From RMBC Cabinet Meeting of 18 Sept
See the reference to it here https://rotherhampolitics.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/formal-statement-by-cllr-roger-stone-leader-of-the-council/
Download the reference documents as a .pdf:
Child Sexual Exploitation Update
Terms of Reference CSE
Terms of Reference for the Inquiry Report
There was nothing about the subject in the October meeting – so it appears they have got no further with finding an Inquiry Chairman. …
To Inaction and inertia, can be added, procrastination!
Or, does no one want to take on this Inquiry?
Rotherham Politics 
RBMC work ??? Ur joking …roger the work dodger hahahhahah paid to eat not work
LikeLike
As I’ve said before, How can this be an independent enquiry when one of the people under investigation is setting out the terms and conditions on how it is to be conducted. The council are probably unable to recruit anyone to chair the enquiry because of these terms and conditions.
Nothing less than a full Judicial Enquiry will do where all parties are required by law to attend and give evidence.
LikeLike
The terms of reference should be set by the independent Chair or outside authorities if it is to be independent. Martin Kimber should not be involved in this other than being investigated himself. This is like being charged with an offence, being taken to court and being able to tell the judge how the trial should be conducted. It is wrong.
That the Chief Executive should be involved with consultation regarding possible witnesses and evidence is a point I am not happy with I would like to raise as worrying. As is the fact the HR teams involvement is too. My past experience of presenting evidence to these 2 bodies is that they work for RMBC and do RMBC’s bidding. They cherry pick evidence and ignore critical evidence or use semantics to brush it under the carpet. They are far from impartial or transparent. An independent chair should appeal for witnesses via the media, direct contact, communications and public statements. They should also review all previous complaints to the RMBC and call those witnesses. An independent chair should be able to decide who is seen, asked questions, provides evidence. Both the Chief Exec and HR won’t do this. They should not be involved in cherry picking at any stage.
” The breadth of files reviewed will be sufficiently representative to provide a robust basis for the analysis. Any arrangements for files, record keeping, minutes, interviews to be arranged on request by
the Monitoring Officer and/or the Director of Human Resources.”
Why leave the it down to ‘on requests’ by the Monitoring Officer Director of HR? All the files should be opened up to the inquiry. Why can’t I ask for my complaint whilst I was working with young people to be made available to the inquiry so they can see how RMBC cover up? There are so many files that RMBC want to hide; me thinks this is one way of doing it.
I am also particularly alarmed by the way RMBC in the minutes refer to CSE being present in all town’s and cities. Yes it is – but other town’s and cities are not being investigated – RMBC are. Some of the statements seem like a defence (possibly outcome) is already being set out.
As for RMBC ex employees giving evidence – how do they (including me) do this? How do we get in touch to offer evidence? Are we going to be contacted (or ignored) and how do we offer our evidence? Do we contact the independent chair? Do we contact RMBC – what is the procedure? What do we do if RMBC ignore our requests? I would like a full published statement on how ex employees can volunteer evidence directly to the Inquiry issued by RMBC in the local media on a weekly basis. However, I can’t seer this happening as I have no faith the Chief Exec or HR will administer this process fairly.(They never have before)
I am also worried about the RMBC legal team being named as an adviser. Past evidence of their involvement as only shown the piper calls the tune.
As for Mrs Thacker’s little report. Standard tick box Thacker style. A few external questionaires seem to have been used. I could have done a similar report in half a day. It says little other than cover the basics that should be in place at at all times and nothing about what isn’t being done to the accepted standards. Sorry Mrs T must do better – it’s an exercise in stock checking – not a report. Where are gaps in provision and failings of yourself and RMBC?
Finally, I feel for the current RMBC employees wanting to offer evidence. They will have to put up with a lot of bullying behind closed doors (direct and indirect) before the hearing. My best wishes go with them. And please please ignore the threats of ‘remember you have a mortgage and bills to pay’, ‘redundancies may still be a possibility’ or ‘your appraisal is due’. Just tell the truth you have nothing to fear if you do. Remember the children too.
SKT xxxx
LikeLike
Hmmmm……………………………….
The answer I got from Sarah Champion when I emailed her about this was a HoC postcard telling me ‘my comments have been noted’. In other words-sod off.
Does anyone in Rotherham (including our MP’s) know and understand the word ‘Independent’?
I fear not. B&Q must be doing a roaring trade in whitewash (Yes I know. It’s white emulsion these days but you get my drift?)
LikeLike
As I said, a Judicial Enquiry is the only way such an investigation can be independent. We, the public of Rotherham should be demanding such an enquiry. Nothing else will do.
LikeLike
An update!
http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/news/article/1077/lead_officer_for_rotherham_cse_inquiry_announced .
Lead Officer: Alexis Jay
http://ssscnews.uk.com/2013/07/alexis-jay-is-the-new-independent-chair-for-celcis/
Consultant : Sheila Taylor
” Sheila Taylor runs Safe and Sound Derby, a group that was instrumental in persuading girls to give evidence against Siddique and Liaqat.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12140641
Whilst these two people have lots of experience and real credibility in the Social Work field with children, I can’t help feeling that I would feel happier if there had been a senior legal figure involved.
LikeLike