Council apology over Ofsted findings

MEMBERS of Warrington Borough Council have unanimously apologised to the people of the town over failings in its services for vulnerable children which led to a damning report from Ofsted.
The apology came at the end of a stormy debate at an extraordinary meeting of the council last night (Thursday) during which both the Labour opposition and the Lib Dem-Conservative coalition accused each other of “playing politics.”
Labour councillors had called the special meeting and Coun Colin Froggatt, (right) opposition spokesman for children’s services moved a resolution which called on council leader Ian Marks, children’s services executive member Sheila Woodyatt and chief executive Diana Terris to “consider their positions.”
This was rejected by the controlling group who moved an amendment that accepted the Ofsted findings and expressed determination to “drive up significant improvements” but fell short of an apology.
But eventually a further amendment including an apology was accepted unanimously.
It stated: “This council fully accepts all the findings and recommendations made by Ofsted following their recent inspection of Safeguarding and Looked After Children services within the borough.
“This council is absolutely determined to drive up significant improvements in this key area of service and apologies that its services in this area have fallen well below the high standards set for the children and young people and their families in Warrington.”
Coun Froggatt told the meeting Ofsted had found the council to be “inadequate” in seven key areas of children’s services.
He said the deterioration had taken place since 2007 – and demanded to know what had happened during that time to reduce a functioning service to an inadequate service.
Coun Froggatt said the council had been given no explanation from the controlling group and it was obvious the Minister for Children, Dawn Primarolo, had no faith in the present management of the council.
He asked why executive board members did not notice children’s social services were under funded by £2.3 million – almost 20 per cent of its budget.
Why did they not know staff were overloaded with work, using unqualified students and were 28 staff short in the department?
Why did the political leadership not challenge officers financial assumptions or service delivery issues?
He accused senior councillors of subordinating themselves and allowing the council to become “officer led”.
Executive members should recognise that when they took power they also took responsibility and should account for their behaviour.
Coun Marks (left) acknowledged there had been serious failings but said there had been no serious effect on any children in Warrington.
He pointed out that Ofsted had itself been criticised and that its team had been carrying out the first of a new type of inspection. Nine other councils had been labelled as inadequate.
Warrington’s children’s services had historically been underfunded by the Government and the council had repeatedly tried to get additional funding – failing to receive any help from its MPs.
However, additional funding of £2.9 million had been made available and the Minister had accepted the council had taken early action to remedy the situation.
“We have acted swiftly,” he said.
After the meeting, Coun Marks and deputy leader of the council Keith Bland issued a joint statement: “We are pleased that the council came to a unanimous view in the end. Our amendment said that the council ‘is extremely disappointed’ about what happened, but we have no problem in saying that the council ‘apologises’. What is important now, is that we put all our energies into putting things right. The Children’s Minister is satisfied with what we are doing and only issued a notice to improve, which we expected. If she had grave concerns she could have used her statutory powers to intervene which she has not done.”