Registered user login:

'Balls lives up to his name'

Lynne Featherstone

Published 03 December 2008

In a wake of the appalling Baby P case swingeing changes are still needed at Haringey - despite the sacking of Sharon Shoesmith and the resignation of key council figures - including, perhaps, the separation of education and child protection and better means of scrutiny

The treatment of Baby P has shocked the nation - but so has the failure to protect him

The devastating critique that damned Haringey Council’s part in the Baby P tragedy has at last blasted a hole in the defensive, rank-closing administration.

I had my doubts whether it would really happen – as I was there, as a councillor, during the Victoria Climbie tragedy when Haringey failed, was damned in a report that singled out senior people for their failures to take responsibility or to understand they had got things wrong – and not one senior person went.

Indeed, George Meehan not only didn’t quit as council leader, but he subsequently had a period in charge of children’s services and then came back again to head the council. Only now has he finally taken responsibility for that long period of failure, punctured by those two awful deaths of Victoria Climbie and Baby P. Going too are senior staff – this time, it isn’t just the most junior social worker being blamed.

Credit to Ed Balls who, while the Haringey Labour network of friends and colleagues closed ranks and bunkered down in the London borough claiming no-one needed to go and nothing had gone too wrong, has lived up to his name and had the determination to ring the changes.

That in itself gives me some hope for the future. More hope too comes from the quality of those brought in to run children’s services. From the ashes of tragedy we now have some of the most highly respected social services staff in place right at the top.

It’s going to be a tough job to turn that around – but we need to make Haringey an exemplar so that the best and brightest in the social care world want to come to a new Haringey – imbued with a zeal to make it work. We need swingeing changes in management, structure and staffing. We will need resources to make sure that changes can be properly implemented – and I didn’t hear Mr Balls talk extra resources as yet.

But there are also wider issues untouched by Ed Balls’s short, sharp investigation.

For example – Sharon Shoesmith was in charge of education as well as child protection – following the recommendations of Lord Laming turned into legislation by the 2004 Children’s Act. It seemed a good and obvious idea at the time – stopping the gap through which children might fall if teachers didn’t communicate worries with social services. But it clearly didn’t work. Is this the failing just of staff in Haringey, or is there a deeper problem with the manner – or perhaps even concept – of merging the two? It’s not fashionable for politicians to say, “I don’t know”, but on this one I don’t. My mind is open – but I am sure we need to consider the issue carefully.

And what about inspections? Just before Victoria Climbie’s death outside inspectors gave Haringey a glowing report. Just as this time Haringey got a glowing report just before all the truth over Baby P’s death came tumbling out. Huge resources go in to inspections. Are they really being well used?

And what about the overview and scrutiny system at local councils, which is meant to put local councillors – with their on-the-ground knowledge – in place to really get into the truth of how well or badly services are being run? In Haringey, the process was little short of worthless. Labour rolled out the block-vote party mentality and stopped effective scrutiny when concerns were raised over children’s services.

Baby P died because of the almost unimaginable evil of three people. The council, health and police services that should have intervened to stop this failed. But we should heed all the warnings from the case – some of which, as with scrutiny are by no means restricted to children’s services but instead can impact any council service. Let at least Baby P’s death bring that about that pause for thought.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

4 comments from readers

Carl Jones
03 December 2008 at 09:56

Lynne; you sound bitter and while I am not a specialist in LA childcare, you are skating over the issues.

FUNDING, FUNDING and FUNDING!

As I understand it, case loads are double what they should be. Its very easy for social works and their departments to fall into a crisis coping strategy. The legal costs of taking a child into care have rocketed and this is just the start of the costs.

As I understand it, the death of "baby P" was the result of a "legal decision" and of course, the MSM hoo haa has once again protected the government and its ministers....4 were sent warning letters and did nothing.

Your part in the coverup is bourne out by saying "the council, health, and police" failed, they did not fail!!

If the funding isn`t there, then government is responsible and therefore, its fair to assume that these tragedies are built into the system and are to be expected.

The sorry state of British life was further reduced the other day, when the government suggested that mothers be forced back into work when their BABY reaches its 1st birthday....

....that should put another few thousand children into care.

I don`t think your article is helpful, in fact, I think its part of the problem.

Pierre
03 December 2008 at 15:13

If only there was a workable test for common sense .

We would then be on the road to a better society.

Piye
03 December 2008 at 15:44

Destroyed is our sense of locality as everywhere is

looking like one another while the singularity and

importance of locality is no more.

Cases such as this will become the norm not the

exception.

The drive to cut cost championed by Tory and Labour

is at the heart of the poor quality service we get.

While the blame has been shifted on to individuals the

fact remains the majority of the visits were by agency

care workers deemed a cheap source of labour i.e no

pension..no benefit.

What is the motivation for the worker to do the job

effectively on low pay?

Do they have a local connection or ties to their cases.

It's an illusion to expect good quality service from

workers on low pay.

These are not lazy workers as they sometimes have to

juggle their family lives with two to three jobs now to

usually high bills.

What we lack is the ability to take responsibility for our

actions as shown by the account of this tragic incident

though we've been down this road many times.

PM Tony Blair was cut off from reality as he tends to

discount genuine criticism and has an urge to

emphasise positive news. It gets worse until there's an

implosion.

During his stewardship we borrowed and borrowed

when we should have been saving as a government

we were told is was for education and investment.

This now seem a bit weird for me to fully comprehend

as the Banking and Insurance Industry are filled with

educated people who made silly investments that has

brought us to the brink of economic ruin.

While my hard earned pound is buying less Tony Blair

is making millions as a bank adviser while our

government reaction to a crisis is give bank more of

me and you cash which will still lead to poor service

and waste.

Our education has failed the evidence is all around us

from politicians without well thought out policies to

institutionally racist police force to underfunded

childcare services.

A Collective Takeover is required to change the

direction of our country for all our children.

no arms
03 December 2008 at 19:26

I live in Haringey, have done for 40 years, my experience of the council social services in the last 10 years is that it is a complete and utter mess. Completely ineffective, with sometimes arrogant and intimidating officers. The social workers I dealt with were left to the last minute to be told of changes in practice to 'cut costs' (his words not mine) to mental health services. What few services that existed have been removed and more pressure put on people to fend for themselves, and despite their dire circumstances pressured further by so called 'welfare reforms'. More bad housing ( small shoe boxes) built in an already overcrowded area opposite the busy tube, with no consideration for the environment or well being of the local community. Housing should benefit and enhance the community this does nothing for it., more noise and disruption. What are they thinking?

So called 'leaders and short term 'career driven' 'professionals' paid outrageously in comparison to many of the people who live there, do the real work out of necessity or good will to rectify incompetent mismanagement . It is a disgrace and it is a good job that the previous head of social services left when she did, (useless). She should have been sacked much sooner. Good ridance too to Barbara Roache who thought it ok and shrugged that a person who experienced numerous mental beakdowns was left distressed and on anti psychotic drugs to wander the streets.for months. I agree with the comment about Tony Blair as well these people are money driven, self serving, and it is sickening that he is reponsible for so much paranoia and ill feeling and loss, yet is allowed to accumulate his own private financial fortune, and view it as success. Disgusting!!!!

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

About the writer

Lynne Featherstone

Lynne Featherstone is LibDem MP for Hornsey & Wood Green and is her party's spokeswoman on Youth and Equality.

Read More

Vote!

Should the international community intervene in Gaza?