unsafe.

I personally recognise that in many cases it takes years for the victim to come to terms with what has happened to them and to find the strength and courage to make the allegations public.

If the limit is ten years, and the offence was committed when the victim was only five, six or seven, for example, then we are expecting them to come forward at the latest in their teens.

It is my view that a civilised society should take all steps possible to protect its children and to punish those who would steal a child's innocence and childhood. Some crimes should not go unpunished, no matter how long after the event.

I am trying to determine the views of Londoners on this issue and would ask your readers to write to me at the London Assembly with their views.

Should there be a time limit to prosecution or should paedophiles always live with the fear of prosecution?

RICHARD BARNES,

GLA, Ealing and Hillingdon,

Conservative spokesman,

crime and disorder

July 18, 2002 12:00