Gone it seems are the talks of BASW (British Association of Social Workers) becoming a trade union (as distinct from a professional body) and their role in the forming of the Social Work College (Royal or not) is fraught with tensions – or more to the point fraught with competition.  Added to this there are now further tensions between BASW and Unison (the primary local authority trade union.)

Personally, I had some hope for BASW http://www.basw.co.uk/) under the leadership of Hilton Dawson but I am beginning to wonder if even he can drag the organisation out of the utter mess his predecessors created. BASW could never become the organisation to run the Social Work College as they are simply too unsophisticated.

Although BASW claim a massive increase in membership (not yet Wilt) they represent still a small minority, and the term “represent” even has some uncertainty, especially if it comes to dealing with the GSCC et al. Somehow, I do not think this is Hilton’s fault, he probably has as many challenges within BASW as he does external – the BASW committees are a bit of a wet rag, believe me.

They need to bring Dr Ray Jones back on board, although even he (who is very competent) struggled with BASW – or at least its previous head that was an utter disaster.

And so BASW fight this corner, as in this article: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/02/26/113926/basw-ditches-plan-for-joint-membership-scheme-with-unison.htm but fails to win agreement, but somehow one tends to think that perhaps it is not unrelated to this other tussle: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/02/26/113924/basw-and-unison-split-over-independent-practices.htm

On the latter matter, Wilt supports Dawson and agrees with the unstated but underlying belief that Unison are only out to serve themselves, a bit like Arthur Scargill did with the miners – you know, him with the odd hair style http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Scargill and otherwise a total fucking twat!

An independent social work workforce is the answer, but unfortunately BASW is not the vehicle to lead that progress, nor sadly are some of the voluntary agencies such as the NSPCC (total twats) – it needs a competent mixture of direct service delivery from the private and voluntary sectors with local authorities acting as commissioning agents. In time, that is what will happen, and bit by bit it is, even under the Brown/Balls leadership much to the chagrin of Unison Stalinists.

When it does come in to final fruition, and it is not if but when, it will certainly sort out the men from the boys and it will ensure that there is a proper agreement between Government and social care providers on what are the priorities – not like now that everything is a priority whether or not there is funding. And, those who are incompetent, and that includes you Mrs C, will find themselves in the wilderness.

So it is less that Hilton Dawson is failing, it is simply he is in the wrong place and has committed himself to a defunct organisation which needs a complete overhaul and shake up – indeed wake up!

I remain confident in Hilton, for now, but Gawd he has a job and more than a half to do. Step back Hilton and think on my man.

We will monitor his progress here on Regulator Watch.

Wilt

The next chapter in the Mrs and the GSCC saga is ready and will be uploaded once it is clear that it will not interfere with ongoing investigations or pervert the course of justice.

However, chapter 6 is in hand – that may come before chapter 5. Odd I know, but we try to keep on the right side of “proper.”

Wilt

The CCW (Care Council for Wales) who are the equivalent of the GSCC have made a 5 year admonishment of a former Barnardo’s worker for fiddling his expenses, as set out in this Community Care article here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/02/11/113775/ccw-admonishes-welsh-social-worker-for-dishonest-behaviour.htm

Naughty boy, but then he has had a good example to follow in our dishonourable MPs. Was he prosecuted we wonder?

Meanwhile the Scottish Nationalist Party and Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has advocated to a Court in Edinburgh that her constituent Abdul Rauf should not be imprisoned for fraudulent claims of state benefits amounting to £80, 000 whilst owning a property worth £200,000 (which he rented out) and lived in a further property worth £400,000. It also emerges that Mr Rauf had a previous conviction for fraud (£60,000) and was sentenced to four years in prison. Obviously the TWAT does not lean and is simply a greedy bastard.

See the BBC article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8510133.stm

Ms Sturgeon pleads that the man is married with children under 10 years of age and has already paid back £27,000 of his fraudulent claims.

I suppose it is our fault, we elect these fools. I am growing in my opinion that these frauds, when they are locked up, should be made to pay for their upkeep i prison – a bit medieval but it reduces my tax bill.

Also in the news is the new IPSA (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) who will cost us ££6.5M per year to employ 80 staff – that equates to £8, 250 per employee. Obviously that will include accommodation, National Insurance, Pension and other “on costs” but it still seems a bit steep. Do they really need 80 staff? I think not.

See the Telegraph article here:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/7211733/MPs-expenses-watchdog-will-cost-6.5m-and-employ-80-staff.html

Also note that the Chairman of the IPSA (http://www.parliamentarystandards.org.uk/) Sir Ian Kennedy is on a three day a week £100,000 per year contract and whilst in his previous role with the Healthcare Commission as Chairman run up taxi expenses of £15,000!

Is this the right person for the job, we wonder? Gawd help us. Only Gordon Brown could have made this appointment – what a TWAT!

As yet no comment on this that I can find from Guido (http://order-order.com/) – he must be down the pub. I will join him shortly.

Also remember, the Healthcare Commission became the Care Quality Council – ex the NCSC and CSCI. Their website is here: http://www.cqc.org.uk/

If you want to apply to join the new IPSA, go here: http://www.theipsa.co.uk/microsite/index.asp

My application is in the post……….

Wilt

To further recap: (This Is Part 4)

Mrs C was, with Plaskitt MP, did whatever they could to destroy Happen Fostercare or “Happiness” as referred to in the Spectator article, here:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/3061606/after-baby-p-the-crisis-in-child-foster-care.thtml#comments

that was published in December 2008 – not that the Spectator did anything else other than meet a total stranger on a train station platform and report her side of the facts. Was “Tom, Dick or Harriett” asked their opinion – well no, of course because Mary Wakefield seemingly, according to some reports, has a bit of a fixation with big black folders and no journalistic talents, or at least she (Mary Wakefield) was just lazy and incompetent.

Well, that was December 2008 – Mrs C (her of the big black folder) was by this stage desperate to find a new audience – indeed anyone who might listen to here.

Let us return however to four years earlier………..

Plaskitt MP in the autumn of 2004 delivered his now infamous and shameful speech to the House of Commons and a certain David Cameron (then a relatively unknown MP) intervened on behalf of his constituents, the Directors of Happen Fostercare. It was a shameful exploitation by Plaskitt of Parliamentary privilege, naming and shaming all and sundry but at the same time protecting the identity of his “constituent” who in later press articles and in the CSCI Internal Review Report was identified as Mrs C.

Hansard Plaskitt 15 Sept 2004

csci-report-part1 AND

csci-report-part2 AND

csci-report-part3

The Plaskitt (utterly shameful and cowardly) speech was widely reported in the press, without of course, any opportunity for any of the individuals or Happen Fostercare having an opportunity to comment.  Odd, since Mrs C complains she is not afforded any voice! Hmmmmm.

Identifying Mrs C is not difficult – by her MPs admission she is both a constituent and a foster carer – she therefore lives in Warwick/Leamington Spa. She was previously a foster carer with Happen Fostercare and (among other avatars) has been named in the press as Mrs C or Ms A. So reader, and Wilt knows many of you already know, it does not take a lot to know who this individual is, especially among those numerous agencies she frequently contacts i.e. GSCC, Ofsted etc., etc. Yet she complains of having been “outed” by others, harassed even – Mmmmmmm.

The outcome of the press reports (added to the circulation of the flawed/unlawful Judy Downey report widely circulated by Mrs C) was for Happen Fostercare to experience extreme prejudice and a shying away by local authorities to use their services. Why? Quite simply local authorities aim to minimise their liability and cognisant of that fact both Mrs C and Dork Plaskitt MP intended that be the outcome – in short to destroy Happen Fostercare in order to recover or retain the status of Mrs C. What status you ask – well that is a good question?  All will be revealed.

Happen Fostercare (“Happiness” in Spectator speak) had by the time of the Plaskitt debacle complained of the unfair treatment afforded them by the Regulator – like being investigated but not interviewed and the Regulator (in the form of its predecessor the NCSC) providing Mrs C with a report (which Happen knew nothing about) and consequently were blissfully ignorant of. Yes Ms Downey, Dork of the profession, which was you – we wonder if she is GSCC Registered?

Happen Fostercare (and again I reiterate it is not the agency which exists today) had a hell of a time. Mrs C and basket Case Plaskitt (not much longer to be an MP with a curious eating disorder based on his claims for food on his expenses) created absolute fucking havoc at huge public expense, which even at that time was a dead issue. Now, my mate “Paul”, looked on in horror at all this – his heart sank when seeing the plight of the Henderson’s and could not believe that this Mrs C and her TWAT MP could be allowed to get away with such fucking nonsense. The impact on the individuals was devastating, and that of course is what was intended – Mrs C was going to destroy them, and at the same time illustrate to the world that she was little Ms perfect victimised by others. That is what she would like people to believe. Read on – get the facts.

This was now late 2004/early 2005. “Paul” continued to have occasional work from Happen Fostercare on various pieces of work – just to remind you “Paul” acted (at least tried to) as a mediator between Mrs C and Happen Fostercare in 2002. Instead Mrs C “copped out” and ran away, she hoped, to another IFA (Independent Fostering Agency) but in fact ended up with a Midlands local authority. By this time Mrs C had an acceptance of responsibility for failure to disclose relevant facts from Northamptonshire County Council, and they gave her a written apology (in 2002). So what the fuck was the issue remaining in 2004? What possessed this DORK to continue with her complaints?

Madness? That is the widely – and I mean widely – held view (ask any at the GSCC, Ofsted, DH etc., etc.) among most.  Evilness? That has a minority view but it is equally compelling. Probably it is a mixture of the two. Either way, she is persistent as evidenced by her reports (with the assistance of oddball Plaskitt) to the press and complaints up to this day in 2010 – 8 years later. And there is no sign of her giving up.

Anyway, in late 2004 our man “Paul” who is an excellent social worker was appointed, by competitive interview, as the Independent Chairman of both a local authority Adoption Panel and Fostering Panel – it transpired to be the local authority who had registered Mrs C in 2002 after she departed Happen Fostercare. Realising this connection, “Paul” gave a voluntary written declaration of a potential conflict of interest and resolved that he would always stand down as Chairman whenever an agenda item concerning Mrs C appeared. That seems very reasonable to me.

Up until this time “Paul” had no contact with Mrs C (since early 2002) and quite frankly had no desire to do so given his knowledge of her persistent harassment of Happen Fostercare, with the help of basket Case Plaskitt MP. She had hitherto and up until that point not regarded “Paul” as either relevant or even circumstantial to her case against Happen Fostercare, so “peripheral” and inconsequential was his involvement. He was not mentioned by Plaskitt in his disgraceful speech to the House of Commons, nor had she complained about “Paul.” So, nothing to worry about then? Wrong, big time!

Within weeks the (mad/evil –depending on your perspective) Mrs C had made a complaint to the GSCC of “Paul’s” appointment as Independent Chairman! Why, well that is of little mystery as facts further unfold but at the time Paul was not aware of the complaint and as matters transpired it withered away and amounted to nothing, until Mrs C found the energy to make a more substantial complaint in the following year (and in the interim attempted to convince a host of well known agencies – in some cases convincingly – to believe “Paul” was a “fraud”, dishonest, unprofessional, falsified his credentials/experience and was in cahoots with Happen Fostercare to destroy her as a foster carer. This being odd as “Paul” did everything possible to distance himself from this evil bastard.

However, just before the SECOND complaint to the GSCC “Paul” started to receive “threatening” unprovoked fax and letters from Mrs C, and these are published here:

Mrs C Letters 2005

These are not redacted in any way other than to exclude the address of the parties and their names – unlike Mrs C we prefer to protect identities and respect private life. Mrs C however identifies herself – make of her attitude and approach as you will. We think it rather revealing of her attitude. And as Winston Churchill illustrated, attitude is a small thing with potential for big consequences, and rather telling of the individual.

Now “Paul” was utterly baffled – he was accused of making disingenuous comments about Mrs C and circulating them. Mrs C was WRONG on both accounts as will be illustrated later in the ongoing release of data via this blog.

This is now 2005 – Mrs C (or as she truly can be identified in her letters to “Paul”) is reliably determined to be mother earth and sole adjudicator on matters well beyond her competence to even sniff at, let alone judge. Not that different from the GSCC who will feature greatly in the next chapter of this very sad story – and the GSCC now regard Mrs C (somewhat belatedly) as “vexatious”. Now, where have I heard that description before? Was it the CSCI – YES! Perhaps SMBC – YES! Possibly everyone else in private – YES! Is it true – YES! And did a certain gentleman from the GSCC say “Do not quote me but she [Mrs C] is vexatious” – YES!

We will leave it here for now, Part 5 of Mrs C and the GSCC to follow shortly. In it you will find “Paul’s” reply to Mrs C –and it pulled no punches.

Wilt (in collaboration with numerous others)

A couple of more GSCC hearings upcoming, see here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/

Interesting stuff and the GSCC do appear to be getting on track with substantive issues.

Albeit in one case the matters go back to 2005 -07 alleged misconduct. Why the delay, again? What is wrong with these people?

However, the other case is 2009 based – a result of a Court conviction.

In both cases, an easy picking for the GSCC again – this is fortunate as they have shit all competence to bring a successful case purely based on their own evidence gathering abilities on misconduct!  If they lose these cases, it will say it all.

Nevertheless, good to see some progress on the GSCC getting to grips with proper case matters.

We await with interest if this apparent progress is real – whilst they remain UNDER SPECIAL MEASURES.

It’s remarkable that a Regulator can be UNDER SPECIAL MEASURES. You could not make it up!

Wilt

Part 3

So let us recap.

Mrs C has had a bit of a bad deal and she has had an apology from Northamptonshire who were the key culprit in the withholding important details of a young person who could have posed a sexual risk. Not good.

No actual injury or harm was done, or none reported but alarming all the same.

She could not reconcile her differences with her independent fostering agency, (who were essentially blameless and at worst of limited culpability) despite their offers to find a solution, and Mrs C went and joined another agency. Lucky them!

The complaint to Northamptonshire resulted in an acceptance that they were at fault and apologised. End of story, you would think. She had moved agencies, end of story you would think, sadly no as set out in the CSCI Internal Review Report part 1 as found here:

csci-report-part1

She complained to another local authority and to the newly formed NCSC about Happen Fostercare who undertook a series of complaint investigations, the third of which never involved consultations with the fostering agency but resulted in Mrs C circulating the damming but seriously flawed report as can be illustrated in the next two parts of the CSCI Internal Review Report, see here:

csci-report-part2

And here:

csci-report-part3

Just as a reminder, this report (it is only in three parts to allow it to be uploaded because of its size) was commissioned by David Behan, then CEO of CSCI because of complaints from the Directors of the independent fostering agency, the Henderson’s and because James Plaskitt for Mrs C had raised concerns that (I remind you an unlawful and flawed) the earlier third stage complaint  report had not been acted upon – and Plaskitt raised the matter in a House of Commons debate, see here:

Hansard Plaskitt 15 Sept 2004

The third stage report (by Judy Downey) was unlawful because the CSCI had used the wrong procedures and had effectively acted beyond its powers, it was ultra virus. It was flawed because it was entirely one sided and the author consulted no one other than Mr & Mrs C. Her style of investigation and the scope of the work undertaken was criticised severely by the CSCI Internal Review Report which Mrs C and Plaskitt to this day reject, and still complain about as in a second House of Commons debate only just recently, see here:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm091021/halltext/91021h0010.htm#09102129000505

Now not wishing to do a Judy Downey trick, Wilt will point out that the CSCI Internal Review Report did come in for some criticism from Community Care, with the help of Mrs C and Plaskitt. You can find that here:

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2007/05/24/104573/Fostering-Investigation-MP-attacks-CSCI39s-handling-of-foster-carers39-child-protection.htm

When reading it, do not forget to read the response from CSCI, who essentially rejected the criticisms.

What the CSCI also pointed out was that if Plaskitt and Mrs C had a problem with the CSCI Internal Report , they could make a complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman which Plaskitt as an MP could authorise. As quoted by Community care by CSCI:

“We believe that the report does not contain serious inaccuracies, although inevitably there will be points that are open to interpretation and personal opinion. James Plaskitt and other interested parties were given the opportunity to comment on a draft copy.

As a result of their contributions, the report was amended where this was clearly required. We have had detailed discussions over a considerable period of time with the foster carer and have repeatedly advised her to refer any claim of maladministration on our part to the parliamentary ombudsman, via her MP, but she has chosen not to do so.”

“We believe the references made in the report to the performance of Happen Fostercare during the period in question are accurate, as evidenced in the inspection reports.”

And why have they never done this? Might it be because the Ombudsman would find no fault with the CSCI Internal Review Report – it is after all a forensic piece of work that reports facts. Is it a fear of Plaskitt and Mrs C that the Ombudsman would endorse those facts – and what is it about those facts that Plaskitt and Mrs C fear?

After all, facts are facts – especially when based on Mrs C’s mammoth correspondence file, held now by numerous agencies because she has supplied it to them, although we understand in edited form to the press.

Another factor of course is that if the Ombudsman did not uphold the complaint of Mrs C (aided and abetted by Plaskitt) then in effect their concerns would be killed stone dead, which is what they should be. End of the road.

Plaskitt and Mrs C want the whole matter opened up again, that anything that does not fit with their way of seeing the world expunged (especially the CSCI Internal Report) and to prevent others (including Wilt) from commenting, whilst Mrs C and Plaskitt remain free to engage the press and publish their half truths and untruths.

Personally, I vote for utter transparency and that is why Regulator Watch is here – of course if you do not like it then do not visit, in the same way I prefer not to watch certain TV programmes, read certain press or listen to certain radio shows.

Fortunately there will be no reopening of an investigation, to expunging of data and no involvement of Ofsted or anyone else. It is, in Monty Python fashion, a dead parrot that has gone to its maker, as politely but very persistently explained to Plaskitt in the Hansard record here:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm091021/halltext/91021h0010.htm#09102129000505

Every agency is just fed up of Plaskitt and Mrs C. What on earth is her problem? Please, please I hear people say, go to the Ombudsman so that he/she can give them a dose of reality – just because she or Plaskitt do not like the CSCI Report does not mean it is untruthful or misleading.

Sometimes bare facts act like a mirror into your soul and you have to realise, oh yes I am vexatious, yes I do have an obsession and yes what people say (mostly not to their face) in private is true.

If Plaskitt and Mrs C want to hear what people really say, then join in the debate here on Regulator Watch rather than just lurking and stalking – Mrs C up to five times daily, even on her new internet connection, unless of course she has moved to Milton Keynes. If however they do not want it in their face – well simply do not lurk and stalk. Simple, I hear the Mearat say!

There is much, much more to follow on this debacle that Wilt cannot believe – the impact on the individuals involved is immense, usually through incompetence on the parts of the NCSC, CSCI and GSCC (more on their part in this sorry story later). On incompetence, the CSCI outcome of the Internal Review Report was that it accepted full responsibility for creating, what Wilt will describe, as a fucking nightmare scenario. David Behan, CEO of CSCI at the time, wrote a long apologetic letter to numerous parties. It effectively said that the NCSC and CSCI had, in this matter, served no one’s interests. He apologised to the numerous parties and staff, even to Plaskitt and Mrs C. See letter here:

(Copy to foloow)

So to recap –Mrs C had now had two apologies. That must solve the issue. Um, no regrettably for some it was no end to Mrs C’s desire for blood and rolling heads from the block. For those some unfortunates, it involved the GSCC, you know, those careful, intelligent and proficient people who help promote public confidence in social work (Wilt vomits violently). It also involved several police forces and the saviour of social work, Ofsted – Wilt after vomiting falls on the floor in uncontrollable laughter.

However to conclude matters on this phase it might be of interest, especially to Mrs C to note that before Happen Fostercare was sold, as a strong going concern, with excellent Inspection Reports and the Henderson’s remained ‘fit persons’ (it was sold for £0,000,000) that the CSCI paid a out of Court settlement of (£00,000). Now unless Wilt has got it wrong somewhere, do government agencies usually pass on thousands of pounds without good reason, or do they pay the Henderson’s a good whack of dosh for harm done? And the Henderson’s, how are they doing? Well, rather well actually and regular visitors and friends of Regulator Watch, together with Paul of course.

Part 4 of Mrs C and the GSCC to follow shortly, and then even more scary stories to haunt the reasonable thinking person. Paul and others (otherwise et al) have collaborated with Wilt in this production and the next several phases of publication. Readers have not the first clue what will come out. Mrs C and Plaskitt will be experiencing flatulence (possibly wet underwear) whilst the GSCC will, not unusually, be shitting bricks when visiting Regulator Watch.

Wilt (in collaboration with Paul et al)

As is well known, Wilt loves to see Ed Balls getting politically fucked. The man is an evil bastard at the best of times – a bit like Hitler’s Dr Mengele. In this Community Care article Balls is referred to as “a bit of a bully’ which is putting it lightly, in my opinion. He even looks like some kind of clone from the film ‘Boys from Brazil.’

See the article here:

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2009/10/19/112901/ed-balls-accused-of-being-a-bit-of-a-bully.html

Reference to ‘bully’ reminds me of a phone call the Regulator Watch designer had from a certain woman from Leamington Spa a few weeks ago.

“I demand to know who is Wilt” she said. “I am a lawyer you know” (in fact she is not) and “I want my MP [James Plaskitt] to know their details.” It would be “in confidence” she said – oh yeah!

Wonderful thing is she put it in writing in her own name – brilliant!

“Can I pass some names past you” she said. “Is it Tony Xxxxxxxx, XXXXXX or Tony Xxxxxxxxx.” She went on (and on, and on and on – as usual):

“I am wondering now if the Regulator Watch site is registered in the name of Tony Xxxxxxxx. If it is this would be particularly significant, as we have often wondered about there being some connection between Tony Xxxxxxxxx and Tony Xxxxxxxxxx. Tony Xxxxxxxxx and Tony Xxxxxxxxxx have both had a concerning involvement in two serious child-protection complaints my partner and I raised against our former fostering agency, Happen Fostercare Ltd  (complaints which are, as a matter of law, fully upheld, but you would never think it because of misleading statements that continue to be widely publicised). Please see Private Eye magazine’s coverage of our case, which gives some indication of what Mr Xxxxxxxxxx’ and Mr Xxxxxxxxxx’s involvement has been.”

Signed Elizabeth Calleja

Regulator Watch recognises only one of those names and Wilt aint him. Got it, yet? Now get on do something constructive.

The woman is clueless. Three – four times daily (but only usually once on Sunday’s) Calleja visits Regulator Watch via Leamington Spa, Birmingham, Edgebaston and London on her tiny screen. It must hurt the eyes having a screen that small.

We logged Elizabeth from day one – in the last thirty days you have logged on to Regulator Watch over 125 times. And we know every click of the mouse you make when visiting. And her Flash Version is way out of date.

Elizabeth and her partner Mr Cooper are foster carers. It was Mr Cooper’s email address that was used to contact Pixelmakers. They Live in an ex-council house in the constituency of James Plaskitt – a soon not to be MP given his minuscule majority in a very unsafe Labour seat.

The articles in the Spectator and Private Eye were interesting but incompetent and Regulator Watch has/will be subject to further analysis on these pages.

As Elizabeth says herself:

“I am forwarding to you Private Eye magazine’s recent coverage of our case, to enable you to understand why I am making the inquiries I am in relation to the the identity of the person who has set up, and who moderates, the “Regulator Watch” website.

Prior to Private Eye magazine’s coverage of our case The Spectator magazine had also covered our story – if you put into “google” “After Baby P the crisis in child foster care”, by Mary Wakefield, you should bring this up. Extremely offensive commentary upon what has been written in The Spectator is appearing within the ”Regulator Watch” website. It is this that has prompted my making contact with you to ask if there is any way I can confirm the identity of the person who is responsible for this. I would like my MP, James Plaskitt, to have this information as he is to raise our case in Parlaiment, for the second time, very soon. As I said to you if you feel able to pass on to my MP, James Plaskitt, any information you have concerning the site in question, including in whose name it is registered in (with any conditions you see fit to impose being respected) this would be very much appreciated.

James Plaskitt MP (Warwick and Leamington) may be contacted on tel. 01926 831151 or email mp@jamesplaskitt.com orandy@jamesplaskitt.com

Many thanks for listening to my concerns.”

Signed Elizabeth Calleja

Shame the Spectator and Private Eye never sought any comment from any of the named other parties other than Calleja.

Wilt expects much greater access to Regular Watch blog from now on. She seems to have nothing better to do.

Anyway, Wilt is away home from the beach with the salty dog – work tomorrow and the rest of the week. Driving this new Range Rover Sport however makes the 5 hour trip very easy.

Bet Elizabeth regrets contacting Pixelmakers. We suspect she will bemoan her confidence being broken, even though she has a long history of this herself and trying to bully Pixelmakers into breaching confidence. And, despite Elizabeth having had a written warning to stop harassing certain friends of Wilt – does she give up? No, of course not, the woman is just a sad person of questionable competence and merit.

Wilt will not reveal the identity of contributors but in accordance with the conditions of access to our website we reserve the right to identify vexatious individuals. Elizabeth is not a contributor, nor is Dork Plaskitt.

Wilt

It seems the beginning of government cut backs have begun. See the community care article here:

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2009/09/25/112686/cafcass-cuts-jobs-to-tackle-post-baby-p-budget-crisis.html

And this will only be the beginning – local authority cuts will be made too, and inevitably there will be numerous Whitehall losses. Not a bad thing, but obviously traumatic for those involved, except of course for those who crave a redundancy and/or early retirement package.

When you think about it, do we still need CAFCASS (putting children first in family courts) <mmmmmmm>.Children are represented by solicitors – do they really need a social worker independently appointed too – assuming you can find one?

Wilt thinks not, or at least not always. And Wilt has acted as a Guardian, before some nerd thinks Wilt should know better. So Wilt suggests getting rid of CAFCASS, the end of another error.

All the Courts need to do, as they do frequently anyway, is appoint an “expert” of some description as and when absolutely necessary to assist the child’s solicitor or to independently advise the Court. Simple!

Just think of the financial savings. Blimey, the economy could be saved a major burden.

In addition, just think of all those unemployed children’s guardians who could be available to front line social work – ok they may not be keen on that, indeed it is probably true that some of them will be a total liability and outright dangerous – but hey what, it would swell the ranks and put bums on seats. The right bums, willing bums, probably not in all cases – becoming a children’s guardian is after all about not being accountable or having to put up with the shit of daily toil in the front office.

Just imagine Anthony Douglas at the local office of XYZ Council taking a call from a service user and saying, ‘how can I not help you.’ Fucking brilliant, and far better use of my tax money.

All we then need is to disband the GSCC and the workforce can feel safe again. At this rate I am going to have to form the Wilt Party and stand for election – its rally call will be ‘Fuck the Quango – do some proper work, Dorks.’

Have I already said Ed Balls is a twat?

‘And what relevance is that’ someone asks Wilt?

Answer: ‘well nothing at all, but a smile comes to my face just saying it.’ Bloody marvellous!

Mmmmmmm.

Wilt

The commission for social care inspection (CSCI) is the daughter of the earlier national care standards commission (NCSC) which was launched in April 2002 – it was a bit of a runt of an agency which grew out of the Care Standards Act 2000.

That Act was brought about by a number of factors and events, one of which was the North Wales child abuse revelations where numerous children were systematically sexually, emotionally and physically abused.  A rather revealing report “Lost in Care” (the Waterhouse Report) describes the utter failure of all sector providers (public/private/voluntary) for looked after children and both within residential care and foster care. One of the most concerning was the utter failure of managers and elected members to take responsibility (or sometimes colluded in their demise) for children in care, resulting in the concept that these are ‘our children.’ The full report can be read here:

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/Browsable/DH_4097884

Hitherto local authorities ran inspection units, effectively inspecting themselves – and we know what that means!

So the 2000 Care Standards Act and the birth of the NCSC (later CSCI – Commission for Social Care Inspection), the General Social Care Council (GSCC) and others such as SCIE (Social Care Institute for Excellence).

In summary the NCSC/CSCI no longer exist but SCIE, the GSCC do and the NCSC/CSCI functions (child care) have been assumed by Ofsted as of April 2008. Their respective websites are listed below:

http://www.scie.org.uk/

http://www.gscc.org.uk/Home/

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/

These are all the English based organisations – each of the three other countries have similar but differently titled and seperate organisations responsible to the pwn Assemblies/Parliament. Is that a good thing? Time will tell.

The Waterhouse Report – Lost in Care should be essential reading for every child & family social worker. It contains essential reading that will significantly influence practice. Remember, what was discovered in Wales could and was discovered in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Wilt