Safe from Harm? 10 Years After Soham

Safe from harm? 10 years after Soham... Foreword

The past 10 years, as a father, school governor and solicitor representing victims of child abuse, I have considered from different perspectives the impact of measures taken in response to the Soham tragedy. At the time of the murders in the summer of 2002 steps had already been initiated to improve upon child protection measures, under the Police Act 1997. However, further steps were taken, after Soham, to provide greater protection. In the past 10 years, from my different perspectives, I have had cause to wonder whether those steps have had the kind of beneficial effect that we all hoped for. I became concerned that, perhaps, inappropriate individuals were still working in schools. I therefore commissioned this report to ascertain whether those perceptions were real or imaginary. The information collated from the majority of England’s local education authorities supports my concern that there are still too many people gaining access to children, for their own iniquitous behaviour. Of equal concern is that some local education authorities were unable to provide answers to the requests, as they do not collate the statistics. As to those authorities that did respond, the replies reveal a high number of allegations of abuse and consequential action taken. This suggests further work needs to be done and I am delighted that so many stakeholders have participated in the report which, I hope, will promote further contributions on this very important subject. Malcolm Underhill Partner, IBB Solicitors

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 3 Introduction Freedom of information......

It has been more than 10 years since school Labour government set up the Independent caretaker Ian Huntley murdered the two Soham Safeguarding Authority in 2009 under the schoolgirls, Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 (see August 2002. The Protection of Freedoms Act The Safeguarding left) with the aim of vetting every individual 2012 received Royal Assent in May this year, who applied to work with children or vulnerable a few months before the 10th anniversary of Vulnerable Groups adults, paid or voluntary. According to official that tragic event. That 2012 Act represents a estimates, as many as 11.5 million adults – scaling back of the scheme designed to introduce 20% of the population – would be registered safeguards to protect children and vulnerable Act 2006 with the scheme by the time it was fully rolled adults in the wake of the Soham murders. It out. However, there was a dramatic public and is part of a wider policy initiative to end what The Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 was passed political reaction to the original proposals for deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has called a by Parliament in the wake of the Soham murders and in a vetting and barring scheme particularly when ‘13-year assault on hard-won British freedoms’. response to the Bichard Inquiry’s recommendations. the new Coalition government came into power. This report looks at the regime introduced to Home Secretary Theresa May called a halt to protect the most vulnerable members of society The ideas behind the legislation were to: the ‘draconian’ vetting scheme in June 2010, in the aftermath of the Soham murders. It • Create the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) to declaring that it was time to return to a more considers how effectively such a regime provides oversee a new ‘Vetting and Barring Scheme’ to deal with ‘common sense’ approach. The scaling back of a safeguard and how the Coalition government referrals and decide who should be on its barred lists; the scheme was given statutory effect under the proposes to reform it under Protection of • Reduce red tape: two ‘barring’ lists were to be run by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which received Freedoms legislation. In compiling this report ISA (one for adults and one for children) rather than the Royal Assent in May this year (see box). we submitted Freedom of Information requests three lists previously (under the Protection Of Children Speaking last February, the deputy Prime to all local education authorities in England to Act, Protection of Vulnerable Adults, and List 99); Minister Nick Clegg said that the post-Bichard get a picture of how many allegations of child • Introduce barring from ‘regulated activities’: people regime had to be ‘scaled back to sensible levels abuse had been made in schools and how those included on the ISA lists were to be barred from a wider whilst at the same time protecting vulnerable allegations had been dealt with. range of jobs and activities than before; people’. • Introduce a new duty to share information: employers, ‘Labour engaged in a 13-year assault on social services and regulators would have to notify the our hard-won British freedoms. The coalition Calls for change ISA of relevant information so individuals who posed a Government is determined to hand them back When it emerged that Huntley had previously been threat could be identified and barred; to people. We inherited a messy criminal records accused of indecent assault and rape there was • Introduce new criminal offences: for example, it would regime that developed piecemeal for years and understandable outrage and calls for a system be a crime for a barred individual to seek or undertake defied common sense.’ of protection to more robustly police those work with vulnerable groups and a crime for employers to Nick Clegg people who work or volunteer with children and knowingly take them on; As to whether this scaling back of the vulnerable people. • Introduce a new system of registration: From July 2010, scheme represents an injection of ‘common The creation of such a regime over the decade all new entrants to jobs working with vulnerable groups sense’ to redress the balance as a result of a has been convoluted and controversial. would have to register with the VBS and be checked by ‘knee-jerk response to a tabloid-fed panic about Following the murders, Sir Michael Bichard the ISA. child abuse*’ or an over-sensitive response was appointed to investigate institutional to criticisms of the original scheme, depends failings and recommended increased use of According to the Home Office (press release, March 20th on your perspective – and both views are vetting and a registration scheme for people 2009), the new scheme would have a much broader represented in this report. Speaking earlier this working with children and vulnerable adults. This coverage ‘with an estimated 11.3 million people needing to year, the independent crossbench peer Lord was distinct from the CRB scheme, which was be registered up from around 6.5m who are checked today.’ Bichard accepted the current arrangements conceived as an aid to help safer recruitment were ‘not proportionate’ but also called for the by employers. The new scheme would replace safety of children ‘to be placed above all other barring schemes such as List 99 and others considerations’. and would be a statutory barring scheme based on a quasi-judicial process. The New * The Spectator, 17 December 2011

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 4 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 5 Freedom of information

Despite the fact that all volunteers and a clearer picture of how many allegations were professionals who work regularly with children are made and how they were treated. now required to undergo checks as a result of the FoI requests were sent to 152 local education Soham murders and the Bichard report, concerns authorities – we received 119 responses. We Protection of Freedoms remain about just how well protected children and asked about allegations of sexual and physical young people are from their workers. abuse; suspensions and dismissals as a result Act 2012 The reality is that abuse does take place and of those allegations for three separate years all too frequently with traumatic consequences 2008/09; 2009/10; and 2010/11 and in relation for the victims. As part of our study, we have to two classes of employee (teachers and non- As part of the coalition agreement, the government committed to made Freedom of Information (FoI) Act requests teaching staff). reviewing the ‘Vetting and Barring Scheme’ and the CRB regime – relating to allegations of abuse (both sexual in its words – ‘scaling them back to common sense levels’. Home and physical) at schools. The idea was to gain Secretary Theresa May called a halt to the registration scheme under the 2006 Act. † The Coalition’s Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 introduced changes We asked LEAs : to the VBS regime as of September 2012, including: • How many allegations of physical or sexual abuse have been made against nursery, • A new definition of ‘regulated activity’: covering an estimated five primary and secondary school teaching staff in your LEA the past three complete million people; academic years (i.e. 2008/9, 2009/10 and 2010/11)? • A repeal of ‘controlled activity’: this had covered people who might • How many of those have been suspended and/or dismissed as a result of those have less contact with vulnerable groups including children than allegations? people in ‘regulated activity’; • How many have remained employed at the establishment they were working at, at the • Repeal of registration and continuous monitoring: the original time of the allegation, or remain employed at other educational establishments within plan under the VBS was anyone who wanted to work with your LEA? vulnerable groups would need to register and be continuously • How many allegations of physical or sexual abuse have been made against employees monitored for new criminal record information. This never came without Qualified Teacher Status at nursery, primary and secondary schools, in your LEA into force; the past three complete academic years (i.e. 2008/9, 2009/10 and 2010/11)? • Repeal of ‘additional information’: under the Police Act 1997, • How many have been suspended and/or dismissed as a result of those allegations? police forces can provide certain sensitive ‘additional information’ • How many have remained employed at the establishment they were working at, at about applicants only to organisations, not to the applicants the time, of the allegation, or remain engaged or employed at other educational themselves – sometimes known as ‘brown envelope’ material and is establishments within your LEA? issued separately to an enhanced CRB check. This provision will no longer exist in the Police Act; A further FoI request was sent to the Independent Safeguarding Authority, we asked: • Introduction of a minimum age (16 years) at which someone can • How many teachers have been referred to the ISA for physical or sexual abuse of a child apply for a CRB check; in the years 2008/2009? • Introduction of a more rigorous ‘relevancy’ test as to when the • How many teachers have been referred to the ISA for physical or sexual abuse of a child police can release information held locally on an enhanced CRB in the years 2009/2010? check. Prior to September 2012 the police included information • How many teachers have been referred to the ISA for physical or sexual abuse of a child if it ‘might be relevant’ whereas now they will include it if they in the years 2010/2011? ‘reasonably believe it to be relevant’. Plus if information is included on an enhanced CRB certificate and the applicant does not think that it should be, they will be able to ask the Independent Monitor to review and the Independent Monitor can ask the CRB to issue a new certificate either without that information or amend it. • Challenges to information on CRB certificates: an applicant for a CRB check who believes that information disclosed on the certificate is inaccurate can apply to the CRB for a decision as to its accuracy.

† You can read the wording of the FoI requests in Appendix 1 to this report.

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 6 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 7 Findings A balance to be struck Licensed To Hug? In relation to the FoI requests sent to LEAs, we found: The debate over the regime to best protect As Jan Cosgrove points out the politicization of Teachers: those children and vulnerable adults post- child protection pre-dated the Coalition. Under • Total numbers of allegations: 6,107 Soham is often couched in terms of striking the New Labour, the children’s secretary Ed Balls • Total numbers of suspensions: 1,038 balance between the protection of children and called for a review of the regime and for a review • Total numbers of dismissals: 496 vulnerable adults and protecting the rest of us that would reduce the numbers covered by the ‘from unwarranted state intrusion in their private scheme from 11 million to nine million. ‘It’s not All staff: lives’ (as the government said in relation to the doing a proper job when you fix the outcome of a • Total numbers of allegations: 2,941 Protection of Freedoms Act). review,’ reflects Cosgrove. • Total numbers of suspensions: 317 ‘When ministers spoke of redressing the balance A 2008 study by think tank Civitas called for • Total numbers of dismissals: 370 between freedom and child protection, we felt regulation and vetting to be relaxed because the that was such an extraordinary statement. Child ‘dramatic escalation of child protection measures In relation to the FoI request sent to the ISA: protection is a freedom, one of those rights [had] succeeded in poisoning the relationship How many teachers have been referred to the ISA for physical or sexual abuse of a child in the years of children listed in the UN Convention on the between the generations’. The report (Licensed To • 2008/2009: 163 (physical, 45; sexual, 118) Rights of the Child to which the UK is signatory,’ Hug) by the sociologist Frank Furedi described • 2009/2010: 225 (physical, 41; sexual, 184) comments Jan Cosgrove, national secretary of ‘an atmosphere of mistrust’. ‘From Girl Guiders to • 2010/2011: 228 (physical, 49; sexual, 179) Fair Play for Children. football coaches, from Christmas-time Santas to ‘Children’s welfare is a primary concern in UK parents helping out in schools, volunteers - once Information from the ISA (from its annual report 2011/12) law. We also felt that, in addressing the rights of regarded as pillars of the community - have Number of people placed on ‘barred lists’ since October 2009 and still on the lists at 31 March 2012 employees and volunteers who wished to work been transformed in the regulatory and public • ISA’s children’s list: 46,557 with children, no one paid any regard at all to the imagination into potential child abusers, barred • ISA’s adults list: 43,249 rights of adults who wish to work with children, from any contact with children until the database • Total across both lists: 48,485 no one one paid any regard at all to those other gives them the green light.’ • This includes information from England, Wales and Northern Ireland lists. adults who would be working alongside them as The backlash against the 2006 Act gathered volunteers and employees.’ pace when children’s authors Philip Pullman 2011/12 statistics In the intervening years after the Soham and Michael Morpurgo complained that it was • Number of referrals received and processed: 6,222 murders, the issue of child protection moved ‘outrageous and demeaning’ that they should • Number of automatic bars: 11,618 from an issue that united political and public have to go through the £64 vetting checks • Number of discretionary bars: 467 opinion in a response to a single tragic event to before they could give readings in school. one that sharply divided both sets of opinion. Sir Roger Singleton, chairman of the The ISA does not comment upon cases that have been dealt with by its internal disciplinary ‘The Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA), also process. ‘The important consequence of any referral sent to the ISA is that we reach a fair and had all-party support. Nick Clegg was home affairs commented upon the distance travelled from proportionate decision based on all the available and relevant information. Given the serious spokesman at the time,’ continues Cosgrove. ‘But apparent political consensus on the arrangements implications of a barring decision, the number of people barred will be significantly lower than the the issue became a political football with David of the new scheme to disharmony over the number referred to the ISA,’ a spokesman said. Cameron and Nick Clegg talking about it as an implementation of the practical arrangements example of the worst excesses of new Labour on Radio 4’s Today programme in September authoritarianism.’ 2009. ‘I’m surprised that some of the concerns now being expressed were not raised by legislators at the time,’ he told John Humphrys. ‘Do we not have parliamentarians whose job is to scrutinise this legislation?’ Josie Appleton is director of the Manifesto Club, a group that campaigns for ‘freedom in everyday life’. ‘The vetting of adults in the name of child protection is out of control,’ the group argues; adding that the 2006 Act ‘institutionalises distrust’. ‘Running an after-school

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 8 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 9 club is now subject to more stringent security tests A relationship of trust they said. The group’s key outstanding concern children because the employer is not told? What than selling explosives,’ it claims. In a recent interview ahead of the 10th was the exclusion of ‘supervised’ work from does “supervision” mean? How do you monitor Appleton points out that many of the people anniversary of the murders and after the regulated activity. They argued that supervised it?’ who still regularly contact them to complain implementation of the Protection of Freedoms employees and volunteers are still able to A spokesman for the ISA says that it is about the worst excesses of the vetting regime Act, Sir Michael Bichard warned policymakers develop relationships with children which ‘anticipated that current volumes of referrals are parents ‘mainly mothers – who are the that the balance between protecting children could be exploited (‘... for example, a volunteer and barring decisions made by the ISA will be least likely child abusers statistically speaking’. and not putting off volunteers from helping teaching assistant in a classroom of 30 children, maintained’. ‘This is because the new definition ‘Essentially, the majority of the checks are for out at schools, sports clubs and Scout groups, with only light-touch supervision by the classroom of regulated activity focuses on those roles within people who are low risk. To me it is a concern was a delicate one. His view was that New teacher...’). the workforce considered to represent the highest for civil liberties reasons and also for community Labour’s vetting system was ‘not proportionate’. The idea of supervision adds ‘another layer risk and it is those roles that currently generate and civil society reasons. Plus, in terms of social ‘Some of us felt, and I felt quite strongly on of complication which is not particularly helpful’, the majority of referrals,’ he says. work and child protection, it’s simply a bad use this, that Labour’s rules had gone too far. It’s reflects the NSPCC’s Colin Reid. ‘Trying to work Another point raised by the child welfare of resources. We reckon there have been some 32 always a question of balance. I think the Labour out who is supervised and who is not supervised groups was that the new Act would mean that million checks over 10 years costing £1.5 billion. regime was covering too many people. It was too becomes very complicated and this was subject to people would only be placed on the barring list if Every time you check a grandmother that is cost bureaucratic and excessively complex,’ he told the considerable debate in parliament at the time the the ISA has reason to believe that they are, have – a cost to the police, to the organisation, and a Cambridge Evening News (August 3, 2012). Protection of Freedoms Bill was passed. Our view been, or might in the future work in ‘regulated cost to her.’ However Bichard went on to say: ‘You have to now is that we would suggest to employers that activity’. ‘We believe if adults are convicted of an be careful it does not swing too far the other way.’ for supervised roles, while there is no requirement offence that is sufficient for bar, then there is In particular, he was worried by the government’s for a check, the legislation does allow employers no reason why they should not be automatically plans not to require vetting for adults working to do one with the caveat that the enhanced placed on the barring list, as presently happens,’ A real evidence base with children where activities are ‘supervised’. disclosure will not include barred list information.’ they added. The NSPCC is in no doubt that the statutory ‘My concern is that you can be supervised and still If employers choose to perform a CRB check By contrast, Josie Appleton of the Manifesto response to Soham through the introduction of develop a relationship of trust with a child, which on someone working with children, but outside Club welcomes the new Act as ‘a very significant the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 has can then be exploited. It may not happen during of regulated activity, they will not be able to see step’ insofar as it scraps the requirement for had a tangible and positive impact. ‘We always the supervised activities but it could happen if that person is barred. ‘In some 20% of cases people to register with the ISA. However, she took the view that vetting and barring was only through the internet or away from school, the where people are barred by the ISA they do not adds: ‘It has left in place the whole concept one aspect of good practice – alongside, child youth club or wherever.’ involve police information and so the employer of “regulated activity” and therefore the legal protection policies and good recruitment practices might not know if they are barred because they obligation to have a CRB check if you do certain - and one shouldn’t over-rely on any aspect are not engaged in “regulated activity”,’ says work with children’. ‘The main issue for me is the of it,’ comments Colin Reid, policy and public Supervision Reid; adding that the government has brought changing role of CRB checks to what they were affairs manager at the NSPCC Northern Ireland. The NSPCC was part of a broad coalition of into place various mechanisms to ensure that 15 years ago – they were at level of 400,000 a ‘But vetting does play a significant part in the groups concerned with children’s welfare the ISA share with the police barring information year in 1988 and now there are four million a protection of children today. The CRB has already (comprising Action for Children, Ambitious about to prevent this happening. Reid points out year. There has been a shift from CRB checking screened out a lot of unsuitable people. There is a Autism, the Children’s Commissioner, Children that ministers made a significant concession in for certain child professionals to checking people real evidence base for having this type of regime.’ England, the Children’s Society, ECPAT UK, Sport bringing back further education and work with according to the degree of the intensity of Reid offers a more qualified response to the and Recreation Alliance and the Scouts). In a 16 and 17 year olds into the scope of ‘regulated the contact with children and in very informal 2012 legislation. ‘What happened after Soham briefing prepared for the third reading of the activity’. settings.’ Such as the parent who ‘pitches in’ was that we ended up with two schemes - criminal Protection of Freedoms Bill, the groups welcomed Such concerns are echoed by Jan Cosgrove, to assist with your child’s local football team. records disclosure and an ISA registration scheme,’ the introduction of ‘a simpler and streamlined of Fair Play for Children. ‘The worst part of the ‘You wouldn’t think you would need government he continues. ‘The positive thing about the vetting and disclosure system’ but listed a number scheme is that extent to which it has been scaled clearance. It’s your own child, his friends and government’s reforms is that it will introduce one of significant concerns. back. The biggest worry for us is the confusion everyone knows everybody else,’ she adds. certificate that, by and large, will be portable For example, a major issue related to the and ambiguity caused over whether a person is within sectors. That makes a lot of sense to definition of ‘regulated activity’ which, they deemed to be “supervised” and that then the fact NSPCC.’ argued, did not cover some groups of people who of them being barred will not be revealed to the have frequent and close contact with children. employer on the CRB certificate. What is the point ‘This creates risks for children. Those who seek to of a barring scheme if somebody who is working harm children can be predatory and manipulative,’ with children and is barred is able to work with

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 10 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 11 Scaling back Checks can and do save lives Unsurprisingly, employee representative groups The new Act is ‘one of the few things we ‘There is a lot of incorrect information in the and trade unions broadly welcome the scaling welcome about Coalition policy’, comments press about vetting which can be really unhelpful,’ back of the scheme. Amanda Brown, assistant Ben Thomas, national officer in education and the NSPCC’s Colin Reid says; referring to a recent secretary (employment conditions and rights) at children’s services with Unison. ‘Because of story in the Sunday Mirror (September 30, 2012) the National Union of Teachers also approves of the scope of the system – originally covering 11 claiming that a school in Swindon had ‘stopped the introduction of the procedure to complain million workers – some of the natural justice parents from watching their children take part about information held ‘rather than ending up was removed from the system. For example, you in sports unless they are cleared by a police CRB in the Never-never land of bureaucracy’. ‘We do not have the right to a personal hearing or check’ (Furious dad Neil Park, 54, fell foul of the see these as positive steps but we don’t think the right to appeal against an ISA decision. policy when he was turned away from watching they go far enough to deal with the problems We felt that was a breach of natural justice.’ his son George, 12, play rugby. He said: ‘What are caused by the way that, for very good reasons, Unison’s main objection though was to the £64 they going to stop you going to next? Parents’ the procedures were tightened up over the last 10 cost for individuals to pay for registration. ‘It evening?’). years. Somewhere in that process things went off had a particular impact on the low paid. It’s ‘CRB checks protect children and can, and do, track. They became far too bureaucratic, losing a transfer of what we say is a public service – save lives,’ comments Jon Brown, sexual abuse sight of reasonableness.’ child protection – to the employee and largely lead for the NSPCC. ‘But they were never intended A key message from unions is the disproportionate in terms of risk. Most people to be used for one-off events such as parents devastating impact on members’ lives who have who are subject to sexual abuse allegations are attending sporting competitions and the NSPCC become embroiled in complaints which are men, however, 98% of the early years workforce would never support their use is this way. In fact, either unfair or malicious. ‘For a period of time are women.’ schools doing this may find they are actually they are almost outcasts in their community. breaking the law. Of course there is always some Many leave the profession,’ says Brown. risk, however small, but that risk has to be put It is a point made by a legal spokesperson into perspective and the response must always be for a teaching union. ‘As a result of the Bichard proportionate. The NSPCC believes that putting inquiry and the implementation of the CRB parents off attending their own child’s sporting regime, for the first time “soft information” events will do more harm than good by spoiling a could be disclosed - and so an individual can fun day out for children and parents alike.’ face an allegation, and even if that doesn’t Why do these stories persist? Is it a go anywhere, they are effectively rendered misunderstanding at a local level or a unemployable,’ she says. ‘It’s very easy to make determination on the part of the media to an allegation against a teacher, or carer, and misunderstand? ‘It’s a combination of all those that individual is tarnished by the allegation things. You cannot vet everyone, you have to despite it not being prosecuted by the police or have sensible thresholds and there are already other prosecuting authorities.’ exemptions in both the 2006 Act and the In her experience such allegations are amendments brought in by government. If, often baseless and often with fairly traumatic for example, you go to school to run a one-off consequences. ‘The Protection of Freedoms Halloween disco you do not meet the “frequency” Act will raise the threshold slightly in relation conditions then you do not need a CRB check,’ to the hoops that the police have to pass says Brown. The idea of the ‘frequency’ test in before they disclose information to prospective the 2006 Act is to allow sensible flexibility for employer. In my view it does not go far enough.’ organisations to allow for a stand-in ‘without The legislation will repeal powers under the being caught up in the red tape around vetting’. Police Act 1997 enabling the police to provide There are a number of qualifications under the ‘additional information’ (or ‘brown envelope’ 2006 Act that have been further amended and material) in relation to enhanced CRB checks. added to by the 2012 Act.

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 12 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 13 Conclusion Appendix......

Malcolm Underhill, Partner, IBB Solicitors APPENDIX 1: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS - QUESTIONS It is clear that opinion is divided on the likely We need to understand the extent of abuse consequences of the Protection of Freedoms Act across all institutions, not just schools. Only with 1. How many allegations of physical or sexual abuse have been made against nursery, primary and 2012. This is highlighted by the concern about a frank debate can society have confidence in secondary school teaching staff in your LEA the last three complete academic years (i.e. 2008/9, whether individuals are “supervised”. I certainly the recommendations of any further inquiry. I 2009/10 and 2010/11)? believe under the most recent legislation there also hope that in respect of any further work the is a real risk that inappropriate individuals will Government does in this area, they will allocate 2. How many of those identified in question one have been suspended and/or dismissed as a result of continue to gain access to children, under the sufficient resources to the impact of abuse on those allegations? cloak of supervision. children. At present the debate is, possibly, too With this protection paedophiles will be able focused on the abusers and the organisations they 3. How many of those identified in question one have remained employed at the establishment to make initial contact within the protected work in, without sufficient support given to the they were working at, at the time of the allegation, or remain employed at other educational environment, but then exploit the relationships victims, particularly when such abuse can cause establishments within your LEA? in a different setting. These concerns have been long term suffering. articulated within the report, but deserve a 4. How many allegations of physical or sexual abuse have been made against employees at nursery, louder voice. I hope the publicity surrounding primary and secondary schools, without Qualified Teacher Status in your LEA the last three the activities of Jimmy Savile will prompt the complete academic years (i.e. 2008/9, 2009/10 and 2010/11)? Government to do much more work in this area. 5. How many of those identified in question four have been suspended and/or dismissed as a result of those allegations?

6. How many of those identified in question four have remained employed at the establishment they were working at, at the time, of the allegation, or remain engaged or employed at other educational establishments within your LEA?

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 14 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 15 APPENDIX 2: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS - RESULTS APPENDIX 3: LOCAL EDUCATION AUTHORITIES WHO DID NOT RESPOND Teachers County/Borough Population Size Region Total numbers of allegations: 6,107 1 Barnet 356,000 London Total numbers of suspensions: 1,038 2 City of London 7,400 London Total numbers of dismissals: 496 3 Enfield 312,500 London 4 Hackney 246,300 London All staff 5 Harrow 239,100 London Total numbers of allegations: 2,941 6 Hounslow 254,000 London Total numbers of suspensions: 317 7 Bournemouth 183,500 South West Total numbers of dismissals: 370 8 Cornwall 532,300 South West 9 Council of the Isles of Scilly 2,200 South West Teachers 10 Swindon 209,200 South West Allegations 11 Hampshire County Council 1,296,800 South East 2008/2009: 1846 12 Isle of Wight 140,500 South East 2009/2010: 2154 13 Reading 155,700 South East 2010/2011: 2107 14 Southend-on-Sea 173,600 East Suspensions 15 Birmingham 1,073,000 West Midlands 2008/2009: 273 16 Staffordshire County Council 318,800 West Midlands 2009/2010: 346 17 Wolverhampton 249,500 West Midlands 2010/2011: 419 18 Derby City 248,700 East Midlands Dismissals: 19 Leicester 329,900 East Midlands 2008/2009: 81 20 Lincolnshire County 714,800 East Midlands 2009/2010: 224 21 Northamptonshire County 687,300 East Midlands 2010/2011: 191 22 Rutland County Council 37,400 East Midlands 23 Sheffield 552,700 Yorkshire & Humber All Staff 24 York County 198,000 Yorkshire & Humber Allegations: 25 Blackburn with Darwen 147,500 North West 2008/2009: 829 26 Manchester 503,100 North West 2009/2010: 1035 27 Rochdale 211,700 North West 2010/2011: 1077 28 St Helens 175,300 North West Suspensions: 29 Tameside 219,300 North West 2008/2009: 92 30 Wigan 317,800 North West 2009/2010: 129 31 Gateshead 200,200 North East 2010/2011: 96 32 South Tyneside 148,100 North East Dismissals 33 Sunderland 275,500 North East 2008/2009: 103 2009/2010: 151 2010/2011: 116

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST TO THE INDEPENDENT SAFEGUARDING AUTHORITY How many teachers have been referred to the ISA for physical or sexual abuse of a child in the years 2008/2009: 163 (physical, 45; sexual, 118) 2009/2010:225 (physical, 41; sexual, 184) 2010/2011:228 (physical, 49; sexual, 179)

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 16 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 17 (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure)

QTS Non QTS Total QTS Non QTS QTS Non QTS Total Total Total QTS Non QTS Total QTS Non QTS QTS Non QTS Total QTS Non QTS Total

County/Borough Allegations Allegations Allegations Allegations Allegations Allegations Allegations Allegations Suspensions Suspensions Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals Dismissals

per 100,000 per 100,000 per 100,000 as Percentage of per 100,000 per 100,000 per 100,000 as Percentage of as Percentage of as Percentage of Total 2009 to 2011 Total 2009 to 2011 2009 to 2011 Proportion Proportion Total 2009 to 2011 Total 2009 to 2011 Total 2009 to 2011 Total 2009 to 2011 Proportion Proportion population population population Allegations population population population Allegations Total Allegations Total Allegations

Bath North East Somerset 35 3 38 92 8 19.9 1.7 22 0 0 6 0 6 100 0 3.4 0.0 3.4 17 0 9 Bexley 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Bracknell Forest 7 5 12 58 42 6.2 4.4 11 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Buckinghamshire 132 72 204 65 35 26.1 14.2 40 46 23 0 20 20 0 100 0.0 4.0 4.0 0 28 14 Calderdale 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Cambridgeshire 139 51 190 73 27 112.2 41.2 153 67 35 0 11 11 0 100 0.0 8.9 8.9 0 22 11 Cheshire West and Chester 5 4 9 56 44 1.5 1.2 3 1 13 0 3 3 0 100 0.0 0.9 0.9 0 0 0 Coventry 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Darlington 9 3 12 75 25 8.5 2.8 11 4 32 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Derbyshire 23 18 41 56 44 32.3 25.3 58 50 123 10 0 10 100 0 14.1 0.0 14.1 43 0 22 Devon 13 8 21 62 38 1.1 0.7 2 11 51 2 2 4 50 50 0.2 0.2 0.3 15 25 20 Doncaster 6 6 12 50 50 2.0 2.0 4 7 58 1 4 5 20 80 0.3 1.3 1.7 17 67 42 Dudley 42 16 58 72 28 13.4 5.1 19 10 17 0 9 9 0 100 0.0 2.9 2.9 0 56 28 Durham 131 41 172 76 24 25.5 8.0 34 48 28 10 7 17 59 41 1.9 1.4 3.3 8 17 12 East Riding 45 18 63 71 29 13.5 5.4 19 30 48 6 7 13 46 54 1.8 2.1 3.9 13 39 26 East Sussex 12 19 31 39 61 2.3 3.6 6 9 28 0 6 6 0 100 0.0 1.1 1.1 0 32 16 Greenwich 13 8 21 62 38 5.3 3.3 9 18 87 1 1 2 50 50 0.4 0.4 0.8 8 13 10 Hartlepool 3 1 4 75 25 3.3 1.1 4 1 27 0 1 1 0 100 0.0 1.1 1.1 0 0 0 Havering 34 18 52 65 35 14.3 7.6 22 13 24 0 5 5 0 100 0.0 2.1 2.1 0 28 14 Herefordshire 59 0 59 100 0 32.2 0.0 32 0 0 5 0 5 100 0 2.7 0.0 2.7 8 0 4 Hull 3 3 6 50 50 1.1 1.1 2 7 119 1 1 2 50 50 0.4 0.4 0.8 33 33 33 Islington 21 11 32 66 34 10.2 5.3 16 5 17 2 2 4 50 50 1.0 1.0 1.9 10 18 14 Kingston 7 6 13 54 46 4.8 4.1 9 6 47 0 2 2 0 100 0.0 1.4 1.4 0 33 17 Lancashire 15 479 494 3 97 1.3 40.9 42 133 27 1 64 65 2 98 0.1 5.5 5.5 7 13 10 Leicester 51 48 99 52 48 15.5 14.5 30 20 20 0 9 9 0 100 0.0 2.7 2.7 0 19 9 Lewisham 13 17 30 43 57 4.7 6.2 11 14 47 0 9 9 0 100 0.0 3.3 3.3 0 53 26 Liverpool 41 10 51 80 20 8.8 2.1 11 13 26 0 7 7 0 100 0.0 1.5 1.5 0 70 35 Merton 0 2 2 0 100 0.0 1.0 1 1 50 0 2 2 0 100 0.0 1.0 1.0 0 0 0 Middlesbrough 54 22 76 71 29 39.0 15.9 55 18 24 8 4 12 67 33 5.8 2.9 8.7 15 18 16 Newham 74 48 122 61 39 25.0 16.2 41 0 0 1 8 9 11 89 0.3 2.7 3.0 1 17 9 Norfolk 251 169 420 60 40 111.3 74.9 186 102 24 6 1 7 86 14 2.7 0.4 3.1 2 1 1 North Lincs 6 13 19 32 68 3.6 7.8 11 10 51 0 5 5 0 100 0.0 3.0 3.0 0 38 19 North Somerset 34 1 35 97 3 16.8 0.5 17 3 10 7 1 8 88 13 3.5 0.5 3.9 21 100 60 North Yorkshire 97 100 197 49 51 16.2 16.7 33 40 20 0 26 26 0 100 0.0 4.3 4.3 0 26 13 Northumberland 33 5 38 87 13 10.4 1.6 12 5 12 0 1 1 0 100 0.0 0.3 0.3 0 20 10 Oldham 25 9 34 74 26 11.1 4.0 15 7 21 0 1 1 0 100 0.0 0.4 0.4 0 11 6 Plymouth 47 34 81 58 42 18.3 13.3 32 29 36 2 5 7 29 71 0.8 2.0 2.7 4 15 9 Poole 4 2 6 67 33 2.7 1.4 4 3 56 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Portsmouth 14 8 22 64 36 6.8 3.9 11 16 72 0 4 4 0 100 0.0 2.0 2.0 0 50 25 Redcar & Cleveland 3 3 6 50 50 2.2 2.2 4 6 104 1 0 1 100 0 0.7 0.0 0.7 33 0 17 Sefton 31 21 52 60 40 11.3 7.7 19 35 67 0 1 1 0 100 0.0 0.4 0.4 0 5 2 Shorpshire 7 2 9 78 22 2.3 0.7 3 6 63 1 1 2 50 50 0.3 0.3 0.7 14 50 32 Solihull 38 22 60 63 37 18.4 10.6 29 30 49 0 11 11 0 100 0.0 5.3 5.3 0 50 25 South Glos 12 3 15 80 20 4.6 1.1 6 6 41 2 0 2 100 0 0.8 0.0 0.8 17 0 8 Stockton 10 14 24 42 58 5.2 7.3 13 14 60 0 2 2 0 100 0.0 1.0 1.0 0 14 7 Suffolk 42 16 58 72 28 5.8 2.2 8 18 31 8 2 10 80 20 1.1 0.3 1.4 19 13 16 Sutton 5 7 12 42 58 2.6 3.7 6 7 56 0 6 6 0 100 0.0 3.2 3.2 0 86 43 Tower Hamlets 92 44 136 68 32 36.4 17.4 54 42 31 3 4 7 43 57 1.2 1.6 2.8 3 9 6 Walsall 2 1 3 67 33 0.7 0.4 1 1 46 0 1 1 0 100 0.0 0.4 0.4 0 100 50 Warrington 10 15 25 40 60 4.9 7.4 12 13 54 0 7 7 0 100 0.0 3.5 3.5 0 47 23 West Berkshire 7 1 8 88 13 4.6 0.7 5 8 96 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Windsor and Maidenhead 30 14 44 68 32 20.7 9.7 30 16 36 0 7 7 0 100 0.0 4.8 4.8 0 50 25

Total 1787 1441 3228 55 45 747 430 1177 950 29 84 270 354 24 76 43 82 126 0 19 9

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 18 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 19 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 125 250 375 500

Bath North East Somerset Bath North East Somerset

Bexley Bexley

Bracknell Forest Bracknell Forest

Buckinghamshire Buckinghamshire Calderdale Calderdale

Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire Cheshire West and Chester Cheshire West and Chester Coventry Coventry Darlington Darlington Derbyshire Derbyshire Devon Devon Doncaster Doncaster Dudley Dudley Durham Durham East Riding East Riding East Sussex East Sussex Greenwich Greenwich Hartlepool Hartlepool Havering Havering Herefordshire Herefordshire Hull Hull Islington Islington Kingston Kingston Lancashire Lancashire Leicester Leicester Lewisham Lewisham Liverpool Liverpool Merton Merton Middlesbrough Middlesbrough Newham Newham Norfolk Norfolk North Lincs North Lincs North Somerset North Somerset North Yorkshire North Yorkshire Northumberland Northumberland Oldham Oldham Plymouth Plymouth Poole Poole Portsmouth Portsmouth Redcar & Cleveland Redcar & Cleveland Sefton Sefton Shorpshire Shorpshire Solihull Solihull South Glos South Glos Stockton Stockton Suffolk Suffolk Sutton Sutton Tower Hamlets Tower Hamlets Walsall Walsall Warrington Warrington West Berkshire West Berkshire Windsor and Maidenhead Windsor and Maidenhead

(Full Disclosure) QTS Allegations 2009 to 2011 (Full Disclosure) Non QTS Allegations 2009 to 2011

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 20 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 21 0 25 50 75 100 0 50 100 150 200

Bath North East Somerset Bath North East Somerset

Bexley Bexley

Bracknell Forest Bracknell Forest

Buckinghamshire Buckinghamshire Calderdale Calderdale

(Full Disclosure) Total Allegations 2009 to 2011 (Full Disclosure) QTS Allegations per 100,000 population

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 22 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 23 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200

Bath North East Somerset Bath North East Somerset

Bexley Bexley

Bracknell Forest Bracknell Forest

Buckinghamshire Buckinghamshire Calderdale Calderdale

Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire Cheshire West and Chester Cheshire West and Chester

Coventry Coventry Darlington Darlington Derbyshire Derbyshire Devon Devon Doncaster Doncaster Dudley Dudley Durham Durham East Riding East Riding East Sussex East Sussex Greenwich Greenwich Hartlepool Hartlepool Havering Havering Herefordshire Herefordshire Hull Hull Islington Islington Kingston Kingston Lancashire Lancashire Leicester Leicester Lewisham Lewisham Liverpool Liverpool Merton Merton Middlesbrough Middlesbrough Newham Newham Norfolk Norfolk North Lincs North Lincs North Somerset North Somerset North Yorkshire North Yorkshire Northumberland Northumberland Oldham Oldham Plymouth Plymouth Poole Poole Portsmouth Portsmouth Redcar & Cleveland Redcar & Cleveland Sefton Sefton Shorpshire Shorpshire Solihull Solihull South Glos South Glos Stockton Stockton Suffolk Suffolk Sutton Sutton Tower Hamlets Tower Hamlets Walsall Walsall Warrington Warrington West Berkshire West Berkshire Windsor and Maidenhead Windsor and Maidenhead

(Full Disclosure) Non QTS Allegations per 100,000 population Chart (Full Disclosure) Total Allegations per 100,000 population

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 24 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 25 00 3850 75100 113150 150200 0 25 50 50 10075 100 150 125 200150

BathBath North North East East Somerset Somerset Bath North East Somerset

BexleyBexley Bexley

BracknellBracknell Forest Forest Bracknell Forest

BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire Buckinghamshire

CalderdaleCalderdale Calderdale

CambridgeshireCambridgeshire Cambridgeshire

CheshireCheshire WestWest andand ChesterChester Cheshire West and Chester

CoventryCoventry Coventry DarlingtonDarlington Darlington DerbyshireDerbyshire Derbyshire DevonDevon Devon DoncasterDoncaster Doncaster DudleyDudley Dudley DurhamDurham Durham EastEast Riding Riding East Riding EastEast SussexSussex East Sussex GreenwichGreenwich Greenwich HartlepoolHartlepool Hartlepool HaveringHavering Havering HerefordshireHerefordshire Herefordshire HullHull Hull IslingtonIslington IslingtonIslington KingstonKingston Kingston LancashireLancashire Lancashire LeicesterLeicester Leicester LewishamLewisham Lewisham LiverpoolLiverpool Liverpool MertonMerton Merton MiddlesbroughMiddlesbrough Middlesbrough NewhamNewham Newham NorfolkNorfolk Norfolk NorthNorth Lincs Lincs North Lincs NorthNorth Somerset Somerset North Somerset NorthNorth YorkshireYorkshire North Yorkshire NorthumberlandNorthumberland Northumberland OldhamOldham Oldham PlymouthPlymouth Plymouth PoolePoole Poole PortsmouthPortsmouth Portsmouth RedcarRedcar & & Cleveland Cleveland Redcar & Cleveland SeftonSefton Sefton ShorpshireShorpshire Shorpshire SolihullSolihull Solihull SouthSouth GlosGlos South Glos StocktonStockton Stockton SuffolkSuffolk Suffolk SuttonSutton Sutton TowerTower HamletsHamlets Tower Hamlets WalsallWalsall Walsall WarringtonWarrington Warrington WestWest Berkshire Berkshire West Berkshire WindsorWindsor and and Maidenhead Maidenhead Windsor and Maidenhead

(Full(Full Disclosure) Disclosure) Total Non QTSSuspensions Allegations Total per 100,0002009 to 2011population Chart (Full Disclosure)Disclosure) Total AllegationsSuspensions per as 100,000 Percentage population of Allegations

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 26 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 27 00 10 50 20 30 100 40 50 150 60 20070 0 0 10 50 20 30 100 40 50150 60 20070

BathBath North North East East Somerset Somerset BathBath North North East East Somerset Somerset

BexleyBexley BexleyBexley

BracknellBracknell Forest Forest BracknellBracknell Forest Forest

BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire

CalderdaleCalderdale CalderdaleCalderdale

CambridgeshireCambridgeshire CambridgeshireCambridgeshire

CheshireCheshire West West and and Chester Chester CheshireCheshire West West and and Chester Chester

CoventryCoventry CoventryCoventry DarlingtonDarlington DarlingtonDarlington DerbyshireDerbyshire DerbyshireDerbyshire DevonDevon DevonDevon DoncasterDoncaster DoncasterDoncaster DudleyDudley DudleyDudley DurhamDurham DurhamDurham EastEast Riding Riding EastEast Riding Riding EastEast Sussex Sussex EastEast Sussex Sussex GreenwichGreenwich GreenwichGreenwich HartlepoolHartlepool HartlepoolHartlepool HaveringHavering HaveringHavering HerefordshireHerefordshire HerefordshireHerefordshire HullHull HullHull IslingtonIslington IslingtonIslington KingstonKingston KingstonKingston LancashireLancashire LancashireLancashire LeicesterLeicester LeicesterLeicester LewishamLewisham LewishamLewisham LiverpoolLiverpool LiverpoolLiverpool MertonMerton MertonMerton MiddlesbroughMiddlesbrough MiddlesbroughMiddlesbrough NewhamNewham NewhamNewham NorfolkNorfolk NorfolkNorfolk NorthNorth Lincs Lincs NorthNorth Lincs Lincs NorthNorth Somerset Somerset NorthNorth Somerset Somerset NorthNorth Yorkshire Yorkshire NorthNorth Yorkshire Yorkshire NorthumberlandNorthumberland NorthumberlandNorthumberland OldhamOldham OldhamOldham PlymouthPlymouth PlymouthPlymouth PoolePoole PoolePoole PortsmouthPortsmouth PortsmouthPortsmouth RedcarRedcar & & Cleveland Cleveland RedcarRedcar & &Cleveland Cleveland SeftonSefton SeftonSefton ShorpshireShorpshire ShorpshireShorpshire SolihullSolihull SolihullSolihull SouthSouth Glos Glos SouthSouth Glos Glos StocktonStockton StocktonStockton SuffolkSuffolk SuffolkSuffolk SuttonSutton SuttonSutton TowerTower Hamlets Hamlets TowerTower Hamlets Hamlets WalsallWalsall WalsallWalsall WarringtonWarrington WarringtonWarrington WestWest Berkshire Berkshire WestWest Berkshire Berkshire WindsorWindsor and and Maidenhead Maidenhead WindsorWindsor and and Maidenhead Maidenhead

(Full(Full Disclosure) Disclosure) QTS Non QTSDismissals Allegations Total per 2009 100,000 to 2011 population Chart (Full Disclosure)Disclosure) NonTotal QTS Allegations Dismissals per 100,000 Total 2009 population to 2011

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 28 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 29 70 00 10 50 20 30 100 40 50 150 60 20070 0 20 50 40 100 60 150 80 200100

BathBath NorthNorth EastEast SomersetSomerset Bath North East Somerset

BexleyBexley Bexley

BracknellBracknell ForestForest Bracknell Forest

BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire CalderdaleCalderdale Calderdale

CambridgeshireCambridgeshire CambridgeshireCambridgeshire CheshireCheshire WestWest andand ChesterChester CheshireCheshire WestWest andand ChesterChester

CoventryCoventry Coventry

DarlingtonDarlington DarlingtonDarlington DerbyshireDerbyshire DerbyshireDerbyshire DevonDevon DevonDevon DoncasterDoncaster Doncaster DudleyDudley Dudley DurhamDurham Durham EastEast RidingRiding East Riding EastEast SussexSussex EastEast SussexSussex GreenwichGreenwich Greenwich HartlepoolHartlepool Hartlepool HaveringHavering HaveringHavering HerefordshireHerefordshire HerefordshireHerefordshire HullHull Hull IslingtonIslington IslingtonIslington KingstonKingston KingstonKingston LancashireLancashire Lancashire LeicesterLeicester LeicesterLeicester LewishamLewisham LewishamLewisham LiverpoolLiverpool Liverpool MertonMerton MertonMerton MiddlesbroughMiddlesbrough MiddlesbroughMiddlesbrough NewhamNewham NewhamNewham NorfolkNorfolk NorfolkNorfolk NorthNorth LincsLincs North Lincs NorthNorth SomersetSomerset NorthNorth SomersetSomerset NorthNorth YorkshireYorkshire NorthNorth YorkshireYorkshire NorthumberlandNorthumberland NorthumberlandNorthumberland OldhamOldham Oldham PlymouthPlymouth PlymouthPlymouth PoolePoole PoolePoole PortsmouthPortsmouth PortsmouthPortsmouth RedcarRedcar && ClevelandCleveland Redcar & Cleveland SeftonSefton Sefton ShorpshireShorpshire Shorpshire SolihullSolihull SolihullSolihull SouthSouth GlosGlos South Glos StocktonStockton Stockton SuffolkSuffolk SuffolkSuffolk SuttonSutton SuttonSutton TowerTower HamletsHamlets TowerTower HamletsHamlets WalsallWalsall WalsallWalsall WarringtonWarrington Warrington WestWest BerkshireBerkshire West Berkshire WindsorWindsor andand MaidenheadMaidenhead Windsor and Maidenhead

(Full(Full Disclosure) Disclosure) TotalNon QTSDismissals Allegations Total per 2009 100,000 to 2011 population (FullChart Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) QTS Dismissals Total Allegations as Percentage per 100,000 of Allegations population

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 30 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 31 00 20 50 40 100 60 150 80 100200 0 20 50 40 100 60 150 80 200100

BathBath NorthNorth EastEast SomersetSomerset Bath North East Somerset

BexleyBexley Bexley

BracknellBracknell ForestForest Bracknell Forest

BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire Buckinghamshire CalderdaleCalderdale Calderdale

CambridgeshireCambridgeshire Cambridgeshire CheshireCheshire WestWest andand ChesterChester Cheshire West and Chester

CoventryCoventry Coventry DarlingtonDarlington Darlington DerbyshireDerbyshire Derbyshire DevonDevon Devon DoncasterDoncaster Doncaster DudleyDudley Dudley DurhamDurham Durham EastEast RidingRiding East Riding EastEast SussexSussex East Sussex GreenwichGreenwich Greenwich HartlepoolHartlepool Hartlepool HaveringHavering Havering HerefordshireHerefordshire Herefordshire HullHull Hull IslingtonIslington IslingtonIslington KingstonKingston Kingston LancashireLancashire Lancashire LeicesterLeicester Leicester LewishamLewisham Lewisham LiverpoolLiverpool Liverpool MertonMerton Merton MiddlesbroughMiddlesbrough Middlesbrough NewhamNewham Newham NorfolkNorfolk Norfolk NorthNorth LincsLincs North Lincs NorthNorth SomersetSomerset North Somerset NorthNorth YorkshireYorkshire North Yorkshire NorthumberlandNorthumberland Northumberland OldhamOldham Oldham PlymouthPlymouth Plymouth PoolePoole Poole PortsmouthPortsmouth Portsmouth RedcarRedcar && ClevelandCleveland Redcar & Cleveland SeftonSefton Sefton ShorpshireShorpshire Shorpshire SolihullSolihull Solihull SouthSouth GlosGlos South Glos StocktonStockton Stockton SuffolkSuffolk Suffolk SuttonSutton Sutton TowerTower HamletsHamlets Tower Hamlets WalsallWalsall Walsall WarringtonWarrington Warrington WestWest BerkshireBerkshire West Berkshire WindsorWindsor andand MaidenheadMaidenhead Windsor and Maidenhead

(Full(Full Disclosure) Disclosure) NonNon QTS Allegations Dismissals per Percentage 100,000 population of allegations dismissed Chart(Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) Total DismissalsTotal Allegations as Percentage per 100,000 of populationTotal Allegations

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 32 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 33 00 50 5 100 10 150 20015 0 50 5 100 10 150 20015

BathBath North North East East Somerset Somerset Bath North East Somerset

BexleyBexley Bexley

BracknellBracknell Forest Forest Bracknell Forest

BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire Buckinghamshire

CalderdaleCalderdale Calderdale

CambridgeshireCambridgeshire Cambridgeshire CheshireCheshire West West and and Chester Chester Cheshire West and Chester

CoventryCoventry Coventry DarlingtonDarlington Darlington DerbyshireDerbyshire Derbyshire DevonDevon Devon DoncasterDoncaster Doncaster DudleyDudley Dudley DurhamDurham Durham EastEast Riding Riding East Riding EastEast Sussex Sussex East Sussex GreenwichGreenwich Greenwich HartlepoolHartlepool Hartlepool HaveringHavering Havering HerefordshireHerefordshire Herefordshire HullHull Hull IslingtonIslington IslingtonIslington KingstonKingston Kingston LancashireLancashire Lancashire LeicesterLeicester Leicester LewishamLewisham Lewisham LiverpoolLiverpool Liverpool MertonMerton Merton MiddlesbroughMiddlesbrough Middlesbrough NewhamNewham Newham NorfolkNorfolk Norfolk NorthNorth Lincs Lincs North Lincs NorthNorth Somerset Somerset North Somerset NorthNorth Yorkshire Yorkshire North Yorkshire NorthumberlandNorthumberland Northumberland OldhamOldham Oldham PlymouthPlymouth Plymouth PoolePoole Poole PortsmouthPortsmouth Portsmouth RedcarRedcar & & Cleveland Cleveland Redcar & Cleveland SeftonSefton Sefton ShorpshireShorpshire Shorpshire SolihullSolihull Solihull SouthSouth Glos Glos South Glos StocktonStockton Stockton SuffolkSuffolk Suffolk SuttonSutton Sutton TowerTower Hamlets Hamlets Tower Hamlets WalsallWalsall Walsall WarringtonWarrington Warrington WestWest Berkshire Berkshire West Berkshire WindsorWindsor and and Maidenhead Maidenhead Windsor and Maidenhead

(Full(Full Disclosure) Disclosure) QTS Non QTSDismissals Allegations as Percentage per 100,000 of population Allegations Chart(Full Disclosure) (Full Disclosure) Non QTS Total Dismissals Allegations Percentage per 100,000 of population allegations dismissed

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 34 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 35 0 5 10 15

Bath North East Somerset

Bexley

Bracknell Forest

Buckinghamshire Calderdale

Cambridgeshire Cheshire West and Chester Coventry Darlington Derbyshire Devon Doncaster Dudley Durham East Riding East Sussex Greenwich Hartlepool Havering Herefordshire Hull Islington Kingston Lancashire Leicester Lewisham Liverpool Merton Middlesbrough Newham Norfolk North Lincs North Somerset North Yorkshire Northumberland Oldham Plymouth Poole Portsmouth Redcar & Cleveland Sefton Shorpshire Solihull South Glos Stockton Suffolk Sutton Tower Hamlets Walsall Warrington West Berkshire Windsor and Maidenhead

(Full Disclosure) Total Dismissals as Percentage of Total Allegations

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 36 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 37 0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100

Bath North East Somerset Bath North East Somerset Bexley Bexley Bracknell Forest Bracknell Forest Buckinghamshire Buckinghamshire Calderdale Calderdale Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire Cheshire West and Chester Cheshire West and Chester Coventry Coventry Darlington Darlington Derbyshire Derbyshire Devon Devon Doncaster Doncaster Dudley Dudley Durham Durham East Riding East Riding East Sussex East Sussex Greenwich Greenwich Hartlepool Hartlepool Havering Havering Herefordshire Herefordshire Hull Hull Islington Islington Kingston Kingston Lancashire Lancashire Leicester Leicester Lewisham Lewisham Liverpool Liverpool Merton Merton Middlesbrough Middlesbrough Newham Newham Norfolk Norfolk North Lincs North Lincs North Somerset North Somerset North Yorkshire North Yorkshire Northumberland Northumberland Oldham Oldham Plymouth Plymouth Poole Poole Portsmouth Portsmouth Redcar & Cleveland Redcar & Cleveland Sefton Sefton Shorpshire Shorpshire Solihull Solihull South Glos South Glos Stockton Stockton Suffolk Suffolk Sutton Sutton Tower Hamlets Tower Hamlets Walsall Walsall Warrington Warrington West Berkshire West Berkshire Windsor and Maidenhead Windsor and Maidenhead

Percentage of QTS vs non QTS alleged against Percentage of QTS vs non QTS dismissed

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 38 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 39 0 25 50 75 100

(Full Disclosure) QTS Allegations Proportion (Full Disclosure) Non QTS Allegations Proportion

0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100

(Full Disclosure) QTS Allegations Proportion (Full Disclosure) QTS Dismissals Proportion (Full Disclosure) Non QTS Allegations Proportion (Full Disclosure) Non QTS Dismissals Proportion

0 25 50 75 100

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 40 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 41

(Full Disclosure) QTS Dismissals Proportion (Full Disclosure) Non QTS Dismissals Proportion About the authors Appendix (Methodology)......

About IBB About the author Assumptions • IBB is recognised in the Legal 500 as a South Jon Robins is director of the legal research East regional heavyweight. company Jures, freelance journalist and author. • Where a combined figure has been provided • Regional child demographics are taken from He has been writing about the law for the national over a three year period, we have assumed the ONS population tables published in 2012 • The Personal Injury team are specialists in child and specialist legal press for over 15 years. equal incidence in each year relating to mid 2010. abuse claims, head injury and spinal injury with a strong expertise in a whole range of personal • A figure <10 has been assumed to be an • These percentages have been used to estimate injury and clinical negligence claims. The team incidence of 5; <5 an incidence of 2 child populations in each LEA and calculate acts for a whole spectrum of clients, those of all About Jures incidences per child population ages and backgrounds. Jures is an independent research company dedicated to the legal services market which • Malcolm Underhill is ranked in the top tier combines expertise from a number of different as a leader in his field by independent legal disciplines: journalism; research; PR and Key points directory Chambers and Partners. communications; as well as publishing in both traditional and new media. Of the 119 local education authorities who Of the 119 LEAs who responded 32 (27%) recorded • The firm has offices in Uxbridge and Chesham responded only 52 (44%) held complete data to the number of teaching staff remaining as a total (Bucks). It is a full service law firm handling provide us with full information on teachers and figure for the three years. complex legal work for both businesses and those without QTS for the last three academic The number of LEAs recording the number of individuals across four main practice areas — years. This includes those who combined figures staff remaining without QTS is also increasing but Real Estate, Corporate & Commercial, Private for teachers and those without QTS and those who there are still a greater number of LEAs who do not Client and Community Legal Services. gave undefined responses. record any such data: • 19 (16%) of the remaining 67 who responded • The private client office at Chesham offers did not disclose or hold any information at all. • In 2008/2009: 62 (52%) of the 119 LEAs who a wide range of services to high net worth responded were unable to provide us data individuals, their families and businesses, • 48 (40%) of the 119 LEAs provided us with for the number of staff remaining without including: family and matrimonial; residential incomplete data. QTS status. So 28 (24%) of the 119 LEAs who conveyancing; wills, trusts and probate. responded provided us with the number of staff The number of LEAs recording the number of without QTS status who remained. teaching staff remaining is increasing: • In 2009/2010: 63 (53%) of the 119 LEAs who • In 2008/2009: 55 (46%) of the 119 LEAs who responded were unable to provide us with data responded did not include the number of staff for the number of staff remaining without remaining. So 32 (27%) of the 119 LEAs who QTS status. So 27 (23%) of the 119 LEAs who responded did include the number of staff responded provided us with the number of staff remaining. without QTS status who remained.

• In 2009/2010: 54 (45%) of the 119 LEAs who • In 2010/2011: 61 (51%) of the 119 LEAs who responded did not include the number of staff responded were unable to provide us with data remaining. So 33 (28%) of the 119 LEAs who for the number of staff remaining without responded did include the number of staff QTS status. So 29 (24%) of the 119 LEAs who remaining. responded provided us with the number of staff without QTS status who remained. • In 2010/2011: 52 (44%) of the 119 LEAs who responded did not include the number of staff • Of the remaining 119 who responded 29 (24%) remaining. So 35 (29%) of the 119 LEAs who recorded the number of staff without QTS responded did include the number of staff status remaining as a figure for the total of the remaining three years.

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 42 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 43 • Kent had the highest number of allegations • Only three LEAs had no allegations against • Some of the highest suspension rates were • Kirklees – 148 allegations, 111 suspended for teaching staff (632) but did not record teachers or those without QTS: Coventry, in Hull (100% of 3 instances), Derbyshire Knowsley and Kirklees also have the highest the number of suspensions or number of Calderdale and Bexley. In addition, Merton (65.2%), Knowsley (96.9%), Kirkless (75%) number of suspensions. staff remaining in place. There were 300 had no allegations against teaching staff and West Berkshire (85.7%). dismissals and eight convictions amongst Kent and Halton had no allegations against those • NB: Hull, Derbyshire, Brighton and West teaching staff. It should be noted that we without QTS. • Knowsley – 64 allegations, 62 suspended Berkshire had a lower number of allegations have interpreted ‘substantiated’ allegations as (e.g. Hull had 3 allegations and 3 dismissals). dismissals as we assumed that if an allegation • Norfolk, Surrey and Ealing had a high number of physical or sexual abuse was found to be of allegations against both teachers and those true, then that member of staff would have w/t QTS. (Norfolk – teachers: 251 , others 169; been automatically dismissed. Kent did not Surrey – teachers 183, others: 195; Ealing – Regarding dismissals record the number of dismissals or suspensions teachers: 227, others: 89). against those without QTS. The information In addition to not recording the number of allegations) were in Newham (1%), Norfolk (2%), Kent did provide showed there were 529 • The majority of LEAs with a high number of dismissals at all, many LEAs combine these figures Essex (3%), Tower Hamlets (3%), Bristol (4%) allegations against staff without QTS, this was allegations are in the south, suspension and with the numbers of suspensions (e.g. Dorset, Hillingdon (4%), Plymouth (4%) Gloucestershire also the highest number of allegations. dismissal rates (i.e. the number of suspensions Dudley and Cambridgeshire) (7%) and Durham (8%): and dismissals per allegations) are also The highest number of dismissals was in Kent • Newham – 74 allegations, 1 dismissal • Gloucestershire had the next highest number generally lower in the south. (300). It should be noted that we have interpreted • Norfolk – 251 allegations, 6 dismissals of allegations against teaching staff (314) but ‘substantiated’ allegations as dismissals as we • Essex – 299 allegations, 9 dismissals (no data held no data on those without QTS. Kirkless • The overwhelming majority of authorities did assume that if an allegation of physical or sexual for 2010/2011) had the second highest number of allegations not hold data for 2000/2001 or 2002/2003. child abuse was found to be true that member of • Tower Hamlets – 92 allegations, 3 dismissals. against those without QTS with 193 (as the 479 staff would have been dismissed instantly. • Bristol – 159 allegations, 6 dismissals figure for Lancashire is combined data). The next highest was 21 in Gloucestershire. • Hillingdon – 99 allegations, 4 dismissals Kensington, North Somerset, Middlesbrough • Plymouth – 47 allegations, 2 dismissals and South Gloucester had more dismissals than • Gloucestershire – 314 allegations, 21 dismissals More specifically: suspensions. • Durham – 131 allegations, 10 dismissals The lowest dismissal rates (i.e. dismissals per

TEACHERS: Allegations (across three years) Regarding allegations The lowest suspension rates (i.e. suspensions per allegations) were: The highest number of allegations against staff without QTS were found in North Yorkshire (100), • Southampton, Luton, Salford and Redbridge do Oxfordshire (101), Ealing (89), Norfolk (169), Buckinghamshire (72), Kirklees (193) and Surrey (157). not record the number of allegations. • Newcastle – 95 allegations, 3 suspensions In Kirklees, North Yorkshire, Surrey and Oxfordshire there were more allegations against staff without QTS than teachers. Regarding suspensions • Kensington – 28 allegations, 1 suspension Headline Analysis on Global data • Examples of LEAs that did not record • North Somerset – 34 allegations, 3 suspensions information on suspensions were: Richmond, • The UK child population (under 16) has been calculated as 6.59 million during mid Camden, Cumbria, Stoke, Barking, West Sussex, • Norfolk – 251 allegations, 17 dismissals 2010. Barnsley and Torbay. This is quite surprising as some of these LEAs had a high number of • Bristol - 159 allegations, 8 dismissals • In total, 9,048 allegations were made, 1,355 suspensions and 866 dismissals. allegations (e.g. Stoke: 115, West Sussex: 164, Cumbria: 100 and Barnsley: 83). • Milton Keynes – 50 allegations, 1 dismissal. • 6,107 allegations were made against teaching staff, with 1,038 suspensions and 496 dismissals

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 44 Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 45 • Overall, 9.57% of allegations resulted in dismissal.

• 63.84% of those suspended were dismissed.

• Based on child population, there are 0.14% (0.09% teaching staff) incidences where an allegation is made. The highest incidence of this is in NE, SE & Y&H (0.17%) and the lowest is West Midlands (0.05%)

• Total suspensions are 0.02% of child population, Y&H having the highest at 0.04%.

• The highest suspension rate occurs in NW (27.74%), lowest suspension rates in SE, 6.41%

• There has been an 19.02% increase in child abuse allegations between 2008 and 2011

• Suspensions have also increased in that time by 41.1%

• Dismissals have increased from 184 in 2008 to 306 in 2011, an increase of 66.3%

• The increase between 2008 and 2009 was even greater, a jump of 103.8%

• 21.7% of all QTS allegations were made in the Lancashire LEA (639 of 2,941)

• Norfolk has the highest allegations per child population at 0.99% over the 3 year period

• 26.2% of allegations were made in South East LEAs, the SE child population makes up 20.5% of the English child population.

• 414 dismissals were made in the South East region. 47.8% of all dismissals over the 3 year period

• Kent had 300 dismissals in the period, 34.6% of all dismissals

• The child population of Kent (under 16’s) makes up 4.22% of England’s total

Safe from harm? | 10 years after Soham | Page 46