Category Archives: Blog

Has Lord Laming come to the right conclusions?

Posted on by

OK – so now I’ve had time to have a look at all Lord Laming’s proposals (from his review into the state of Children’s Services following the Baby P tragedy) – but my view is not much altered as his report is much as I expected. Another 50+ recommendations because his first recommendations were not implemented.

There’s some good strengthening stuff – but I still can’t see what will make it different so that we avoid the next time. For example – take the Safeguarding Children Board. This is where all the partners around child protection meet to discuss children at risk. In Haringey it is the Board that Sharon Shoesmith chaired, and it is from this Board that the deeply flawed Serious Case Review into the death of Baby P flowed. So flawed that Ed Balls has ordered a second Serious Case Review to be produced and has put in an independent chair.

Lord Laming has recommended an independent chair for all Safeguarding Children Boards and he further suggests the addition of two members of the public – but I’m not convinced this will really deal with the sort of events that went wrong in Haringey.

In the case of Baby P, my understanding is that various of those attending the Board did raise matters of concern – but the management wore down those who raised concerns and in the end forced through what it wanted to do. So – whilst Laming’s proposal could be a help, what we’re missing is a requirement to minute the discussions and disagreements. Lord knows every other bit of information is recorded, computerised, etc etc – but no records are kept of these crucial meetings – and that makes it far too easy to bulldozer past disagreements.

Next let’s look at Lord L’s recommendation for a National Unit for Safeguarding to ensure his recommendations are implemented. Forgive me – but the last thing we need is more central attempts to micromanage what is happening on the ground all round the country.

The eyes and ears that can really help are on the spot – locally. The tragedy is that they were ignored by Sharon Shoesmith and by the Labour Haringey leadership. It’s a strengthening of local accountability and scrutiny that we really need.

What went wrong in Haringey was that the Labour administration, ineffective and defensive, didn’t challenge officers. Ranks were closed, jobs were protected and there was a refusal by Labour or senior officers involved to engage or listen to the many voices that were trying to warn Haringey that children were at risk.

Quite frankly – I could go on and on. There are wider issues untouched by Laming’s investigation: budgetary pressures, the inspection regime (inspectors say things are good, something goes wrong, inspectors say things are bad), the temptation to fudge or mislead when jumping through government hoops brings funding, the need for whistle blowers to have somewhere to take their concerns and have them acted on; the failures of the health services – and so on.

I don’t want to be a misery guts – but I just don’t feel that Lord Laming’s work is going to really cut through the culture and attitude that Labour Haringey operates and which is the reason (in my view) why we have now had two tragedies, Victoria Climbie and Baby P, in Haringey.

Laming's inquiry reports

Posted on by

Not (yet) had time to blog about Lord Laming’s report into the state of children’s services – so instead here’s a link to press coverage with my views:

Liberal Democrat MP Lynne Featherstone, who represents Haringey in north London where the Climbie and Baby P deaths occurred, has repeated her calls for a full public inquiry into the Baby P case.

She said: “Clearly the rulebook doesn’t need to be rewritten, the rules just need to be applied. To do this, Haringey needs two things above all – more accountability and more openness.

“However, key questions remain unanswered, such as why did Haringey’s whistle-blowing policy fail so badly?

“Why were the people who warned that something was wrong ignored? We have had review after review and yet we seem no closer to the truth.” (epolitix.com)

Cambridge Univesity comes calling

Posted on by

Cambridge came calling. After my blog about unequal pay at Cambridge University – the Director of External Affairs and Indi Seehra, Director of Human Resources, came to Portcullis House. Having referred Cambridge University to the Equality and Human Rights Commission after seeing its voluntary pay audit (full credit for producing one) they were keen to tell me what steps they are taking to improve their gender pay gap. They said that they knew by publishing the pay audit they would expose themselves to criticism.

And they were right on that – and that is why these pay audits should be mandatory not voluntary, because many will balk at exposing their organisations in this way. The Government still is sticking to voluntary audits in the coming Equalities Bill (if it ever arrives) – so will keep on pushing for this to change.

In Cambridge’s case – by publishing the figures, I was able to pick it up, question their gender pay gap and the lack of women particularly at higher grades – and they came and explained what they were doing. I listened to their explanation and also the reviews and the efforts they are now going to put into narrowing that pay gap.

The real proof of the pudding though, will be next year, and the year after – when we can see whether their efforts result in a closing of the gaps. So – Cambridge – so far, so good – let’s see where we are next year.

What will Lord Laming have found?

Posted on by

The Laming findings on how his recommendations following the Victoria Climbie tragedy have been implemented will be reported tomorrow.

I have had some qualms about Lord Laming looking at his own recommendations as I have been afraid he might not want to find fault. However, he takes the issue of child protection extremely seriously and is the wise old owl who realised that the leadership was key to changing the way a department works – hence the Children’s Act 2004 which made clear where individual responsibility should rest – and so ultimately was why Sharon Shoesmith and Liz Santry were in the frame.

From all the leaks, I expect that Laming will have looked pretty thoroughly at social workers’ caseloads and discovered that they are not kept to the 12 cases I believe he recommended. But I also hope that he has looked at the line management. We were all gobsmacked that Baby P could be visited so many times to no avail. Surely we must see the creation of a culture where if the social worker visiting is too scared or inexperienced etc to ask to see the child from top to bottom – it would be normal for her or him to go back and report this, be supported, and be accompanied back to satisfy themselves of the true condition of the child.

More tick boxes and process driven stuff is the last thing we need – so I’m glad that Laming looks to be staying clear of that. However, I am pretty sure that the atmosphere on the Safeguarding Children Board in Haringey was such that the members gave up putting forward their professional views – as my understanding is that they were simply over-ruled by management and bludgeoned ultimately into silent acquiescence. This needs to change – and so a key recommendation I will look for will be to have the Board discussions and particularly disagreements minuted. They are not currently.

Outside of the leadership and management within Children’s Services – I am fearful that the wider issues will not feature – and those wider issues if not examined now will cause us regret after some future tragedy.

So what about the joining together of education and children’s social services – has it worked? I tread carefully as they were joined to stop children falling through the gap – but clearly in Haringey the Director of Education found herself then in charge of an area where she had no experience. How significant was that? During the furore – Ms Shoesmith was supported by many Heads of Schools who praised her education record – but amongst the hundreds of people from social services who contacted me, not one praised her work on that side.

What about the issue of Haringey Labour Council not heeding any of the warnings that children were at risk? They had plenty – from me, from relatives, from whistleblowers and from opposition members. They ignored all of them. If something is wrong – how can the administration be made to listen? Secrecy, cover-ups and rank closing were the culture of Haringey Labour and officers. Gagging orders, injunctions, refusal to submit to scrutiny and so on meant that no light shone on what was going on. Moreover, even since the furore and the shaming of Haringey – Labour are still blocking moves to proper oversight.

Then there’s the inspection regime. Ofsted gave Haringey three stars just whilst all this was going on under the cover. How can we rely on an inspection system that failed so miserably? And what of the Government whose system of stars makes authorities jump through hoops to get funding and autonomy – putting the temptation in front of people to fiddle and distort the system?

And what of budgetary pressures – they are ever-present. It was said that in an email managers were told not to take children into care because there was no funding. What part did this play?

And finally – what of the nightmare going on in the health services? More of that later.

So you can see – whilst I am hopeful Lord Laming’s recommendations will address some of the issues – in my view we still need a public inquiry on these other issues to ensure that the whole debacle and failure that let Baby P be killed is properly and extensively addressed.

Where have all the sparrows gone?

Posted on by

Here’s my latest column for the Highgate Handbook and Muswell Hill Flyer:

A tiger stared out at me from the pages of a Sunday newspaper recently. ‘What will you do after I have gone?’ was the line printed over the appeal to adopt a tiger. Malu Lothi is the name of ‘my’ tiger. I couldn’t bare the idea that these beautiful, beautiful animals might die out and any grandchildren of mine would never have the opportunity to see such magnificent creatures.

However, we have a looming disaster right here on our own doorsteps – because our bird population is dwindling rapidly due to the loss of habitat. Remembering the old adage – charity begins at home –I therefore put up a bird box in my garden to kick-start National Nest Box Week recently.

Haringey’s birds need homes if we are to stop the rapid decline in their numbers. I put up the box to try and inspire others to do same. And at a local meeting last week I met a local residents (taking it even further) who is making a bird box to put in his Highgate garden. Hurrah! But one isn’t enough!

Haringey’s birdlife has dropped drastically in diversity and numbers over the past thirty years and we need lots and lots of local people to put up bird boxes in their gardens too. It’s quick, easy – and helping birds in your own garden isn’t just about the greater good, as it also makes your own garden nicer too. No hair shirts required for this good deed!

The house sparrow was once one of Haringey’s most common garden birds, but according to the results of last year’s RSPB Great Garden Bird Watch survey sighting of it have dropped by 80% reduction in the last 30 years.

I am going to be following the latest developments in Haringey’s bird count and will be announcing the local results of the RSPB survey later this month. Meanwhile, anyone wanting to find out more about how to fit a bird box should visit the National Nest Box Week website.

Loss of habitat and lack of food is really the reason why we see fewer birds in our gardens. So putting up a nest box in your garden is really the best and easiest way to help Haringey’s feathered friends.

If I can – you can!

Politicians and Twitter: why The Times is wrong

Posted on by

So – Rachel Sylvester in The Times has taken a dislike to politicians who use Twitter.

What particularly gets my goat is the comment from “psychologist Oliver James” who claims: “Nobody would Twitter if they had a strong sense of identity.” Well – I don’t think you’ve ever met me Mr James – and I’m sure they are millions of other Twitter users who you’ve not yet either. And no-one would have time to read the tweets from everyone who uses Twitter. So you’re diagnosing millions of people who you’ve never met – and whose words you’ve never read. Not impressed!

Not surprisingly, I also take issue with her claims about how politicians have reacted to the economic crisis – “The opposition parties are quick to criticise Labour’s decisions but find it hard to say what they would do instead.” Can I introduce you to Vince Cable perhaps?

But what’s really wrong with the piece is the idea that politicians shouldn’t move with the time. I don’t send telegrams. My campaign team has no carrier pigeons. I hardly ever use a classical reference in my speeches. And that’s because I’m not a Victorian politician. Times change. The public changes. Today – 2009 – many of my constituents and other people are on Twitter – and so it makes sense for me to be too. If that’s how they choose to get information, it’s not a lack of identity that makes me honour those choices – it’s respect for the public.

Of course you can’t squeeze everything into 140 characters – but then I’ve not stopped doing other, wordier things (such as this blog, leaflets, speeches etc etc). And as for the parting line in The Times about the need to have politicians with moral fervour – I agree.

By the way – I’ve not counted, but I’m pretty sure you could fit each of the 10 commandments into a 140 character tweet (or the equivalents from other religions). Brief messages doesn’t mean you can’t have beliefs or passion!

Technology Advisory Board news: Howard Dean done, meetup to come

Posted on by

It was really good to see lots of people come to hear Howard Dean on Saturday at the special event for coding volunteers at our Harrogate conference this weekend. Lots of words of wisdom from him – and lots of enthusiasm to do even more and better things from everyone!

For those who volunteered to help fill the gap in some of our coding and technical resources by filling in my survey a few weeks ago – the next event is a meetup in London later this month. If you filled in the survey, you (should!) have got an invite by email last week to this.

Although we’re having this first meeting to kick things off in London, I’m keen that we involve people right across the country – whether that’s with regional groupings, meetings round the country, online discussions or whatever. As we’re a grassroots party – in part that’s up to you to decide!

As for the rest of the board’s work – keep your eyes peeled for more news!

How the authorities left someone at the mercy of a highly dangerous man who had already beaten and threatened to kill her on several occasions

Posted on by

A woman called Sabina Akhtar came from Bangladesh to this country in 2003. She and her husband had an arranged marriage in Bangladesh and Sabina joined her husband in the UK two years later, when she was pregnant with their son, who is now three. On Friday, her husband was sentenced to 17 years in jail for killing her.

He had attacked her 25 times and made repeated threats to kill her. In July he told his wife, Sabina, to prepare for death by reading passages from the Qur’an before warning: “I am going to get a knife and when I return I am going to slaughter you”. A few days later, he stabbed her through the heart.

The inept dealing of this case by the CPS and police – who failed to treat the complaint seriously saying that she was too confused and there were language difficulties – probably resulted in the death of this young woman. The CPS has apologised to the family but the Independent Police Complaints Commission has dropped its investigation of the police handling of this case.

The organisation Refuge is calling on the government to conduct a homicide review. They also believe that the authorities should be sued under the Human Right’s legislation and any damages that might be paid should be used to support Sabina’s 3 year old son. In addition, Refuge hope that such a case would put pressure on the government and the legal system to respond appropriately in future.

Sandra Horley, Refuge’s CEO, said, “In my 30 years of running Refuge, this is one of the most shocking cases I have ever come across. To say we are outraged is an understatement. Sabina Akhtar came to the Police desperate for help and fearing for her life. She was living with an extremely violent and dangerous man and it took incredible courage for her even to come forward. She was isolated, with no friends and family to turn to and the legal system let her down. Domestic killings are predictable and preventable and victims of domestic violence are more likely than any other victims of crime to experience repeat attacks. Years of evidence and research show that abused women are most at risk at the point of separation. The police and CPS should have known this and recognised that Sabina was in incredible danger. They had a duty to protect her and should have acted quickly and decisively to ensure her safety. To not treat her complaint seriously on the grounds that she was too confused and had language difficulties is simply not good enough. Sabina has lost her life and her son has lost his mother – let’s hope that Sabina does not just become another statistic and that the public will stand up and make sure she hasn’t died in vain. We all need to speak out for the dead to protect the living”.

I totally agree!

Come on Barclays!

Posted on by

One of my constituents, Ralph Crisp, was done by the Barclay’s Bank ATM in Crouch End Broadway the week before last. It’s been all over the local papers but I want to post it here to shame Barclays for their performance in all of this.

It was the sort of scam we are warned about. Some villain has inserted something into the slot where you put your card so that when you put your card in it doesn’t come out. You go home and ring the bank when it opens – but the villains have meanwhile got your card and noted your PIN. Your money begins to be spent in places you have never been.

You phone the bank to say that the machine swallowed your card but at first you don’t suggest canceling card – just ask to have it back. So you go to the bank as it opens next morning. The machine hasn’t swallowed the card and within 15 minutes of insisting on seeing the manager the CCTV has demonstrated the scam.

Astonishingly, you are told that there have been 10 victims of the same scam in the last ten days!

Now when Ralph told me this – my hackles rose. If this had been going on for 10 days – where was the special notice warning customers? What on earth could be the reason for not widely publicising the fact that this ATM was under attack? Where was the duty of care to Barclay’s customers in all of this? Yes – I am writing to Barclays and the police – for what were they thinking? Were they scared of bad publicity? If you’ve got a pattern of crime, why not warn people?

The police say they had four of the then eleven cases reported directly to them. For the bank’s part – as far as I can gather – it is simply a matter for their fraud department and not referred onto the police. Can that really be the case? At what point should such a scam become a police matter? How do the police work with the Bank’s fraud department? Who monitors what is happening and how rigorous and successful the fraud department of banks are?

Yes – the Bank may ultimately cover the cost of what is gone from the account – but that doesn’t make up for the worry and hassle in the interim. It is in the public interest that criminals are caught and in the individual customer’s interests that the bank puts up a public warning at the first realisation of a scam.

So come on Barclays – you’ve got a lot of questions to answer!

Harrogate party conference

Posted on by

Didn’t really blog from Lib Dem conference over the weekend – reckoning that the world wouldn’t end – I just carried out my duties and enjoyed the debates. I did tweet! But not a lot.

Ironic really – that one of the highlights was Howard Dean’s speech to Conference – and even more – his private session with me and my burgeoning army of coders et al – who will develop (I hope) into a problem busting, tool improving, development force for the Lib Dems.

What was so interesting about Howard Dean’s description of the birth of real political net campaigning, was that the key message was that it was a communication tool to form relationships and that the net was about communities AND that none of it was a substitute for going out door knocking! That said – net political campaigning is key to any modern campaign!

The substance of the debates this conference was children and families – particularly education. Brand new and visionary is our policy of giving parents the choice of parental leave between them up to 19 months – followed by filling in the black hole of child care by extending the right to free early years education to 20 hours a week from the age of 18 months – if the parents want it. Particularly for disadvantaged children – this will give them far better life chances – as according to current thinking it is basically all over by the time you are six! Well – what I mean is that studies show that children from disadvantaged backgrounds are already a year behind by the age of three. Such children are exposed typically to about 400 words a day – whereas their better off contemporaries are exposed to 3-4,000 words per day. You can see my point!

When your child then gets to school – they will find all class sizes halved – bringing that infant school education into line with the sort of numbers in private schools. That ratio is critical to what comes next.

And next – as a child progresses into secondary education – Liberal Democrats propose a ‘pupil premium’ which is basically a sum of money that goes with the child so that schools have the resources to deal with challenges and therefore don’t suffer when they have an inclusive policy.

Going on into further education – Liberal Democrats continue their commitment to scrap tuition fees. Hurrah! And this is now extended to part-time courses as well. Basically – everyone will have five years of post-16 education free – and they can choose where and when they take it up. Flexible and suited to the person -not regimented and forced down your throat by central command!

And of course – there was Nick Clegg’s speech. The content was brilliant – but I will let you read the speech for yourselves. It was strong, radical – and basically the proposition was if you vote Labour or Tory you will get the same old same old that led us to this current destruction. Liberal Democrats are genuinely different. So – if you believe we need change (and personally I can’t see how anyone can think that changing to a Tory Government or keeping the defunct Labour one will deliver anything decent or different or new) then bring in the Liberal Democrats.