Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Haringey Council Leader resigns
Tags for Forum Posts: Ally Pally, george meehan, haringey chief executive, liz santry
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
John's comment was taken down since his tongue in cheek humour was not apprrciated by a couple of members; Tongue in cheek humour removed, he said:
Anette, I think your sense of moral outrage is misplaced.
I have never heard of anyone being sacked without compensation for anything other than misconduct (e.g. stealing from your employer). Her only failing was that dreadful press conference, IMHO.
I am still pretty convinced she'll get a 7 figure payout from someone.
PS: My apologies - in doing this and trying to get this comment in the right place, I seem to have deleted some other comments - not intended.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Regarding charges or punishment, this Council was fortunate not to have faced charges of Corporate Manslaughter. The events surrounding the torture and killing of Peter Connelly preceded the extension of power of the Act, which probably would have caught the council, who would then have had some explaining to do. Haringey's lawyers know this and if it ever happens again, the incentive to cover-it-up may be greater.
(There should be a public enquiry. There are still unanswered questions. Not least, did LBH owe a duty of care to the killer of Baby P, as someone with known learning issues? They knew of him and his history. Should the council not have been monitoring him?)
Shoesmith chose to bring the case. She has not been punished beyond losing her highly paid job. Ordinary workers lose their jobs for far less reason every day but cannot afford to argue the toss. Her responsibilities covered the Council Child Protection Register. And her general attitude was that these things happen. Not responsible. The incompetence – as Anette rightly says – is not good enough. It's why Child Protection is accorded such a high weighting in Council ratings and why it causes LBH to have such a low score.
-
Permalink Reply by Mr Growbag on
-
"Shoesmith chose to bring the case. She has not been punished beyond losing her highly paid job"
Apart from widespread vilification in the national media making her probably more hated than the actual killers; the not-insubstantial damage to her career and the death threats?
-
-
No one who genuinely cares about life could support death threats. It is sad when the careers of highly paid council officers attract more sympathy than a toddler whose welfare and even life (once identified as being At Risk) depended largely on the efficient running of a council department.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
People are angered and appalled by the killing of a little boy. And by the failure of the agencies involved to protect him. (Which includes Haringey Children's Service, Health Services and Police.) But it's at times of outrage and anger that we most need considered judgement. By the courts; and by ourselves as individuals.
Lord Laming's Inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbié had two main purposes. To learn what happened and to make recommendations for avoiding such tragedies in the future. As Professor Peter Beresford wrote, the Inquiry was an opportunity to take stock and rebuild.
The horror of the murder of Peter Connelly is not lessened by the unfair vilification of Sharon Shoesmith and other professionals involved in the case. In fact, this makes it harder to protect other children, not just in Haringey but in every agency involved in protecting children across the country.
(Labour councillor & candidate Tottenham Hale.)
-
-
Alan, similar soothing words were spoken after the death of Victoria Climbié. In your remarks I'm struck by a lack of sense of urgency to fix the problems, something verging on complacency. Your interpretation of the Climbié Enquiry seems benign in the light of some of what Lord Laming said. In fact, he was highly critical of the culture at Haringey. It was a public enquiry and received national attention. Southamton Council made a response to the Department of Health of it in this pdf and I quote:
REPORT DETAILS
The Inquiry’s Conclusions
11. Lord Laming describes the extent of the failure to protect Victoria, as
“lamentable” – basic good practice would have prevented her abuse
and death. Lord Laming states, categorically, that all agencies involved
were under funded, inadequately staffed, and poorly led. Police
procedures were not followed to even elementary level. The basic
discipline of medical evaluation, covering history taking, examination,
arriving at a differential diagnosis and monitoring the outcome was not
followed. Social workers are described as “hapless”. The most
swingeing criticism, however, is reserved for senior managers:
Haringey managers such as Gurbux Singh, Mary Richardson and Chief
Executive Gareth Daniel, as well as Cllr Gina Adamou are identified as
deserving particular criticism:
… the greatest failure rests with managers and senior members
of the Authorities whose task it was to ensure that services for
children, like Victoria, were properly financed, staffed and able
to deliver good quality support to children and families……There
was also a reluctance among senior officers to accept there was
anything they could have done for Victoria. The former chief
executive of Haringey council, Gurbux Singh, said, “There is the
issue of resources…but beyond that I cannot honestly think of
what else I could have actually done to ensure that the tragedy
which happened did not happen.” This is not a view I share.
(pp4-5)
12. The Inquiry’s “single most important change in the future” involves the
drawing of a clear line of accountability, from top to bottom, without
doubt or ambiguity about who is responsible at every level for the wellbeing
of children. Many of the recommendations aim to put a stop to
what is clearly labelled “buck-passing”. The Inquiry concludes that what
is needed for the future are managers with a clear set of values about
the role of public services, particularly in addressing the needs of
vulnerable people, combined with the ability to lead from the front:
This Inquiry saw too many examples of those in senior positions
attempting to justify their work in terms of bureaucratic activity
rather than in outcomes for people. (p5)
[emphasis added in bold]
Sharon Shoesmith did not cause the culture of incompetence at Haringey Council Children's Services: she is a reflection of it. That is why in the recent High Court Decision, the Judge agreed that the OFSTED enquiry did not set out to get Shoesmith: they were looking at what went wrong and who had responsibility (responsibility was something that Lord Laming identified as sorely wanting). The sacking of Shoesmith was needed, but that does not mean the culture is changed, far from it.
Can anyone deny the persistence of the culture identified by Lord Laming? One might have supposed that after a multi-million pound public enquiry that attracted national attention, lessons might have been learned. With the death of Peter, that was not caused by Haringey but enabled by Haringey, due to bungling, casualness and incompetence: can the public have confidence that things will get better?
I submit that the culture of complacency has to change and the tolerance of poor performance has to end if things are to get better.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
You do not sack civil servants, you sack politicians.
Who was the politician who SHOULD have been sacked over Victoria Climbie and who was the politician who SHOULD have been sacked over Baby P?
-
-
Ed Balls was looking very smug on the news when asked to comment on the Shoesmith verdict, wasn't he...
-
-
when asked to comment on the Shoesmith verdict
You mean more so than usual? He is the new Portillo.
-
Permalink Reply by Old-Age-Emporium(OAE) on
-
Presumably that's why Mary Richardson, unlike Sharon Shoesmith, wasn't sacked but transferred to what seems to have been a better job as Director of Children's/Social Services in Hackney.
While George Meehan was replaced as Leader by Claire Kober after the Baby Peter case, should politicians deemed responsible for any degree of failure in either the Climbie or Connelly cases be still standing as Labour candidates to represent Harringay or Woodvale in yet another election? Labour candidates have been deselected for less.
-
-
for Woodvale read Woodside. Can't think why I nominated G. Meehan for a Belfast ward.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
