Dear Editor,

YourHarlow’s article published May 15 regarding Anglia Ruskin University’s research into unregistered children’s homes was a shocking read. It is also shocking that time and again Labour councillors voted to grant planning applications for private children’s homes in residential homes, often in cramped mid-terrace houses.

It is to the credit of the Conservatives on the planning committee who raised concerns, especially councillors Andrew Johnson, James Leppard and Matthew Saggers.

Labour’s Kay Morrison, Nancy Watson and Jake Shepherd played the violin and used the “think of the children” card to vote for every application bar one.

Now Anglia Ruskin university shows the dangers of unregistered children’s homes, which are distinct from those Ofsted registered homes appearing at the planning committee which I have examined. However, the extortionate cost, lack of proven track record in both financial sustainability and care delivery gives rise to serious concerns about the long term care quality of children in private care.

It is also of great credit to YourHarlow’s editor Michael Casey in writing these articles to highlight the issue in both Thurrock and Harlow. Also, it should be noted that the concerns of commentators on YourHarlow articles, such as Seamus, have helped get this issue more attention. 

The recommendations of the Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) research team, which appear in their report from page 45 onwards, need deep study by councillors. It is especially concerning that researchers say: 

“The discrepancy between the most recent Ofsted reporting and our FOI responses should therefore be interpreted as a governance signal, indicating that some areas do not have clear operational understanding of whether unregistered provision exists locally, or how many children are being placed into such settings, which undermines prevention and sustains a reactive safeguarding model. It could  also demonstrate a lack of ability or desire to disclose this data through the FOI process.”

A serious crackdown on these private operators is needed, but ultimately the state must bear responsibility for the care of children and bring provision back in-house, with purpose built homes that will provide the proper facilities that vulnerable children deserve.

Fortunately, I know from discussions with councillors in the Conservative group that they take this issue seriously and proves yet again that we were right to hand all 11 council seats to them last week.

Regards

David Forman