Category Archives: Blog

Wightman Road Mosque

Posted on by

Last night visited Wightman Road Mosque as part of Islam Awareness Week. Spoke to the Community Safety Forum set up so that we all in Haringey can work across our differences. There was a really large turnout and lots and lots of questions.

I want to pay tribute to Wightman Road Mosque and all who work there and in the Forum for the work they do in reaching out to the community, the integration work that goes on, the work with young Muslims and the genuine warmth that exists there.

I was particularly struck by the anger over the issue raised by a couple of people there about the language used by the media that still seeks so often to somehow link the word Muslim and terrorist – and I agree – that the media needs to understand what damage that does. Many terrorists are not Muslim. Many victims of terrorism are Muslim. But too often the media puts the two words together as if neither of these were the case.

I suggested that every time any one there sees such pejorative language they take it up directly with the media outlet. Recorded complaints are effective – as we saw the BBC over Ross/Brandt. But it should be public pressure, not legislation, that is used to tackle this issue.

It was a lively evening with lots of good questions on the Middle East, Iraq, free speech and much more. What was impressive as well was the desire to participate and someone else raised the issue of where can young people debate politics – without actually joining a political party. And I thought that was a very good question – as outside of the UK Youth Parliament, which is for younger people than this audience, there isn’t really a forum. So – I think we should look at how we might create one.

We need a fresh start in Haringey

Posted on by

Ed Balls made a statement to the House of Commons on Thursday about the Baby P case and the actions he was taking. Mr Balls was able to say to most questions essentially – I will wait until I get the report from the urgent investigation I have commissioned and then I will decide and act.

Understandable – except none of us have had access to the Serious Case Review full document. In response to requests by myself, David Laws (Lib Dem spokesperson on Children and Schools) and Michael Gove (Conservative spokesperson) Ed Balls has said that the Information Commissioner has ruled that such a document cannot be published – though as Iain Dale reports, that doesn’t seem to be the full story.

My tack, when Madam Deputy Speaker called me to ask my question in response to Ed Balls statement, was to call for three things to happen so that Haringey can have a new, fresh start – which is what we desperately need.

Firstly that those accountable must go – and the Children’s Act 2004 names those key accountable posts. It came into being because of Victoria Climbie’s death and Lord Laming’s subsequent report – so we should make sure the lesson learnt then is followed now.

Secondly – that Haringey be put under special measures so that we can be held safe whilst things are being resolved.

And thirdly that there would still be a need for a public inquiry because the two week urgent investigation cannot possibly touch on the wider issues. I give you two examples. Firstly, budgetary pressures. It became clear from the figures about how many children were taken into care in Haringey before and after Baby P’s death that Haringey was reducing the numbers of children being taken into care whilst Baby P was being visited all those times. Directly after (and part of which could be a natural reaction) the figures shot up. Also John Hemming, a Lib Dem MP colleague who specialises in this area, had also found figures on reductions because of budgetary pressures. So Haringey’s decisions around budgets needs scrutiny for starters.

A second example of an area needing wider scrutiny – what part did the fragile state of the health team charged with looking after health needs of children at risk in Haringey play? After all, the paediatrician who failed to diagnose Baby P’s broken back was a locum in that very department. A post deleted, the key post of ‘named doctor’ who has particular responsibility in Child Protection cases. £400,000 of cuts required by the PCT (Primary Care Trust). Doctors leaving because of unhappiness with management. An unbelievably high level of sickness. A high level of bullying found by the last Health Care Commission inspection. All in all – a service that needs looking at. Hopefully some of this will be being pursued anyway by the urgent investigation team – but there are wider issues to go in to.

I did go personally to see the Chair of Haringey PCT with all these concerns. I was told – this is no longer the concern or business of the PCT. They had ‘outsourced’ their health team to Great Ormond Street Hospital. So – in my limited research as to why such an important local service would be outsourced – this is what I have been told thus far. Great Ormond Street want to become a Foundation Trust Hospital. In order to do so it has to demonstrate ‘community outreach’. Great Ormond Street had none and no experience in that area. Hence it negotiated with Haringey to take on that department. Well – if that’s all the case, is that what should have happened?

And as I said to Ed Balls – there is a wealth of information that people are contacting me about that needs to come to the inspection and that’s why we need a public inquiry. And we need a new start with new faces at the top – so that everyone involved in child protection in Haringey is imbued with the necessary zeal and support to make that fresh start and to make our vulnerable children as safe as they can be.

Is information being kept from the Baby P investigation?

Posted on by

The inspection ordered by Ed Balls following the death of Baby P is looking at the local authority, health services and police. I’ve received a tip off from someone working in one of these agencies about how the visit of the inspectors to their staff team had been handled.

The reason they rang me was that they were concerned that the inspectors were seemingly allowing this team to present the picture they wanted. The manager chose which staff would meet the inspects – and prepped them prior to the visit. No-one else was allowed to speak to the inspectors.

My caller felt passionately that the services were being allowed by the inspectors to manage the inspection so that staff who had voiced concerns in the past did not get to meet the inspectors.

I’ve raised this issue with Ed Balls, who assures me that his inspectors are excellent. Well, I hope so – but it doesn’t fully reassure me as so often in the past I’ve heard the excuse, “it’s all ok, we know what we’re doing” when that turns out not to be the case. So – let’s hope the inspectors are as good as said, but one to keep an eye on.

Baby P investigation update

Posted on by

Yesterday saw Ed Balls (Secretary of State for Children) at his request. He was basically offering me the opportunity of a chat given my concerns over Baby P. It was helpful to be able to have this discussion and after the meeting I wrote to Ed Balls to formally raise several issues.

This includes an issue over who will get to speak to those investigating Haringey. I have had a number of people who have contacted my office wishing to bring their concerns about Haringey Children’s Services and the associated agencies involved to the attention of the inspectors. These are people who work for the services and therefore have direct and pertinent knowledge. The information such people could provide would be invaluable in allowing the “rigorous scrutiny” that the Secretary of State demanded in his letter to the inspectors. I ask Mr Balls to indicate how they can make their concerns known to the inspectors confidentially before the end of the review. I understand the inspectors will be leaving Haringey on Friday.

At my meeting with Beverley Hughes (Minister for Children) yesterday she suggested that if I wished the inspectors to look at the political leadership issues I should raise that directly with the inspectors. My particular issue is that role of the individuals named in Section 18 and 19 of the Children’s Act 2004, which places requirements on the political leadership of councils. However, having then spoken to the inspectors, they have refused to stray beyond the remit laid out in the Secretary of States letter describing the terms of reference for the investigation.

This was a bit of a surprise as it contradicted what Beverly Hughes had said to me the day before. She seemed very genuine when we talked – so I don’t think this was intended.

So – I have asked Ed Balls if he would let it be known to the inspectors that he would like them to review those named in statute as being responsible for the services.

Last night was the first public meeting with Labour councillors since the verdict from the Baby P trial. George Meehan (Labour Leader of Haringey Labour of Haringey Council) has been entirely absent since the conviction. But last night there was nowhere to hide – and so he finally, after prompting by Robert Gorrie (leader of the Liberal Democrat group) made an apology:

In his statement, Mr Meehan said he would wait for the outcome of the review before commenting in detail on the case. But he added: “There is no failure to apologise in full by this council, we do so unreservedly.” Lib Dem councillors asked him to to offer his personal apology, to which Mr Meehan replied: “I have no problem saying I personally apologise.”

Meeting Beverley Hughes about Baby P

Posted on by

Following my request to meet with the Secretary of State for Children, School and Families last week – I was given a short meeting with Beverley Hughes the Minister. The reason I wanted to meet was to really find out more about the terms of reference and remit of the urgent investigation Ed Balls has ordered.

I asked if it would be made public – and am assured it will be following the department’s decision on what comes next.

I asked if the three inspectorates would be including any public and service user information to inform their investigations. She said it was up to them.

Would it look at the political leadership – as the political leadership is made accountable under the Children’s Act of 2004 – brought in as a measure because last time with Victoria Climbie there was no actual senior officer or politician held accountable in the end?

I raised this because there is a willingness to look at the health, social services, and police – all welcome – but, so far, almost no desire to look at the political part in all of this – both ministerial and local administration. The Children’s Act places clear responsibility on the political (as opposed to staff) side of councils, and so the question of how councillors behaved has a legal point to it beyond the obvious ‘they’re in ultimate charge, so they hold responsibility’ point.

I’ve blogged already about some of my concerns on how Haringey Council has – at both the senior staff and political level – failed to react properly to concerns raised with them.

The Minister said there was no instruction to do so – but that we (myself and local Liberal Democrats) were welcome to talk to the inspectors ourselves. So we will.

All in all – good to see the steps now being taken, but plenty of work ahead to ensure that in the end all the relevant issues are looked at and the right issues learnt.

Panorama on Baby P

Posted on by

Trailers for tonight’s Panorama on Baby P (BBC1, 8:30pm) point to how the police advised Haringey not to return Baby P. Haringey went against that advice – and then the police apparently did an about-face and agreed with them.

I think this probably points to one of the problems that will be uncovered in a public inquiry – that ultimately those who sit in partnership on the Safeguarding Children Board – i.e. the local authority, the health and police agencies psychologically (and for safety perhaps) find that they ultimately have to agree amongst themselves. It means the focus can become, “what’s the minimum we can all agree on?”

However, Laming rightly made it quite clear in his recommendations post Victoria Climbie, that the central focus, the eternal focus, the over-riding focus for anyone coming in contact with the child – must be the child.

He advises the use of critical faculties and judgement and to ensure for themselves that they are satisfied that everything is in order – not to listen to anyone else. Or rather – they can listen to what parents or carers or other adults say – but they need to hold their own council and judgement directly focused on the child.

So – what occurs to me – is that sitting together on this Safeguarding Children Board – perhaps they acquire a group mentality where decisions are agreed. This would be normal – but in this type of board – perhaps this is exactly the wrong approach?

Where difference occurs as Panorama says did occur between police advice and Haringey Council – then simply conceding for sake of unanimity is not the answer. No one can let an inner voice that says that any part of the decision-making is wrong go unheeded.

It is difficult – and maybe it is that the local authority has ultimate say – but when the authority is as bad as Haringey is – then the dangers are too immense.

Why do I say Haringey is bad? Because it is coming to light every day that passes just how many times people tried to warn them of the dangers to children in this borough. We know how Haringey Council has been responding to warnings about how it was looking after children: for all the good work done by many front line staff, at the most senior levels the reaction to concerns and warnings has been one of delays, hostility, failures to act and unwillingness to accept responsibility.

Now we know that the police, the grandmother, the opposition politicians – almost everyone took their concerns to Haringey.

Ed Balls has said he is angry. Ed Balls has said he will take whatever action is necessary. When the report from the urgent investigation he has ordered lands on his desk – he will face the real trial of a politician. For it is clear and becoming clearer each day that there have been systemic and personal failings – particularly by the political and officer leadership in Haringey as well as those others in the frame. If he really takes the action that is necessary – he will be a politician really fit for his office.

Today is Questions to Mr Balls as Secretary of State for Education – and if I manage to catch Mr Speaker’s eye – the questions today need to be about the terms of reference of the investigation he has ordered. Who has drafted the terms of reference? Will it include reviewing the conduct of the political leadership (a councillor – the lead member – is named in the Children’s Act of 2004 as responsible – so her conduct must be examined). Will the findings of the inquiry by Ofsted etc be made public? Will they publish the Serious Case Review in full? Will the findings of the investigation be made public? Will the investigation have any interaction with or input from the public or service users? Many, many questions…

Two blog posts from others that are well worth a read on this topic:

  • From Neil Williams, who was leader of the Haringey Liberal Democrat group at the time of Baby P’s death – and has written about how Haringey tried to keep him quiet when he raised concerns.
  • From Alix Mortimer – on how the anger and frustration and horror over Baby P’s death can be used for good.

Meanwhile, during the week I also…

Posted on by

Well – so much going on in the aftermath of the verdict on Baby P’s death, and so tragic the case, that it’s dominated my blog in the last few days. However, I don’t want to leave out completely the local events and groups that I have been visiting in middle of all this – for the bread and butter day-to-day work continues – so here’s a sample of the rest of the week.

At the start of the week I took part in the Liberal Democrat Opposition Day debate on the economy – see my intervention to make banks publicise any bonuses they pay.

Alexandra Park School came up to Parliament for a visit and I joined them for a half hour of questions. On Wednesday, I had a question to the Prime Minister –

I took part in the debate on an SI (Statutory Instrument – i.e. delegated legislation) changing bits around what information can be presented to the Youth Justice Board. I voted against the Government as they couldn’t – or rather didn’t – answer my questions.

I hosted our lovely Hornsey Trust for children with Cerebral Palsy for their reception at Parliament. I love this group – and if you remember I went to their sports day not that long ago.

I went to the Spectator Parliamentarian of the Year awards where Vince Cable won Parliamentarian of the Year (who else?). There was a lovely moment when Peter Mandelson won an award and George Osborne presented it … !

Lynne Featherstone at the Hornsey Territorial Army baseI inspected 16F Squadron of the Air Training Corps (ATC) in Hornsey at the Territorial Army base in the High Street. I was so impressed with the young people I met there – all with shining enthusiasm and fantastic posture.

They meet on Thursday and Monday nights and learn drill and take lessons. Being the Air Training Corps – the lesson I looked in on was a small group learning plane recognition. Very mixed in terms of ethnicity and gender – it seemed an absolutely great way to have a good time, make friends, learn self-confidence and self-control.

Yes – they wear a uniform – but they adore it. And no – it’s not just a recruiting ground for the forces.

Being a liberal and not a natural follower of uniforms and drill – I have to say that this group gives the young people a real purpose, they learn a lot and have loads of fun. Within a few months of joining they go flying and yes – they are allowed to fly the plane/glider. At 16 they can even get their solo wings! (Scary!)

I was truly impressed and have come full circle on this one – now thinking it is a very beneficial way to give young people a structured and constructive pathway to adulthood.

I held my usual advice surgery (where constituents come and raise issues face-to-face with myself), a quick lunch with the team from one of my local newspapers – the Ham & High – and visited Nightingale School to see the boxes for Africa that they have filled and to have a photo with them and the boxes. They are so sweet…

I judged the winner of my Christmas Card competition – results will be out in due course, so watch this space!

I attended the Liberal Democrat London Regional Conference, where there were many questions about Baby P and what I was doing in Parliament about it (see numerous other blog posts).

Lynne Featherstone with children from Muswell Hill SynagogueAnd I went to support the Jewish community and Muswell Hill Synagogue, which was having an action day where you could do a Mitzfah (a good deed). I joined them on two stalls – one outside Sainsbury’s and the other outside M & S where they were asking shoppers to donate one item of food or clothing from their shopping to the cause – which would then be given to a range of charitable causes. The children were all dressed in Mitzfah T-shirts and so cute that shoppers were all apparently beguiled into extreme generosity judging by the mountains of stuff donated. Hugely successful. They were also going to do baking at an old peoples’ home and were clearing rubbish at Durnsford Road Rec Centre.

Congratulations to all of them – a lovely and highly successful day. And it’s just great to do a Mitzfah – it’s the feel good factor!

And I watched Strictly and the X-Factor!

To round off the weekend – about to head off to do Radio 4’s The Westminster Hour.

The roles of Sharon Shoesmith and George Meehan

Posted on by

On Saturday went on Ken Livingstone’s LBC show.

Most of the time was spent on Baby P, not surprisingly. Just to break for a brief moment from Baby P – Ken said at the end that I could spend the last minute ranting about whatever I wanted. So I did. I made an appeal to Gordon Brown to re-open the sub-post offices in London that he has closed. Having decided to stop any further closures it seems to me that those of us who were unfortunate enough to have had the axe already fall should have the closures reversed.

Back to Baby P – Saturday was the day Sharon Shoesmith received some support in the form of a letter to the media from 61 head teachers in Haringey. Sharon is Director of Education here in Haringey. As Ken put it on air – she’s their boss.

But this isn’t about her competence or otherwise in education – it’s about her responsibility and accountability for the social services side of her brief – which includes having – under the Children’s Act of 2004 – the responsibility for child protection in Haringey. Under this legal framework her and the political leadership side of the equation have the ultimate responsibility.

Whilst she has – rightly – been in the firing line, thus far George Meehan, Labour Leader of Haringey Council, has not had the decency to step forward to take his share of the responsibility. He was leader too during the Victoria Climbie affair – and it is worth remembering some of the damning conclusions in Lord Laming’s report:

The manner in which a number of senior managers and elected councillors within Haringey discharged their statutory responsibilities to safeguard and protect the welfare of children living in the borough was an important contributory factor in the mishandling of Victoria’s case … I was left unimpressed by the manner in which a number of senior managers and councillors from Haringey sought to distance themselves from the poor practice apparent … [The report’s criticisms] are directed not just at the front line staff … but at senior managers and councillors.

Neither George nor any of the other councillors so criticised resigned their posts then.

What Sharon Shoesmith, Geroge Meehan and Liz Santry (the Haringey Council Cabinet member for this area) don’t seem to understand is the really, really deep sense of outrage amongst the public.

One illustration of the depth of public concern and anger over this issue is that in the last week my website has been read more heavily that at any time ever before. My office is inundated with phone calls and emails – all virtually of one voice – how could this happen again in Haringey and this time they must not be allowed to get away with it.

During the time of the Laming inquiry I wrote a newspaper column, quoting Ambrose Bierce – and the quote seems all too apposite once more: responsibility is “a detachable burden easily shifted to the shoulders of God, Fate, Fortune, Luck or one’s neighbour. In the days of astrology it was customary to unload it on a star”. If only it were not so.

Haringey Council's systematic failures

Posted on by

Some months after the lawyer for Nevres Kemal (the whistleblowing social worker) had written to the four ministers David Lammy (minister as well as the tragic Baby P’s own MP), Patricia Hewitt, Ivan Lewis and Rosie Winterton and got no satisfactory response – her story finally came to me – can’t say how.

Concerned by what I heard – anything that links Haringey with serious failures in child protection automatically sets alarm bells ringing – I decided that the best and most direct action I could take would be to bring it to the attention of George Meehan who, as Leader of Haringey Council (as he was at the time of the Victoria Climbie tragedy), ultimately must bear responsibility for its actions.

I personally wrote to him, both about the issues raised by Nerves Kemal and also two other cases which I thought indicated a systemic failure in Haringey’s Children’s Services.

I quote a few of the paragraphs from my letter of November 2007:

There have been a few cases in terms of Children’s / Social Services issues that concern me and I wanted to bring them to your attention…

[There] is a seeming repeating pattern. A parent or social worker makes a complaint about something to do with a child – be that against the school or the Council department. From analysing three cases in particular, what seems to happen is that the first instinct of the authorities is to turn the complaint on the complainant in a sort of closing of ranks.

I then go on to describe the three cases, the third of which being Nevres Kemal:

The third case: Social Worker Nevres Kemal. I’m sure you know she was dismissed for breach of confidence and trust. But my concern is the pattern again – that tables appeared to turn on her after she raised the issues of no medical reports being completed on a case.

The point I am raising George, is that it would seem that there is a pattern of the Council exhibiting more interest in protecting the school, Authority, department than investigating the actual complaint. Moreover, that in seeking to protect the ‘establishment’ the real issues are not being investigated – which may lead to incompetent people staying in post, bad practice and so on – and worst of all – children being at risk … I could not rest easy without bringing this initially to your attention.

I then asked for a meeting, and finally managed to get one with George Meehan on 31st January 2008. Ita O’Donovan (Chief Executive of Haringey) was in attendance at George’s request – so it was Haringey’s more senior politician and most senior member of staff at the meeting.

I brought the case histories and the letters with me and went over my extreme concerns with them both. They assured me they were as concerned as I was and Ita O’Donovan said she was looking at this in particular and commissioning an expert examination (I believe that is what she said).

But chasing letters following the meeting asking what had happened were not responded to.

So whilst Ms Kemal raised concerns with Ministers – and I subsequently raised them face-to-face with those directly accountable in Haringey – it seems from the unfolding of tragic events that neither route produced the right response. And the horror of this is that if both at local and national level there was no effective response – then we do not have in place adequate safeguards.