OK, this is not good: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13329634 It is similarly reported in the Telegraph who first reported on it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8501369/Public-sector-pay-soaring-out-of-control.html

Wilt Portfolio

It is just unacceptable. And of course, who is to blame – fucking Gordon Brown. Grrrrr!

The Tory Government (sorry coalition) need to get this sorted, big time. It is outrageous that any local/central government (sick leave) and gold plated pension lacklustre officer can Lord it over the much hard working and accountable private sector worker – it is a joke not very funny.

Wilt Portfolio

The entire sector of local government should be on a commission only basis, i.e. not providing direct services and commissioning officers on a maximum salary of £20,000 per year, and a Chief Executive on £30,000 per year. The private and third sector (voluntary sector – otherwise private sector by another name) can then determine their own charging.

Wilt

What a total dork. Impersonating a social worker: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2011/03/08/116417/first-conviction-for-impersonating-social-worker.htm This relates to Tracy Smithy convicted of the said offence under the Care Standards Act 2000.

Wilt knows of someone who impersonates a lawyer – she lives in Warwickshire. She also is a total jerk, allegedly!

Allegedly, a well known term used by Ian Hislop, has some advantages.

It is also known that the GSCC are allegedly a regulator.

Perhaps all three, Tracy, the jerk from Warks and the GSCC should get together and share in ‘how to be a fraud’ party – and toast a drink to their fabulous failures.

Wilt is up at some unearthly God forsaken hour to catch a flight on business – back Friday night and then a family wedding Saturday.  Who gets married on a six nation’s rugby weekend, for Gawds sake – have these people no respect? Wilt will have to be dragged from the hotel room to go to the wedding, then back to the hotel room to watch a second game before being dragged again to the formal reception!

Wilt

Again Tim Loughton (Children’s Minister) is giving the Courts and adoption agencies a ‘heads up’ that they need to get their act together. Key to his concerns are:

Wilt Portfolio

“I think the courts are too process-driven. There are some cases where very clearly there is no way back to a child’s birth parents and the child is a strong candidate for adoption. Do we need to go through quite as many processes for that child as for another where it is not such a clear cut decision? I think we can use a more proportionate approach in many cases.”

Loughton gives his views in a claimed exclusive interview withy Community Care here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2011/02/23/116332/minister-wants-ombudsman-for-contentious-adoptions.htm

He adds:

“Whenever I speak to adoption services and adoption panels they say their job is being made harder because of court processes and delays: in getting the hearing; in the fact that judges are always asking for that extra expert witness statement and so forth.

“Then I speak to judges and they say adoption panels are taking so long to process paperwork, hold meetings and bring cases back to court. There just seems to be a huge disconnect at the moment.”

Wilt Portfolio

All this is of course with a backdrop to issues of concern over trans-racial placements, or the lack of, due to political correctness among social workers, as reported in the Telegraph:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/8340410/Adoption-shake-up-new-guidelines-will-stop-social-engineering.html

And here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/8340280/Adoption-shake-up-the-five-key-points.html

Although it is claimed these are new issues, they are in fact very old, well ingrained and stale issues – there is absolutely nothing new in these assertions by Michael Gove, but he is right to reinforce earlier policy which negates the damaging and irresponsible attitudes of some social workers to hold onto a false and misleading concept of integration of children into families who must (at all costs) reflect a child’s ethnicity.

However, if he feels adoption services are better or at least equally delivered by Voluntary Adoption Agencies (VAA’s) then he must have second and third thoughts, we think.

In this article Community Care report: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2011/02/22/116318/government-urges-more-use-of-voluntary-adoption-agencies.htm that the Government urges more use of VAA’s. Do Gove and Loughton really think that will improve matters – some of the worst offenders of political correctness occupy posts in the voluntary sector.

Wilt Portfolio

And to add injury to insult, voluntary agencies (REMEMBER THE WORD VOLUNTARY) charge such massive fees as set out by BAAF (British Association for Adoption & Fostering) http://www.baaf.org.uk/ to the tune of £20,640 + £3,440 to cover a package of post-adoption services for each child placed. That is £24K per child, and more if it involves London based agencies. See the BAAF list of charges here: http://www.baaf.org.uk/webfm_send/2108

A VOLUNTARY ADOPTION AGENCY charging fees to a local authority? Is Wilt confused or do these people obtain grants and pay executives massive salaries, or what? These are not voluntary agencies but a private business masquerading as voluntary agencies – they have a mantra, as described by BAAF themselves as “Every Child Deserves a Family.”

Mmmmmmm, yes at a cost and profit to the voluntary agencies.

Not infrequently Wilt undertakes kinship or otherwise general assessments of prospective adopters and foster carers, at a fraction of the cost, normally within the region of £3500 – £4000.00.  How is then possible for voluntary agencies need to charge £24K?

So Mssrs Gove and Loughton – think on mates. Costs and political correctness? Who do you think runs the national adoption register? Well, it is of course BAAF who also set the national inter-agency fees for inter-agency placements.

Is there a conflict of interest here?

In Big Society Terms there needs to be a root and branch review of what is the distinction between so called VOLUNTARY agencies and effectively private business – and not just their tax breaks.

Wilt

Wilt Portfolio

This is a long article – but read on, as it is worthwhile we humbly submit. Above all it gives a two finger salute to those who attempt to curtail freedom of speech.

It has been a little while since we turned our attention to the subject of Calleja, that Elizabeth of Leamington Spa. After her arrest last year for suspected harassment Wilt et al reflected on her character.

Wilt Portfolio

She remains a regular visitor to Regulator Watch via her T-Mobile Android driven and Safari web browser on the tiny screen of her mobile phone – she appears to believe her activity by such media is undetectable or not permanently recorded both on her device and by the Regulator Watch “sniffer” programme to monitor access to the website. No such luck Elizabeth – your every click is recorded, by us and T-Mobile.

Whereas Elizabeth was not ultimately charged with any offence and released from bail, the arrest, we think, had a definite impact on her activity – Wilt has received reports that (due to bail conditions) she did not access the websites of those companies who brought the police complaint against her, for the full period of her three month bail. She has on a couple of occasion’s accessed one company (complainant) website post release from bail.

Probably for the second time ever, Calleja was on the back foot – it was she who was under scrutiny and despite her efforts to achieve the same it was not those who she complained about but in fact her who was arrested. The police were in fact rather annoyed that this “crying wolf” Calleja was an utter menace and distraction from the real and vital crimes that police forces try to address daily. This is not a dissimilar position adopted by the former CSCI (Commission for Social Care Inspection) who, were to their credit, the first to take on the task of dismantling the Calleja/Plaskitt mythology of “victimisation.”

Plaskitt is the former Labour MP for Warwick & Leamington Spa. You can find details here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Plaskitt or upcoming http://www.jamesplaskitt.com/ – the latter is reserved and we can only assume the twat has something in mind. Perhaps photographs of dunes!?

James Plaskitt - Wikepedia

Police “forces” is used in the plural because it was not just West Mercia Police but also several other police forces that were in receipt of complaints – Calleja will and has made multiple complaints on the same “stale” issues to numerous agencies.

The list of agencies Calleja has complained to is far too numerous to mention (they run into the dozens) in her near 11 year campaign to, what she/Plaskitt term as an effort to clear her name, to attack the character of others – the classic “attack is the best defence” approach which she and idiot Plaskitt (now ex-MP) undertook in a rather underhand way.

Wilt Portfolio

Quite a number of agencies were initially taken in by this nun with a switchblade and took up her cause in the mistaken belief that Calleja, aided and abetted by former MP Plaskitt, was a victim of the big bad system. These were her high points. Some of it was captured in the CSCI Internal Review Report here: http://regulatorwatch.co.uk/2009/11/csci-internal-review-report/ and thereafter her demise was assured. Well done CSCI.

Come the general election in 2010 (when Plaskitt lost his Parliamentary seat) Calleja was on her own, most agencies had realised she was simply “vexatious“(including even the GSCC) and her reputation with the said dozens of agencies was in disarray.

After her arrest in 2010 she focused her switchblade, very nun like, on Regulator Watch which has, among other matters, reported the alternative and more truthful story of Calleja – she had begun the process by reporting her (false) woes to the press herself, aided and abetted by former MP Plaskitt in both the House of Commons and the press. She made herself public, her cause public and seriously discredited others very publicly – is it therefore a surprise that others defend themselves publicly via Regulator Watch?

Plaskitt it appears, as some describe him, been a “poodle” or “lap dog” of the woman, forever doing her bidding.  Calleja, otherwise known as Mrs Fax (given the volumes of data sent by fax to numerous bodies), became more and more isolated and considered by many agencies as suffering some kind of illness.

Why otherwise would she harass so many over so many years? Munchausen’s Syndrome was once proposed and remains a significant contender but Wilt et al have another theory, too.

The demise of Plaskitt (who lost his Parliamentary seat) was a significant loss to Calleja – the “poodle” no longer had a voice, safe within the protected confines of the lower House. He also needed to take a low profile due to his dodgy MP’s expenses, especially his £400 per month (no questions asked) food bill, among other claims on expenses. If only Wilt (and most of the world) had £400 per month for food, without receipts – world hunger would be solved, surely?

There is a considerable body of belief that Calleja “is just simply evil” – she was fully aware of the damage she did to the reputations of others and the distress that caused, but that explanation does not exclude the impressions of others who state that “Munchausen’s Syndrome” or indeed simple “Narcissism” also play a part in the makeup of this complex woman – this is the consequence of having psychiatrists, psychologists and religious people on the board of Regulator Watch.

Wikipedia

See an article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder – if reading these you are looking into a mirror, do not blame Wilt, especially if your name is Elisabeth.

Being a pure “evil” person argument is a strong contender – Calleja was intent upon doing the maximum harm to her victims. This does not of course exclude simple mental health problems. “I want this agency de-registered” (or words to that effect) or this and that person de-registered from the GSCC suggests a vengeful and disproportionate attitude especially when it carries on a decade after her perceived abuse of her by others – abuse which all evidence indicates never really took place, although she did as a foster parent suffer some mild maladministration by a local authority (Northamptonshire – see the CSCI Internal Review Report).

Such efforts at revenge never stopped her after it was conclusively determined that the CSCI/GSCC/Police/Information Commissioner could find no grounded cause of complaint – she simply regarded those agencies as complicit in her “paranoid” view that there was a conspiracy, and thus she was even more embolden.

Wilt Portfolio

“Paranoid” is one thing, “Munchausen’s Syndrome” is another – that remains a virtual certainty. However how about Calleja being a Narcissist? Well, the combined thoughts of the experts seem to agree at least on this description of the nun with a switchblade – a term coined to describe Julie Andrews of The Sound of Music acting fame who was, it is suggested, “a bit of a bully.”

This assessed Narcissist – Elizabeth – fits every description of that mirror admiring Greek mythological figure. Indeed she would surpass the fame of that classical body that ultimately became a disgrace both in life and death. She does live in infamy and a warning to mankind in terms of “selfishness”, but Calleja will leave no legacy, other than the compensations awarded to her victims. And those compensations were rather generous!

Wilt

If Brick http://wallofbrick.wordpress.com/2010/08/09/monro-review-second-act/ believes that the Children Act 1989 was ever or is, as claimed, a “charter for children” then they are barking up the wrong wall.

The Act was a very effective charter for lawyers, Guardians and experts. Within a very short period of time court cases were taking up to two years to complete. I certainly share the concern that local authorities should not be allowed to practice unfettered but then neither should social workers be permitted to ignore policies nor Guardians think they know better than anyone else what constitutes best practice.

And it was nowhere near as bad as suggested by Brick pre the 1989 Act (implemented on 14^th October 1991) – Wilt remembers those days too.

The fact is, lawyers got to be very greedy, some Guardians (some with little clue or even less competence) loved and love playing the prima donna of the Court corridors and interfered in casework they sometimes could not understand (let alone practice) – experts instructed by the cartload were set loose and who in some instances actually told one very little or what was already known.

There was frequently no ‘added value’ to best outcomes for children and the poor social worker from the local authority was diminished to the wicked witch of all points of the compass. Playing with children’s lives in this way is dangerous and certainly not giving paramount concern to the welfare of the child.

Promoting justice and it being seen that justice is done does not need to look like this. Suggesting that money is no obstacle within the justice system is tantamount to contempt of the taxpayer.

I have a lot of time for Brick and the blog Wall (http://wallofbrick.wordpress.com/) – its author is well experienced and very eloquent on subjects Wilt feels strongly about. Occasionally the postings cause some great laughter and joy. However, the Act has not worked and it needs serious reforming and to suggest that it is all because Guardians are being fettered or that the Courts are being restricted because of budgets is pure folly. The fact is, Guardians have been too often a part of the problem – not the solution or silver bullet.

And how does Wilt know all this? Well he is an expert witness and has been for many a year; he too is a Guardian and had a former senior management role within social work for longer than he cares to remember – he is also a tribunal chairman in a related field. He has observed the effects of the Children Act therefore from many an angle and perspective. That does not necessarily make Wilt ‘right’ in his opinions but it certainly is not opinion based on lack of experience.

Of course social workers are experts – the fact that they represent the applicant in court proceedings does not diminish that status and are entitled to stand on an equal footing as any other expert, or Guardian – they are just another expert and not as some Guardians mistakenly believe some kind of ‘super’ social worker wearing their underwear over their tights.

When Wilt acts as a Guardian he is, as with other Guardians, frequently consulted by children’s social workers. Wilt has a ‘contract’ with social worker’s that is shaped broadly thus:

i)  You [social worker] are the expert until it is shown otherwise;

ii) I am happy to be consulted but I will not be your supervisor;

iii) I will not attempt to case manage the child’s case;

iv) We will treat each other with mutual respect and recognise and respect our different roles;

v) We are all duty bound to hold the needs of the child as paramount;

vi) As I consider you an expert, do not propose instructing another expert on matters that are perfectly within your competence/resources to complete yourself; we must minimise costs and delay;

vii) When completing your written assessment not only should you demonstrate competence but also fairness to avoid the appearance of bias;

viii) This Guardian does not wear his knickers over his tights or have any super human qualities – he too was once a social worker.

Generally, the above understanding leads to reasonably stress free relations. It sets the social workers mind at rest that the Guardian is not ‘off planet’ waiting to invade and sets them free to get on with what they do best – social work. It also creates opportunity for dialogue and debate, and if it comes to it, permission to disagree or arrive at differing views of settling (disposal) the matter at Court.

Unfortunately not all Guardians take that approach – they do wear their knickers over their tights and are simply social workers who not ‘hack it’ in frontline practice. Some others are just simply not of this world and yet others are the prima donna who love sitting around for hours on end in the Court at huge expense to the public purse but to the benefit of their own bulging purse.

It aint as simple as Brick might have you believe – but he/she is an expert too and can have an opinion, just like that fresh faced social worker from the local authority.

It is for certain there are some Dork social workers – you only need to look at the GSCC files to determine that. There are in proportional terms, take my word for it, far more Dork Guardians, lawyers and experts but they are far less scrutinised or evaluated.

Things really have to change – throwing money (we do not have) at the problem is not the answer.

Brick gets 9 out of ten for composition and language skills, 10 out of 10 for spelling but only 4 out of 10 for his/her reasoning and concluding the solution to the test. A good effort but s/he needs to try harder.

Wilt

It is a month since Mrs C was arrested – not much changes however; she still stalks and continues her favourite activity, complaining. People really should read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberstalking

Therein one will find a good description of the disgusted of Leamington Spa.

Here is another useful site: http://www.bullyonline.org/related/stalking.htm

And this one: http://www.flayme.com/stalker/

Let’s look at Mrs C stalking activity, and this is typical:

On 28^th July she was surfing via her T-Mobile phone at 00:14 am (Wilt was in bed), then 07:40 am – she really should get her 8 hours of sleep as it is unhealthy not to do so. Then at 12:38 pm and 16:25 pm – she also found time to access the Cloud Network again, but it appears in London this time. Mrs C is on walkabout. Does she know her every click on Regulator Watch is monitored – yes. Can she help herself by not accessing Regulator Watch – no.

What is her obsession, exactly? Well of course we already know the answer to that question – its Munchausen Syndrome. She should look it up – really, together with reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberstalking. Either that or it is mad cow disease, or as some argue, pure evilness. Wilt is coming around to that thinking himself but reserves judgement.

Meanwhile access to Regulator Watch remains high in relation to searches and access about Mrs C – the press and government agencies just love it. We have however needed to block a firm of solicitors in London and their IT support service. They had a little too much interest and strayed into a friends website post the arrest and bail of Mrs C. That of course amounts to stalking and consequently harassment – ooooooeeeeeerrrrrrr!

We understand Mr Plod is being advised. We are further advised that Leamington Spa has a brand new combined Court, police station and cells – very convenient we think, and good economics.

The more she lurks and stalks, the more google uprate Regulator Watch as the primary Blog on social care – carry on Mrs C, you are good for business.

Wilt

Happy birthday Regulator Watch – you are one year old.

On 14^th May 2009 Regulator Watch went live and is now a worldwide phenomenon with a hoard of regular readers, contributors and stalkers. Of course our number one fan is Mrs C from her hovel in Warwickshire together with her numerous entourage of people to whom she complains – the list is far too long and boring.

Wilt having recently made his epic sail from the Mediterranean to the shores of his homeland is back and has gathered much information from Malta. It’s enough to make an old Templar cry in laughter. Much fun will be had. Not so much as lost or stolen files as brand new files – that should get the Information Commissioner and a poor harassed constable of Banbury a phone call. Shiver me timbers mates, the Wilt is back yet again from his sojourn. More travel (business) is on the near horizon, although this time via tarmac and airports as distinct from choppy seas. There might just be a few Salty Dog trips to North Wales – you bet there will.

But what a year Regulator Watch has seen – it has created a bit of a stir among the regulators in social care, the social care press and the press as a whole. Not to mention interest from some political figures and the like minded reasonable thinking people of the Wilt age i.e. sceptical friends of social care (like a critical friend). The police have had complaints (at least two police forces) from Mrs C (bless her), as have the GSCC and a host of other quango and government agencies. A huge fan has of course been James (The Dunes) Plaskitt, now a former MP of Warwick and Leamington Spa, and those he enlisted in his support – various Ministers, Ofsted and the Information Commissioner. All in an effort to close down Regulator Watch and find out who this dreaded Wilt is – they think they know who he is but it is belly breaking with laughter to keep them guessing. It is even more amusing, to Wilt at least, to know that in this hide and seek game that they are nowhere near warm, let alone hot.

It is of course very odd, in fact absolutely crass and indefensible, that on the one hand Mrs C and Dork Plaskitt try to gag Wilt whilst Mrs C breaches every aspect of confidentiality at will and Plaskitt attempted to exclude MPs from FOI requests – fucking brilliant. In true “1984” style this pair wanted to rewrite history and prevent any dissent or opposition. Now in the case of Mrs C she can be understood, she is a simple minded plebeian, but Plaskitt read PPE at Oxford – he must have missed the lectures on democracy.  Fucking Dorks, the pair of them – George Orwell will be laughing in his grave and saying “I told you.” Not that I am suggesting that Mrs C and Plaskitt are Mr and Mrs Stalin – well actually, I am!

And how UK politics have changed – apart from the decimation of Plaskitt! Gordon the Cyclops has gone after tearing out his fingernails hanging onto his desk, Ed the Ferkin Balls is a “has been” (but still an evil looking/acting bastard) and “Dave” the man is farting in the same place where Gordon frequently experienced dysentery – the Number 10 PMs private bathroom. It is rumoured that the party manifesto is used as a bog role!  We have hopes for Dave, after all he got our vote, and our local Conservative MP reckons that this coalition will result in real change.

We can but hope.

The year ahead is going to be very choppy – not only in wave action terms but also in CUTS. Big CUTS! We approve.  Big government (Whitehall/quango) will suffer immense trauma and just several hundred thousands of people will be looking for “real” jobs – you know, like earning a living.  No huge pay offs, a few quid and here is your P45. Oh, and don’t bother attempting to claim dole money cos you will effectively sign up to a contract of doing community work – Wilt needs his lawns, flower borders and fish pond tending to, and a few paint jobs. He will even let you clean his 3 cars. These (so called “employed”) scroungers will become nothing more than the drug taking alcoholics they think themselves to be above – they will all become very reliant on the decreasing state subsidies of other scroungers and beggars, notwithstanding “Cyclops” created a whole host of decent people unemployed through no fault in their work ethic.

And it will not just be Whitehall/quango. Hello local government – the smile is about to be wiped from your face.  A cut of 30% (in numerous places around the UK) will result in major job losses too. Again, we approve. Wilt is not aware of any local authority that will not make cuts in the range of 10 to 20%.

Business, including that of Wilt’s will boom for sure. Gone will be the influx of cheap labour from abroad as the increasing domestic workforce market “gets real” in terms of available options and enterprise flourishes – no longer the Albanian weekly car wash and more like the Swindon Cooperative of Ex-Government Employees Franchise Car Wash. So that these nice Whitehall and quango people fully understand, the current (Albanian) cost of a complete valet of a car is £10 (less the charitable on-cost for pension fund), is usually involving 3 persons, it takes about 30 minutes and they smile. OK they (Albanians) sleep 15 to a room (Gawd the smell must be awful) and might get pissed (for US readers – drunk) on occasion, and at which times lock up your daughters and sons, but you know, it is their choice and for them at least it provides a means to a living.  They certainly provide a service which I will pay for, and do so weekly. How then will our domestic workforce respond in the light of a choice between jobs/enterprise and a reduction in benefits?

We will see.

Anyway, it’s party time and I have to go blow out the candle on the birthday cake.

Wilt

In a matter close to Wilt’s heart (and his wallet) Community Care report on the fiasco with the LSC (Legal Services Commission). See article here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/05/05/114425/lawyers-hit-out-at-court-fee-cap-on-social-workers.htm

Another article here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/05/04/114412/cut-in-independent-court-report-fees-imperil-expert-input.htm

This has been going on for months – it’s an effort to restrict the ever growing public law court costs in child care cases. Essentially reducing the costs paid out in expenses to expert witnesses in preparing reports and in giving expert evidence. However it is restricted to reducing the costs of social workers specifically, as distinct from other experts such as psychologists/psychiatrists etc., etc.

Now Wilt, even though this work is the backbone (although not exclusive) of his business, has mixed feelings.

YES, all budgets need cutting back, and in my opinion far too many experts are engaged and not always successfully, Dr David Southall being a prime example http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8661639.stm

But why single out social work experts? Use them less is my answer, not cap their fees – but of course the LSC aint got any control over that.

And it is true, very experienced and competent experts will simply “fade away” and do something else – no doubt the LSC will have factored that scenario into their equation – I would as a business person, managing a budget.

The overall problem lies with the Children Act. The so called “charter for children” (as it was hailed) was nothing remotely resembling anything concerning children or putting their needs as “paramount.” The pecking order is as follows:

i)             Lawyers

ii)            Children’s guardians

iii)           Expert witnesses

iv)           Parents

v)            Children

Court proceedings involving children is big, big money. Utterly hopeless cases are examined to such a degree that is bewildering – however justice has to be done and be seen to be done, but not before the lawyers, guardians and experts have taken their (several) pounds of flesh in fees, and yes sometimes very high fees – you ever seen a poor solicitor?

If the Act is to do justice to children, it needs a massive overhaul. Do not get me wrong, there are some excellent lawyers, very sound guardians, very competent experts and some brilliant magistrates/judges – between them they resolve some highly complex cases, and in others cut through the crap and get to the point.

Expert social workers are sometimes necessary because, we know, some local authorities (not necessarily their social work staff) are utter crap. But folk can we please also recognise some local authority social workers (because of or despite of their organisation) are experts in their own right – yes there are indeed good social workers, and good organisations. It should not, as is common practice, to require an independent social worker to confirm this.

The simple message is – reduce demand on experts and do not cap fees. How that is done?  Change the legislation.

Community Care reported earlier here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/03/16/114063/court-fees-insult-to-independent-social-workers.htm

Wilt being both an “expert” witness (I prefer the term professional witness) and Independent Children’s Guardian has some insight into these matters. How many social workers, for Gawd sake, does it take to change a light bulb or indeed resolve a court matter – typically there is the local authority social worker (even several in some cases), possibly an “expert” social worker and then a children’s guardian.

Wilt is of limited ability but even he can count – that accounts for a minimum of three, and very possibly more, social workers per case.

There is already an expert in the proceedings – they are called a Children’s Guardian. Does it really need several more social workers?

Wilt

According to several reports to Wilt Mrs C has also been busy, talking to the BBC, ITN News and the Mirror Group about her woes. A certain Salop person reported a visit on their website from ITN and the Mirror Group – not by any means by accident. He also reports certain persons in Oxon had similar visits to their website (BBC/ITN) – the person in Salop is disappointed he had no visit from the BBC!

By some very strange coincidence Regulator Watch has had visits from all three! Excellent, we love it. Bring it on.

What fucking story is she now promulgating, apart from “I am a victim” and “people are out to get me”? No doubt she claims she is “misunderstood, misrepresented and people keep saying things about me. I am a solicitor you know”, as she frequently and (FRAUDUENTLY) claims. We like the word “fraud” as it is so synonymous with Mrs C.

Munchausen Syndrome is a serious condition – it means you staying up all night and spending all day on tasks associated with promoting victim status for the sufferer. Never mind fostering, children, family, doing work  or generally having a normal life – in this case Mrs Fax is faxing, emailing, surfing the net, phoning anyone who is willing to hear from her – not many anymore.

She is a spent cause; she is a “dead parrot” in another scenario and a very, very sad case. Very sad indeed, and very desperate! Her health and that of her family, those she is meant to care for her so called career will be suffering, and if she persists will suffer even more as she and her pet (no longer) MP fail consistently to get even a fingernail hold on her desperate, stale and fraudulent claims.

Bully Girl Mrs C is fast becoming a total non-entity. She digging deeper down that dark hole and a hollow voice cries out – “hello!” Sadly no one listens, no one wants to hear her FALSE cries of despair and victimisation. The truth is that all those agencies, press, local authorities, the Milk Marketing Board and quango have now for a long time “sorted” Mrs C into the category of a “minor irritation.”

It is not nice being in a dark hole – it is damp, dark and rather restricted. Putting yourself in that dark hole is just plain stupid. Some people however just cannot help it.

Dit………dit……….dit…….dot….dot……..dot etc., etc there is more news coming in – oooooooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrr Mrs C. Did she really do that!? Gawd forbid, Gawd help her.

Wilt

Wilt has been working hard, hence his absence from the Blog. However, he has been doing some catching up with, even for him, an earlier than normal start to the day.

It seems according to Community Care: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/03/04/113956/one-third-of-foster-carers-forced-to-consider-giving-up.htm that foster parents are displeased with their remuneration, and that comes as no surprise as they are as a whole undervalued and not really seen by many in social care as partners.

It is further reported here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8548636.stm by the BBC.

Let me be clear, the vast majority of foster parents are true professionals, occasionally far more grounded and professional than some of those spotty faced newly qualified social workers, their managers and elected members – generally, although not always the voluntary and independent agencies are much better at managing these services and is one area where local authorities would be best to chuck in the towel.

I say generally as to be fair some local authorities are very good at it, but even the best of them struggle.

Foster care is no panacea as there remains as evidenced (mostly in the private sector) in the high numbers of children’s homes in operation. Equally, as there are Dork social workers there are utter idiots and charlatans among the ranks of foster parents, purely out for their own ends and to do as little as possible and, in order to divert attention from their failings/inadequacies, spend immense energy in finding fault with others – as in Mrs C.

So whereas the VAST majority of foster parents work hard, diligently and with complete focus on the child, others (and there is usually one per agency) simply want to create as much havoc as possible in the hope of promoting their personal vanity and lazy/false suggestion of their talents in professional child care. They are a distraction which on the whole obscures the tireless but genuine foster parents who quietly get on with the very hard task of caring for neglected, rejected and abused children, of all ages.

In days gone by the former National Foster Care Association, now the Fostering Network (http://www.fostering.net/) were an organisation you could do business with and were a true and righteous political pressure group, led by good people who, although occasionally lacking a sense of reality, actually cared about children.

They struggled in balancing the factual portrayal (then) of foster carers being intrinsically and instinctively motivated by no personal gain (other than caring for children) and the aspiration that they should be recognised as equal professionals. That struggle is ongoing sadly, but the new Fostering Network does not help itself when failing to distinguish between really good foster carers and really rather poor, questionably motivated people like Mrs C – it is rumoured/reported (from numerous sources) that Mr C is the real foster parent whilst Mrs C is just, well, a waste of space and to boot does not give a shit. And these are reliable sources.

Most “normal” people simply get on with the job – they perform well and are rewarded by results. Some however do the least possible and divert attention away from their personal failures, as in Mrs C.

A bit like social work, foster care is as much a passion and vocation as it is a professional task (unless you are Mrs C et al) but it is imperative that there is “body” which promotes its advance. As BASW is a false hope for social work, so equally is the Fostering Network under its current leadership.

If the Fostering Network (among others) wish to (and it seems it is a wish) defend the likes of Mrs C on the indefensible, then so be it – all it will achieve will be to drag itself down to the level of Mrs C, which it has done hitherto even to values and means exploited by the GSCC, and one gets low in moral standards at that level. In a case matter even the GSCC considered the Fostering Network as a hopeless witness in a (unpublished) finding and the Police were simply, well, spitting in their contempt for this (so called) representatives of foster carers.

Dorks come to mind.

However, better recognition (professionally) is necessary – they like others will however need to ride out the recession and consequential major cutbacks soon upon us. They remain however, with a few exceptions, my heroes.

Wilt