Below you will find an internal e-mail that was sent to all States Members from Senator Alan Breckon, who was Chairman of the Scrutiny sub-panel further made up of myself and Deputies Geoff Southern and Roy Le Herissier. As some readers might recollect the four of us, along with our excellent Scrutiny officer, Sam Le Quesne, worked flat out right through last summer - a period of some 18 + weeks overall as I recall - producing a review that concluded quite unequivocally that a fully independent Committee of Inquiry into the Management of the Health & Social Services Department was urgently needed. It was, of course, rejected by most of the usual crew as the attached States vote demonstrates.
The content of Senator Breckon's email was written in the aftermath of the final report revelations at yesterday's press conference. A press conference and later statement from the Minister where we hear yet again that regardless of the horrific findings in this particular case no-one will be held accountable. Once again it is apparently all about 'learning lessons for the future'. according to the Minister Incredible but true. Still, having been a member of the Scrutiny sub-panel that put so much work into the review that had concluded an independent Committee of Inquiry was essential I did initially feel that I should make some observations on this issue. But reading Alan's e-mail last night I came to the opinion that actually, by and large, he had said just about everything of importance that needed to be said. Thus, rather than simply risk repeating his words I obtained Alan's permission to make his thoughts publicly available on the JDA's website.
I believe the content of the e-mail speaks for itself; as does the original proposition and States Assembly vote attached. I will leave readers to make up their own mind and ask the questions that result. Comments on the website are welcome as always. Equally, maybe these questions should be directed to the 30 States Members who chose not to support the proposition that Alan, Geoff, Roy and myself worked so very hard on in coming to our conclusions.
All I would add personally is the following. Until propositions - ALL propositions - are debated and voted upon according to their need and merit, rather than which States Members are behind them, or what damage to the image of Corporate Brand Jersey might occur if they were supported and passed government will never do the job that it should within a so-called democracy. Senior civil servants and employees who get things wrong, fail or simply do not do their jobs will never be made accountable as they should be. More serious than either of these two points, of course, in instances of this nature some of the most vulnerable within our society will never have the protection and security that should be theirs by right.
As for the Chapman Report...maybe we should be asking for a refund.
Deputy Trevor Pitman
From: Alan Breckon
Sent: 26 March 2010 17:35
To: All States Members (including ex officio members)
Subject:
Dear Colleague FYI I have attached the Proposition & Vote on whether to hold a Committee of Inquiry Into the Management of the Health & Social Services Department this is self explanatory.
All the existing Ministers + two former Health Ministers voted against!
However I wish Members to be mindful of the following;
on one hand I was accused of being mates with Civil Servants and therefore willing to move on without proper attention to detail where faults may have been found;
on the other hand I was accused of making mischief and not having any evidence of any malpractice;
if you re-read the short Report attached you will see that neither of the above is true;
I did not have another agenda, however I knew there were issues that went beyond the scope of the Panel's ability to investigate fully - hence the Committee of Inquiry;
In the Chapman Report Into Health & Safety issues on bullying, harassment, blogs etc he says this at para 10.19
"As it was put to me on more than one occasion: "people are keeping their heads down." To an outsider that is a critical concern as if action is not taken to address the problem it will firstly lead to inertia in the decision making process and ultimately a potential breakdown in normal day to day government. For example I understand that the States will in due course be required to decide whether to set up a Committee of Inquiry to investigate allegations of misconduct and incompetence within the management of Health & Social Services. I am aware from my own research for the purposes of this investigation that there have already been seven independent investigations and reviews covering much of the same ground. In the course of my research I read four of those documents either in whole or in part. It was quite clear that no evidence had been found in any of those reviews to justify any of the allegations made and the call for a further Inquiry appeared to me as an external observer to indicate an inability to move on and manage the present." (my emphasis)
so this Chapman bloke was telling us to "move on manage the present" - wonder who told him that? (the extract is attached below) How much was he paid for these little gems of wisdom? "wool" & "eyes" are words that spring to mind!
the Scrutiny Panel became aware, through family situations with the Court that children had been returned to abusive situations over long periods of time.
this is proven by PUBLISHED case judgements and prosecutions - one for rape of a child
the Jersey Child Protection Committee (until most recently) had never held one Serious Case Review - we wondered how this could be? - we got 10 years of their minutes?
I hope this clarifies the situation for those 30 of you who voted against a Committee of Inquiry - this was not a point scoring exercise it came from an uneasy feeling that the Sub Panel of Roy, Geoff, Trevor and myself had for the situation we found.
So while the recent Report on the JCPC may be uncomfortable for some it was where sadly the Sub Panel knew somebody had to go - so well done to the JCPC.
Finally The Sub Panel & Officers worked very hard over about a 20 week period to produce a significant Report in a very sensitive area with lots to commend it - the cost - although I do not have figures to hand was about £15,000 and we did get some outside advice, however the Report was our own - the only lesson is that we all must learn is to open our minds to some of this stuff and NOT adopt the opposition stance or personalise issues - its too important for that!
Regards
Alan
View Vote P145/2009/(re-issue)
Committee of Inquiry into the management of the Health and Social Services Department. 05 November 2009
POUR: 20 CONTRE: 30 ABSTAINED: 1 ILL: 1 EN DEFAUT: 1
Senator Alan Breckon
POUR
Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson
POUR
Connétable Alan Simon Crowcroft
POUR
Connétable Silvanus Arthur Yates
POUR
Deputy Frederick John Hill, B.E.M.
POUR
Deputy Roy George Le Hérissier
POUR
Deputy Geoffrey Peter Southern
POUR
Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey
POUR
Deputy Collin Hedley Egré
POUR
Deputy Jacqueline Ann Hilton
POUR
Deputy Paul Vincent Francis Le Claire
POUR
Deputy Shona Pitman
POUR
Deputy Montfort Tadier
POUR
Deputy Angela Elizabeth Jeune
POUR
Deputy Trevor Mark Pitman
POUR
Deputy Tracey Anne Vallois
POUR
Deputy Michael Roderick Higgins
POUR
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E.
POUR
Deputy Deborah Jane De Sousa
POUR
Deputy Jeremy Martin Maçon
POUR
Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur
CONTRE
Senator Paul Francis Routier
CONTRE
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf
CONTRE
Senator Terence John Le Main
CONTRE
Senator Ben Edward Shenton
CONTRE
Senator Frederick Ellyer Cohen
CONTRE
Senator James Leslie Perchard
CONTRE
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean
CONTRE
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand
CONTRE
Connétable Kenneth Priaulx Vibert
CONTRE
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan
CONTRE
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy
CONTRE
Connétable Michael Keith Jackson
CONTRE
Connétable Graeme Frank Butcher
CONTRE
Connétable Peter Frederick Maurice Hanning
CONTRE
Connétable Leonard Norman
CONTRE
Connétable John Martin Refault
CONTRE
Connétable Juliette Gallichan
CONTRE
Deputy Robert Charles Duhamel
CONTRE
Deputy John Benjamin Fox
CONTRE
Deputy Judith Ann Martin
CONTRE
Deputy James Gordon Reed
CONTRE
Deputy John Alexander Nicholas Le Fondré
CONTRE
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke
CONTRE
Deputy Sean Power
CONTRE
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis
CONTRE
Deputy Ian Joseph Gorst
CONTRE
Deputy Philip John Rondel
CONTRE
Deputy Daniel John Arabin Wimberley
CONTRE
Deputy Edward James Noel
CONTRE
Connétable Deidre Wendy Mezbourian
ABSTAINED
Deputy Anne Teresa Dupre
ILL
Senator Stuart Syvret
EN DEFAUT
Shocking stuff. But no surprise. Is it possible to put a link to the original proposition here?
ReplyDeleteThis is all very curious. We of Team Voice sat through the recent Health etc Scrutiny examination of Williamson and Taylor telling the world how everything was wonderful in child welfare and protection in Jersey. We posted a blog saying that it was a load of baloney and that the right questions simply were not being asked by the Scrutiny team - but how did Taylor say what he said at all if he obviously knew all about the Report that he had just written on the prevailing mess!
ReplyDeleteWhen is somebody going to expose this whole farce?
Obviously there are decent people involved in all this but why are they being so stifled?
Constable Mezbourian was part of the Scrutiny team - but why was she not demanding a Childrens Commissioner when the witnesses Williamson and Taylor were there to respond and tell all?
All this PR pretence serves no useful purpose. What is really going all and who shall the public trust?
Trevor.
ReplyDeleteHow many more of our children need to be abused before anybody is ever held to account?
It has been published in our "accredited" media that a senior Civil Servant at the Education Department was a suspect in the "ongoing" Child Abuse investigation, was never suspended as a neutral act and remains in post today.
When our Law Offices are trying to opese the abuse survivors they tell them that just because there was not enough evidence to convict child abusers in a court of law doesn't mean to say they didn't commit the act(s) and that the victim is not believed. WHY IS THAT CIVIL SERVANT STILL THERE????????????????????????
Furthermore, who was the judge in 1999 who ordered the children back into the "care" of their mother? surely this person seriously needs taken to task LET'S HAVE THIS PERSON'S NAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hope the THIRTY people who voted against Alan's proposition consider what their vote reflects. The way I see it is those 30 people are more concerned with protecting Civil Servants and hence contributed to the prolonged TERRIFYING abuse af young vulnerable children........when is this ever going to stop? PLEASE, PLEASE, somebody help save us and our children from this government.
It may be interesting to have a matrix of voting on the various issues dealing with and surrounding the abuse of children.
ReplyDeleteyou may note it is always the same suspects who vote against any sort of accountability!
ReplyDeletethe same suspects who are afraid of the civil servants.....
Did anyone hear Talk-Back today? Was that really a States Senator speaking to a member of the public as if the gentleman was a piece of garbage?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous #1:
ReplyDeleteThe Proposition is no longer on the States website to link to. I have now added it as a slightly blurred image - for technical reasons I had to use a roundabout way of posting it, that degraded it a bit. DR
I see that the JEP have obviously been checking out this site as Senator Breckon's e-mail formed the basis of a story in tonight's paper. Didn't mention the JDA webssite, of course, but no ssurprise there. Out of interest when I clicked on today for some reason I couldn't access the pages showing the report. Me or you I don't know.
ReplyDeleteVoiceforchildren
ReplyDeleteSorry, just a quick reply as I'm pushed for time with Scrutiny work and three new constituent cases arriving this evening.
The details of 1999 you raise I am looking into anyway. I don't know what you or anyone else on here feels but hearing the same old scratched record of 'we must just move on, no-one is to blame'I'm beginning to think vote of no confidence.
Which is a shame in a way because in line with what a number of colleagues are thinking there are one or two others in the Ministerial ranks who are naturally well out in front of the pack heading for one of these.
The only question to be agreed, I would suggest, is...when.
Anonymous #5:
ReplyDeleteThe report is on here as a screengrab of a pdf, which is not ideal, but I can't directly post it. If you click on each page it does open in a new window that you can zoom in on a bit.
Our Council of Muppets is a disgrace and same goes for their little band of followers.
ReplyDeleteShould Senator 'Topper' be let out on his own let alone speaking to the public without supervision?
ReplyDeleteWell done for highlighting this JDA. For a bunch of radicals out to destroy the fabric of society you lot impress me more and more. Commonsense politics and speaking out on what needs to be said time and time again. By my reckoning there are only about a dozen people in the States who are real quality politicans working for the best interests of the majority and you lot account for four of them.
ReplyDeleteDoes Geoff Southern read any of this?
ReplyDeleteI see Trever Pitman has now resorted to personal attack on Ian Le Marquand. As Ian is an honourable man, that is the last time anybody around my group of people will ever give a vote to any member of the JDA, you are a disgrace.
ReplyDeleteDoes Geoff Southern read anything?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous @15...
ReplyDeleteI would be most interested to learn of my apparent 'personal attack' on Ian Le Marquand. In fact, he would be interested too. Why? Because as you know full well no such 'personal attack' has ever been made. Of course, if we are talking honest criticism then hands up - I'm guilty!