Did you see this report on the BBC?
The former head of Haringey children’s services Sharon Shoesmith has been awarded £679,452 following her unfair dismissal claim. Ms Shoesmith was sacked after a damning report into the 2007 death of Peter Connelly, known as Baby P, who was subjected to months of abuse. The payments, previously been rumoured to be a six-figure sum, emerged in the London council’s accounts.
Now, I do hope the BBC will ensure we are reminded that it was Ed Balls, who was let us all recall Children’s Secretary at the time of the Baby P scandal, and who fired Shoesmith from her £130,000-a-year post without giving her the right of reply . She learned of her sacking – and the name of he successor – while watching the TV news. Balls made his decision after a report by the regulator Ofsted found Haringey had failed to protect 17-month-old Peter, who died in 2007 following months of abuse.
Whilst we may all abhor the wretched performance of Haringay council, and whilst our sympathies must surely lie with the poor child, the fact is that the taxpayer has been forced to pay out due to the incompetency of Balls.
Incompetence and neglect obviously pays when your employer is a socialistic monopoly.
And the poor taxpayer bears the brunt !
Certainly mirrored in the BBC, with the licence fee payer bearing the brunt of the full legals and/ or compo, with those responsible (accountable being outside their vast pay grades, apparently) at worse enjoying a bit if a side step before returning to the fold to carry on their good works.
Speaking of people saying not to tweet anything stupid, is Jasmine back in her slot yet?
A win/win for Balls. He got to look tough while knowing that a fellow member of the nomenklatura would get a massive pay-off after a temporary period of purdah. All at no cost to his party while the rest of us foot the bill.
Looking at the very basic red button news text stories on BBC1 Freeview, the Sharon Shoesmith story naturally doesn’t find room to mention Labour Government or or Labour’s Ed Balls who got her sacked. Perhaps there isn’t room in the two pages of text allocated to the story.
But what’s this story about an ex-MEP who allegedly has been money laundering. They find room to mention UKIP in just the second paragraph.
Funny that.
just makes you sick how the establishment looks after each other,if this woman has 1 ounce of decency she would hand over this money to a children charity to compensate the real victims of injustice and child abuse,but i suspect she wont and will have already booked her around the world cruise to celebrate her nice little pay off.
I wonder if it is possible for relatives of Peter to take a Civil case against Ms Shoesmith and take this money off her.
http://www.atangledweb.org/?p=19542
Two faces, one smile, one smirk
By Mike Cunningham On May 28th, 2011
” In one of the very, very few actions of the Labour Government and its Cabinet Officers of which I approved; Ed Balls, Schools Secretary fired Sharon Shoesmith after the publication of a report into Haringey Social Services actions regarding Peter Connelly’s death.
And after a High Court battle which she lost, an Appeal Court action has stated that she was unlawfully dismissed. So if the Government and Haringey lose an appeal to the Supreme Court, she walks free, still smirking.”
In response to this post:
David Vance, on May 28th, 2011 at 2:03 PM Said:
“Good post, Mike. Fully agree.”
Well David, was Ed Ball’s right or wrong?
What on earth is all this diversification here by trying to implicate David Vance and David Cameron.
The facts are plain and simple:
Labour were the Government and they got this decision wrong:
Same as:
1. The lunatic Benefits culture.
2. Bank Regulation – They destroyed our economy again – the second time they were in Government in my lifetime.
3. Labour presided over the slowest growth in 50 years; they produced the fastest decline in British manufacturing since manufacturing began.
4. They left us mired in the longest recession ever bequeathing us the largest deficit in peacetime history,
5. The debt so huge our Grandchildren will still be repaying it off.
6. Blair got rid of most of Thatcher’s EU rebate leaving us a daily bill of 57 million PER DAY. (See chortling after-dinner promise from Jacques Chirac that he’d make Tony Blair President of the EU, which he didn’t. A small mercy).
7. Immigration – where does one start? They wanted to rub our noses into it – and did they certainly did that. Nearly 4 million net increase, (plus god knows how many illegal’s). More than entered these islands in the preceding 1,000 years combined.
8. But instead of catering for the increase with schools, doctors, housing: THEY nearly destroyed the NHS – including unavoidable death rates going through the roof – 1,200 died in Mid-Staffordshire alone. Taking us back to medieval times of the Black Death.
9. Talking of Medieval – the Wars they got wrong – Afghan & Iraq being there most heinous crimes – resulting in ISIS – radiclising UK Muslims to Syria and Rigby, FMG, Muslim Paedo gangs all over our land. This is a brewing legacy which we all, (including the vast majority of non-radical decent Muslim population themselves), will have to face up to determinedly when the time comes – in the same way we stood up to Hitler – mark my words!
10. They built less houses under there reign than since the 20s – notwithstanding this millions increase in the population! They now even question why house prices have no longer become affordable by the upcoming generation, since they made it an area only the rich can enjoy, like their current front bench ‘Millionaires Row’ – not to mention the Blair’s!
11. They raided 5 billion a year from pensions.
12. They sold off 400 tons of UK gold at the lowest price possible – yet they want to criticise Royal Mail sell off – totally different league! More neck than a Giraffe!
13. UK School results slipped from in the world’s top 5 to now in the late 20s. Biggest error was closing Grammar Schools which gave the poor a chance – and allowing Muslims to run Madras’s – another legacy we currently having to unpick!
16. They failed to build a lot of the other necessary infrastructure such as power stations. ZERO is that total.
13. Its easy now to forget the Millennium Dome – 800 million pounds lost – it seems insignificant chicken feed now compared with the total overall legacy!
18. They continually increased fuel duty by over 107% – YES that much – now thankfully escalator dropped.
19. Brown sneakily, discreetly signed the Lisbon treaty, giving vast amounts of power to the EU – going against their own manifesto in which they specifically said they would give the people a referendum.
20. Allowing rich people to buy peerages – even Police interviewed the Prime Minister – what sort of Prime Minister is that! Possibly the one currently under-going Maxwellisation under Chilcot!
21. Started HS2.
22. PFI – again where does one start – just £50 Billion’s worth is costing us £300 Billion in repayments-genius!
23. They have given us a radical Muslim problem which sometime in the future the country is going to have to face head on.
24. They can’t even run their party finances with constant debts – Nor Co-op Bank – relying on Union Barons to call the shots.
25. Under Labour MPs fiddling/expenses ballooned – same as Pedophile scandals.
Even 5 Labour MPs found guilty of expenses fraud by a court and sent to prison26. Racist Diane Abbott.,
27. Labour corruption from Eccleston to Qinteq defence service making LABOUR Lord Drayson worth over £542 MILLION
28. The gap between rich and poor widened vastly under Labour?
28. They allowed a substantial amount of our 0.7% overseas aid pledge to be corrupted.
29. Sucked up to crony public sector Unions inflating public pay and pensions way above the private sector.
30. Imposed postal voting extension open to political corruption – just look at Tower Hamlets recently – tip of an iceberg!
31. Packed Quangos full of Labour cronies that it is causing huge ongoing problems for the majority of the Nation who do not vote Labour.
32. Impoverished millions with the Climate Change Act of alternative energy zealotry.
33. Created the catastrophe of multicultural extremism by damming those RACIST who dared to point out the real issues.
34. Sent our military to wars under equipped – heinous.
35. Created welfare as a lifestyle, with the totally dysfunctional tax credit system, and the catastrophe of excessive housing benefit
36. Labour insisted on 50% of pupils going to university even though degree level jobs for only 20%.
Got a 100 other points – but the blood pressure too much now!
You forgot to mention the now media darling who claimed her sisters bedroom as her main residence so she could trouser thousands of pounds.
David Vance:
“Now, I do hope the BBC will ensure we are reminded that it was Ed Balls…”
As we are in the BBC report you link to:
“Ms Shoesmith was sacked in December 2008 by the then children’s secretary Ed Balls.”
However, what we are not reminded of by the BBC is that it followed a sustained campaign by The Sun newspaper [sic] demanding the immediate sacking of Sharon Shoesmith; supported by an online petition, which was shamelessly backed by one Mr D. Cameron.
The same Mr D. Cameron who wrote an open letter to The Sun newspaper [sic] saying;
“More than 1.3 million signed The Sun Baby P petition, each name a cry for justice. Yesterday, those cries were answered. The sackings, suspensions, resignations were long overdue”.
Brown & Balls made a stupid decision to sack Shoesmith for nothing more than short term populist support. But Cameron was pushing them all the way and shares a large part of the blame. Not that you’d know that from the BBC report, or from David Vance’s selective memory.
What sort of bias is that?
You go to all that effort to attack DV and yet if you’d spent a little time reading his post you might have understood the issue……‘Whilst we may all abhor the wretched performance of Haringay council, and whilst our sympathies must surely lie with the poor child, the fact is that the taxpayer has been forced to pay out due to the incompetency of Balls.‘
The obvious point being made was that it was Balls’ incompetence meant the sacking was carried out in a manner that was unacceptable. The problem was not the fact of the sacking itself, that was just the natural course of events considering Shoesmith’s performance.
The BBC says that she was ‘unfairly scapegoated’ in its latest report but that isn’t the issue, this was….
Judges at the Court of Appeal said then children’s secretary Ed Balls and her employers, Haringey Council, had been “procedurally unfair” when they sacked her three years ago.
So DV is right…the BBC have not made a connection between Balls’ incompetence and the sacking.
And you are wrong.
That Albaman and Dez are so fast out the traps trying to make create smoke and mirrors connections beyond the clear facts of the BBC’s handling of the reporting of this case, now, shows them for what they are.
One can only presume their personal antipathy for Mr. Vance has blinded them again. I never read this other blog, and see no reason to as it is little to do with logging BBC bias.
If he once erred or was in lockstep on the politics over there, that of course may have a bearing on credibility true, but their attempts are clearly trying to steer away from the BBC’s role, now.
And if the precedent of what is written elsewhere troubles them so, the twitter record of many BBC employees seems enough to render anything they are part of damned by the association.
Which may explain why when the latest ‘views my own’ outing goes pear-shaped, they are nowhere to be found here.
I don’t think they are BBC stooges but they were fast out of the traps to deflect criticisms of Balls.
So maybe they are Labour stooges?
It is perfectly legitimate for someone to be sacked for gross incompetence, failing to meet the requirements of the post, criminal acts, whatever, but only after following due process – which includes an opportunity to mend their ways, deny it is their personal fault. That’s the way employment law works, and is I guess supported by both parties. Demanding people are “sacked” sounds tough but it is not legal and Ed Balls should have known that, as should the Sun. Everyone looks stupid in this populist kneejerk sacking and Shoesmith and her lawyers have done very nicely out of it. Sometimes you do despair of employment law, but will Cameron and Clegg change it? I think not.
If the BBC reports this it will only say the Government were responsible, Ball will be home and dry.
Ball [sic] will be home and dry.
Well he ain’t been seen in public for ages so maybe he is ruling the World from his shed like his former master Gibbo?
Is it me or did I miss the explanation that if it was not for that stupid sod Ed Balls sticking in his oar and the lefty council not having the balls (npi) to say we need to do it legally. If they had gone through due process she would not have a leg to stand on.
There was no incompetence on the part of Balls.
It was a great political move to distract from Labour’s own responsibility for the systemic failings in social services.
He knew all along that there would very likely be a legal challenge to his decision. But what the hell, he or his party wouldn’t have to pay a penny.
I think it’s what they call, “win, win”.
Although the fair Sharon did herself no favours by her unapologetic stance in all this, it’s obvious that both Balls and Haringey Council were, if nothing else, procedurally at fault here. Moreover, as Mr Justice Foskett said (almost) at the end of his ruling “However, of one thing I am absolutely clear: a concerted mission to make someone a scapegoat for the failings of others or for the failings of a system that was doomed to be characterised as a failure in any event is repugnant to ordinary notions of fairness and justice in a civilised society.”
It appears then that Sharon was financially exonerated because she happened to be the head of a dysfunctional department of a dysfunctional council (overseen by a dysfunctional government department headed by a world-class political turd). Baby P died because the council, the council departments concerned, the medical staff concerned and AFAIAA the police all cocked up massively. It was the “system” and Sharon was not immediately responsible for the “system”. Accordingly, in the long run no-one really lost out except baby P.
Quite why Sharon was appointed as head of children’s services in the first place since her previous experience/qualifications were in “education” bears examination. I suspect Haringey was desperate and somebody in the national nomenklatura who was seen as a success in something connected with children (“special needs” education as it happens) could be appropriately appointed to another – completely different although child-connected – role.
Since I live in Haringey and, perforce, have to contribute to Sharon’s treasure trove, I note that the manifest incompetence of the councillors and local bureaucrats involved has not resulted in any adverse political, financial or career-related consequences for them. As with the loss to Haringey of £30+ million in the Icelandic banks debacle, no adverse consequences have resulted for the local incompetents.
One thing stays with me: Sharon basically refused to apologise for any personal failings and, if she wasn’t personally to blame, she might be justified in that stance. However, in a previous generation, I think that she would have seriously considered resigning purely on the basis that baby P died on her watch. As it is, she walks with £600,000+ and baby P lies in his grave: as good a picture of the Britain delivered to us by our political class.
If only the Tories would “bang on” about Labours role in both creating and rewarding their client state cronies like Shoesmith!
But they`re gutless-witness the craven removal of Gove, by Cameron.
Shoesmith and Savile are the very faces of the last Government-so why don`t the Tories go for them?
Why? In a word, “Cameron”, a PR spiv who keeps telling us how he feels about events instead of changing them. He doesn’t do anything difficult, like erase 13 years of Labour placemen.
If the Tories had any spine they would defenestrate Cameron and replace him with a Conservative – if there are still any left. Instead we get Cameron’s eye-candy promotions, and a plastic bag tax.
DV, I’m really not with you on this one. Whatever criticism one has to make of Balls, a woman who is without question at fault is cashing in on a baby’s death because the Minister didn’t cross the T’s and dot the i’s before sacking her is utterly obscene.
It’s just another example alsto of the absurdity of correctnick ‘British Justice’ these days.
Sixsmith is from that ‘morally superior’ lefty milieu that are simply monsters.
Spectacular overcome! I wish to trainee whilst you fix your website, the way can i actually signed up for just a blog page internet site? The account made it simpler for us a suitable option. For a nice and somewhat familiarised of this your transmitted available brilliant crystal clear thought