| Mr. Crockett questioned Councillor Calver about the Report in the Western Telegraph concerning the dismissal by the Press Complaints Commission of a complaint. |
|
At previous meetings of Manorbier Council, in Cllr Calver's
absence, Mr Crockett had
asked for Cllr Calver's resignation over an alleged incident at the school. At the meeting
of the council held on the 1st March 2007 Cllr Calver was present to respond to Mr
Crockett's
queries during the public session of the council. Cllr Calver informed Mr Crockett
that he
was happy to answer any questions relating to the incident and informed Mr Crockett
to
feel free at any stage to ask for clarification on any of the points raised.
ooooo000ooooo The following is a full note of the incident that was the subject of Mr Crockett's questions given by Cllr Calver and the resulting complaints panel meeting and with its conclusions. In addition the complaint regarding the Western Telegraph is also detailed. I had been endeavouring to arrange an appointment with Mrs Craig, the head of maths, as the link governor for Maths at the school. In order to arrange an appointment I attended the school arriving at the entrance hall at approximately 8.45 am. I was escorted to Mrs Craig's classroom by a member of staff. On entering the classroom, which at that stage was full of the pupils and several adult members of staff, I waited for Mrs Craig to approach me from the opposite side of the room. A child approached me and asked me a question relating to the Jameston area and events that had occurred there. Those events being that there had been several anti social incidents that had resulted in the phone box being smashed twice. Also the bus shelter was being used as a urinal and a dumping ground for all sorts of rubbish. I had arranged for the bus shelter to be pressure washed out and repainted by the County Council at taxpayer's expense and replied with something like "I hope it would now not be returned to its previous state". I spoke to Mrs Craig about the appointment that was arranged and then left the classroom. I have reproduced the statement given by Mrs Craig to the complaints panel when the complaint was raised a few months after the occasion that I had attended the school. |
|
Mrs Craig Statement
Mr. Calver is the Link Governor for Maths and during the early part of the summer term we both agreed it would be helpful if he would come and visit me to discuss the subject area further, as I am, indeed the Maths coordinator for the school. Mr. Calver had tried, on several occasions, to get hold of me on the phone to arrange an appointment to meet up. However. I was always teaching on these occasions and could not get to the phone. Therefore, Mr Calver visited me in my classroom, first thing I the morning, sometime between the 5th - 16th June, to try and arrange an appointment. I don't remember how he entered my classroom, neither do I remember the precise date or time. However, it must have been around 9:00am as I remember the children just beginning to settle at their desks and I was starting to get my lesson underway whilst briefing the LSA's for the day. Mr. Calver was very polite to me and asked questions about my well-being as I would have been 6 months pregnant at the time. I apologised to him for not returning his phone calls and explained that I was extremely busy at the moment as we were due to go on a residential trip to Cardiff in the next few weeks and I was finding it very difficult to get ail the necessary paperwork in place. I was aware that my class were starting to become unsettled, so I apologised that I needed to start and after looking in my diary, suggested that the best thing to do, would be to come and see me on either the Thursday or Friday that we return from Cardiff as I didn't have a spare lunchtime or evening up until this point As he didn't have his diary with him, I asked him to ring Mrs. Greenhouse and to pass on a message as to which day it was going to be. Mr Calver left my classroom but I do not recall which door he left from. |
|
As the complaint was made to the school months after the incident by the parent of the child my recall of the exact detail of the conversation with the child was not full as it had been a passing moment and had not been the main focus of my visit to the school as one of its Governors. However having two children of my own I could be sure that I would have answered fully any question brought to me by a child. The complaints panel was convened with three members of the school Governors and two from other parts of the county to advise them on procedures. I attended the meeting with Mr. Tew, acting in his capacity as an independent witness and advisor. On entering the school on the day of the complaints panel I was met by its chairperson, Mrs Horley, who informed me that no recordings of the meeting could be taken of the meeting. This statement surprised both Mr. Tew and myself as we would have been quite happy for notes or recording to have been taken. On entering the hall we were introduced to the remainder of the panel, Mrs. Codd and Mr. Griffiths, both local governors and Mrs. Yvonne Evans and Mr. Bramley, both Federation of Governors representatives, and there as being the panel advisors. I believed that I had previously met Mrs Evans and asked her whether we had met. She replied that it did not matter. It was only later and away from the meeting that I recalled that we had met a couple of years ago and had disagreed over an issue. Initially I wished to clarify a point with the panel that the statement made by the headmistress referred to a visitors' book for the school and the fact that I had not signed it on the day I visited Mrs. Craig, I therefore asked to see the book. Mrs. Horley queried why I needed to see it to which I responded that as it had been referred to in the Headmistress' statement, and not exhibited, I therefore could legitimately ask to have sight of it. When Mr. Tew asked for it to be produced Mrs Horley duly left the room to locate it. On her return she informed the panel that it could not be found and Mrs Greenhouse had advised her that it could be lost or shredded. This caused me concern as it had been mentioned in the Headmistress' statement and although I had not signed the book this was not due to an oversight on my part as I had never been told that signing it was a prerequisite of visiting the school. As it could not be produced the Headmistress' point that it had not been signed could not be weighted with the any significance. I was somewhat concerned also about the make up of the panel. This was due to an incident that occurred after my election as County Councillor for the ward. I had been presented with the results of an appraisal which had been carried out in the area of Manorbier, Jameston, Manorbier Newton and Lydstep. Following research into the concerns of those who brought the issue to my attention I has reason to believe that the appraisal had been rigged as a large and significant number of the questionnaires the data analysis had been based on were forgeries and photocopies. A questionnaire document had been produced for this appraisal with funding by taxpayers through a WDA grant. I had supplied the evidence to the police regarding the forgeries the production of which had seemingly involved some members of the community. The police inquiry was ongoing at the time therefore I asked that if any member of the panel or their family members were in any way involved with the investigation and that perhaps they should consider declaring that interest as they were part of a panel that was being asked to formulate a judgement on me. Mrs. Evans again queried why I was asking the question to which my adviser reminded that she was there as adviser to the panel and surely it was her duty to advise members that if they had any connection with the investigation they should openly declare that interest. Such declarations being essential to comply with the requirements of the guidelines for such complaints procedures and in demonstration of removing any prejudice or bias. At this point Mrs. Codd revealed that her husband had been interviewed by the police regarding the matter but felt that this did not mean that she had an interest to declare. My adviser was concerned regarding the makeup of the committee but felt justice must dictate that there would be a right of appeal to a independent panel without the appearance of bias. The complaints panel result was given and they concluded that I had spoken to a child on a non school matter. As I indicated earlier I have always felt that you should answer a question that a child brings to you, after all a child learns by asking questions and a full responsible answer to those questions tailored to their age and understanding can only serve to assist in their education. Therefore the panel's findings are in my view somewhat incomprehensible as I do not know how I could have responded to the child without referring to the issue raised by him. The composition of the panel concerned me as the members of the panel seemingly did not wish to consider my point that their judgement either was impaired or could be viewed as being impaired. In order to remove this appearance the issue should have been ventilated openly. In addition I was advised by Mrs Horley, who was responsible for the panel in her capacity as its chairperson, that I had a right of appeal. I later found this to be untrue. The complaints panel findings consisted of four recommendations and these are given below. |
|
Panel findings
Complaints Panel Consisting of: Mrs. P. Codd Foundation Governor Mr. Andrew Griffiths Parent Governor Mrs. D. Horley LEA Governor Decision After considering carefully all of the evidence it was noted that there is a discrepancy between the two parties version of events. The panel had asked Joshua for his account of the incident which differs from the statement of Cllr. Calver. The bottom line is that in speaking to Joshua Cllr. Calver did act inappropriately, as the topic of conversation was not a school matter, but involved other issues Cllr. Calver was investigating and that no other adult was party to the conversation. Therefore the panel find that the complaint against Cllr. Calver to be upheld, and in an effort to ensure that such an incident does not happen again the following recommendations are made: The Governing Body and the Head teacher draft a policy and protocol for Governors when visiting the school. That the signing of the visitors book is adhered to. That the whole Governing body attends training on the Roles and Responsibilities of Governors which will include the new policy and protocol mentioned above. That the school door security key pad to be in operation all the time and that the side doors are secure. 4th October, 2006 Mrs. D. Horley (p.p. The Panel) |
|
It is perhaps appropriate to offer a comment on the findings of the complaints
panel. Firstly I would agree that there was a discrepancy in the evidence from
the child and myself. However the significance of the classroom teacher appears
to have been ignored. The requirement of a visitors book is not something new
and has to be considered as essential from a health and safety aspect, it being
essential to know, along with class registers, exactly how many persons were in
a building in the event of a calamity. It also provides a record of visitors able
to be searched through in the event of seeking confirmation of dates of visits!
The fact that the panel concluded from this single complaint about one governor
that the whole governing body needed to attend training on their roles, and for
it to include the protocol outlined in their first finding, is staggering. The
final recommendation would suggest that security has not been a high priority
for some considerable time. It certainly is, like the visitors book comments
made earlier, divorced from my visit to the school and sadly reflects upon
management.
ooooo000ooooo In relation to the article in the Western Telegraph I was contacted by their reporter Ruth Davies following information given by an anonymous caller advising her to look at an Internet web-log describing the incident and the result of the panel's findings. When she contacted me she seemingly had already made up her mind on the issue so I advised her that it would be better if she gave me a right of reply the following week as in my view she had got her facts wrong. The paper duly printed the story but then when I requested a right of reply the editor Fiona Phillips informed me that this would not be made available to me and requesting instead that I send to the paper a letter written by her under the guise of having written it myself. I am quite capable of providing my account of the events and I do not need the assistance of editor of the paper in this respect. In fact it concerns me that she would wish to even contemplate such a step. The paper had also not reported the incident truthfully and it appeared to me it was simply indulging in unhelpful sensationalism regarding the issue and had not checked on the true situation.
The newspaper report stated that the child has learning difficulties, something I believe to be untrue. It is also interesting to note that no letters regarding the incident have been printed in the Western Telegraph from other people, perhaps they have not been sent, however I would wish the paper to confirm that this the case. If other letters have been sent and not printed I'm sure an explanation would be forthcoming as to why this is the case. ooooo000ooooo Overall I would ask anyone to give consideration to the report provided by Mrs. Craig, the form teacher in whose classrrom the event took place, as it is from the only person to have seen the event. Her submission to the complaints panel of the School Governors is highly signicant regarding this incident. This is the only first hand witness account of the discussion therefore I would contend considerable weight should be attached to it. It would appear that the complaints panel attached little or no weight to it at all. I was reported to the Ombudsman by the parent of the child and also by Mrs Codd over this incident. Following their consideration of the evidence the decision of the Ombudsman was to dismiss the complaints. |
Cllr Malcolm Calver
9th March 2007