Among the events of the last week perhaps the most unnerving are the revelations of the Murphy report by the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin. see www.justice.ie. We already know from previous reports of the nature and extent of abuse in Ireland related to the church. What this report makes clear is the extraordinary ability of the organisation to cover up.
Over a forty or more year period, four archbishops and numerous others who knew what was happening failed to act properly. As the BBC report put it “too many people put the reputation of the Church before the welfare of the children” see news.bbc.co.uk
Even the police were party to the deception and denial, and frequently failed to act on information when made. So bad was their involvement that there are now calls of police to be prosecuted for not helping abuse victims. see breakingnews.iol.ie
You can read other aspects of the organised cover up of this from national newspapers eg
guardian and times
What I would ask readers to consider is that this is not an attitude or stance peculiar to the Church. The capacity of organisations, particularly hierarchic ones, to put their public image and self-interest above the interests of all other parties, is much stronger and widespread than you might imagine. In the last week a German Minister resigned after it came to light he had ‘mishandled’ (covered up) the bombing of civilians in Afghanistan. Spiegel
Or how about the gagging order on the Guardian reporting an injunction over illegal toxic dumping in the Ivory Coast, see wikileaks. Or how about the way the tobacco industry hid what it know of the cancerous effects of smoking for decades, as documented it the film Insider.
Do you think Jersey’s Government apparatus is any different? Is there something miraculously superior in our State's structures and employees? What do you think was foremost in former Chief Minister Walker’s mind when he blurted out his now famous political epitaph (‘You’re just trying to shaft Jersey internationally’)?
Actually there is a difference locally from what happened in Ireland. Read the Statement by the Irish Government: www.justice.ie Imagine our Chief Minster coming out with “We all owe a profound debt to the victims of this injustice for their brave cooperation with the Commission in its work. The remarkable selflessness they have shown, in the face of great adversity, is a beacon of light in a harrowing catalogue of the abuse of power.” Or “Whatever the historical and societal reasons for this, the Government, on behalf of the State, apologises, without reservation or equivocation, for failures by the agencies of the State in dealing with this issue.”
You will have to imagine it, because there has not been any proper expression of regret or remorse nor any apology to the victims of abuse in care in Jersey. It will, I believe, take a bigger man or woman than our Chief Minister to do that.
- Organisational canker
-
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
st_ouennais- November 29th, 14:08
- Care Leavers statement
-
- st_ouennais
- September 8th, 20:30
I was in town this morning to support Carrie giving her press statement. The full text is below, but you can see the video clip over at Voice For Jersey. Don't try looking for it on the BBC - they didn't turn up. Too busy covering the urgent and vital business of someones opinion of the Victoria College cricket pavillion to judge by the news on their web site.
Here's the statement:
"For the past 2 years or so the people of Jersey have lived with the horrors of the unfolding story of Haut de la Garenne and related matters. We, on the other hand, the so called “victims of historic child abuse” have lived with the horrors for decades.
We are a group of people only because we all share a similar dreadful experience. We were all innocent children but we are as different from one another as any other people in society. We all had our own individual characters, ambitions and abilities.
Some of us have survived our experience better than others. Some have found happiness with our own families but some have found personal relationships impossible to achieve. Others sadly have succumbed to despair. But, we were all damaged in some way as a result of the abuse that we suffered whilst in the care of the States of Jersey.
When the States of Jersey Police announced 2 years ago that investigations were being commenced into child abuse allegations at various care homes, we responded with some reluctance to the call to come forward with our testimonies.
Many of us have tried to make complaints to officials about our abuse in the past, but have not been believed or have been further humiliated or worse. To re-live the experiences of our childhood abuse, even amongst family and friends, is an extremely stressful experience and it is not something that we undertake with any enthusiasm.
Nevertheless, we were given every assurance by Lenny Harper and his Police team that our experiences would be treated seriously and would be properly investigated and so far as we are aware, the investigations by Lenny Harper and his team were carried out with care and sympathetically.
We had no reason at all to believe that the Jersey Police were not managing our cases in a professional manner. We were at all times kept informed of the progress of our individual cases and we were led to believe that those who had abused us would be prosecuted where ever possible. We had no complaints about our treatment by the States of Jersey Police whilst Lenny Harper was in charge of the investigations.
However, since Lenny Harper retired, we have found that the States of Jersey Police have consistently failed to communicate directly with us, or to keep us informed of progress on our individual cases or the investigation in general.
On the contrary, we have repeatedly discovered through the media that the standards of Police conduct are hotly disputed; that there are allegations of incompetence and malpractice and such information has not been the result of casual rumour, but the deliberate outpourings of the most Senior Police Officers themselves. And most of us have learned, by the same means that more and more cases have been abandoned and that now, only one or two prosecutions only might yet be initiated, but we do not know which these might be, if any. There have only been three cases taken to Court to date, all of which came back with a guilty verdict and all as a result of the work carried out by Lenny Harper and his team.
During the past 2 years we have had the most private and painful details of our lives broadcast world-wide. These details have been discussed, analysed, argued and fought over, in public, by police officers, politicians, lawyers, journalists and every Tom, Dick or Harry. Our emotions have been mangled. Our dignity stripped bare and our reputations and motivations called into question. We did not and do not deserve such treatment.
During the past two weeks the public of Jersey has been exposed to a barrage of information via the Jersey media from, and interviews with, retiring police officer Gradwell which has totally rubbished the credibility of the entire investigation carried out by Lenny Harper and his team. In addition, the public have been told that the enormous expenditure is not justified.
All this has taken place in an Island where the Chief of Police is suspended from duty for reasons which have not been made public and our Political and Judicial heads seem to take every opportunity to discredit us, our complaints or the manner in which these have been dealt with. Yet, nobody made any official attempt to prior warn us that these things were likely to happen or that our cases might have been handled with such incompetence. Nobody has offered us even the hint of an apology that such things have been allowed to happen. They should all hang their heads in shame.
Once again, we who were abused as children and at every turn when we sought help have been treated with contempt by the Jersey Police and other island authorities. We have been humiliated yet again and are now presented in the public mind as the cause of many problems whereas we are, in fact the totally innocent victims.
Now, the investigation is in disarray. But our lives are more damaged than they were 2 years ago because we have dared to trust in the Jersey Judicial system and to cooperate with the Jersey Police, we are being abused all over again.
We are reluctant to offer any public statement on these matters because every word that is uttered only adds to our grief and the discontent among our families and friends. We are also aware that enquiries still continue and we do not want to say anything that could harm these cases.
But we want the public of Jersey to understand that we did not wish for any of these things to happen. We have only sought to achieve justice for the wrongs committed against us when we were children whist in the care of the States of Jersey and we have been let down very, very badly, all over again.
May God forgive you."
I am in awe of the courage shown by the victims and survivors like Carrie and Dannie. My experience of the care system in Jersey was different. However I did not feel able to talk about the circumstances or issues of being in care and its associatied impacts, either publicly or privately until Stuart Syvret brought the topic into the open locally. That of course is nothing compared to those who have been abused in care. That is why I cannot overstate how brave are these people who have come forward. Almost as remarkable is the fact that Lenny Harper was able to win the trust and confidence of the victims and survivors Without that none of the cases would have come to court at all. That alone shows the utmost skill and professionalism of the man.
I said it in the election hustings, and I am just as ready to repeat it here: Lenny Harper is a Hero!
- Sorry is the hardest word
-
- st_ouennais
- August 24th, 19:54
I have not commented on the Wateridge case not least because there are strict rules around commenting on cases before the court. Much has been written elsewhere, but not being a JEP buyer I haven't followed their reporting in any detail. I understand they have taken every opportunity to denigrate Lenny Harper (the Hero) , but when I have asked people about substance it seems curiously lacking. Did anyone notice mention of the ACPO reports on the running of the investigation in any of the press?
Wateridge's case was of course of immense significance to his victims, and it makes a couple of important points clear, but in the grand scheme of things he appears to be a dispensable small fry. There are much more prominent names that have been implicated in the failings of the child care system, and the abuse of those in its care. Long dead former States member's names have come up more than once in relation to activities at Haut de la Garenne and elsewhere. What chances we will see a case or two where this will be part of the evidence?
A critical outcome of the Wateridge trial is that we are no longer debating hypotheticals, We have to deal with the facts. It has now been established in court that abuse did take place within the Jersey child care system. We have now had three trials arising from the historic abuse investigation led by Lenny Harper. Three convictions have ensued. We no longer simply have alleged abuse and alleged victims . These are facts tested in court. That abuse happened atests that there must have been failings the system. Three convictions indicates something systematically wrong. Not a one off mistake, but a general failure to protect children in the Island. At the very least one has to suspect a turning of a blind eye, and willful reluctance to hear or believe such things could happen in our Island. At worst...?
From Ireland to Australia political leaders have had the good grace to make a full and public apology to those abused in institutional care in their country. It seems the very least that should be expected. Here in Jersey our ministers have been conspicuous only in their absence and silence on the matter. For them it seems sorry really is the hardest word.
- 'Moron' part 2
-
- st_ouennais
- August 9th, 18:23
Officially we have a £3million pound loss/overspend on the new incinerator contract, so far. However this figure rather depends on where in the conception of the project you start to count. Figures prepared by Deputy Wimberley (St Mary) show a different picture.
The loss/overspend on currency fluctuation after the signing of the contract was approximately £3.06 million. That's the oft quoted figure.
There is also, it appears, a £5.25 million pound loss due to currency fluctuations before the contract was signed.
Further to that there was £2.65 million net of unauthorised expenditure before the contract was signed.
Total additional cost/loss of £11million in round figures.That dwarfs the costs of the historical child abuse investigation. Yet the repercussions and impacts on those responsible are much the lesser.
- 11 more historical abuse cases dropped
-
- st_ouennais
- July 7th, 15:49
The Attorney General has dropped 11 more cases. According to the JEP online that includes a number of cases involving employees of the Education and Social Services departments. It is the worst of all possible outcomes. Names are not cleared, nor claims of victims vindicated. Simply there is no resolution here. Its akin to leaving the gangrenous limb untreated. The stench will continue. Either administer the antibiotics, or get out the amputation saw.
Dropping the cases does not prove that abuse did not take place, it does not clear the names of anyone accused, and crucially it does not give voice to the victims. Having so many cases unresolved is in no way in the public interest, however expedient it may appear to some.
- Anger over Attorney General's decision
-
- st_ouennais
- June 16th, 17:43
I have been trying to analyse why I feel so angered by the Attorney General’s recent decision not to allow the prosecution of 2 abuse cases. It is not as though the decision was a surprise or unexpected outcome. Indeed it was rather anticipated. Well I think I have got it now.
The AG’s reasons for not pursuing the cases rather mirror the sort of way children in care are treated. He might just as well as said ‘you are all such big fibbers. Stop telling tales about these wonderful people who have done so much for you’.
So what if there were inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the statements. Just imagine the outcry of collusion there would have been had everything matched up nicely. Is it really beyond comprehension that over the passage of time traumatised children have got facts, times and details confused or mixed up? Let me ask you a question. What did you do on your 13th birthday? I don’t have a clue what I did on mine, what presents I received or even if I enjoyed it. I bet you struggle with it too. But in thre AG's mind it can’t be that hard, it was after all a special day, and it should stand out.
It is a major function of the courts, and especially the jury where a case is before a jury, to sift, weight and balance the evidence and testimony of witnesses. The whole basis of the decision making, depending on the type of case, is either beyond reasonable doubt, or on the balance of probabilities. The system is structured as it is because there is almost always some disagreement, inconsistency or contradiction of elements of the evidence and testimony.
In taking the line he has the AG has simply reinforced the outmoded, outdated and thoroughly wrong stereotype of children who have been through the care system. Too long the voices of the victims of child abuse have unheard by those in authority and position to take action. Please tell me what exactly has changed?
- A brief history of child abuse in the UK
-
- st_ouennais
- June 12th, 6:57
A useful round up of historical cases and events in the UK
http://www.bonkers.hall.btinternet.co.uk/abuse.htm
- In their own words
-
- st_ouennais
- June 10th, 10:38
You can get the 'other' side of the recent Child abuse case decision from the video piece posted on VFC's site here. Carrie and Dannie very bravely express how very many, probably the overwhelming majority, of Care Leavers feel about the Attorney General's recent decision.
I do find it extraordinary how the image of the Island has been such an important consideration in other facets of life, but is not in this case. We are told we have to have a policy of deliberately increasing population otherwise people would think 'Jersey is closed for business', and who will forget those immortal words of former Chief Minister Walker to Senator Syvret when he thought the camears weren't rolling.
In English law, there is an important precedent set in R v Sussex Justices, Ex parte McCarthy. It can be summed up thus: justice not only has to be done, it has to be seen to be done.
There is another observation to make here. You will recall Senator Syvret and John Hemming M.P. did not succeed in their legal case in the UK because they had not exhausted the process. As far as I can see we have now exhausted the processes locally. The JCLA tried working with the new police regime, as practically that was the only way to amass the evidence needed to be able to bring prosecutions. What other course of action is now open to the victims other than direct confrontation?
- The march
-
- st_ouennais
- May 2nd, 14:21
I haven't written a report about the march last Saturday. My first inclination was to say if you wanted to know about it you should have gone on it. But of course some people were otherwise occupied, and I have a few non-resident readers who may be interested. Fortunately a couple of other bloggers have done the job for me:
ratleskutle
voiceforchildren
a bi.
- Frighteningly familiar
-
- st_ouennais
- April 28th, 8:30
I found much of this piece from Germany , filed under 'culture of collusion' disturbingly familiar to things I have heard locally. http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,620925,00.html
- Child abuse, Harper and the feudal way
-
- st_ouennais
- March 15th, 5:44
The Guardian yesterday carried an important piece on Haut de la Garenne and the abuse enquiry.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/mar/14/haut-de-la-garenne
It is significant for a couple of reasons. First ,it names names. Second it comes very shortly before Sen Syvret and John Hemming MP go to court in the UK to get Jack Straw to act on his constitutional obligation for oversight of the administration in Jersey. John Hemming's blog is http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/, Senator Syvret's is http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.com/ .
Naming names. This is a big step for them, especially when some of those named are still alive. The Guardian would not do so without sound evidence they would not lightly risk a libel case. It does raise the inevitable question of why our local media with all their access, local knowledge, and contacts have not done so.
The timing is also important, but more of that in a bit. I want first to comment on the phrase in the piece - feudal culture survives. I believe this goes right to the heart of many issues in our Island. I recall the debates about the abolition of the seigneurs' rights to a couple percent of all property transaction in their seigneurie. It may be true we have done away with many of the physical trappings of feudalism. We plebs have been given a vote, and allowed to have our own representatives in the States. However those outward changes are not the only ones that have happened. When we had full blown feudalism it went with the clear understanding by the elite that with power and privilege came responsibilities to the rest of society. It has come down to us as the concept of noblesse oblige. Jersey has become a mismatched hotchpotch of legacy feudal thinking with quasi democratic mechanics. So we are expected to show respect for those in authority merely by virtue of holding the office mixed with an abandonment of responsibilities and duties of the office holders towards the poorest and weakest in society. Possibly the worst of all possible combinations.
Since we are on the topic of feudal approaches, we can cast the ongoing struggle concerning the child abuse fiasco metaphorically as medaeval seige warfare. Senator Syvret and his peasant army allies have laid seige to the fortress Jersey Way with its garrison of well armoured and provisioned knights, squires and followers. It is a long haul affair, often with nothing much appearing to be going on at all. But every day that passes increases the odds of the seige succeeding. The defenders grow weary of watching out for when the final assault might come, they grow increasingly concerned their food and resources are being depleted, they fret at the risk of disease and they lose composure and rationality as the situation deteriorates and desperation mounts. There are only two outcomes. Either a relieving force arrives and drives off the beseiging forces, or the garrison eventually capitulates.
The Guardian piece with its forthright naming certainly hasn't come to relieve the beleaguered garrison of fortress Jersey Way. Indeed the odds appear to have shifted very much in favour of the peasant army, unless the UK court on Tuesday provides that relief to the garrison.
- Lenny Harper, Child Abuse Enquiry, and the role of media and politicians.
-
- st_ouennais
- 30th December 2008
Mr Harper spoke on the Radio 4 programme 'Taking a Stand' broadcast 30th December 2008. Available for playback from the BBC site for 7 days.
You can listen to it here: Taking a Stand
- Child abuse: 1 in 10
-
- st_ouennais
- 3rd December 2008
Both Radio 4 and Reuters are reporting this morning on a paper in the Lancet. The respected medical journal has published a peer reviewed paper that about 1 on 10 children in wealthy nations is abused each year. I don't have access to the original paper, so I have to be very clear I am relying here on press reports.
The definition of abuse they used is very wide ranging, but I note it also includes making a child feel worthless or unwanted. Well that includes just about any child who has ever been in care, almost by definition. It is also reported that most abuse, other than sexual abuse, is from parents. As I have tried to explain elsewhere in this journal, failure to be protected and nurtured by those who should do so, in this case parents, leads to serious issues of trust for those abused. Trust is a key element in any functioning society. It is hardly surprising then that Reuters write " Tackling the problem is critical as there is clear evidence that effects from abuse last well into adulthood, making it more likely these children will be violent and engage in risky sexual behaviour as adults".
If 1 in 10 children is abused by one of their own parents, then that suggests at least 1 in 20 adults has a capacity to harm children. When you apply that sort of figure in a situation of people in charge of children other than their own you might reasonably expect that figure to be higher. If those children are disturbed, or exceptionally challenging then the proportion might be higher again. Suddenly those 100 + people who have came forward in the historic child abuse enquiry in Jersey looks to be a very credible number, and we could well think there are more still to materialise. It also supports the belief that the abuse could have been a wider network of people than just an exceptional one or two. Or put it another way, is Jersey that much different?
http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKTRE4B21EA20081203
- Not coming along quietly.
-
- st_ouennais
- 12th November 2008
angry
The Press Association are reporting the suspension of Police Chief Graham Power on matters relating to his role in the historic child abuse investigation. It is reported that the Minister for Home Affairs offered him the opportunity to retire, which he declined. He denies any wrongdoing and is contesting any allegations.
I think this must be jolly inconvenient for those who have the knives out for Lenny - the Hero - Harper. Chief Power was of course Lenny Harper's boss during the investigation, and so with him still place there was the delicate question of how to get at Mr Harper without implicating Mr Power. An early retirement would have sorted that out very neatly. But by not going quietly, Police Chief Power has in effect upped the ante.Intriguingly he is suspended in what is seen as neutral move, while another former police officer who had previously been arrested was not suspended. Is someone going to neatly explain the consistency or otherwise in that?
Given the undeniable material evidence unearthed during the investigation including teeth, bone fragments and pieces of equipment which all corroborated witness statements, I should say the Police Chief and his former deputy have a pretty solid case there was evidence to suspect and pursue a potential murder enquiry, treating the location as a homicide scene. Or put it another way - how much material evidence was overlooked in the heart wrenchingly horrific case yesterday of baby P and the consequences thereof.
- Biscay, Fitzroy, Sole........
-
- st_ouennais
- 22nd October 2008
Senator Syvret has named the very senior civil servant in the education department who is under investigation for child abuse, but not suspended. In an old but extremely valuable feature of many english speaking parliaments around the world, senator Syvret used his parliamentary privilege to reveal the name. As an elected member speaking in the chamber he is immune from slander or other civil (but technically as I understand it not criminal) charges. You can read more at around item 175 of the comments here https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7
124117913567332282&postID=51831274548927 78480
As a result of the naming in the States, the press are now at liberty to report the facts of this naming. Had I been in the chamber to record the actual exchange I would do so myself.However to my mind the really breathtakingly outrageous part of all this is the statement that revealed the mindset of the Ministers involved. I have it from more than one source the Education Minister (soon to be just mister) Vibert said they have a duty of care to employees. That's true, but they also have a duty of care to children, especially the 1/3 corporate parent, in charge of schools, Education Minister Vibert. No word of that. The truth of it from his own mouth by implication is that senior civil servants are more in need of exercising of his duty of care than children in the schools run by his department. This is the endemic, imbecilic, and downright wrong headed attitude that got us into this child abuse mess in the first place. He and the other howling monkeys who joined in shouting down senator Syvret have obviously learned nothing from the past year. These are same people who complained about a bit of public heckling at a hustings! They are stuck in their Victorian attitudes - put the troublesome ones away, out of sight out of mind, and keep up appearances at the gentlemens club. He's a jolly good fellow, one of us you know, his father was my uncle's fag at St Duffers.
Anywhere else I can think of such an appalling failure to put the interests of children over well paid civil servants would have resulted in union action by teachers, and parents organising a mass withdrawal of children from schools until action was taken to protect the children. But this is Jersey, and as they say in journalism, if you want to get to the bottom of a story follow the money.....
- More from Liz Davies
-
- st_ouennais
- 25th August 2008
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/blogs/social-care-experts-blog/2008/08/jersey-mus t-learn-lessons-from.html
"In the absence of prosecutions there are likely to be current child victims. The Jersey investigation provides an opportunity for both the UK and Jersey governments to demonstrate a willingness to support staff, children, adults and families in speaking out to inform both current and historic investigation"
Well said Liz, carry on the good work.
- Care Leavers' Association
-
- st_ouennais
- 27th July 2008
For the first time in more than a decade I went to Fort Regent this week. The Jersey Care Leavers’ Association public meeting there on Saturday precipitated this rare occurrence.The first half of the two hour meeting was taken up with short presentations from people experienced in various aspects of dealing with abuse in child care settings and institutions. They Included Jim Goddard from the UK Care Leavers’ Association, Liz Davies senior lecturer in children and families social work, Fay Maxted who is Chief Executive of the Survivors Trust, and Valerie Sinason who is the director at the Centre for Dissociative studies. After the presentations, questions and comments were invited from the audience.There was way too much information to recall it all, so I’ll just pick up the main points and impressions I got from the meeting. The overriding point is that the key requirement is that services and support for the victims and survivors of abuse in the child care system are independent services. Quite naturally and understandably, people who have been abused in care, usually by those in authority, have massive trust issues, and a near complete mistrust of authority. Victims and survivors will not come forward for help if they believe or suspect the services are not genuinely independent. A key campaign of the UK Care Leavers’ Association is to have an independent home inspection system lead by care leavers themselves.It follows from those trust and authority issues that many victims and survivors will self medicate – alcohol and other drugs are an effective mechanism to cope with trauma. I was very surprised to hear that councellors, nurses and GPs do not receive training in trauma as a matter of course.The experiences of survivors from other institutional child abuse investigations in the UK show remarkable similarities to the Jersey. In Powys the director of social services had said something like: it is a small community, everyone knows everyone else, it’s like a big family, abuse could not happen here. They were soon dismissed, and we now know North Wales was the biggest scandal up to that date. Since we know most sexual abuse is perpetrated by people who know the victims, often in families, it follows that family like close communities are if anything more likely to harbour abuse. It is in such communities that things can more easily be hidden.Liz Davies gave us an insight into just how widespread are the organised paedophile organisations, and how they used the children’s home in Islington. Liz blew the whistle on the goings on there, the negative impact of Particia Hodge M.P. the obstructions and closing down of official support, the ‘disappearance’ of records and duplicate records, involvement of senior council insiders, and clear links to Jersey.One of the difficulties in detecting and pursuing abuse in the care system is the attitude of those in authority. A police complaints investigation in Leicestershire into why childrens’ complaints had not been acted on is revealing. “They considered the police officers who dealt with them did not believe their stories. They were justified in that suspicion. To most of the police officers who dealt with them, they were no more than juvenile criminals who habitually tell lies”. As Jim Goddard pointed out only 5% of those in childcare are there because of their own behaviour. The majority are placed in care to protect them from a negligent or abusive behaviour by parents, family etc. In recent cases police were the best allies of the abused because the police are quite used to hearing conspiracies and lies, and can tell when stories are real and when false.There were some good questions and points raised on the floor. In particular someone from a mental health group asked about the link between abuse and mental health. There is clear evidence of both care leavers and abuse victims/survivors having significantly higher incidence of mental health problems. It is very likely extra resources would have to be found to deal with this locally. So why have we closed the relevant hospital ?A teacher who had trained in the USA commented that it is a legal requirement there to report abuse. There was also a compulsory element of the teacher training there that dealt with identifying and issues around abuse in children. The panel gave the impression the reporting requirement and mechanism in the UK is very messy.There was a comment from a local therapist with specialisation in trauma, who commented they had offered assistance via the States but had been declined. I had the strongest impression that independent therapists would be very high on the list of things the victims and survivors would like to see in place, and its far from clear we have enough therapists to deal with the people. As someone pointed out ,getting a slot once a week for a specified hour doesn’t really fit with how and when traumatised people feel they can speak. The system has to work for the victim/survivor, not geared to the convenience of the therapist. Someone from Brooke Advisory reported they had been approached by a number of survivors for help because they are known to be independent.A couple of people from Time for a Change spoke, referring to a demonstration they had organised, but didn’t say anything else of consequence that I could tell. I spotted a few elected politicians present Senator Syvret, who spoke briefly, deputy Le Hérissier, and I think deputy Pitman, and Senator Perchard (see below). Where were all the others? Surely not all on holiday at the same time? I saw someone who I think was senatorial candidate magistrate Le Marquand.Jim Perchard (minister social services) spoke. He referred to the specialist therapist who spoke and confirmed they had been in contact, but said the States were not going to pay paying for someone who is in business for themselves. He also outlined the current States policy for childcare, which is to close children’s homes and promote more fostering. Both points are rather astounding really.I would have thought the independent therapist would be exactly what is needed right now, provided their experience and bona fides are checked out. As for the States not paying people who are in business for themselves, that’s risible. Did Senator Perchard oppose the hiring of Oxera for the many reports they have done for the States, or the hiring of architects for the new incinerator building or for the Water affront masterplan? Did he, when he was a dairy farmer and in business for himself never take an area payment or any of the other grants for slurry handling facilities etc that are made under the States rural initiatives? I fully expect the occasional whiff of bullshit about a former dairy farmer as an occupational hazard, but not enough to feed an anaerobic digester.As for closing the homes and promoting more fostering, what can I say? It gives Mr Perchard a chance to say were doing something about children’s homes, and be seen to be doing something. Obviously if we close homes than there can be no abuse in children’s homes. You can apply that logic to all sorts of problems. Close hospitals and your hospital acquired MRSA problem is gone. Close schools and you have no school bullying problem overnight. Close roads and your traffic congestion problems vanish. In truth closing children’s homes in favour of fostering saves the department money, that’s what that policy is all about.Does Mr Perchard really believe there is no abuse in foster homes, or family homes? Does he not realise that there will always be a need for homes, not least because we need a diversity of supply in order to meet the differing needs of children who need care from the State. Closing homes does not treat the core problem. As the panel rightly pointed out there is such a thing as a good children’s home.Finally, as Jim Goddard said in his closing remarks, “the eyes of world are on Jersey: this can be used as an opportunity to build an exemplary child care system”.
If you are a care leaver in Jersey, or interested in supporting its work, you can e-mail them cla.jersey@yahoo.co.uk
