Archived Transcript for 26 November 2001: Pages 151 to 200

151



1 heard referred to in volume 42 starting at page 71. One

2 of the categories there is something called welfare

3 points. That is on page 85, but I think you are

4 probably familiar with it, are you not?

5 MR KAKOURATOS: I think so.

6 MS LAWSON: So how does that work?

7 MR KAKOURATOS: That works where the social services would

8 refer a child to us who, for example, they are trying to

9 keep out of council care. They refer the case to us and

10 we would consider the housing situation and if we

11 thought that the housing situation was pretty dire and

12 required some assistance from us, we would consider

13 awarding these points. Obviously primarily in regards

14 to the wealth of the child and to help social services

15 keep the child out of council care.

16 MS LAWSON: And who would do that? Is that something that

17 you would do or --

18 MR KAKOURATOS: That is something I may do if the

19 application came to me, but it could be done in any of

20 the team. It could be done by the Special Needs Team or

21 the Homeless Team.

22 MS LAWSON: And generally was it you who authorises the home

23 visit?

24 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, that is right.

25 MS LAWSON: So it does not go directly from Ms Alexandrou to

152



1 Ms McGregor. It goes via you, is that right?

2 MR KAKOURATOS: That is correct.

3 MS LAWSON: When Ms McGregor comes back from her visit what

4 happens to the forms and documents that she has filled

5 in? Do they come back by you or do they --

6 MR KAKOURATOS: Normally, yes, they are passed back to me so

7 I can allocate cases to staff.

8 MS LAWSON: Right. Now, you said once or twice during your

9 evidence already that you think that you have already

10 accepted that you should have taken more initiative in

11 telling social services what the outcome of the

12 processing of the application was. But it would not,

13 would it, have made any difference to the question of

14 whether or not Ms Kouao was eligible for housing?

15 MR KAKOURATOS: No it would not have made any difference.

16 I was just saying that, as good practice, yes, I agree

17 with the statements that were made.

18 MS LAWSON: Some of the questions that you have been asked

19 about whether you should have made more effort to get

20 correspondence translated or followed things up you

21 dealt with by describing some of the pressures that your

22 office operates under. Is it the case that Haringey has

23 a large surplus of housing stock which is available to

24 anybody who can be encouraged or persuaded to fill in

25 a form correctly?

153



1 MR KAKOURATOS: No.

2 MS LAWSON: No, I did not think it was. The position is

3 this, is it: that you have a much greater number of

4 people wanting housing than can actually be easily

5 accommodated?

6 MR KAKOURATOS: That is correct. On the register we have

7 11,000 people and 3,500 are on the waiting list for

8 housing. So that is about just under a third, I think.

9 MS LAWSON: So the other 8,000 who are on the register, are

10 they ever going to get houses?

11 MR KAKOURATOS: Well it depends on their circumstances.

12 MS LAWSON: Unless their circumstances change they are not.

13 You have about 3,500 people waiting of those who you

14 decided are eligible?

15 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes.

16 MS LAWSON: And others have told us about the range of

17 people and the circumstances of the people who use

18 Haringey's services in terms of their ethnic and

19 cultural mix and their language difficulties. And so

20 far as they are concerned, by and large with the

21 assistance which your officers provide, they seem to

22 manage to fill in the forms all right, do they?

23 MR KAKOURATOS: By and large.

24 MS LAWSON: And to pursue their housing applications

25 vigorously because housing is something they really

154



1 want?

2 MR KAKOURATOS: That is correct.

3 MS LAWSON: Thank you.

4 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms Lawson.

5 Mr Kakouratos, can I ask you a couple of questions,

6 please? First of all, could you look at paragraph 10 in

7 your statement, please? Basically you are saying that

8 you agree with Ms Alexandrou's comments and what she did

9 in the file. Would you say that this particular housing

10 file is typical of the way in which Haringey Housing

11 does its work?

12 MR KAKOURATOS: It is not a typical case, so I do not know

13 what you are trying to ask me.

14 THE CHAIRMAN: All right, then. Is it the only case of its

15 kind that has ever been dealt with by Haringey Housing?

16 MR KAKOURATOS: Of course not.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: So does it typify that kind of case in

18 Haringey?

19 MR KAKOURATOS: Sorry, I do not understand what you are

20 trying to ask me.

21 THE CHAIRMAN: Well, do you think that the file is

22 representative of the way in which Haringey views

23 applications of this kind?

24 MR KAKOURATOS: In terms of -- yes. In this case we made an

25 assessment of this application. We used our allocation

155



1 scheme, we made an assessment. We gave this person

2 a certain number of points which reflected the situation

3 they were in. We did a home visit and based on the

4 information we received we followed every point of

5 procedure that we had to follow. I admit, as I said

6 before, certain points of good practice were omitted in

7 terms of communication, but generally the methods and

8 procedures were followed.

9 THE CHAIRMAN: The key point was the assessment. Everything

10 springs from the assessment. What in your professional

11 view -- how would you rate the assessment that was made?

12 Good, average, bad? I do not know, you tell me.

13 MR KAKOURATOS: Do you mean the assessment in terms of the

14 way the allocation scheme was applied and the points we

15 gave?

16 THE CHAIRMAN: No, I mean how the assessment of housing need

17 was handled. Was it a good assessment? I mean you know

18 what a housing assessment means. Was it a good housing

19 assessment?

20 MR KAKOURATOS: I think so, yes.

21 THE CHAIRMAN: Well you are a professional. I am asking for

22 your guidance in these matters. Have you done home

23 visiting?

24 MR KAKOURATOS: Years ago. Only for a short time.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: Did you ever see children living in

156



1 unsatisfactory conditions?

2 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: Did you listen to the evidence of your

4 colleague Ms Alexandrou?

5 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes I did.

6 THE CHAIRMAN: Were you surprised by any of that?

7 MR KAKOURATOS: There were some comments I was surprised at

8 but ...

9 THE CHAIRMAN: Tell me them, please.

10 MR KAKOURATOS: I think she -- I think she overlooked that

11 she was dealing with cases that did involve children and

12 the needs of children. I do not think she was aware of

13 what she actually did and was able to explain that to

14 you.

15 THE CHAIRMAN: Quite important.

16 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you happen to know -- and I just want your

18 view on this -- whether or not housing is represented on

19 the Haringey area Child Protection committee?

20 MR KAKOURATOS: I do not know.

21 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms Gibson.

22 MS GIBSON: Thank you, sir. I have no more questions for

23 Mr Kakouratos.

24 Sir, the next piece of evidence is a video of

25 Yolande Viljoen that was taken last week but I wonder if

157



1 now might be an appropriate time to have a break so the

2 video might be set up. Also the video will take about

3 an hour so it might be better to break now rather than

4 later.

5 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms Gibson, I am happy to take your

6 advice. We will break, then, until 3 o'clock.

7 (2.50 pm)

8

9 (Short adjournment)

10 (3.00 pm)

11 MS GIBSON: I know the room is a little bit empty but I do

12 not think there is anything to prevent us starting with

13 the video now.

14 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms Gibson.

15 MS YOLANDE VILJOEN (sworn)

16 Evidence given by video

17 MS GIBSON: Good morning, Ms Viljoen.

18 MS VILJOEN: Good morning.

19 MS GIBSON: You have made one statement to the Inquiry. Do

20 you have a copy of that with you?

21 MS VILJOEN: Yes, I have.

22 MS GIBSON: Are the contents of that statement true to the

23 best of your knowledge and belief?

24 MS VILJOEN: Yes, it is.

25 MS GIBSON: You were also served with a series of additional

158



1 questions by the Inquiry and we have your responses to

2 those questions. Do you also have those with you?

3 MS VILJOEN: Yes, I have.

4 MS GIBSON: And are those responses also true?

5 MS VILJOEN: Yes.

6 MS GIBSON: Is there anything at this stage that you would

7 wish to amend either to your statement or those

8 questions?

9 MS VILJOEN: No, nothing.

10 MS GIBSON: Thank you. You were a Duty social worker for

11 the Child In Need Team at Brent between May 1999

12 and December 1999; is that correct?

13 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

14 MS GIBSON: And you were in the team that was led by

15 Edward Armstrong?

16 MS VILJOEN: That is right.

17 MS GIBSON: And within that team am I right in saying that

18 you were supervised by Pauline Philips?

19 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

20 MS GIBSON: You have a four year degree qualification in

21 South Africa; is that correct?

22 MS VILJOEN: Yes.

23 MS GIBSON: Did you have any experience as a social worker

24 in South Africa in dealing with work with children?

25 MS VILJOEN: Yes. I did my practical six-month at

159



1 a family -- how can I say -- at a family organisation

2 where I specifically worked with families that had

3 children.

4 MS GIBSON: Did you have experience in South Africa of doing

5 child in need assessments?

6 MS VILJOEN: Social working in South Africa is more generic

7 so I did a little bit of everything in my working. In

8 South Africa I did child in need assessments as well.

9 MS GIBSON: When you say generic, does that mean you were

10 covering work with adults and a whole range of different

11 social issues?

12 MS VILJOEN: Yes.

13 MS GIBSON: When you came to the United Kingdom you first

14 worked in the London Borough of Southwark, is that

15 right, before going to Brent?

16 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

17 MS GIBSON: Did you receive any kind of orientation

18 programme at Southwark?

19 MS VILJOEN: No, I did not.

20 MS GIBSON: Did you find that having no orientation

21 programme either at Southwark and more particularly when

22 you joined Brent Social Services handicapped you in your

23 ability to work as a social worker in Britain?

24 MS VILJOEN: No, I would not say that. The support from the

25 whole Duty Team in Brent and my seniors and team

160



1 managers was very good. So we had an open door policy

2 where I had supervision -- where I could get supervision

3 throughout the day whenever I needed it and the other

4 Duty members, I mean, we all supported each other. So

5 it took a time to adapt but I would not say that it made

6 it difficult for me to work as a social worker in Brent.

7 MS GIBSON: There must have been, however, many differences

8 between social work practice in England and in South

9 Africa to adjust to; is that fair or is it really quite

10 similar?

11 MS VILJOEN: I would not say -- the only differences --

12 I think social work is social work. The difference was

13 that in South Africa the case load is much bigger than

14 in the UK, and like I said it is more generic social

15 work. I mean, you work with adults and with children

16 whereas in England it is more specialised. So I would

17 say that is the only real big difference in social work

18 but the criteria for child in need and child protection

19 is just the same.

20 MS GIBSON: Did you find it easy to familiarise yourself

21 with the Children Act and the provisions governing work

22 with children in the United Kingdom?

23 MS VILJOEN: Yes. On my arrival in the UK I bought myself

24 the Children Act so I worked it through and I always had

25 the manual with me, the Children Act, I always had it

161



1 with me so I could always refer back to it if I was not

2 clear about something.

3 MS GIBSON: Did the senior management in Brent know of your

4 own -- your familiarisation with the Children Act that

5 you have done this yourself?

6 MS VILJOEN: I remember when I came for the interview at

7 Brent we actually -- part of the interview was

8 consisting of a couple of questions about the Act, and

9 I was quite familiar with the questions when they asked

10 it. But they did not ask how I knew about it. It was

11 just I knew it. They did not ask me.

12 MS GIBSON: When you arrived at Brent we know that you

13 received a series of manuals relating to child

14 protection procedures as practised in Brent. Were you

15 allocated a time to read those manuals?

16 MS VILJOEN: I cannot remember. When I first came to Brent

17 I had to shadow another social worker for I cannot

18 remember how many days, but there was a couple of days

19 that I did not really actually do social work, I just

20 shadowed another social worker on the Duty Team that had

21 been there for quite some time or longer than I had been

22 there. I was not sure how long she had been there, and

23 after that I started working.

24 But I did not really -- they did not really give me

25 a specific period of time. I felt more confident after

162



1 starting, after answering phones and taking referrals.

2 That was totally up to me then.

3 MS GIBSON: How long was it before you went out yourself to

4 do home visits?

5 MS VILJOEN: I cannot remember.

6 MS GIBSON: Can you help whether it was between days, weeks

7 or months of your arrival on the Brent team?

8 MS VILJOEN: I would say within two weeks but I did not go

9 alone. We never went alone on home visits. It was

10 usually two Duty workers on home visits.

11 MS GIBSON: Would the other Duty worker accompanying you be

12 more experienced or of a similar level of experience to

13 you?

14 MS VILJOEN: I was the last one there to join the team. The

15 team stayed quite constant while I was there, and I was

16 the last one to join the team. So there was a time

17 period of about two or three weeks or a couple of months

18 which started prior to me. So I would not say they had

19 more experience because we finished -- the South African

20 social workers finished with their degrees in the same

21 year that I finished my degree. So they did not have

22 more experience in social work, I would say. They were

23 just in Brent for longer than I was there.

24 MS GIBSON: So was the purpose of two people going on

25 a visit more to give the other person moral support than

163



1 that the other worker was necessarily, if you like,

2 supervising your work?

3 MS VILJOEN: Yes. I would say for moral support as well as

4 just for the safety to go out, two workers. Sometimes

5 it is good just to have someone that is a witness with

6 you if there is something that you have seen or heard

7 that you need a witness for. So that was always our

8 policy to go out as two workers. If it was a case that

9 I have been to before and knew the people or something,

10 I would sometimes go on my own, but then I was familiar

11 with the people and with the case as well. But if it

12 was a new allocation, we went on visits, two social

13 workers.

14 MS GIBSON: You say in your statement that most of your work

15 consisted of taking telephone referrals; is that

16 correct?

17 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

18 MS GIBSON: With some home visits but mainly telephone

19 referrals?

20 MS VILJOEN: Yes.

21 MS GIBSON: And that most of your visits were the first

22 visit only?

23 MS VILJOEN: Yes.

24 MS GIBSON: Did you feel that you were able to conduct very

25 effective initial assessments with the time constraints

164



1 that you were working under?

2 MS VILJOEN: If I went on a referral and I was concerned

3 about something and I thought that it needed more

4 attention, I would put it in my case notes and say that

5 this needed to be allocated to a long-term social worker

6 because of -- we did not keep a case load, and if there

7 were any more social problems that needed to be

8 addressed, I would tell that to my senior social worker

9 who would then pass it on to a Long Term Team.

10 MS GIBSON: Were there problems in passing on work from your

11 team to the Long Term Team that you were aware of?

12 MS VILJOEN: Yes, there were problems definitely. The Long

13 Term Team, I think there was a lot of -- there was

14 a shortage of staff. So the Long Term Team had case

15 loads that were also very high. So it took some time

16 for a case to be allocated to a Long Term Team and

17 especially I knew that -- I know that I held on to

18 a couple of cases for some time, but if it was something

19 serious we would have taken it up with the seniors and

20 tell them that it needed immediate attention but there

21 was definitely a problem passing on, and that was

22 something that came out from -- all the other social

23 workers felt the same about that.

24 MS GIBSON: Would you say that your team was working under

25 considerable pressure at this time between May

165



1 and December of 1999?

2 MS VILJOEN: I would not say pressure, but there was a lot

3 of -- the case loads -- I mean, the people coming in

4 were quite high. It was also the time that the Kosovan

5 crisis was going on, and all the refugees came into the

6 country and there was a lot of unaccompanied minors and

7 they needed to be housed and that was very

8 time-consuming. So the case loads were very high and

9 the stress is high as well. But we just always -- the

10 group, the Duty Team was a very close team as well so we

11 really kept each other's morale quite high and supported

12 each other as far as we could.

13 MS GIBSON: At that time -- you have mentioned the wave of

14 Kosovan refugees that you were dealing with. Did you

15 feel that your team had become more of a housing team

16 than a social work team at that time?

17 MS VILJOEN: I would not really say that we were just

18 a housing team, although the housing problem was quite

19 a big issue. But I would not say that we were just

20 housing people because we did not always have the

21 resources to do so either. So, no, I would not say that

22 it was more a housing team.

23 MS GIBSON: Can you tell us anything about relations between

24 your team and the Child Protection Team who we know

25 shared the same floor in the offices at Brent Social

166



1 Services?

2 MS VILJOEN: Yes. Like I said, we shared the same room and

3 we knew each other. If there was something that I was

4 not sure of, because the Duty Team would usually take

5 a telephone referral if it is a child in need -- either

6 way, if there was a child in need or a child protection

7 referral, and just take down all the details and then

8 pass it on to our seniors who would then pass it on to

9 the manager and he would then pass it on to the other

10 manager, the Child Protection Manager. But we all got

11 along very well and if there was anything that I was not

12 clear about, or just some support from them, we were

13 really a close team. Although we were two separate

14 teams we were very close and we worked closely as well.

15 MS GIBSON: Were you aware of any disputes between your team

16 and the Child Protection Team, in particular the manager

17 of your team, Edward Armstrong, and the manager of the

18 Child Protection Team relating to categorisation of

19 cases?

20 MS VILJOEN: No, I am not aware of any of that.

21 MS GIBSON: Can I ask you now about administrative support

22 when you were working in the office? We have heard

23 evidence from Edward Armstrong already about faxes

24 coming into the office being allowed to pile up on the

25 floor, and the general impression of a fairly chaotic

167



1 office. Does that accord with your impression at the

2 time you were working there?

3 MS VILJOEN: I would not say that. I know that the

4 Emergency Duty Team, if they took a referral throughout

5 the night or at the One Stop Shop, they would fax it to

6 us and our team would collect the faxes from the fax

7 machine in the morning and the senior social worker

8 would log it into the diary that she kept. So I could

9 not -- I will not say that I ever saw faxes lying around

10 on the floor.

11 MS GIBSON: Were there delays in conducting administrative

12 checks?

13 MS VILJOEN: Yes, definitely. The admin workers were

14 relentlessly overworked. There was a lot of backlog,

15 and the cases were piling up and there were definitely

16 problems. And I remember Martin Punch, the

17 administrative worker, saying on a couple of occasions

18 that there was a problem with the admin for the logging

19 of the new cases and the checks that the cases were

20 known.

21 MS GIBSON: Were you ever aware of files going missing in

22 the office?

23 MS VILJOEN: No, I was not aware of any of that because we

24 did not really work with files. I mean, that was more

25 the Long Term Team. I was not aware of any files going

168



1 missing.

2 MS GIBSON: So you would be working more just with the

3 referral forms than seeing complete files; is that

4 right?

5 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

6 MS GIBSON: You mention in your statement that when you

7 wanted an in-depth check to be carried out that you

8 would stand behind the administrative officer while that

9 was done. Was that your way of ensuring it was done

10 quickly? You really had to do that to make sure the job

11 was done?

12 MS VILJOEN: Yes.

13 MS GIBSON: If you had not done that, would there have been

14 a delay which may have caused problems in your

15 effectively dealing with the case?

16 MS VILJOEN: I would say so, yes. Because most of the times

17 we needed to interrupt the admin workers with their

18 other work asking them to do a check because we

19 sometimes got telephone calls from other boroughs asking

20 us if a child was known to our borough, and we would

21 then interrupt the admin worker standing behind him like

22 I said or next to him and just asking him to do this

23 check for us while the person was hanging on, you know,

24 on the phone. So I think that was very disruptive for

25 them as well, for the admin workers.

169



1 MS GIBSON: Can I now ask you about your involvement with

2 Victoria's case. We know at the time that you were

3 dealing with the case that she was known as Anna Kouao.

4 Do you recall receiving a referral on 21st June in

5 relation to a child called Anna with no surname given at

6 the time?

7 MS VILJOEN: I have no recollection of that. If I did take

8 a referral, telephone referral, I would have written it

9 down on a referral sheet, a D2 referral sheet and then

10 passed it on to my senior because that was the practice

11 to do so. But I have no recollection of taking any

12 phone calls, from recollection, with Anna on the 21st.

13 MS GIBSON: The reason I ask is that it seems there may be

14 papers missing from the file at Brent; just to see if

15 you have any memory at all of that because

16 Edward Armstrong recalls that a social worker in the

17 team took a referral on 21st June in relation to a child

18 called Anna who was wetting herself. Does any of that

19 jog your memory?

20 MS VILJOEN: No, nothing.

21 MS GIBSON: Was there a general problem in the office with

22 any referral forms going missing? One imagines that

23 that might have happened when you were dealing with

24 loose sheets of paper.

25 MS VILJOEN: After I took this referral, I would then pass

170



1 it on to my senior social worker or the team manager if

2 the team, one of the seniors was not available and they

3 would then log it into the diary that they kept. So

4 I cannot say if anything went missing because after it

5 left my hands I did not have anything to do with it

6 again. So I cannot say if any of the referral forms

7 went missing. Not that I can recall.

8 MS GIBSON: Did you ever pass referral forms directly to the

9 Child Protection Team, for example, rather than going

10 through your senior and through your manager?

11 MS VILJOEN: No. No, we always passed the referral forms to

12 our senior social worker or, if she was not available,

13 one of them was not available, we would then pass it to

14 our own team manager who would then discuss it with the

15 Child Protection Manager.

16 MS GIBSON: What would happen if none of those people were

17 available at the time that you took the referral?

18 MS VILJOEN: There was always a senior social worker

19 available, either Monica Bridgeman or Pauline Phillips.

20 They never left the building at the same time. When

21 I needed them, there was always one available.

22 MS GIBSON: You say in your answers to the additional

23 questions asked by the Inquiry that you do not recall

24 contacting Ealing Social Services on 21st June to speak

25 to Godfrey Victor about case responsibility. Can I ask

171



1 you: do you know or did you have contact while you were

2 at Brent with Godfrey Victor?

3 MS VILJOEN: I have thought about this really very

4 intensively but I have no recollection of speaking to

5 Godfrey Victor at any time.

6 MS GIBSON: Would it have been usual for you to have

7 discussed case responsibility with someone from another

8 borough? I mean, would that be something that you would

9 ever have done?

10 MS VILJOEN: Yes, if it was necessary to do so, I would

11 discuss it with another borough, yes. I would also

12 phone another borough to see if a case was known to

13 them, like they would do -- phoning Brent, asking if an

14 application is known to us.

15 MS GIBSON: Can you help with whether you recall having any

16 contact with Ealing Social Services and discussing case

17 responsibility with them over any cases during this

18 period?

19 MS VILJOEN: I have no recollection of any case that

20 I discussed with Ealing.

21 MS GIBSON: You say no recollection of any case; I am not

22 asking now about particular cases but just generally.

23 Can you remember having any contact with Ealing Social

24 Services about case responsibility?

25 MS VILJOEN: I cannot remember. I mean, there might have

172



1 been times that I phoned Ealing and other boroughs as

2 well but I cannot remember.

3 MS GIBSON: Can you help with whether there were regular

4 disputes with other local authorities about whose case

5 it happened to be, just generally?

6 MS VILJOEN: I have not been in a dispute with any other

7 borough. If it was necessary for us to find out whose

8 responsibility it is, it would either be one of the

9 senior social workers or the team manager that would

10 take on that responsibility and not one of the Duty

11 social workers.

12 MS GIBSON: I just want to ask you to look at a document

13 from the Brent Social Services file to see if you can

14 help with the origin of this document. It gives an

15 address at Nicoll Road and it is in handwriting. I just

16 want to see whether it is your handwriting and whether

17 you can help with that. It will be put up on the

18 screen.

19 MS VILJOEN: Was that --

20 MS GIBSON: It is at page reference volume 5, page 15.

21 MS VILJOEN: Yes, I see it quite clearly.

22 MS GIBSON: You see it clearly. Firstly, can I ask you is

23 that your handwriting?

24 MS VILJOEN: No.

25 MS GIBSON: Have you seen that handwritten note before?

173



1 MS VILJOEN: No, never.

2 MS GIBSON: Thank you. Can I ask you now about the

3 15th July referral which we know that you dealt with

4 from Dr Dempster. If you can just have a look at the

5 page, the page reference for that is volume 5/37. Just

6 wait for that to go up on the screen. It is probably

7 not a very good copy.

8 MS VILJOEN: I have a copy with me.

9 MS GIBSON: Well, it may help if you have a look at that.

10 MS VILJOEN: Okay. It is not very clear on the screen so

11 I would rather look at my copy that I have.

12 MS GIBSON: If you could have a look at that. I really

13 wanted to have a look at that with you to see if that

14 particular document assisted with your memory of those

15 events. Can you tell us whether you have now any

16 independent recollection, taking that particular

17 referral from Dr Dempster?

18 MS VILJOEN: I have not got any independent recollection.

19 I have also asked them to send me this referral, so

20 I could read through it and see if I could remember

21 anything. This is my handwriting and I took this --

22 definitely took this referral but I cannot recall the

23 telephone conversation that I had with Dr Dempster.

24 MS GIBSON: We know from Michelle Hines' note that she asked

25 for Dr Dempster to fax through some information

174



1 confirming their diagnosis of scabies, and I just wanted

2 you to have a look at that and see if you recall

3 receiving this document. It is at volume 5/12.

4 MS VILJOEN: I have not got a copy of that with me.

5 MS GIBSON: Well we will put it up on the screen and I hope

6 it is a better photocopy.

7 MS VILJOEN: Me too.

8 MS GIBSON: Just from the top, do you recall having seen

9 that fax at the time?

10 MS VILJOEN: I have got a copy like that one with me.

11 I cannot recall seeing this fax at the time. They have

12 sent me a copy of that just to refresh my memory but

13 I cannot remember that I have seen this fax at that

14 time. We dealt with so many cases and so many faxes and

15 referrals that came through, I really cannot remember

16 this specific one.

17 MS GIBSON: The reason I ask is that Michelle Hines in her

18 file recording asks Dr Dempster to send that through,

19 and Dr Dempster said that she had already sent it

20 through to the Duty social worker that she had been

21 speaking to, and I assume that would have been you given

22 the referral.

23 MS VILJOEN: Yes --

24 MS GIBSON: And I just wondered if you could assist with

25 whether you received that and what you remember doing

175



1 with that referral. If you cannot, then please say so.

2 MS VILJOEN: I cannot remember what I have done with it, but

3 if Dr Dempster sent it through and I was working on the

4 case at that stage I would have attached it to my

5 referral form. But I cannot remember.

6 MS GIBSON: Can I ask you, when you were dealing with the

7 case and you had your referral form which we have

8 already looked at, were there any other papers attached

9 to that?

10 MS VILJOEN: I would not -- I cannot remember if there were

11 any papers attached to it. If there was any necessary

12 papers that needed to go with this referral form, it was

13 practice to attach it to your referral form and then

14 hand it to the senior social worker or the team manager.

15 So if there was not any papers attached to my referral

16 form, I would say there was not any necessary papers

17 that needed to be attached or there was not any papers

18 to attach to it, except for Dr Dempster's -- the fax

19 that she sent through, the one that is on the screen

20 now.

21 MS GIBSON: Do you recall whether there was a file at the

22 time that you were dealing with the case on the 15th

23 called simply "Anna"?

24 MS VILJOEN: No, I do not recall. I have not seen such

25 a file.

176



1 MS GIBSON: Would you have ensured that any administrative

2 checks were carried out following the referral from

3 Dr Dempster that you received on 15th July before

4 passing it on to your senior?

5 MS VILJOEN: Sorry, could you just repeat that question?

6 MS GIBSON: Would you have carried out administrative index

7 checks in relation to this child before passing on the

8 referral to your senior?

9 MS VILJOEN: No. I would just write down the referral and

10 then pass it on to my senior or my team manager who

11 would then decide which action they should take on this

12 case.

13 MS GIBSON: Can you assist in this case with which of your

14 seniors you passed this referral to?

15 MS VILJOEN: Sorry, can I just ask you if you could maybe

16 take this off the screen so I can see you again?

17 MS GIBSON: Is that better?

18 MS VILJOEN: No, it is still on the screen. The fax from

19 Dr Dempster is still on my screen.

20 MS GIBSON: We will see if we can sort it out.

21 MS VILJOEN: Thanks, you are back.

22 MS GIBSON: Okay. I was asking you whether you recall which

23 of your seniors you passed the referral on to in this

24 case.

25 MS VILJOEN: I cannot remember which senior it was, but

177



1 because Pauline Phillips was my supervisor, so if she

2 was available at the time it would have been

3 Pauline Phillips.

4 MS GIBSON: Can I ask you whether you were aware while you

5 were dealing with this case of a match being made with

6 this referral relating to the Central Middlesex Hospital

7 and an earlier unanimous referral dated either 18th June

8 or 21st June?

9 MS VILJOEN: I was not aware of that.

10 MS GIBSON: There was a visit conducted by Lori Hobbs and

11 Monica Bridgeman on 14th July relating to this case we

12 know now, but were you aware at that time of that visit

13 and the link between that case and the case of the child

14 admitted to Central Middlesex?

15 MS VILJOEN: No, I was not aware of the link. We would not

16 discuss the cases with each other. The senior would

17 know that you went on a home visit and what the address

18 is and the person that you are going to visit but it was

19 not necessary that the other social workers on the Duty

20 Team knew where you were going or which visit you were

21 doing. I was not aware that this case was already -- it

22 was already referred to Brent.

23 MS GIBSON: You say that you do not recall seeing Kouao or

24 Victoria at any stage during your dealings with the

25 case; is that right?

178



1 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

2 MS GIBSON: The reason I ask is that Edward Armstrong in his

3 statement recalls you meeting with Kouao and Victoria at

4 your office and referring them back to Ealing. Are you

5 quite clear that that did not happen?

6 MS VILJOEN: I cannot remember. Like I said in my --

7 I think it was in my questions as well, I cannot say it

8 was this specific case. I remember a lady and a child,

9 a French speaking lady came into the office and

10 Mr Armstrong asked one of the other workers because she

11 could speak French just to go and tell the lady to go

12 back to another borough, I cannot say which borough, and

13 I cannot say that it was this specific case, you know,

14 Victoria's case. I cannot say.

15 MS GIBSON: Did you have any direct involvement with that

16 particular case involving Lindsay Webber? Do you

17 remember speaking to the person that Lindsay was

18 speaking to in French?

19 MS VILJOEN: No. The person that Lindsay spoke to could

20 only speak French. I could not have spoken to her

21 because she could not really understand English very

22 well. But I had no -- I mean, I cannot recall any of

23 that. I cannot recall that I have seen them or spoken

24 to them at any stage.

25 MS GIBSON: When you say that the person only spoke French,

179



1 is that the impression that you got from Lindsay Webber

2 or is that from your own memory of speaking to that

3 French speaking person?

4 MS VILJOEN: I really do not know why -- the reason I think

5 Eddie would ask Lindsay to speak to this lady in French,

6 if she could understand English why would he ask her to

7 go and say it in French? So that was my impression,

8 that she did not understand English very well, and that

9 is why he asked someone to go and speak in French to

10 her.

11 MS GIBSON: Thank you very much, Ms Viljoen. If you wait

12 there, there may be some more questions from your own

13 representative.

14 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I now invite Ms Okoye to ask you

15 any questions she wishes, Ms~Viljoen.

16 MS OKOYE: Good morning again. Just a few questions. The

17 first one: would it be right to say that you do not have

18 any independent recollection of specific cases whilst

19 you were in Brent?

20 MS VILJOEN: Cases in general?

21 MS OKOYE: Yes, of specific cases, in particular this one.

22 MS VILJOEN: No, the case loads -- I mean, the Duty Team was

23 very busy and the phones would ring constantly and we

24 would take referrals all the time. So I cannot remember

25 one specific case because we did not really hold on to

180



1 the cases for very long. We just did the first

2 assessments, I cannot really remember specific cases.

3 MS OKOYE: If I could concentrate on Victoria's case, is it

4 right that you do not have any independent recollection

5 of any specific case in point that you may have done on

6 that particular case?

7 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

8 MS OKOYE: Just to move on, you have been asked about the

9 relationship between the Duty Team and the Child in Need

10 Team and what the relationship was like. It is correct

11 to say that it was not a good and helpful working

12 environment in Brent as far as you were concerned?

13 MS VILJOEN: Yes, that is right.

14 MS OKOYE: It is also right to say that you do not simply

15 depend on your South African colleagues; you depended on

16 the whole team and the whole team gave its support?

17 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

18 MS OKOYE: As far as your managers were concerned, did you

19 feel they gave you the appropriate support to carry out

20 your tasks?

21 MS VILJOEN: Yes. I got supervision on quite a regular

22 basis, informal and formal supervision, and there was

23 also an open door policy in our office that if

24 Mr Armstrong was available at that time you could go

25 into his office and discuss a case with him. Otherwise,

181



1 if he was not available, you could just ask him if you

2 could see him later on and he always made time to

3 discuss cases if it was necessary for us to discuss

4 something with him.

5 MS OKOYE: You mention that at the time you were at Brent it

6 was quite busy and it was quite pressurised and there

7 were very little resources. How did you feel that your

8 team coped with the pressure at the time?

9 MS VILJOEN: Our team really got along very well. All of us

10 were quite young social workers and we would after work

11 sometimes go out for supper together or something, and

12 just -- just to keep the morale in the team high

13 I suppose. So we really supported each other and if

14 there was a crisis everyone would help. They would not

15 leave you on your own to deal with it on your own.

16 Everyone was always willing to give the necessary

17 support and help as far as they could.

18 MS OKOYE: Did that apply to your seniors as well?

19 MS VILJOEN: Yes.

20 MS OKOYE: You have been asked about your experiences before

21 taking up employment in Brent and how it compared to the

22 specialist Child In Need Team that you were involved in.

23 Just to be clear about your answer, you indicated that

24 you were quite confident in carrying out your child in

25 need assessments whilst you were in Brent.

182



1 MS VILJOEN: That is correct.

2 MS OKOYE: Would that be correct?

3 MS VILJOEN: That is correct, yes.

4 MS OKOYE: We have also heard from Lori Hobbs that the

5 procedures and the reporting of assessments were very

6 strictly adhered to by your managers. Is that your

7 experience as well?

8 MS VILJOEN: Yes.

9 MS OKOYE: I do not think I have anything further.

10 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much indeed, Ms Okoye.

11 Miss Viljoen, can I ask you a couple of questions

12 for clarification? The first one if we could put back

13 on the screen that handwritten message that Ms Gibson

14 asked you about. Did you say that you had not seen this

15 before?

16 MS VILJOEN: I have not seen it, no.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: Could you help us: do you know whose

18 handwriting that is?

19 MS VILJOEN: No, I cannot remember seeing that handwriting

20 before.

21 THE CHAIRMAN: So you cannot help us. Okay. Thank you very

22 much. The second question I want to ask you was you

23 mentioned that the Duty Team passed on cases, they did

24 the initial assessment and then they passed on the cases

25 as best they could to the other team, the Child

183



1 Protection Team.

2 MS VILJOEN: Sorry, can you just repeat that?

3 THE CHAIRMAN: Sorry, you said that the Duty Team took the

4 referrals, made an initial assessment and then passed on

5 the case.

6 MS VILJOEN: Yes, we would pass it on to a senior social

7 worker who would then pass it on to the team manager.

8 If the senior was not available, which did not happen at

9 the time that I was at Brent, we would give it directly

10 to the team manager.

11 THE CHAIRMAN: But then they would pass on the case to the

12 Child Protection Team?

13 MS VILJOEN: Yes. Our team manager Mr Armstrong would

14 discuss it with the team manager of the -- with the

15 Child Protection Team to see whether it was child in

16 need or child protection.

17 THE CHAIRMAN: And in that case he would pass it on to one

18 of those teams or the Long Term Team?

19 MS VILJOEN: Yes, that is correct.

20 THE CHAIRMAN: Were you aware of cases coming back to you?

21 MS VILJOEN: Yes. I mean there were some other cases that

22 came on that were -- came in that I would say they was

23 border cases and sometimes after Mr Armstrong and

24 Tina Roper discussed the case and they felt that it was

25 child in need, then the case would come back not to the

184



1 specific social worker that took the referral but they

2 would be allocated to one of the Duty social workers to

3 either do a home visit or an office visit.

4 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Could you just explain to us what

5 your experience was in working with the One Stop Shop in

6 Brent?

7 MS VILJOEN: The One Stop Shop would sometimes either fax

8 through referrals to us or sometimes someone would,

9 because it was just over the road, sometimes bring in

10 referrals to us, but they also sent a lot of people to

11 the office for emergency -- then we did emergency office

12 visits. They did not have an appointment with us but we

13 needed to see them. I can remember that there were

14 times that the One Stop Shop and the Duty Team that

15 there was -- I will not say that they were unhappy with

16 each other but there were some disputes between them.

17 I cannot really recall about what but I know that there

18 were times that they were in dispute about some of the

19 cases.

20 THE CHAIRMAN: From your perception, if you could share with

21 us your perception, what was the difference in the

22 responsibilities between the One Stop Shop and the Duty

23 Team?

24 MS VILJOEN: The One Stop Shop, they sent a lot of

25 unaccompanied minors to us. They would help all the

185



1 people above a certain age, I cannot exactly remember

2 what their ages, whether it was minors, they would send

3 it to the Social Work Team, to the Duty Team then. They

4 did not handle any unaccompanied minors or minors.

5 THE CHAIRMAN: What was the reason for the difficulties,

6 then, that you mentioned, that there were sometimes

7 tensions between the One Stop Shop and the Duty Team?

8 Could you explain what the reasons for that tension

9 were?

10 MS VILJOEN: I would say it was more at the time of the

11 Kosovan refugees. There was always language barrier and

12 we always needed interpreters to work with the Kosovans

13 and there was also a -- I mean there were a lot of cases

14 that the children said they were unaccompanied but later

15 they found that they had family with them in the UK. So

16 I think that was really something that there was quite

17 some disputes about. The One Stop Shop would sometimes

18 see them first and then send them to us. I cannot

19 remember what the disputes were about, but I remember

20 hearing the seniors talking about the One Stop Shop and

21 that there were problems. I do not know what about but

22 I know that there were problems.

23 THE CHAIRMAN: That is fine, Ms Viljoen. Just a couple of

24 other questions, then, please. The first was: you

25 mentioned that you cannot recall any -- you have not had

186



1 any contact with Anna as she was known or Ms Kouao?

2 MS VILJOEN: That is correct. I cannot recall.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: Did you ever have any contact with a family

4 called Cameron?

5 MS VILJOEN: No, I cannot remember. If I had contact with

6 that family, there would be, if I took the referral, it

7 would be in my handwriting or there would be case notes

8 to a referral because it was my policy to always take

9 case notes, even if it was just a telephone call.

10 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, we have a slight disadvantage in that

11 some case notes are missing.

12 MS VILJOEN: Oh.

13 THE CHAIRMAN: That is why we need to ask you these

14 questions.

15 MS VILJOEN: Okay.

16 THE CHAIRMAN: That is fine. Thank you very much. I will

17 just ask Ms Gibson if she has any other questions.

18 MS GIBSON: No, I have no further questions.

19 THE CHAIRMAN: Well, thank you very much indeed, Ms Viljoen.

20 We very much appreciate your help in giving evidence to

21 the Inquiry.

22 MS VILJOEN: It is a pleasure and good luck to all of you.

23 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Goodbye.

24 (Video ended)

25 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you Ms Gibson and Ms Okoye.

187



1 MS GIBSON: Thank you, sir. I believe there is now an

2 application from Haringey Council.

3 THE CHAIRMAN: Right. Ms Lawson.

4 MS LAWSON: Sir, there are two matters that I want to raise,

5 and since one of them at least relates to evidence which

6 we may have tomorrow and we have rather more time today

7 than we are likely to have tomorrow, it is agreed

8 between myself and Mr Garnham that I will make it now.

9 The matter which it relates to is this: you may

10 recall that during the course of Miss Arthurworrey's

11 evidence she was asked about and asked to name other

12 individuals in the office in North Tottenham in the

13 context of what was going on in the office and

14 particular individuals who -- one in particular who so

15 far as we are able to ascertain has no direct

16 involvement in the subject matter of this Inquiry, was

17 so named.

18 This has caused me to be concerned about what the

19 proper way forward is to deal with people who have some

20 involvement with Haringey, may have worked in the same

21 office but who otherwise have no connection with the

22 subject matter of this Inquiry. Because it seems to me

23 right that, unless we are going to go down the road

24 where the only question is, "Do you now or have you ever

25 worked for Haringey ..." there ought to be a balance

188



1 struck between protecting the anonymity of such

2 individuals and the proper openness and transparency

3 which the Inquiry wants for its work.

4 I therefore invited Mr Garnham to consider some

5 proposals to try to strike what seemed to me to be the

6 right balance. As he does not agree with them, he is

7 inviting me to make the application to you now and for

8 convenience I hand in the proposals I am making about

9 how we should treat this. (Handed)

10 Sir, as it suggests -- and I am reading it out only

11 so everybody else will know what is being suggested --

12 before Counsel to the Inquiry asks the witness for

13 a name in this situation, counsel should establish

14 whether the person concerned is someone who has either

15 made a statement to the Inquiry or is otherwise

16 concerned in Victoria's case. If they are, then that

17 person can be named in the way suggested. If they say

18 no, or they do not know, then the witness should be

19 invited to write down the name and hand that to counsel

20 who can then consider whether it is someone who falls

21 into category 1 or not. If it does then again the

22 person can be named. If it does not, then that written

23 note of the individual's name would be handed in and

24 become part of the Inquiry's papers.

25 But just as with other witnesses and people who are

189



1 named such as, for example, Ms Kouao's children by her

2 previous relationships, they have not actually been

3 named to the Inquiry. So this document would not

4 normally be included in the bundle.

5 Unless fairness to other witnesses or some other

6 compelling reason requires that that individual's name

7 be publicly disclosed, I am inviting you to say that

8 apart from those situations those individuals are

9 entitled to anonymity and I draw an analogy particularly

10 with the very careful way in which the Inquiry dealt

11 with the grievance procedure between two of the Ealing

12 witnesses, where there was a serious dispute about

13 whether that should be publicised or not.

14 If that procedure is followed, and when Counsel to

15 the Inquiry wishes to ask questions of another witness

16 which involves this particular individual, they can be

17 shown the name in writing in order simply to allow them

18 to give their evidence fully, and we adopt the same

19 procedure in relation to somebody else who is named in

20 a report or other document which again has arisen out of

21 the pursuit of other documents which have been mentioned

22 in documents which we have disclosed to the Inquiry, and

23 where the issue is not what that individual did or did

24 not do in relation to Victoria's case but, for example,

25 how the manager in the North Tottenham office handles

190



1 the situation.

2 I am not suggesting in making these proposals that

3 the latter is not a proper subject of the Inquiry, but

4 I do think that if we are to focus on Victoria and her

5 case there needs to be some limit on how many of these

6 other interesting byways we go down and that is what

7 I hope my proposals would achieve.

8 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms Lawson. Mr Garnham.

9 MR GARNHAM: Sir, Ms Lawson was kind enough to indicate the

10 nature of her submission to me in advance so that we

11 have had time to consider it. I oppose my friend's

12 application. The starting point for consideration of

13 any matter such as this is, in my submission, your

14 initial indication that this should be a public Inquiry

15 and it should be conducted openly and in public. There

16 may well be, as Ms Lawson indicates, certain exceptional

17 cases where it is necessary for you to consider adopting

18 a different course. Such a circumstance it seemed to

19 us, and I think, sir, to you as well, to arise in the

20 case of the allegations made about historical matters in

21 the case of some of the Brent social workers and we

22 devised a method of achieving both thoroughness and

23 preserving confidentiality on a matter of only

24 tangential relevance in that particular instance.

25 Ms Lawson invites you, sir, to go a good deal

191



1 further and to say that whenever the name of a person

2 crops up in the course of evidence from whom we do not

3 already have a witness statement, that it is necessary,

4 in order to preserve that person's confidentiality, for

5 us to adopt the mechanism she sets out in her note. She

6 gives as an example of that the instance that occurred

7 a few days ago when a name emerged during the course of

8 evidence relating to the management of staff in the

9 Haringey office and the atmosphere in which social

10 workers were carrying out their work. But as

11 I understand her submission, it would go wider than that

12 particular example.

13 Because this is an Inquiry and not a civil action or

14 a criminal trial, it is inevitable that we as Counsel to

15 the Inquiry will not know the answer to all the

16 questions we pose. Similarly, we will not necessarily

17 have identified every witness who is able to give

18 material evidence on all the matters that affect the

19 issues in this Inquiry. That is particularly so where

20 as in the instance cited by Ms Lawson the questions

21 emerge from documents that are discovered relatively

22 late in the day.

23 If this is to be a public Inquiry, in my submission

24 information of this sort will on occasions need to be

25 obtained and then to be explored in public and you

192



1 should hesitate long and hard before adopting any

2 procedure that involves it being dealt with in any more

3 private or secret manner.

4 The nature of an Inquiry such as this means that the

5 names of people about whom we have previously heard

6 nothing will be referred to in oral evidence, unless

7 a device such as Ms Lawson's is adopted. We then will

8 often need to explore with the person who mentions that

9 individual's name the extent and nature of their

10 involvement.

11 If your undertaking to run this Inquiry in an open

12 and transparent way is to be respected, in my submission

13 that has to be done publicly. The alternative proposed

14 by Ms Lawson involves in essence abandoning a central

15 tenet of your procedures and replacing openness with

16 private inquiry because of the risk of an individual

17 being named in a way that that individual might not find

18 comfortable. But in my submission, sir, that is an

19 inevitable consequence of this sort of Inquiry. You

20 have promised, sir, not only thoroughness but also

21 transparency. It may well be possible to continue to

22 provide the former adopting Ms Lawson's procedures, but

23 in my submission it would be difficult if not impossible

24 to provide the latter.

25 The ordinary rule ought to be in an inquiry such as

193



1 this, in my submission, that all the evidence including

2 names of individuals for whom we have not as yet

3 obtained statements should be given publicly, unless in

4 a particular case exceptional circumstances dictate

5 otherwise. Such an exceptional circumstance you found

6 arose in the case of the Brent witnesses. It is

7 conceivable it might again in the future but I would

8 urge you not to adopt the sort of blanket approach for

9 which my learned friend Ms Lawson contends.

10 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Ms Lawson and

11 Mr Garnham. You may have had notice of this -- sorry,

12 Ms Lawson, were you going to say something.

13 MS LAWSON: No. I have another application as well so

14 before you go you might as well hear that one too.

15 THE CHAIRMAN: My hesitation was simply because I was

16 writing my notes.

17 MS LAWSON: It is important to do that at the time.

18 MR GARNHAM: Sir, before you move to the second application,

19 I wonder if you should ask others.

20 MS BOYE: Sir, we have not had notice of this application so

21 I cannot say too much but just to say that my clients

22 are very concerned to hear this and I am very concerned

23 that there should be any anonymity given at all,

24 especially in the blanket way in which it is suggested.

25 It is right to say that transparency is one of your

194



1 tenets. The way in which the matters are dealt with

2 with Brent we of course understood but there was of

3 course the Ealing evidence which came to us by way of

4 public gallery and we need to make everybody aware of

5 the fact that what is happening to the parents in this

6 case is that information will of course be brought by

7 people to the parents who feel that there are things

8 they ought to know, and when such information comes to

9 light I think it is very much an issue for the integrity

10 of the Inquiry and the way your job is being perceived

11 to be done if it looks as if things are being kept

12 anonymous and there are matters which are not being

13 brought to public attention.

14 That is what the parents say at the moment, sir, but

15 I would like the opportunity to take some proper

16 instructions on everything that both Ms Lawson and

17 Mr Garnham said.

18 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms Boye.

19 MR GARNHAM: I should correct myself. It is apparent from

20 what Ms Boye said I intended to refer to the Ealing

21 Social Services and not Brent. That was a slip by me.

22 The exceptional case I had in mind was Ealing not Brent.

23 MS BOYE: I am grateful for that, sir. I was just about to

24 start on Mr Garnham about something else.

25 THE CHAIRMAN: Oh dear. Well that will save him from that

195



1 I hope. Does anyone else want to comment on this?

2 Thank you for that. Ms Lawson, you would like to make

3 a second application?

4 MS LAWSON: Yes, sir. It is probably going to get treated

5 in the same way because it involves a similar point.

6 Sir, whatever else we can be accused of I do not think

7 Haringey can be accused of not having provided documents

8 to this Inquiry but there comes a point when the straw

9 breaks the camel's back and that arose in relation to

10 a request made on the 23rd from Mr Fitzgerald for

11 a particular document. Again, sir, I do not think

12 I have quite enough copies but if I can just hand you

13 the relevant bits of the correspondence. (Handed)

14 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms Lawson.

15 MS LAWSON: On Thursday evening the Evening Standard quoted

16 extracts from a document which had come into its

17 possession. It had been provided by a councillor who

18 perhaps for understandable reasons wishes to remain

19 anonymous because it was provided in clear breach of an

20 obligation in which that document was received. It was

21 received in circumstances in which confidentiality was

22 being claimed for it and also legal professional

23 privilege. Notwithstanding that, the councillor hurried

24 off to the newspapers with it.

25 The quoted passage which has raised the Inquiry's

196



1 interest relates to a covering document which quotes --

2 if you go to the third column in the report -- a passage

3 in which the Director Anne Bristow substantially

4 reiterates the position taken by Haringey since the

5 outcome of this Inquiry; that there were failures and

6 mistakes but that it cannot -- as she puts it here, the

7 case review was unable to conclude that any of the

8 missed opportunities would necessarily have guaranteed

9 that Victoria would not have died.

10 We were then asked to produce what is referred to in

11 that article as a preface. We responded by setting out

12 the circumstances in which that document came into the

13 councillor's possession, the breach of confidentiality

14 which brought it into the public domain, and inquiring

15 why this document is said to be relevant to the

16 Inquiry's work when the Inquiry has the report itself

17 and can form its own judgment about its conclusions.

18 That in my submission remains the position.

19 Mr Fitzgerald does not agree and says it is for the

20 Inquiry to say whether it is relevant or not. But sir

21 I do say this particular instance does raise rather an

22 important point of principle. I appreciate that the

23 Inquiry has hitherto insisted that the only issue is

24 whether something is relevant, not whether there are

25 other arguments against its production.

197



1 But it does seem to me that when we have reached the

2 point at which documents which are disclosed in breach

3 of a councillor's obligation to the newspapers are

4 picked up on and we are told we must have them even when

5 on the face of the newspaper report it says nothing

6 different than our stated position in relation to this

7 Inquiry, there must come an end.

8 It is additionally a point we make in our letter of

9 the 23rd: we have really reached overload so far as the

10 documents are concerned in this case, and I do therefore

11 ask you to adjudicate on whether or not on this

12 particular occasion we should be required to produce

13 this document.

14 THE CHAIRMAN: Well, I am very happy to do so. I suppose

15 I will listen to Mr Garnham first before I say

16 something.

17 MR GARNHAM: Somewhere amongst that I take it is an

18 invitation to reply.

19 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, of course. It is just that I know what

20 my position was and is.

21 MR GARNHAM: There seem to be four points of significance

22 that Ms Lawson raises in relation to this document:

23 relevance, confidentiality, legal professional privilege

24 and overload.

25 As regards the first, relevance, it is in my

198



1 submission that the document that Mr Fitzgerald has

2 sought sight of is plainly relevant to issue F1 in your

3 list of issues since it goes to the question of what if

4 any lessons Haringey have learned as a result of

5 Victoria's case. In my submission, this request plainly

6 passes the relevance test.

7 As regards confidentiality, confidentiality may

8 indeed provide a means by which a councillor could be

9 restrained from disclosing this document to a newspaper.

10 It does not in itself provide a bar to disclosure to

11 this Inquiry pursuant to a request in exercise of your

12 statutory powers. So that in my submission would not

13 assist Ms Lawson unless she can say the balance

14 overwhelmingly favours preserving confidentiality as

15 opposed to the public interest in your seeing all

16 relevant material.

17 Third, legal professional privilege: I do not

18 understand whether Ms Lawson is claiming it. If she is,

19 it is something that ought to be looked at carefully and

20 I for one would want to reconsider my stance on this if

21 legal professional privilege was claimed. Because it

22 would be a strong case where you could properly say that

23 legal professional privilege is to be overridden. So it

24 may be that Ms Lawson will want to come back to us on

25 that.

199



1 The fourth point, overload. I know what she means

2 but I am afraid in my respectful submission the fact

3 that we have 50 volumes of documents is no ground for us

4 not having sight of the straw that appears to be

5 breaking her back.

6 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Garnham. Well I was absolutely

7 right to listen to you as ever. Ms Lawson, is there

8 anything that you want to come back to, particularly on

9 this point of legal professional privilege?

10 MS LAWSON: Yes, sir. The point was that was the basis upon

11 which the -- as you are aware, sir, council documents

12 have to be -- are subject to public disclosure unless an

13 exemption to the general right of public access is

14 claimed for them. In respect of these particular

15 documents, the basis of the claim and that was not just

16 this preface document so-called but the report itself,

17 were claimed on the basis that they were covered by

18 legal professional privilege because of the possibility

19 of legal claims arising out of them. So that is the

20 basis of it.

21 MR GARNHAM: Can I just ask my friend whether she has

22 claimed legal professional privilege as against us?

23 MS LAWSON: Sir, the difficulty is of course that the

24 Inquiry properly has the Part 8 report. So since it is

25 that which is the substance of the thing rather than

200



1 this really rather -- this additional document, I am not

2 claiming separately that the document which I am now

3 objecting is covered by legal professional privilege.

4 It was the whole package so far as the initial

5 disclosure was concerned that was covered.

6 MR GARNHAM: I think that means that my friend recognises

7 that she cannot now claim legal professional privilege

8 against the Inquiry, sir. She nods.

9 THE CHAIRMAN: Does anyone else wish to say anything on this

10 particular subject? Ms Lawson, I am grateful to you.

11 I would like to deal with the second application, if

12 I may, because I think that you may have detected -- and

13 I suspect other people have -- that I tend to take these

14 applications very, very seriously indeed and one might

15 say agonise over them as I consider them.

16 I would like to retire with the first one because

17 I want to think very carefully about the first one that

18 you have made. But with regard to the second one I must

19 say that I read this report on my way home, and I have

20 to say I found it surprising and I was concerned

21 particularly about the second part of the quote that you

22 drew my attention to. That seemed to me to be

23 a conclusion which is certainly of great importance to

24 this Inquiry, and so the next day -- the reason why

25 I reacted as I did earlier, the next day I asked that we