Charles Thomson - Freelance Writer/Reporter

Campaigners Slam Essex Council As It Hides Details of Alleged Child Sex Abuse and Corruption, Including the Shoebury Sex Ring
Thur 26th April 2018, Yellow Advertiser

ESSEX Council has refused to answer basic questions about an inquiry linking some of its former employees to alleged child sex abuse.

For the second time this year, County Hall has refused to release details of the ’Kenward Report’, commissioned in the late 1990s to probe allegations that child protection staff abused kids in care.

The Taxpayers’ Alliance described the council’s refusal to answer basic questions as ’ludicrous’, whilst the founder of a leading child abuse charity said the ongoing secrecy gave the impression that the council ’have something to hide’.

The ’Kenward Report’ was penned by independent child protection expert Helen Kenward, who had conducted high profile abuse inquiries for other local authorities.

The Yellow Advertiser revealed its existence in March, when Essex Council refused to publish it, even in a redacted form.

We asked to view the report after learning it had been shown to police investigating a historic paedophile ring in Shoeburyness. The ring was originally investigated in 1990 but only two of the perpetrators named by the victims were prosecuted. The case has been reopened after the YA unearthed evidence other men were named by victim at the time but never brought to justice.

The YA has seen evidence that whistleblowers were interviewed by Mrs Kenward in 2000 and 2001, about subjects including alleged corruption connected to the Shoebury paedophile ring.

But the council claimed in March that there was ’no public interest’ in allowing taxpayers to read the report and dismissed the YA’s request to view it as ’vexatious’, claiming it would take ’many hundreds of hours’ to redact sensitive information.

The YA then filed a Freedom of Information (FOI) request for basic details of the report, such as who commissioned it, the date on which it was published, how much it had cost taxpayers, and which council officials were permitted to read it upon completion.

County Hall claimed it could not answer those questions because paperwork had been destroyed.

The YA also asked for statistical information about the report, such as how long it was, how many people were interviewed and how many staff were disciplined or sacked as a result of its findings.

But County Hall refused to answer a single question – even withholding simple facts, like the number of pages in the report.

It claimed collating any of the requested information would cost more than £450 in man hours.

It said: “Not all the pages are numbered. While FOI allows you to request information we hold, it does not allow you to require the council to produce new information which it does not hold.

“It would take such a long time manually to produce the statistical analysis needed to respond... a response would cost more than £450.”

The YA has filed a formal complaint over the council’s response and has made clear that unless some data is released, we will report the council to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Abuse survivor Peter Saunders, founder of the National Association for People Abused in Childhood, said: “The council is continuing its well-trodden path of being as evasive on this issue as it possibly can, which flies in the face of any willingness to try and tackle this vile issue.

“They obviously take the view that these things are best kept secret and out of the public eye, which plays into the hands of people who abuse children.

“This makes it look like they have something to hide. It’s time to shine a light on this murky past. How can taxpayers have any confidence in a council refusing to cooperate on such a delicate, sensitive, important issue?”

James Price, campaign manager for the Taxpayers’ Alliance, added: “FOI requests are among the most effective tools people have for holding politicians to account, and no attempt to avoid transparency should be allowed.

“It will seem ludicrous to anyone reading this that the council is wriggling out of its legal obligations by claiming it will take too long to release how many pages a report is.

“Taxpayers deserve not only to see the report they paid for, but to be treated with respect by their councils.”