RECOMMENDATION 1: A Commissioner for Children.
We recommend that a Commissioner for Children be appointed to ensure independent oversight of the interests of children and young people in Jersey. Such a position should be enshrined in States legislation and should be consistent with what are known as the Paris Principles, as is the case with other Children’s Commissioners across the UK and Ireland.
RECOMMENDATION 2: Giving children and young people a voice.
Alongside the appointment of a Commissioner, we consider that other steps are necessary to ensure that children in Jersey are given a voice. An effective complaints system is one key element in the structures that are necessary to ensure that looked after children are safe, and, to that end, we recommend that the current complaints system is replaced with one that is easily accessed and in which children and young people have confidence.
The outcomes of complaints should be reported regularly to the relevant Minister, who, in turn, should present an annual report to the States. This improved system should include the appointment of a Children’s Rights Officer, who will have responsibility for ensuring that children in the care system, irrespective of where they are accommodated, are supported to ensure that their voice is heard and that the matters they raise are addressed. Additionally, Jersey should develop a partnership with an independent, external children’s advocacy service such as Become (formerly the Who Cares? Trust). We also suggest that the Chief Minister should consider making a personal commitment to meet annually with care-experienced young people, to hear at first hand of their experiences.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Inspection of services
A further essential element of keeping children safe is having an empowered, professional and truly independent inspectorate. Between 1981 and 2001, there were no independent inspections of services for children, and, since 2001, there have only been occasional ad hoc inspections. We believe that the current plans for an internal inspectorate are encouraging, but we also consider that an external element of scrutiny is required. We recommend that Jersey establish a truly independent inspection arrangement for its children’s services, which will have the confidence of children, staff and the wider public.
RECOMMENDATION 4: Building a sustainable workforce
Recruiting and retaining suitably qualified staff at all levels is essential if services are to be improved and developed. We recommend that Children’s Services be provided with a dedicated specialist HR resource to work alongside managers in building a stable and competent workforce. We set out suggestions for breaking down silo working and developing a culture of corporate working across all public services in Jersey, led by senior politicians and the Chief Executive and his or her senior team. This includes using principles and practices that have seen the London Borough of Hackney in the UK transform their Children’s Services and become employer of choice among professionals in this field, suitably adapted for the island context.
RECOMMENDATION 5: Legislation
Legislation for children in Jersey has lagged behind the developed world. We have set out suggestions for Jersey keeping pace with other jurisdictions, including developing collaborations with English authorities. We heard from witnesses a view that the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014 should have a section inserted into it recognising that the welfare of children should be a primary consideration. We agree with this proposal, but it is our view that this in itself would not be sufficient unless the whole system were amended to centre on the welfare of the child. We recommend therefore that the youth justice system move to a model that always treats young offenders as children first and offenders second. To that end, we recommend that a suitable training programme be put in place for the judiciary, including a requirement for refresher training to ensure that all carrying these onerous responsibilities are kept briefed on the latest thinking and research.
RECOMMENDATION 6: Corporate parent
The corporate parent is an important concept in social policy, and it is essential that all those with this responsibility have a common understanding and are equipped to fulfil those responsibilities. We recommend that, following every election, there should be mandatory briefing for all States Members as to their responsibilities as corporate parents for looked after children, and that new States Members would be unable to take their seat until this had been undertaken.
RECOMMENDATION 7: The ‘Jersey Way’
Throughout the course of our work we heard the term the ‘Jersey Way’. While this was, on occasions, used with pride, to describe a strong culture of community and voluntary involvement, it was more often used to describe a perceived system whereby serious issues are swept under the carpet and people avoid being held to account for abuses that have been perpetrated. This was well summarised in the contribution of a Phase 3 witness who told us: ‘We (also) have the impossible situation of the non-separation of powers between the judiciary and political and there is a lot of secrecy, non-transparency and a lack of openness. This brings with it the lack of trust, the fear factor that many have spoken about and contributes greatly to the Jersey Way.’ That fear factor and lack of trust must be addressed, therefore we recommend that open consideration involving the whole community be given to how this negative perception of the ‘Jersey Way’ can be countered on a lasting basis.
RECOMMENDATION 8: Legacy issues
Finally, a number of legacy issues require to be considered. Our proposals include that all of the Inquiry’s vast documentation is preserved in perpetuity, with all public documents being retained in the public domain. Consideration should be given to making that archive accessible and more easily searchable. We also recommend that there is some form of tangible public acknowledgement of those who have been ill served by the care system over many decades. We believe that the buildings at Haut de la Garenne are a reminder of an unhappy past or shameful history for many people. They are also a symbol of the turmoil and trauma of the early stages of Operation Rectangle, the attention it brought to the island and the distress it evoked in many former residents. We recommend that consideration be given as to how the buildings can be demolished and that any youth or outdoor activity or services for children located on the site should be in modern buildings bearing no resemblance to what went before.
