Cross Post from Clare Sambrook: State-sponsored cruelty

Clare Sambrook the novelist and journalist, who is the pro-bono co-ordinator of End Child Detention Now wrote to be asking if I would cross post this article writen by here for open democracy. I am happy to cross post that article in full and unabridged here today as our party gathers in Liverpool for conference.

State-sponsored cruelty

The Liberal Democrats must fight to salvage their promise to end the detention of children for immigration purposes in the UK.

Ask Boy A what he is scared of and he says dogs, strangers and policemen. He is scared to go outside and play with friends. At night he wets his bed. He cannot sleep without his mother. He is nine years old.

At their autumn conference this weekend Liberal Democrats wanting to rescue their end child detention pledge from Home Office sabotage will find ammunition in a chilling new report from Medical Justice.

Boy A is one of 141 children in the report that takes its title — 'State Sponsored Cruelty' — from Nick Clegg's pre-election definition of the detention policy. Almost half the children were born in Britain, and 62 per cent of all of them were released from detention back into the UK, raising the question, why on earth were they locked up in the first place?

Boy S, aged 9, arrested with his mother in a dawn raid and locked up in Yarl's Wood detention centre, lost one tenth of his body weight in a single month. Another child, bounced in and out of Yarl's Wood time and time again, spent 166 days behind bars before she was three years old. And this, in Britain, a country where dawn raids and imprisonment of families who have committed no crime is unimaginable in any other context.

At their Spring conference six months ago Liberal Democrats voted to make ending child detention an Election promise. ('The Government must find its long lost moral compass and put an end to child detention immediately', said Chris Huhne, then shadow Home Secretary.) Clegg pushed successfully for its inclusion in the Coalition Agreement.

Then the Home Office went to work. Instead of stopping the dawn raids and closing the asylum prisons, immigration minister Damian Green invited selected NGOs to join a 'working party' helping the government; to review alternatives to detention.

Gre>en announced: 'All those who have the most knowledge of the asylum process should play a significant role in guiding us onto the right path.' Behind their backs, he sanctioned ill-thought out draconian 'pilots' of 'alternatives', bundling vulnerable families out of the country without recourse to legal advice.

In a parallel and chilling show of true intent, the Ministry of Justice, ignoring appeals from scores of leading lawyers and the Archbishop of Canterbury, let the biggest provider of legal representation to asylum seekers — Refugee & Migrant Justice — fail, for want of prompt payment of fees owed by the government. RMJ’s collapse robbed many thousands of vulnerable people of legal advice, and thrust the surviving not-for-profit legal aid providers and specialist solicitor firms under catastrophic strain.

As for Damian Green’s review process, its integrity is manifested in the person put in charge of it. Dave Wood, a former police officer with no experience in children’s services, is director of criminality and detention at the UK Border Agency, locking up more than 1000 children every year in conditions known to harm their health.

Such is Wood’s enthusiasm for detention that he told the Home Affairs Select Committee last year that families rarely abscond but should be locked up anyway to deter others from coming here.

He wrote to the committee falsely undermining peer-reviewed medical evidence that Yarl's Wood was damaging children’s physical health and messing up their minds. 'The study was undertaken without any reference to the UK Border Agency or its clinicians,' he told MPs. Not true. Home Office documents attest to the discussions that took place.

No maverick, Wood is a perfect product of his department's culture. As recently as June, an eye-popping safeguarding report criticised the Border Agency for 'fundamental' child protection failings. Dismissing a mother's desperate pleas for medical care for her five year old, sexually abused at Yarl's Wood, the Border Agency (catchphrase: 'treating children with care and compassion is a priority') swept mother and child out of the country.

The Minister for Children and Families, Sarah Teather — a Liberal Democrat — sent a friendly message to last week's parliamentary launch of the Medical Justice report, easserting the Coalition's commitment to ending child detention, but adding: 'We have to be careful not to rush into this as we are dealing with the safety and well-being of often vulnerable children and it is essential it is done properly.'

Quite how children’s safety might be served by not rushing to end a practice proven to wreck their lives is a mystery that suggests leading Liberal Democrats have been gulled by the detention enthusiasts at the Home Office.

Liberal Democrats may take pride in their end child detention pledge. But they must summon the political integrity to fight for it, or else the Home Office will swap one form of state sponsored cruelty for another. As Medical Justice concludes: 'Ending the immigration detention of children should be immediate, and not contingent on any reviews or pilot projects on alternatives to detention.'

Not All Seasonal Joy Up One Alley and Down One Street

Having been up to the graveyard yesterday on my father's birthday and seeing the diggers digging some fresh graves, it is horrible to think that at this time of year when some of us are celebrating having family together others are losing some of theirs.

Just now I opened the BBC entertainment page and found that two stars of my childhood have passed away, neither are big names that you would recognise straight off unless you are a Tele geek. The first is Alaina Reed Amini one of the black actresses from Sesame Street, who finally succumbed to a two year battle with breast cancer aged 63. The other big star is Arnold Strang, who was the voice of the most tip top Top Cat who passed away at 91.

So in tribute a little song for both:

Vactican Buck Passing In Extremis

The latest comment from the Vatican on the Church's child sex abuse scandal is attempting to shift blame to the gay community at large rather than at the priesthood (hattip to Daniel Edward Pitt @myinfamy). It states that it is caused by gay men preying on teenage boys not paedophiles.

Ignore for a start that paedophilia is the sexual attraction to children and therefore is gender non-specific. That is just a spin that the Church appears to be trying to say somehow that being sexually attracted to an opposite sex child is somewhat less debauched.

Now there may well be 80-90% of the paedophile instances in the Catholic Church are against boys, but those that automatically by definition place the blame on the gay community. The fact is do all the girls that have been abused by priests admit to it. Is the fact that they may have been deflowered by the church maybe something that they don't want to report. Is Thorn Birds merely a make believe or is that going on too? After all we know that there are occasions of priests fathering children with their house keepers. So is it maybe all down to the willingness and availability of personnel, housekeepers or alter boys?

The fact that the Catholic Church indoctrinates their priest that they are to be celibate and abstain from sex from women folk could well led to a deep outpouring of sexual pent up anger. Also does the restriction of the right to marriage also attract a certain type of person to the priesthood? Is it possible that the churches latest statement throws up a whole chicken or the egg kind of situation that they are not prepared to address.

Now I'm not denying that there have been instances of child abuse in other churches, I know there have been cases. Nor am I denying that some of those weren't carried out by men against boys. But they have admitted that 1.5 to 5% of priest have been abused in underage sexual abuse, this isn't accounting for affairs of an adult nature. The question does arise if the vow of celibacy a causal effect of all this?

Trying to shift the attention to gay men also doesn't negate the effect that those men were ordained and took Holy Orders in the Church. They were under its jurisdiction and supervision. We know that on occasion they were not dismissed but merely moved over elsewhere with the same responsibility, accessibility and opportunity. Trying to dust it under the carpet and attempt to shift the focus doesn't negate the Churches responsibility for the issue.

Muggles are Following JK Fast

I got news not from the Daily Prophet but Muggle.Net that a certain someone was starting to Tweet. Less than 10 minutes ago I became JK Rowling's 4458th follower on Twitter, however we noticed that her followers were growing fast. I guessed she would pass through the 5000 mark within 10 minutes by 19:48. I was wrong she made it at 19:43 and I managed to capture the moment for posterity*.



With the time now 19:52 she has 5,547, she's getting approximately 100 followers a minute at the moment.

* I'm quite good at guessing these things, but at the rate she was gaining followers even I was impressed by catching her at the moment of her 5,000. We were on constant refresh for a while and getting 3-6 every time we did that.

Government to Think Again Over ISA

While the Detective Chief Superintent, Chris Stevenson, responsible for the Soham investigation says expanded ISA powers as going to far and called for a return "back on an even keel" the Government position softened. Possibly unlike Tom Harris MP they listened to public opinion from more than just parents, people like the NSPCC, senior Police Officers acting and retired.

Retired Mr Stevenson said:

"The furore that has gripped the nation since [Soham] has made us all paranoid. Is it in the interests of children?

"Commentators keep referring back to Huntley and the events in Soham, citing this as the cause. I am sure Sir Michael Bichard did not intend this wave of recrimination over one case"

He recalled the tale of he a retired former police office was ordered to delete pictures of his own Grandson from his camera after taking pictures playing in the village team. One of the team managers said he would need the permission of every child present to be able to keep them. he said:

"I felt humbled. I am now a suspected paedophile. Along, I suspect, with millions of other parents and grandparents."

Being from a sporting family a quick look through our family album shows all manner of pictures of me and my brother in sporting settings. Vivid images of past triumphs and defeats which the current generation of children will not have to look back on when their muscles give way and (as in the case of my brother) middle age spread sets in.

Mr Stevenson though does have a stern word for those who use Soham as a reason for such over regulation, like Tom Harris and Ged Robinson (who debated with Mark Thompson). He pointed out:

"What he did to Holly and Jessica was as high as you can get on the offending scale, but did he come into contact with them through his appointment as a caretaker? Not exactly. You see he was caretaker of Soham Village College, the senior school for over 11-year-olds.

"How do we prevent such chance encounters happening? You can't. No amount of legislation, record keeping or checking can ever totally prevent this type of crime. Thankfully they are extremely rare.

"Are we feeding the paranoia that stops a grandfather taking a picture of his nine-year-old grandson playing football? Surely this cannot continue, someone needs to put things back on an even keel."

Andrew Flanagan, chief executive of the NSPCC, speaking on the Government's rethinking of its strategy said last night:

"Ed Balls has made the right decision to check the vetting and barring scheme to ensure it strikes the right balance.

"People want to make sure children are protected but need to understand fully and buy into any major new plan that helps to do so. This review and improved information about how it works will hopefully allay confusion and misunderstandings about what the scheme is meant to do and lead to its successful introduction."

Latest Clamp Down By Child Catcher Brown

First we may not be able to drive them to sports or other clubs without a criminal check, now they may lose some of their factual television output due to over reactionary Government clampdowns.

A leaked memo from the Department of Children, Schools and Families (DCSF)is aiming to ban children from appearing on TV unless they are singing, acting or dancing. The aim is noble because of some of the reality shows that have shown children such as Channel 4's Boys and Girls Alone, but the implications yet again go far further than Labour seem to think, or have thought. Factual shows like Blue Peter or Newsround rely on their young viewers input.

The memo sent to local authorities who have to licence children to appear on TV is the first to update the rules since 1968. It moves the latest time which 5 to 16-year-old can perform from 7pm to 11pm, but compulsory 'emotional risk assessments' would be introduced, as well as programme makers having to engage child psychologists to ensure the child's well being. However, it is the ban on certain types of appearance that is going to hit factual children's TV hardest. The memo says:

"We will highlight the application of existing primary legislation that says that many more factual programmes must be licensed, and that children under 14 cannot take part unless they are singing, dancing or acting."

The broadcasters are up in arms at this advise another Government tightening of control, the BBC issued a statement saying:

"The BBC understands the need for sensible licensing of child performers but is very concerned that it looks like the participation of children under 14 in factual entertainment shows could be threatened by an over-bureacratic and over-extensive system.

"This would have a direct and negative impact on such shows as Newsround's Press Packers, and CBBC's Me and My Movie as it would prevent children’s voices being heard in entirely appropriate circumstances."

All sorts of programmes would be affected, even Children in Need and Comic Relief would be affected as the documentaries to show the needs that they aim to help would surely not fit within the letter of that statement.

John McVay, the chief executive of the Producers Alliance for Cinema and Television, which represents the Independent Producers considers the latest Government clampdown 'absolutely chilling' saying:

"It would be a disaster for the young children of Britain if they weren't able to see themselves on television doing the everyday things that they enjoy."

What is telling is that even those groups that were lobbying for tighter control have said that the Government has gone too far. Melanie Gill, the forensic child psychologist who led the complaints against Boys and Girls Alone said:

"It takes it too far, it's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We think that children under 14 should be allowed to be on television, as long as it’s done in a psychologically safe environment."

The DCSF rather that denying or clarifying the ability for factual TV makers to use children sensibly and appropriately issued a statement saying:

"This is not about clamping down on popular talent programmes but making sure that the regulations and guidance, which haven’t been updated in 40 years, enables children to take full advantage of the opportunities television and other forms of entertainment can offer in a safe and sensible way."

How are they going to take full advantage if they can only perform on TV? Think of all the stuff we would have missed under these rules. Why Don't You? or Jim'll Fix It couldn't have been made, now could Swap Shop or Tiswas. On Blue Peter we wouldn't have seen young Lewis Hamilton racing a remote-controlled car but the fire taking light in front of the Girl Guides would have been fine as they were singing. There would be no more Junior Mastermind candidates under 14. Even schools educational programming would take a hit in some aspects unless we start having singing and dancing Maths programmes.

For those of us who remember Margaret Thatcher as the milk snatcher it seems that on Gordon Brown's watch our country is rapidly turning into Vulgaria from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, which him child catcher in chief.