ABSTRACT
This chapter examines how categorisation and accountability are features of communication in an atypical encounter, the questioning of social workers as witnesses in a public inquiry. It suggests that investigating the examination of the talk of social workers' witnesses in public inquiries offers opportunities for understanding the construction of social work talk, but such requires caution. Whilst there might be considerable overlap between the notions of support and protection, policy-makers, managers and practitioners have tended to treat them as distinct. Estimates are made of those ‘in need’ and those ‘at risk’, and procedures entail distinctions between how cases should be handled. In the inquiry, the witnesses were questioned by the inquiry barrister, followed by a short re-examination by the witness’s barrister and sometimes additional questions by the chairman. Whilst witnesses in public inquiries are not on trial, they can be subjected to questioning which goes beyond merely disclosing the facts, challenging their competency, plausibility and integrity.
