Archived Transcript for 18 January 2002: Pages 51 to 100

51



1 and are now being told that you are looking at their

2 terms and conditions changes. They all start to leave

3 or a large number of them do, which means you then have

4 to come up with some more money in order to persuade

5 them to stay. It ends up costing you money, that

6 exercise, does it not?

7 MRS ADAMOU: I do agree that from Social Services' point of

8 view it did not help, but when you look at the overall

9 picture Council-wide, you know because if the Council

10 has to find a large amount of savings and then each

11 department they are allocated a number of savings, if by

12 looking at the terms and conditions, if there is

13 a possibility of saving money and then you do not

14 have -- ask the department to find the savings, you look

15 at it --

16 MR SHELDON: It may be a Council-wide decision but you are

17 the voice of Social Services on the Council, you are the

18 Lead Member, so why are you not standing up in late 1999

19 when this issue is being discussed, when people are

20 saying "Let us look at terms and conditions", and

21 saying, "No, because it will have a disastrous impact on

22 my staff who are already in a fairly fragile state"?

23 MRS ADAMOU: I cannot remember the timetable around this.

24 But at the time I do not think -- I do not want to make

25 a mistake. I am not quite sure the timetable when

52



1 I became aware what was said about staff leaving and

2 when the Council decided about terms and conditions.

3 But the reason I did not -- the reason I did not,

4 because I was aware if the Council as a wide body, the

5 majority could find savings by looking at terms and

6 conditions and that means I have to find less savings

7 from Social Services' budget. That is the reason I did

8 not speak up.

9 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Miss Lawson please.

10 MISS LAWSON: There are a number of matters arising out of

11 the evidence that you have given. Some of it relates

12 back to the evidence that you gave on Wednesday. I hope

13 that between us our memory will not be too short.

14 One of the things that you were asked about was the

15 circumstances in which your statement to this Inquiry

16 was prepared and you are aware I think of criticism made

17 by Counsel to the Inquiry about your statement and that

18 of others during the course of his opening.

19 Can I just ask you, so far as you were concerned

20 when you were preparing your statement did you consult

21 with the other councillors about what they had put in

22 their statements?

23 MRS ADAMOU: No, in fact I have not even read their other --

24 I made a point of not reading their statements.

25 MISS LAWSON: Yes. I wonder whether you would just mind on

53



1 another point that was made to you which was about the

2 fact that it was suggested you had not said in your

3 statement that you were just doing this to the best of

4 your knowledge and belief. I wonder if you would mind

5 turning to the very end of your statement, the last page

6 in the bundle. It is witness bundle 2, page 23 I think.

7 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes.

8 MISS LAWSON: Do you have the very last page, the paragraph

9 at the top of that page?

10 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

11 MISS LAWSON: You do appear to be making exactly that point.

12 MRS ADAMOU: Yes, I certainly am.

13 MISS LAWSON: Can I bring you on to matters of perhaps

14 rather more substance. There are three main topics that

15 I want to pick up with you. The first is about the role

16 of councillors as a corporate parent and the letter from

17 Mr Dobson which you were asked about and you spoke

18 about. Now, you said that you had seen that letter and

19 I wonder if you might have bundle 24A, please, page 142.

20 This deals with other information about the Dobson

21 letter which appears from the documents to have gone to

22 councillors and I would just like you to confirm that

23 that was the case in relation to each of them and that

24 you yourself saw them.

25 First of all, the letter at 24A is a letter to

54



1 members of the Social Services Committee and under

2 paragraph 2 Quality Protects, it deals with letters to

3 councillors, framework for action and objectives for

4 social services for children. The letter as I say you

5 have dealt with already.

6 Go over please to the next page which outlines

7 a little more of what was being -- it summarises what

8 the objectives and responsibility were. Did you see

9 that?

10 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

11 MISS LAWSON: There is then on the next page, 144, a report

12 to the Social Services Committee on 16th November 1998

13 from the Director of Housing and Social Services

14 outlining for members the key elements in the

15 Government's major new initiative for Children's

16 Services, Quality Protects, to identify further work

17 which was undertaken and to summarise the impact that it

18 is envisaged that will have. Yes?

19 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

20 MISS LAWSON: Again, did you see that report?

21 MRS ADAMOU: Yes I have. I was on the committee at the

22 time.

23 MISS LAWSON: You were on the committee at the time

24 I appreciate that. Would you go forward to page 148

25 because obviously the report is dealing with the wider

55



1 issues about Quality Protects as well as specifically

2 the role of elected members, but at paragraph 7 at the

3 bottom there you see guidance for elected members and

4 the way in which it was spelled out and was that your

5 understanding?

6 MRS ADAMOU: Absolutely. In fact we used to have rolling

7 programme and make sure that every time the committee

8 met that it was read out, it was a report about members'

9 visits to the Children's homes and so on, yes.

10 MISS LAWSON: I will come on to that if I may. I am asking

11 about the guidance at the moment. So you had that?

12 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

13 MISS LAWSON: If you go forward to page 154, that is

14 a Government paper which is the objectives for Social

15 Services for children. Do you remember seeing that?

16 MRS ADAMOU: Yes, I have still got it at home somewhere.

17 MISS LAWSON: I hope so. Then on 163 does this strike

18 a bell too, the framework for action?

19 MRS ADAMOU: The Quality Protects, yes.

20 MISS LAWSON: Quality Protects, they are two very similar

21 documents which deal with councillors' responsibilities.

22 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

23 MISS LAWSON: Now, you have mentioned the way in which the

24 Council then dealt with members' responsibilities and to

25 help to assist them in their task from that time

56



1 onwards. Now, did that involve new learning for

2 councillors about having a more hands on role as far as

3 Children's Services were concerned?

4 MRS ADAMOU: Certainly, and we had a number of members

5 including myself very involved in Children's Services

6 and making sure we visit all the homes and so on.

7 MISS LAWSON: Yes. I wonder if you might have volume 45H

8 please, page 048.501. This is agenda item 6, it is

9 a report about corporate parenting and the corporate

10 parenting member sub-group dated 5th March 2001, so

11 obviously we have moved on quite a bit by this time but

12 it would appear from that that there is now a corporate

13 parenting member sub-group.

14 MRS ADAMOU: There is.

15 MISS LAWSON: Are you a member of that?

16 MRS ADAMOU: Yes I am.

17 MISS LAWSON: And that deals with a proposed presentation in

18 relation to Quality Protects and a number of different

19 seminars and placements and various other work that is

20 being done to equip members for that task.

21 MRS ADAMOU: We had a number of presentations. We had

22 a White Paper on adoption and in fact we had someone who

23 looked after children that came and spoke to us and it

24 is quite a very good way of ...

25 MISS LAWSON: It seems to be something that caused a lot of

57



1 interest to you and your fellow councillors. If you go

2 forward a couple of pages to .512, 48.512, do you have

3 that, a letter of 4th April, or a memorandum I should

4 say?

5 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

6 MISS LAWSON: This is a memorandum from the Director to

7 a number of other officers referring to the way in which

8 the -- that a meeting on 29th March had gone well, and

9 I wondered if you had you remembered anything at all

10 about the third paragraph of that letter where the

11 members are wanting to see a more innovative approach to

12 the presentation of information and not just the

13 standard report. More like a seminar, less like

14 a committee.

15 MRS ADAMOU: Yes, we did have discussions on that, yes.

16 MISS LAWSON: So there was a lot of active interest it would

17 appear?

18 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

19 MISS LAWSON: And it goes on to refer to the adoption

20 seminar that you were telling us about?

21 MRS ADAMOU: Yes, and may I say that all the lead members on

22 that body, there is the Lead Member for Education, there

23 is the Lead Member for Environment and so on, the Leader

24 actually you know, so there is a very good group of

25 members involved, you know, in that.

58



1 MISS LAWSON: You several times mentioned the proposal to

2 involve members in Regulation 22 visits.

3 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

4 MISS LAWSON: We see a similar document page 45H, 48.519.

5 MRS ADAMOU: Is it here?

6 MISS LAWSON: Yes, it is. Looking at the bottom it is .519.

7 I do not think we need go into the detail of this but it

8 is a document confirming your recollection that this was

9 about going back to a situation which used to prevail

10 before the Children Act when members were involved in

11 regular visits to children's homes as they were then

12 called.

13 MRS ADAMOU: This is the Children's Service Group which we

14 meet every month. It certainly had training in

15 Regulation 22 and as we speak we have police checks done

16 on members that they had the training and will follow up

17 with visits, so yes.

18 MISS LAWSON: I think it is also the case that that

19 particular group has been involved with and asked to

20 meet members of the Social Services Inspectorate during

21 the course of their work. I am not sure that I need to

22 take you necessarily to the letters but for reference

23 they continue in the bundle at page 48.536 and 537.

24 MRS ADAMOU: They certainly came to one of our meetings,

25 yes.

59



1 MISS LAWSON: Has there been an increased tendency for

2 members to ask questions about Children's Services?

3 MRS ADAMOU: Certainly, absolutely. I think we do a lot

4 more scrutiny, a lot more questions now than we ever did

5 in the past.

6 MISS LAWSON: And the Inquiry is aware from other

7 documentation that it has that the Council now receive

8 regular monthly reports on a wide range of matters

9 affecting Children's Services, is that right?

10 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

11 MISS LAWSON: Again I do not think I need take you to those.

12 Instead I would like to move on to two matters you were

13 asked about in relation to the Trade Unions. Now you

14 said during the course of your evidence that Haringey

15 was an authority in which there were frequent regular

16 formal and informal meetings between members of the

17 Trade Unions and that the Trade Unions in your

18 experience were not slow to raise matters of concern

19 with members on a whole variety of topics. That is

20 right, is it not?

21 MRS ADAMOU: That is right.

22 MISS LAWSON: You did not remember them raising issues about

23 the restructuring?

24 MRS ADAMOU: No. I mean in the past I recollect a time when

25 they wrote to me and I met up with them. It did not

60



1 happen in 1999.

2 MISS LAWSON: You have talked about that on an informal

3 basis, but there is also a formal structure for meetings

4 between members and the Trade Unions on a more formal

5 basis, the Council and Employee Joint Consultative

6 Group.

7 MRS ADAMOU: That is correct.

8 MISS LAWSON: I think you were a member of that group

9 throughout 1999.

10 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

11 MISS LAWSON: I would like you therefore to look at the

12 minutes for 1999 which we have in bundle 24A again,

13 please, page 137.501. We will need to come back to some

14 of these minutes again but just at the moment I would

15 like us to concentrate on whether there is anything in

16 these minutes about the restructuring.

17 Now, as I say I think we can take it quite quickly

18 because the first meeting which is on 1st December 1998

19 we can see looking down there that by that stage, which

20 of course was around the time that the statutory notice

21 went out but not before the restructuring, there is

22 nothing in there about what one might expect about

23 restructuring but we see the sort of range of matters

24 which are raised and that there is a regular agenda item

25 for the employee side to raise matters of concern.

61



1 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

2 MISS LAWSON: By the time we get to February the

3 restructuring is out in the open and the unions are

4 aware of it?

5 MRS ADAMOU: Well yes, because I think the Housing and

6 Social Services Committee March 1999 the report went to

7 them, even though I was not chairing I remember them

8 very well for endorsement of the proposals.

9 MISS LAWSON: Again, looking at the minutes of this meeting

10 there does not seem to be anything at all at that stage

11 being raised by the unions about restructuring.

12 MRS ADAMOU: No, there is not.

13 MISS LAWSON: The next minutes I need not trouble with

14 because they are dealing with a particular single issue.

15 20th April 1999, again one sees other matters being

16 raised on both sides, particularly in relation to

17 different matters, but again nothing relating to the

18 restructuring.

19 Perhaps of more interest to this Inquiry, bearing in

20 mind what is the other evidence that it has, are the

21 minutes of 12th July which start at page 137.510. We

22 see there again a number of matters arising, information

23 items, employees side items, bottom of page 511. They

24 are raising an item about Internet access.

25 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

62



1 MISS LAWSON: And a claim about the use of bicycles, but

2 again nothing in that document to suggest that they were

3 using this opportunity to raise any concerns from social

4 workers about the restructuring proposals.

5 MRS ADAMOU: That is correct.

6 MISS LAWSON: And again for the sake of completeness the

7 minutes of the 9th November, again there does not appear

8 to be anything at all about the restructuring.

9 MRS ADAMOU: No.

10 MISS LAWSON: I think also as well as these formal meetings

11 between members and the Trade Unions there were also

12 departmental consultative committee meetings, again

13 those are in the bundle but I do not think members are

14 part of that, that is?

15 MRS ADAMOU: No, that is Management Team.

16 MISS LAWSON: Can I move on to ask you about the other

17 matter you were asked about which is the dealings with

18 the Single Status Agreement. Can I just ask you to

19 begin with, was the Single Status Agreement something

20 that was unique to Haringey as far as you understood it?

21 MRS ADAMOU: No, as far as I understand it we had no choice

22 but to implement it by the following year, April

23 I think.

24 MISS LAWSON: You have made it clear already in your

25 evidence that it was a Council-wide agreement and was

63



1 not something specially targeted at social workers.

2 They may not even have been -- I do not know -- was it

3 your understanding that they were particularly targeted

4 by the Single Status Agreement?

5 MRS ADAMOU: No, not particularly, no.

6 MISS LAWSON: I mean, was it your understanding that there

7 were other staff groups who might have been more

8 adversely affected by it than social workers?

9 MRS ADAMOU: I think so, yes.

10 MISS LAWSON: Now, if we go back to the minutes that you

11 were looking at a moment or two ago, the minutes of the

12 20th April of 1999, which is page 137.508 in the same

13 bundle, it is part of those minutes. We see I think for

14 the first time the question of the Single Status

15 Agreement being raised if you look at paragraph 5.2 on

16 that page. Do you have the right one?

17 MRS ADAMOU: Yes, here it is.

18 MISS LAWSON: 5.2 single status, and the employee side

19 circulating a copy of their comments made in response to

20 the report which had gone earlier to policy and strategy

21 and raising their concerns about it.

22 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

23 MISS LAWSON: So as I say there does not appear in the

24 minutes we have anything earlier than that, but it would

25 appear to suggest that the Single Status Agreement was

64



1 being discussed between members and Trade Unions as

2 early as April 1999?

3 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

4 MISS LAWSON: And again if one goes forward to July and back

5 to page 512, it is raised again under item 9.1?

6 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

7 MISS LAWSON: And again the emphasis on discussions and,

8 just to complete the picture, forward to page .515, in

9 the minutes of the 9th November 1999, where there is

10 a summary of the discussions and so on that had been

11 going on, the problems about budget as well and the

12 Council's position being as you have said to negotiate

13 at any time.

14 MRS ADAMOU: Absolutely, yes. As I say, a very detailed

15 negotiation about it.

16 MISS LAWSON: So the matter we know was not able to be

17 resolved by negotiation.

18 MRS ADAMOU: No. At the end I think nothing happened

19 actually.

20 MISS LAWSON: I think that is the evidence that others have

21 given to the Inquiry.

22 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

23 MISS LAWSON: Thank you very much.

24 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you Miss Lawson. Just so I can clarify

25 a couple of points please, could you just in the bundle

65



1 that is in front of you, maybe you could be helped to go

2 to 144. It has already been touched upon by both

3 Mr Sheldon and Miss Lawson. This is the report to the

4 committee as I understand it, but correct me if I am

5 wrong, that informs members of the letter from

6 Mr Dobson.

7 MRS ADAMOU: Yes, that is correct.

8 THE CHAIRMAN: Could I take you then a few pages on to 148

9 which is actually the guidance. It is paragraph 7, the

10 bottom of the page.

11 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

12 THE CHAIRMAN: The very last paragraph. It tells members

13 that the letter lays down for them 12 expectations and

14 it poses a checklist of 52 basic questions.

15 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

16 THE CHAIRMAN: In answer to Mr Sheldon if I understood it

17 right, you took these questions very close to heart?

18 MRS ADAMOU: Yes, yes.

19 THE CHAIRMAN: And you repeatedly asked for the answers to

20 these 52 questions?

21 MRS ADAMOU: Well, I am not quite sure whether I asked all

22 the 52 questions but certainly I did ask a lot of

23 questions, yes.

24 THE CHAIRMAN: We will settle for perhaps a lot rather than

25 52.

66



1 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

2 THE CHAIRMAN: You asked a lot of questions about what was

3 happening to children?

4 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

5 THE CHAIRMAN: You were satisfied with the answers that you

6 were given?

7 MRS ADAMOU: Well yes, at the time, yes.

8 THE CHAIRMAN: And you thought that the service to children

9 was all right?

10 MRS ADAMOU: For what time are we talking about, in 1999?

11 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, we will settle for 1999.

12 MRS ADAMOU: Well, obviously in 1999 I did think the

13 Children's Services were doing okay. There are always

14 areas where one can improve and so on but on the whole,

15 yes.

16 THE CHAIRMAN: Could we then have a look at 28A, 163.

17 Mr Sheldon took you to this earlier. This is a report

18 that was prepared by David Duncan which the date on the

19 last page you can take from me is 17th May 1999. So it

20 is right in the period that you were getting all these

21 answers apparently. If you can look at the middle of

22 163 it refers to "unallocated cases", in other words

23 cases that were the responsibility of the department,

24 Haringey, where there was no social worker allocated and

25 in the East Team there were 61 and in the West Team

67



1 there were 48, which if my mathematics are correct means

2 there were 109 children for whom the authority had

3 responsibility that had no allocated social worker. Are

4 you telling me that you were not informed of that?

5 MRS ADAMOU: Well, In May 1999 I just came in after a lapse

6 of two years as a Lead Member of Social Services and no,

7 I could honestly say that I was not told at the time

8 this or seen this report, but there are reports that

9 they never come to members, they are what they call

10 management reports where the Director or Assistant

11 Director will ask one of their officers to look into an

12 area, come back with a report on the areas of concern

13 and the members do not actually see, and I am sure you

14 have a lot of reports, sir, that I have not seen and

15 I could say I have not seen this.

16 THE CHAIRMAN: But you were asking the questions posed by

17 Mr Dobson only a few months before.

18 MRS ADAMOU: In 1998 we had the full Social Services

19 Committee at the time and which it was chaired by

20 another person but we did have on a regular standing

21 item in the number of children on Child Protection

22 Register where we always looked at the number of

23 unallocated cases and ethnic background of the children,

24 how long they had been on the register and so on.

25 In 1999 when I came as you know as Lead Member for

68



1 Social Services it was at the time we had the new

2 structure if you like, political structure. We decided,

3 the Council decided that we were moving away from

4 committees to what is known now as the Cabinet system,

5 but at the time it was the Advisory Group.

6 So the questions, all the questions I refer I did

7 ask it was not informal Social Services Committee,

8 because that was not happening the same way it was

9 happening in the past, but at the Officer Member Group

10 which we used to meet every two or three months,

11 sometimes you know earlier then later, it depends what

12 was on the agenda for discussion, you know. That was

13 when I, the questions I used to raise, not only myself

14 but other members.

15 THE CHAIRMAN: All these structural issues might be

16 interesting from politicians' point of view, but the

17 question arises: do they actually protect children or

18 not, and either you were not asking the questions or you

19 were not getting the answers if this is the first time

20 that you knew that at that time there were 109

21 unallocated cases, children for whom the authority had

22 accepted responsibility but had no social worker

23 allocated to them.

24 MRS ADAMOU: I do not disagree with you at all sir. All

25 I was saying is that I have not seen this document and

69



1 when I came in as new Lead Member for Social Services

2 I was not told that there was this concern.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: So you came in as the Lead Member for Social

4 Services in this new structure, modernisation,

5 streamlining the efficiency of the way in which the

6 authority does its business, and you as the Lead Member

7 did not know at that time there were 109 children who

8 the authority had accepted responsibility for that had

9 no social worker allocated to them?

10 MRS ADAMOU: If I was not told by the Director or Assistant

11 Director I would not know, no.

12 THE CHAIRMAN: Quite serious.

13 MRS ADAMOU: I agree. I absolutely agree and I was quite

14 upset when I saw this document on Wednesday for the

15 first time.

16 THE CHAIRMAN: I can understand you being upset Mrs Adamou.

17 I can understand. The question that the Inquiry has to

18 understand is was that a failure on the behalf of the

19 members of the authority, in particular the senior

20 members of the authority, or was that a failure on

21 behalf of the officers and the senior officers of the

22 authority?

23 MRS ADAMOU: I honestly would say that if there is a problem

24 and as members we are not aware of it it can only be

25 because we have not been told and in that case the blame

70



1 will go on the appropriate officer who did not do his or

2 her job.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: You emphasise that there is a, what, if I got

4 it right, quite a long standing arrangement of officer

5 member meetings in Haringey?

6 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

7 THE CHAIRMAN: They do not seem to have worked very

8 effectively if this really essential information is not

9 discussed in such meetings.

10 MRS ADAMOU: Well, I do accept there are, there would be

11 reports that they do not necessarily come to members and

12 I accept that, but I also will say that in this, you

13 know, if there are unallocated cases, if there are

14 problems, I agree with you wholeheartedly it should have

15 come to members and if members did not respond

16 appropriately, then yes.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr Sheldon asked you if you were

18 glad when Ms Richardson made her decision to leave the

19 authority and I was struck by your reaction. I will not

20 repeat the same question, I will put it a different way.

21 Were you glad when Ms Richardson left the authority?

22 MRS ADAMOU: I would not say glad or sad. It was her

23 decision. I did not have a long relationship with --

24 I mean I had a lot of respect, she is a very able woman,

25 make no mistake, but I did not have the kind of

71



1 relationship I had for instance with Andy Ludlow.

2 THE CHAIRMAN: I know it was her decision, I fully accept it

3 was her decision.

4 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

5 THE CHAIRMAN: What I am wanting to get from you is what you

6 personally felt about it.

7 MRS ADAMOU: Well, you are asking me so I have to reply.

8 I personally found it a little more difficult than

9 working, you know, with a Director then than I had with

10 the previous Director. It was more difficult in a sense

11 to get a lot of detailed information you know. She will

12 say for instance, if I ask questions she would say

13 "Councillor Gina, everything is okay, do not worry; if

14 there is a problem I will let you know", where with the

15 previous Director I had regular weekly meetings with him

16 every Tuesday and we sit there for a long time

17 discussing issues.

18 It was a difficult time in a sense that it was new

19 political structure as well and sometimes there were,

20 you know, officers knew when things were going straight

21 to the committees, it had some teething problems. We

22 are more settled now.

23 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your answer. Can I ask you, as

24 you are a long-standing senior member of the authority,

25 you must have formed a picture of the nature of the

72



1 relationship between the chief officers of the authority

2 at that time. What was your picture of the relationship

3 between the chief officers of the authority at the time?

4 MRS ADAMOU: I am afraid I cannot honestly answer that

5 because I was never -- as members we never were part of

6 those meetings. The Chief Executive had meetings with

7 his Management Team and I personally was never present

8 there, so I cannot say.

9 THE CHAIRMAN: I hope you did not --

10 MRS ADAMOU: I misunderstood probably.

11 THE CHAIRMAN: Let me put the question another way. I know

12 that you were not present -- well, I suspect I know you

13 were not present in the Chief Executive meetings with

14 the Chief Officers, and I was not going to ask you about

15 the content of any of those meetings because that

16 I think would probably be something that you could not

17 answer. I was asking you what picture did you form

18 about the relationships between the Chief Officers?

19 MRS ADAMOU: There was some problem sometimes between --

20 I suppose different points of view between some

21 officers, there is no doubt, I mean that is natural

22 I would say in every -- in any large organisation,

23 whether it is a local authority or a business, there

24 will be disagreements at some points or different

25 opinions I may say, you know, but ...

73



1 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, that actually does not help me if I may

2 say so. I understand the nature of human relationships

3 in organisations. What I am really asking you is were

4 these a happy band or were they an unhappy band of

5 people?

6 MRS ADAMOU: Well, they were people that were getting on

7 fine, you know working together with no problems, and

8 obviously there were some times where there were

9 personality clashes, how can I put it?

10 THE CHAIRMAN: Tell me where the personality clashes lay

11 then.

12 MRS ADAMOU: Oh dear, but I do not wish to sit here and

13 gossip about people and I do not wish to make -- it is

14 very difficult but there are always as I said

15 differences of opinion sometimes or different, you

16 know~...

17 THE CHAIRMAN: Gossip is not my business either but what is

18 my business is trying to understand what was happening

19 in Haringey.

20 MRS ADAMOU: I appreciate that.

21 THE CHAIRMAN: Sometimes clashes between senior people can

22 actually impede the effectiveness of the organisation.

23 MRS ADAMOU: I appreciate that.

24 THE CHAIRMAN: It is a very serious question I am asking.

25 MRS ADAMOU: I do understand but I do not think I am in

74



1 a position to say any more, as much as I wish to help.

2 THE CHAIRMAN: Let me put it this way. The picture you have

3 given me is that there is a lot more you could say but

4 you do not feel comfortable about saying it.

5 MRS ADAMOU: I do not know what to say to that, I must say.

6 THE CHAIRMAN: Tell me if the picture is wrong.

7 MRS ADAMOU: All I would say is that Haringey is under a lot

8 of stress a lot of times, you know financial stresses

9 and difficulties, and when we members and officers are

10 trying to find savings and trying to provide the best

11 services we can provide for our -- for the public, it

12 may be you know there are times where there are

13 differences of opinion, there is no doubt about that,

14 I think that is human nature if I may say so, and there

15 are times when officers may disagree or members, but it

16 was not anything too serious, it was not anything that

17 will have effect on the kind of services we wanted to

18 provide for the public.

19 THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. I have tried to put the question to

20 you as fairly as I can. I have observed your response

21 and listened very carefully to the words you have used.

22 You will have to leave it to me to make my own

23 assessment.

24 MRS ADAMOU: Of course, thank you.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: I am not sure that you should be thanking me.

75



1 At any rate I will make my assessment.

2 You corrected a part of your statement when you

3 began two days ago.

4 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

5 THE CHAIRMAN: Which was about when the decision was made to

6 separate Social Services from Housing. It would be

7 helpful if you could tell me from your understanding

8 when that decision was made.

9 MRS ADAMOU: It certainly was not made in 1999, I can assure

10 you of that. I think the decision was made from my

11 understanding, because by then I was not a member of the

12 Cabinet, I think it was about 2001. I think it was

13 after the new Director came in.

14 THE CHAIRMAN: Were you involved at all with the appointment

15 of the new Director?

16 MRS ADAMOU: No I was not.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: But do you know what the new Director was

18 told about what job she was coming to?

19 MRS ADAMOU: I think if I am correct, and I may not be,

20 I think my understanding is that after the Director

21 accept the offer they did say to her they were looking

22 at further restructuring and it may lead to separation

23 of the department. That is my understanding.

24 THE CHAIRMAN: Let me get it right. The job was advertised

25 in your view as a joint post managing Social Services

76



1 and Housing?

2 MRS ADAMOU: Yes.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: The person was appointed, accepted the post

4 and then after she accepted the post she was told that

5 the Council had in mind separating the two departments.

6 That is your perception?

7 MRS ADAMOU: That is my understanding. She may have been

8 told before she accept the job, I am not sure. I am not

9 in a position to know exactly when she was advised that

10 it may happen, as I was not on the panel or took part in

11 those discussions.

12 THE CHAIRMAN: How much money did Haringey get for Quality

13 Protects?

14 MRS ADAMOU: Which year, because I think it changes.

15 I think it is about a million, a million and a half.

16 THE CHAIRMAN: We will settle for about a million and

17 a half, yes, so when you were answering Mr Sheldon about

18 all of these problems and you included Quality Protects,

19 actually Haringey probably did reasonably well out of

20 Quality Protects?

21 MRS ADAMOU: But Quality Protect grant is ring fenced and it

22 can only be used in certain ways.

23 THE CHAIRMAN: No different from every other authority.

24 MRS ADAMOU: Of course, yes.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: You said two things that confused me a little

77



1 bit and so I would like to be clear. When Mr Sheldon

2 was asking you about the restructuring of the Social

3 Services Department you said this only affected managers

4 and therefore did not affect social workers.

5 MRS ADAMOU: No, what I meant to say was that -- perhaps

6 I did not make myself very clear -- it was, you know,

7 the restructuring was basically looking at the

8 management structure. It was not the idea about -- we

9 are trying to protect front line services and that is

10 what I was trying to say.

11 THE CHAIRMAN: But you agreed that one of the key points was

12 to reduce the number of team managers and increase the

13 size of the teams and change the supervisory

14 arrangements for the social workers.

15 MRS ADAMOU: I think some of the roles of the staff may have

16 changed because if you look at the numbers of managers

17 let us say in North Tottenham before and after the

18 restructuring, I think I am trying to remember now the

19 numbers but I think they are only about two or less

20 posts after the restructuring. I think the jobs where

21 you had before senior practitioners and then they

22 became -- I forgot. The job's name was changed,

23 I forgot now.

24 So what you had, you know, you had different names,

25 different job responsibilities if you like, but the

78



1 number of people actually I think it was only reduced by

2 two, so you know it is just the jobs were changed, you

3 know. I think from senior practitioners they became

4 practice managers, so we are talking about a very small

5 reduction.

6 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. Let me be clear though. The purpose

7 was to reduce the number of team managers and increase

8 the size of the teams?

9 MRS ADAMOU: I think so, yes.

10 THE CHAIRMAN: So it did affect the social workers?

11 MRS ADAMOU: Well, the idea was that it will provide better

12 services you know.

13 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes Mrs Adamou. You also said if I may put

14 it this way, and I hope I do not misrepresent you so

15 this is only so you can help me. When the Council was

16 thinking of changing the terms and conditions, staff

17 single status was referred to, you said that you were

18 only thinking about it. In a situation in which the aim

19 was to reduce expenditure, not only the Trade Unions but

20 everybody else must have understood exactly what the

21 implications were of members looking at this because it

22 was obviously a serious option that was in members'

23 minds. It is so important, this, that members would not

24 have raised it unless they were seriously intending to

25 change the conditions of service?

79



1 MRS ADAMOU: We seriously did consider it but all we were

2 trying to do was negotiate, not implement it. We did

3 not make a decision to actually implement it. It was

4 a decision and a discussion and decision to negotiate

5 and speak to the unions before moving on actually.

6 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, this is really important. So there is

7 a huge difference about members thinking about something

8 privately and actually members opening up negotiation

9 with the Trade Unions. Members do not open up

10 negotiations with the Trade Unions generally unless they

11 intend to achieve change.

12 MRS ADAMOU: As it happens we never -- nothing came out of

13 it.

14 THE CHAIRMAN: I am fully aware of that.

15 MRS ADAMOU: So it was always if we intended to do it

16 without agreement with the unions, that was never the

17 intention. The intention was negotiate with unions,

18 staff, find a way of agreement and then come to members

19 for a decision, which it never happened. Everything

20 came to a standstill.

21 THE CHAIRMAN: It sure did come to a standstill, you are

22 right.

23 Let me ask you then what do you think went wrong

24 with Victoria's case?

25 MRS ADAMOU: There is no doubt there have been failures.

80



1 A child does not die if people do not fail. I think

2 there were failures all across different agencies,

3 failures doctors, hospitals, police, social workers.

4 You know, failures all across. All the different

5 agencies that they had, they missed opportunities to

6 help the child. It does not mean that you know it may

7 have prevented it, it may not, but at least they missed

8 opportunities to help the child. It is very sad affair

9 indeed when that happens.

10 THE CHAIRMAN: You must leave it to me to think about the

11 other services, but from Haringey's point of view who is

12 responsible for that?

13 MRS ADAMOU: Well, certainly Haringey has to share the --

14 have to share the responsibility of missed

15 opportunities. The child as I understand, you know,

16 they should have visit, make sure they visit the child,

17 the child should have full assessment, and as

18 I understand it it did not actually happen. I think

19 Haringey along with the rest of the other agencies

20 involved, they had the responsibility and they failed,

21 there is no doubt about that.

22 THE CHAIRMAN: I believe I am right in thinking that the

23 Government has placed Social Services on special

24 measures.

25 MRS ADAMOU: That is correct.

81



1 THE CHAIRMAN: Why do you think they have done that?

2 MRS ADAMOU: I am not in a position to say but obviously

3 this case, the child, this death I would say had a lot

4 to do with it.

5 THE CHAIRMAN: And anything else to do with it then?

6 MRS ADAMOU: Obviously as I say we had some problems by

7 then, as I said, there is no doubt about it, and we are

8 very happy to oblige and try to turn it around. That is

9 what we are working on you know --

10 THE CHAIRMAN: As an experienced, important member of the

11 authority, former Lead Member on Social Services, how

12 well do you think that Haringey members have served the

13 needs of children in Haringey?

14 MRS ADAMOU: As members you see, there is clear line between

15 members and officers. We are lay people. We are not

16 social workers, environmental health officers or housing

17 officers. We meet in the evenings and we consider

18 reports, we look at our policies and procedures and with

19 advice from professionals try to do the best we can.

20 That is I think members' responsibility. We do not

21 see -- we do not assess people, we are not social

22 workers. That is the difficulty we have as members.

23 You have all the responsibility but there is a clear

24 line between our responsibilities and officers'

25 responsibilities.

82



1 THE CHAIRMAN: So the members did quite well, the officers

2 did badly?

3 MRS ADAMOU: I am not saying that at all. We all are trying

4 to do the best we can but unfortunately sadly sometimes

5 things go wrong.

6 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, very painfully.

7 MRS ADAMOU: Absolutely.

8 THE CHAIRMAN: Tell me this then Mrs Adamou, which is

9 a member responsibility. What was the evidence that led

10 you to a situation in which the committee that you were

11 responsible for spent above SSA on services for elderly

12 people and significantly below SSA on services for

13 children?

14 MRS ADAMOU: It is true to say that we spend above SSA on

15 a number of areas, learning difficulties, physical

16 disabilities, mental health, elderly. Social Services

17 Committee never actually decided let us spend above SSA

18 in this area and not in others. What happens is we look

19 at the needs, you know, a report will come to us and say

20 for instance this is the care packages we have, this is

21 the demands we have in this area, this is how much money

22 we need for next year in this area and other areas, and

23 we make decisions accordingly to information we are

24 provided with.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: What was the justification then for spending

83



1 less on Children's Services than the SSA?

2 MRS ADAMOU: I was aware that we spend less on children,

3 there is no doubt about it, and we tried to address it

4 a number of ways. Every year when we have the budget

5 discussions and we find the savings and if we need to

6 make cuts, what we do is put them in priority, make them

7 priority, lower and higher. Children's Services we

8 always put them high priority, trying to protect them

9 as, you know, as much as possible, not to make direct

10 cuts in front line services.

11 THE CHAIRMAN: But if --

12 MRS ADAMOU: May I say many times we switch resources. When

13 we had Social Services Committee if we had underspends

14 in other areas and overspends in children's areas we

15 often used to switch resources to Children's Services,

16 one that it was so often we were often criticised by the

17 finance people for doing that. This year, because again

18 we had overspends in Children's Services, in fact the

19 decision was made where we put another £600,000 from

20 balances to the Children's Services. So we are very

21 much aware and we are trying to address the issue and if

22 you look at the spending on Children's Services, slowly

23 over the last three years it has slowly increased.

24 THE CHAIRMAN: Slowly that is true, slowly. Is it not the

25 case then that if, as you have fairly said, you decided

84



1 politically to spend above SSA on services for elderly

2 people, learning disabilities and the like and

3 significantly under SSA for services for children in an

4 area of very high social deprivation, the implication of

5 that is that services for older people were politically

6 more important than services for children?

7 MRS ADAMOU: The facts are that we have a lot of needs in

8 Haringey. We need a lot more money in Social Services

9 and I wish that the Government in future would consider

10 what they did with education, as saying this is extra

11 money for education, they want the local authority to

12 passport the money to education. I hope in future they

13 will consider doing something similar with Social

14 Services.

15 All I would say is that if at any time as a Lead

16 Member if the Director came to me and said that we

17 cannot provide the statutory responsibilities for

18 Children's Services at any point, I would have gone

19 straight to the Leader, to my colleagues and done

20 something about it, but I was never told that we did not

21 provide our statutory responsibilities.

22 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.

23 MR SHELDON: I have no further questions, perhaps Ms Adamou

24 can be released.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your evidence.

85



1 MR SHELDON: Sir the next witness is Mr Craik. We have been

2 handed a small number of documents by the Metropolitan

3 Police. I do not know whether you were intending to

4 have a short break?

5 THE CHAIRMAN: I was hoping to catch your eye.

6 MR SHELDON: It would be a convenient moment now and we can

7 distribute those documents during it.

8 THE CHAIRMAN: I am grateful for that and thank you very

9 much. Ladies and gentlemen, I think if we get back at

10 eight minutes to 12.

11 (11.42 am)

12 (A short break)

13 (11.52 am)

14 MR SHELDON: Michael Craik please.

15 DCC MICHAEL CRAIK (sworn)

16 MR SHELDON: Please have a seat.

17 DCC CRAIK: Thank you. Good morning ladies and gentlemen.

18 MR SHELDON: Could you confirm your full name and

19 professional address.

20 DCC CRAIK: Michael Craik. Northumbria Police Headquarters,

21 Pontiland, Northumberland.

22 MR SHELDON: You have prepared one statement for use by this

23 Inquiry, a copy of which is in front of you.

24 DCC CRAIK: I have.

25 MR SHELDON: Could you have a look at the last page. Is

86



1 that your signature?

2 DCC CRAIK: That is.

3 MR SHELDON: Are you happy that the facts and matters in

4 that statement are true?

5 DCC CRAIK: Yes. One small matter of courtesy. I believe

6 I have misspelled Superintendent Akers' name all the way

7 through.

8 MR SHELDON: No "c".

9 DCC CRAIK: That is correct.

10 MR SHELDON: One other point of detail that may need an

11 amendment at the outset. Could you have a look at

12 paragraph 35. You say there that the HMIC thematic

13 inspection report was produced in 1989. Do you mean

14 1999?

15 DCC CRAIK: Yes, well spotted, thank you.

16 MR SHELDON: Thank you. You make the point at the outset of

17 your statement that it was compiled principally from

18 memory and without reference to some of the documents

19 you might otherwise have looked at.

20 DCC CRAIK: Yes.

21 MR SHELDON: Is that because of your move to Northumbria?

22 DCC CRAIK: It is.

23 MR SHELDON: In view of that, can you assist us with how

24 reliable you regard it to be as an account? Are there

25 any sections of it we should treat with caution?

87



1 DCC CRAIK: No, I mean it is reliant on memory. The

2 difficulty is I have seen other documents and I refer to

3 since.

4 MR SHELDON: That was my next question. The sight of those

5 documents has reinforced the account that you gave from

6 memory at the outset?

7 DCC CRAIK: Yes.

8 MR SHELDON: You joined the Metropolitan Police Force

9 I believe in 1977, is that right?

10 DCC CRAIK: That is correct.

11 MR SHELDON: And you stayed there until your recent move to

12 Northumbria where you are currently Deputy Chief

13 Constable?

14 DCC CRAIK: That is correct.

15 MR SHELDON: When did you move to Northumbria?

16 DCC CRAIK: 3rd July 2000.

17 MR SHELDON: And in February 1999 you became the Commander

18 (Crime) for North East London?

19 DCC CRAIK: That is correct.

20 MR SHELDON: As I understand it from your statement,

21 in April 1999 there was a restructuring exercise at

22 least at ACPO level which merged North East and North

23 West areas, is that right?

24 DCC CRAIK: It happened actually before that. It is just

25 some of the staff, I actually took over the North West

88



1 Area formally in terms of Commander of Crime only when

2 Commander Campbell actually retired, so we worked

3 together as it were for the period between February and

4 April.

5 MR SHELDON: That may explain, may it, why Mr Cox when he

6 gave evidence to us -- and sir it is Day 46 page 3 --

7 said that this restructuring started in January?

8 DCC CRAIK: Yes, that is correct. There was not actually

9 a definitive here is a kick-off day. It was rather less

10 structured than that. It was around managing handovers.

11 MR SHELDON: And it was when Commander Campbell retired that

12 you took over his job of Commander (Crime) for North

13 West London in addition to your existing one?

14 DCC CRAIK: Yes, that is correct.

15 MR SHELDON: Making your job twice as big?

16 DCC CRAIK: Yes.

17 MR SHELDON: Was it manageable?

18 DCC CRAIK: It was -- I was always aware it was a temporary

19 holding position and in terms of work on a personal

20 level, yes twice the span of command, yes over 8,000

21 police officers to manage, yes twice as many crimes to

22 manage because it was all crime I was responsible for,

23 so it was a holding position for me but it was still

24 business as usual for the organisation.

25 MR SHELDON: Were you in that holding position until you

89



1 moved to Northumbria?

2 DCC CRAIK: No, I was not. I changed again to a position of

3 Territorial Policing Commander at the beginning, in fact

4 in February, 23rd I believe if there was a handover date

5 that we can fix on 2000. I then held that position in

6 east London until my transfer in July 2000.

7 MR SHELDON: So you were in that holding position for

8 a little under 11 months or so?

9 DCC CRAIK: April until February, yes indeed.

10 MR SHELDON: So it was in that case April 1999 when you

11 became responsible ultimately for the child protection

12 teams with which we are principally concerned?

13 DCC CRAIK: That is correct.

14 MR SHELDON: You will understand, and it is a question or

15 a line of questioning that has been put to various other

16 senior managers and other organisations, that we will be

17 interested to know the extent to which you were able to

18 familiarise yourself, be aware of what was going on on

19 the ground in the various areas of your responsibility.

20 DCC CRAIK: I understand.

21 MR SHELDON: In view of the fact that your job seems to have

22 dramatically expanded in April 1999 were you content,

23 given the nature of your role, that you were able

24 adequately to satisfy yourself of the standard of

25 policing on the ground in your area of responsibility?

90



1 DCC CRAIK: I engaged in a take-over strategy if you like

2 that I believe would help me manage that process and

3 give me the confidence that I could do that as best as

4 possible, but I would not give any guarantees around

5 that, I was going into the unknown but I believe I had

6 a takeover strategy that would allow me to do that to

7 the best of my abilities.

8 MR SHELDON: We will look at that in some detail in a moment

9 but if we can start at this point understanding

10 precisely what your role and areas of responsibilities

11 were, and for this you will need volume 31 page 184.

12 That as I understand it is the job description that

13 would have been applicable to you at the period we are

14 concerned with?

15 DCC CRAIK: That is correct.

16 MR SHELDON: Before we come on to that in detail, I want to

17 understand from you what your understanding of your role

18 and responsibility was. I appreciate as I am sure the

19 Inquiry does that you had a wide range of

20 responsibilities but you will understand that our focus

21 is necessarily a fairly narrow one.

22 DCC CRAIK: Yes.

23 MR SHELDON: So what I would like your help with is to what

24 extent in your post from April 1999 to February 2000

25 were you responsible for the operational standards of

91



1 child protection teams in North West London?

2 DCC CRAIK: I think probably the simplest way I can put it

3 was I was the Commander (Crime), child protection issues

4 involve crime. They were my responsibility, so

5 responsible for crime in terms of child protection

6 issues, as indeed I was across all the range of crime on

7 North area.

8 MR SHELDON: Because the way in which you put it in

9 paragraph 6 of your statement is that in particular you

10 were responsible for crime policy and strategy in north

11 London. To what extent were you responsible for

12 performance?

13 DCC CRAIK: The performance was an issue that was overseen

14 by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner but I was

15 responsible for delivering on crime, that included crime

16 intelligence, criminal justice issues but also crime

17 performance as well.

18 MR SHELDON: For example, if we turn to your job description

19 page 184, we see about two-thirds of the way down the

20 page that each Commander has responsibility for taking

21 the lead on a number of projects, one of which is

22 improving the quality of criminal investigations.

23 DCC CRAIK: Yes, I did not take up a personal portfolio

24 responsibility. You will no doubt hear if you have not

25 heard already that Commander Kendrick, the crime

92



1 predecessor on North East London, had a particular

2 portfolio responsibility for child protection issues.

3 I did not take that on.

4 MR SHELDON: I see. Does that mean that insofar as it

5 suggests otherwise, this job description is not entirely

6 accurate given the unique position you found yourself in

7 in 1999/2000?

8 DCC CRAIK: There will inevitably be some weaknesses in

9 that. That job description was designed for the

10 previous arrangement and was not updated and could not

11 be in the timescale.

12 MR SHELDON: If we turn to page 185 for example, would that

13 be applicable to item 2, to take the load in all

14 strategic issues relating to crime on the area

15 including, last bullet point, effective management of

16 performance in crime matters?

17 DCC CRAIK: That is correct.

18 MR SHELDON: Again more Kendrick/Griffiths than you?

19 DCC CRAIK: No, the effective performance of crime matters,

20 it is how my officers operationally performed their

21 duties on the streets or in their offices, was me.

22 David Kendrick's responsibilities and then

23 Bill Griffiths were then around policy issues.

24 MR SHELDON: I see.

25 DCC CRAIK: So operations Commander Craik, policy

93



1 procedures, guidelines --

2 MR SHELDON: To maintain an overview of the work of the Area

3 Crime OCU, particularly focusing on proactive and covert

4 operation and murder investigations, was part of your

5 role even in relation to CPTs?

6 DCC CRAIK: That is right.

7 MR SHELDON: And that would require if nothing else, that

8 item alone, that you informed yourself as far as

9 possible of the state of those CPTs and the service they

10 were providing?

11 DCC CRAIK: Yes.

12 MR SHELDON: You say in paragraph 7 of your statement, and

13 it is a point that you have touched on already, that

14 Commander Kendrick and then latterly Mr Griffiths had

15 portfolio responsibility for child protection. What

16 exactly does portfolio responsibility mean?

17 DCC CRAIK: I will try and explain that as succinctly as

18 I can. That goes to the situation where the management

19 of the Metropolitan Police Service was structured

20 geographically. There were five geographical areas.

21 Policy issues would be managed by individuals on those

22 areas. That required them then to cooperate and bring

23 together others, the other areas to agree policies,

24 procedures and guidelines.

25 So it was a geographical responsibility in terms of

94



1 management, not a functional responsibility. The Matrix

2 Management Group then split up the policy work between

3 the individuals so that Commander Kendrick on North East

4 Area prior to my taking over had responsibility for

5 crime as we see defined in there, but also had a special

6 portfolio interest in child protection matters.

7 MR SHELDON: For those of us who do not have the

8 Metropolitan Police structure and those sort of

9 divisions of responsibility entirely at our fingertips,

10 perhaps I can try and understand that in relation to

11 a specific example. Say for example I was a detective

12 inspector in charge of a particular child protection

13 team and I have a number of problems including what

14 I regard to be as not enough staff, not enough radios,

15 not enough cars, inadequate information technology for

16 example, would I be right to say the first person

17 I would take that up with would be my Area DCI?

18 DCC CRAIK: That is correct.

19 MR SHELDON: Who in our scenario is Mr Wheeler?

20 DCC CRAIK: Correct.

21 MR SHELDON: He says to me, "These are decisions which

22 I cannot take" or "These are matters with which I do not

23 have the authority to help you". I would then go, would

24 I, or he would go on my behalf to the Superintendent?

25 DCC CRAIK: Correct, yes.

95



1 MR SHELDON: Ms Akers in our scenario?

2 DCC CRAIK: Correct.

3 MR SHELDON: If Ms Akers felt again that this was something

4 that could not be done adequately at her level, she

5 would go to the Detective Chief Superintendent, our

6 Mr Cox?

7 DCC CRAIK: Correct.

8 MR SHELDON: If Mr Cox acknowledged that there was a problem

9 that needed to be addressed but did not feel that he was

10 sufficiently senior or had the ability to take the

11 necessary resourcing decisions for example to deal with

12 it, who would he go and see?

13 DCC CRAIK: To me.

14 MR SHELDON: He would not go to Mr Kendrick/Griffiths?

15 DCC CRAIK: Assuming Mr Kendrick has gone by then, when

16 I was in that position he would come to me for

17 resourcing issues. If those resourcing issues had an

18 impact on policies that had been made early then either

19 he or I could feed that back in later but I would deal

20 with the resourcing issues with him.

21 MR SHELDON: Perhaps that is a convenient point to deal with

22 this matter at the outset. During the period with which

23 we are concerned which coincides fairly neatly with the

24 period that you were in charge, in relation to child

25 protection teams specifically because I understand the

96



1 position in relation to murders, was Mr Cox coming and

2 saying that sort of thing to you?

3 DCC CRAIK: No.

4 MR SHELDON: Ever?

5 DCC CRAIK: No. There were issues on North East Area around

6 major child abuse enquiries in Bow and that channel

7 worked then but not on North West Area.

8 MR SHELDON: Perhaps we can now look at it from the top down

9 in a more strategic way. We have heard for example

10 evidence during the course of this Inquiry that for the

11 period with which we are concerned and indeed some years

12 prior to that, the child protection training courses and

13 the detective training courses were not operating within

14 the Met. Would you in any of the areas referred to in

15 your job description or described in your statement have

16 conversations along the lines of whether or not those

17 courses should be reinstated in respect of child

18 protection teams?

19 DCC CRAIK: Conversations with who, can I clarify?

20 MR SHELDON: That is what I am trying to understand. Is

21 that likely to be an item on the agenda of the sort of

22 meetings you were attending during your year in charge?

23 DCC CRAIK: No, only if it came up to the policy level at

24 Crime Operation Policy Group. I did not routinely sit

25 on the senior supervisors' group meeting for child

97



1 protection team supervisors. I would see the minutes or

2 I would have access to the minutes of those meetings but

3 I would not personally be involved in that.

4 MR SHELDON: And that would be at Met-wide level, would it?

5 DCC CRAIK: If somebody brought those issues to me or

6 I detected them when I went to look, I would arrange for

7 them to be dealt with, either if they were policy issues

8 through those channels or, if they were resourcing

9 issues, deal with them myself.

10 MR SHELDON: When we are attempting to consider the strategy

11 insofar as it related to things like training, insofar

12 as it related to things like IT rollout or encouraging

13 detectives to apply to child protection teams, should we

14 be addressing those questions to the Portfolio Officer,

15 Mr Kendrick or Mr Griffiths, or should I be addressing

16 them to you now?

17 DCC CRAIK: Those sort of issues were taken up following the

18 publication of HMIC's inspection, and Bill Griffiths in

19 a central role in a functional role took up the business

20 of setting the objectives and the plans that would

21 deliver on the recommendations. Part of that were the

22 nine objectives that he set and commissioned the work by

23 others to look at those policy issues. How do we change

24 training? What training do we actually need across the

25 force? Those sort of issues were driven forward by him.

98



1 Similarly with IT and other critical issues that had

2 been raised in HMIC, he formulated the action plan and

3 the objectives and directed the work that would deliver

4 the improvements for the organisational part. It would

5 not, this is a personal view, have been sensible for

6 I or the other Area Crime Commanders to try and go about

7 that in five different --

8 MR SHELDON: But it would have been sensible for you to keep

9 a watching brief on the sort of work that he was doing

10 and to if you felt it necessary contribute to that with

11 the concerns that were being raised with you?

12 DCC CRAIK: Absolutely. If I met concerns either from

13 seeing the minutes of meetings, but then Bill Griffiths

14 would presumably see those minutes as well, or had he

15 been present at those meetings, if they had come to me

16 by other means, I had had contact with people who had

17 fed back to me or in my visits to people, they had

18 raised those concerns, I was free to raise those with

19 Bill Griffiths and any of his groups at any time.

20 MR SHELDON: To what extent were you on a regular basis

21 during your year or so in post raising child protection

22 matters or concerns with Bill Griffiths or Mr Kendrick?

23 DCC CRAIK: Not particularly often. I think the critical

24 issues that came up for me were the operations on North

25 East Area.

99



1 MR SHELDON: Is that in relation to North West Area and the

2 area with which we are concerned symptomatic of the fact

3 that you were not hearing from people like Mr Copson of

4 any particular difficulties?

5 DCC CRAIK: That is right, but I also was not finding

6 difficulties when I went to look.

7 MR SHELDON: You went round, did you?

8 DCC CRAIK: Well, I went round the whole of the area, do not

9 forget I need to say as part of my takeover strategy,

10 and this may help if you bear with me, is that came in

11 in three phases. The first is research. I knew I was

12 going to take over from Malcolm Campbell so I had that

13 intervening three months to catch up on all the

14 documentation, HMIC Inspection Report, the Force

15 Inspection Report and some historical research about

16 both the jobs I was now getting into.

17 It was also part of my takeover strategy, who are

18 the people I am going to be dealing with? Who are the

19 people who are going to deliver this child protection

20 and all other crime issues and the OCU commanders and

21 the divisional commanders? Who are going to be doing

22 this work for me in North West Area? North East Area

23 I had grown up most of my life with the individuals,

24 I was quite well cited on.

25 North West Area was schedule of visits first of all

100



1 to the OCU commanders, then to their superintendents and

2 down to detective chief inspector level or chief

3 inspector level. I did not at the time I was there get

4 round all chief inspector levels but I did get to see

5 all of the chief inspectors in the Crime OCU because

6 that was a priority for fairly obvious reasons.

7 Now, part of that was my having scoped with my

8 colleagues about what I was inheriting in terms of the

9 legacy systems on North West Area, who are the people

10 I am inheriting? What are they like? What are their

11 skills, their weaknesses, and then I would go out and

12 meet them and actually interview them.

13 There were two stages to that process. One passive,

14 one more interventionist. One was here am I, the new

15 Crime Commander, these are my values, my beliefs, here

16 are my expectations of you. But also here is what

17 I come to offer you in terms of advice, guidance,

18 support and what are your issues? I would carry that

19 out down to detective chief inspector and chief

20 inspector level.

21 The next bit of the handover of my takeover strategy

22 was the passive bit which is management information

23 sickness rates, what little documentation we had around

24 management information you will have heard it was not

25 sophisticated. It still certainly in my force now is