COMMITTEE FOR HEALTH, SOCIAL SERVICES AND PUBLIC SAFETY
OFFICIAL REPORT
(Hansard)
Safeguarding Board Bill:
Evidence Session with the Police Service of Northern Ireland, the Probation Board for Northern Ireland and the Youth Justice Agency
7 October 2010
Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Jim Wells (Chairperson)
Mrs Mary Bradley
Mr Mickey Brady
Dr Kieran Deeny
Mr Alex Easton
Mr Paul Girvan
Witnesses:
| Detective Inspector Anne Marks | ) | Police Service of Northern Ireland |
| Superintendent Alister Wallace | ) | |
| Mr Hugh Hamill | ) | Probation Board for Northern Ireland |
| Mr Ivor Whitten | ) | |
| Ms Paula Jack | ) | Youth Justice Agency |
The Chairperson (Mr Wells):
I welcome representatives of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), the Probation Board for Northern Ireland (PBNI) and the Youth Justice Agency to the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety. You gained a flavour of how we operate by being in the Public Gallery for the previous evidence session. This is one of a series of ongoing evidence sessions on the safeguarding board for Northern Ireland (SBNI), which is a crucial body. We usually ask witnesses to give a 10-minute presentation, after which members may ask questions. Are you giving evidence jointly, or is each group giving its own presentation?
Mr Hugh Hamill (Probation Board for Northern Ireland):
We will give separate presentations. I will be brief.
The Chairperson:
I will introduce you: Superintendent Alister Wallace and Detective Inspector Anne Marks are from the Police Service of Northern Ireland; Paula Jack is the chief executive of the Youth Justice Agency; Hugh Hamill is the assistant director of the Probation Board; and Ivor Whitten, who has been before the Committee many times, is the communications officer for the Probation Board.
Mr Hamill:
I thank the Committee for affording us the opportunity to give evidence on the Safeguarding Board Bill.
As members know, the PBNI is a non-departmental public body that was set up in 1982, and its aim is to reduce reoffending and to contribute to creating safer communities. We employ over 400 staff of mixed grades in over 31 locations in Northern Ireland. All our probation officers are professionally qualified. We have a forensic psychology unit and a victims’ unit. We also provide grant aid to community organisations for the rehabilitation of offenders.
At any given time, the PBNI supervises more than 4,000 offenders in the community. We do so in compliance with a wide range of court orders. We are heavily involved in protection and safeguarding issues. We supervise a number of young offenders who are defined as children under the Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995. We also provide pre-sentence reports for those individuals.
In our supervision of adult offenders, we are mindful of child protection issues that may arise. Some of those individuals have serious problems that relate to alcohol dependency, domestic violence, and so on. If concerns are evident, we will refer those individuals to social services. We also supervise individuals in the community who have committed offences against children. PBNI managers also chair local public protection arrangements Northern Ireland (PPANI) panels. They risk-manage and risk-plan for individuals who have been convicted for sexual offences and certain violent offences. The PBNI also sits on the five trusts’ child protection panels and the regional child protection committee. We also have our own child protection policy and procedures.
We have made it clear in our written submission that we welcome the Safeguarding Board Bill, particularly its statutory duties to co-operate and promote child welfare. We have no significant reservations about the Bill as it is currently constituted. We welcome its introduction.
Superintendent Alister Wallace (Police Service of Northern Ireland):
Rather than go through our written brief word for word, I will summarise it. Thank you for inviting the PSNI to give evidence on the Bill. We believe that it is highly important. I emphasise that we regard the Bill as a significant opportunity to increase the level of child protection and safeguarding in Northern Ireland. We already contribute to the regional child protection committee, which, perhaps, has been a step towards a safeguarding board. We hope that the Bill will take us to the next level in safeguarding children.
We have good working relationships and partnerships with all the other justice agencies and, indeed, the health and social care trusts. We believe that it is particularly important to be proactive. There is no straightforward definition of child protection. It tends to refer to protection from child abuse in various forms — sexual, physical, mental, and so on. That is an important aspect of police work in detection and investigation. We see safeguarding as a much wider issue that includes Internet safety; child safety at home; safeguarding children on the roads, and so on. We envisage that the safeguarding board will take on a much wider remit than previous bodies.
I must admit that I have not considered the situation in England and Wales in great depth. However, it appears that because boards there are independent within their council areas, there may not be consistency. The Safeguarding Board Bill is a great opportunity to provide uniformity in strategic direction and also in operational, day-to-day matters.
With regard to accountability in the legislation, we are satisfied that it provides appropriate checks and balances, both for the chairperson and those who would hold him or her to account. Although the PSNI and the Chief Constable are legally accountable to the Policing Board through the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 2000, we do not envisage that the Safeguarding Board Bill will impinge on that specific independence. We believe that good governance arrangements will also be reflected in the appointment of an independent chairperson.
We have pointed out some minor issues about the legislation, which have already been addressed in written submissions to the Chairperson. Therefore, all that is left for me to say is thank you for allowing us to give evidence. We believe that the safeguarding board will deliver significant improvements in outcomes for all children and young people.
Ms Paula Jack (Youth Justice Agency):
As the new chief executive of the Youth Justice Agency, I thank you for inviting me to give evidence to the Committee today. The statutory aim and function of the Youth Justice Agency is to deliver orders that are passed by the youth court and provide diversionary youth conferences to the Public Prosecution Service. However, we deliver a much wider range of services than our statutory requirement. We have always worked in partnership with other agencies. We address offending behaviour, divert young people from crime and assist their integration into the community while always meeting the needs of the victims of crime.
We have always taken our child protection and safeguarding responsibilities very seriously, and, like the police, the Probation Board and other agencies, we have always participated in child protection committees and serious case reviews. We welcome the move to put all those onto a statutory basis. All those functions should be on a statutory basis, and there should be well-established, clear arrangements for the agencies that are involved in that work. It is important to have the right focus on the development and promotion of good practice in all areas, as was outlined by the police, surrounding the safeguarding of children. It is important that that is at a strategic level at the board, and it is also important that we get a multi-agency environment from the board’s work.
We agree with the proposed membership of the board. It is important that the right agencies, which are those that have the most contact with children, work together on the child protection issues with statutory backing. There is no doubt that other agencies will become involved on a non-statutory basis with the board’s work, particularly when the local panels evolve. We will be interested in the regulations that control the practical operations of the legislation, specifically the expectations for the role of the board.
It is vital that we remain focused on child protection issues and that we deliver them efficiently and with strong governance. It is important that the board seeks to avoid duplication with many other strands of work in Departments and agencies in that area. However, it is quite clear that the strength of the board will come from the engagement and commitment of the key agencies to its future. We also welcome the appointment of an independent chairperson. I know that there has been much debate about that today.
The Chairperson:
On a fabulous salary.
Ms Jack:
Better than mine.
In conclusion, we fully support the Safeguarding Board Bill, and we look forward to any future consultation on guidance or directives as an agency.
The Chairperson:
I will start the ball rolling with the questions. Membership of the board has been a matter for much discussion. This question is aimed at the PSNI: what role do you see the police or the judiciary having in respect of membership or advising the board?
Superintendent Wallace:
I cannot speak on behalf of the judiciary, but there should be representation at chief executive level on the board, which is probably assistant chief constable level. That would give significant weight to any policies and procedures that flow from the board. Below that, there are groups that will look after case management review panels and, possibly, a child death panel. At that level, there will probably be representatives at my grade — superintendent — to carry out those aspects of work. That would add a significant impetus to what is already happening. In fact, it would raise it a level.
The Chairperson:
Do you see an assistant chief constable of the PSNI sitting on the board on a permanent basis and someone at your level sitting on the panels?
Detective Inspector Anne Marks (Police Service of Northern Ireland):
There will be a community safety superintendent on the panels. On the committees that flow from the SBNI — for example, the case management review panel — there would be people with the right expertise for that work.
Superintendent Wallace:
The assistant chief constable would sit at a strategic level, taking part and giving strategic direction to the workflows, but there will be significant weight and authority in those committees to ensure that that is carried out.
The Chairperson:
The Committee thinks that that is the appropriate level at which to pitch your representation. Other organisations, such as the health and social care trusts and the NSPCC, said that it should be at director or deputy director level, so that seems to fit quite neatly.
Superintendent Wallace:
It seems to be the equivalent level.
The Chairperson:
Do either of the other two organisations have any thoughts about membership of the board in respect of who should be on it and at what level of seniority?
Mr Hamill:
As regards the level of seniority, there should be some discretion for the various agencies to make their own decisions. However, it has to be someone who can make decisions and stand over them. The wider membership numbers must be kept manageable. The proposed membership is a good cross-representation of statutory agencies and some non-statutory agencies. However, those agencies that cannot sit on the main board will have a place on the various panels and committees. There are three standing committees at present, and it is likely that there will be further subcommittees and panels to address other issues.
The Chairperson:
Do you think that members of the Probation Board should sit on the main board?
Mr Hamill:
Yes; the Probation Board will sit on the main board.
The Chairperson:
At what level?
Mr Hamill:
At my level or above.
The Chairperson:
Would that be at an extremely senior level?
Mr Hamill:
Yes — a senior level. [Laughter.] I am not “extremely” senior.
The Chairperson:
It is more than £17,000 a year anyway. [Laughter.]
Mr Hamill:
I hope so.
The Chairperson:
Are you committed to that?
Mr Hamill:
Absolutely.
The Chairperson:
What level will sit on the panels?
Mr Hamill:
Either area managers or assistant directors will sit on the panels.
Mr Easton:
I have a question for all of you: are you concerned about the independence of the board? Any reports that are published or any board inquiries must have the approval of the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (DHSSPS). Do you fear that there may be some interference there? You can answer yes or no.
Ms Jack:
I can probably answer that question more generically. If anything of a serious nature involving child protection occurs, we all have policies in place. We are already subject to scrutiny, even before the SBNI comes into place. I do not see there being interference from any Department about any inquiries because we are all open and accountable to various bodies in relation to such serious issues. I cannot see how it would necessarily affect sitting on the SBNI if there were a review of that nature.
The Chairperson:
Does the same constraint apply to the Probation Board or the Youth Justice Agency? By that I mean: do you have to refer reports or documents that you intend to publish to a higher authority for approval before they are released?
Ms Jack:
We are part of the Department of Justice (DOJ) in any event, so —
The Chairperson:
Therefore, you would have to do so. What about the Probation Board?
Mr Hamill:
We are not an agency of the Department of Justice, but we would liaise with the DOJ to get its view on any meaningful report that would go to the public.
The Chairperson:
If the Department of Justice’s view was that the document was awfully embarrassing and that you could not publish it, what would happen?
Mr Hamill:
We are an independent board. We would take account of what the Department says, but my understanding is that our board is ultimately the final decision-maker.
The Chairperson:
Has such a situation ever arisen? Have you always published?
Mr Hamill:
It has never arisen. There is much consultation and discussion with the Department of Justice, and formerly with the Northern Ireland Office (NIO), on such issues.
Ms Jack:
The Youth Justice Agency is an executive agency, so I would go through the Department of Justice before the publication of any material.
The Chairperson:
I presume that the police are in a freer position to do what they want?
Superintendent Wallace:
Yes, we are, for certain issues. At a strategic level, the Police Service is accountable to the Policing Board. Many items are put before the Policing Board and scrutinised before being published. Certainly, if any issues related to large expenditure or any change in strategic direction, then yes.
The Chairperson:
One witness raised a query about the board’s ability to be proactive and start investigations rather than simply reacting to headline cases, which sounds good in theory. I think that that is a good idea. However, others say that the board’s role should simply be to react to what happens. Some people say that if a worrying situation develops, the board should investigate and report, but others say that the board should consider potential situations of concern and issue documents, material and reports even before such a situation materialises. What do the three organisations think about that view?
Mr Hamill:
There is a clear role for the board to be proactive. It will develop policy and practice procedures, so it will not be a solely reactive body and nor will its constituent panels. That happens now with the regional child protection committee and, indeed, with the trust panels,so there will be no change there. The board will be proactive, promote welfare and protection and have consistent policies and procedures throughout Northern Ireland.
Ms Jack:
The legislation is drafted in such a way that it is wide enough for either or both of the scenarios that you describe. If we consider reviewing the effectiveness of what is being done by each body, that is almost pre-empting and examining best practice in advance, so I think that there is definitely a role. The obvious difficulty with a safeguarding board of this nature is that you will be reacting to something that happens, and you will be doing both.
The Chairperson:
It could happen that one, two or all three of the organisations that are represented here are cited in an SBNI report after something has gone terribly wrong. Given the nature of your work, all three organisations could be involved. How do you envisage that working out if the board is investigating an issue that board members are involved in through their lead agencies? How would your organisations deal with that situation? On almost every occasion, the police would be cited as being involved in cases or reports. It is an odd relationship in that the board will deal with an issue by shining a searchlight onto the work of one of its members.
Superintendent Wallace:
I draw a parallel with the current situation with PPANI. An assistant chief constable sits as the chairperson of the panel and would be expected to speak if there were an issue. The difficulty is that, when he does so, the police are perceived as being responsible when, in fact, he is speaking on behalf of all the agencies. That is one reason why my current assistant chief constable asked for the position to be reviewed to make it totally independent of all the agencies that are involved in PPANI so that they would speak independently and not be seen as representing one or other of the agencies.
The Chairperson:
Should the lead member from an organisation continue to sit on the board while it is being investigated by the board?
Mr Hamill:
It will be similar to current practice. If, for example, a child dies, the current practice is that a case management review takes place, which has an independent review element, and all agencies have to prepare reports and be answerable to whoever sits on the committee. If a person who sits on the SBNI were to have any direct involvement in the case, I am sure that they would have discretion over whether to step aside until the issue were dealt with. However, in most cases, I do not imagine that, given their level of seniority, they would have any direct involvement in a specific case.
The Chairperson:
However, it could be alleged that they were protecting their staff, who may have fallen short on some issue.
Ms Jack:
That goes back to what I said earlier about how we are already highly accountable on issues of child protection. We all now work in an open and transparent way when offending of a serious nature takes place, so that will not be a problem for a member of the board. The English and Welsh boards have guidance on what to do in such circumstances. Unfortunately, I do not have them with me. As Mr Hamill rightly said, it would be on a rare occasion that someone at chief executive or a similar level had to step back.
Mr Hamill:
A serious case review would have access to all our files and personnel, so, in that sense, there is no hiding place.
The Chairperson:
We have been told that there will be independent board members from charities such as the NSPCC so that, even if an attempt were made to get together as a cabal and keep quiet on an issue, the independent members would blow the whistle. It is still an issue that will arise.
Dr Deeny:
Paula, you mentioned that you had seen the make-up of the main board. Do we know about that yet?
Ms Jack:
I was going by the Bill.
The Chairperson:
Kieran, it does not show names. It lists the organisations that will comprise the board: health and social care trusts, the Youth Justice Agency, education boards, district councils, and so on. No names are listed.
Dr Deeny:
I do not want names, but the composition of the board is important. Having dealt with all sorts of committees and panels in the health area, I am worried about a breakdown in communication. That is why I am glad that your agency, Paula, is on the main board. Are you concerned about that? For example, you are all aware of the dreadful McElhill tragedy in Omagh. After the event, people were pointing fingers of blame at individual police and social workers, which was not correct. Looking back, I think that we all agree that it was no one’s fault and that everyone was doing their best, but that there was a breakdown among agencies. Do you have any concerns that the structure might become too big? I do not mean the main board; proper representation on the main board is the crux. However, I do not know what the exact end product of the subcommittees and panels will be. We do not want any breakdown in communication.
My final question is about the multi-agency approach that you spoke about, which is important in today’s world to prevent and reduce child abuse and neglect and to focus on the wider safeguarding issues.
I am interested in Internet safety, which you mentioned. That is a global issue. However, perhaps the PSNI, working with police elsewhere, could take the lead. I have spoken previously in Committee, on a slightly different issue, about how worrying the Internet can be. A young person spoke to me, in my capacity as a GP, about visiting a site on which he had tried to talk people out of committing suicide. I asked him how he found out about the site, because, some months previously, he had been on the other side of the situation and had been using the Internet to find out how to commit suicide. The Internet can lead young people to meet other people who may put their lives at risk. I know that that is a global issue. However, how can the PSNI contribute?
Superintendent Wallace:
I can give you an example of what we are doing already. We have a case programme on citizenship and safety education, which goes into schools. As an integral part of that, local police officers have been trained by the Child Exploitation Online Protection Centre (CEOP), which I am sure that you have heard of. We work closely with CEOP and were one of the first three police forces in the UK to try to get that programme into schools. In the past number of years, 65% of schools were covered, but, last year, that dipped to 50%. One of the important things that the programme teaches children is, if they feel uncomfortable with what they are doing online — for example, if they are being bullied — how to report that directly to CEOP. Most of CEOP’s work concerns child sexual exploitation and Internet grooming. The programme tries to teach children that the Internet is a great tool for studying, having fun and socialising, but that there are things to be aware of. The programme educates children on how to report such things and empowers them to protect themselves online.
We can continue to work with the education side to develop that in the future. Certainly, suicide among young people is worrying, as has come out recently in the media. If children are feeling suicidal, we must teach them whom they can trust to report that to. That must be signposted. It is not only the work of the police to direct children in the proper way but the work of many other agencies that operate alongside us.
Dr Deeny:
The difficulty is that the people who set up such sites could be based anywhere. They could be in Japan.
Superintendent Wallace:
They are all over the world.
Dr Deeny:
Is there nothing that we can do about that?
Detective Inspector Marks:
We have a proactive team that identifies people in Northern Ireland who are using the Internet to groom or make contact with children. On the international side, we link with CEOP and sites such as Facebook, on which there is a click button for children to use if they have concerns. It would then be for us to take that forward and identify who is involved.
Dr Deeny:
You are saying that, if certain sites are identified as coming from within Northern Ireland, you would be alerted to that and would take action. Could a worldwide Interpol-type service be set up? For example, in Germany —
Superintendent Wallace:
That already happens.
Detective Inspector Marks:
There is the Virtual Global Taskforce.
Superintendent Wallace:
The Virtual Global Taskforce works 24/7. Various law enforcement agencies around the world are involved, and, as time spins round, different countries take over — for example, Australia, followed by America, and then back to Europe. That is ongoing. However, not every police force in the world is signed up to that. We work with the agencies and police forces within Interpol that are prepared to assist. If, for example, we know that a site is coming from America, there are clear channels along which we would pass that intelligence information.
Dr Deeny:
From here to America?
Superintendent Wallace:
Yes, and vice versa. We have had good co-operation from the American authorities in the past. However, it depends on each country. Unfortunately, many sites come from eastern Europe or emerging states, and that has been difficult.
Dr Deeny:
Thailand.
Superintendent Wallace:
CEOP has been trying to work with countries to promote safeguarding children around the world, and, certainly in south-east Asia, has made good contacts.
Detective Inspector Marks:
In Northern Ireland, it is more a case of individuals’ grooming over the Internet and linking into wider activity in other countries rather than a site being set up here.
The Chairperson:
I attended a CEOP event about a year ago, where I learned of some of the work that your officers do. Some of the stuff that they are exposed to is stomach churning. I admire them for being able to sleep at night given the sort of things that they are asked to do, but their work is absolutely essential.
I will move on to something a bit lighter. You heard the discussion about the status of the chairperson of the safeguarding board. I will be kind and not ask you to comment on the specific salary. You stated that you will take the board very seriously and appoint high-level people in your organisation to it. However, do you think that the post would command the respect of your members as it is advertised presently, given that they are all so senior? Do you think that the post will attract someone to whom everyone will be more than happy to owe their allegiance?
Mr Hamill:
The chairperson of the safeguarding board must be a highly skilled and competent person who is embedded in this type of work. If that person has that level of competency, he or she will get the respect of the agencies around the table. If that person does not have that level of competency, experience and leadership traits, that will clearly have an impact on the work of the board. Irrespective of salary, it is about leadership traits, skills, competencies and the ability to communicate. That is what we will look for from the chairperson of the SBNI.
The Chairperson:
The sort of person sought will come from bodies such as yours. It will be someone who has been at a very senior level in child protection, social work or an affiliated field. Is there a pool of people who would take early retirement or a leave of absence to chair the board? Do you think that the post, as it is currently advertised, will attract that type of person? Are you allowed to answer that question? The Committee thinks that the position is absolutely crucial. The legislation envisages the role of chairperson as being much more than simply saying that it is Mr Wells’s turn to speak, followed by Mr Smith. It is a leadership role, in which the chairperson will take the board forward proactively. As a Committee, we are not convinced that the post has been pitched at the right level. It may be unfair to ask people who will sit on the board what they think, but we would be interested to hear any of your observations.
Superintendent Wallace:
There may be a public-spirited person out there who has a particular interest in the post who is at the right level. I have no doubt, from working with people in all the agencies, that there are certain people who may take up the post because of their passion for the subject.
The Chairperson:
I hope that you are right.
Superintendent Wallace:
I hope that I am right.
I will draw a parallel with my own work. I look after different parts of branches, and one could say that I devote only one fifth of my time to a particular issue. However, I have good people working under me who spend much time on that issue. Comparisons between my salary and their salaries indicate that, as their overseer, I probably get the credit for their work. However, they actually do all the work. My job is to provide the vision and strategic direction for them to do all the groundwork and to set out exactly what I think should happen in particular areas.
It is possible that the chairperson of the SBNI could come in for two or three days a week and give strategic vision and direction to the appropriately qualified people to do all the work and bring it together. It will be interesting to see who will put themselves forward for that role.
The Chairperson:
Finally, as we have the expertise here, I need to ask the following questions. We had a briefing this afternoon from the Nexus Institute,which looks after the counselling side of sexual abuse cases, most of which, unfortunately, involve children. What is the nature and state of the problem? Is it growing? Are we on top of it? Are we seeing the tip of the iceberg? Obviously, the SBNI, when it comes into action, will deal with an issue of huge public concern. However, we do not know whether we have it under control or whether it could rapidly slip away from us as a community because it has become more prevalent.
Superintendent Wallace:
I will let Anne speak about that. If the public have more confidence in the police, in many different areas, they will tend to report issues that they did not previously report. For example, people report incidents of domestic abuse more freely, where previously it was a hidden crime in our society. The statistics indicate that there is an increase in domestic abuse. I do not believe that it is on the increase; I believe that it is becoming more socially unacceptable. It may be an indication of how confident people are in reporting those matters to the police and other agencies, and their confidence in how they will be protected and dealt with by the system.
Anne will speak about child abuse.
Detective Inspector Marks:
There are a huge number of victims of child abuse. I do not know whether the number of incidents of abuse has gone up. However, we have restructured how we do business. We encourage victims to report incidents. The police service has observed that crimes against male victims have gone up quite a bit. We are trying to address that through the sexual violence strategy for Northern Ireland along with other agencies such as the Nexus Institute. We are trying to take forward strategies to deal with victims and bring more offenders to justice.
The Chairperson:
I suppose that, until recently, part of the problem was that people in certain communities were reluctant to come forward and give evidence to the police, the Probation Board or the Youth Justice Agency. Is that a dead issue? Are people now prepared to come forward from every corner of the Province to provide material evidence against those who are involved in such activities?
Detective Inspector Marks:
I have worked for a significant number of years in this area. I would have said that, over the years, there was never a problem that members of one particular community would not report such matters to the police if they felt confident that they could talk about the issue. In my experience, that was never a problem for the RUC or the PSNI.
The Chairperson:
The problem was not so much about the community but the stigma of reporting the issue.
Detective Inspector Marks:
Absolutely.
The Chairperson:
You mentioned abuse against males, which is a taboo subject in many areas. Are we still just seeing the tip of the iceberg in that regard?
Superintendent Wallace:
We are seeing an increase in the statistics.
Detective Inspector Marks:
We are definitely seeing an increase. Our rape crime units are very busy at the moment. They say that many more males are reporting such incidents.
Superintendent Wallace:
It is the same for domestic abuse. In my early service, I would have seen very few instances of males reporting domestic abuse, yet the most recent statistics show that around 20% of reported domestic abuse is against males. There has been a change.
The Chairperson:
The Committee has had a long sequence of evidence sessions from representatives of various bodies who have, more or less, teased out many problems. You have come here at a stage where it is quite clear that there is consensus on the nature of the safeguarding board and on where people want to go with it. That has made life easier for the witnesses who have come here later in the process. There is not a cigarette paper between any of the witnesses on the principles of the safeguarding board, what it needs to do or the strength that it requires, although there are some arguments on the fringes. It is good to hear that three diverse bodies in the same field have, more or less, indicated that they are content with the proposals. It is our role to make certain that we have the strongest safeguarding board anywhere in the UK and that we have learned from the examples in GB.
Thank you very much for your time.