|
Archived Transcript for 30 November 2001:
Pages 51 to 100
51
1 MR GARNHAM: Who were they?
2 MS KOZINOS: And the practice managers. Do you want me to
3 name them all?
4 MR GARNHAM: I want to know to get a feel of who was there
5 so we can identify this meeting.
6 MS KOZINOS: It would have been the Commissioning Manager at
7 the time, it would have been --
8 MR GARNHAM: Is that David Duncan?
9 MS KOZINOS: That is right. It would have been I think
10 three team managers there at the time from what I can --
11 do you want me to name them?
12 MR GARNHAM: Please.
13 MS KOZINOS: I think Julian Green, Chris Sandercombe,
14 Mary Rice as Team Manager, Angella Mairs was also
15 present and the practice managers.
16 MR GARNHAM: Were those members of staff expressing
17 different views about the problem or were they
18 unanimous?
19 MS KOZINOS: They were unanimous about the problems.
20 MR GARNHAM: What efforts had been made by the Directorate
21 in the period between that meeting and your leaving
22 Haringey to address these problems?
23 MS KOZINOS: In terms of the Duty Investigation and
24 Assessment Team, in my opinion none. There was talk of
25 refurbishment in January and certainly by the time
52
1 I left in June none had been evident, and also, as
2 I point out in my memo, new desks and new chairs are not
3 very useful if you have no one to put behind them. And
4 I was offered in terms of this memo counselling but then
5 never given the time or --
6 MR GARNHAM: You were offered counselling?
7 MS KOZINOS: In response to my memo.
8 MR GARNHAM: By whom?
9 MS KOZINOS: By Anne Bristow.
10 MR GARNHAM: I am not going to ask you about the substantive
11 response that we now discover was made to your memo but
12 I do want to ask you just about the short form letter
13 that apparently you got in reply. It is not yet in
14 a bundle so I wonder if our witness manager could hand
15 this to you.
16 This is the memo of 7th June from Anne Bristow to
17 Ms Kozinos which we had copies of this morning. She
18 writes further to that memo. She is obviously concerned
19 about the issues you raise, about the working
20 environment at North Tottenham District Office and the
21 impact this is having on your health, wellbeing and
22 family and on the service provided to local people.
23 "I therefore wish to see you at 11 am tomorrow
24 [8th June] at my office. I will be accompanied by your
25 Assistant Director Ann Graham. I note you copied your
53
1 memo to UNISON and if it would be helpful I have no
2 objection to your bringing a friend or trade union
3 representative to the meeting."
4 Did you receive that?
5 MS KOZINOS: I did.
6 MR GARNHAM: Was there a meeting?
7 MS KOZINOS: First of all I was off sick from the pressures
8 of work. No, I did not respond to the meeting. I was
9 not physically able to.
10 MR GARNHAM: You did not attend the meeting?
11 MS KOZINOS: No, but I would also like to note that it was
12 the first contact I had with Anne Bristow in relation to
13 supporting us and I strongly felt at the time it was
14 only due from me having put this in writing rather than
15 verbally expressing these concerns that I got that
16 response.
17 MR GARNHAM: You end your memo, page 504 in the bundle, by
18 saying that you felt you could no longer carry out your
19 duties. Were you then indicating that you were going to
20 resign?
21 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
22 MR GARNHAM: Had you then decided to resign?
23 MS KOZINOS: Soon after.
24 MR GARNHAM: When you wrote this had you --
25 MS KOZINOS: No, I had not resigned at this stage.
54
1 MR GARNHAM: Did you have it in your mind to resign?
2 MS KOZINOS: No, but I was feeling incredibly pressured and
3 incredibly unwell.
4 MR GARNHAM: You say that your goodwill had been tested to
5 the limit. What do you mean by that?
6 MS KOZINOS: That there was a lack of support. Actually
7 I was -- I would say no support since the media
8 attention from December. I was asked because of
9 problems in Hornsey to deputise or act up as a team
10 manager for I&A for three months. I was just left there
11 with absolutely no contact, no support apart from the
12 community manager there at the time.
13 MR GARNHAM: You requested urgent support and guidance.
14 MS KOZINOS: It was late coming, I had requested it several
15 times before.
16 MR GARNHAM: You say it was late coming. What was it that
17 came, was that the offer of counselling?
18 MS KOZINOS: That letter, the offer, the letter I had in
19 support in terms of my -- was an offer of counselling
20 which puts the onus back on me rather than what my --
21 the concerns I am raising.
22 MR GARNHAM: It might be said the offer about counselling
23 was given due to concerns raised about your health.
24 MS KOZINOS: A token gesture if you are not given the time
25 off to go and attend it.
55
1 MR GARNHAM: I am also interested in what efforts were made
2 to provide you with guidance, which was your other
3 request. Did you receive any guidance from Ms Bristow
4 before you left?
5 MS KOZINOS: No.
6 MR GARNHAM: Had you ever been visited by Ms Bristow whilst
7 you were at the DIA Team at North Tottenham?
8 MS KOZINOS: Not the team itself, never, just that meeting
9 I referred to when we asked her to come down, the
10 meeting I referred to earlier.
11 MR GARNHAM: It was not her practice to attend the office
12 and sit and watch how things were going on or talk to
13 the staff?
14 MS KOZINOS: Not that I recall. No. No, I cannot recall.
15 MR GARNHAM: The one occasion she came down to talk to you
16 and the other managers about your concerns but otherwise
17 she did not visit your office?
18 MS KOZINOS: She did one more visit to talk to the staff
19 after, in relation to this, and I think concerns raised
20 about Lisa's suspension, I remember that.
21 MR GARNHAM: Thank you very much. I will come back to the
22 report that was apparently commissioned as a response to
23 your memo on Monday morning but I will leave that for
24 now. Can I ask you about your position in 1999, please.
25 You set out the training courses that you had attended
56
1 in paragraph 5 of your statement. Had you received any
2 training on supervision techniques?
3 MS KOZINOS: Not that I recall although I did apply for
4 a training early 2000, the early part of year 2000 but
5 I was told by the Training Department I did not get on
6 it.
7 MR GARNHAM: So you had applied for some training in
8 supervision techniques but never received any?
9 MS KOZINOS: Yes, there was not places. They gave them --
10 MR GARNHAM: Was it common that supervisors and managers
11 were expected to carry out supervisions without being
12 trained how to supervise or were you alone in that?
13 MS KOZINOS: I cannot talk for the other teams.
14 MR GARNHAM: No. If you do not know, say you do not know.
15 MS KOZINOS: I do not know about the other teams.
16 MR GARNHAM: What guidance or manuals were available to you
17 in the North Tottenham office? Was there a collection
18 of books or a bookcase or a library or something of that
19 sort?
20 MS KOZINOS: In terms of supervision?
21 MR GARNHAM: No.
22 MS KOZINOS: Generally?
23 MR GARNHAM: Other guidance.
24 MS KOZINOS: No, and we raised that as an issue. Angella
25 had a few copies of certain documents, like the
57
1 Children Act but the information in terms of documents
2 was quite limited.
3 MR GARNHAM: What about Haringey's Child Protection
4 Guidelines, the Purple Book I think it is called?
5 MS KOZINOS: Yes, we all had a copy and we had to sign for
6 that.
7 MR GARNHAM: You presumably were familiar with the Purple
8 Book?
9 MS KOZINOS: I was familiar, I did not know it inside out
10 but it was familiar, I would refer to it.
11 MR GARNHAM: Was that the sort of thing you would dip in and
12 out of or read from cover to cover or look at once
13 a month or what?
14 MS KOZINOS: When you needed clarification you would refer
15 to it.
16 MR GARNHAM: Give us a feel of how often you would have
17 resort to that book.
18 MS KOZINOS: It would depend. It is difficult to answer.
19 MR GARNHAM: Is it constantly open on your desk?
20 MS KOZINOS: No.
21 MR GARNHAM: Is it something you pick off the shelf every
22 now and again?
23 MS KOZINOS: It is on my desk. I would pick it up now and
24 again if I needed to refer to it.
25 MR GARNHAM: At the time with which we are primarily
58
1 concerned, in the summer of 1999 you were Acting Senior
2 Practitioner?
3 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
4 MR GARNHAM: You set out your main duties and
5 responsibilities in paragraph 2.1 of your statement.
6 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
7 MR GARNHAM: Could you be given volume 26A page 71. At the
8 bottom of that page there is a section headed -- I ought
9 to identify this for you, sorry. If you go back to
10 page 35, you will see the start of this document. It is
11 a series of procedures which we have heard were designed
12 by Ms Mairs in June of the previous year, 1998. Had you
13 seen that before?
14 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
15 MR GARNHAM: Go then back to page 71. The role of senior
16 practitioners is there set out. You presumably are
17 familiar with that?
18 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
19 MR GARNHAM: Was that the role as you understood it to be?
20 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
21 MR GARNHAM: In preparing the list that you have put in your
22 statement at paragraph 2.1, have you based it on that or
23 have you based it on some other document?
24 MS KOZINOS: I just gave my job description, human
25 resources, to my solicitor and she --
59
1 MR GARNHAM: You used the job description document?
2 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
3 MR GARNHAM: At the end of that paragraph, paragraph 2.1 in
4 your statement, you say that you did not have
5 responsibility during the period up until December 1999
6 for supervising other social workers.
7 MS KOZINOS: That is right, yes.
8 MR GARNHAM: But you did have responsibility, did you not,
9 for supervising the regular review of all allocated
10 cases.
11 MS KOZINOS: What review? Sorry?
12 MR GARNHAM: I am taking the words from your statement,
13 page 2 fifth bullet point. You will not need that
14 volume again, that can be taken away for the time being.
15 Go to page 2 of your statement.
16 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
17 MR GARNHAM: The fifth bullet point on that page is:
18 "Supervise and ensure the regular review of all
19 allocated cases in accordance with statutory
20 requirements, court orders, local procedures and other
21 needs of the case."
22 MS KOZINOS: No, I did not do that.
23 MR GARNHAM: I am sorry, I thought we had established that
24 what you set out in your statement was your main duties
25 and responsibilities.
60
1 MS KOZINOS: I added my job description to my statement.
2 MR GARNHAM: I am sure it is me. Go if you will, please, to
3 the very last sentence of paragraph 2.1. You say.
4 "Notwithstanding the above I would point out that
5 I did not at that time have a responsibility for
6 supervising any social workers."
7 Now, I take that to mean, but tell me if I am wrong,
8 that despite what it says in your job description you
9 did not in fact supervise social workers?
10 MS KOZINOS: No, not as a senior practitioner.
11 MR GARNHAM: You are agreeing with me?
12 MS KOZINOS: Absolutely.
13 MR GARNHAM: Yes. Go back to 204. I had taken the fifth
14 bullet point to be something different, namely
15 supervising and reviewing allocated cases. You see the
16 difference?
17 MS KOZINOS: Yes, I do.
18 MR GARNHAM: Was it your job as you set out at paragraph 2.1
19 to supervise and ensure the regular review of all
20 allocated cases?
21 MS KOZINOS: I did not supervise those social workers. This
22 is part of the job description and it was not that --
23 that then was not in practice, I did not supervise
24 social workers as Senior Practitioner.
25 MR GARNHAM: There is a distinction between supervising
61
1 social workers in what they are doing and looking over
2 their cases to check the cases are up to scratch. Are
3 you saying you did neither of those two things?
4 MS KOZINOS: I would action cases while Senior Practitioner
5 on Duty, which is advising, finding guidance and
6 consultation and also directions and decisions on cases,
7 but on Duty, which are unallocated.
8 MR GARNHAM: But did you not see it as your job to ensure
9 the regular review of all allocated cases?
10 MS KOZINOS: No.
11 MR GARNHAM: Despite the fact that is in your job
12 description?
13 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
14 MR GARNHAM: That must put you in a rather curious position.
15 You have a job description given to you presumably by
16 Personnel or Human Resources or whatever it is called
17 which includes one significant piece of work for you,
18 which you understand is not to be part of your job.
19 MS KOZINOS: No, I did not say it was not part of my job but
20 we were never asked to do that specific part of the job
21 description.
22 MR GARNHAM: So the position is this, is it, that you are
23 given a job description but you take the view that you
24 do not have to do the jobs on it unless you are
25 expressly instructed?
62
1 MS KOZINOS: No, that job description or the role of senior
2 practitioner was very well established before I took up
3 my post.
4 MR GARNHAM: And it is different from what was in the job
5 description you were given?
6 MS KOZINOS: Obviously, from looking at this.
7 MR GARNHAM: What did you do about that? That must have
8 concerned you.
9 MS KOZINOS: No, it did not.
10 MR GARNHAM: It appears from to me that personnel think you
11 are doing one thing and you think you are doing
12 something different, does it not?
13 MS KOZINOS: I am not responsible for writing up or drawing
14 up the job descriptions.
15 MR GARNHAM: No, you are responsible for doing the job.
16 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
17 MR GARNHAM: I want to understand what it is you thought
18 your job was and whether you appreciated that there was
19 a difference between what you thought your job was and
20 what your employers thought your job was.
21 MS KOZINOS: My team manager was very clear in regards to
22 the structure she gave me and I never was informed that
23 I was not doing any part of my job description.
24 MR GARNHAM: I see. But this difference of view as to what
25 you were supposed to be doing was never reduced to
63
1 writing, or you never wrote and said, "Excuse me, I see
2 on my job description I am supposed to be supervising
3 allocated cases but it has been made clear to me by my
4 manager that I am to do no such thing"?
5 MS KOZINOS: No, I did not put it in writing and it was not
6 a concern at the time.
7 MR GARNHAM: But how much more of the job description that
8 you list in paragraph 2.1 are we to take it that you did
9 not actually do? I mean you write this statement to
10 help the Inquiry and you say: "The main duties and
11 responsibilities of a Senior Practitioner were as
12 follows", and you set out a page and a half of bullet
13 points.
14 MS KOZINOS: No, what I did was attach my job description,
15 what I actually said my function was actually above.
16 MR GARNHAM: I see. So your official responsibilities are
17 those four items we have there and the rest we can
18 disregard, can we?
19 MS KOZINOS: No.
20 MR GARNHAM: Tell us what the position is then please.
21 MS KOZINOS: They were our main duties and having looked at
22 this job description there is some that were implemented
23 and some that were not.
24 MR GARNHAM: And how do we know which are part of your job
25 and which are not?
64
1 MS KOZINOS: I do not know. I can only tell you --
2 MR GARNHAM: You go through them.
3 MS KOZINOS: I can only tell you the standard practice at
4 the time and how we worked.
5 MR GARNHAM: You go through your job description as you have
6 listed it in your statement under the heading "main
7 duties and responsibilities", and you tell us which ones
8 you felt were not your job.
9 MS KOZINOS: Not not my job but we might have not been
10 practising. I did not say it was not my job.
11 MR GARNHAM: Sorry, that is a distinction that is escaping
12 me for the moment. You are not saying it was not your
13 job, you are saying it was not a job you did?
14 MS KOZINOS: You are asking me, sorry, you are asking me
15 which out of this list was I working?
16 MR GARNHAM: I foolishly assumed that when you listed in
17 your statement your main duties and responsibilities in
18 your job as a senior practitioner that that was your
19 job. It is obvious from what you have said that you did
20 not regard it as your job and you have listed it here
21 for some other reason and it is important for us to
22 understand what you did consider your job to be. Now,
23 which of these jobs do you think was yours? Let us go
24 through them.
25 Was it your job to receive and process referrals
65
1 which were judged to meet departmental eligibility
2 criteria?
3 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
4 MR GARNHAM: Was it your job to investigate cases where
5 children are allegedly at risk?
6 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
7 MR GARNHAM: And the rest of that, to develop emergency and
8 long-term protection plans as required?
9 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
10 MR GARNHAM: Was it your job to assess the needs of service
11 users in accordance with national and local procedures
12 and standards?
13 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
14 MR GARNHAM: Was it your job to devise, implement,
15 coordinate and monitor appropriate protection care and
16 family support plans involving service users where
17 possible in all decisions?
18 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
19 MR GARNHAM: Was it your job to offer a casework service
20 including the provision of support and counselling to
21 children in need and their families?
22 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
23 MR GARNHAM: Was it your job to supervise and ensure the
24 regular review of all allocated cases in accordance with
25 statutory requirements, court orders, local procedures
66
1 and other needs of the case?
2 MS KOZINOS: No, we did not have supervisory responsibility
3 for social workers.
4 MR GARNHAM: Thank you. Was it your job to undertake
5 special projects, visits and group work?
6 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
7 MR GARNHAM: Undertake where appropriate supervision of
8 students for preprofessional and professional training
9 courses?
10 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
11 MR GARNHAM: To make appropriate reports, maintain records
12 and conduct correspondence?
13 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
14 MR GARNHAM: Undertake other temporary duties consistent
15 with those basic objectives and duties?
16 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
17 MR GARNHAM: Deputise you for Children and Families or I&A
18 Team managers as appropriate?
19 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
20 MR GARNHAM: Provide professional supervision and workload
21 management for up to three social workers?
22 MS KOZINOS: This was not in practice.
23 MR GARNHAM: That was not in practice?
24 MS KOZINOS: No.
25 MR GARNHAM: To offer specialist consultation advice to
67
1 social workers and Duty workers on their own and on Duty
2 cases?
3 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
4 MR GARNHAM: To organise induction of staff members new to
5 the team when requested to do so?
6 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
7 MR GARNHAM: To assist the Team Manager in planning the
8 rotas, team meetings and team statistics?
9 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
10 MR GARNHAM: So of that list there were two that you do not
11 say was part of your job, namely to provide professional
12 supervision for social workers or to supervise allocated
13 cases?
14 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
15 MR GARNHAM: Thank you very much. You tell us that on
16 24th December you were appointed Practice Manager.
17 MS KOZINOS: Yes, that is when I was told verbally I had the
18 post.
19 MR GARNHAM: Did that post arise out of the restructuring
20 exercise which we in this Inquiry have heard a lot
21 about?
22 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
23 MR GARNHAM: When were you interviewed for that post?
24 MS KOZINOS: 20th December.
25 MR GARNHAM: Do you know why it was so late in the day?
68
1 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
2 MR GARNHAM: Would you be given volume 29. Page 080.501.
3 That is a memorandum from Dave Duncan to Carol Wilson
4 concerning you. He says that you have shown great
5 commitment skills and loyalty to the Tottenham office,
6 that you are an invaluable member of the office and he
7 urges Ms Wilson that you should be allowed to compete
8 for a permanent Senior Practitioner's post. That was
9 copied to you, so presumably you were aware of it?
10 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
11 MR GARNHAM: And I imagine pleased to see it?
12 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
13 MR GARNHAM: Because it is complimentary about your skills
14 and it suggests that you should be allowed to compete
15 for a Senior Practitioner's post on a permanent basis.
16 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
17 MR GARNHAM: Is it your understanding that it was as
18 a result of this that you were so considered? Was this
19 the trigger?
20 MS KOZINOS: No.
21 MR GARNHAM: How did it come about then that you were
22 eventually interviewed for that post in December?
23 MS KOZINOS: UNISON were involved and there was a lot of
24 correspondence with Carol Wilson at the time. Also, the
25 persons, the permanent post of the Senior Practitioner
69
1 who I was acting into temporary, she -- sorry, I cannot
2 remember if she extended her job as a reviewing officer
3 or she was given it permanent so it freed up that post.
4 MR GARNHAM: I see, and then as a result of that you
5 eventually got offered the interview and got the job at
6 the end of December?
7 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
8 MR GARNHAM: Your position you tell us was backdated to
9 8th November in recognition of the work which you had
10 carried out in the past. Is that right?
11 MS KOZINOS: Yes, that is right.
12 MR GARNHAM: So that although you were not formally in the
13 post of -- I have been calling it Senior Practitioner,
14 it is now Practice Manager -- although you were not
15 formally in that post on 8th November you presumably
16 were back paid as if you were from 8th November?
17 MS KOZINOS: That is something the Commissioning Manager did
18 at the time because he felt that I was.
19 MR GARNHAM: Because that is in reality the work you had
20 been doing so you ought to be paid for it?
21 MS KOZINOS: Well, I was not doing all the work but I was
22 obviously working quite hard and he felt, that is how he
23 felt, that is what he recommended.
24 MR GARNHAM: Thank you very much. In paragraph 6 you
25 describe the structure of the Investigation and
70
1 Assessment Section. You worked in the team run by
2 Angella Mairs. Paragraph 6, you worked in the team run
3 by Angella Mairs.
4 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
5 MR GARNHAM: The other team was run by Carole Baptiste?
6 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
7 MR GARNHAM: And Lisa Arthurworrey was in Ms Baptiste's
8 team.
9 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
10 MR GARNHAM: You describe the workload as being relatively
11 high.
12 MS KOZINOS: Busy.
13 MR GARNHAM: And you did between 150 and 200 hours unpaid
14 overtime a year?
15 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
16 MR GARNHAM: Why did you do that?
17 MS KOZINOS: The work, because we work in a crisis team, it
18 was not always predictable when a referral would come in
19 and because we were dealing with emergencies we did not
20 just cut off at 5 o'clock, we had to deal with
21 investigation and at times that took us very late into
22 the evening.
23 MR GARNHAM: So you would go on working to finish the job?
24 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
25 MR GARNHAM: But you were not always paid for that?
71
1 MS KOZINOS: No.
2 MR GARNHAM: Were you ever paid for that? Did you ever get
3 overtime?
4 MS KOZINOS: I might have claimed, in the time I was in the
5 Assessment Team I might have claimed for it once,
6 overtime, but that would have had to have been approved
7 by the Assistant Director and Commissioning Manager.
8 MR GARNHAM: Did you feel you were properly supported in
9 this team?
10 MS KOZINOS: By my own team manager, yes.
11 MR GARNHAM: And properly supervised?
12 MS KOZINOS: I felt I was.
13 MR GARNHAM: And you tell us that in your team sickness was
14 not a particular problem.
15 MS KOZINOS: Not that I can recall.
16 MR GARNHAM: Do you say that to draw comparison with others?
17 Were there others where sickness was a problem.
18 MS KOZINOS: My own sickness or other workers' sickness?
19 MR GARNHAM: You say in your team sickness was not much of
20 a problem. You might find it easier if you look to me
21 to the questions first of all and then if you need to go
22 to your statement, rather than trying to follow every
23 line, because I am not following your statement in quite
24 that way. If you find you need to go back to your
25 statement please say so, because you can, but it may
72
1 make it easier to do it this way.
2 MS KOZINOS: Okay.
3 MR GARNHAM: You tell us that sickness was not a problem in
4 your team.
5 MS KOZINOS: Not that I can recall.
6 MR GARNHAM: Do you say that because it was a problem
7 elsewhere?
8 MS KOZINOS: Not that I recall.
9 MR GARNHAM: Thank you. A number of witnesses we have heard
10 have described the way in which the Duty Investigation
11 and Assessment Team was being run in 1999.
12 Lisa Arthurworrey likened it to a girls' school with
13 Angella Mairs as the headmistress. You were described
14 as one of the head girls, others were described as
15 schoolgirls, including Lisa Arthurworrey. Is that
16 a description of the atmosphere in that office which you
17 recognise?
18 MS KOZINOS: No, that is Lisa's description. It may be
19 something she might have obviously how she saw it but
20 I do not necessarily feel that Lisa's perception of how
21 it was represents everybody else's.
22 MR GARNHAM: Tell us how then you saw that office. Was it
23 a happy place?
24 MS KOZINOS: I felt it was, yes.
25 MR GARNHAM: And people --
73
1 MS KOZINOS: Busy, it was very stressful.
2 MR GARNHAM: People got on well?
3 MS KOZINOS: In general, but in any organisations where you
4 find so many people you will find office politics, it is
5 human nature.
6 MR GARNHAM: There has been some suggestion that the team
7 was divided into different camps.
8 MS KOZINOS: The team was divided into A and B before the
9 restructuring.
10 MR GARNHAM: Yes, that is why I chose my words carefully.
11 By camps I mean groups who differed in their approach
12 from other groups. You do not recognise that?
13 MS KOZINOS: Some people got on better with others.
14 MR GARNHAM: Nothing more than you would expect in any
15 healthy office?
16 MS KOZINOS: Personally, yes.
17 MR GARNHAM: You tell us in paragraph 9 that throughout 1999
18 there were increasing difficulties with the team run by
19 Carole Baptiste. What difficulties?
20 MS KOZINOS: In terms of Carole's availability.
21 MR GARNHAM: Go on. I am not asking you to read out your
22 statement.
23 MS KOZINOS: I need to refer to it.
24 MR GARNHAM: No, for the time being answer my questions. If
25 you get stuck, go back to your statement.
74
1 MS KOZINOS: Say your question again please.
2 MR GARNHAM: What were the difficulties that were being
3 experienced in Carole Baptiste's team?
4 MS KOZINOS: From what I could recall there was an issue in
5 terms of Carole's attendance and punctuality.
6 MR GARNHAM: Issue is a bit of a colloquialism. What do you
7 mean she was never there? She was five minutes late
8 each day? What was the issue?
9 MS KOZINOS: It varied depending which period. It was
10 something like I say in my statement that grew
11 relatively --
12 MR GARNHAM: Let us talk about spring and summer of 1999.
13 What was the problem with Carole Baptiste's performance
14 then?
15 MS KOZINOS: I cannot remember but I do recall her being
16 around like I refer in my statement and that was because
17 my team manager was away, so that was something
18 I specifically remember in terms of support and cover.
19 MR GARNHAM: Carole Baptiste was around did you say?
20 MS KOZINOS: In the summer.
21 MR GARNHAM: Yes, was she regularly available, you know,
22 9 to 5 Monday to Friday?
23 MS KOZINOS: I could not say then.
24 MR GARNHAM: We have heard evidence from others that she was
25 frequently absent.
75
1 MS KOZINOS: It is not a problem I particularly became aware
2 of until much later. It did not really impact on me as
3 such because my team manager was there. It became
4 noticeable when members of Carole's team, who she was
5 supervising, would come to us for guidance and
6 consultation.
7 MR GARNHAM: It was obvious they were coming to you because
8 Carole Baptiste was not available?
9 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
10 MR GARNHAM: When was that?
11 MS KOZINOS: It grew I think after the summer and the
12 situation just escalated to the point that by the end
13 of December 1999 it was the last time I saw her.
14 MR GARNHAM: We have heard evidence about a meeting that was
15 called in July, so early summer of 1999, when a number
16 of her team raised concerns with managers about
17 Carole Baptiste's non-availability when she was working
18 I think two and a half days a week.
19 MS KOZINOS: That may be the case but I was not party to
20 that meeting and --
21 MR GARNHAM: You were not aware of that problem?
22 MS KOZINOS: No, I was aware there was a meeting because
23 there had been issues raised about attendance, but we
24 were not party of that meeting or nor were the other
25 team informed of the discussions. I think it was
76
1 confidential between the people that had attended.
2 MR GARNHAM: I see. Do you know anything, and say if you do
3 not, about Carole Baptiste's competence as a supervisor?
4 MS KOZINOS: She was someone higher than me so I could
5 not --
6 MR GARNHAM: That does not necessarily explain why you
7 cannot comment on how good she was at supervision, but
8 perhaps you had never --
9 MS KOZINOS: I was about to say I had never had any direct
10 personal supervision from Carole.
11 MR GARNHAM: Did you have any reports about the quality of
12 her supervision addressed to you?
13 MS KOZINOS: No. I did after January/February when I was
14 supervising Lisa but she left --
15 MR GARNHAM: What were the reports then?
16 MS KOZINOS: What, from Lisa? She said that she felt Carole
17 was quite unclear.
18 MR GARNHAM: Unfocused?
19 MS KOZINOS: I cannot remember if that is the word she used.
20 I remember unclear. She felt she -- because at the time
21 she had chosen me as a supervisor and the reason she
22 stayed for that was because she found me clear and very
23 directive, unlike her previous manager.
24 MR GARNHAM: But you had no firsthand evidence you can give
25 about Carole Baptiste's supervision skills?
77
1 MS KOZINOS: No, I would not have any firsthand knowledge.
2 MR GARNHAM: Paragraph 10 you describe the restructuring
3 process and we have heard a lot about that so I need not
4 go through it in any detail with you, but do you say
5 that it had a knock-on effect on social workers? What
6 was that knock-on effect?
7 MS KOZINOS: Morale was quite low. I previously stated it
8 was very uncertain, it was a very unsettling time. In
9 terms of the -- I will talk about the Duty Investigation
10 and Assessment Team which I was part of. For example,
11 the exercise was so long it took from May 1999, and
12 I think it was still in dispute in terms of senior
13 practitioners' jobs, so it was not really implemented
14 until about February. It caused a lot of uncertainty in
15 the team because they saw the team managers going for
16 their post and also the practice managers.
17 The theory was by 8th November there would be one
18 Team Manager in the Duty Investigation and Assessment
19 Team and three Practice Managers, but in reality there
20 was one Team Manager, the other post was vacant, there
21 was no one in it, the practice managers were in disputes
22 regarding their jobs and I was not, I was fighting to be
23 given an opportunity for an interview. So in that case
24 it was very unclear --
25 MR GARNHAM: Did that process and that lack of clarity make
78
1 managers less available to staff for things like
2 supervisions? I will tell you why I ask that question.
3 We have had evidence that because managers were
4 preparing for their interviews and worrying about their
5 interviews and conducting their interviews, they were
6 less available to their staff.
7 MS KOZINOS: Possibly, it was a very pressurising time for
8 them.
9 MR GARNHAM: You also say it had a knock-on effect on
10 administrative staff. What was that?
11 MS KOZINOS: There was a high turnover of staff and like we
12 said, morale was quite low, they felt quite affected by
13 it.
14 MR GARNHAM: Service delivery, you said impacted on service
15 delivery. How?
16 MS KOZINOS: The work was carried out. The demands of the
17 work never changed but the structure did. And what was
18 in place after was less resourced than what was in place
19 previously, but it was the same work demands.
20 MR GARNHAM: So you think the quality of the work, the
21 amount of care and attention that was shown to the
22 clients you had was unaffected, do you?
23 MS KOZINOS: It is difficult to say. I think it is easier
24 to talk about my position. It is hard, it is hard to
25 predict but I imagine it must have had some knock-on
79
1 effect.
2 MR GARNHAM: Was the turnover of staff noticeably worse
3 during that period, say from March 1999 to December
4 1999?
5 MS KOZINOS: Yes, it became worse and also particularly
6 after the strikes.
7 MR GARNHAM: Particularly after the?
8 MS KOZINOS: We were on strike as well.
9 MR GARNHAM: That was in December, was it?
10 MS KOZINOS: Yes, the 7th, 14th and 15th.
11 MR GARNHAM: The position became worse after that but it had
12 been deteriorating during the year.
13 MS KOZINOS: Yes and we lost a lot of our permanent
14 experienced members after that.
15 MR GARNHAM: What do you understand to have been the
16 motivation for this restructuring?
17 MS KOZINOS: Me personally, as I have referred in my
18 statement, it was costs, from my perception.
19 MR GARNHAM: I am asking about your perception. Was that
20 the only motivation? The reason I ask is there is some
21 suggestion in the papers that we have that one of the
22 motivations may have been a means of moving managers in
23 whom Haringey had lost faith. You understand the point?
24 MS KOZINOS: Yes and again I would agree with that. That is
25 what we were told.
80
1 MR GARNHAM: That is also what you were told. So we should
2 see two motivations for this, one saving money and
3 secondly moving managers with whom Haringey had lost
4 faith?
5 MS KOZINOS: That is how I felt, yes, at the time, it came
6 across.
7 MR GARNHAM: Were you conscious -- and do not guess, only
8 tell us if you are aware of this on some sensible
9 basis -- were you aware of who the managers were that
10 Haringey had lost faith with?
11 MS KOZINOS: I do not know who the others are.
12 MR GARNHAM: Others apart from?
13 MS KOZINOS: It is speculation, I do not know.
14 MR GARNHAM: Very well, I will not ask you to speculate.
15 I do want to ask you a little more about Ms Baptiste.
16 MS KOZINOS: Sorry.
17 MR GARNHAM: I think it is right that Lisa Arthurworrey was
18 not the first social worker you had had to supervise who
19 had previously been supervised by Carole Baptiste.
20 MS KOZINOS: Gosh, refresh my memory, sorry?
21 MR GARNHAM: I am not anxious to give you the name of the
22 social worker because there is no reason why that name
23 should be made public since it has got nothing to do
24 with this case, and my interest is not in that social
25 worker but in the way Ms Baptiste supervised her, but
81
1 are you aware that a report was carried out by
2 Mr Prince?
3 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
4 MR GARNHAM: Do you know now who the social worker is?
5 MS KOZINOS: Yes, but it is a long time -- sorry, I was
6 thinking more.
7 MR GARNHAM: What was her first name? Do not give her
8 surname.
9 MS KOZINOS: People will be able to identify her.
10 MR GARNHAM: Those who already know will know. I do not
11 think the rest of us will. Give us her initials then.
12 MS KOZINOS: They are going to know, they are going to know.
13 MR GARNHAM: The first initial of her first name please.
14 MS KOZINOS: B.
15 MR GARNHAM: Very well. Let us use Miss B for these
16 purposes. It is right, is it not, that Miss B had
17 previously been supervised by Carole Baptiste and was
18 subsequently supervised by you?
19 MS KOZINOS: No, she then went on to be supervised by
20 Angella and right at the end by me.
21 MR GARNHAM: Sir, this report, the Prince report, was one
22 that we received relatively late in the day from
23 Haringey and I am not confident it has yet gone in the
24 bundles. It has gone in. It may be someone can help
25 me. Volume 29.
82
1 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr Garnham, I do not know were whether it has
2 gone in the bundles but I wonder has it been anonymised
3 in the way in which you are asking the question.
4 MR GARNHAM: Apparently not. That will not greatly matter
5 sir if interested parties, subject to the undertaking,
6 see it and a copy in similar terms can be made available
7 to Mr Wilkinson. But sir I just notice the time.
8 I wonder whether this might be a convenient moment to
9 take a short break during which time I can ensure that
10 this is done.
11 THE CHAIRMAN: Right. Guide me on how much time you need to
12 get it done.
13 MR GARNHAM: Return at 12?
14 THE CHAIRMAN: We will adjourn until 12 o'clock.
15 (11.52 am)
16 (A short break)
17 (12.00 pm)
18 MR GARNHAM: Sir, thank you for that. It is my error, sir.
19 Apparently the document team did distribute this I think
20 last evening and I had not found the reference. The
21 Prince report is now in volume 29 at page 47.750 and
22 I wonder if that could be put in front of the witness.
23 It has been redacted to this extent, Ms Kozinos: the
24 appendices which refer to individual clients of your
25 department has been removed for our purposes, because we
83
1 do not need it.
2 The document refers to the name of the individual
3 concerned. It is not necessary for me to ask you to
4 give us her name, because that is not material, and all
5 those who have the document and can see her name are
6 under an undertaking not to disclose that or use it
7 outside these proceedings. We will as a result continue
8 to refer to her if we may as Miss B. Have you seen the
9 Prince report before?
10 MS KOZINOS: No.
11 MR GARNHAM: I do not need to trouble you to read the whole
12 of it. His conclusion was that in respect of Miss B her
13 performance as a social worker was turned around as
14 a result of vigorous management first by Angella Mairs
15 and then by you. Does that tally with your experience
16 of Miss B?
17 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
18 MR GARNHAM: You were apparently, according to Mr Prince,
19 very positive about her abilities once she had been
20 under the tender care of Ms Mairs and you.
21 MS KOZINOS: At the time, yes.
22 MR GARNHAM: She was starting to look like she might make
23 a decent social worker.
24 MS KOZINOS: Well, I do not remember anybody saying she was
25 not a decent social worker.
84
1 MR GARNHAM: There were criticisms of her performance
2 previously, were there not?
3 MS KOZINOS: I was not made aware of those criticisms.
4 MR GARNHAM: When she came to you she had come from being
5 supervised by Ms Mairs, had she?
6 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
7 MR GARNHAM: So was she already when you first got her so to
8 speak performing adequately?
9 MS KOZINOS: Yes, relatively, although I think she was --
10 actually I think she was on long-term sick if my memory
11 serves me correct.
12 MR GARNHAM: But you did work with her, you did supervise
13 her work?
14 MS KOZINOS: Yes, for a short time.
15 MR GARNHAM: I think it is right that Ms Baptiste had
16 previously worked in the Children and Families Long Term
17 Team?
18 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
19 MR GARNHAM: And then she was transferred on her return from
20 maternity leave to the DIA Team?
21 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
22 MR GARNHAM: Do you know why she was transferred to your
23 section?
24 MS KOZINOS: From memory I think the explanation that I was
25 given is that her previous team had expressed strongly
85
1 that they did not wish for her to return there and at
2 the time I think the Commissioning Manager felt she
3 might do well under Angella's guidance.
4 MR GARNHAM: So the previous team were not keen to have her
5 back and so she was moved to Angella Mairs' team?
6 MS KOZINOS: That is right, from what I can recall.
7 MR GARNHAM: Do you still have the Prince report there?
8 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
9 MR GARNHAM: Turn to page 760. Do you have that?
10 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
11 MR GARNHAM: I do not think you are looking at the right
12 page. 29/047.760.
13 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
14 MR GARNHAM: Three paragraphs from the end Mr Prince writes:
15 "Positive management would have returned Ms Baptiste
16 to her substantive post and disciplined Miss B with
17 a view to her dismissal. This lack of positive action
18 meant a continuation of the appalling service to
19 Miss B's clients, unacceptable supervision of the
20 Children and Families Team by Ms Baptiste and the
21 potential passing on of that particular problem to
22 DIAT."
23 Do you agree with that?
24 MS KOZINOS: I was not involved --
25 MR GARNHAM: In other words, was your view that the problems
86
1 posed by Ms Baptiste were simply being passed from one
2 team to another?
3 MS KOZINOS: Yes, it felt like that at the time.
4 MR GARNHAM: Thank you. You have told us that you were of
5 the view that it was no part of your job to supervise
6 social workers.
7 MS KOZINOS: It was never asked of us, yes, and it was not
8 standard practice.
9 MR GARNHAM: When did you start supervising Miss B?
10 MS KOZINOS: I do not recall.
11 MR GARNHAM: Year?
12 MS KOZINOS: Possibly.
13 MR GARNHAM: Which year? You began supervising
14 Miss Arthurworrey at the very end of 1999. Was Miss B
15 before or after that?
16 MS KOZINOS: I do not recall. Yes, because there was --
17 I was going through this sickness disciplinary with B at
18 the time so it is clouding.
19 MR GARNHAM: Very well. Did you supervise anybody else
20 apart from --
21 MS KOZINOS: The administration, the team clerks, duty
22 clerks, the receptionist from what I can remember.
23 MR GARNHAM: I see. So if for example we -- I do not need
24 to take you to it unless you need to see it, but in the
25 memo we have already looked at from Dave Duncan to
87
1 Carol Wilson about your senior practitioner interview,
2 where he writes about you, "she has regularly supervised
3 staff," who or what staff is he referring to?
4 MS KOZINOS: I do not know.
5 MR GARNHAM: You tell us that you had supervised some
6 administrative staff, had you?
7 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
8 MR GARNHAM: But you say you had never supervised social
9 workers?
10 MS KOZINOS: Only for deputising in teams in managers'
11 absence and that is very different from supervision. It
12 is case direction only.
13 MR GARNHAM: Yes. As we will hear a little later, however,
14 you did supervise Lisa Arthurworrey on 23rd December
15 1999.
16 MS KOZINOS: Yes, that is right.
17 MR GARNHAM: Were you given any form of handover for that
18 supervision by Carole Baptiste?
19 MS KOZINOS: No, we did not know her whereabouts at that
20 time.
21 MR GARNHAM: Carole Baptiste had been the previous
22 supervisor of Lisa ah Arthurworrey, had she not?
23 MS KOZINOS: Angella, then previously Carole, but the
24 arrangements at the time were that because practice
25 managers were not able to take their posts, they had not
88
1 been interviewed, for example, Carole was to remain
2 until January and she would continue to supervise the
3 workers she had. However, in her absence, as her
4 attending the office became less frequent, Angella
5 supervised some of Carole's staff.
6 MR GARNHAM: In any event you did not receive any form of
7 handover in respect of Lisa Arthurworrey?
8 MS KOZINOS: Most definitely not.
9 MR GARNHAM: Was there when you took over
10 Lisa Arthurworrey's supervision any form of supervision
11 contract in place?
12 MS KOZINOS: We did not have a file, we did not have
13 anything handed over. I drew up a supervision contract
14 with Lisa.
15 MR GARNHAM: That is what I wanted to ask you about.
16 Presumably you drew it up because there was not already
17 one in existence, or would you have drawn up a fresh one
18 anyway?
19 MS KOZINOS: I would not have known if there was one in
20 existence because nothing was handed over. I drew one
21 up.
22 MR GARNHAM: Did you not ask Miss Arthurworrey, "Is there
23 a supervision contract in existence"?
24 MS KOZINOS: I think she said there was not a supervision,
25 if I can remember, but I think Carole had done a session
89
1 or few sessions on PDR, but we did not have a --
2 MR GARNHAM: Simple question: did you ask Lisa Arthurworrey
3 whether there was a supervision contract in existence
4 when you began her supervision?
5 MS KOZINOS: Not that I recall specifically, sorry.
6 MR GARNHAM: You then drew one up --
7 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
8 MR GARNHAM: -- at the time you started supervising
9 Lisa Arthurworrey?
10 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
11 MR GARNHAM: What happened to that contract, that agreement?
12 MS KOZINOS: It should be on her file.
13 MR GARNHAM: I am sure it is that I have missed it. If not,
14 doubtless it can be provided to us. Thank you for that.
15 Let me turn to your involvement with Victoria's
16 case. When did you first become aware of the case of
17 Victoria Climbie?
18 MS KOZINOS: 28th July 1999.
19 MR GARNHAM: That is the day of the first strategy meeting
20 in that case?
21 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
22 MR GARNHAM: You tell us in your statement that
23 Shanthi Jacob had taken a referral. Was it not in fact
24 Caroline Rodgers?
25 MS KOZINOS: Yes, it was Caroline Rodgers but it was Shanthi
90
1 who set up the strategy meeting.
2 MR GARNHAM: So we should read your statement to refer to
3 a referral taken by Caroline Rodgers?
4 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
5 MR GARNHAM: Volume 6, page 41. We should start at page 40.
6 That I think is the referral.
7 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
8 MR GARNHAM: We see from the next page that it is taken by
9 Caroline Rodgers and that thereafter Shanthi Jacob draws
10 up the action plan we see at page 42.
11 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
12 MR GARNHAM: The referral recorded by Caroline Rodgers on
13 page 41 is really rather detailed, is it not?
14 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
15 MR GARNHAM: Can I suggest to you, can I ask you first of
16 all whether you read it at that time on 28th July?
17 MS KOZINOS: Not prior to the meeting.
18 MR GARNHAM: Why not?
19 MS KOZINOS: Because I was asked to chair the meeting by
20 Shanthi and we normally go into strategy meetings cold
21 unless we were the person that took the referral and had
22 knowledge of it on Duty.
23 MR GARNHAM: You normally go into strategy meetings cold
24 unless you took the referral?
25 MS KOZINOS: Yes, because sometimes they would be rearranged
91
1 or you would cover for other senior practitioners.
2 MR GARNHAM: You were going to chair the strategy meeting,
3 were you not?
4 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
5 MR GARNHAM: Is it not a matter of common sense let alone
6 good practice for you to know something about the case
7 before you start chairing it?
8 MS KOZINOS: It is but I was asked at short notice to do it.
9 MR GARNHAM: Then why not say, "I am going to need
10 10 minutes to read through this file"?
11 MS KOZINOS: Because I was chairing another strategy meeting
12 prior to this one.
13 MR GARNHAM: Yes. That does not answer the question at all.
14 Why not before starting this one ask for 10 minutes to
15 look through the file?
16 MS KOZINOS: Because the social worker brings the referral
17 with her and she also transfers some of the notes on to
18 the strategy meeting.
19 MR GARNHAM: The social workers brings the referral with
20 her?
21 MS KOZINOS: The Duty social worker, and also would fill out
22 part of the form, so she would update the meeting
23 regarding the current concerns or the presenting
24 concerns.
25 MR GARNHAM: In any event you began chairing this meeting
92
1 without reading the referral sheet at page 41?
2 MS KOZINOS: No, we went through the referral as part of the
3 strategy meeting.
4 MR GARNHAM: That was not my question. You began to chair
5 the strategy meeting without reading the referral sheet?
6 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
7 MR GARNHAM: But the information that is contained on that
8 page was then drawn to your attention during the course
9 of the meeting?
10 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
11 MR GARNHAM: Can I suggest to you that there were eight real
12 points of concern drawn to the attention of those who
13 read the file by Caroline Rodgers, and presumably drawn
14 to your attention during the strategy meeting, and they
15 are these, tell me whether you were aware of each of
16 them:
17 Five and a half hour delay between the incident
18 involving Victoria and Victoria's admission to the NMH.
19 MS KOZINOS: I would need to refer to the strategy meeting.
20 MR GARNHAM: I do not think so. Look if you will at the
21 referral which you say was drawn to your attention
22 during the course of the meeting. If it is right that
23 the substance of this referral sheet was drawn to your
24 attention then each of these points should have been
25 apparent to you, and if it was not I need to know that.
93
1 MS KOZINOS: Okay.
2 MR GARNHAM: Five and a half hour delay between the incident
3 and the arrival at the NMH. Were you aware of that
4 during the course of the strategy meeting?
5 MS KOZINOS: I was aware of a delay.
6 MR GARNHAM: But not the length of time?
7 MS KOZINOS: I cannot recall.
8 MR GARNHAM: Presence of old marks on Victoria's body which
9 hospital staff felt sure were non-accidental.
10 MS KOZINOS: From what I recall it was possible old marks
11 that could possibly look like --
12 MR GARNHAM: Belt buckles?
13 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
14 MR GARNHAM: One particular doctor, namely Dr Forlee,
15 suggesting that the marks looked like they had been done
16 by belt buckle marks. Did you know of Dr Forlee's
17 involvement?
18 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
19 MR GARNHAM: Victoria was slightly nervous of her mother and
20 on edge when she visited. Were you told that?
21 MS KOZINOS: I do not recall that one.
22 MR GARNHAM: Victoria jumped to attention when her mother
23 appeared?
24 MS KOZINOS: I do not recall, sorry.
25 MR GARNHAM: Victoria wet herself when her mother was there?
94
1 MS KOZINOS: Sorry, I do not know, it is hard to recall.
2 I do not know if that is information I know now or what
3 I knew then. Sorry, I am finding it -- solely on my
4 memory --
5 MR GARNHAM: I appreciate it is difficult and if the answer
6 is "I do not remember" please say "I do not remember".
7 Victoria was unkempt whilst her mother was well
8 dressed?
9 MS KOZINOS: I recall something about Victoria being unkempt
10 but I think it was also related to scabies.
11 MR GARNHAM: Mother brought in no new clothes for her
12 daughter during her stay in hospital?
13 MS KOZINOS: I do not recall.
14 MR GARNHAM: The reason why that might be thought to be of
15 concern is that all of those eight points can be gleaned
16 from a three-minute read of the referral. I want to
17 understand what the problem is. Is it that you think
18 you have simply forgotten what you were told or is it
19 that you were never aware of that information?
20 MS KOZINOS: I think I have forgotten what I have been told.
21 It has been --
22 MR GARNHAM: So you would not dispute that each of those
23 matters were brought to your attention during the course
24 of the strategy meeting?
25 MS KOZINOS: I cannot say for certain.
95
1 MR GARNHAM: I see. In fact you tell us in your statement,
2 paragraph 15 if you want to look at it, that by
3 28th July "we had very limited information". I have to
4 suggest to you that is nonsense. As we have just seen
5 by looking at the referral, which was available to you,
6 there was eight clear pieces of information which should
7 have alerted you and the others to the problems. How
8 can you say you had very little information?
9 MS KOZINOS: The information I had was recorded on the
10 strategy meeting. From what I recall, any other
11 information that came up through the course of the event
12 I added, so I can only refer to my written notes.
13 MR GARNHAM: That is quite extraordinary, is it not, because
14 it means that not only did you not read the notes drawn
15 up by your colleague, Ms Caroline Rodgers, during the
16 course of the meeting, but you did not get her to relay
17 those concerns to you during the meeting.
18 MS KOZINOS: No, it was up to the Duty social worker to
19 inform the meeting of the concerns that had come in of
20 the current referral.
21 MR GARNHAM: So you say the error was by Caroline Rodgers
22 for not telling you this information?
23 MS KOZINOS: I am not saying she did not tell me the
24 information because I cannot recollect what information
25 she told me, but it would be down to the Duty social
96
1 worker to present the concerns, or the referrer who was
2 making the referral.
3 MR GARNHAM: I thought you had said that you recorded in the
4 minutes of the strategy meeting all that you were told.
5 MS KOZINOS: Yes, I added bits on if I can remember in the
6 course of the event.
7 MR GARNHAM: So we should therefore find when we come to
8 look at it, which we will in a moment, that all of these
9 concerns that Caroline Rodgers reported were recorded in
10 the strategy meeting notes if they were mentioned during
11 the course of the strategy meeting?
12 MS KOZINOS: Yes, they should have been.
13 MR GARNHAM: You tell us that you noted, that is your words,
14 you noted that you were to chair the strategy meeting.
15 Where did you note it from?
16 MS KOZINOS: I have looked back and I have provided the
17 Inquiry with rotas. I was not actually on Duty that
18 week. And what I have recorded is that I was on
19 a Wednesday at 2 o'clock and 2.30 asked to chair two
20 strategy meetings.
21 MR GARNHAM: That is what I want to ask about. When you say
22 you were asked to chair them, is that orally or is that
23 because a note is made somewhere?
24 MS KOZINOS: No, it would have been orally first and then
25 I would have made a note which --
97
1 MR GARNHAM: So when you say "I noted" you mean you were
2 told?
3 MS KOZINOS: I was told and I would have maybe noted it in
4 my diary.
5 MR GARNHAM: I see. Why was the strategy meeting held at
6 the North Tottenham District Office?
7 MS KOZINOS: It had been arranged that way from the previous
8 senior practitioner.
9 MR GARNHAM: By whom, by Shanthi Jacob?
10 MS KOZINOS: That is right.
11 MR GARNHAM: Did that concern you?
12 MS KOZINOS: We do have strategy meetings in the hospital,
13 they have also been known to take place at North
14 Tottenham.
15 MR GARNHAM: Yes, that was not my question. Did it concern
16 you that this strategy meeting was taking place at your
17 office?
18 MS KOZINOS: It concerned me but not enough not to proceed.
19 I felt we had sufficient information -- that it needed
20 urgent action, so I proceeded.
21 MR GARNHAM: It should have taken place at the hospital,
22 should it not?
23 MS KOZINOS: Ideally, yes.
24 MR GARNHAM: Not ideally. It should have done, that is what
25 Haringey's Child Protection Guidelines say is a must.
98
1 MS KOZINOS: But ideally. They do not always happen in the
2 hospital.
3 MR GARNHAM: Do you agree with me that Haringey's guidelines
4 require strategy meetings, where the child concerned is
5 a patient in a hospital, to take place at the hospital?
6 MS KOZINOS: They do say that, yes.
7 MR GARNHAM: But you are telling me that that was not always
8 honoured?
9 MS KOZINOS: At times, yes.
10 MR GARNHAM: Why?
11 MS KOZINOS: I do not know. Maybe it was because -- I do
12 not know. I would be speculating.
13 MR GARNHAM: Did it not concern you given your post that one
14 of Haringey's rules for the conduct of child protection
15 cases was regularly being disregarded?
16 MS KOZINOS: I would not say regularly being disregarded.
17 MR GARNHAM: So this was an unusual case that it was not at
18 the hospital, was it?
19 MS KOZINOS: Yes, but it did not get -- the greatest volume
20 of our reference were not necessarily from the hospital.
21 MR GARNHAM: You decided not to cancel this meeting and
22 reconvene it at the hospital because you say potentially
23 it required urgent action.
24 MS KOZINOS: And we also had the police child protection
25 officer there and also the hospital social worker.
99
1 MR GARNHAM: Let me ask you about the first of those first.
2 Why did it potentially require urgent action?
3 MS KOZINOS: Because there was sufficient concerns.
4 MR GARNHAM: What concerns?
5 MS KOZINOS: I would have to refer back to my strategy
6 meeting.
7 MR GARNHAM: Right.
8 MS KOZINOS: I think it was an indication --
9 MR GARNHAM: Let us look at that, volume 6 page 91. There
10 we find the strategy meeting record signed by you
11 28th July.
12 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
13 MR GARNHAM: Yes. Reference on the second page to "child
14 has scabies" as it is misspelled. Current concerns
15 listed on the third page:
16 "Mum, Marie-Therese Kuaou, brought Anna to North
17 Middlesex on the 26th at 5.25, saying that child had
18 poured hot water over her head. Child had scabies and
19 is very itchy and mum said that hot water was supposed
20 to stop itching. Child admitted to Rainbow Ward. Nurse
21 noticed marks on body. Dr Forlee suggests they look
22 like old belt buckle marks. Skeletal survey carried
23 out, no results as yet. Also concerns re neglect.
24 Child very unkempt, mother was not."
25 Do I take it from what you have said before that
100
1 that is the totality of what you were told?
2 MS KOZINOS: This is not a verbatim account of what takes
3 place in a meeting. These are some of the things that
4 were jotted down.
5 MR GARNHAM: Do you jot down the things that matter or how
6 do you decide what to jot down?
7 MS KOZINOS: Well, it is the social worker in this instance
8 who has filled out the bit you are referring to.
9 MR GARNHAM: Okay. What was it in the concerns you learned
10 about during that strategy meeting that led you to
11 decide this was urgent and so could not be transferred
12 to the hospital?
13 MS KOZINOS: I felt we needed to proceed and the reasons for
14 that I felt it was very unlikely that a strategy meeting
15 would have taken place again on that same day, it was
16 very unlikely to happen on the same day.
17 MR GARNHAM: You say it was because it was urgent. What was
18 urgent about what you had learned in this strategy
19 meeting?
20 MS KOZINOS: Because there are suggestions of physical
21 abuse, neglect. That I felt needed investigating.
22 MR GARNHAM: The child was in hospital?
23 MS KOZINOS: Yes.
24 MR GARNHAM: At risk in hospital?
25 MS KOZINOS: No, but we would have had to carry out a risk
|
