Cross Post from Clare Sambrook: State-sponsored cruelty

Clare Sambrook the novelist and journalist, who is the pro-bono co-ordinator of End Child Detention Now wrote to be asking if I would cross post this article writen by here for open democracy. I am happy to cross post that article in full and unabridged here today as our party gathers in Liverpool for conference.

State-sponsored cruelty

The Liberal Democrats must fight to salvage their promise to end the detention of children for immigration purposes in the UK.

Ask Boy A what he is scared of and he says dogs, strangers and policemen. He is scared to go outside and play with friends. At night he wets his bed. He cannot sleep without his mother. He is nine years old.

At their autumn conference this weekend Liberal Democrats wanting to rescue their end child detention pledge from Home Office sabotage will find ammunition in a chilling new report from Medical Justice.

Boy A is one of 141 children in the report that takes its title — 'State Sponsored Cruelty' — from Nick Clegg's pre-election definition of the detention policy. Almost half the children were born in Britain, and 62 per cent of all of them were released from detention back into the UK, raising the question, why on earth were they locked up in the first place?

Boy S, aged 9, arrested with his mother in a dawn raid and locked up in Yarl's Wood detention centre, lost one tenth of his body weight in a single month. Another child, bounced in and out of Yarl's Wood time and time again, spent 166 days behind bars before she was three years old. And this, in Britain, a country where dawn raids and imprisonment of families who have committed no crime is unimaginable in any other context.

At their Spring conference six months ago Liberal Democrats voted to make ending child detention an Election promise. ('The Government must find its long lost moral compass and put an end to child detention immediately', said Chris Huhne, then shadow Home Secretary.) Clegg pushed successfully for its inclusion in the Coalition Agreement.

Then the Home Office went to work. Instead of stopping the dawn raids and closing the asylum prisons, immigration minister Damian Green invited selected NGOs to join a 'working party' helping the government; to review alternatives to detention.

Gre>en announced: 'All those who have the most knowledge of the asylum process should play a significant role in guiding us onto the right path.' Behind their backs, he sanctioned ill-thought out draconian 'pilots' of 'alternatives', bundling vulnerable families out of the country without recourse to legal advice.

In a parallel and chilling show of true intent, the Ministry of Justice, ignoring appeals from scores of leading lawyers and the Archbishop of Canterbury, let the biggest provider of legal representation to asylum seekers — Refugee & Migrant Justice — fail, for want of prompt payment of fees owed by the government. RMJ’s collapse robbed many thousands of vulnerable people of legal advice, and thrust the surviving not-for-profit legal aid providers and specialist solicitor firms under catastrophic strain.

As for Damian Green’s review process, its integrity is manifested in the person put in charge of it. Dave Wood, a former police officer with no experience in children’s services, is director of criminality and detention at the UK Border Agency, locking up more than 1000 children every year in conditions known to harm their health.

Such is Wood’s enthusiasm for detention that he told the Home Affairs Select Committee last year that families rarely abscond but should be locked up anyway to deter others from coming here.

He wrote to the committee falsely undermining peer-reviewed medical evidence that Yarl's Wood was damaging children’s physical health and messing up their minds. 'The study was undertaken without any reference to the UK Border Agency or its clinicians,' he told MPs. Not true. Home Office documents attest to the discussions that took place.

No maverick, Wood is a perfect product of his department's culture. As recently as June, an eye-popping safeguarding report criticised the Border Agency for 'fundamental' child protection failings. Dismissing a mother's desperate pleas for medical care for her five year old, sexually abused at Yarl's Wood, the Border Agency (catchphrase: 'treating children with care and compassion is a priority') swept mother and child out of the country.

The Minister for Children and Families, Sarah Teather — a Liberal Democrat — sent a friendly message to last week's parliamentary launch of the Medical Justice report, easserting the Coalition's commitment to ending child detention, but adding: 'We have to be careful not to rush into this as we are dealing with the safety and well-being of often vulnerable children and it is essential it is done properly.'

Quite how children’s safety might be served by not rushing to end a practice proven to wreck their lives is a mystery that suggests leading Liberal Democrats have been gulled by the detention enthusiasts at the Home Office.

Liberal Democrats may take pride in their end child detention pledge. But they must summon the political integrity to fight for it, or else the Home Office will swap one form of state sponsored cruelty for another. As Medical Justice concludes: 'Ending the immigration detention of children should be immediate, and not contingent on any reviews or pilot projects on alternatives to detention.'

So Tory Bear Describe a Typical Paedophile?

The disgusting and thoroughly uncuddly Tory Bear has made a tweet too far. During the Gordon Brown interview with Piers Morgan he tweeted. "Brown looks like paedo".

(I see that Tory Bear has deleted the post put I'd taken a sceen print in case he deleted without apology, no apology so here it is)



Of course of those involved in acts of child abuse 30% are as likely to be family members not just the strangers you'd meet on the street. Up to 20% of offences may be perpetrated by women rather than men.

Maybe in light of this Tory Bear would like to tell us what sort of new detection process, maybe facial profiling, he has come up with that would help the police, or is that Dave's SS, to round up all the paedophiles in the country by sight alone?

Indeed this is the blogger who wants to take the Tory spotlight and push their agenda front and centre but with such language and reaction he's really just a low life and he's proven it again.

However, if this is the level of Conservative Future, maybe it isn't that much of a surprise that Dave doesn't want actually Tory students behind him when he's making a speech. But then the Conservative Future Scotland Chair thinks it's OK to lie about their provenance "it's called PR". Oh dear the young Tories seem to not understand when the people don't trust politicians to start PR needs to be truthful, honest and decent.

PS I wonder if the same action from un high in Conservative Central Office will befall Tory Bear's use of language. Which IMHO is actually worse as it is in a political sense that that which brought the heavy hand down on Cardiff Blogger last November.



Update 19:00 I see that Harry Cole is trying to excuse his tweet on drink and twitter mixing. Only problem is that even sober he still keeps putting into writing his thoughts and they haven't changed.

Update 2 on Baby Ben

There is good news for Kerry Robertson, Mark McDougall and their baby Ben. As I reported last Friday when Ben was just 4 days old he was snatched from his parents by Irish social services upon the request of Fife Council's team who had deemed that Kerry was incapable of raising the child.

Yesterday mother and baby were reunited in a mother and child unit in Ireland. While that does mean that they will be under constant supervision it mean that the bonding process between mother and child can resume.

Fife Council it emerges have never carried out a formal psychological assessment of Kerry, who readily admits to not having many qualifications from school. However she was employed as a childcare worker in a local school in Fife before becoming pregnant and does hold a certificate in child care.

Now at least I'm glad that a proper appraisal in the mother and baby unit of Kerry capabilities as a mother can be assessed, though why this wasn't the first port of call from Fife or Ireland is beyond me. I hope that this period of supervision is successful for the family and they can then get on with the normality of raising their child.

UPDATE: To help raise money for the family and Mark to be able to get to the mother and baby unit you can bid for some of his pictures on ebay (via Morgan Gallagher).

Fife Council Child Snatchers

I used to say "I" and "me"
Now it's "us", now it's "we"
Ben, most people would turn you away
I don't listen to a word they say
They don't see you as I do
I wish they would try to
I'm sure they'd think again
If they had a friend like Ben

from Ben by Michael Jackson

The problems is for one little Ben that chance may not be forthcoming. Earlier this week Fife Council put him on at risk-register once they were aware that he had been born last Friday. At four days old Irish Social services came and took the baby away from his mother and father.

His mother 17 year-old Kerry Robertson has mild learning difficulties, but Fife Council consider that she is incapable of raising the baby. The fact is that they found the mother and her 25 year old partner Mark McDougall because having fled Scotland when she was 29 weeks pregnant she kept up all her checks and scans in Ireland. So the fact that the couple were capable of looking after an unborn babies well being led Fife Council to them in Waterford.

John Hemming, Liberal Democrat MP for Birmingham Yardley, actually believes that the removal of baby from his parents under the protection order in Ireland is actually illegal. And says:

"There is no evidence that Mark and Kerry cannot be good parents and I just hope that the Irish authorities can resolve this as quickly as possible."

Now I know there has been some slop handed social services work in protecting real at risk children but the evidence in this case is not proven. As the FTO the South African News Blog points out:

Lets just say things was different and Kerry had no learning difficulties and she died at childbirth, no one would take Ben from his father. Why is this so different? Even if Kerry was unable to care for the child she is not alone, she has a partner who is committed and loving with a supporting family.

Indeed they also report:

When Mark McDougall saw Ben's care order there was a different name on it and date of birth. He believes social services has kidnapped his baby. Who can blame him?

So we come to Fife council whose executive director of social work, Stephen Moore said:

"I can confirm that although the Robertson family are not presently within Fife, we are committed to working closely with professional colleagues elsewhere to ensure safety and welfare of the child and indeed the whole family as this is of paramount concern to us.

"I would urge Kerry to use all the support that is being made available to her and her baby and to get appropriate help should she need it."

Now herein lies a major fault in what they say. Kerry had been doing just that. The two midwifes who had been caring for her and Ben fled the room in tears when the social services took the infant away from his mother and father. David Cameron may want to lock single parents up in the poor house, but here is a father who has stuck by the mother of child, even though the council had also stepped in to stop their marriage. Both parents are being denied the chance to prove they are capable parents because of an arbitrary decision made by some council official.

Had they asked the medical staff for evidence of their ability in the days since Ben's birth? It doesn't appear that they did, or if they did they went against that advice. With a sister-in-law who is a midwife I know how carefully the early days of a child's life are observed by those around the ward. They insure that the child and the parents are going to get the best start. They are the experts, they can spot if there is going to be any difficulties, not some paper pusher who thinks that someone's IQ is below a line in the sand.

Each case should be assessed on its merits. Fife council have not done so in this case, they made a decision long before full term as to the mother's ability irrespective of other situations such as her partner it appears.

Here in GMTV's report into the case back in October. You can even see how much Mark cares for Kerry and the unborn child at the time. Mark Goldring the expert from Mencap says that Fife at that time said they would look at all the facts and circumstances. Judge from yourself if that is the case. I feel that they have not.



UPDATE: Here is a letter from Morgan Gallagher of 'Nursing Matters' to Mr Moore of Fife Social Services and Nicola Sturgeon the Scottish Health Minister.

UPDATE 2: If you have been touched by this story join the Facebook Group to show your support. One comment from Mark MacDougall on there:

"Kerry has already proved Fife very wrong as all the medical staff at hospital nothing but praise for her parenting skills."

Read Also: A similar tale from Essex which makes you wonder just what can spark such decisions even more.

Gay Youth Faces Death In Iran

There is a story that you'll be hard pressed to find in the UK Press. It is the story of Nemat Safavi, who is only 21. At the age of 16 he was arrested and charged with the crime of Lavat (sex with another man). On the 31 October he was finally sentanced for his crimes, the penalty is death.

Iran has signed two treaties on the treatment of juveniles and has promised not to execute any minor for a crime. However, Nemat though his 'crime' was committed while he was a minor is now of age, Iran are twisting the rules. Detaining people until they are old enough, to sentance them for something that is who they are, not what they do.

Many of the claims of Lavat have for obvious reasons not been proven by actual evidence it is largely circumstantial. But young men are disappearing all the time in Iran under a cloud of this change. The Islamic Republic of Iran like to boast that there are no homosexuals in Iran. However, there clearly are they are just not tolerated and allowed to be who they are.

Last year many of us were up in arms about the case of Mehdi Kazemi who was being deported back to Iran for the same fate. Amnesty International, the European Parliament and the UN are already on this case as well but why don't you also apply your own pressure, find out how on the Facebook Group.

Hattip to The Wardman Wire

Vactican Buck Passing In Extremis

The latest comment from the Vatican on the Church's child sex abuse scandal is attempting to shift blame to the gay community at large rather than at the priesthood (hattip to Daniel Edward Pitt @myinfamy). It states that it is caused by gay men preying on teenage boys not paedophiles.

Ignore for a start that paedophilia is the sexual attraction to children and therefore is gender non-specific. That is just a spin that the Church appears to be trying to say somehow that being sexually attracted to an opposite sex child is somewhat less debauched.

Now there may well be 80-90% of the paedophile instances in the Catholic Church are against boys, but those that automatically by definition place the blame on the gay community. The fact is do all the girls that have been abused by priests admit to it. Is the fact that they may have been deflowered by the church maybe something that they don't want to report. Is Thorn Birds merely a make believe or is that going on too? After all we know that there are occasions of priests fathering children with their house keepers. So is it maybe all down to the willingness and availability of personnel, housekeepers or alter boys?

The fact that the Catholic Church indoctrinates their priest that they are to be celibate and abstain from sex from women folk could well led to a deep outpouring of sexual pent up anger. Also does the restriction of the right to marriage also attract a certain type of person to the priesthood? Is it possible that the churches latest statement throws up a whole chicken or the egg kind of situation that they are not prepared to address.

Now I'm not denying that there have been instances of child abuse in other churches, I know there have been cases. Nor am I denying that some of those weren't carried out by men against boys. But they have admitted that 1.5 to 5% of priest have been abused in underage sexual abuse, this isn't accounting for affairs of an adult nature. The question does arise if the vow of celibacy a causal effect of all this?

Trying to shift the attention to gay men also doesn't negate the effect that those men were ordained and took Holy Orders in the Church. They were under its jurisdiction and supervision. We know that on occasion they were not dismissed but merely moved over elsewhere with the same responsibility, accessibility and opportunity. Trying to dust it under the carpet and attempt to shift the focus doesn't negate the Churches responsibility for the issue.

Government to Think Again Over ISA

While the Detective Chief Superintent, Chris Stevenson, responsible for the Soham investigation says expanded ISA powers as going to far and called for a return "back on an even keel" the Government position softened. Possibly unlike Tom Harris MP they listened to public opinion from more than just parents, people like the NSPCC, senior Police Officers acting and retired.

Retired Mr Stevenson said:

"The furore that has gripped the nation since [Soham] has made us all paranoid. Is it in the interests of children?

"Commentators keep referring back to Huntley and the events in Soham, citing this as the cause. I am sure Sir Michael Bichard did not intend this wave of recrimination over one case"

He recalled the tale of he a retired former police office was ordered to delete pictures of his own Grandson from his camera after taking pictures playing in the village team. One of the team managers said he would need the permission of every child present to be able to keep them. he said:

"I felt humbled. I am now a suspected paedophile. Along, I suspect, with millions of other parents and grandparents."

Being from a sporting family a quick look through our family album shows all manner of pictures of me and my brother in sporting settings. Vivid images of past triumphs and defeats which the current generation of children will not have to look back on when their muscles give way and (as in the case of my brother) middle age spread sets in.

Mr Stevenson though does have a stern word for those who use Soham as a reason for such over regulation, like Tom Harris and Ged Robinson (who debated with Mark Thompson). He pointed out:

"What he did to Holly and Jessica was as high as you can get on the offending scale, but did he come into contact with them through his appointment as a caretaker? Not exactly. You see he was caretaker of Soham Village College, the senior school for over 11-year-olds.

"How do we prevent such chance encounters happening? You can't. No amount of legislation, record keeping or checking can ever totally prevent this type of crime. Thankfully they are extremely rare.

"Are we feeding the paranoia that stops a grandfather taking a picture of his nine-year-old grandson playing football? Surely this cannot continue, someone needs to put things back on an even keel."

Andrew Flanagan, chief executive of the NSPCC, speaking on the Government's rethinking of its strategy said last night:

"Ed Balls has made the right decision to check the vetting and barring scheme to ensure it strikes the right balance.

"People want to make sure children are protected but need to understand fully and buy into any major new plan that helps to do so. This review and improved information about how it works will hopefully allay confusion and misunderstandings about what the scheme is meant to do and lead to its successful introduction."

Latest Clamp Down By Child Catcher Brown

First we may not be able to drive them to sports or other clubs without a criminal check, now they may lose some of their factual television output due to over reactionary Government clampdowns.

A leaked memo from the Department of Children, Schools and Families (DCSF)is aiming to ban children from appearing on TV unless they are singing, acting or dancing. The aim is noble because of some of the reality shows that have shown children such as Channel 4's Boys and Girls Alone, but the implications yet again go far further than Labour seem to think, or have thought. Factual shows like Blue Peter or Newsround rely on their young viewers input.

The memo sent to local authorities who have to licence children to appear on TV is the first to update the rules since 1968. It moves the latest time which 5 to 16-year-old can perform from 7pm to 11pm, but compulsory 'emotional risk assessments' would be introduced, as well as programme makers having to engage child psychologists to ensure the child's well being. However, it is the ban on certain types of appearance that is going to hit factual children's TV hardest. The memo says:

"We will highlight the application of existing primary legislation that says that many more factual programmes must be licensed, and that children under 14 cannot take part unless they are singing, dancing or acting."

The broadcasters are up in arms at this advise another Government tightening of control, the BBC issued a statement saying:

"The BBC understands the need for sensible licensing of child performers but is very concerned that it looks like the participation of children under 14 in factual entertainment shows could be threatened by an over-bureacratic and over-extensive system.

"This would have a direct and negative impact on such shows as Newsround's Press Packers, and CBBC's Me and My Movie as it would prevent children’s voices being heard in entirely appropriate circumstances."

All sorts of programmes would be affected, even Children in Need and Comic Relief would be affected as the documentaries to show the needs that they aim to help would surely not fit within the letter of that statement.

John McVay, the chief executive of the Producers Alliance for Cinema and Television, which represents the Independent Producers considers the latest Government clampdown 'absolutely chilling' saying:

"It would be a disaster for the young children of Britain if they weren't able to see themselves on television doing the everyday things that they enjoy."

What is telling is that even those groups that were lobbying for tighter control have said that the Government has gone too far. Melanie Gill, the forensic child psychologist who led the complaints against Boys and Girls Alone said:

"It takes it too far, it's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We think that children under 14 should be allowed to be on television, as long as it’s done in a psychologically safe environment."

The DCSF rather that denying or clarifying the ability for factual TV makers to use children sensibly and appropriately issued a statement saying:

"This is not about clamping down on popular talent programmes but making sure that the regulations and guidance, which haven’t been updated in 40 years, enables children to take full advantage of the opportunities television and other forms of entertainment can offer in a safe and sensible way."

How are they going to take full advantage if they can only perform on TV? Think of all the stuff we would have missed under these rules. Why Don't You? or Jim'll Fix It couldn't have been made, now could Swap Shop or Tiswas. On Blue Peter we wouldn't have seen young Lewis Hamilton racing a remote-controlled car but the fire taking light in front of the Girl Guides would have been fine as they were singing. There would be no more Junior Mastermind candidates under 14. Even schools educational programming would take a hit in some aspects unless we start having singing and dancing Maths programmes.

For those of us who remember Margaret Thatcher as the milk snatcher it seems that on Gordon Brown's watch our country is rapidly turning into Vulgaria from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, which him child catcher in chief.

25% of Adults to Be Police Checked!

The latest Government scheme to get those who regularly drive children for sports and social clubs will have to undergo criminal record checks or face fines of up to £5000, may well encapture 25% of adults.

This is so clearly another attempt at Big Brother by stealth. 11.3m innocent people are going to have to voluntarily submit to a police check. As Mark reckons is this a case of we are all dangerous until we are proven safe. What has happened to innocent until proven guilty? Or the principle of ei incumbit porbatio qui dicit, non qui negat*, not of course that people are denying anything they are in essence innocent with nothing to deny. As Chris Huhne the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman points out the government is "in danger of creating a world in which we think every adult who approached children means to do them harm" by implementing this move.

Also think of strain on police resources to actually run checks on one in four of the population. You’d have to ask for a start with all that time going on checking out so many people surely some police time is going to be lost elsewhere. You know time that would actually be spent actually solving crimes that have been committed, or patrolling our streets to prevent more taking place.

Also the Home Office’s Independent Safeguarding Authority** will undoubtedly be storing this data somewhere, and be looking for a regular update and rechecking on the individuals over time (as Nich points out the CRB checks aren't even transferable). So the data will be kept (how securely knowing Home Office records on this things is hard to gauge, but easy to guess) and revisited, DNA swab samples and all no doubt. It will but even more strain on the crime solving ability of our society as Big Brother Britain continues to delve deeper and deeper into our lives.

When I was involved in youth and childrens’ work they did bring in a Child Protection assessment of those who worked with the young people. These were carried out by a Child Protection Officer appointed by the Trustees of whatever organisation someone was working for and held by them. There was no central storage of these, and people didn’t mind going on regular updates and refreshers to maintain their position of trust. With the new scheme being controlled and regulated so centrally it is feared that will not be the case and that the people who will suffer most will be the children, as the range and options for their trips and events will be so much harder to arrange.

Update: Another issue is the fact that the error rare in vetting people who currently need to be recently doubled.

Update 2: I see that Child Line founder and wannabe independent MP Esther Rantzen has laso spoken out against these latest proposals. She says the whole population was being "blanketed with this extraordinary suspicion that they might be a danger to children."

Adding that she was worried that the checks might "take account of rumour, gossip, unfounded allegations which may be recorded on the police computer."

Update 3: There is now also a Facebook Group you can join to lodge your protest with others.

*The burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies.

** That name makes you wonder what safeguards are in place to look out for the independence of the Home Office amidst this authoritarianism.

They'll be Dancing in the Streets of Anhk Morpork

It may be Hogmanay but that means the announcement of Queen Liz's New Year's honours.

Those plucky British Olympians are adding to their Beijing honours with one knighthood, six CBEs, 13 OBEs and 35 MBEs in Queenies New Years Honour lists.


No prizes for guess who will be having the royal sword dubbed on his proud shoulders, it's Mister Chris for his three cycling golds. But Liz didn't take poolside advice from the Water Cube proffered by Miss Cassie by only making 'Dame' Rebecca Adlington only an OBE. Paralympian Miss Ellie Saunders becomes the youngest ever recipient of the MBE at just 14. F1 World Champion Mister Lewis picked up an MBE. Many of the tops coaches were also honoured as was Chris's mother Carol for their services to sport.

As the sunlight slowly moves across the Discworld to herald another dawn, the creator, known on our world as Mister Terry has been awarded a Knighthood.

Sara Payne who has battled for better safeguards against sex offenders following the kidnap and murder of her daughter Sarah was also awarded an MBE.

However, in the year that the economy took one hell of a pasting there is anger that the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury picked up his knighthood as part of the automatic promotion through the merit system that comes with rank not performance.

Child Protection Measures to be Discussed in West Lothian

West Lothain Council is to look into one of the suggestions made by members of the public following the disappearnace and murder of Rory Blackhall in August last year.

The idea is that if a pupil fails to turn up to scholl without prearrangement or at the prearranged time a text message will be sent to the parent or guadian to alert them to this and prompt them to respond either that the child is absent with the parents knowledge or to take appropriate action. In Rory's cases his absence from school was only noted when his grandfather came to collect him at the end of the school day. This scheme would give police a vital few hours head start in the case of any further abductions.

Meanwhile the Scottish executive is to introduce Scottish Candidate Numbers for all pupils in state schools to be able to track their movements. This would stop the re-occurance of incidents such as Danielle Reid who went missing in 2003. Her mother lied that the child had be en take n out of school and the family moved to Manchester to cover up for her partner who had murdered the child and thrown her body in a suitcase into the Caledonian Canal.