Matters of opinion : Scots teenagers and their voting intentions in the coming referendum on Scottish independence.

On May 20th, 2014 a Daily Telegraph sponsored blog was posted online by the Daily Telegraph columnist, Jenny Djul about the voting intentions of Scottish teenagers in September’s referendum on Scottish independence . This would not have concerned us except that the blog was reproduced as a feed on the news page of a widely read, highly respected and influential network site which is concerned with the care and welfare of children and young people. The problem with news feeds like these is that they can be random and there is no guarantee that there will be a subsequent more balanced feed on any given topic from another source.

The teenage vote carries more influence in the upcoming referendum because the Scottish Government decided to lower the minimum age at which an individual might vote from 18 years to 16 years of age.

At goodenoughcaring there is not an official or indeed a collective view about what the voting intentions of teenager in the referendum should be. We welcome people’s different views on this. Our general approach is that any view related to the care and education of children and young people is valid as long as it is thoughtful and is not abusive or unfairly prejudiced toward children and young people, the adults who look after them, and the communities from which they come.

We are interested in a balanced discussion about this issue and we have posted a copy of the blog here together with some responses to it. We would welcome further comments.

From The Daily Telegraph Blog, May 20th, 2014

If Scottish teens are backing the Union, in whose name are the Nats fighting.

By Jenny Hjul

Alex Salmond must be regretting his push for a change in the voting rules to get young people on board for his independence referendum. The SNP’s cynical ploy to extend the suffrage to 16- and 17-year-olds, based on a mistaken belief that youngsters would vote Yes, has backfired spectacularly as enfranchised teenagers across Scotland endorse the Union.

David Cameron said on the Today programme that in the school debates he’d been to, the No campaign had triumphed, and his experience is borne out in the latest polls. Almost two-thirds of voters under 18 are worried about the economic future of a separate Scotland.

The Carrington Dean survey of teens aged 15-17 found that 41 per cent believe their parents would be worse off, compared to 21 per cent who think that they’d be better off. The survey also found that 64 per cent worry about the economic outlook post-independence, while only 17 per cent said they weren’t concerned.

School referendums since March this year show the SNP has an impossible task ahead with young voters: 84 per cent No, 16 per cent Yes in Craigmount High in Edinburgh; 70 per cent No, 30 per cent Yes at Hazelhead Academy in Aberdeen; 72 per cent No, 28 per cent Yes in Forres Academy in Moray; and 75 per cent No, 25 per cent Yes in Orkney High Schools, according to Better Together. In Lockerbie, 70 per cent voted in favour of remaining in the UK.

In Aberdeenshire, where the SNP won every seat in the last Scottish parliamentary elections, a mock referendum of more than 11,000 schoolchildren eligible to vote on 18 September found that almost 9,000 wanted to stay in the UK.

The Nationalists say that many young people have open minds on the issue and could be persuaded to change their opinions before September. But they should be careful not to sound too patronising. The fact that so many youngsters have rejected the separatists’ spin is not a reflection of a politicised generation but a sign that parochial nationalism has not captured the imagination of today’s youth.

A Better Together rep said after a debate in his school: "A lot of my friends went in undecided but after listening to both sides, they understood that being part of the UK means we have so many more opportunities than we would if we went it alone. "I think nationalism is a thing of the past. When we live in such an interconnected world and can speak face to face with our friends across the world at the touch of a button, why would we want to shut ourselves off from our neighbours just down the road?",/p>

Another youngster, writing in a national newspaper, said: "Ultimately, I can’t help but ask what the purpose of independence is? Why fix something that isn’t broken?"

University students are also predominantly in favour of the status quo. A student referendum at the University of Strathclyde was won by the Unionists with 55 per cent of the vote, against 45 per cent for the Nationalists.

And when more than 1,500 students from Glasgow Caledonian University were asked how they would vote, 63 per cent said No and 37 per cent said Yes. In February last year, more than 2,500 students at Glasgow University took part in a similar event and 62 per cent voted to stay in the UK, compared to 38 per cent against.

Young people today are the products of a social media revolution and their cultural context is global. They do not see their future in terms of shrinking horizons; they are children of the universe and their outlook is boundless.

It might be convenient for the Nationalists to dismiss young voters if they don’t toe the secessionist line, and say they represent a tiny part of the electorate. But their resounding No saps energy from the separatists, and gives their elders pause for thought.

If tomorrow’s student radicals – as well as its leaders, legislators, policy makers and law enforcers – are committed to the United Kingdom, then the Nationalists have to ask themselves: in whose name are they fighting?

Jenny Hjul, 
20 May, 2014

Comments

Stuart Russon writes,

I fully support lowering the voting age.  I can only go by my own experience and I reckon 13 or 14 would have been about the age I feel I could be trusted to vote properly and not just put an Andy Gray panini sticker (I was then and am now an Aston Villa supporter) over the ballot sheet.

I think I probably would’ve been more to the right at that age though. I still had the same instinctive desire for fairness that I do now but I had yet to learn how unfair and unbalanced society could be. I wasn’t particularly well informed about the news and it is only recently (last 10 years or so) that I’ve realised how much of the news that was reported to me was biased. Miners were thugs, football fans were thugs, socialism/communism was to be feared etc. etc. I could go on for yonks.

So I suppose if I do have a view on this aside from ‘yes, lower the voting age’ it would be to be cautious and aware of the propaganda machines that would be set-off to chase the young vote as perhaps younger people are more susceptible to direct marketing. I’ve no reason to make this sweeping statement except that I think I probably was more easily swayed and paid less attention to the detail when I was young which often means missing out on the truth I think.

Cynthia Cross observes,

Over the years I have pondered what I think about 16 year olds having the vote and on balance I think “Why not?”

I can’t think that their reasons for voting a particular way would be any worse than that of the average adult (who ever they are)  As John Stein says,” they will have to live with the outcome longer.”

I remember in 1951, when I was 16,  standing as Labour candidate in mock elections at school and think that issues were taken very seriously, and most people read the party manifestos.

Better education in critical thinking and problem solving would be helpful. Instead of mugging up facts to remember for exams and then forget, exams could be taken in reference libraries with access to the internet, so children could be given questions to solve, that involved finding information, verifying it is authentic, and showing that they know how to use it. Have we got the teachers to teach this, or the examiners to mark it?

About Scottish Independence, any sort of nationalism is worrying.  I cross out nationality on any forms I fill in and write born in England – it has caused problems on occasions.

Having said that I understand that Scottish, child care, justice education and  welfare law is better than that of England and of course I applaud the Scots wanting to get rid of nuclear weapons.

Jack Colhoun remarks,

From all the radio and television programmes I have heard and seen about this it seems to me these new 16 and 17 years old voters in Scotland think about their politics with more consideration than their elders.

John Stein writes,

What the right age for enfranchisement is, requires me to really think. Here in the USA I had not known 17-year-olds were allowed to vote, until I went to Wikipedia, which says that currently, 19 states allow 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections if they will be 18 in time to vote in the general election.

My thoughts are that the voting age should be based on whatever age the majority of the people of that age have the maturity to make an informed decision, and the responsibility to inform themselves. 16 seems reasonable. Many at that age are still in school, and therefore likely to be exposed to issues in class. More, in class there should be a mix of people with different views, so that healthy discussions could take place, beginning in class and continuing after class. The rest of us tend not to have that opportunity, with people, at least in this country, tending to associate with those with similar views, and refraining from expressing their views on political matters when associating with others whose views they do not know.

I remember first becoming interest in politics as a high school student. John F. Kennedy was campaigning in our home town (Reading, PA), and we were to leave school to attend. My best friend was most interested in politics and watched the nominating conventions on tv religiously, so he convinced me to go with him and got me interested. He was quite liberal. (He has since become so conservative that he refuses discuss politics with me).

My final point, on the issue of independence, the younger voters will have to live with the outcome longer than the older voters, and should be allowed to vote.

Jeremy Millar comments

I completely agree with Mark’s analysis of the Telegraph piece. As if David Cameron would ever visit a school in an area affected by his party’s ‘welfare reforms’. The YES campaign are vibrant and putting forward a positive message. People of all ages and social class are debating the issues. I believe that on the day people will take the leap of faith despite the fear factor being peddled persistently through the London controlled media.

Mark Smith writes

This certainly is biased - but perhaps no more or less than we might expect from the Telegraph - it epitomises a metropolitan arrogance that we're too wee, too poor, too stupid to govern ourselves. It's interesting even to look at the examples cited. At a very quick glance they're very middle class schools (but even here I'd question the results). There are other examples out there. Have a look at the futureukandscotland website for more academic analysis or google to watch and listen to the Queen Margaret University debate on the referendum here

My reading of the situation is somewhat ironic in that under 18s have actually experienced competent government under the SNP and do not have the sense of grievance that previous generations have experienced.

Having said that, for what it's worth my own kids tell me that there's a definite move towards a Yes vote amongst their pals.

This news and opinion article first appeared on the home page of the goodenoughcaring.com website on May 21st, 2014

Information for young Scottish voters : new survey evidence - Under 18-year olds’ views on Scottish Independence

With 100 days left before the vote on whether Scotland should become an independent country on Monday, 9 June, AQMeN hosts an event to present findings from a new survey on the youngest voters in this referendum.

The referendum on Scotland’s constitutional future in September 2014 will see 16- and 17-year old voters coming to the polls for the first time at the national level in Scotland. Following on from the AQMeN survey project last year, the team from Edinburgh University’s School of Social and Political Science will present updated findings based on a completely new survey conducted in April and May 2014. The survey addressed voters who will be able to participate in the referendum this September but who are currently under the age of 18 and therefore excluded from other representative surveys on this topic. While some polling institutes include 16- and 17-year olds in their samples, there are too few members of this age group in those polls to allow for any specific in-depth engagement with this age group.

The only comprehensive, representative survey of this age to date has been conducted as part of this project illustrating how the newly enfranchised young people suggested they would vote in 2014 and allowing us to examine what drove their decision making. Using the new data we will now be able to see whether one year later the campaigns have been able to engage with young people in an effective way and thus changing their views and perceptions.

At this event participants will hear presentations from the Edinburgh University team members

• Dr Jan Eichhorn (Social Policy)
• Prof Lindsay Paterson (Social Policy)
• Prof John MacInnes (Sociology)
• Dr Michael Rosie (Sociology)

Discussing a range of topics including:

• The methodology of the survey
• The referendum voting intentions of the young people
• Their evaluation of the information provided and the sources they use
• The way in which young people discuss the referendum and what impact that has on their views
• How their general political attitudes relate to their constitutional preferences
• Comparisons to the adult population regarding voting intention and evaluations of an independent Scotland

Attendance is free of charge, but places are strictly limited and registration is required. Please sign up here in order to secure your place 

Venue: Royal College of Physicians, 9 Queen Street, Edinburgh
Date: Monday, 9 June 2014
Time: 09.30 – 12.30

Venue: Royal College of Physicians, 9 Queen Street, Edinburgh

Date: Monday, 9 June 2014

Time: 09.30 – 12.30

There will be coffee and tea during the registration from 09.30 until 10.00. The presentation will begin subsequently and will be followed by an open discussion with the audience and the research team providing ample space for questions and engagement.

This news and information item first appeared on the home page of  goodenoughcaring.com on May 25th, 2014

Sometimes it’s best to keep it in the oven a little longer : issue 14 of the goodenoughcaring Journal will be on the table for December 18th, 2013

Hungry and perceptive visitors to our kitchen will notice that the oven is still on and our assortment of savouries will not be out on the table until Wednesday, December 18th. Some recipes demand a slower cooking time, but we are sure you will agree the wait is well worth it. This is perhaps the finest menu we’ve ever presented. The flavour of this issue is imbued in the main by the work and ideas of Clare and Donald Winnicott and their influence on our thinking about how children develop, and how social work can help troubled children and their families. We also have other dishes for those who wish to explore a wider cuisine.

More than a baker’s dozen of authors have drawn generously from the contents of their Winnicottian and other larders. Kiaras Gharabaghi writes  about the quality of the professional education for Child and Youth care . John Burton writes about compliance and abuse in care settings,Cynthia Cross considers the Donald Winnicott’s thoughts about residential child care, while Luci Ashbourne asks how we can understand the the organisational re-enactment of traumatised children and young people. John Fallowfield cites Donald Winnicott among others in his essay about child development and observation in social work, Joel Kanter writes about Clare’s and Donald’s notion of the social worker/therapist as 'transitional participant' when in relationship with children traumatised by dislocation, Patrick Tomlinson cites Winnicott’s game "The Squiggle "in his article about communicating with traumatised children, and Charles Sharpe refers to Clare Winnicott's interview with Alan Cohen, and the writings of others to consider what she has to offer residential child care. Jeanne Warren’s essay is a consideration of the Scottish philosopher, (and contemporary of the Winnicotts) John Macmurray’s and the American educationalist, Nel Nodding’s ideas about the education of children. Charlotte Witheridge writes about the application of psychodynamic thinking to residential work with children and Mark Smith questions the application of the psychodynamic approach to residential work with children.

Bob Royston presents an article in our series of childhood of memoirs adding to our new bake's relish with an account of a period in his life living in a ‘country club.’ John Stein adds spice our new bake with recollections of Richard T. Cass, the first social worker he ever met and tells us about what he learnt from Richard, Kevin Ball puts forward a framework that should assure quality in residential child care as he gives a comprehensive explanation and evaluation of the role of the Regulation 33 visitor, and Sara Kirkwood's article about children's experiences of foster respite care in a Scottish hutting community rounds off our classic fare, though “The Girl from the Workhouse” an article from a magazine ‘conducted’ by Charles Dickens is a fascinating petit four.

We hope visitors to the goodenoughcaring website and readers of the Journal will agree that they are in for a pre-winter holiday treat.

Three cheers for the increased support to children in foster care ! Now let’s do it for those in residential care

The current United Kingdom Conservative led coalition government has not altogether covered itself in glory in its treatment of troubled families and troubled children and so the announcement made today, December 4th, 2013, by the government minister for Children and Families, Edward Timpson, that children being looked after in foster care in England will continue, if they so wish, to have their foster care and support funded until the age of 21, is one to be welcomed. This is something that foster carers and others involved in the care and education of children looked after in the care system have long called for.

Mr Timpson, whose own family fostered nearly 90 children, stated that the government would pledge £40m to this initiative over three years and the measure will be introduced during the third reading of the Children and Families Bill next year. I congratulate Mr Timpson. His intention will give us something of which, as a community, we can be proud.

There is of course another smaller, though significant, group of looked after children. These are children in children's homes and they are perhaps the most vulnerable group of young people in our community. They are children who for a variety of reasons are not available for foster care. Too frequently their difficulties are seen as 'more problematic' rather than - as they should seen - ‘different.’ So the residential care they are provided with becomes, quite wrongly, understood as a of 'last resort’ sump of care when it is clear that for these children it is a ‘first resort.’ It is what they need. Let us hope that within a very short period of time the government will announce a similar level of support for children and young people who are in residential care beyond the age of 18 years. Their needs for further support may well be different, perhaps more expensive, but if such support is provided it will be a further welcome sign that as a community we are attempting to edge towards becoming civilised. We will have demonstrated that we are as determined to establish, as much as we can, positive future prospects for young people in residential care, which are equal to those now being put in place for children growing up in foster care.

Information source BBC news at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-25201336

This opinion piece first appeared on the home page of the goodenoughcaring website at http://www.goodenoughcaring.com on December 4th, 2014

Comments

John Stein writes : 

I agree with your comment about residential child care being 'first resort' rather than last resort. I couldn't agree more. (Except that I strongly prefer the term, 'residential treatment' to residential care). Virtually every child I met in residential placement needed coordinated treatment in the life space. 'Care,' especially here in Louisiana, implies 3 meals a day and a roof and a bed with an adult with no more than a high school education to look after them. After all anyone can care for kids. That attitude is all too pervasive in our social work profession here, and it runs the programs.

A rich and nourishing offering : issue 14 of the goodenoughcaring Journal will be brought out of the oven on December 18th, 2013

On December 18th, 2013, Issue 14 of the goodenoughcaring Journal will be brought out of the oven and put online. The flavour of this issue is nuanced by the work of Clare and Donald Winnicott and its influence on our thinking about how children develop, how they are brought up and how social work can help troubled children and their families. Our authors have drawn generously from the ingredients in their Winnicottian larders. John Burton writes about compliance and abuse in care settings, Cynthia Cross considers the Winnicotts' impact on residential child care, John Fallowfield cites Donald Winnicott among others in his essay about child development and observation in social work, Joel Kanter considers Clare’s and Donald’s notion of the social worker/therapist as 'transitional participant' when in relationship with children traumatised by dislocation, Patrick Tomlinson cites Winnicott’s game "The Squiggle "in his article about communicating with traumatised children. Charles Sharpe reflects upon Clare Winnicott's interview with Alan Cohen and examines her influence on social work, and Jeanne Warren’s essay is a consideration of the Scottish philosopher, (and contemporary of the Winnicotts) John Macmurray’s ideas about the education of children.

Added to our new bake's relish is Bob Royston’s account of a childhood spent in a ‘country club’, an article which continues our series of individual memoirs of childhood, John Stein's recollections of Richard T. Cass, the first social worker he ever met, tell us all that John learnt from him, while Kevin Ball provides a comprehensive explanation and evaluation of the role of the Regulation 33 visitor whose task it is to monitor the care provided for children who live in children’s homes. Finally, for some, the icing on the cake will be “The Girl from the Workhouse” an article from a magazine edited by Charles Dickens.

More articles may well be added to further spice our mix but we hope that visitors to the goodenoughcaring website and readers of the Journal will agree this issue is looking to be a rich and nourishing offering.

This item first appeared on the homepage of the goodenoughcaring website on November 27th, 2013.

More comment on Richard Webster and his book "Bryn Estyn : the making of a modern witch hunt"

The issues of alleged child abuse in residential child care and alleged false accusations  of child care workers continue to create deep concern for all who have been involved in this field : for children and young people who are placed  in residential care settings, for adults who experienced residential care during their childhood as well as for those who in a variety of roles are or were providers of residential child care. The sadness and anguish we feel as these issues cast a shadow over residential child care is surely because the latter is a human endeavour which springs from an altruistic desire to give unfortunate children a better chance in life. 

Richard Webster's book continues to be a focal point for the tensions that these matters inevitably create. Rory Connors has written to us commenting on John Molloy's article about Richard Webster's book. John's article first published in December, 2013, has been re-published here in order to give context to Rory's comments.   The article was originally published in the goodenoughcaring Journal. 

A link to Rory's wider writing about these issues can be found at Irish Salem.

The discussion and comments which took place in this blog about Richard Webster as both a man and an author at the time of his death can be found on the goodenoughcaring blog along with Mark Smith's tribute to him.

Mark Smith's article "Two book reviews : Kathy's Real Story by Hermann Kelly and The Secret of Bryn Estyn by Richard  Webster can be found in the goodenoughcaring Journal.

Looking back at Richard Webster's book  “The Secret of Bryn Estyn – the making of a Modern Witch Hunt”

(Orwell Press 2005) (Paperback 2009)

by John Molloy

The death of Richard Webster in July 2011 was marked by a number of obituaries in the British Media and on websites. They drew a picture of a very sincere, conscientious scholarly man who scrupulously attempted to expose one of the great injustices of our time – an alleged witch hunt that resulted in the imprisonment of many innocent social care workers. Although I was familiar with some of the press coverage at the time of the North Wales investigations in the 1990’s and with Ty Mawr in particular I was not aware of the publication of “The Secret of Bryn Estyn” until Richard’s death, earlier this year. The warmth expressed in the obituaries and the strength of support for his work left me feeling slightly uncomfortable. My understanding was that he had exposed a witch hunt, and that arising from “The Secret of Bryn Estyn” this “witch hunt” theory that all the upper echelons of society, (the press, police, courts, and government itself) were conspiring against social care workers, believing them to be paedophiles, child abusers, paedophile rings or whatever. With this in mind I set myself the task of finding out what the secret of Bryn Estyn was. I read the book.

Trawling through the obituaries I was struck by one comment in Mark Smith’s tribute* to Richard Webster that he “couldn’t help but think that there is something quintessentially English about his life.” I think this comment helped me understand some of where Richard Webster’s passion, zeal, and commitment came from in undertaking such a detailed comprehensive review of the facts. It also helped me understand where some of his arguments led him astray.

The Waterhouse Tribunal was set up in 1996 arising from a decision made by John Major, the British Prime Minister, following the outcry in the British media about the allegations coming out of North Wales and Gwent. It is important to place this in the context of the culture of the time. Richard Webster chose not to do this in his book. John Major had replaced Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister in 1990. In her time as Prime Minister, Thatcher through her Chief Press Secretary Sir Bernard Ingham often used the media to influence the public through leaks and briefings, using misinformation as a tactic. This was designed to cause public outrage, demonising and defaming anyone who dared defy Thatcherism. This in turn influenced the courts and gave licence to the police to operate heavy handed tactics. Without this tactic we might not have seen the brutality of the police in dealing with the N.U.M. at the behest of John McGregor and the National Coal Board, the brutality of police in dealing with the press workers because of the move to Wapping, the vilification of Liverpool fans at the Hillsborough Tragedy, the operation of a “Shoot to Kill Policy” in Belfast and indeed Gibraltar, not to mention the wrongful convictions of Annie Maguire, The Guildford Four, and the Birmingham Six through the manufacturing of evidence. These stand out as some of the most extreme examples. I could easily add many more. By the time of the emergence of the scandal in North Wales, the press (especially the tabloid press) had almost assumed a role of being another arm of Government. While the circumstances of children’s homes in Wales was something new and unique in their own right, this trial by media, and resultant unsafe convictions through the courts, following corrupt police investigations, was not new.

It was in this context that a strong left wing anti-authoritarian, anti-police, atmosphere grew up particularly amongst some of the more extreme members of the Labour Party. These were branded in the media as “The Looney Left”. One of the more infamous areas where this thrived was in the Merseyside area, where Labour leader Derek Hatton stood out as an infamous example. By coincidence Merseyside and nearby Chesire experienced more police trawling investigations than any other area outside of London. This was the context in which the North Wales Children’s Homes scandals emerged. I think it is a mistake to look at the “Secret of Bryn Estyn” without looking at this wider context. With this in mind if we accepted Richard Webster’s assertion that there was a witch hunt, it would have to be in the context of saying that this was just one more witch hunt in an ocean of others.

When describing Peter Howarth’s shock at being convicted Richard Webster wrote:

“One dimension of British Society which is not always understood by those who observe the workings of our judicial system is the intensity and dept of the faith which most ordinary people have in British justice.” (p 372)

Earlier he had described how Peter Howarth had chosen to rely on a duty solicitor to defend him because of his mistaken belief that because he was innocent he would not be convicted. The fact that Howarth, among others, had left themselves open to allegations being made against them by their professional practice, in particular by insisting on the wearing of a pyjamas with no underwear by residents while visiting his flat, did not help. The fact that three other adults who had worked for the same or related organisations were charged with and later convicted of similar offences did not help either. On the one hand the actions taken by Peter Howarth did not just express a deep faith in English justice. It was the action of an extremely naive man. “The secret of Bryn Estyn” goes some way towards attempting to correct the miscarriage of justice suffered by Peter Howarth. Unfortunately, Peter Howarth had died in Prison before Richard’s book was published.

The facts as Richard Webster presents them, that led up to his conviction and apparently subsequent death in prison are more frightening than any theory around witch hunts.

In summary, one disgruntled former manager who lost her job because of her record of poor performance, made a number of third party allegations. The police investigating them found her allegations to be untrue. She enlisted the help of a former resident from a children’s home, who, acting as her acolyte, sought to involve others. The former manager met with a journalist, who when facing a tight deadline, for whatever reason stated, did not do the correct research. This same woman met with two anti-police labour councillors. From the interactions of these five people, and their different individual motivations, ten years of trauma, trawling, interrogation, convictions, deaths, and suicides emerged.

Initially, that quintessential intensity and debt of faith in British justice seemed well justified. The police were very appropriate in how they investigated the early complaints. As the allegations changed, and the press began to talk of a police cover up, the reactions of the police became very defensive. It was this that changed the entire climate. Although Richard Webster presents the facts in great detail, I found it frustrating that his constant referring to a witch hunt, took him away from stating that at some point, the police acted as if Social Care Workers were just collateral damage. The goal of the police was to deal with the rumours that “had circulated that the force was riddled by freemasonry and that this, together with the participation of its own officers in an alleged paedophile ring, had been one of the principle motives for an alleged cover up.” (p 436) In order to clear their name, the police had to be seen to be investigating the allegations and had to get convictions. “The Secret of Bryn Estyn” is a very detailed account of how they went about this, deviating from all previous accepted practice, perverting the course of justice, regardless of the implications for others of their actions.

What Alison Taylor and her acolyte Ryan Tanner had begun, was now out of their hands. Thanks to the salacious journalism of Dean Nelson, and the interference of Labour counsellors Malcolm King and Dennis Parry, a police trawl began, taking on a life of its own.

Richard Webster stated when talking of the Waterhouse Tribunal that:

“The North Wales police were acutely conscious that one of the main reasons the Tribunal had been called into being was that allegations had been made against them.” (p 436)

Having read his account of how the North West Police went about the trawling for allegations, in order to clear their own name, Richard Webster has made a very strong and compelling argument that the methods used were inappropriate, unjust, and corrupt. I don’t believe he used these words, but in every detail he recorded how allegations were sought, how they were edited, and in Chapters 66 and 67 how information was either withheld or disregarded if it damaged the case for prosecution.

“Careful study of the ‘unused evidence’ made it quite clear that the case presented in the trial had been arrived at through careful editing. For obvious reasons the prosecution had discarded the more blatant fabrications.” (p 486)

The account given implies either that the defence legal teams were all inept or else there were major breaches of the appropriate disclosure protocols. What is described in the book must surely represent a major corruption of the justice system on the part of the investigating police.

Rather than look at the witch hunt theory, it could be argued that if the Waterhouse Tribunal was not aware of the inappropriate investigation practices, then some of their rulings would be reasonable, rather than be part of a conspiracy or witch hunt.

For example in “note 516” it is stated by the Tribunal that:

“Our approach has been that, in the absence of a successful appeal, the convictions are evidence that the offences were committed and that it has not been within our jurisdiction to question the correctness of those convictions, unless possibly fresh evidence were to be tendered going to the root of the convictions.” (p 668)

I believe this to be a sensible argument given that if the Tribunal was not to take on the role of an Appeal Court, which it was never designed to be, then it had no other choice than to accept the legitimacy of the convictions, given its implicit trust in the integrity of the police investigation. Whereas Richard Webster writes that the Tribunal Chairperson, Sir Ronald Waterhouse dismissed the undertaking of a detailed examination of each specific allegation as being “impracticable and wastefully expensive”, Richard goes on to say “that a fundamental principle of justice was ignored” (p423). The predisposition to accept the police investigation’s evidence without proper scrutiny is understandable if we look at Richard Webster’s comments quoted earlier on the deep faith British people had in the justice system. One of the most striking examples of this was seen earlier in an unrelated rejection of an appeal by the Birmingham Six in 1979. Lord Denning, in his ruling rejecting the appeal stated:

“If they won, it would mean that the police were guilty of perjury; that they were guilty of violence and threats; that the confessions were involuntary and improperly admitted into evidence; and that the convictions were erroneous…. That was such an appalling vista that every sensible person would say, ‘it cannot be right that these actions should go any further’.”

Lord Alfred Denning

(from the Appeals Court Transcript 1979.)

When we look at the comments made in 1999 in “You told me you loved me” – a booklet published by three police forces in the Merseyside, Cheshire and Liverpool areas explaining the process and guidelines for Police Trawling in cases of institutional child abuse it is stated that:

“ Critics have pointed out that these operational methods represent a departure from normal police practice. This may be true but the methods have been scrutinised by the judiciary in trials without criticism to date.” (p 492)

If Richard Webster’s assertion that evidence had been altered, edited, or omitted in order to secure convictions then any scrutiny “by the judiciary in trials” was bound to end “without criticism to date.” The fact that this document recognised criticism of their techniques may well have reflected a growing unease within the police forces involved. However, it was not until 2000 with the collapse of the prosecution of David Jones, a well known football manager that a serious discrediting of the process took place.

It is difficult to fathom how the trawling experience took on a life of its own. What started out as a normal investigation became contaminated by allegations of a police cover-up and then in their desperation to accumulate quantities of allegations, it was further contaminated by police forces and local authorities talking of compensation.

Be it greed, revenge, selling newspapers, or making political gain; none of this seemed to matter anymore. The corrupt trawling process became a monster that could not be stopped. That deep faith that people had in the justice system was ill-founded.

I believe that in trying to make the argument that there was a witch hunt, Richard Webster does not join the dots up. Instead by using emotive words like “witch hunt”, he distracts the reader from the much more real worry about the power of the police to corrupt the justice system to meet their own ends.

This was one aspect of the book that I found frustrating to read. “The Secret of Bryn Estyn” is a very significant review of how the investigations were mishandled, and gives a real explanation as to how so many allegations were made against social care workers, not just across Britain but in many other countries as well. We owe Richard Webster a dept of gratitude for the immensity of the task he achieved in completing this review. My frustration with the book is that from time to time, he slips into a type of pamphleteering with highly emotive or unfounded comments. By extrapolating his findings from his British experiences he seems to assume that all other police trawls were as equally unreliable. I was astonished at his claim that:

“In the English speaking world alone, the number of false allegations of sexual abuse made in all contexts in the last thirty years must certainly be numbered in hundreds of thousands and has already reached millions.” (p 550)

It is difficult to see how he could have reached such figures other than by just guessing. Such a comment takes from the credibility of his research and leaves him open to a counter charge, to the one he makes of the police in their publication “You told me you loved me” (1999) that “at no point is the problem of false allegations even discussed”. It would be easy to criticise “The Secret of Bryn Estyn” for the scant and at times patronising acceptance that some allegations were true. One comment he makes in the chapter “Fragments of a Witch Hunt” stands out:

“Once again it must immediately be acknowledged that some of the allegations which have been made against Roman Catholic Priests – possibly the majority of the early ones – are genuine. Others, including a number based on bizarre recovered memories are quite evidently false.” (p 542)

Such a comment leaves me gasping in wonder at how anyone would have the resources to be able to carry out the research that could lead to such a conclusion! Surely the older convictions, because of the length of time elapsed would be the least convincing? The Cloyne Report 2011, which included a review of previously withheld records of abuse by Catholic Priests in the Diocese of Cloyne (Ireland) included many recent cases of abuse that the Diocese had tried to cover up. These were generally not the subject of police trawling or promises of compensation.

I am very mindful of the fact that “The Secret of Bryn Estyn” is a colossal work that goes some way to explaining what emerged from North Wales and damaged the image of Social Care Workers throughout Britain. I would argue that despite the great detail and comprehensive research, trying to prove the existence of a witch hunt takes from the real strength of this story. It is a very clear depiction of Social Care Workers being used as collateral to clear the reputation of the police. It is also a clear depiction of the discovery that the faith that ordinary people had in their justice system was ill founded.

In saying this I am reminded of the old sit-com character in “Till death do us part”, Alf Garnett, and his great sense of National pride and loyalty to the Royal family. I always found it ironic that some of those who are so praising of the institutions of state are often those most excluded by them.

While it is really important that Social Care Workers should not see themselves as victims of witch hunts, I was moved by one section in particular when Richard summarised what might well be the real “Secret of Bryn Estyn” or even Social Care in general when he talks of this episode as constituting “one of the most terrible instances of collective ingratitude in our recent history” He goes on to explain:

“For decade after decade, we expected that one of the most poorly regarded and poorly paid groups of workers in our society would look after some of the most difficult and disruptive children with conscientiousness and care. To an astonishing extent this is what tens of thousands of dedicated workers actually did. They worked in obscurity, often with immense patience and generosity, to give such children a second chance. (p 574)

It was their altruism, idealism and “the sense of service they owed to society” that made them so vulnerable. They were easy prey for a police force wanting to save their reputation. They were not the victims of a witch hunt. Five people with their own individual agenda started the process. It then took on a life of its own. Ten years of trauma ensued. Aspects of it still go on today. No one gets over wrongful convictions. Families grieve those who died. Those who lied still have to face their Maker.

Finally, let me finish with an often used quote attributed to Sir Bernard Ingham, Thatcher’s Chief Press Secretary, when talking of the media. He said:

“Many journalists have fallen for the conspiracy theory of Government. I assure you that they would produce more accurate work if they adhered to the cock-up theory.”

Richard Webster’s “Secret of Bryn Estyn” is a very important book. Social Care Managers, in particular, should read it carefully. It is hard to understand how the dismissal of one person could have such devastating consequences. There are lessons to be learned from almost every chapter. We owe Richard Webster a debt of gratitude for the time, the dedication, and the passion he brought to this work. His death brought his work back into the limelight again. May he rest in peace.



May 20th, 2013
Rory Connors comments

I refer to  John Molloy's article on the late Richard Webster's "The Secret of Bryn Estyn" and in particular his comment regarding Richard's statement that

“Once again it must immediately be acknowledged that some of the allegations which have been made against Roman Catholic Priests – possibly the majority of the early ones – are genuine. Others, including a number based on bizarre recovered memories are quite evidently false.” (p 542)

In his article John Molloy observes:

"Such a comment leaves me gasping in wonder at how anyone would have the resources to be able to carry out the research that could lead to such a conclusion! Surely the older convictions, because of the length of time elapsed would be the least convincing? The Cloyne Report 2011, which included a review of previously withheld records of abuse by Catholic Priests in the Diocese of Cloyne (Ireland) included many recent cases of abuse that the Diocese had tried to cover up. These were generally not the subject of police trawling or promises of compensation."

I supplied Mr Webster with much of his information regarding Ireland and he later published it on his website as "States of Fear, The Redress Board and Ireland's Folly"
http://www.richardwebster.net/print/xbrynestynireland.htm

What I sent him was mainly material on false allegations against the Christian Brothers and the Sisters of Mercy rather than Catholic priests and of course the Cloyne Report came out AFTER the publication of his book. However here are a few facts about that particular scandal:

The sole result of several years of police investigations was the conviction of ONE priest for mutual masturbation of a 16 year old youth decades before. He got a suspended sentence.

Another priest was the subject of 11 allegations. Nine were dismissed by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Two went to court; in the first case the judge directed the jury to acquit, in the second the jury acquitted the priest.

The DPP was forced to make a public statement that it was a criminal offence for members of the public to attempt put pressure on him to order a prosecution. This was probably the only time in the history of the Irish State that such an event had occurred and indicates the level of public hysteria about child abuse allegations.

The Bishop of Cloyne had been the subject of false sexual allegations for which the UK Guardian was forced to alologise in 1994 and TV3 in 1999. Presumably these experiences  must have affected the  way the Bishop dealt  with allegations against his priests. Yet Judge Yvonne Murphy choose to ignore them completely - they do not appear in the Cloyne Report.

Incidentally Mr Webster does refer in his book to one notorious false allegation against the Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland. Deputy Pat Rabbitte brought down the government led by Fianna Fail in 1994 by falsely suggesting that Cardinal Cahal Daly had conspired with Attorney General Harry Whelehan to prevent the extradition of Fr Brendan Smyth to Northern Ireland. This set the scene for the hysteria that followed and  that continues to the present day.

From Maria to Munro Safeguarding Children : Procedures, Regulation or Nurturing Relationships?

On a date in July 2013* yet to be announced, the Child Care History Network is holding a conference at the Planned Environment Therapy Trust at Toddington near Cheltenham. The theme of the conference From Maria to Munro Safeguarding Children : Procedures, Regulation or Nurturing Relationships? is intended to provide a springboard for some fundamental thinking about child protection. For the last forty years child protection and safeguarding have dominated social work with children and their families. The conference will look at how this thinking has developed and ask whether it is time to move on to a different way of viewing ways of meeting children's needs.

How do we best protect children? Is safeguarding still the top priority? Should we place a greater emphasis on nurture? What else should we be doing? As with all CCHN events, delegates shall not only be considering historical developments but also looking at how we can apply what we have learnt from history.

Among the speakers who will be presenting to the conference are Sir Roger Singleton, Chair of the Independent Safeguarding Authority and Mark Smith, Senior Lecturer at the School of Social Work at the University of Edinburgh.

As well as the presentations, the day will provide opportunities for delegates to participate and share thinking on the theme.

The date and further conference details will appear on this page and on the CCHN website in the very near future.


* Please note the CCHN announced that the date of the conference was to have been June 21st, 2013 but due to unforeseen circumstances the conference has been deferred to a later date.

CCHN has provided us with the following rationale for the conference :

Safeguarding Children : achievement or rhetoric ?

Safeguarding children is officially defined as :

The process of protecting children from abuse or neglect, preventing impairment of their health and development, and ensuring they are growing up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care that enables children to have optimum life chances and enter adulthood successfully. (Ofsted, 2005)

The claim made for the concept of "safeguarding children" is that it is comprehensive and goes beyond what its proponents describe as "basic child protection." The new view is that "safeguarding children" deals with a wider spectrum of issues than what we have come to know as child protection. Safeguarding children, it is suggested, provides effective child protection where the latter is only a part of wider work to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. Safeguarding children also demands that all agencies and individuals should aim to be proactive in safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children so that the need to protect children from harm is reduced. (Department of Education, 2013).

In our conference we will trace the narrative of the history of what has come to be known as "safeguarding children" and we will also hope to examine the claim that "safeguarding children" really does represent a paradigm shift from what was termed "child protection" to the extent that it will help all children and make all children safer.

From the Maria Colwell Report of 1974 through to the Munro Review of Child Protection in 2011 there is a sense in which "child protection" has grown into a huge empire in the social work school of professional thought. Certainly it has engendered a continuous production line of different policies, and procedures. This process is still alive and working among us without, it seems, ever creating a situation with which we can rest more easily. More importantly there are still many children who live in poverty, who suffer neglect, who fail to flourish, who do not enjoy good health and there are still children who are the victims of emotional, physical and sexual abuse.

It has been suggested that the problem with child protection is that in a way it has become an institution with some of the flaws characteristic of big institutions. It was born out of professional failure and the tragic death of a child and it sustains itself in the aftermath of further tragedies by producing literature and teaching that speaks of "imperatives" which in turn cultivates a blame culture when things go wrong. It is a system which says, after the event. "Why didn't we do a risk assessment?" rather than saying a priori, "Now have we made sure our children have what they need to see them happily through today?"

There are those who would argue that the formal safeguarding risk assessment procedures we have in place to safeguard children are too impersonal and inorganic. Too often they disregard the views of children and parents alike. They would suggest that it might be better to approach "child protection" in a fundamentally different way by providing unhappy children with the kind of natural nurturing relationships they need with adults: relationships uncluttered by the requirements of regulation and procedure. This of course might necessitate not only the provision of means to train people to develop their already naturally held nurturing capabilities in order to extend these to the care of other people's children. For this scenario to flourish there may be a need to cultivate a more nurturing social climate within our wider community if children are to be safeguarded.

On the surface safeguarding children appears to be straightforward: something that should just happen yet it evokes contentious and complex issues as well as many ideas about how these would be best approached. Our hope is the conference will stimulate you to pursue, discuss and debate these ideas as well as the many others that will arise during the day.

This news and opinion item first appeared on the goodenoughcaring website home page on April 11th, 2013.