Councillor Patricia Bamford under fire after Kingston's child safeguarding rated worst in London

Kingston Council has come under fire for 'failing to safeguard children' Kingston Council has come under fire for 'failing to safeguard children'

The councillor responsible for Kingston Council’s children and young people has been called on to resign after a damning Ofsted report into child protection.

Kingston Council’s social workers are reviewing case files to make sure no child is in danger in the light of the “inadequate” rating, made public this morning.

The council is now rated lower than Haringey, the authority accused of failing to save Baby P and is the only London authority to receive an "inadequate" rating for safeguarding children.

Councillor Patricia Bamford told the Surrey Comet she would not resign despite calls from the Conservative opposition to do so.

The Liberal Democrat councillor expressed disappointment at the results and pledged the service would be restored to high standards.

She said: “I was shocked and deeply disappointed that we had let our residents, and more importantly, our vulnerable children down, but it is time to rise to the challenge and put things right.

“I have always taken my responsibilities very seriously and will continue to do so.”

Conservative leader Howard Jones said he was shocked and appalled by the report.

He said: “The quality of our safeguarding has nosedived from outstanding to inadequate during the stewardship of lead member for children and young people Patricia Bamford.

“Coun Bamford should resign.”

And councillor Andrea Craig, shadow member for children and young people, said: “We are now below Haringey and are the worst borough in London for safeguarding which is horrific.”

According to the report, in one case a vulnerable young person regularly went missing despite information suggesting she had been putting herself at considerable risk, and in another instance a case was closed despite a young person suffering significant harm.

The council also reportedly failed to deal properly with a domestic violence murder.

Leader of the council Derek Osbourne said he believed the opposition had not read the report properly as credit was given to Patricia Bamford and the administration within it, and said that certain opposition members had been privy to the same information as them throughout the report process.

He said: “Patricia Bamford is the person Ofsted will have confidence in in turning this around. What is the benefit in wanting to remove somebody in whom Ofsted has confidence?”

Comments(8)

UKIP Surbiton says...
1:34am Wed 11 Jul 12

Patricia Bamford simply has to resign ... there is no argument to be made for her to keep her job whatsover . The Lib Dem pantomine is finally unravelling . Liz Green next please ... has anyone actually realised just how bad its going to be in 2015 when the 2004 baby boomers hit secondary schools in RBK .

Beverly RA says...
5:53am Wed 11 Jul 12

Of course the lib Dems new about this during the Grove bye election, yet still put out leaflets saying how good they were. who can ever believe what they say again. they just scrapped in by 23 votes having dropped from a majority of over 500. Now we can see why.
The Grove residents were mislead and will not forget it next time around. who can trust the lib dem leaflets again?

Tony from Surbiton says...
9:27am Wed 11 Jul 12

Beverly RA wrote:
Of course the lib Dems new about this during the Grove bye election, yet still put out leaflets saying how good they were. who can ever believe what they say again. they just scrapped in by 23 votes having dropped from a majority of over 500. Now we can see why.
The Grove residents were mislead and will not forget it next time around. who can trust the lib dem leaflets again?
Was pressure put on council officers to hush up the news because of the by-election? That would be a total abuse of power by the Lib Dems in order to alter the result of an election.

Whatever happened, it is clear that councillor Bamford should resign immediately. She is in charge and has overseen the situation. It is shameful to try to hang on in such circumstances.

GarethK says...
1:59pm Thu 12 Jul 12

Have any councillors resigned yet? Surely just a matter of time....

Tony from Surbiton says...
9:48am Fri 13 Jul 12

GarethK wrote:
Have any councillors resigned yet? Surely just a matter of time....
Still no resignations. These councillors treat us with contempt. None of them will resign while the cheques keep coming in every month.

NewKingstonian says...
1:44pm Sat 21 Jul 12

There hasn't been anything like the clear out of councillors, managers and front line staff that there needs to be to convince us that child protection in Kingston is safe. There will be guilt at all levels for this failure.

Nick Whitfield from Richmond is supposed to be in charge, why hasn't the clear out started or is he as bad as the rest of them and will nothing improve.

Do these people not understand, action is required. NOW.

Miffedy says...
12:55am Thu 2 Aug 12

I used to work for this council, and to be frank this article involves a lot of misunderstandings concerning how councils and childrens' services actually function. For one thing, the idea that elected Councillors can closely 'manage' areas of the council's work is just not accurate. Mainly because there is a strict boundary that is observed between 'elected' politicians and professionals working to provide services within the council organisation. But the idea that a Councillor could be intimately involved with specific aspects of council work is especially misleading in the case of Child Protection where most of the information is strictly confidential, and social work teams are directed by specialist managers. Even if Councillors could have the time, experience, inside knowledge and academic specialisms to be aware of shortfallings and oversee their improvement, I don't see how they could do much to help anyway. The fact is that central government is demanding the impossible of councils in the current financial climate - they want excellent social care and improved services to be provided, despite having slashed the council budget by 20% and 'deleted' half the social work posts. There are people working in councils at the moment who are going beyond the call of duty to try to protect children despite having their hours cut and colleagues and managers 're-structured'. Perhaps central government needs to decide where its priorities lie and turn its attention from bailing out banks to funding childrens' services.

Miffedy says...
1:32pm Thu 2 Aug 12

Cutting funding for frontline services in local councils is a false saving - you get what you pay for: i.e. automatic notices, knee-jerk court orders, under-experienced (i.e. cheaper) staff, concerns not being followed up due to lack of time and case overload, thinly-spread management, limited supervision of social workers, etc. (you get the picture).

To solve a problem like this it's no good simply calling for everyone to be sacked. They can't all just be terrible social workers. And what's going to happen now the child protection role has moved to Richmond? There will be even fewer social workers and managers spread over an even greater area. A saving for central government, but what about the children?

What we need are higher taxes for those who can afford it, which would allow more support for those who can't, and improved monitoring of how the benefits are distributed (which in turn would save money being wasted). This would allow councils to be more efficient and effective, to employ better ways of monitoring the provision of services involving face-to-face assessment and support, as opposed to automatic fines and computer systems.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree