| Introducing a new section | |||||
|
|||||
|
What the Papers Said Most of the papers made the Waterhouse Report a major item of news on the front page, as well as giving fuller details inside and offering editorial views in a leading article. Here is a selection of the main papers. The Daily
Mail The paper gave over a further five pages of text to the story. First, there was a double spread entitled "40 monsters who must be found", with smaller sections on Sir Robert Waterhouse, the social services, the police and the recommendations. Unlike other papers, a story was also made of the influence of the Chester branch of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality. The second double spread focused on those who had been abused, with the headings "A life sentence for the victims", "My tormented childhood by the boy known as Number 28", "Unimaginable horrors that were just too much to bear" and "In my dreams , I hear the screams". The text spoke in detail of the abuse, and there were photos of the victims, some of whom had since committed suicide. The last page was headed "Naming names, the evil men at the centre of the web of abuse" with a brief account of Alison Taylor's role as whistleblower. The main editorial also focused on the Waterhouse Report. "For two decades, predatory paedophiles… got away with it because social workers and local politicians were too complacent and incompetent to notice what was going on. … Nobody listened. The children's stories were dismissed…" The Mail concluded that only time would tell whether Waterhouse's 72 recommendations would help to protect the vulnerable children in care. "But how many times have we been here before?" Altogether a very thorough piece of reporting, with plenty of detail. The Daily
Star All in all, the Star's coverage offered an interesting comment on the editor's view of the readership's level of interest in such matters. The Daily
Telegraph The Telegraph's leader (the
third, after ones about Mugabe and Sinn Fein) took an individual
line in three respects. First it attacked local authority residential
care : "Fortunately, the fashion for consigning children
in care to council-run homes does, finally, appear to be waning,
with many more now looked after by foster-parents." This
statement is not only sweeping, but failed to notice the risk
of abuse in foster care as well as residential care. Secondly,
it stated that "what this sorry affair shows, yet again,
is that local authorities are not, in general, good at looking
after the needs of children". The Express The front page report was carried over onto two clearly laid-out double spreads The first was entitled "A betrayal of the most vulnerable" and majored on four case studies of victims of abuse and a major piece on Alison Taylor, the whistleblower. In a balanced and forceful piece, she is quoted as saying "Child abuse is not recognised as being simply part of the spectrum of human behaviour and therefore a constant and ever-present threat". The report also quoted the Association of Child Abuse Lawyers which called for another 80 public inquiries, to match the current police investigations into abuse. The second double spread, headed "Exploitation on a wholesale scale" covered the abusers, the history of events and the recommendations. Further coverage included a long leader - the only one that day, an article by Christian Wolmar on "The culture of apathy that ruined so many lives", and a cartoon of three staring teddies, seeing, hearing and speaking no evil. Christian Wolmar is a Joseph Rowntree Foundation journalism fellow, writing a book on abuse in children's homes, and his article covered the other recent cases in Staffordshire, Cleveland, Orkney, Ayrshire and Leicestershire. The editorial was the hardest-hitting of the national papers, pointing out that after all the abuse and the cover-ups, the Inquiry, despite its £13 million costs and 500,000 word Report, failed to identify the names of those responsible, other than those convicted. It described this as "a betrayal of the high hopes that the full story would be told and the guilty parties identified". All in all, the Express reporting and commentary was very thorough, and is to be commended to anyone wanting to get the full facts in a single paper. The Financial
Times The possible take-over of Courtaulds, the Zimbabwe referendum and the possibility of China joining the G8 were all more important. The Guardian Next there was a double spread, including photographs. The key areas covered were the children's homes, headed "Refuges that turned into purgatory", the impact on the victims, with the headings "Haunted mother's legacy of fear and loathing", "Recalling life in the Colditz of care", and "I just hope this will protect future generations in care". A useful section gave questions and answers about the Report. Further on, there was an article by Christian Wolmar, a journalism research fellow, who pointed out that until twenty years ago, nearly all residential childcare workers were women, and that by contrast with the pattern of child abuse in the wider community, which consists mainly of men abusing girls, the pattern in residential care is primarily of men abusing boys. He argued against any knee-jerk reaction, and suggested that a sober analysis was needed of residential child care, taking account of other factors, such as poor educational achievements. The Guardian devoted its first leader to the Report and commented at length. The article summarises the report, noting that "The system was devoid of leadership, management or planning. No part of it escapes censure - social services, councillors, police or the Welsh Office." It notes the lack of impact of the earlier reports and comments that Waterhouse is exceptionally weak in defending the decision not to publish the Jillings Report. "He's no champion of the public right to know" said the leader, but then "Waterhouse has cleared the air." Finally, there are comments on the cost of the Inquiry against the poor investment in better services, on the improvements which the Government has in hand and on Alison Taylor's comment that child abuse is not going to disappear. The Independent On the next two pages, the Report is covered in detail. With pictures of the Inquiry team, Alison Taylor and the homes where the abuse happened, the text deals with the report's contents, Alison Taylor's role, the impact on Darren Laverty, one of the victims, and the views of child protection organisations. The Independent devoted its first leader to the Report, recording the cove-up and the process by which the Inquiry was established, giving itself a pat on the back for publishing the findings of an earlier report which led William Hague to set up the Waterhouse Inquiry. The leader spoke of the ignorance of senior managers, with paedophiles operating unpunished, and concluded "But this is not just a problem for Wales. Across Britain, vulnerable children are in danger. Those dangers need to be confronted head on." The Mirror The reporting throughout appeared to be thorough, accurate and balanced, a good example of direct tabloid writing. The Sun The message of the editorial is simple and clear. Headed "Lone voice" it reports that only Alison Taylor spoke out and was sacked. It concludes "The least we can do for the victims is hunt these fiends down and bring them to justice. Then throw away the key." The Times The Times was the only paper to give a full account of the parliamentary debate, mainly referring to the announcement of the Report's publication in the Commons, but also mentioning the Lords. The Times made the Report the subject of its main leader, headed "Avoidable abuse" and subheaded "Waterhouse's report must not join its predecessors on the shelf." The leader underlined the main messages of the Report, and emphasised that there were still weaknesses in the system. Proper qualifications were needed and the recommended pay review needed to be "on the top of Alan Milburn's in-tray". Children's commissioners and complaints officers were welcomed for urgent action, as "a signal that [the children's] voices will never again be disregarded in such a casual fashion". The Yorkshire
Post The leader moved from horror at the abuse to a condemnation of residential care, and thence to a call for more adoption and a slating of social workers who could halt the tortuous procedures at any time through subjective judgements about the weight of prospective adopters. It is a pity that such an important subject as the Waterhouse Report can be diverted into such trivia. |
|
Issues The Waterhouse Report throws up a lot of issues, which will need to be debated for some time to come. Here is the opportunity for readers to contribute ideas and views. The Financial Cost The Waterhouse Report cost £13.5 million to produce, and this figure presumably does not include the cost of the six previous inquiries. Nor will it cover the money spent on reporters and observers attending the inquiry, civil servant time spent on preparing reactions, and so on. A further amount of £1.5 million is anticipated as the cost of insurance claims. Then there are all the costs of the court cases against the offenders, of keeping them in prison and of their likely reduced productivity on being discharged. The economic spin-offs of events such as this are extensive. Proper investment in the training and management of the services in the first place could have saved a lot of money, as well as preventing the suffering of the 650 victims. Listening to Survivors With such a large group of people who were victims of abuse in the homes in North Wales, there is an unprecedented opportunity to learn from people who have been through the hell of having no-one who will listen and take complaints seriously. The Waterhouse recommendations for a Children's Commissioner for Wales and for Complaints Officers in every authority are excellent, and overdue, but is there more we can learn? What would have made the difference as far as the victims were concerned? What more can we do now to make amends? - we can't undo the past, but there may be ways in which the experience can be used positively, at least to prevent its recurrence. Did Waterhouse get it Right? One of the tests of a Report which deals with conflicting views is to gauge the complaints about its fairness. In the case of the Waterhouse Report, the Bryn Estyn staff support group complained about "trial by ambush" alleging that the Report "made a mockery of the British judiciary's reputation for fair play. … The Treasury team appeared to have no interest in presenting the evidence in a fair and balanced manner. Instead, complainants' evidence was led sympathetically (even when such evidence was clearly fanciful) while alleged abusers were often subjected to hostile … cross-examination." On the other side, it was alleged that former victims had been grilled when giving evidence, while the abusers had not been asked obvious questions and had been let off lightly. On balance, these conflicting observations suggest that the Report must have been taking a middle line. However, it is possible to have a bad report which satisfies no-one. The real test will be the conclusions reached by the time the Report has been read thoroughly, digested and talked about. It will have been successful if the general conclusion is that it got the measure of the abuse, described and analysed it well, and came up with helpful and workable conclusions. Alison Taylor The only person to come out of the whole saga with a really positive image is Alison Taylor, who blew the whistle, not only once but time and again. She went to the top to make her points. She gathered information systematically. She sacrificed her career when the authorities disliked what she was saying. Understandably, her story has been seized upon in one newspaper after another, each with lengthy interviews or quotations. This is a subject which has the type of scandal on which tabloid journalism can thrive, but in all the papers which quote her, Alison offered balanced, insightful remarks, making telling points in a straightforward way and providing factual information. She deserves every credit. |
|
Letters and correspondence on the Waterhouse Report
To: Members of the Assembly Health & Social Services Committee. Dear Member, Subject: Waterhouse Report Implementation. Secretary of State for Wales Paul Murphy launched the Report by claiming that the "culture of complacency" of past senior Social Services managers has now been replaced by the "culture of vigilance". We have evidence that some senior managers and councillors are still putting the "good" name of their council first, before the need to properly investigate and discipline staff who abuse children. Their vigilance has been on silencing the whistleblowers and it has been clear from the evidence of Alison Taylor to the Tribunal that, without whistleblowing by ethical professionals, this sorry tale of harm to children may never have come to light. We are aware of abuse still apparently being improperly investigated and we have passed on this information to the Audit Commission in London for independent investigation. Additionally, we have seen that recent whistleblowers on child protection, adult abuse and financial malpractice in Welsh local authorities are still being pursued and harassed by senior managers and councillors. Waterhouse’s recommendations, the new procedures it will lead to and the appointment of a Commissioner for Children will not be enough if some senior management in local authorities in Wales (and elsewhere in the UK) continue to suppress and conceal complaints on behalf of vulnerable children and adults being harmed in council care. This will continue to undermine the good and caring practice of so many and to deter good staff who wish to speak out against harm and malpractice by their colleagues. It needs a change from the present bully culture of these senior managers and councilors, if the changes called for in Waterhouse (and in the Nolan Report) are to be carried out. As at least one Welsh M.P., Martyn Jones, has said, there is still concern that the Report has not looked hard enough into the covering up of abuse at the highest level. Whistleblowers concerns passed on to national politicians have been passed back to be dealt with in Wales. Thatcher and Tony Newton passed Alison Taylor’s concerns back to the Welsh Office where Derek Brushett, now serving 15 years for multiple paedophilia, was senior social services inspector. David Hanson, the Junior Minister, similarly urged us to take our concerns back to the same senior managers who failed to support whistleblowers and suppressed earlier reports on abuse. Now he has passed on our correspondence to Jane Hutt. A heavy responsibility lies upon the Committee; it has the responsibility to ensure that safe and caring cultures are created across Wales, when it has inherited the supervision of some local authorities which have developed the sadly unsafe cultures of covering up bad news, whatever the cost to the vulnerable. Sir William Utting has blamed the cultures of the old big pre-1996 Social Services Departments for the events in North Wales. There is plenty of evidence that suppression of whistleblowing is alive and well in the small post-1996 unitary authorities too. Beyond the Recommendations and the rewriting of procedures, the Assembly needs to set up mechanisms to ensure that there is real safety for children and adults beneath the cosmetics of documentary conformity. Yours faithfully,
Chris Clode. |