Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
BABY P LIBEL CASE – COUNCILLORS SHOULD PAY.
Is anyone wondering what our Councillors are doing and why we, the Council taxpayer, should pay High Court damages for their Libel abd incompetence.
In this case Councillors were aware and the records clearly showed that Sylvia Henry was without blame yet for months they placed blame on her and it was even on Panorama – follow this link
http://news.aol.co.uk/baby-p-social-worker-wins-case/article/201007...
Sadly there is nothing at all surprising or uncharacteristic either in their behaviour or indeed in the utter stupidity of their constant, pathological lying. If such stuff were repeated by an individual it would probably be considered not only as evidence of a serious personality disorder but also of brain damage, since you'd have to be very mentally challenged not to realise that lying on a matter that can be disproved in the public record is sure to be found out.
This is yet another example of where Harold Wilson went seriously wrong when gerrymandering the boundaries of Haringey to ensure it was forever Labour - for this is just the sort of thing Politicians try to get away with in a one party state.
How did it ever get as far as Court let alone the High Court and who sanctioned it that far along the legal chain? Only arrogance and an inability to eat humble pie and say sorry could get this matter so far.
We should not have to pay for this. The individual Councillors and their legal team that took it all the way to the High Court should pay.
John Leach
In this case Councillors were aware and the records clearly showed that Sylvia Henry was without blame yet for months they placed blame on her and it was even on Panorama – follow this link
http://news.aol.co.uk/baby-p-social-worker-wins-case/article/201007...
Sadly there is nothing at all surprising or uncharacteristic either in their behaviour or indeed in the utter stupidity of their constant, pathological lying. If such stuff were repeated by an individual it would probably be considered not only as evidence of a serious personality disorder but also of brain damage, since you'd have to be very mentally challenged not to realise that lying on a matter that can be disproved in the public record is sure to be found out.
This is yet another example of where Harold Wilson went seriously wrong when gerrymandering the boundaries of Haringey to ensure it was forever Labour - for this is just the sort of thing Politicians try to get away with in a one party state.
How did it ever get as far as Court let alone the High Court and who sanctioned it that far along the legal chain? Only arrogance and an inability to eat humble pie and say sorry could get this matter so far.
We should not have to pay for this. The individual Councillors and their legal team that took it all the way to the High Court should pay.
John Leach
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John W Leach on
-
Thanks for this. I have been very nervous as to what reaction it would draw as it is the first time I have posted but felt something had to be said. Its just crazy the way our Councillors behave and they would be more careful if it were thier own money and had to fight to retain their seats..
John.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
THE information at the link above ("Baby P social worker wins case") is disturbing. It suggests a Childrens Service that is dysfunctional and moreover, dysfunctional years after the public enquiry into the tragic killing of Victoria Climbié. The case of Baby P was worse on many levels.
The report suggests that someone at a senior level was prepared to let a social worker at a lower level take blame unfairly and unjustly. Were they deliberately lying? Are our taxes being used to make good damage caused by Haringey deliberately telling falsehoods? We don't know who it was who did this: a senior person or persons seem to be responsible for a cover-up at a minimum. In turn, they appear to be sheltered by people above them.
The person or persons responsible for besmirching the name of Sylvia Henry may still be employed by Haringey. Is this healthy? Once again, the Haringey culture of secrecy plus the terms of the court settlement, act to protect parties whose conduct appears to be unethical at a minimum. The Children's Service is unreformed. The seeds of the next Baby P are all in place.
One of the placards carried by a young woman protester outside the Civic Centre, at the time of the Baby P debate, read: "Cleanse Haringey". The cleansing is not done and the evidence of this case, as well as information on the grapevine, suggests that the diseased culture in Haringey Childrens' Services continues.
Former Childrens' Secretary Ed Balls called for the sacking of a number of leading characters at Haringey. He took tough action against some political party colleagues. Was the quid pro quo that he would resist calls for a public enquiry?
I sincerely hope that the result of this libel action in the High Court will provide further evidence, if more were needed, for a full public enquiry into the Baby P case.
.
-
Permalink Reply by Lydia R on
-
We can draw a lesson from Alan Dobbie's fall from grace.
I have no particular affection, or even respect for the man and care little about his political career but he was a popular Haringey Councillor for years and years and years: as long as he was a Labour placeholder. When he went over to the Conservatives, his consituents did not re-elect him. Why? Were they not satisfied with his work? If so, why had he been elected so many times before?
The obvious answer is that a majority of the people in Tottenham will vote Labour without even thinking about the quality or morality of its representatives and depressingly enough this is because many of them are being bribed or blackmailed in some way.
With voters like that, why would the local governance need to waste any time at all in the real world?
The Climbié case, the Alexandra Palace debacle, the Wards Corner battle, the Nerves Kemal witchhunt -- they all ended up in the courts instead of being avoided or settled through the accepted channels here in Haringey because our Council has completely lost any ability for self-regulation, self-control, or rational self-examination.
If forcing Councillors to shell out induces them to concentrate a little, then it might accomplish what democratic institutions are powerless to achieve in this neck of the woods.
-
Permalink Reply by Sandi on
-
"The obvious answer is that a majority of the people in Tottenham will vote Labour without even thinking about the quality or morality of its representatives and depressingly enough this is because many of them are being bribed or blackmailed in some way."
Really! And you have proof of this do you Lydia? I have family and a fair few friends in Tottenham; many of them have voted Labour all their lives, after much thought and without corruption. The depressing thing here is the nonsense you talk! And if it isn't nonsense and you have PROOF that corruption is indeed rife in the voting patterns of the Tottenham electorate, then I take it you have already contacted the Electoral Commission with this info? I'm guessing no here; a bit of 'self-regulation, self-control, or rational self-examination' wouldn't go amiss in your direction before you cast aspertions on how electors vote.
-
-
I have stood outside a polling booth in Seven Sisters during an election, and listened to a Councillor promising a group of voters about to go in that should the three Labour candidates be elected, the local community centre would be allocated more funds. I have also been told of another incident which happened in front of witnesses, where a Labour Councillor threatened a Conservative candidate by telling him all the planning permission for extensions in his neighbourhood would be refused if he ran. I have other incidents I could list but it is boring and unproductive. If you think that it is worth the hassle of dealing with this stuff through the electoral commission, then you have more time than me, whoever you are.
-
-
Unchallenged???? My goodness, FilmExposed--you are heartbreakingly honest about yourself, aren't you? Respect.
-
-
Left myself wide open there didn't I Lydia - that's what happens when you engage the keyboard before the brain, and forget to self-edit. You knew exactly what I meant, but to be clear.
Apart from what I see as electioneering and hearsay you cite as examples, you still haven't explained how this accounts for majority of the people in Tottenham voting the way they do as a result of being bribed or blackmailed.
The heartbreakingly depressing thing here is you taking these examples and making the most riduculous of arguments.
-
-
I have to make the point that I am not electioneering. I am not a member of a political party nor have I associated myself with one in about four years. However I did run as a Conservative Candidate in Tottenham on several occasions and I had experiences with various members of the local Labour Party which truly shocked me. This isn't hearsay, things happened to *me*. Furthermore, I got stories from my tellers at elections, reporting to me about incidents which I had to make formal complaints about to the election officers. Again, not hearsay. Also, I have involved myself in non-political action on all sorts of issues, from the closedown of St. Ann's, the Firoka scandal with Alexandra Palace, CPZs in Stroud Green, as well as doing some of my own ad hoc affirmative action, organising the demos at the Civic Centre after the Baby P revelations, for instance. In all that work I met and listened to a lot of people and got a good, broad picture of the political situation in various parts of Tottenham. Whether you like my political opinions or not, you must give me credit for experience. As I said, Alan Dobbie was a long standing Councillor who lost his safe place on the council only when he left the Labour Party. This is proof in itself that people are just blindly voting along party lines. This is not healthy and it is not democratic. I don't think it is doing Tottenham any good. It certainly didn't do Peter Connelly any good.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
"I have also been told of another incident which happened in front of witnesses."
Allegations are easy to make, Lydia. Admittedly hard to substantiate - even when true. Though, even if untrue, they're often harder to refute. But if any of the political parties or candidates have pretensions to integrity, transparency, or even a 'new politics', we all need to challenge incidents of apparent 'threats', bribes and 'blackmail'.
Even when this seems a 'hassle'.
If a threat was made "in front of witnesses" your contact could have dealt "with this stuff" through the Standards Committee.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor.)
-
-
How foolish of Haringey Council to blame their struggling social workers when there were clear instances of professional negligence by the Police and Health services.
How foolish of Ed Balls to use scapegoating as a way to deal with difficult issues.
Accountability seems to have gone out of fashion.
-
-
Accountability seems to have gone out of fashion
In Haringey's Childrens' Services, I'm not sure when it was in fashion. One might have thought after a multi-million pound Public Enquiry into the death of Victoria Climbié, Haringey might have learnt some lessons. Instead, they return a few years later with a case that is even worse. They have learnt less than nothing. And the deceit is breathtaking. I would like to know who is responsible
How on earth did this libel case go all the way to the High Court? Some person or persons in Haringey must have decided that this case was defendable and yet it finishes with an unreserved apology. I am beginning to think there are some in LBH who are simply evil.
I'm inclined to agree with the original poster. Until and unless councillors take personal responsibility for their decisions in a meaningful way, they will continue to behave irresponsibly.
To illustrate with an example not a million miles away, the Haringey Councillors on the Alexandra Palace Trust Board are indemnified by the council (i.e. with yours and my taxes). Normally, Trustees have a Fiduciary Duty to beneficiaries (in this case, us) and are liable personally for breaches of trust. But because of the indemnity, this extra sanction has no meaning and has encouraged reckless decisions.
Until the culture of lies, deceit, secrecy and cover-up in Haringey Childrens' Services improves, unfortunately another death on the Child Protection Register is inevitable. A new public enquiry might get to the bottom of this.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
