Cyngor Gwynedd Council to review vehicle policy amid 'misuse' claims.

 https://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/article.cfm?id=135014 - by Gareth Wyn Williams

Cyngor Gwynedd Council is reviewing its transport policy amid claims the authority’s vehicles have been “misused” by some members of staff driving them home and falling foul of regulations.

According to the council, staff who require vehicles are permitted to take them home if “on call” or have “stand-by” out of hours duties, by being available to support incidents such as storms or accidents.

But officers have conceded there have been “some instances” where staff have not adhered to the policy, confirming it is currently being reviewed as part of ongoing talks with unions.

The move comes after the unveiling of a banner on a busy roundabout in #Caernarfon calling for a stop on the “misuse” of vehicles. It was swiftly taken down by officers who say it had been installed without consent.

A Gwynedd Council spokesman said: “We allow staff that are participating in a recognised out of hours arrangement that requires the use of a specialist vehicle to take a council vehicle home so that they can respond to emergencies as quickly and safely as possible.

“We are aware there are some instances where staff may not have adhered to this policy, and we are working with our trade union partners to address this matter and update our policy.

“We can also confirm that the council removed a banner which was placed without consent on railings near Morrisons roundabout in Caernarfon last weekend.”

Arfon MS Sian Gwenllian has already written to the authority after concerns were raised with her, confirming she would “continue to communicate” with the council.

Cllr Aeron M Jones said he had received similar concerns from council employees.

He said: “For the council to say they’re looking into it, well, I’ve been a member for 12 years and they’ve been saying the same for all of that time.”

“I agree that any member of staff that may have to go out on call should have their council vehicle with them, but there are officers who may be on-call only over the phone and others, perhaps managers, who don’t need them at all in my view.

“The running of these vehicles cost a lot to the taxpayers of Gwynedd and it’s only right that people get value for money, especially with council tax rising every year.

“I fully support whoever placed the sign, while the correct procedure may be for staff to raise concerns with their line managers, some may be afraid of repercussions and I fully support a new whistleblowing policy.

“I don’t know who put the banner up but they have been very brave and it has shed some light on an issue that is clearly of concern.”

 https://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/article.cfm?id=135014

Comments From Cyngor Gwynedd Councillors On Member Training Meetings.

There has been a recent Report released entitled Learning and Development Provision for Members.

It lists two successes -

 • "I benefited from the Effective Presentation training. I have learned how to structure a presentation professionally, something that can become very useful when you have to present in a Committee eg Planning Committee. This training can be very useful for all Members. It was brilliant"

• "The Dealing with the Press was very valuable. No-one knows what issues can arise within their ward, and so the experience I've had on this course are great. Very challenging training, and gained valuable skills. "

It also lists challenges -

Attendance Numbers of Members attending are inconsistent e.g. "Unconscious Bias" training was organized at the request of a Member, but only 2 Members attended the whole session.

However, the response to some titles has been disappointing e.g. when a Corporate Parenting session was arranged for an evening in January (following a specific request from Members), the session had to be cancelled as only 5 registered to attend.

Comments that were received from the councillors included - 

• "I only attend titles that are of interest to me"

• "Too much training"

• "Of course I go to the Planning training because those are compulsory and I am interested in the subject as I am a Member of the Committee"

• "I think others are important, Childcare / Care of the Elderly etc, however, I have contacts that specialise in many areas - and I get any information that I need through those sources"

• "Between day to day work and all Committees, I have to prioritise matters"

• "It is sometimes better to have some Members who specialise in some areas, instead of Members trying to get information about everything"

• "The titles you offer are all that we need as Members and I can only praise that"

• "A great obstacle is that I have to take 'unpaid holidays' for the Committees and training that coincide with my working time, so attending events can be costly for me. In addition, it is very difficult to get time off. Events later in the afternoons would work well for me). "

• "If Members can not attend events, that they receive a copy of the materials by e-mail after the event, so that they can see the presentation."

• "Any area I need help with, I can get the information over the phone / email / internet and I do not feel that Managers / officers need to give me information."

• "At my age, I’m not sure how much more 'development' I need to do - so I do not think it's important for me by now."
 
The full Report can be found here - 
https://democracy.cyngor.gwynedd.gov.uk/documents/g2595/Public%20reports%20pack%2012th-Feb-2019%2010.30%20Democratic%20Services%20Committee.pdf?T=10

Cyngor #Gwynedd Council's Report Into Their #Data Breach 2018

I emailed Morwena Edwards, Corporate Director of Social Services, on the 19th March, 2018.

"We are also concerned that you have been aware of a Data Breach by your Department for nearly a year and no-one from the Council has been in contact with us. The Investigator has been provided with evidence of the Data Breach and she says so in her Report".

On the 29th March, we attended a meeting with an Information Manager at Gwynedd Council regarding us being given the names of children receiving services from the Council and Youth Justice team and to find out who censored our personal information (SAR) and whether the redactions were legal.
Copies of the names and local school that had been released by the department were presented to the Manager.

On the 22nd May, we had to return for another meeting as the Manager did not answer the questions in her initial Report and also misrepresented the physical and oral evidence we provided. There was also an issue with the Manager failing to respond to our emails but an apology was given for this.

The second meeting was attended by a Janet Roberts, who introduced herself as Corporate Support for the council. Mrs Roberts said very little during the meeting but did take note of the questions we wished to be answered by the person in the Children and Families Department who carried out the redactions to our personal information.

Now these questions were asked as part of our Stage 2 complaint first raised with the council in May, 2017 and was to have been answered by the Independent Investigator. 
Gwynedd council reported that the officer responsible for processing our SAR and for the redactions had left the Council and so was unable to be interviewed.

At this second meeting, Mrs Roberts informed us that the person who processed our SAR had indeed left the council but was then re-employed by the council and was NOW our named person within the Customer Care department dealing with another complaint.

Oh forgot to mention that the Investigation of the Data Breach was upheld. The release of the names of children receiving services should not have happened and the Report, June 2018, is as follows -
                                                                  *****************

I write with reference to your complaint to the Council and in particular part 6 which relates to data and information.

The outcomes from the independent investigators report was that:

The complainants seek an explanation for the censoring of their own information and whether or not it is legal to do so. They seek an explanation from Melvin Panther as to how he thought it in any way appropriate or professional to speak about them in such a derogatory manner to another professional working with the family. In relation to the information containing other children’s details, they wish for this to be dealt with via the Council’s information/data protection security policy and procedure.

I will treat these matters in turn:

1.      Censoring of information and redacted and unredacted emails.

Email dated 5^th of April 2016 10:48

You note that this had been provided to you in redacted and unredacted form and wish to know why it had been redacted.

The department have informed me that it was redacted because it was not thought appropriate to disclose at the time.

In my opinion this part of the email is your personal data since it relates to you and you can be identified by the information. There was no particular reason for it to be withheld and it should have been provided without redaction.

Email dated 27^th of June 2016 at 16:45

I have examined the part of this email which has been redacted.

I am satisfied that this part of the email has been redacted appropriately. Under the right of subject access, an individual is entitled only to their own personal data, and not to information relating to other people.

This part of the email relates to information relating to a third party, namely a social worker. Under section 7(4) of the Act an authority does not have to comply with a request if to do so would mean disclosing information about another individual who can be identified from that information except where the individual has consented or it is reasonable in all the circumstances to comply with the request without that consent.

There was no consent in this case nor was it reasonable to comply without consent.

Email dated 5^th of July 2016 at 13:30

I have examined the part of the email which has been redacted.

As above, this information does not relate to you but to a social worker. It therefore does not constitute your personal data. As such, it was appropriate for the information to be withheld in accordance with the reasoning outlined above.

Email dated 13^th of July 2016 at 10:14

I have examined the part of the email which has been redacted.

I believe that this email should have been provided to you as it relates to you and is therefore your personal data.

2.   An explanation from Mel Panther

As noted in previous correspondence, it is not within my remit to comment on the actions of another member of staff.

3.      Emails containing other children’s details

I have examined the emails you provided me in this respect.

In a series of emails between two members of staff in January 2016 the names of children appear in the subject headings.

For a data breach to occur, the information in question must be personal data i.e. it must relate to an individual and allow them to be identified from the information.

In this case, it is not clear that a surname together with the name of a school would enable identification of an individual. However, the information confirms that the child is a child a need, which is sensitive information in itself.

It should also be noted that the name of this child had been redacted from the main text of an email in one instance and therefore there was a recognition that this was indeed third party personal data.

The name of another child also appears in the subject line of the same series of emails. This time there is a name and surname, which makes identification more likely. Again the information confirms that the child is a child in need, which is sensitive information in itself.

Having further considered the Information Commissioner’s Office guidance on determining what is personal data, which notes that someone can be identified from information we hold or ‘the means that could be used by a sufficiently determined and interested person’, I have concluded that on the balance of probabilities, this was personal data and therefore did constitute a data breach.

Therefore, the names should have been removed from the subject line of the emails before being disclosed to you as part of the subject access request.

At our meeting on the 23^rd of May 2018, you asked some further questions which have been addressed below:

4.         Who made the decision to redact both emails?

In her role as the Information Officer, Angharad Hywel would in cases such as this routinely meet with her line manager at the time, Margaret Kenealy Jones to check the information which was to be shared. If she felt that some details noted within the information should be redacted, these  would be identified and advice would be sought from her line manager. In this specific case, she met with her line manager to read through the information which was to be disclosed. During this meeting they discussed some documents which were deemed to contain information which could be misinterpreted or could impact the working relationship between the family and the Service. The officer received guidance in relation to redacting these documents.

5.         Who asked for them to be redacted?

A decision was made between the Officer and the line manager at the time to redact the sentences in the email dated 5th April 2016 and the email dated 13^th of July 2016.

6.         Did they consult with anybody?

No other officers were consulted.

7.         What were the reasons for the redaction?

Having read the redacted sentences in the emails dated 5 April 2016 and 13^th July 2016, the Officer was of the opinion that these statements were the personal opinion about the family and that disclosing them could undermine the attempts to maintain a working relationship between the Service and the family. At the time of this Subject Access Request, and particularly during the timeframe in which this decision was taken, the Service had responded to a number of complaints and many of these were related to difficulties in the working relationship between the family and Mel Panther. It was imperative at this time, and in fact continues to be the case, that efforts were made to maintain a good working relationship between the Service and the family as the Service was focused on trying to ensure that *child* was provided with an assessment of his needs to ensure the best outcome for him.

Moving on to other points made in your email dated the 8^th of June 2018, I would note that no procedures have been broken in terms of the redactions made. The usual procedure for dealing with a subject access request had been followed, ie, information was collated, advice was sought regarding redaction, redaction was carried out and information that was disclosable was disclosed.

It is noted that a breach did occur, but this was due to an oversight, and was low risk in terms of the amount of personal information disclosed.   

  As I stated during our meeting, the question regarding the legality of the redactions is not one I can answer. The redactions were carried out in good faith for the reasons given above. Redacting information is necessarily a subjective task and does, and indeed, can vary from person to person.

In terms of a data breach, the matter will be dealt with via the usual procedure, which is that a report is prepared for the Council’s SIRO (Senior Information Risk Owner) Group.

I will remind the departments regarding the need to take particular care at all times with future subject access requests.

I am sorry that I am unable to add anything further regarding this matter – if you wish to take the matter further you may contact the ICO, whose details are noted below:

https://ico.org.uk/concerns/ or ring them on 0303 123 1113.

                                                          ********************

Anyone else spot the contradictions ?
 
More worryingly, the report states it was the two information officers alone who made the decision to redact but goes on to state the "question regarding the legality of the redactions is not one I can answer."

An Official Report, written by an Information Manager, aided by Corporate Support with access to the entire Legal department at Gwynedd council can not answer to the legality of their Officers actions.
Hmm.

The SAR also reveals that one manager within the council would like to blame us for not reporting the Data Breach earlier.

The Data Breach was part of my complaint first raised with the council on the 25th May, 2017.
How did the council respond ?

See post - https://gwyneddsfailingcouncil.blogspot.com/2017/05/gwynedd-council-respond-to-my-complaint.html

They were all on holiday.

Stage 2 Complaint Against #Gwynedd Council Update.

Today, the 25th of May, 2018, is the anniversary of our raising a Stage 2 complaint against Cyngor Gwynedd Council, on the advice of the Ombudsman for Wales.

One year in a process that should take 28 days and it is still not completed.

#Gwynedd Council Censoring Of Personal Information Update.

On the 23rd May, 2018, Cyngor Gwynedd Council finally released to us an unredacted copy of an email written by a Gwynedd Council manager containing our personal information.

They had no right to censor our personal information, this was done deliberately, to prevent us from reading unprofessional and disparaging comments made about us by a senior social work manager.

It should have been released to us in October, 2016 in accordance with our Subject Access Request.

An Information Manager dealing with the issue says there was no legitimate reason for it to be redacted or denied us, this was not the only email that was redacted in this same manner, for the same reasons, from the same manager.

19 months to obtain all the information allowed us by Law under the Data Protection Act.
A process that should take a maximum of 40 days.

We now wonder whether or not the Council provided us with all that we were entitled to at that time.....or not...who knows ?

Something is so badly wrong within Gwynedd Council.

The Similarities Between Telford And Gwynedd. Sshh...

Re the outcry over the child abuse scandal in #Telford and those calling for an Independent Inquiry into those who failed the children....

Gwynedd Council - who were closed down after they failed the county's children in their own sexual abuse scandal of the 90's - have twice sanitised a recent 'Independent Report' into their Social Services department.

The abuse of children in Gwynedd and Clywd was only allowed to continue by those in authority maintaining a 'wall of silence' for decades.
Gwynedd Council, for whatever reason, chose to turn a blind eye and the whistleblower, Alison Davies - was actually sacked by the council for raising concerns.

It has become apparent that a 'wall of silence' still remains in Gwynedd with no-one willing or able to confront unprofessional and bad behaviour by senior managers within the council.
Sshh no criticism allowed.

The abuse of children in Telford began just after the creation of the New Town in the early 70's.

Just as in North Wales, the authorities at the then Wrekin Council and the local Police turned a blind eye. In fact, the local CID used to hunt down and return those 'children in care' who had fled from the abuse they were no doubt suffering in the council run homes in Wellington.
Sshh.

The authorities in North Wales sat on the Jillings Report into the abuse of children for 20 years - on the orders of the council's insurers - now Zurich International.
Sshh.

There was an Asian gang operating in Telford in the 70's as were White Gangs. There were also huge problems with #Unemployment #Racism and #Heroin. Too many unexplained deaths and mysterious 'suicides'.

The old Wrekin Council have questions to answer along with the now defunct Telford Youth Council, local Churches and the Police.

An Independent Inquiry into the abuse of children in Telford will fail just as in North Wales, Rotherham, Islington etc etc. No-one will be held to account.

An Independent Inquiry is too easily sanitised and the truth covered up - a Public Inquiry would stand a better chance at getting to the truth and the abusers and those who profited from the abuse punished.

But be in no doubt....the abuse of children and vulnerable people continues.
Sshh.....

More -  https://gwyneddsfailingcouncil.blogspot.com/

Cyngor #Gwynedd Council And It's Delayed Response.

Still no sign of the Independent Report into a Stage 2 complaint first raised with Cyngor Gwynedd council in May, last year, on the advice of the Ombudsman for Wales.

Out of frustration we emailed the Corporate Management team - see post from the 17th January - 

https://gwyneddsfailingcouncil.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/so-we-emailed-cyngor-gwynedd-councils.html

Our questions were not answered to any satisfaction but we were told by an Executive Officer on behalf of the Director of Social Services, Morwena Edwards, that we would be receiving an update - 

"Thank you for your email and I apologise that I am unable at this point to answer your questions fully.

I understand that a meeting with the Independent Investigator has been arranged on the 30th of January. Following this meeting the Service will be in a better position to advise you on a timescale for sharing the report.

I understand your frustrations that this is taking longer than expected, however Lowri Williams will provide you with an update following the meeting on  the 30th."

As no update has been forthcoming we sent an email to the Director, Morwena Edwards, on the 6th February -

"Dear Mrs Edwards,

It has been a week since Senior Managers met with the Independent Investigator and we have not received any update as your Executive Officer promised.

So please now answer our very pertinent questions in relation to the stage 2 complaint first raised in May, last year, without delay and release the report immediately.

We remind you that the Council have had the report for 14 (fourteen) weeks now and it is coming up to 9 (nine) months since the complaint was first raised.

We are aware that two months were lost due to the accident befalling the first Investigator so 7 (seven) months in a process that by your own Statutory Policy should take 25 working days".

                                                         *****************

The Director and senior management remain silent.

Perhaps they are all taking the half term holiday early this year ?

Something is so badly wrong within Cyngor Gwynedd Council and its Social Services.

Cyngor Gwynedd Data Breach.

Preparing  paperwork for the meeting with the independent invesigators dealing with my stage 2 complaint against Gwynedd council, I was astonished by the council's use of a black marker to censor comments made by managers to other agencies involved with the family.

The investigators were more shocked than I and told me there was no need or reason for council staff to censor and it should not have happened.

Then I discovered Gwynedd council had also sent me the personal information of another person.

Oh dear.

Arfon AM Ignored By Gwynedd Head Of Department.

I had an email from the office of Sian Gwenllian, Assembly Member for Arfon, this morning.

Marian Parry Hughes, Head of Children and Supporting Families at Cyngor Gwynedd has still not replied to the AM's letter sent in April.

How is it that a council employee can refuse to acknowledge and reply to a democratically elected Assembly Member for Wales ?

 http://gov.wales/topics/health/socialcare/act/?lang=en

Where is the accountability ?

How many other local and national politicians are ignored when they raise issues on behalf of their constituents ?

Or is it just in Gwynedd and Anglesey ?


 

Gwynedd Council's Secure Letterbox - NOT.

In March 2016, a letter addressed to an Aled Gibbard (Senior Operational Manager) at Cyngor Gwynedd was hand delivered to #SiopGwynedd at the Caernarfon offices and placed in their secure letterbox.

It contained confidential and sensitive information relating to an Official Complaint and raised questions in response to a letter from Aled Gibbard dated 11th March.

Mr Gibbard, was dealing with the complaint himself, and, even though repeated reference was made to this letter, alleges the letter was never received.

Margaret Kenealy Jones, refused to acknowledge that hand delivering a letter to Cyngor Gwynedd shop in Caernarfon and physically dropping it into their secure(?) letterbox means it was delivered and... "We have conducted a search; unfortunately this has come back negative....we do not feel that failing to respond to a letter which we did not receive warrants...investigation.

How many letters to the council posted in the secure letterbox get lost each year ?

Months later, Kenealy assured me in a letter that if the letter was to be re-presented Aled Gibbard would answer the points raised.

Is that offer still available, Mrs Jones ?

Gwynedd Children And Families Department Fail.

Though the parents 2nd stage complaint against Cyngor Gwynedd Council showed serious failings within the Children and Families Department and was upheld by independent investigators in 2010 nothing has changed.

I have read through the report and noticed that many names involved back then are now ensconced as managers in Gwynedd social services, though it is not for me to say if these same people are now acting out of spite or have always been so unprofessional.

My experience working in the mental health field with dementia, learning difficulties, challenging behaviour and acquired brain injury was no use to me at all in this case and I was playing catch up for the first year learning about PDA, the boy's complex needs and gaining his trust.

I stood back and watched as first the Council got in contact and after discussions agreed that support may be available and a social worker would be assigned. Everyone was wary because of the behaviour of social services in the past but it was agreed that help towards social skills and integration was more important.

A social worker was allocated and a support worker was granted. Unfortunately the support was still not provided and so in desperation a solicitor was contacted and only then was a support worker assigned.

The first social worker was replaced by a second , this time from Children and Families, as the disability team would not assess, due to the boy having too high an IQ. This social worker introduced himself as having no experience of Autism and was not a disability social worker but said he was there to help.

He did not endear himself to anyone over the next period by comments such as -

'We are really doing the education departments job' 

'What to do you want a core assessment for? I don't see what use it will be, can you explain to me how you think it will benefit *****? '

'I'm a very busy man you know' (when he failed to phone back)

'This service is really for people that need a social worker'


But he was all my partner had to work with and the fact the boy was, finally, going to get help with socialisation and independent living skills was enough for me to still my misgivings and keep my professional mouth shut.

The help and support that eventually began was anything but.

Communication was poor and I mean mono-syllabic from the support worker when asked for feedback. One day he just grunted at me when I tried to engage him.
Different days different times and sessions that were arranged with less than 24 hours notice - and sessions were strictly on a take it or lose it basis.

The stress of dealing with this 'care support' had a knock on effect in dealing with other aspects of care and we all suffered for a period.

So a letter of complaint was sent to Support Services at Cyngor Gwynedd Children and Families Dept asking for continuity of times and reminding them that due to the boy's complexities the family had no idea of where he was taken, what subjects were discussed or how he engaged with others if at all and simply a plea for feedback to help us to help him progress with socialisation.

It is called team work and every professional in the care field will recognise its importance for the child and family - except, it appears, at the Children and Families Department of Gwynedd council.

A letter was duly received apologising for blah blah blah and informing us that we had to ask the social worker to ask the support worker to communicate with us re the sessions !!!! But they did take on board our need for certain times to avoid clashing with the child's education.

To be fair we were allowed the same time and day every week which removed so much stress and I am grateful for that. Imagine being grateful for a regular weekly slot from a children and families service(!) but I truly was.

The feedback from the support worker however did NOT materialise.
(Another social worker was asked further down the line again if we could have some feedback - again nothing)

In fact we did receive reports written by the support worker eventually. We asked Social Services for their file on the family and they were included. So much interesting information (and mis-information)  But that is for future posts.

My misgivings and worry about what I considered unprofessional and totally unacceptable behaviour turned to anger when I returned home and found my wife crying. She had had a phone conversation with the social worker which had caused her upset.

Then after I listened to the recording of the conversation I became quite upset, too.

A meeting between the social worker and my wife had been arranged but I wanted to be there for support so I emailed Cyngor Gwynedd Customer Care to raise my concerns about their social worker, Jamie Haydon and cancel the meeting.

My email and first contact with Cyngor Gwynedd Council was dated 29th Feb, 2016.

#bing #yahoo  


















 

Challenging Behaviour At Gwynedd Council.

I wonder if the Children and Families Department in Gwynedd ever ask themselves the question "how did we get here ?"

They have had Assembly Members for Wales, Members of Parliament, District Councillors, County Councillors, the Ombudsman for Wales all notified of systemic failures in the Department and asking questions of their behaviour.

I have been astounded at how ineffectual all these people are against council managers - whom, it appears, can behave as badly and unprofessionally as they like and there is no comeback - but that is for another post.

My involvement only began, last February, after a phone conversation between my wife and a social worker.

Remembering that - Gwynedd council need to be reminded that challenging bad behaviour does not mean people are whiny bastards - it simply means they are challenging bad behaviour.

Gwynedd Council Services Scrutiny - Needs Updating (Or Something)

Just came across this link on the web.

https://democracy.cyngor.gwynedd.gov.uk/documents/s7887/Adroddiad%20Blynyddol%202015-16%20Sterfynol.pdf

Its slightly long winded so I will not reproduce it here in its entirety but I would like to comment on some of it as it seems so...well...personal to me.

This is an excerpt from a Cyngor Gwynedd Council report written by Margaret Kenealy Jones.
10.3b

Complainants

–

During this year we have recieved(sic) numerous complaints from the same individuals.
The individuals in questions will recieve(sic) a response and will return within a couple of weeks with a slightly different issue they would like to be addressed. They will also contact through different channels, for example

Solicitor or the Local Member of Parliament.
Example
–
A parent has been in contact herself regarding the hours of support work her son recieves(sic). As she is unhappy with the response,she contacted her Solicitor and her Local MP. In this case, as the Service had only recently recieved(sic) Access to the child in question they had not been able to produce a comprehensive assessment of need and therefore the hours agreed during the summer period was based on the information provided by the parent directly.

The Service are in the process of working with the family to complete a comprehensive assessment of the child’s needs in order to ascertain the amount of support needed. This has been closed as a complaint, and is now an operational matter being monitored by Senior Managers.

Does the new regulation allow for such a whitewash of the facts in this case ?

No mention in the report that this particular case has been ongoing for years.

No mention that in 2010 an Independent Investigation upheld an official complaint against the Council in this case.

No mention of the person being so ignored and denied access to services by the Council and so, in desperation, contacted a solicitor - and only then - strangely -  were services granted.

No mention of the Ombudsman for Wales agreeing with the parent that a stage 2 investigation should be allowed.

No mention that the Ombudsman for Wales was then mis-informed in this case and superceded their original decision only after Gwynedd council supplied said 'extra' information.

No mention that Liz Saville-Roberts, MP, was contacted, as advised by the Autism Champion for Gwynedd, Elin Walker Jones.


Please, Kenealy, you are required by Statute to produce a yearly report.

I understand it is your job to paint the council and yourself in as good a light as possible but official reports presented to the public should always be used to give some modicum of accuracy and fairness.

Will you be updating the public on how this case has progressed in your next report ?


google
bing

Why Don't Gwynedd Council Like Step Parents ?

I have been trying to raise a stage 2 complaint against Gwynedd Council since June, 2016, without success. Gwynedd have done everything in their power to thwart an independent investigation into what I consider to be unprofessional behaviour and systemic failings within their Children and Families Services (!) Department.

As Gwynedd Council close one door I have attempted to open another. How ? By contacting my MP, local councillors, county councillors, AM's and even the Ombudsman for Wales. The story is getting out there.

I have noticed a pattern in all those who have contacted Gwynedd Council on my behalf. They are all told that I am NOT the birth father. Why ? What difference do these people think that makes ?

Are they saying that a step parent cares less for a child ?

The last person to point this out this was Gwynedd Council's Head Of Legal Services , Iwan G D Evans.

Does Mr Evans think that people who marry others should have less care for their partners children ?

Or is this an attempt by Iwan Evans to somehow belittle the concerns I am raising with other people ?

Moving To Gwynedd.

In 2008, I had a heart attack.
I had a stent inserted but during the operation I had a second heart attack and so another stent was needed.

My life until then had been spent working in the care field.
It began as a roving first aid responder at Heathrow Airport, then moved to caring for the elderly in a residential setting.
After a year working nights as a Care Assistant in a Nursing Home my nose took me into the field of mental health and dementia.
I found the work fascinating and heartbreaking due to the callous, profiteering nature of Care(!) Home providers.
I managed a sheltered housing scheme for 8 residents in East Sheen – which I hated.
Management  meant staying in an office, dealing with budgets, Doctors and social workers.

I moved on a lot back then.

Learning Difficulties, Challenging Behaviour and the most upsetting for me – Acquired Brain Injury.

Owners of Homes used me to clean sweep their businesses.
Each home was eager for my knowledge and ideas on dealing with ‘challenging’ clients and to train other carers.

Exploring other ideas I had meant working for Agencies where I lived in Clients homes.
24 hours a day, 7 days a week gave me even greater insights into the issues that my clients faced.
I chatted with neighbours of my clients, dispelling their fears and getting them onside.
I asked local businesses to help spend time with them and even give them some unpaid work.
All to get them out of the house and meet and engage with the community.
Exhausting and wonderful.
It transformed their lives and I hope transformed those who gave their time, cash and love to them.

The heart attacks meant an end to all that, sadly.
I discharged myself from hospital after three days.
For the first three months, I was crippled. Gasping for breath, my liver shut down and I turned an interesting shade of yellow.
My doctor was useless so I stopped going though I did continue to take 7 lots of medication for a year.
I was living in Islington at the time but it was isolating for me and expensive. Relying on savings meant I had to find alternative accommodation quickly.

An old friend kindly allowed me to stay in his flat in west London when he holidayed abroad. Another friend allowed me to sit in his workshop during the day to keep warm and even threw me some money and bought me food in return for answering the phone.
Soon I was offered other flat sitting opportunities and some people even paid me to protect their properties when they were away on business. A weekend here, a fortnight there – time passed and my health slowly improved.

One year after the heart attacks, my girlfriend was diagnosed with Breast cancer.
Never rains but pours eh ? Long weekends were spent at her place in Surrey
My girlfriend struggled through the chemotherapy and the rest of her treatment but, one year on, she was given the all clear. She had beaten cancer but our relationship had changed from lovers to carers for each other and we parted.

A year later and I began suffering other health problems. My breathing had never properly recovered and I developed many infections.My back and neck stiffened and caused me pain. My left hand began to hurt and I could no longer clench my fist. By this time, the Conservatives had been elected, London became meaner and many of my friends had left the city. I found myself struggling to find accommodation and work opportunities were drying up. Care work was no longer an option because of Insurance issues and my worsening health meant I was no longer reliable, even for the piecemeal work I sought.

Cutting my needs and relying more and more on my meagre savings I struggled on for another two years. During this time I met up with an ex partner who also was my oldest friend. She was living in Gwynedd, North Wales, with her autistic PDA son.

Social Services in the Gwynedd area are appalling. She has had no support and Bangor CAMHS refuse to acknowledge the boy has any mental health issues, at all. After one incident, in which the teenage boy used violence against her, I gritted my teeth and moved in with both of them. That was 18 months ago now.

All my years in Mental Health did not prepare me in anyway for PDA (Pathological Demand Avoidance). Within weeks my blood pressure went through the roof, chest pains, my heart rate became erratic. I ended up presenting myself at Shrewsbury A&E. (I have had experience of Ysbty Gwynedd and #BCUHB, who treated me after drinking contaminated water and, again when my partner miscarried our baby – it is my hope never to go there again). All the tests were good – well for a man with my cardiac issues and the Hospital put it down to stress.

I then signed on with the local Doctors Surgery and was given statins. Blood tests followed. The statin caused so much pain I could hardly move. A different statin and then Ramipril – more pain than before. I stopped the statin then realised it was the Ramipril. After nearly three months of pain and distress – I stopped the medication. My health improved – my stress levels did not.

The Doctor noticed something during an examination and ordered a Lung test. I failed and was diagnosed with COPD. I have not been back to see her since. My breathing has worsened this last year, blood pressure still too high but I need to be able to move quickly to deal effectively with the teenager and also my disabled partners needs are increasing as she ages.

The boy had recently been given four hours of support a week to aid with his social independence skills. Without warning or a re-assessment of his needs the hours were reduced to two – illegal in law. Take note anyone who has had their child’s support pulled.
The Support worker and Officer do not engage in any communication with us re the work they do with him. They refuse to give email addresses – no paper trail – do not give honest replies and are very evasive of communicating anything.  So unprofessional compared to the integrated planning around the client which I had been used to.