Our government was in dereliction of its duty to its electorate to call a referendum on the terms it did.
They, and successive governments had for years, encouraged the media to manipulate the public to believe the UK’s problems were largely because of Europe,and not government policies, and then risked Brexit without an exit strategy.
Gove/Boris than hoodwinked the public,never thinking, with the Scottish and Northern Irish vote, that they would achieve BREXIT.
So along with Cameron, they to were in dereliction of their duty to the electorate, and Country , and worse, did not even have a basic plan in place, for the country’s exit.
Jeremy Corbyn has always personally, been against membership of the EU, but was forced by his ‘leadership’ role, and his own belief in the democracy of his MPs, to hold a Remain campaign .
As it appears now, going against the majority of his Labour supporters .
His reward – his own MPs used his support of them, against him.
Ironically, doing what they wanted, which appears to be how they interpret ‘Leadership’, is now the Labour MPs’ excuse, his ineffectual leadership shown by Brexit vote, to declare no confidence in his leadership.
Most would call this objectively, hypocritical bullying.
And in dereliction of these MPs’ duty to their Country and Constituents.
And, doubly unfair on Mr Corbyn, as he was forced to campaign Remain, as the Leader of the Opposition, that Opposition knowing that this was largely against the members of its own party, who had elected Corbyn to represent them only 9 months earlier, and, Mr Corbyn’s own personal beliefs.
It is the Labour MPs, who do not truly represent their constituents, not Jeremy Corbyn, he would have been a Brexit supporter had he been allowed to be, and has the public vote..
So the government, opposition, and the very Brexits themselves, had no plan in place, even in respect to when the exit should be triggered, let alone the unravelling of all the EU laws, and counteracting the affect on employment and our economy.
And thus, they made the UK ,the laughing stock of the world..
As I wake today we have a zombie, resigned, but not gone Prime Minster, a vote of no confidence in the opposition leader and half the Shadow Cabinet resigning.
Because a resounding England and Wales voted to leave the EU.
Against the direction of both their Parliamentary representatives.
With a graphic illustration that our United Kingdom is anything but.
So what does this tell us about our political representatives?
They do not represent the people. And proves what we have known for years ,we have no democracy.
But why were the people given the power to expose this fundamental defect in our constitution ?
Why was a referendum really called ?
And Parliament has now been hoisted by its own petard.
At great expense to our reputation, financial markets and political governance.
We were lead to believe the referendum was needed to quell the Tory rebels and hear the people’s voice.
It would not have been called, if the establishment had known the people’s voice would be so loud and be its own.
The government was manipulating, as it did with the Scottish Independence Referendum, that almost shouted loud enough, but luckily did what the government wanted, and secured a Tory majority.
This time the bet did not pay off.
Boris and Nigel were supposed to almost lead the country to victory, leaving Cameron mortally wounded, the EU scared and ripe for fresh negotiations ,and glory for Gove, Nigel and Boris, put in prime, popular position for a further 5 year Tory majority government.
As with the Mental Capacity Act and Carers Act, not only does our legislative not do what it says on the tin, neither do our politicians.
But this time their manipulation went too far, and the referendum has revealed, as we all know, our government does not care about us or our country.
A huge recruitment drive is underway to man the Task Force of intervention of the newly formed ‘adult focused safeguarding service’.
5 temporary social worker vacancies appeared in just 2 weeks in the Simply Hired site.
The Indeed website shows 1876 new jobs in Adult Safeguarding, and 879 in Adult Social Worker, more in Reed Health and Social Care and other agencies, and 3 month contracts for Adult Social Worker Assistant specialised in writing assessments and reports.
Childhood Support Services team, which are responsible for the countywide strategic, policy, commissioning and service development for universal and preventative services for children and their families.
All is now a ‘preventative service’ to remove to state care if any risk can be foreseen.
So social work, as a vocation/profession that supports those in need to remain living with families in their community no longer exists.
Social Workers are forced by funding, and government control to assessment and ‘prevent’ risk of abuse by removal to residential care,..
The government set up a Social Work Task Force and Reform Board in 2012, creating a new social work degree and required continuing education , overseen by a new education body, the College of Social Work.
‘As The ( Social Work ) Task force noted social work calls for a particular mix of analytic skills, insight, common sense, confidence, resilience, empathy and use of authority.’
The government have criticised and taken control of social work education and training.
Social Work Academies were set up in 2014, for newly qualified social workers which provide a year training and support and state their priority to be safeguarding children and supporting vulnerable adults.
The implementation of the Mental Capacity Act in 2007 coincided with the government’s concern for the UK’s army of unpaid carers.
Could this be, because carers care for the potential customers, that would feed the future private residential care industry, and, could now be processed through the newly created Court of Protection ?
In 2008, ‘Carers at the heart of21st Century families and community strategic vision’, was launched .
This vision was that,
‘Carers be respected as expert care partners and have access to the integrated and personalised services they need to support them in their caring role.’
Parents, sons/daughters, husbands/ wives are now ‘care partners’ with the state.
The love and care of a family member, the same as a stranger care worker only unpaid, and surveys show they do not like their new title.
This strategic vision was continued though two successive governments, up to the Carers Strategy Second National Action Plan 2014-2016.
And money has been fed into carer and community charities to seek out, and ‘support’ these carers.
These charities research, support via volunteers, and create ‘Care Friendly Communities’ with the help of businesses. NHS and Local Authority.
Carers UK 2014, received £181,000 from the Department of Health, for Carers Strategy, and paid £164,000 for Carers Ambassador GP Training.
GPs play a pivotal role in safeguarding adults, as they are best placed to check on carers health, including mental health, to ensure they are fit to care, as if they are not, the cared for will be at risk of abuse and/or neglect.
Carers will think their desperate chats to their GP, are confidential, and be unaware that they are being monitored ,and their GP is under a duty to spot those at risk of abuse or neglect.
The Carers Act provides, that any support for the MCA ‘incapable’, must be approved/provided by Adult Services, allowing safeguarding hit squads, trained for removal on safeguarding issues, to be used as the only ‘support’, as described in the next post.
Cuts have also resulted in the closing of most day centres, Respite facilities, and other lifelines for carers.
So what is the real reason for governments’ concern and the money spent assessing, soliciting and monitoring carers, particularly, as their policies have continued to remove support, finance and facilities ?
It would appear, the real agenda of ‘Care Friendly Communities’, is the same as the government that finances them.
To spy, solicit and harvest, those that need protection, and protect them, within the for profit residential care industry.
And, states even a single incident of abuse, or neglect can be sufficient.
This draconian power gives Local Authorities, is in breach of the rule of law, as the executive, too much discretion.
And allows dangerous, unpoliced interventions into every individual’s autonomy and private life.
Not only can the state decide who needs protection, BUT how it protects them by-encagement in for profit ‘care’ for life.
And the Act provides, all officers must be up to date with their legal powers and duties, in relation to the MCA and MHA- removal to state care.
The Act also forces collaboration upon services , even members of the public in this joint safeguarding mission.
As under the Act, Local authorities have a duty to lead a multi agency local adult safeguarding team.
This should include inter alia NHS providers, GPs, police, social services, voluntary groups, care providers, who are charged to develop, share and implement a joint safeguarding strategy.
This makes individual, or organisational independence/ autonomy impossible, and, as bodies are lead by adult social services, safeguarding will be the priority..
A similar cabal, already exists in the non statutory form in MASH- Multi Agency Safeguarding Hubs.
All and any information, must be shared between all agencies.
As the Act provides any relevant person, or organisation, likely to have information , relevant to the Safeguarding team’s function must provide it as requested.
There is no definition of the type of this information, other than as ‘relevant to their function’.
And, the Act provides agencies, should have drawn up a common agreement relating to confidentiality, and the sharing of information between themselves, based on the well-being of the adult at risk of abuse or neglect.
Again no autonomy, or independence.
And this agreement should also set out in what circumstances, information will be shared without agreement .
Therefore making it impossible for a person or organisation not to disclose information.
The Act ignores legitimate excuses for non disclosure, such as confidentiality or non-disclosure
And rides rough shod illegally, through professional confidentiality, privilege, the Data Protection Act, and Human Rights Act right to privacy.
In its explanatory notes to the Care Bill, the government said this might include a GP, who provided medical advice to an adult in respect of a safeguarding matter; a person carrying out voluntary work that brought him into contact with such an adult, or a minister of a church attended by a family member or carer of the adult.
Effectively, the government intends this duty to provide information to extend to anyone even a trusted friend, or member of the public stranger.
So gone is organisational, professional autonomy, or privilege, as is a person’s right to privacy and confidence in any, even the most personal dealings.
You cannot even hide secret conversations from the state.
Big Brother can force their disclosure, and use them to ‘protect’ you, your relative, or friend as they feel fit.
Similar Government Guidance on Adult Safeguarding was in fact titled, ‘No Secrets ‘and the Care Act makes this guidance law.
Job advert for a safeguarding 3 month contract social worker states as follows;
To work with and assess those people with the most complex social care needs, ( autistic/LD as most profitable) enabling them to maintain or retain the highest level of independence, ( how with such needs ?) avoiding or minimising their need for intensive services or interventions. ( Residential/institutions, where there can be no interventions)
-You will undertake specific work to safeguard individuals who are identified to be at potential ( so actual risk is not required, automatic by virtue of disability)or actual risk of harm.
-You will be responsible for ensuring that all County Adult Protection Policies are adhered to and concerns are raised in accordance with these policies
(Any ‘concerns’ to ensure the only policy is complied with- removal to residential private for profit state enforced no choice care for life ).
No one can escape, the Big Brother eyes, all the caring community charities and volunteers, data bases, MASH, GPs, and, no one will even be aware their desperate confidences are being shared with all.
Josh Wills and Mathew Garnett have recently moved out of NHS assessment units.
They appear to be the only 2 so 2,998 remain now for years illegally under the MHA as this de facto cannot be ‘treatment’ particularly for life long conditions like ASD/LD which were not until MHA 09 within the MHA.
Other than in distance, are the two teenagers any closer to going home ?
Josh’s Dad, hopefully proclaimed,
‘Let him be a beacon for all other families in the same situation’.
But is he a beacon of hope?
It is three long years since Winterbourne View, countless meetings, numerous petitions, Mencap, Challanging Behaviour , Justice for LB , Hear my Voice, campaigns, a white paper, weeks of national news coverage, and documentaries.
All costing a huge amount of public money, but, did any of this, result in a single autistic/learning disabled/challanging behavioured person being any nearer to being free to live where he, and/or his family want?
Did it result in the disabled, or, their family being given any rights?
’Autistic boy Josh Wills goes home‘ lead our March BBC News.
But where did he go, and, will he ever live at home again.
Josh is now 15.
When he was 12, he was removed from his parents in Cornwall, to an NHS hospital Unit in Birmingham, for a six week assessment.
This appears now the norm, when an autistic/LD/ challanging behaviour person starts causing problems.
And, ever earlier intervention is being recommended.
As behavioural problems, are the nature of the beast, and occur in ‘ normal’ teenagers, one wonders what purpose such ‘assessments’ can serve.
Other than, an excuse, to pay the assessors, on average, £4,000 per week.
The assessment unit did not improve Josh’s behaviour.
How could it improve anyone’s behaviour, let alone, a highly stressed/frustrated/bewildered autistic adolescent’s, removed suddenly, without knowing why, from all he knew, and loved, to the strange, hostile environment of a secure hospital with strangers.
Josh continued to bang his head, and rain his fists down on his body.
This was the only way he could express, and vent his frustration, at the world he found himself in, his surging hormones, and now, encagement.
His father said, ‘ I long to see his free spirit running along the beaches and moorlands again’
So, what must a helmet, straitjacketed wrap , isolation, drugs, strangers, and a secure unit regime for 3 years, have done to this free spirited child.
Josh’s cries for help, and signs of the deepest distress, were used to severely restrict his movements, and, label him a dangerous self- harmer, and a ‘severe’ autistic .
Such done for his own protection
Such labels would also increase his funding.
Might not his ‘treatment’, and over safeguarding, have contributed to his continued, and increasing self harm ?
Was his behaviour part of an autistic phase, or hormonal so he would or could be helped to grow out of ?
Josh is now 250 miles closer to home, but no closer to apparently running helmet free on the beach and moorlands or living with his family.
How is the ‘support’ of Spectrum, different from his hospital, except for a more homely environment, location, access family, and outings ?
And why could this not have been provided instead of an ‘assessment’ Unit?
And, what purpose did this Unit serve, other than to earn at least £600,000.?
Spectrum, is a registered charity, and from its filed accounts, received £11,081,815 for 28 care contracts in 2015, commissioned jointly by NHS, LA and education.
One employee is paid between £160,000-170,000 a year.
On this basis Spectrum are likely to be paid £392,000 per annum, tax free for Josh’s care.
With tax concessions, that is nearing half a million.
In 2015 Managers were paid £781,612, workers £66,761
Would it not have been better to extend Josh’s real home and provide support within it, three years earlier, or even now ?
In less, than 3 years Josh will be 18.
Again he will be ‘assessed’ this time as likely to be ‘incapable’ of making any decision, under the MCA ,and his parents will lose all rights over him.
Unless the government decide to make him a real beacon of hope Josh will never go home.
Why have only Josh, and Mathew Garnett,apparently been allowed out of NHS assessment units ?
Could it be, because they are under 18 and cannot be made subject to MCA proceedings, and their parents can still act on their behalf ?
As they did when they petitioned, which would not be possible under an MCA gag.
And, also because indefinite ‘treatment’ is illegal under MHA, particularly, if not working .
At 15, Mathew Garnett went for the usual 6 week assessment ,and never came home.
He again was a troubled adolescent.
See the Dispatches Channel 4 ‘Under Lock and Key’ for the treatment of Mathew costing at least £8,000 per week.
And why cannot this ‘treatment’ be provided at home ?
It is hard not to come to the sad conclusion, that, Josh and Mathews’ moves were a PR exercise to make it appear, that something was being done for the many ‘kids in crisis’, and, an excuse to transfer public money into private recycled profit making corporations, known as charities.
Josh and Mathew and thousands more, will never return home.
Here is why, they are worth too much, as this exert, not behind a pay wall, of an article in For Healthcare Leaders HSJ shows;
Private sector gets boost from mental health commissioning freeze (HSJ: 17 February 2016)
NHS England’s moratorium on commissioning new specialised mental health services helped deliver new demand and a return to real terms growth for independent providers, according to new research.
Market analysts LaingBuisson’s report, shared exclusively with HSJ, also says moving away from block contracts could help open up the mental health sector to more independent providers.
The analysis says independent providers of mental health beds are “enjoying robust demand”with growth back up to an average of 4 per cent a year in the last three years, although profitability has been affected by austerity measures since 2008.
NHS demand for private sector beds, which LaingBuisson estimates accounts for 87 per cent of independent mental health care providers’ revenue, is subject to “ebb and flow” as NHS commissioners turn to private sector beds to meet capacity shortfalls.
The report says:
“The demand ‘tide’ has been flowing in favour of independent mental health hospitals in the last few years essentially because of constraints on NHS in-house capacity as a result of an NHS England moratorium on commissioning of new capacity (for centrally commissioned specialised services).” .
Not on their effectiveness or wishes of the patients or their family.