Archived Transcript for 4 Febuary 2002: Pages 1 to 50


1



1 Monday, 4th February 2002

2 (9.30 am)

3 THE CHAIRMAN: Morning ladies and gentlemen. I should say

4 that unfortunately Ms Kinnair is not with us today but

5 as usual we will make sure that she sees the transcript

6 of the evidence. Mr Garnham.

7 MR GARNHAM: Good morning sir. Sir, it feels as if I begin

8 every day by reporting the late disclosure of documents

9 to this Inquiry. It would perhaps be surprising if what

10 is scheduled to be our last day of oral evidence began

11 differently.

12 On Friday evening we were supplied with a small

13 bundle of material by the Metropolitan Police. It

14 should in our submission have been supplied before.

15 However, it relates to a single narrow issue and can

16 readily be dealt with during the evidence of Ms Howlett.

17 Much more disconcerting is the disclosure of further

18 documents by Haringey Social Services. Sir I am afraid

19 I have run out of adjectives or similes to describe

20 Haringey's method of providing this Inquiry with

21 relevant material. First, on Friday evening we were

22 provided with a document of central importance to this

23 Inquiry. I know of no explanation consistent with even

24 modest competence on the part of Haringey behind their

25 failure to provide it to us by June of last year. It is

2



1 a PDR dated 29th July 1999 conducted by Carole Baptiste

2 on Lisa Arthurworrey. That is a PDR conducted on the

3 very day or within 24 hours of the allocation by

4 Baptiste to Arthurworrey of Victoria's case. It has

5 observations which would have been relevant from the

6 first day of this Inquiry.

7 Then this morning, sir, we received yet further

8 documents accompanied by a letter from Mr Lloyd dated

9 this morning. Sir, the letter runs to five pages. If

10 I may I will just related the first two paragraphs:

11 "Dear Mr Fitzgerald, as you are aware, following the

12 events of last Friday a further search was made of the

13 North Tottenham and Hornsey district offices on Friday

14 and on Saturday. On Friday those searching at the

15 North Tottenham office were told that a large quantity

16 of old files had been moved from the building to

17 a locked storage area at the side of the building. This

18 is where most of the material in the list below has been

19 found. Some of the documents were found in Hornsey

20 which is why the word 'Hornsey' has been written on some

21 of them. Some were also in files held by Ann Graham.

22 You may recall that when the previous trawl was done on

23 1st/2nd December 2001 her office was moving that weekend

24 and the files were in crates.

25 "The Inquiry must also appreciate the significance

3



1 of some of these documents has only become apparent in

2 recent weeks as the focus of the Inquiry has shifted or

3 in consequence of the questioning of witnesses."

4 Sir, that last assertion that the focus of the

5 Inquiry has shifted gives us some concern. In our

6 submission the poverty of that argument is demonstrated

7 by the headings for the documents disclosed provided by

8 Haringey in their letter. Those headings are as

9 follows:

10 "Documents relating to Lisa Arthurworrey"; one might

11 have thought it pretty obvious that those would be

12 relevant given Miss Arthurworrey's involvement in this

13 case. "Correspondence between Anne Graham and the

14 Haringey Police CPT"; self-evidently relevant given that

15 the liaison between the agencies was at the forefront of

16 your terms of reference. "Investigation into the

17 Rainbow Church", relevant at least since the time of the

18 opening. "Documents in North Tottenham District Office

19 relating to the NSPCC Family Centre", ditto. "Documents

20 relating to restructuring", ditto. "Staffing, duty

21 cover, allocation meetings in the North Tottenham

22 District Office. Allocation, documents relating to

23 Carole Baptiste's supervision".

24 Sir, it is possible that Haringey may believe that

25 because we have reached what was planned to be the last

4



1 day of oral evidence we would now be content with the

2 documents we have. We will not. We will continue

3 reading and questioning and demanding their proper

4 cooperation with this Inquiry. If necessary we will

5 call for further documents, serve summonses on those who

6 hold the documents and recall witnesses. We are not sir

7 content to leave this matter until we are satisfied that

8 Haringey have done what they should have done in the

9 first place and provided everything that is material.

10 In the meantime, sir, we will continue with the hearing

11 today.

12 THE CHAIRMAN: Miss Lawson, anything you want to say?

13 MISS LAWSON: Sir, I only want to make two points. There is

14 much more in the letter obviously than Mr Garnham has

15 chosen to highlight in terms of the explanation and we

16 have not sought to suggest in the letter that the second

17 paragraph that he read out relates to anything other

18 than some of the material. Undoubtedly the document

19 which I gave him on Friday evening is in a separate

20 league from almost all of the rest of the material. We

21 do not seek to suggest for one moment the documents

22 relating to Lisa Arthurworrey are not material to this

23 Inquiry.

24 The letter does explain where that document was

25 found, which casts some light on why it was not

5



1 produced. It raises different issues, but so that

2 everybody is aware of the position, that document had

3 been placed in the file of another social worker who was

4 supervised by Carole Baptiste. That social worker

5 transferred to the Hornsey office some time after

6 Victoria's death. She died last year. She had no

7 connection whatsoever with Victoria's case. And apart

8 from the obvious question of how the document got into

9 that file rather than where it should have been, it does

10 at least provide some explanation why those who were

11 looking for material documents relating to

12 Lisa Arthurworrey did not find that one, and as I say,

13 I appreciate as well as anybody else here the

14 significance of that document and the fact that it

15 should have been made available before.

16 As far as the other material is concerned, it is not

17 right at the same level and some of it you will have to

18 judge whether it assists you to look at it now or not.

19 We are not seeking to say, "Well this is the last

20 hearing date so it will be all right", very far from it

21 as I made clear on Friday. The feelings of those

22 engaged in this exercise are comparable only to yours.

23 THE CHAIRMAN: Well, I am comforted by that last comment

24 particularly Miss Lawson. I am not given to using

25 extreme language or eye-catching or ear-catching

6



1 language and I do try to express myself wherever

2 possible in ways that have a degree of moderation and

3 I hope they are supported, but I said on Friday that

4 I was furious and I do not often use a word like that

5 and I only use it when it is a feeling which is

6 genuinely felt. Nothing that has happened since has

7 helped me overcome my fury.

8 There are two possible explanations from Haringey of

9 their performance. Either they have deliberately tried

10 to withhold essential information from this Inquiry or

11 that their incompetence knows no bounds. If it is the

12 latter then I have to say that it must be not only

13 a concern, a great concern to Haringey Council, to the

14 users of the services in Haringey, many of whom are as

15 vulnerable as Victoria was when she needed protection,

16 but it must also be a concern to local government and

17 central government because these are the services that

18 are being paid for from the public purse and there is

19 I think a minimum expectation that the services will be

20 run with a degree of competence, which by any standards

21 the performance of Haringey in delivering documents to

22 this Inquiry falls so far short it can only be described

23 as woeful.

24 I will continue to give thought and take advice

25 about if there are any further steps that I can take,

7



1 either against individuals or against the organisation,

2 and that will be certainly something that I will want to

3 pursue if at all possible. I hope Miss Lawson that you

4 and your colleagues will convey to both the Leader of

5 Haringey Council and the Chief Executive of Haringey

6 Council the feeling that I have expressed about their

7 performance of Haringey.

8 For that and other reasons we will not conclude the

9 evidence to Phase I today. It may be that we have

10 reached a certain stage, a certain milestone along the

11 way in terms of current scheduled witnesses, but I think

12 that it is manifestly clear that there may be further

13 work to do and that is something that I will speak of

14 when we get to the end of the proceedings today. In the

15 meantime we will proceed with the Inquiry.

16 MR GARNHAM: I should say that the material that we were

17 provided with on Friday evening is being copied now and

18 will be made available to the interested parties as soon

19 as possible during the course of the morning.

20 I wonder if we could have Ms Bristow back to the

21 witness stand.

22 MS ANNE BRISTOW (continued)

23 MISS LAWSON: Sir, can I say I am aware the Chief Executive

24 and Leader of the Council are already aware of the

25 feelings that you expressed on Friday.

8



1 THE CHAIRMAN: Does it do any good to repeat them again?

2 MISS LAWSON: I leave that to you.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: When I go quiet that is when it is really

4 dangerous you can tell them.

5 MISS LAWSON: Me too. Ms Bristow, can I ask you to

6 elaborate a little more on the events of the end of last

7 week and in particular what you did on Friday to try and

8 deal with the situation regarding the documents?

9 MS BRISTOW: Yes, thank you, good morning. Like everyone

10 else, indeed I offer my apologies Lord Laming, it is not

11 for want of trying of Haringey elected members and

12 senior managers. I appreciate the results do not bear

13 testimony to the effort we have put in. Like you I think

14 it is beyond words how I felt on Friday morning, as

15 I think you can imagine. I therefore, as I was here on

16 Friday and unable to be in Haringey personally,

17 instructed my assistant directors to carry out

18 interviews under the Council's disciplinary procedures

19 to all staff who had been in receipt of the instruction

20 I issued in very strong terms in writing on Sunday

21 2nd December which would have been with or should have

22 been with all staff by 10 o'clock the next morning.

23 I also asked that a team of senior managers

24 unconnected with the North Tottenham District Office

25 should go there and they should search, having

9



1 previously relied on the management of that office to

2 search, with the results that we know of.

3 We have taken the view that however much criticism

4 we will receive for submitting documents late, it is

5 nevertheless the correct thing to do and therefore we

6 are submitting them. We are pursuing some further

7 questioning of staff.

8 In the course of the discussions my managers had

9 with staff on Friday, we were also told, which is in the

10 letter to the Inquiry, that Angella Mairs had removed

11 some other papers in the same way as Mr Duncan and we

12 will explore with Counsel to the Inquiry whether you

13 wish to seek to recover them or whether you wish us to

14 seek to recover them. Clearly until Friday afternoon

15 I did not know that was the case.

16 We have worked -- I had people working late Friday

17 night and people working all day Saturday and people

18 working all day yesterday. In the circumstances I would

19 wish to offer you my assurance that we have put our best

20 foot forward to try and rectify a situation that we are

21 exceedingly unhappy about. I would also want to say to

22 the Inquiry that a number of people who have given

23 evidence as "Haringey" witnesses are in fact former

24 employees of the authority, who have not always left us

25 in happy circumstances, and a number of people who we

10



1 would not see as having their views and interests the

2 same as yourself and the authority's.

3 We take an exceedingly dim view of what has happened

4 and we will take every step that we can. I have

5 throughout the weekend spoken to the Chief Executive,

6 the Leader of the Council and the Lead Member of Social

7 Services and Health.

8 MISS LAWSON: Have those enquiries cast any further light on

9 the documents that were found in the filing cabinet on

10 Thursday evening?

11 MS BRISTOW: Not so far. We do not understand why that

12 filing cabinet, which was in full view of staff in the

13 North Tottenham District Office and where the files we

14 found easily, had not been identified. I understand we

15 intend to put some further questions in the light of

16 some interviews that were carried out on Friday

17 afternoon to people today.

18 MISS LAWSON: Is there anything else that you want to say

19 about that Ms Bristow?

20 MS BRISTOW: Only to say that we will -- I take the point

21 Mr Garnham made, the Inquiry we know has not closed. We

22 are obviously hopeful in the amount of searching by

23 different teams of manager that we have done that

24 nothing further should come to light, but should it do,

25 clearly we will look at that. We have also had papers

11



1 returned to us over the weekend by Mr Duncan who I think

2 had gone home and reflected on your comments to him and

3 had then taken the view this perhaps he did have papers

4 that belonged to the authority and we are going through

5 those now.

6 MISS LAWSON: You may now have some difficulty in

7 remembering what evidence you gave last Wednesday

8 Ms Bristow, but can I just ask you about one or two

9 particular topics? You were asked a number of questions

10 relating to the decision to divide the department back

11 into Housing and Social Services, whereas it had been

12 brought together with some positive benefits.

13 So far as that is concerned, on the ground what has

14 been the impact of splitting the two departments again

15 in terms of the cooperation that is possible between

16 Housing and Social Services?

17 MS BRISTOW: I think the situation is very little changed

18 for front line workers in the sense that they have

19 worked in professional disciplines, specific teams under

20 both organisational structures. At a more senior level,

21 we have been careful to keep in place arrangements

22 between those responsible for developing housing

23 strategy and those responsible for people who have

24 special needs for housing, for example people, children,

25 young people leaving our care, adults with learning

12



1 disabilities, adults with mental health problems. So

2 I believe we have maintained the operational links

3 within an organisational structure which I think gives

4 us more scope to press on with the need to get what

5 I think could be described as a management grip of the

6 organisation.

7 MISS LAWSON: So in terms of preserving the benefits of

8 having a joint department, where do you say things are

9 now?

10 MS BRISTOW: I believe that we have made almost more effort

11 as separate departments being conscious of the need to

12 maintain those links. It is very easy within one

13 department to assume that you are liaising well between

14 sections. We are very conscious that whilst changing

15 the organisational structure we did not want to lose the

16 benefits, and a great deal of active work has been done

17 to maintain those relationships particularly given the

18 changes in the senior personnel in the Council's

19 organisation.

20 MISS LAWSON: In terms of the present arrangements at the

21 North Tottenham District Office and I think the other

22 district office, you referred during the course of your

23 evidence to the fact that there were 23 managers --

24 MS BRISTOW: Yes.

25 MISS LAWSON: -- dealing with each office or both of them.

13



1 MS BRISTOW: I think there would be 23 in total.

2 MISS LAWSON: Yes. And what if any other changes have you

3 made to deal with ensuring that there is now adequate

4 management in those offices? Or do you not think there

5 is?

6 MS BRISTOW: Clearly I hope it is improving on a regular

7 basis. We have over the last four or five months

8 appointed two new third tier managers who take

9 day-to-day operational responsibility, one for Hornsey

10 and one for North Tottenham. The new manager for North

11 Tottenham started work with the authority at the

12 beginning of January and clearly has therefore had

13 limited opportunity so far to impact on the day-to-day

14 operational arrangements. We have also appointed --

15 nearly half of our practice managers are newly appointed

16 and we are in the process of reappointing team managers.

17 MISS LAWSON: Another topic was the question of the review

18 of strategy meetings and what instructions had been

19 given to the staff about that. The Inquiry already has

20 the procedures, I am not sure I need to take you to

21 them. It is bundle 24, page 31. It deals with fixing

22 the date for review strategy meetings. It also has

23 a memo sent out by Carol Wilson on 1st March 2000

24 immediately following Victoria's death dealing with

25 strategy meetings at bundle 42, page 61. Are you able

14



1 to help at all on the extent to which that has been

2 followed up or have you any information about whether

3 there are still concerns that that is not happening?

4 MS BRISTOW: I understand the new Assistant Director has

5 followed up on it. Because these are not procedures

6 I personally work with on a daily basis, I was not able

7 to recall on Wednesday but I have looked again since.

8 My understanding is in the performance management

9 meetings that are now being held on a monthly basis

10 within the Children's Division, where there are any

11 concerns about aspects of performance that is where

12 people would either be reminded about critical things or

13 asked to account for variations in performance.

14 MISS LAWSON: You were asked a number of matters in relation

15 to notes and letters sent to you by Ms Kozinos in the

16 summer of last year beginning with the memo of 6th June.

17 What you were not taken to were two of the letters which

18 you wrote to her on 28th June. I wondered if you could

19 have bundle 26C, page 115 .501. There is a second

20 letter at 115.504, which deals specifically with the

21 action that you had taken in response to her e-mail

22 communication of 6th June and inviting her to come to

23 a meeting to discuss it.

24 MS BRISTOW: That is right, yes.

25 MISS LAWSON: And the earlier letter at 501 deals with the

15



1 consequences of her resignation and deals with her

2 request for the way in which her annual leave is to be

3 dealt with. So that just completes the picture that

4 there were in fact being pulled together three letters

5 dealing with different aspects of the matter sent by you

6 at that time?

7 MS BRISTOW: Yes, that is right and I think what I recall

8 was there was a phone call that said "I do not want to

9 see you." I think it might also be worth commenting,

10 although I agreed that we would pay the time off in

11 lieu, that was not because I considered she had

12 necessarily worked excessive hours, but I felt as she

13 was terminating her relationship with the organisation,

14 there was really little point in arguing over

15 a relatively small number of hours, and to make the

16 payment rather than dispute it.

17 MISS LAWSON: The issue of unallocated cases has been

18 something which has caused particular concern I think to

19 you in relation to ensuring that the standards set by

20 the SAI in relation to this are met, is that right?

21 MS BRISTOW: It is always a matter of concern if there are

22 cases that cannot be allocated, yes. I think in the

23 information I provided Mr Garnham with on Friday it

24 shows that there are actually very -- which was the

25 average case load information -- it actually shows there

16



1 is a very small number of unallocated cases now, all of

2 which -- all of which are family support rather than

3 child protection or looked after children.

4 MISS LAWSON: I think even before you became involved in the

5 matter again -- sir the reference is bundle 42,

6 page 89 -- Ms Carol Wilson was concerned to ensure that

7 the whole question of -- that there should be a policy

8 in relation to the unallocated cases.

9 MS BRISTOW: I think it is clear that it is always a matter

10 that needs to be kept under constant management review

11 about whether cases are being allocating in a timely and

12 appropriate manner. It is something I have had

13 discussions with staff at a number of levels about, as

14 I understand did Carol Wilson, and I certainly know the

15 current assistant directors also have those kinds of

16 discussions.

17 It is not my belief from personal discussions with

18 managers that there is any misunderstanding about the

19 importance of ensuring that allocation but it is a topic

20 of discussion I think in social services departments up

21 and down the country and goes on on a regular basis.

22 MISS LAWSON: We have heard I think from some of the other

23 witnesses that your own stance on issues such as reading

24 the files prior to supervision was rather different from

25 what has been suggested.

17



1 MS BRISTOW: I think my position is unequivocal. The files,

2 I believe very strongly that files and case recordings

3 should not be an administrative chore but is part of the

4 professional practice, and it is where we record and

5 hold sometimes for posterity for a child the history of

6 their life, and therefore it is very important we do it

7 properly, it is very important that we maintain the

8 records and it is crucial if we are to understand,

9 because inevitably we may have contact with the child

10 for 10 years, it is almost certain that during that time

11 the employed staff working with that child may change.

12 Sometimes it is very lucky and it does not happen but it

13 is commonplace that it does, and whilst you minimise

14 that frequency, you need to be able to follow it through

15 so I have tried to set an example in the department by

16 saying if people need to speak to me about cases, which

17 is obviously not frequent but it does happen, and

18 I demonstrate, I read the file, I expect them to bring

19 it, I expect my managers to read the file. I do not

20 think there should be any doubt now about that standard.

21 MISS LAWSON: The last matter I want to deal with is this.

22 You were asked a number of questions in relation to

23 meetings between you and representatives of the police

24 and health authorities, health organisations, prior to

25 the start of this Inquiry, and whether there had been an

18



1 agreement to present a united front to this Inquiry, and

2 you said in terms that there had not. I would like you

3 again to have a look, please, at the letter at

4 45H/208.303.

5 Just before you do so, can I just tell you what

6 Ms Gibb told us about her reasons for referring to that

7 letter and including it in reference to the subsequent

8 meeting in her statement. She said:

9 "It was purely I, as Chief Executive, concerned

10 that -- my perception in the opening days of the Inquiry

11 was that concerns were being raised regarding the

12 competence and honesty of Dr Rossiter. This for myself

13 and for the health economy gave us a serious problem

14 because if you have an individual who has undertaken

15 both the borough-wide role of child protection as well

16 as the trust role of child protection, her integrity and

17 competence are critical. So it was ensuring -- it was

18 me saying I have looked at -- is there any evidence?

19 I have asked are there any concerns and have not been

20 advised of any, because if there were I would take some

21 degree of management action."

22 Now, I just wanted to ask you, if, as she has told

23 this Inquiry, Ms Gibb's concern was whether or not

24 Haringey had any particular concerns about Dr Rossiter,

25 how would you have expected her to deal with those in

19



1 the first instance?

2 MS BRISTOW: I would have expected Rose to pick the phone up

3 to me and speak to me, to be honest, and, failing that,

4 to send me a letter. Clearly sometimes both she and

5 I are extremely busy and there are times when we will

6 not both be in office at the same time, but it is not

7 unknown for us to write to each other.

8 MISS LAWSON: So a letter. If you go now to 45H/208.303,

9 addressed not to you but to the Leader of the Council

10 and the Chief Executive, forgive me, but do either of

11 them have any firsthand knowledge of Dr Rossiter's

12 competency or honesty?

13 MS BRISTOW: I do not believe so but clearly both of their

14 contacts are wide and extensive and they unbeknown to me

15 have had contact.

16 MISS LAWSON: So instead a letter is signed by three chairs

17 and three chief executives as a way of raising this

18 particular matter that Ms Gibb has told us.

19 MS BRISTOW: Yes, it is but I think in the end a helpful

20 meeting was held and a little of what I think is

21 sometimes called a frank exchange of views took place

22 and that helped to strengthen the working relationship

23 which is normally good, but like all organisations who

24 work hard together, part I think of the strength of the

25 relationship with health partners is that we are

20



1 actually able to say what we think to each other.

2 I prefer not normally to do it in such a public arena

3 but nevertheless we do need to be able to have an honest

4 exchange of views if we are to work effectively

5 together.

6 MISS LAWSON: Was that meeting a private one?

7 MS BRISTOW: It was a private meeting held in the office of

8 the Leader of the Council but unfortunately that evening

9 Ms Gibb was not able to attend.

10 MISS LAWSON: Just on that topic Ms Bristow you were asked

11 whether you were aware of any concerns about the present

12 state of working relationships between Haringey,

13 North Tottenham Social Services and the North Middlesex

14 Hospital and Dr Rossiter and in particular since the

15 hospital social workers took up their posts. The

16 evidence we have had from the health professionals and

17 particularly Ms Gallagher was to the effect that she was

18 not aware of any such concerns certainly being raised by

19 the hospital.

20 MS BRISTOW: No. I mean I understand the arrangements

21 working well. There are still some technical

22 difficulties around it that need to be resolved, which

23 means my staff are currently working on laptops, but

24 I do not think that is insurmountable. Could I correct

25 something I said to Mr Garnham on Friday?

21



1 THE CHAIRMAN: You certainly can.

2 MS BRISTOW: On Friday afternoon Mr Garnham put in front of

3 me the schedule of child deaths but which had neither

4 names nor dates on it and asked me a question about the

5 recommendations in relation to Tottenham Children and

6 Families Centre and whether that would have affected

7 Victoria. At the time I said to him yes I thought

8 probably it would because I think that was the line he

9 was hoping I would go to.

10 Having now looked at a date -- a list with dates on

11 it, that was much later and whilst that child died at

12 the end of August 1999 those recommendations were not

13 formulated for some months to come and I am afraid when

14 I gave my evidence on Friday without the dates I did not

15 recall that.

16 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much indeed. Could I just ask

17 you a few questions for clarification? Just in respect

18 of the last matter that Miss Lawson raised about that

19 full and frank meeting that you had with colleagues from

20 the Health Department or was held in the Leader's

21 office, was that full and frank discussion minuted?

22 MS BRISTOW: No it was not. I have actually looked to see

23 if there were minutes. I think because it was deemed it

24 would be a private meeting -- and I also looked to see

25 whether I had written anything in my notebook for which

22



1 I have a few scrappy notes that say who was there and

2 then nothing else, which is unfortunate clearly in this

3 context, but it was not intended to be that kind of

4 meeting.

5 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Just going back to the beginning

6 of your evidence on Wednesday, which as Miss Lawson

7 indicated does seem a long time ago, the splitting of

8 the Housing Department from the Social Services

9 Department, what was the extra cost involved in that?

10 MS BRISTOW: I believe, I do not think I actually know an

11 accurate figure but my understanding is that because it

12 was done as part of a Council-wide reorganisation, the

13 opportunity was taken to take costs out of support

14 services across the authority to try and direct things

15 to front line services.

16 Overall the restructuring of the Council will have

17 saved money, so for example there was some duplication

18 between having directorate personnel sections and

19 a central personnel section. We had directorate IT

20 sections and central IT sections. So it is from those

21 kinds of support services that the costs have been taken

22 out rather than out of direct Housing or direct Social

23 Services.

24 THE CHAIRMAN: So this is one restructuring in contrast to

25 most which actually saved money?

23



1 MS BRISTOW: That is what I am led to believe by the Finance

2 Director.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: And you want me to believe that also, all

4 right. You said that when you were appointed and before

5 you took up your appointment or maybe at the time you

6 took up your appointment, you very sensibly if I may say

7 so sought some briefings from external services and one

8 of them was with the head of the Joint Review service as

9 I understood it.

10 MS BRISTOW: With the lead reviewer of the Haringey's

11 review, Demma Simpson.

12 THE CHAIRMAN: Of the Joint Review service?

13 MS BRISTOW: He was the lead reviewer from the Joint Review.

14 THE CHAIRMAN: When the Joint Review took place?

15 MS BRISTOW: Yes.

16 THE CHAIRMAN: Can you share with us briefly the gist of the

17 briefing that he gave you?

18 MS BRISTOW: I think the gist of it was that he thought the

19 right arrangements were in place, the right policies and

20 procedures, and that what I needed to do, bearing in

21 mind it was now some time on, was to satisfy myself that

22 what had been in formulation or had been in its early

23 days had been seen through to implementation.

24 THE CHAIRMAN: It is just that I read a press report and

25 that is why I treat it with some caution that the head

24



1 of the Joint Review service said that perhaps they got

2 the Joint Review wrong in Haringey. Have you been told

3 that?

4 MS BRISTOW: I have only read a press report quoting

5 John Bolton saying that but I have not -- that was some

6 months afterwards but we have not received any

7 communication from them directly.

8 THE CHAIRMAN: What basically was the problem about getting

9 agreement with the Part 8 review? Where did the

10 disagreements lie and what was so contentious about it?

11 MS BRISTOW: As I understand it, I came in quite a long way

12 through the process and initially I thought we were

13 nearing completion in my first months after my

14 appointment. I understand that from almost every agency

15 involved that they did not feel that the report that was

16 written reflected the information they had given to the

17 person who carried out the interviews and they felt

18 there were some both factual and interpretation matters

19 that led the agencies not to be prepared to sign the

20 report off.

21 They said, what I was told and this would have been

22 about November/December 2000, that they had sought to

23 have it corrected but felt that each time they asked for

24 corrections, which -- that they were not forthcoming.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: This was not the agencies disagreeing with

25



1 each other's contribution, it was the agencies

2 disagreeing with the reputation of their evidence?

3 MS BRISTOW: Yes, it was.

4 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr Garnham asked you about the

5 SSA, not for the first time the SAA has been raised in

6 respect of Haringey, and I think if you recall you were

7 extremely reluctant to express a view about the SSA on

8 the basis that what you were saying was the SSA is not

9 relevant, the relevant thing is whether or not the

10 organisation has enough money to provide a good service

11 and we had. I hope that I paraphrase.

12 MS BRISTOW: Yes, broadly.

13 THE CHAIRMAN: I wondered if we could look at 45J/136,

14 please. I think I know what the document is but perhaps

15 you could tell us what the document is.

16 MS BRISTOW: It is a draft currently being consulted on

17 about what the eligibility criteria for services will

18 be.

19 THE CHAIRMAN: Right. If we go to the second paragraph it

20 says:

21 "However, like many other local authorities the

22 demand for our children's services far exceeds the

23 resources available to meet these demands. In order to

24 ensure the most effective use of our resources would

25 have taken very tough decisions to prioritise requests

26



1 for services in terms of those in greatest need and at

2 the highest risk."

3 I find it very hard to reconcile your statement

4 about the adequacy of the funding of Children's Services

5 in Haringey with that second paragraph.

6 MS BRISTOW: You will appreciate I am not the author of this

7 document. What I suppose I was trying to reflect is

8 that in my time in Haringey the budget available for

9 Children's Services has been substantially increased.

10 It is still increasing. I anticipate it will increase

11 further when the budget is set this year. No, it is not

12 at a level which would make life easy, given the scale

13 of the demands on us, but what I think is also true --

14 and I do not know that I personally think, given I have

15 not yet been asked to comment on these -- there are

16 other resources available to you as an authority that we

17 are trying to rouse, regeneration monies, how we link in

18 with those kinds of initiatives with deprived

19 neighbourhoods, and I think we can provide a reasonable

20 service, but I think, as I said in my evidence as well,

21 I am not suggesting we have got money swooshing around

22 and that there is more than enough, and we are

23 continuing to seek additional funding, but I do not

24 think it is perhaps as tight as that paragraph would

25 suggest.

27



1 THE CHAIRMAN: But if in fact you have had considerable

2 growth in Children's Services and it continues to grow,

3 does that not mean that at the time Victoria needed

4 services the Children's Services were seriously

5 underfunded?

6 MS BRISTOW: I think that is it is possible there was

7 underfunding at the time. I think as I said before it

8 is quite difficult for me to judge, given I do not know

9 what else was available in the community at that time.

10 I have made enquiries but I am very conscious that I am

11 venturing opinion on something of which I do not have

12 firsthand knowledge.

13 THE CHAIRMAN: Let me ask you something you do have

14 firsthand knowledge about. Is it your view that the

15 Government in developing the SSA for Children's Services

16 has over the years demonstrated a degree of generosity

17 that would lead us to believe that the SSA significantly

18 overstates the needs for Children's Services?

19 MS BRISTOW: I do not think I would hold the view that

20 Government funding of Children's Services is generous,

21 no.

22 THE CHAIRMAN: No. And I think you are probably right about

23 that. I ask this because I think this needs to be seen

24 in the context of the minute that your colleague wrote

25 to the team managers on 7th January 2000. You recall

28



1 the allocation of cases?

2 MS BRISTOW: I do.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: My reading of that is that there were a total

4 of 77 unallocated cases and he breaks them down into

5 child protection, looked after children and family

6 support, and he says with perhaps commendable honesty

7 for all I know, he says to the team managers, "This is

8 not something you will be able to achieve by

9 negotiation." So he is already saying to the team

10 managers, "You will not expect an easy ride on this.

11 This is not something you will be able to achieve by

12 negotiation" and he concludes by saying, "As you know,

13 I am happy to talk to you about anything but appealing

14 the decision will not be a productive use of time",

15 making it plain that there is no room for negotiation

16 one way or the other. They do not have the room to

17 negotiate with the team managers and the team managers

18 do not have the room to negotiate with him.

19 Now, what he does is to set out a table which

20 allocates up to 15 cases for each worker and this means

21 that for three of the workers they get six new cases

22 immediately and one gets five new cases immediately.

23 That is exactly what happened with Victoria.

24 MS BRISTOW: I have looked carefully at this because it was

25 clearly a contentious issue and I have reflected on it

29



1 and the language that was used and whilst I might

2 personally have chosen to use different language I do

3 believe, having looked in some depth at the figures

4 I gave Mr Garnham on Friday, I think it was for average

5 case loads, that there should be space on people's case

6 loads.

7 Managers I have got joining us from other

8 authorities -- which I think helps give us some

9 prompters of Haringey practice against other

10 authorities -- do not necessarily concur with the view

11 of some but not all of our staff, I would stress, that

12 case loads are unduly high even allowing for the

13 experience of staff and the complexity of work.

14 However, there is a prevailing culture at

15 North Tottenham from some staff about what equals

16 a reasonable workload and I think that is an issue that

17 we are trying to work with people through training and

18 development initiatives about making them feel

19 confident, because as I have said to staff, I understand

20 it is not just a numbers game and I understand whether

21 you feel hard pressed may be more -- may be about more

22 things than the complexity of the work you are being

23 asked to do.

24 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sorry I expressed myself badly,

25 I apologise for that. I agree with you I am not getting

30



1 into the numbers game either because both you and I know

2 that it is hard to make comparisons about individual

3 cases. What I was concerned about is that suddenly

4 a social worker going into the office would find six new

5 cases landed on them and that is exactly what happened

6 with Victoria. A social worker goes into the office and

7 finds files on the desk. That does not seem to me as if

8 it bears out your earlier evidence that there is a more

9 sophisticated approach of allocating cases to social

10 workers.

11 MS BRISTOW: I think the note that Alison Botham, the new

12 manager for Tottenham, which we looked at on Friday as

13 well, the day after 8th January, sets out at what point

14 the social worker will become responsible for the case

15 and also sets out clearly her expectation that it will

16 not simply be placed on your desk with no explanation

17 but your manager will write on the file what needs to be

18 done and there is a handover period. Now, I hope -- and

19 I say with some trepidation I hope because I will make

20 further enquiries about this now -- that in deciding how

21 many cases each worker was allocated, that the

22 individual managers had looked at the complexity so that

23 there was not one worker who received six that were all

24 complex whilst some less complex cases went to, you

25 know, somebody else got three less complex ones.

31



1 THE CHAIRMAN: You see the impression given, and correct me

2 if it is the wrong impression, is that this was a minute

3 that was done in preparation and anticipation of it says

4 the download for the SSI, suggesting that cases were not

5 allocated, so the impression given was this was

6 a reaction to the SSI visit.

7 MS BRISTOW: When I read that I understand that may have

8 been the perception the author had. My expectation

9 which had been raised with managers every month is we

10 are not allocating cases for the SSI or anybody else, we

11 are allocating cases because there is work to be done to

12 support the children of Haringey, and indeed because of

13 that that was why last year, when we were placed on

14 special measures, I said to Denise Platt that difficult

15 though it was, I did not feel at that time I could have

16 all cases allocated.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: Well, that is a helpful reply because in

18 response to that minute, you recall -- I will read the

19 section. I will take you to it if you want me to.

20 MS BRISTOW: I think I can picture it.

21 THE CHAIRMAN: You can picture it.

22 "Cases should be allocated and managers should write

23 on the file that they are now allocated to a named

24 social worker but that they will not be expected to

25 begin work on the case until this has been discussed

32



1 with a supervisor either in supervision or by the end of

2 next week. In the meantime, duty may need to respond to

3 emergencies."

4 That again is very reminiscent, I have to say, of

5 what happened to Victoria. In other words what I am

6 really questioning is, has anything changed in Haringey?

7 MS BRISTOW: I believe so. I have worked very hard since

8 I have joined Haringey to try and help the service move

9 forward and to try and help rebuild the staff's

10 confidence that they can deliver a good quality service

11 and to try and provide some of the support to staff that

12 I believe they need. We have very many hard working

13 social workers in Haringey and, as I am sure you know,

14 they have felt themselves very much in the glare of

15 publicity and very much under the spotlight whichever

16 way they move, so we are trying to put support in place,

17 we are trying to improve practice.

18 I think the attempt there is to try and strike

19 a balance between it becomes an allocated case and the

20 person should be starting to read the file, discuss it

21 with their supervisor, and not pressurise the person

22 that if they are not in the office when it that

23 happened, that Duty will pick it up. It is a difficult

24 balance but I hope we are making improvement on it and

25 it does not fall between nobody.

33



1 THE CHAIRMAN: I have no doubt at all that you have worked

2 extremely hard, I think my concern is whether or not it

3 is actually made a difference in practice and to that

4 extent I thought I had heard you say that there were no

5 unallocated cases from June onwards.

6 MS BRISTOW: What I had said was there were no unallocated

7 child protection and looked after children. Each month

8 there is a small number of cases -- I did, when I was at

9 North Tottenham on Saturday afternoon, take the

10 opportunity to look in the unallocated filing cabinet to

11 see if the numbers of case files there were comparable

12 to the numbers on the pieces of paper I had given

13 Mr Garnham on Friday and I am pleased to be able to say

14 they seem to tally.

15 THE CHAIRMAN: You see, quite a lot of evidence has been

16 brought to the Inquiry about the definition of

17 Victoria's needs, I have to say not just in Haringey, as

18 to moving between child protection and child in need.

19 Now, under the current arrangements, as I understand it

20 from these minutes we have just been referring to, if

21 Victoria turned up today in Haringey as a child in need,

22 she would not get allocated either.

23 MS BRISTOW: No, that is not true, there are children in

24 need cases allocated. There are a small number that are

25 not allocated. We are always faced with the difficulty

34



1 of if we have to choose whether or not to allocate, if

2 we cannot allocate every case then we will choose first

3 children on the register and looked after.

4 THE CHAIRMAN: You see, if you put together the response to

5 Mr Burns' minute that we have already talked about, and

6 if you put together this second paragraph on the

7 eligibility criteria, even if it is not written quite in

8 the terms that you think you would wish it to be written

9 in, the truth of the matter is that the eligibility

10 criteria has been ratcheted up and that unless

11 a child -- to use this expression here, "concentrating

12 on services for children in greatest need and at the

13 highest risk", the way in which Victoria was presented,

14 she would actually not be recognised as being in this

15 category.

16 MS BRISTOW: I think if you had to make the choice about

17 whether you could allocate on the day when she was safe

18 in hospital or not, then yes, it is possible on the day

19 she was safe in hospital you might not. However, I do

20 not think that is true when she was discharged from

21 hospital, because I think there is often that choice,

22 but I keep, when I have reflected on this -- but it was

23 an allocated case, and irrespective of the eligibility

24 criteria in place, the problem that arose in Victoria's

25 case was not that we did not choose to allocate it.

35



1 THE CHAIRMAN: I understand that it was allocated. I mean

2 we have already talked about how it was allocated,

3 absolutely. My concern is at the present time it would

4 be regarded as a case of what is called family support,

5 and if I read the documents from Haringey, the current

6 documents from Haringey, family support might be

7 desirable but it comes a fair way down, and what this

8 document refers to as setting priority requests in terms

9 of the greatest need and children at the highest risk,

10 family support would be way down that.

11 MS BRISTOW: But it does not mean it does not get allocated.

12 It means the pace at which it is allocated.

13 THE CHAIRMAN: It does not mean it does get allocated

14 either, does it?

15 MS BRISTOW: I think when I have reviewed the average case

16 load figures, there are, as you will have a chance to do

17 I know in due course, there are a fair number of family

18 support cases allocated. It is not my expectation that

19 those cases are never properly considered. The initial

20 assessment should be done before you decide what

21 category some -- a young person or child should be

22 placed in. People should not just arrive, we have got

23 a name and address, and then decide which category. You

24 have to do the initial work.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. Because for reasons that I do not need

36



1 to rehearse about my uncertainty about whether we have

2 received all the reports from Haringey, I wonder if you

3 could throw light on another matter, which is that

4 I understood your chairman or your leader of Social

5 Services to say publicly some months ago that he had had

6 a report from you that at the time that Victoria needed

7 protection, the case loads were not high in Haringey.

8 I have not seen any report that actually supports that,

9 unless you can draw my attention to it.

10 MS BRISTOW: We did supply in September of this year a large

11 selection of documents to the Inquiry that do -- where

12 they have been placed in the bundle I do not know,

13 but --

14 THE CHAIRMAN: What I meant was it justified the comment

15 publicly. I have seen the material I think you are

16 referring to but because a few days later there was

17 a retraction of the comment, and I understand that, so

18 I wondered if you could explain to me what that was all

19 about.

20 MS BRISTOW: At a meeting in July of the Council's Policy

21 and Strategy Committee where I was presenting the

22 monthly monitoring information on Children's Services,

23 Councillor Forrest put a question to me that if we had

24 now reached a stage that we had allocated all the cases,

25 although we had had some improvement in staffing, was

37



1 I satisfied they were properly allocated as opposed to

2 simply, you know, they were against somebody's name, was

3 there someone who would actually do some work on the

4 case; to which I replied in the affirmative that

5 I believed there was.

6 He then asked me a question about whether back in

7 1999 I thought there had been enough social workers at

8 that time. Because I had been shown information that

9 showed total case load numbers and total staffing

10 numbers which were broadly comparable with the total

11 case load and total staffing that we had in the summer

12 of 2001, I had said to Councillor Forrest at the meeting

13 that I believed it would not have been excessive because

14 the numbers appeared to tally.

15 From that both Councillor Forrest and Unison chose

16 to make comments to the BBC who then ran a headline

17 "Haringey social workers not overworked" and we then

18 moved away from a statement where I had said I thought

19 it was not excessive into a fair amount of various

20 reporting, and I think when a reporter put a particular

21 question to Councillor Sulaiman, who had had a very

22 quick briefing on the phone because this -- as you know

23 these enquiries unfold very fast -- I think the words he

24 used did not quite reflect what we briefed him but stand

25 by what I said, that the total case loads, total

38



1 staffing should not necessarily make it excessive,

2 though I understand staff may have felt hard pressed for

3 other factors.

4 THE CHAIRMAN: Just one more document, 45B/138 please.

5 I think that does not look like the document that I have

6 in front of me. 45B/138. This is a report of the

7 spring audit 2001 which Mr Garnham took you to.

8 MS BRISTOW: Yes.

9 THE CHAIRMAN: I do not need to go through it all with you

10 because Mr Garnham has done that in his usual thorough

11 and careful way. I think that all I wanted to get from

12 you is your reaction to this document.

13 MS BRISTOW: I was extremely unhappy when I saw it and

14 worried about whether or not the progress I was being

15 told was being made was actually being achieved on the

16 ground.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: I can absolutely understand that reaction and

18 had I been in your position I would have felt exactly

19 the same. If you go to the very last page, 147, this is

20 written, as I understand it, on 25th May 2001.

21 MS BRISTOW: That is the date it was drafted, yes.

22 THE CHAIRMAN: The date it was drafted. You have in front

23 of you your witness statement to the Inquiry and if you

24 go to the end of your witness statement to the Inquiry,

25 which if I can remove this I can turn to, which I think

39



1 is June, in other words about four weeks later.

2 MS BRISTOW: Yes.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: Now, I find it difficult to reconcile that

4 internal audit document with your witness statement

5 which is that -- I mean I found that internal document

6 dispiriting, worrying, it cast doubt upon what progress

7 had been made, whereas I found your witness statement

8 encouraging what I might call blue sky. Can you help me

9 as to why they are so different?

10 MS BRISTOW: The audit concentrates on a small part of the

11 service and yes, albeit important, inevitably this

12 Inquiry has concentrated on the work done by two small

13 groups, two groups of social workers in the Children's

14 Division, and has not looked at the work, inevitably,

15 because of its terms of reference, of our other teams of

16 social workers, and when we had been looking across the

17 board at our family placement services, children with

18 disabilities, I do still feel that the services are

19 turning around, albeit slowly, it feels at times it is

20 like a tanker.

21 Certainly whenever I got to Christmas of this year,

22 when I was quite tired as you might imagine and had

23 a break at Christmas and reflected on am I actually

24 getting anywhere, are we getting anywhere, it is not

25 just my efforts but those of a very large team of

40



1 people, I think we are making progress, sometimes

2 slowly, sometimes painfully, sometimes in the nature of

3 progress you start to move forward and then something

4 happens and it moves back and you then have to reclimb

5 the hill you are on I suppose. So I do remain

6 optimistic we are making improvements.

7 I feel impatient at times, as I am sure other people

8 must, about the pace of change or whether we have

9 succeeded in -- we make an improvement and is it

10 sticking and we have to keep revisiting it to make sure

11 that something I believe we have secured three months

12 later is still secured, so I think that is the

13 difference, and I suppose on the day I was doing the

14 witness statement amongst other things I was --

15 THE CHAIRMAN: It was a good day?

16 MS BRISTOW: It was a good day.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: I do not want to make it a bad day for you

18 and I want to put something to you that is not in any

19 way intended as a criticism to you personally or

20 intended to give the impression that you are not doing

21 the job that you were appointed to do, but you will

22 understand the focus of this Inquiry and the concerns

23 that I and my colleagues have. From the evidence that

24 we have had, I have gained the strong impression -- and

25 this is your opportunity to tell me if it is right or

41



1 wrong -- that actually in some respects the position for

2 children in the situation of Victoria is worse now in

3 Haringey than it was when Victoria became a client.

4 MS BRISTOW: I understand very clearly why you might have

5 formed that impression because as often as I can I have

6 listened to the oral evidence being given and also tried

7 to keep up-to-date on the transcripts when I cannot be

8 here. However, I am very mindful that many of the

9 people I think, as I said earlier this morning, who have

10 given evidence are no longer employed by Haringey, and

11 therefore in giving their evidence I think with honesty

12 from their perspective they paint the picture as when

13 they last worked with Haringey or what they claim they

14 have been told by people.

15 I believe we are strengthening the management, the

16 Council has taken considerable steps to establish with

17 its managers, "Are you on board with an improvement

18 agenda? Are you prepared to put in the necessary effort

19 to turn these services round and make them first rate

20 services that the people in Haringey deserve? Or have

21 you either reached a stage where you cannot see how to

22 do it and you will not or where does it stand?" We have

23 said very clearly to people, "If you are not on board

24 with that agenda, you need to think about a career

25 elsewhere and it may be you have given many years of

42



1 long, hard service and you are burnt out I think is the

2 popular expression, and maybe need to work somewhere

3 else for a little while". That is not an easy message

4 to give to people.

5 We are mindful that where people have worked hard we

6 would like people if possible to move on in the least

7 damaging way possible because it is not our intention to

8 damage anyone's health, careers, but nevertheless our

9 primary responsibility is to the people we provide

10 services to, not to the staff. Now, I do believe it is

11 getting better, and as I said a moment ago, at times

12 I am impatient about the pace at which we are achieving

13 it. I do not think it is worse but nor do I think that

14 everything is wonderful, and what I anticipate will

15 happen from the inspection of my services that is

16 starting today is that I hope it will recognise we are

17 travelling but not arrived.

18 THE CHAIRMAN: You see, I have already expressed my concerns

19 that Victoria would be regarded as family support and

20 you know that is a fairly low priority, desirable but

21 not essential, when the reality is that even children

22 whose names have been put on the Child Protection

23 Register are not guaranteed a visit from a social worker

24 at least once in every six weeks.

25 MS BRISTOW: I think the current performance is better than

43



1 the indicator: the way the indicator is calculated, if

2 you miss even one visit, so you start in April of each

3 year, if for example the visit is not done within

4 42 days on that first month you can never come

5 up-to-date on the indicator for the rest of the year.

6 Now we are conscious that there are some children

7 for example who got 10 visits in the year but on one of

8 the visits failed to get it within the 42 day period.

9 We are confident that most children are now being

10 regularly visited but do not always meet the technical

11 definition and it is something we are looking at very

12 closely every month, we are chasing people to do.

13 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. You said to Mr Garnham that you

14 anticipated the findings of this Inquiry and that you

15 were going to help me write the report, which is an

16 offer that I can gladly accept. What would you expect

17 me to say about the performance of Haringey in producing

18 documents and cooperating with this Inquiry?

19 MS BRISTOW: I am sure you will say the performance is poor.

20 But I hope in the cool light of reflection you will

21 recognise the efforts that we have put in and it is not

22 for want of trying. We may have failed miserably to be

23 successful, but our commitment to try and assist you is

24 there.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, you mean that the intention is stronger

44



1 than the ability to actually deliver?

2 MS BRISTOW: The difficulty I have encountered with an

3 organisation that has clearly suffered some problems for

4 a number of years and does not have a good document

5 management system in place is -- and with a number of

6 staff, as we have rehearsed, have left our employment --

7 it has proved to be a nightmare at times and it is

8 certainly not my intention to spend many of my weekends

9 searching storage areas personally in my authority when

10 I expect it should be able to produce the documents.

11 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, it is a nightmare and to be absolutely

12 blunt about it, the Inquiry can survive but a child that

13 is seriously at risk cannot survive when the

14 organisation operates in a way where it has such

15 a woefully inadequate document management system. In

16 other words, what I am saying is is there any reason

17 today that Victoria would have suffered the same fate as

18 she did when she did?

19 MS BRISTOW: I think your question is in two parts. We are

20 taking steps, as you might imagine close to my heart, to

21 improve the document management, and there are two kinds

22 of document management; the priority has been given to

23 ensure that client files are in a proper state with the

24 proper documentation in the correct order with the

25 appropriate chronologies and summaries that enable the

45



1 work to be done with them. A second exercise is being

2 done about other management and personnel type

3 documents.

4 I think we have taken a number of steps to try and

5 improve the professional practice which is what would

6 directly impact on the work with a child like Victoria.

7 However, I think like you we remain of the view there

8 were some individual mistakes of judgment made. We hope

9 we have strengthened the arrangements so that the

10 likelihood of those kinds of mistakes being made is

11 lessened, but I am very mindful of the fact of how

12 difficult that is to achieve on each and every occasion

13 on the number of children we are dealing with every day.

14 THE CHAIRMAN: My final point is this. Is it not a serious

15 comment on the authority when the Children Act was

16 implemented in 1991 and here we are in 2002 talking

17 about the absence of effective case paper management and

18 ensuring that documentation on extremely vulnerable

19 children is secured?

20 MS BRISTOW: My understanding of reading Haringey's historic

21 records is there have been times when it has been good

22 in that 10 years and there have been times when it has

23 been less good. I believe the work that has happened

24 recently has once again improved. We were one of the

25 authorities that were inspected for recording with care

46



1 and I believe following that inspection a significant

2 amount of work was done and I believe the case files

3 certainly over the last six months are improving.

4 You will appreciate we have recently looked at

5 a large number of case files and whilst some of what is

6 there in the past we obviously cannot change because you

7 cannot -- that would be to falsify the record to change

8 them, so we cannot change them, but the current

9 recording and bringing up-to-date of files I believe is

10 showing significant improvement.

11 THE CHAIRMAN: I hope so. At a time when we are told that

12 important documents have just been discovered in a top

13 drawer filing cabinet in North Tottenham office, it does

14 not exactly inspire confidence, does it?

15 MS BRISTOW: I understand that. I think there could be no

16 one more acutely aware of that than me.

17 MR GARNHAM: Nothing from me from the material we have heard

18 today, but I have been handed two more documents just to

19 keep me on my toes. Apparently these are documents that

20 originated or were found in Mr Duncan's loft. I wonder

21 if I may ask the witness about them so that we have

22 dealt with them.

23 The first of these documents Ms Bristow is a report

24 prepared by Mr Heatley dated 9th February 2001 and

25 Mr Heatley can be asked about that when he gives

47



1 evidence in a few minutes. There is one matter I want

2 to ask you about. It is called a recruitment crisis

3 report. The purpose of the report is said to be the

4 identification of a "possible solution involving

5 substantial contracts with a private firm of social work

6 associates." Do you recall that?

7 MS BRISTOW: Yes, I do.

8 MR GARNHAM: What Mr Heatley was proposing was a contract

9 with an organisation called Aid Hour with a view to

10 their providing social work assistance. Do you recall

11 that?

12 MS BRISTOW: Yes I do.

13 MR GARNHAM: Partway through that report Mr Heatley writes,

14 paragraph 10:

15 "Aid Hour will offer two social work teams and

16 a range of more senior consultants. A child protection

17 team comprising of a part-time manager two days, two

18 full-time equivalent social workers and four social

19 service officers will work with 30 plus open and

20 unallocated protection and looked after children cases."

21 This presumably is the situation as it was ahead of

22 the June date by which you said you achieved allocation

23 of all such cases, is that right?

24 MS BRISTOW: Yes, we have made no secret of the fact that at

25 that time there were unallocated cases that we needed to

48



1 address.

2 MR GARNHAM: You have not. The reason for my question is to

3 ask whether this suggestion of employing these

4 consultants was taken up.

5 MS BRISTOW: Yes, though I believe the final version that

6 was agreed with them was slightly different to set out

7 in that report. At the same time as we did that we also

8 took someone on to manage a recruitment process for us

9 directly in a series of adverts in the trade press to

10 recruit to permanent posts.

11 MR GARNHAM: But you did employ that agency or some other

12 similar agency to provide short-term assistance?

13 MS BRISTOW: Yes, what I cannot recall from memory is

14 whether the configuration you gave to me was exactly the

15 configuration that in the end was agreed.

16 MR GARNHAM: And it was with the help of that consultancy

17 that you achieved your June/July target of allocating

18 all child protection and LAC cases?

19 MS BRISTOW: It was a contributory factor because at the

20 same time we were also month on month recruiting to our

21 permanent staff.

22 MR GARNHAM: Thank you. Second matter. From the same

23 source we are told we have been provided with a letter

24 of 13th June 2001 from Anne Graham addressed to both

25 Dave Duncan and Shirley Quashedan. I imagine although

49



1 this came from Mr Duncan there ought to have been copies

2 of it on your files both because Anne Graham is the

3 author of the letter and because it is also addressed to

4 Miss Quashedan. Be that as it may, it is a letter

5 entitled "North Middlesex Hospital" and the first

6 paragraph reads:

7 "I received a call from Dr Rossiter recently raising

8 concerns about the management of strategy meetings in

9 the district offices. Dr Rossiter complained the

10 strategy meetings for children based in hospital were

11 still being held in district offices, this despite

12 doctors protesting and stating the agreed policy. The

13 strategy meetings for hospital based children take place

14 in hospital settings. I raised the named cases in

15 question with Shirley who looked into the matter and

16 I know Shirley fed back to the doctor concerned."

17 You recall that I asked you on Wednesday I think

18 about the practice of holding strategy meetings

19 elsewhere than in the hospital and you assured me, using

20 the present tense it is fair to say, that that no longer

21 happened. It appears from this internal Haringey letter

22 that certainly in June 2001 there were still strategy

23 meetings concerning patients in hospital, children in

24 hospital that were taking place in North Tottenham

25 District Office. First of all, is that correct?

50



1 MS BRISTOW: I have -- I cannot tell you directly.

2 I presume so, given that you have that document in front

3 of you, that -- sorry, what are you asking me is it

4 correct?

5 MR GARNHAM: Is it correct that in June 2001 strategy

6 meetings were still taking place in hospital in respect

7 of children in hospital?

8 MS BRISTOW: I have no direct personal knowledge of that but

9 I assume if Ann Graham is saying so it is correct.

10 MR GARNHAM: When you told me that that was not happening

11 when you answered my questions on Wednesday, to what

12 time period were you referring?

13 MS BRISTOW: Over the last few months, and I am sorry I do

14 not know precisely when, I have seen correspondence

15 between Terry Burns at North Tottenham and Dr Rossiter

16 and certainly since the social workers have been

17 appointed that suggests to me there is no longer

18 a problem. I have also seen Dr Rossiter at a number of

19 Area Child Protection Committee meetings and she has not

20 indicated to me that there is a problem.

21 MR GARNHAM: Could you have volume 45F please.

22 MS BRISTOW: I did check last week that the social workers

23 are at the hospital and all appears well.

24 MR GARNHAM: Page 168, letter from Dave Derbyshire to

25 Rose Gibb, Chief Executive of the North Middlesex,