The buck has to stop with Sharon Shoesmith
Diane Abbott, MP for Hackney North & Stoke Newington
This article titled “The buck has to stop with Sharon Shoesmith” was written by Diane Abbott, for guardian.co.uk on Friday 27th May 2011 17.10 UTC
Am I the only person to think that there is something inappropriate about Sharon Shoesmith, the London borough of Haringey’s former head of children’s services, standing on the steps of the royal courts of justice giving the appearance of someone who thinks that she has been vindicated over the death of Peter Connelly, also known as Baby P?
All along, Shoesmith has appeared to think that it is wrong she should ultimately take responsibility for the death of that little boy. She seemed to believe that she earned her £133,000 salary through the elegance of her report writing alone. And she appears to have no notion that the buck should stop with her and that there should have consequences.
Yet, years before the tragic death of Baby P, Lord Laming produced a report about another child who died in hideous circumstances in Haringey, at a time before Shoesmith was involved. That child was Victoria Climbié. It was not much remarked on at the time, but Laming was clearly frustrated by the unwillingness of social services bosses to take any real responsibility for what happened. In fact some of these bosses were some were even able to move on to higher paying jobs. Laming said in his Victoria Climbié report:
“It is not to the handful of hapless, if sometimes inexperienced, front-line staff that I direct most criticism for the events leading up to Victoria’s death. While the standard of work done by those with direct contact with her was generally of very poor quality, the greatest failure rests with the managers and senior members of the authorities whose task it was to ensure that services for children, like Victoria, were properly financed, staffed, and able to deliver good quality support to children and families. It is significant that while a number of junior staff in Haringey Social Services were suspended and faced disciplinary action after Victoria’s death, some of their most senior officers were being appointed to other, presumably better paid, jobs. This is not an example of managerial accountability that impresses me much.”
And he returned to the theme in the report that he wrote after the death of Baby P: “I strongly believe that in future, those who occupy senior positions in the public sector must be required to account for any failure to protect vulnerable children from deliberate harm or exploitation.” But Shoesmith appears to believe that feeling sorry is enough. And, in her triumphalism, she has overlooked the fact the court has upheld the damning Oftsed report that formed the basis of her sacking.
I believe that is no coincidence that the Victoria Climbié tragedy was followed with in a very few years by the Baby P tragedy and in the very same local authority. As long as six-figure salary social services bosses feel that they will suffer no penalty when these tragedies happen on their watch, these tragedies will continue to recur. Laming can write brilliant reports. Rank and file social workers can be made to fill in even more forms. But if top social services bosses can keep their jobs and walk away with their gold plated pensions, then nothing will change.
Apparently Shoesmith could get nearly £400,000 compensation as a result of this case. It may be that there were procedural problems with her sacking. And like Laming, I do not believe in making scapegoats of “hapless frontline staff”. But, when it comes to the people at the very top of social services departments, the principle that they should pay with their jobs when things go as badly wrong as they did in the Baby P case is a good one.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010
Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.