Royal Commission Q&a: Salvation Army's Floyd Tidd Talks about Apology, Compensation Settlements and Rebuilding Trust

By Candice Marcus
ABC News
October 15, 2015

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-15/salvation-armys-floyd-tidd-talks-about-apology-compensation/6857522

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has wrapped up in Adelaide after hearing harrowing accounts of abuse and cruelty at Salvation Army run children's homes.

One of the men at the centre of the Salvation Army's response is territorial commander Floyd Tidd, who sat through the seven-day hearing.

He spoke to reporter Candice Marcus on the final day of the hearing.

Q. Commissioner Tidd thanks for your time. You've delivered a comprehensive apology at the royal commission to the survivors, what is the Salvation Army's message to the survivors?

The message to survivors is one of an unconditional apology, as I've listened again this week to the evidence and testimony given by survivors I've been deeply moved and deeply distressed.

These were children, they were all blameless and they suffered under the care of the Salvation Army and so I offer to each and every one of them, personally and also as the leader of the Salvation Army, an unreserved apology.

They should not have experienced that which was their reality.

Q. You've ordered a review into 418 past compensation settlements, why just limit that review to identifying outliers or inconsistencies in payments?

What we're looking for in this review is where there has been an inconsistency, we're really looking to assess in the 418 cases that there has been a fair and there has been a consistent approach to all of the cases.

Q. But why not reopen all of those claims, isn't it possible that the bulk of the claims may have been inadequate payments in the eyes of the survivors?

Until there's a response to the recommendation of the national redress recommendations it's uncertain for us to begin to measure what is the appropriate organisational response.

We're really looking from an organisational view, have we been consistent and fair? The interim arrangements we have made and the consideration that we're giving is consistent with the recommendations for interim response by the royal commission's recommendation into redress.

Q. But isn't time of the essence in terms of settling any redress issues with these survivors?

We recognise that and that's why we're looking at all 418 claims and I anticipate that study, that review, will be completed before the end of this year.

Q. We've heard during the royal commission that the average payment to survivors from the Salvation Army is about $40,000, do you think that's adequate?

I think that's a point that we'll be looking at in the review and we'd be looking for a response from the national redress recommendations.

Q. You've said that the Salvation Army supports the recommendation for a national redress scheme, one of the recommendations was for a maximum of $200,000 compensation, do you support that element of a redress scheme?

Having just received the recommendation report three weeks ago we're currently working through all the elements and so the element of the maximum and even the average amount we're not able yet to give a full response to.

Q. What will happen if a national redress scheme isn't adopted? What will be the options for survivors in terms of having their claims looked at?

That is a bridge we'd have to cross when we come to it, if we come to that. But I think we'd want to also recognise that we continue to work with states that are operating currently redress programs or are seeking to develop redress programs.

PHOTO: Survivors and protesters spent time outside the royal commission hearings in Adelaide to voice their concerns. (ABC News: Candice Marcus)

Q. Are you aware that many survivors are still unhappy with how they're being treated by the Salvation Army, in fact one of them threw rubber snakes at your feet this week during the commission. Are you aware that there's still a sentiment of unhappiness with the Salvation Army?

I recognise that there are some survivors who are still unhappy with the Salvation Army, and any of the survivors as I've indicated in my opening address to the royal commission I'm prepared to meet with them personally, hear their story, hear their point of concern and see what can be done to assist them.

I'm also aware from my own interaction with a number of survivors that they are feeling more comfortable with the Salvation Army's response to them.

Q. You've taken on this role fairly recently, you've come from Canada. How much of your role is about smoothing over public perception of the Salvation Army and rebuilding that trust?

I think it's important in my role as the territorial leader of the Salvation Army's Australia southern territory to ensure the public know that they can trust us, that where we have failed in the past we are not denying nor defending, we are seeking to work with survivors to find healing and wholeness and we are

revisiting all of our policies and practices to ensure this never happens again.

Q. Have donations to the Salvation Army been affected in recent times as a result of things like the royal commission?

Over the last couple of years we have seen a downward trend in some of our Red Shield collecting but we would recognise and want to articulate clearly that no Red Shield dollars, donations from the public, are actually used in our redress or in dealing with the royal commission. What have been factors, and we have done some external review of our own fundraising, there have been a number of factors that have affected our recent downturn in donations.

Q. How committed are you to walking the walk rather than just talking the talk, as you said to the royal commission?

I think my commitment to that is firm and resolved, I owe it and I have committed it to a survivor directly and each time I listen to a story of any survivor or I speak to any worker in the Salvation Army who works with children, that commitment is reaffirmed each day.