Conclusion

Abstract

Murphy summarises the main findings of this investigation into blame at public inquiries. He argues that the linguistic pragmatic approach taken in analysing the written and oral evidence is the right one and points to the indirect nature by which blame is achieved discursively from start to finish. Murphy goes on to discuss the value, as he sees it, of blame achieved through non-adversarial legal action—since it allows justice to be accessed without the view of some that it is motivated by financial reward. He concludes with some recommendations, including the process of establishing inquiries being made more democratic and compelling inquiry chairs to communicate their findings in plain English.