|
Archived Transcript for 11th October 2001: Pages
51 to 100
51
1 that is why she just brought -- she suspected, so she
2 did not want to alter evidence, that is why she brought
3 her in.
4 MR MASON: So it did not mean much to you at the time?
5 DR AJAYE-OBE: No.
6 MR MASON: You were also taken to volume 37, page 20, which
7 is your medical examination form. In response to
8 a question about why you did not refer to bruising in
9 that form, you said you did not know why. Might one
10 explanation for you not mentioning it on the form was
11 that you did not think that, at the time, there was
12 clinically significant bruising?
13 DR AJAYE-OBE: It is possible.
14 MR MASON: Turning if I may to the body charts, you said
15 that you thought that some of them, or at least one of
16 the injuries, could not be self-inflicted, and I think
17 you particularly made reference to the mark on
18 Victoria's back.
19 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes.
20 MR MASON: Where I am scratching now, is that the area where
21 the mark was?
22 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes.
23 MR MASON: So if I can do that, that is a place that
24 Victoria could have reached?
25 DR AJAYE-OBE: It was suggested in the trial that it could
52
1 have been a spoon -- because it was pretty high up, it
2 could have been a spoon or a fork that she could have
3 scratched herself with.
4 MR MASON: Is it somewhere that Victoria could have reached?
5 DR AJAYE-OBE: With her mid-upper back, so for a young child
6 of seven -- it is possible.
7 MR MASON: The question of whether or not the injury was
8 caused by herself is obviously a question for the
9 Inquiry, but that is somewhere that she could reach if
10 necessary?
11 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes.
12 MR MASON: Thank you very much, Doctor. Thank you, sir.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you indeed, Mr Mason. Doctor, just
14 a couple of quick questions if I may, please. First of
15 all, in answer to Mr Garnham, you said that you had seen
16 scabies before in your practice. Could you say whether
17 or not you had seen scabies in children before?
18 DR AJAYE-OBE: I have seen scabies in children, yes.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: Secondly, reference has been made to the webs
20 within the fingers; did you notice anything unusual
21 about Victoria's webs in the fingers?
22 DR AJAYE-OBE: No, I did not, not the webs, no, but just --
23 no.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: Nothing on the web?
25 DR AJAYE-OBE: I did not notice anything on the webs.
53
1 THE CHAIRMAN: The third question, and you will just have to
2 excuse me a minute, I have to manipulate my -- to take
3 me back, I want to read something to you, if I may. It
4 is just for understanding. Mr Garnham asked you -- this
5 was in respect of whether you were surprised at the
6 diagnosis of scabies, and could I just read the text
7 that I have in front of me, so that I can be clear about
8 that? He said:
9 "Were you surprised to hear Dr Schwartz's diagnosis
10 of scabies?
11 "Answer: I was surprised, I mean --
12 "Question: But she was the consultant.
13 "Answer: Well, I mean, it was not so much I was
14 surprised, but the way she had actually mapped it all
15 out, she had mapped it out so that everything was in
16 place ..."
17 Could you just explain what that meant, please,
18 because I am not familiar with what that means.
19 DR AJAYE-OBE: All right, she had said -- I heard she had
20 made a diagnosis of scabies. I was not 100 per cent
21 sure that scabies was not part of it, it could have been
22 part of it, but the fact that the social worker had been
23 informed, and they were going to oversee Anna,
24 everything had been set up in place, so I said, "If it
25 happens not to be non-accidental injury, if it does
54
1 happen to be -- if it is not, then all good and well,
2 but if it is, then there are people there who can
3 actually" --
4 THE CHAIRMAN: So the mapping out was a plan of action?
5 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: That is what I wanted to know. The last
7 question; volume 37, I do not know whether that is still
8 in front of you, page 020 -- is that right?
9 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: That is in front of you. There is a section
11 on that form which is number 2 that I have in front of
12 me, which begins "From parent, if seen -- and if child
13 old enough". Are we on the right form?
14 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes.
15 THE CHAIRMAN: There is a bigger section underneath it that
16 says:
17 "General appearance, emotional state and behaviour
18 of child."
19 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes.
20 THE CHAIRMAN: Could you read from me your handwriting from
21 then on under that, which I think begins "Much
22 more~..."?
23 DR AJAYE-OBE: Okay. "Much more mature in responses when
24 related to the chronological age. Quite a bubbly child,
25 laughed quite a bit. Watched with curiosity as
55
1 I charted the bruises on the body chart."
2 THE CHAIRMAN: That is fine, thank you very much indeed
3 Doctor. (Pause). Just one final question if I may then.
4 I just wanted your professional opinion again, just to
5 make sure I have got it right. Your professional
6 opinion is the injuries that you have outlined in detail
7 this morning, not all of them could be accounted for by
8 scabies?
9 DR AJAYE-OBE: I am not -- the experience I have is not --
10 I thought she had NAI, and scabies was brought up.
11 I probably have not seen enough -- I mean, scabies'
12 perspective is very wide, but what I saw, from my own
13 experience, I did not think scabies was enough.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: That is fine. All I wanted was your
15 professional opinion, which you have given me. Thank
16 you very much indeed. Mr Garnham?
17 MR GARNHAM: Sir, just one question arising out of
18 Mr Mason's questions.
19 Doctor, Mr Mason asked you whether it was possible
20 that the reason there was no reference to bruising on
21 the medical report on a child thought to have suffered
22 abuse, at page 20 in volume 37, was that the bruising
23 was not clinically significant, and you said in reply,
24 "That is possible". Do you remember that?
25 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes.
56
1 MR GARNHAM: Can I ask you to look at the criminal trial
2 transcript, please, in volume 49, page 27? At the foot
3 of that page, counsel for the prosecution, Mrs Stern, is
4 asking you some questions and she begins to ask you
5 about the body chart, and she asks you, by line G, the
6 question:
7 "What did you find, please?
8 "Answer: I noticed -- I observed that there were
9 bruises and scars of different ages and sizes, mainly on
10 the face."
11 When you gave that answer, were you describing
12 something you thought clinically significant?
13 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes, I did, because bruises, scars, they do
14 have -- both of them have the significance.
15 MR GARNHAM: Did you regard the existence of bruising on
16 this child's body as clinically significant?
17 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes, at that point in time I did.
18 MR GARNHAM: Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: Sorry to -- I do not make a habit of this,
20 but I just want to be absolutely clear about this.
21 Could we just go back to that child protection form that
22 you kindly read from, which is 020? It is in volume 37
23 at page 20.
24 It is that section, Doctor, that you kindly read out
25 for me. That bottom line, the third line, I will not
57
1 get you to repeat the whole thing, but if you could just
2 repeat the bottom line.
3 DR AJAYE-OBE: "Watched with curiosity as I charted the
4 bruises on the body chart".
5 THE CHAIRMAN: And that was because you were confident that
6 you had seen bruises?
7 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes, I had seen -- well, bruises was -- that
8 bruise, the word "bruise" was to encompass everything
9 that I saw, so whether it was a scar, whether it was
10 a bruise, whether it was a graze, that term was -- that
11 is why I wrote that. It was just bruises was the first
12 thing that came of the three or four things.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, but as far as you are concerned, it was
14 a significant description?
15 DR AJAYE-OBE: Yes, what I saw, yes.
16 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much indeed. Thank you,
17 Mr Garnham.
18 MR GARNHAM: Thank you very much, Doctor.
19 (The witness withdrew)
20 MR GARNHAM: Thank you, sir. Miss Gibson will take the next
21 witness.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Garnham. Miss Gibson?
23 MS GIBSON: Yes, sir, the next witness is Robert Smith.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
25 MR ROBERT SMITH (affirmed)
58
1 MS GIBSON: Thank you, Mr Smith. Could you begin by giving
2 the Inquiry your full name and professional address,
3 please?
4 MR SMITH: My name is Robert David Smith, my address is
5 Brent House Annexe, 356 to 358 Wembley High Road,
6 Middlesex.
7 MS GIBSON: Thank you. You have made one statement for this
8 Inquiry found in volume 1, page 132, and you are just
9 being shown a copy of that. Are the contents of that
10 statement true to the best of your knowledge and belief?
11 MR SMITH: Yes.
12 MS GIBSON: Thank you. Am I right in saying that at the
13 time we are talking about, the incidents relating to
14 Victoria, you were the Group Administration Officer in
15 charge of the Acton Area Office?
16 MR SMITH: Not Acton, no.
17 MS GIBSON: I am sorry, of the office where Martin Punch was
18 working.
19 MR SMITH: That is correct.
20 MS GIBSON: And you were responsible for supervising
21 Martin Punch?
22 MR SMITH: Yes, I was.
23 MS GIBSON: We have heard already that at that time, there
24 was a considerable backlog of work for administration
25 officers. Does that accord with your experience at that
59
1 time?
2 MR SMITH: It is difficult to put a time on it. There was
3 a period where there was a major backlog. I am not sure
4 whether it was during that period.
5 MS GIBSON: Can you look at volume 28, page 000.519? We
6 will get a copy of that for you. That is a letter
7 written by Martin Punch. Have you seen that letter
8 before?
9 MR SMITH: I have.
10 MS GIBSON: And when was that letter brought to your
11 attention?
12 MR SMITH: I believe on the date that Mr Punch wrote it, he
13 actually e-mailed it to the people, Mimi Konigsberg,
14 Branton Bamford and myself.
15 MS GIBSON: Are you familiar with the contents of that
16 letter, or do you need some time to look through to
17 refresh your memory?
18 MR SMITH: Yes, I am fairly familiar.
19 MS GIBSON: If you could just look over on to the second
20 page of that document, at 520, you will see there at the
21 top that Mr Punch is expressing a concern that for the
22 past two years, Duty and CP Admin has been understaffed,
23 so that is going back from the date of this letter,
24 which is September 2000, for two years. So it looks
25 there as though at the time we are discussing, there
60
1 were concerns about understaffing of admin officers that
2 you were responsible for supervising.
3 MR SMITH: Mr Punch makes reference that there were five
4 staff. When I actually joined the organisation in
5 September 1998, there was only four staff, of which one
6 shortly left, and in April 1999 one began a sickness
7 period, of which at the time we did not know that it was
8 going to be long-term, but it ended up to be.
9 MS GIBSON: And then just looking back to the first page, we
10 have got a summary there of the concerns set out in the
11 rest of the letter, so understaffing; do you agree that
12 was a problem at the time?
13 MR SMITH: It was felt between myself and my line manager,
14 Mr Bamford, that possibly when one of the members of
15 staff had left, that we may be able to cope with three
16 staff. Unfortunately due to leave and the sickness of
17 one member of staff, that actually did not happen, so
18 they were down to two, and with myself helping out.
19 MS GIBSON: Because we know in this particular case at one
20 stage you came down from your office to assist in
21 logging referrals.
22 MR SMITH: That is correct.
23 MS GIBSON: So it is a fair summary, is it, to say that at
24 this period, in the Easter to summer of 1999, the office
25 was understaffed and there was pressure, because you
61
1 were having to step out of your normal role to assist?
2 MR SMITH: Certainly it was understaffed, but it was
3 discussed with my line manager, and at the time, we did
4 not know how long the member of staff was going to be
5 off sick, so we did not make a replacement at that time.
6 MS GIBSON: 2, mention of "running two relational database
7 systems/untimely introduction of SSID". It seems from
8 Mr Punch's evidence that SSID was not introduced until
9 September of that year.
10 MR SMITH: That is correct.
11 MS GIBSON: Is that correct?
12 MR SMITH: That is correct.
13 MS GIBSON: Can you explain why SSID was not introduced
14 before that?
15 MR SMITH: When I joined the organisation, we only used the
16 Filemaker database, known as the referrals database.
17 I was not aware why we were not using SSID. As far as
18 I understood, the rest of social services and the one
19 stop shops in the Council used SSID. I believe we were
20 informed by a Council directive that we had to use SSID.
21 MS GIBSON: Why did you not have access to SSID when all the
22 rest of the Social Services Department did?
23 MR SMITH: I do not know the reason why we were not using
24 it. I can only say that SSID is a very problematic
25 system to use. It is very difficult. It is not the
62
1 easiest system to record information on.
2 MS GIBSON: Did it not lead to problems though when the rest
3 of your department was using that system, and you were
4 using a system that was out of sync with it?
5 MR SMITH: I believe that is one of the reasons we were
6 instructed to use it, especially as the One Stop Shop
7 were taking our referrals and obviously they could not
8 access the system that we were using.
9 MS GIBSON: So looking at that, the One Stop Shop had SSID,
10 so if you needed to do checks with external agencies,
11 you would have to contact them to do the checks for you?
12 MR SMITH: That is correct.
13 MS GIBSON: I mean, that must have been quite problematic.
14 If they were busy doing what they have to do, answering
15 calls, to get those checks through must have led to
16 considerable delays.
17 MR SMITH: We did not -- the only time -- well, the only
18 organisation that we would contact regarding doing
19 a check is what was known as SNAPS, Special Needs and
20 Pupil Assessment Services, which was an education/social
21 services unit based in the education department. It
22 actually dealt with children with disabilities
23 assessments, and they were the only organisation that we
24 did not have access to checks, so we had to contact
25 them. We would not have contacted the One Stop Shop
63
1 regarding our referrals, they would have been on our
2 referrals database.
3 MS GIBSON: Yes, but if you wanted to check if the child was
4 known to any other social services departments, you
5 would have to go to the One Stop Shop to find out?
6 MR SMITH: We would have done, or directly to the other
7 social services unit that was dealing with the case.
8 MS GIBSON: And presumably that led to delays in processing
9 information?
10 MR SMITH: Yes, a check could take a while to deal with.
11 MS GIBSON: A while; about how long are we talking about?
12 MR SMITH: There was a form that we completed certainly to
13 get -- to require information from SNAPS, that we used
14 to send off, and we did not get the response for days
15 sometimes.
16 MS GIBSON: And what was done to ensure that referrals made
17 to the One Stop Shop were received back and logged on
18 your system?
19 MR SMITH: I do not recall any checks done with the One Stop
20 Shop.
21 MS GIBSON: If we just go on to item 3 now, another concern
22 expressed there that referrals were completed
23 improperly; is that a concern that you share?
24 MR SMITH: Yes, it was.
25 MS GIBSON: Is that a continuing concern, because Mr Punch
64
1 mentioned in his evidence to us that there was still
2 concern that names were misspelt on referrals, which
3 could lead to considerable problems in matching up
4 cases.
5 MR SMITH: As far as I know -- I am not actually supervising
6 the staff at this current time, but I have not heard of
7 any problems currently.
8 (11.30 am)
9 MS GIBSON: But at the time, a problem with details on
10 referral forms being completed incorrectly?
11 MR SMITH: Details and lack of details.
12 MS GIBSON: And those concerns at this time in 1999 were
13 brought to your attention by Mr Punch?
14 MR SMITH: They were, and obviously through working in the
15 environment, I noticed them as well.
16 MS GIBSON: And what was done to remedy those concerns?
17 MR SMITH: I believe it was brought to the attention of the
18 duty manager and also my line manager.
19 MS GIBSON: By the duty manager, you mean Edward Armstrong?
20 MR SMITH: That is correct.
21 MS GIBSON: And your line manager, Mr Bamford?
22 MR SMITH: That is correct.
23 MS GIBSON: Do you know if Mr Bamford did anything in
24 response to those issues that you raised?
25 MR SMITH: I do not know.
65
1 MS GIBSON: And what did you see happen in the office as
2 a result of your raising of these concerns?
3 MR SMITH: I think there was an improvement in the
4 completion of the referrals, especially as we tried to
5 explain the importance of this information, certainly
6 with us running any checks on any databases.
7 MS GIBSON: In "ineffective filing systems" at item 5, "Lack
8 of filing and storage space"; was that an issue for you
9 also?
10 MR SMITH: Yes. There certainly was not a lot of room down
11 there, no. Files were not kept in one particular place,
12 due to the small area that they were in. Files were
13 difficult to find.
14 MS GIBSON: And did files go missing as a result of lack of
15 filing space, an ineffective system for filing?
16 MR SMITH: Certainly from one day to the next, files would
17 not be where they should be, and return by the next day.
18 You could go from one day to the next, from not finding
19 a file to finding a file. There was no movement or log
20 of files. There was no cards giving us links to suggest
21 where the file was or who it was with.
22 MS GIBSON: You have spoken of files going missing and
23 turning up again, but was it not the case that at times,
24 files would go missing and never reappear?
25 MR SMITH: I believe that has been known, yes.
66
1 MS GIBSON: Mr Armstrong spoke of files going missing,
2 I think one plus a day in his evidence; does that accord
3 with your knowledge?
4 MR SMITH: Mr Armstrong would be in a better position,
5 obviously, working down there more on a regular basis.
6 I have not known of any one particular file that has
7 never been found.
8 MS GIBSON: But this concern was brought to your attention
9 at the time, that there was a problem with files, if not
10 going missing completely, certainly that they could not
11 be tracked when somebody needed to get hold of them.
12 What did you do to remedy that?
13 MR SMITH: Apart from bring it to the attention of my
14 manager, I did not directly do anything.
15 MS GIBSON: So that was Mr Bamford again?
16 MR SMITH: That was Mr Bamford, and I believe that we had
17 quarterly meetings, the whole management of children's
18 social work. I think the issues were raised at that
19 level with our director at the time.
20 MS GIBSON: Issues raised, but what was done to sort the
21 problem out?
22 MR SMITH: During this period, nothing has been particularly
23 done. Currently, the organisation is changing, so there
24 is more space in the area that they work now. There is
25 a new filing system.
67
1 MS GIBSON: You are not working in that post any more, so --
2 MR SMITH: I do not have -- currently I do not supervise the
3 staff, no.
4 MS GIBSON: What is your current role?
5 MR SMITH: I am still a Group Admin Officer. When I joined
6 the organisation, there were three; there is only me
7 now. I have taken on all the other responsibilities.
8 The organisation is changing, it is splitting into
9 different areas. As of, I think, November, my new title
10 will be Service Unit Administrator for the West Team.
11 MS GIBSON: You say there were three of you in your post,
12 now only one; is that as a result of cuts? You have to
13 do more work than ever now?
14 MR SMITH: Yes.
15 MS GIBSON: How are you able to cope with that?
16 MR SMITH: I would probably be honest in saying that I do
17 not, but I try my best.
18 MS GIBSON: Number 6, "No induction of new duty staff".
19 Again, was that a concern that you had at that time,
20 that new staff coming on to the duty team did not
21 understand the systems in place, and how the admin team
22 worked?
23 MR SMITH: I do not necessarily agree with that, that there
24 was not any induction. It is not as thorough as it is
25 now, there is an induction pack that we have now.
68
1 Certainly any new staff are taken through the databases
2 that they would need to use. But no, I would not agree
3 that there was not any induction.
4 MS GIBSON: Was it an adequate induction at the time?
5 MR SMITH: Probably not, no.
6 MS GIBSON: I just want to be clear about what social work
7 staff did, and what administrative staff did; again,
8 Mr Armstrong has referred to the fact that social work
9 staff did not have access to the databases, such as
10 Filemaker, and that was left to the administrative staff
11 to deal with. Was there any reason why social workers
12 were not allowed to do those checks themselves?
13 MR SMITH: I believe that with Filemaker, you purchase so
14 many licences for the application. We had only
15 purchased, let us say, 30 applications, so we only had
16 30 machines that had Filemaker on it. I think it was
17 felt by Mr Bamford, who set the systems up, that the
18 more people that had access to it, the more things that
19 could go wrong with it.
20 MS GIBSON: Did you agree with that assessment?
21 MR SMITH: I did not at the start, but on seeing some things
22 that happened, yes, I agree with him now, yes.
23 MS GIBSON: But is Filemaker a particularly complex system,
24 once you are given some basic training in it to use?
25 MR SMITH: Not if you are using it every day, on a regular
69
1 level, it is no harder than any other system. The
2 social work teams have access to SSID, but the checks
3 still go through the administration staff now. Unless
4 you are using the system regularly, then you are not
5 going to be familiar with it.
6 MS GIBSON: So you say now social workers have access to
7 SSID; do some of them do their own checks or is it left
8 to admin staff?
9 MR SMITH: It could be that some do, but the majority
10 certainly still go through the admin staff, but everyone
11 has got access to SSID.
12 MS GIBSON: But am I right in saying that SSID is a more
13 complex system than the Filemaker system?
14 MR SMITH: It is more time consuming. Yes, maybe not to do
15 a search though.
16 MS GIBSON: Can I ask you now -- you have described your
17 agreement with some of what Mr Punch says in his letter.
18 There was a backlog at this time in inputting referrals;
19 we know in this particular case you yourself logged
20 a referral on 6th July that came in on 18th June.
21 Perhaps if we go to volume 5, page 8, there is a copy of
22 the logging of the referral done by yourself; is that
23 correct?
24 MR SMITH: That is correct.
25 MS GIBSON: Looking at that, there is a box with "CIN",
70
1 which is the category of the case. Who would be
2 responsible for determining the category of the case,
3 and how was that information relayed to you?
4 MR SMITH: The responsibility was with the duty manager or
5 one of the duty seniors, and they would have written it
6 on the referral.
7 MS GIBSON: If we can just go through the procedure in this
8 particular case, we know that a referral came from the
9 One Stop Shop on 18th June, faxed through by
10 Samantha Hunt. Firstly, Mr Armstrong said that there
11 was only one fax machine that served both the Intake
12 Duty Team and the Child Protection Team, both on the
13 ground floor of your office; is that right?
14 MR SMITH: That is correct.
15 MS GIBSON: And that often there would be faxes -- faxes
16 would come through and lie on the floor, and whoever
17 happened to be passing would pick them up?
18 MR SMITH: I cannot recollect that. Certainly there was
19 a lot of faxes and a lot of information coming through,
20 but I cannot ever remember seeing faxes sprawled all
21 over the floor, no.
22 MS GIBSON: But was there any system in place for ensuring
23 that a person was responsible for collecting faxes and
24 distributing them to the appropriate team?
25 MR SMITH: No.
71
1 MS GIBSON: Just go to page 6, just before. That is a copy
2 of the referral that appears to have been faxed through
3 on 18th June. At the top is marked "CSW"; what did you
4 understand by that?
5 MR SMITH: That is Children's Social Work.
6 MS GIBSON: How would anyone determine which team that fax
7 was designated for, child in need or child protection?
8 MR SMITH: Are you saying if it had come via the fax on the
9 ground floor?
10 MS GIBSON: Yes, it lands on the fax machine, comes into the
11 office. Who knows which team that is to go to?
12 MR SMITH: It goes directly to the admin, for them to do
13 a check, as far as they can do, on the information that
14 is given to them. They will then, if the person is
15 known, pass it on to the relevant team person.
16 MS GIBSON: So let me get this right. The fax comes in and
17 it does not go through the hands of a manager of either
18 of the teams, it goes straight to admin for logging?
19 MR SMITH: If you are talking about this referral form, it
20 should -- it would go to the duty manager or the duty
21 senior for them to log into a referrals log book. They
22 would put the necessary paperwork on, i.e. a yellow
23 checklist form and a pink cover sheet, fill in the
24 information, and inform the admin staff of what to do.
25 Then it would come to admin.
72
1 MS GIBSON: Would that sort of fax ever go straight to the
2 Child Protection Team rather than through the Intake
3 Duty Team?
4 MR SMITH: I have not known of that, no.
5 MS GIBSON: Just to be clear, because on page 7 there is
6 reference to the child having cuts and bruises on her
7 face. If this fax was picked up by someone from the
8 Child Protection Team, might they have dealt with that
9 directly, or not?
10 MR SMITH: All I can say is they should not have done. If
11 they did, I have not known of that. Most of the social
12 workers who were there understood the procedures and
13 what should have been done.
14 MS GIBSON: Most of the social workers; how were you
15 confident that people knew what to do?
16 MR SMITH: It was down to the managers of both teams to make
17 sure that they were properly inducted, certainly social
18 workers were or did spend some time with the
19 administration on each team, to understand what they did
20 and what was expected of them.
21 MS GIBSON: How did you ensure that the managers actually
22 did properly induct their staff, or did you just rely on
23 them to do that?
24 MR SMITH: Yes, we just relied on them.
25 MS GIBSON: So just going back to page 8 there, the category
73
1 "child in need"; that would have come probably from the
2 duty manager, having filled in the pink and yellow
3 referral forms you spoke of?
4 MR SMITH: That is correct.
5 MS GIBSON: Would there ever be times when administrative
6 staff would include the categorisation of a case, if it
7 had not been done by a manager?
8 MR SMITH: It could be that if the manager had not stated,
9 it would automatically go in under "child in need",
10 because we were not told otherwise.
11 MS GIBSON: Would that be the default position; if you did
12 not know, it would go in under "child in need"?
13 MR SMITH: That is correct.
14 MS GIBSON: And then after this referral is completed, what
15 is done with it? What is the next step in the
16 procedure, after you have done the index checks?
17 MR SMITH: Obviously we complete the index check sheet, give
18 it back to either the duty manager or the duty senior,
19 and await the next instruction.
20 MS GIBSON: And how do you ensure that it is acknowledged by
21 the duty senior or the duty manager?
22 MR SMITH: We actually hand it to them themselves.
23 MS GIBSON: Is there any system in place for saying who it
24 was given to, so there is a recording of that?
25 MR SMITH: Not in this database, no.
74
1 MS GIBSON: Can you just look at page 3 now? You see at the
2 top of that form there is reference to a home visit,
3 "Lori 3.00 pm", and then a date is given, "Wednesday,
4 14th July". Who would be responsible for giving dates
5 for home visits?
6 MR SMITH: If there was an actual date written on there, it
7 tended to be from either the senior social workers or
8 the duty manager. I assume that one of them had written
9 the date down.
10 MS GIBSON: So that is not your writing on that form?
11 MR SMITH: It is not, no.
12 MS GIBSON: As I understood Mr Armstrong's evidence,
13 responsibility for giving dates would be from
14 administrative officers, who ran, if you like, the
15 appointments diary and they would fill in the date on
16 a form such as this. Does that accord with your
17 recollection of what would happen?
18 MR SMITH: Yes, there was an appointments database. We did
19 record the information in it. We were directed by our
20 director that Duty were only to receive four
21 appointments per day, two in the morning, two in the
22 afternoon. A database was set up which informed us if
23 there were four appointments on a certain day and would
24 go to the next available date, so yes, that is correct,
25 but certainly we would not have written the dates on
75
1 this action sheet, so I can only assume that we would
2 have been informed that this is the date that they
3 wanted to make the visit.
4 MS GIBSON: And then if you look at page 11 in that bundle,
5 there is a letter for that appointment. Whose
6 responsibility would it be to ensure that these letters
7 went out for appointments?
8 MR SMITH: This is part of our appointments database. It
9 generates a letter; this is the letter, and we would
10 have sent it out.
11 MS GIBSON: Just going back to index checks on cases, when
12 you log in a referral, is there a standard check that
13 has run in every case, or do you decide what sort of
14 checks you are going to do according to the type of
15 case?
16 MR SMITH: We check the same databases for every single
17 check.
18 MS GIBSON: And was there any procedure in place for making
19 sure the previous referrals as a child in need were
20 noted on the system, when you did checks?
21 MR SMITH: Could you repeat that, please?
22 MS GIBSON: Was there anything in the system to make sure,
23 when you did a check on a particular child, if there had
24 been any previous referrals under the child in need
25 category, as opposed to child protection?
76
1 MR SMITH: Only in the referrals database itself. The other
2 databases would not have informed us if the child was
3 child protection or child in need.
4 MS GIBSON: And again in this case, we know there was
5 a delay in logging the referral between 18th June and
6 6th July, when you entered that referral. Was that
7 a usual sort of delay in this type of case?
8 MR SMITH: I would say no, it could have been the first time
9 that the administration staff had actually seen the
10 referral.
11 MS GIBSON: On the July date?
12 MR SMITH: It could have been, yes.
13 MS GIBSON: Why would that have been?
14 MR SMITH: It is not unheard of for a case to be -- maybe
15 not worked on for a long time, but if there was a small
16 piece of work that needed to be done, it could be that
17 that work had already been done before the
18 administration staff had seen it.
19 MS GIBSON: So there was no system in place for a fax that
20 came into the office to be logged, when it came in, and
21 then to make sure that it got back to the administrative
22 team in a timely fashion?
23 MR SMITH: Apart from the system that I have explained to
24 you, that is the only system that we had.
25 MS GIBSON: Again, we know now that in this particular case,
77
1 a link does seem to have been made between this
2 referral, the child in need referral, and the referral
3 to the Central Middlesex Hospital. What system was in
4 place for ensuring that such links were communicated to
5 the social workers on the team?
6 MR SMITH: If the link was made during the check, and
7 recorded on the database, then the previous papers
8 should be found and attached to that actual referral.
9 MS GIBSON: So the previous papers would be found and
10 attached, and then what would be done to bring that
11 bundle of documents to the attention of a social worker?
12 MR SMITH: Then you would pass all the information on to
13 that social worker, for them to read and to see that
14 there has been previous referrals.
15 MS GIBSON: Thank you very much.
16 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Miss Gibson. Mr Turner, please?
17 MR TURNER: Mr Smith, just a few practicalities first of
18 all, to clarify points that are perhaps outstanding.
19 Have you, since you were asked to do so, managed to
20 print for the Inquiry rather more of the information on
21 the different computer documents which we have, and to
22 which you have just been referred; in other words who
23 made what link and who inputted and so on?
24 MR SMITH: Regarding the child protection database?
25 MR TURNER: Yes.
78
1 MR SMITH: Yes, I have printed off some information.
2 MR TURNER: Just dealing with the documents in sequence, the
3 18th June document, which you have just been shown in
4 bundle 5, at page 8; I think there is no doubt that that
5 is a document which you created.
6 MR SMITH: Yes.
7 MR TURNER: And the computer shows that you created it on
8 6th July?
9 MR SMITH: That is correct.
10 MR TURNER: When you created it on 6th July, had you seen
11 those referral papers, to which you were directed
12 a little earlier, in bundle 5?
13 MR SMITH: I cannot recall that far back, but I can only
14 assume that I had not.
15 MR TURNER: Did you create the sentence that appears in the
16 box on the form, which we see rather more fully on the
17 confidential form on the next page?
18 MR SMITH: I did not actually create the sentence, I pulled
19 a sentence out of the actual referral.
20 MR TURNER: That presupposes that you had access to the
21 referral by 6th July, and that was a sentence which you
22 made or chose.
23 MR SMITH: Yes.
24 MR TURNER: How do you go about that? How do you make
25 a decision about what to put in?
79
1 MR SMITH: You try to the best of your ability to analyse
2 what the important parts of the referral are.
3 MR TURNER: Right. In this case, your summary was:
4 "Sees the child constantly wetting herself and has
5 seen her previously with cuts and bruises around the
6 face. Others have expressed concern. As far as the
7 referrer knows, the child is not attending school."
8 A two line summary of the One Stop Shop
9 communication.
10 MR SMITH: Yes.
11 MR TURNER: When you inputted those details, you would have
12 had, would you, the referral, signed by Mr Armstrong, in
13 front of you?
14 MR SMITH: Yes.
15 MR TURNER: Right. On that referral, he indicates -- and
16 this is at 5/003 -- that this is a case designated for
17 other advice and assistance. Of a number of boxes he
18 could tick, that appears to be the one that he has
19 ticked.
20 MR SMITH: Yes.
21 MR TURNER: Was it on that basis, the basis of that
22 document, that you took the view that an appropriate
23 category was CIN, child in need?
24 MR SMITH: Yes, or the referral clarification, there is
25 a box there for child protection; it is not ticked.
80
1 MR TURNER: Exactly. Now what do you think is the most
2 likely explanation for the delay between 18th June and
3 6th July, when you inputted it? I think Brent accepts
4 that it is an unacceptable delay, as I think you do.
5 MR SMITH: Yes.
6 MR TURNER: What is the most likely explanation for that?
7 MR SMITH: I would argue that it is not a regular occurrence
8 that it would take three weeks for us to see a referral.
9 I can only assume that, as I said, it was the first time
10 that it was passed to administration staff.
11 MR TURNER: And if it had not been passed to administration
12 until 6th July, what would have been likely to have been
13 happening to it?
14 MR SMITH: It could be put into a file tray, for us to do
15 our checks, but as I said, the two cover sheets -- the
16 duty manager and the duty senior social workers would
17 have seen this. If there was a backlog at the time, and
18 it was felt that it was an urgent case, then they would
19 bring it directly to the administration staff
20 immediately.
21 MR TURNER: Yes. When you saw it on 6th July, did you
22 think, "My, this looks serious, I had better talk to
23 somebody"?
24 MR SMITH: I cannot actually honestly say that I remember
25 directly this referral.
81
1 MR TURNER: Very well. Going on to the 14th July document,
2 and I have this, and it may be convenient for you to
3 look at it at 7/000.453. This is the 14th July
4 inputting, and I think you have got some further
5 information about that. That entry was created,
6 I think, by Martin Punch on 15th July; is that correct?
7 MR SMITH: Yes.
8 MR TURNER: And the computer indicates that.
9 MR SMITH: Yes.
10 MR TURNER: The computer also indicates that it was modified
11 by, and the category is "Social Services", on
12 6th September 1999. If it was modified by Social
13 Services, what might that mean?
14 MR SMITH: That means that someone has not actually been
15 given a password, so it automatically goes to "Social
16 Services" if it does not recognise a name.
17 MR TURNER: Now that referral, as we have already seen, does
18 make a connection with 1009966, which is the 18th June
19 referral.
20 MR SMITH: Yes.
21 MR TURNER: So we can take it that Mr Punch made, as he
22 accepts, that connection.
23 MR SMITH: On the database, yes.
24 MR TURNER: And you have just told us what ought to have
25 happened in relation to that information; there is no
82
1 evidence here that the information was communicated
2 further than Mr Punch.
3 MR SMITH: No, that is correct.
4 MR TURNER: The indication on the computer indicates not
5 only that a link was made, that it was created by
6 Mr Punch on 15th July, but it was last modified by
7 Social Services on 6th September. What step does that
8 represent?
9 MR SMITH: It means that someone has made an amendment or
10 added something to that database, so that was the last
11 time that any recording happened on this actual
12 referral.
13 MR TURNER: And in this case, that seems to be, from again
14 the computer print-out that you have checked,
15 Mr Armstrong closing the case on probably 3rd September.
16 MR SMITH: Yes.
17 MR TURNER: With the entry being made in the box "Decision:
18 closed, client re-referred to Ealing."
19 MR SMITH: That is correct.
20 MR TURNER: I want to ask you, in the same bundle, please,
21 if you would turn on to 7/000.456? I want to understand
22 what document we see here.
23 MR SMITH: It is still part of the referral database, it is
24 just a different area that we have gone into.
25 MR TURNER: And what area are we in on this page?
83
1 MR SMITH: It is informing us about who the manager is, what
2 action is being taken. It also mentions about the
3 appointment date, where the appointment is going to take
4 place, what the decision is currently and who the
5 allocated social worker is.
6 MR TURNER: I think as far as this document is concerned, it
7 was again created by you on 6th July, is that right?
8 MR SMITH: That is correct.
9 MR TURNER: And modified by you on 6th July?
10 MR SMITH: Yes.
11 MR TURNER: The initial action date is 21st June; that seems
12 to tie in, I think, with Mr Armstrong's duty manager's
13 action sheet; am I right about that?
14 MR SMITH: That is correct.
15 MR TURNER: And the action is to be a home visit?
16 MR SMITH: Yes.
17 MR TURNER: What does "open on duty" mean?
18 MR SMITH: It means the case is just on duty with social
19 worker Lori Hobbs.
20 MR TURNER: I would like you to look on at 7/000.459. There
21 is a pretty indistinct reference at the top of that
22 document which I think you have now managed to see more
23 clearly. Does it read as follows? Number first of all,
24 working from the left to the right, 1010060?
25 MR SMITH: Yes.
84
1 MR TURNER: Date, 14/7/99?
2 MR SMITH: Yes.
3 MR TURNER: "Category: CP. Health: Excluding GP. Closed",
4 and then a date, 3/09/99?
5 MR SMITH: That is correct.
6 MR TURNER: Most of that is obvious. What is "Health:
7 exc GP"?
8 MR SMITH: I think that is where the referral source come
9 from.
10 MR TURNER: That is obviously the hospital referral.
11 MR SMITH: Yes.
12 MR TURNER: And that has been entered appropriately?
13 MR SMITH: Yes.
14 MR TURNER: Turn finally in this section for clarification,
15 please, to 7/000.462; this was a point that the Chairman
16 raised in relation to an entry which again is indistinct
17 on this document. This is the address search, is it?
18 MR SMITH: That is correct.
19 MR TURNER: And indeed there seem to be several references
20 to the address. At the top, and very indistinct, we
21 have a number; then we have a date of 9/7/97. Then we
22 have CIN, child in need. The referring source is
23 education. That was closed, and then we have a date,
24 30/7/97.
25 MR SMITH: Yes.
85
1 MR TURNER: Need that necessarily have come up on
2 Miss Hunt's preliminary look at the One Stop Shop or
3 not?
4 MR SMITH: This information?
5 MR TURNER: Yes.
6 MR SMITH: No.
7 MR TURNER: Why not?
8 MR SMITH: They do not have access to this database.
9 MR TURNER: Is what we are looking at here Filemaker or
10 SSID?
11 MR SMITH: It is Filemaker.
12 MR TURNER: All these are Filemaker?
13 MR SMITH: Yes.
14 MR TURNER: So Miss Hunt checking, even by address, as she
15 told us she did, would not necessarily have spotted that
16 there had been a previous referral to 8 -- obviously
17 there are some differences of address, I accept, but
18 8 Nicoll Road as part of the address?
19 MR SMITH: No, that is correct. She would not have been
20 able to access this information.
21 MR TURNER: We do not know and have not been able to clarify
22 what the YJ, the Youth Justice referral may have been on
23 7th July, but it might have been, I suppose, some sort
24 of reference to the police or a complaint to the police,
25 something to do with the property, would it?
86
1 MR SMITH: It could have been, yes.
2 MR TURNER: But your enquiries do not reveal any further
3 detail about that?
4 MR SMITH: No.
5 MR TURNER: Anywhere in your computer searches, Mr Smith,
6 have you found any referral received or which may have
7 been received by Mr Armstrong on 21st June?
8 MR SMITH: No.
9 MR TURNER: He seems to think that you may have been
10 inputting on the July date, 6th July, a referral
11 received on 21st June; were you?
12 MR SMITH: The referral that I was inputting at that time
13 was the referral taken by Samantha Hunt.
14 MR TURNER: Of the 18th?
15 MR SMITH: That is correct.
16 MR TURNER: And as far as you are aware, nothing in any of
17 our computer systems indicates a referral received on
18 the 21st?
19 MR SMITH: No, that is correct.
20 MR TURNER: I just want to clarify one or two points about
21 the system, if I may, quite briefly. When you talk
22 about external checks, what checks are actually possible
23 on Filemaker, in terms of external checks?
24 MR SMITH: There is not any. They are all our internal
25 databases. There were spreadsheets, an Excel
87
1 spreadsheet for the Youth Justice Team and the Aftercare
2 Team about the cases that they held, otherwise the
3 databases that we were checking for --
4 MR TURNER: There may have been an impression given that you
5 had for some reason to go back to the One Stop Shops for
6 checks on other or outside agencies. I think you told
7 us you needed to do that for SNAPS, is that right?
8 MR SMITH: That is correct.
9 MR TURNER: Nothing else?
10 MR SMITH: It was not through the One Stop Shop, we went
11 directly to SNAPS.
12 MR TURNER: And where was that accessed, in your own office
13 or elsewhere?
14 MR SMITH: We did not access it, we sent the appropriate
15 form after request, whether a child or a family was
16 known, if they had any involvement to us, and they
17 completed the form and returned it.
18 MR TURNER: If, for example, one wanted to know whether a GP
19 or a health visitor or any of the other very important
20 network of contacts had anything to contribute to
21 information about a child, how would that sort of
22 information be gathered? By computer or by other means?
23 MR SMITH: By computer. I believe one of our databases is
24 called "Schoolmedi", which is school medicals, would
25 hold that information.
88
1 MR TURNER: Right. You set out the details of those in the
2 statement. Mr Smith, it is said against you really that
3 you failed to ensure that the administrative systems
4 were adequate to enable social workers to link the
5 referral made on 18th June with that on 14th July, and
6 you are personally criticised for that. What do you
7 want to say about that?
8 MR SMITH: It seems obvious that the referral certainly as
9 on the database was linked. I cannot say for definite
10 whether the papers were linked together, but that is
11 human error, if that is the case.
12 MR TURNER: And where, so far as it is possible to judge,
13 does the human error lie, in your view?
14 MR SMITH: If we assume that Mr Punch did the second
15 referral, and he is the person who made reference to the
16 first referral, then he should be obtaining the first
17 paperwork, and attaching it to the second referral.
18 MR TURNER: Yes. Now just a little bit about systems and
19 where we are at the moment in terms of these matters.
20 The understaffing aspect you have described; did you
21 consider at the time, and we are talking about
22 June/July 1999, that the system was swamped or coping?
23 MR SMITH: I would probably say in between. I would not say
24 it was swamped, but with two permanent members of staff
25 down there, they certainly would not be able to cope
89
1 with the volume they were dealing with.
2 MR TURNER: And in terms of the content of the backlog,
3 Mr Armstrong told us that he thought among the backlog
4 may have been child protection cases. First of all, do
5 you think that was the case?
6 MR SMITH: Child protection cases tend to go directly to
7 Mr Punch, and they do not sit in trays. They tend to be
8 given directly to the administration staff, because of
9 the urgency and the nature of the cases.
10 MR TURNER: And whose responsibility is it or was it to get
11 a child protection case into the hands of the
12 administrative officer, to get it on the computer?
13 MR SMITH: The responsibility lies with either the duty
14 manager or the child protection manager.
15 MR TURNER: Right, and in this case that is Mr Armstrong or
16 Ms Roper?
17 MR SMITH: Yes.
18 MR TURNER: SSID, you have told us, is a database not
19 without its problems. Was Filemaker a good system for
20 CSW purposes?
21 MR SMITH: Yes.
22 MR TURNER: Are you clear why CSW chose to use Filemaker at
23 a time when much of the rest of the Council was using
24 SSID?
25 MR SMITH: I understand that as of April 1996, Children's
90
1 Social Work was all brought together under one umbrella,
2 and Mr Bamford, the line manager, put together all the
3 systems and databases. It was a package that he was
4 used to, so as far as I understand, that is how we began
5 to use Filemaker.
6 MR TURNER: And did Filemaker as a system serve the
7 Council's CSW well or badly in your judgment?
8 MR SMITH: It served Children's Social Work very well, but
9 obviously not so much for the One Stop Shop, because
10 they could not access it, and if you are expecting them
11 to take our referrals, they should be accessing the
12 system that we have.
13 MR TURNER: Right. And that is resolved, and everyone is
14 now on SSID, I think.
15 MR SMITH: That is correct.
16 MR TURNER: Is it working satisfactorily in your opinion
17 now, or not?
18 MR SMITH: We cannot extract any information out of SSID.
19 It is not currently up to date. The information from
20 this referrals database has not been entered on to SSID.
21 It was a gradual process, of which I would say we were
22 30 to 40 per cent of transferring the information over,
23 and I believe that is how it currently stands. We still
24 have many databases in Filemaker, throughout the unit.
25 MR TURNER: And typically, if a case came in at the moment,
91
1 would a check on Filemaker be run?
2 MR SMITH: Yes.
3 MR TURNER: So it is still extant, and working in parallel?
4 MR SMITH: Yes.
5 MR TURNER: And would that be invariably run, or just in
6 a case where it was thought there may be relevant
7 information before a certain date?
8 MR SMITH: No, we would check all the databases.
9 MR TURNER: The physical configuration you have told us has
10 improved and I would like you just very briefly to tell
11 the Inquiry how that has improved, with more space and
12 so on. What are the present arrangements for storage of
13 files, and how are they better?
14 MR SMITH: At the time, during this period, it was known as
15 the Duty and Child Protection Team. They are now
16 referred to as Referral and Assessment Teams. It is
17 split into two areas, east and west of the borough. If
18 I describe it that the long-term work of Referral and
19 Assessment is dealt with on the first floor, and the
20 duty side of Referral and Assessment is dealt with on
21 the ground floor, which has created a lot more space,
22 plus we have had all that area redecorated and all our
23 interview rooms redone out, made a lot bigger and
24 accessible to anyone in a wheelchair.
25 MR TURNER: Do you have a sense overall, Mr Smith, that the
92
1 administrative arrangements are now better than they
2 were in 1999?
3 MR SMITH: Yes, I believe they are.
4 MR TURNER: And in headline form, in what ways? You have
5 touched on the space point. What are the other
6 improvements which you discern?
7 MR SMITH: I think it is more organised. Certainly it is
8 still as busy, but whenever I go down into the teams, it
9 is certainly more organised.
10 MR TURNER: You have, I think, looked at all the documents
11 for the relevant period, between June and September, in
12 respect of Mr Punch's private log; am I right?
13 MR SMITH: I would like to correct that. It was not
14 actually Mr Punch's private log. He created the
15 database, but it was accessible to all the
16 administration staff on Duty and Child Protection.
17 MR TURNER: You I think were aware of its existence; were
18 you troubled by its existence or not?
19 MR SMITH: I was aware of it. It was in existence when
20 I arrived. I thought it was a lot of duplication, and
21 a lot of it is the same information that goes on the
22 referrals database. I think probably Mr Punch set up
23 his database for statistical purposes, and maybe could
24 have spoken to Mr Bamford about what was missing from
25 the referrals database and he could have amended it to
93
1 fit the child protection area.
2 MR TURNER: I have indicated to Mr Garnham that these
3 documents are freely available to the Inquiry if anyone
4 wants them, but I think it is right that apart from one
5 reference which I will come to, there is absolutely no
6 reference to Victoria or Anna, as she was known to
7 Brent, in that independent, separate system?
8 MR SMITH: No, there is not.
9 MR TURNER: And I think the only reference comes at a time
10 when she had died?
11 MR SMITH: That is correct.
12 MR TURNER: And papers were being requested, or something of
13 that sort?
14 MR SMITH: That is correct.
15 MR TURNER: But it does not throw any light at all on what
16 was happening in the management of the case during the
17 relevant period?
18 MR SMITH: No, it does not.
19 MR TURNER: Thank you very much.
20 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr Turner, I am grateful to you.
21 Mr Smith, just a few questions. You said earlier on
22 that a link was made between the referral on the 18th
23 and the referral on the 21st. Can you tell us when that
24 link was made?
25 MR SMITH: Not on the 21st. The link was made between the
94
1 two --
2 THE CHAIRMAN: Sorry, 18th and 14th. My mistake.
3 MR SMITH: Could you repeat the question, sir?
4 THE CHAIRMAN: You said that the link was made. When was it
5 made?
6 MR SMITH: I could not tell through the database, because
7 the last entry was by Social Services. I cannot
8 remember the date. It could have been linked
9 immediately, when Mr Punch inputted the information, but
10 that does not necessarily mean that he made the link
11 between the papers.
12 THE CHAIRMAN: Was that link known at the time of the
13 criminal trial?
14 MR SMITH: I am not sure. I do not know.
15 THE CHAIRMAN: Could you show us, from your evidence, when
16 the link was made, or is that not possible?
17 MR SMITH: No, it is not possible.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: Perhaps Mr Turner can help us later on.
19 MR SMITH: I am not even sure that we could go back. As
20 I say, the last entry was by Social Services. It could
21 have been that there was a link after the referral but
22 before the date of the last entry, so it automatically
23 overrides that information.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: I may come back to that, Mr Smith.
25 Mr Smith, you mentioned that the One Stop Shop made
95
1 referrals by fax, with regard to children's work.
2 MR SMITH: That is correct.
3 THE CHAIRMAN: So the example that we have got about the
4 child that was known as Anna that I think is in front of
5 you, which, for your reference, is 05/007; I think it is
6 the one you referred to earlier on, I think you are
7 familiar with it.
8 MR SMITH: Yes.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: Would that be typical?
10 MR SMITH: Yes.
11 THE CHAIRMAN: And so that would arrive by fax on the ground
12 floor?
13 MR SMITH: It does not actually say at the top of it. It
14 states when it was faxed, it does not actually say where
15 it was faxed. We can only assume that it went to the
16 ground floor. It could have gone to another fax around
17 the building.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: Sorry, I thought you said in evidence there
19 was only one fax machine --
20 MR SMITH: There was only one fax machine on that floor,
21 between the Child Protection Team and the Duty Team, but
22 there were fax machines on every floor.
23 THE CHAIRMAN: So it could have gone to any one of several
24 faxes?
25 MR SMITH: It could have.
96
1 THE CHAIRMAN: Then it would help me if you could just take
2 us through then exactly what would happen to it.
3 MR SMITH: If it went to another floor, whoever would pick
4 it up would, if they were not understanding of what the
5 process was, they would probably speak to the
6 administration in their team, and the administration
7 should then send any faxes down to the Duty and Child
8 Protection Administration Team.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: So it would come to your unit?
10 MR SMITH: It would.
11 THE CHAIRMAN: Just for absolute clarity, what would then
12 happen?
13 MR SMITH: Then it would be given to either the senior
14 social worker or the duty manager to record the
15 information in a referrals log book. They would put the
16 necessary paperwork on top of it, and then it should
17 come back to Admin.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: So nothing happened in Admin, other than to
19 convey it to the duty manager?
20 MR SMITH: No. Once the duty manager has hatched the
21 necessary check sheet, and the pink front sheet that he
22 completes, then it comes back to Admin to do their
23 checks.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: So somebody would pick it up from the fax
25 machine -- I just want to be absolutely clear about
97
1 this. They would bring it to your unit, but your unit
2 would do nothing at that stage?
3 MR SMITH: We would pass it on to either the senior social
4 worker or the duty manager, depending on who was
5 recording the information in the referrals log book.
6 They would log it then, a very similar -- like
7 a handwritten version of our referrals database, record
8 the information and then inform us on the necessary
9 papers of what they expect the Admin to do, i.e. to
10 complete the necessary checks throughout the databases,
11 and then it would go to and from the duty manager and
12 the admin staff at each stage of where the referral was
13 at.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: So if I could take you to 05/003, that is
15 what happened?
16 MR SMITH: That is, yes.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: And whose writing is on that form?
18 MR SMITH: I believe that Mr Armstrong said that he
19 completed the information on the child and the address,
20 and what he expected the Admin to do, and signed it off.
21 I am not too clear on whose writing it is regarding the
22 appointment. If it is not Mr Armstrong's, it could be
23 one of the senior social workers.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: So you in Admin would not know who actually
25 has given the instruction, because this is not signed in
98
1 any way.
2 MR SMITH: It is on the second page. That is part of the
3 form. It has just been separated; this would be the
4 back page.
5 THE CHAIRMAN: I assume that what you are saying as
6 signature, that is an indication to you as to who has
7 done it.
8 MR SMITH: Yes.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: But if you go to the writing on the top
10 right-hand corner, you have no idea whose that writing
11 is?
12 MR SMITH: No.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: So you do not know who wrote that or when it
14 was written?
15 MR SMITH: I do not, no.
16 THE CHAIRMAN: Would you like to speculate?
17 MR SMITH: I am looking at a copy. I think, if I saw the
18 original, I am not too clear, but I might have seen the
19 original, and it might have been initialled MB, which
20 would be Monica Bridgeman, but I cannot be 100 per cent
21 clear on that.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Could I take you to 07/000.456? Sorry about
23 this, Mr Smith, it is just trying to be absolutely
24 clear, if we can, about this trail, which I have to say
25 has not been entirely clear so far.
99
1 MR SMITH: Okay.
2 THE CHAIRMAN: Are you familiar with that?
3 MR SMITH: Yes.
4 THE CHAIRMAN: Tell us what that is, please.
5 MR SMITH: Are we looking at 000.456?
6 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes.
7 MR SMITH: That is part of the referrals database. If you
8 look at the page before, you can see the three headings
9 that are at the top, "Referral", "Status" and "Reports".
10 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes.
11 MR SMITH: We are in the "Status" page, on the second page.
12 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. And tell us what the significance
13 of that is.
14 MR SMITH: It is just informing us of who the manager was,
15 what action is being taken, on what date that action is
16 being taken, and what the current status is of that
17 referral, i.e. it is open on duty and the social worker
18 is Lori Hobbs.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: And who completed 000.456?
20 MR SMITH: That is -- I believe that is part of my referral.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: And where did you get that from?
22 MR SMITH: That would have been part of the referral that we
23 were just looking at.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: So you have transposed, if I can put it that
25 way, the handwriting on the top of D5 on to this sheet?
100
1 MR SMITH: That is correct.
2 THE CHAIRMAN: When would you have done this?
3 MR SMITH: I believe I did it exactly the same time as it
4 was entered, which was on 6th July.
5 THE CHAIRMAN: When you say believe, just so that I am
6 absolutely clear --
7 MR SMITH: I do not have it in front of me, but I believe
8 the date I created the record and the last entry in the
9 record are exactly the same.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. You referred to, in your
11 statement to us, in paragraph 4, that there were five
12 databases.
13 MR SMITH: Yes.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: From the letter that Mr Punch wrote, and from
15 what you have said, if I am not mistaken, we could
16 actually get that to seven, but let us not argue about
17 it, shall we? We will just accept there were several
18 databases.
19 MR SMITH: Yes.
20 THE CHAIRMAN: For a member of staff, particularly somebody
21 trying to connect all this together, it must have been
22 quite a challenge to work their way through this system.
23 MR SMITH: Index checks take a high proportion of time for
24 the administration staff, yes, in particular if a social
25 worker is standing there with someone on the line
|
