News

Chief inspector of social services Denise Platt failed to submit a document to the Victoria Climbie inquiry because she was unaware of its relevance, writes Sally Gillen.

The document, an internal review of a 1999 joint review of Haringey social services, which called into question its conclusion that service users in the borough were "generally well served", was given to the inquiry three weeks after it had ended.

In a statement to the inquiry, which was reopened for two days this week to seek an explanation from Platt for the late submission of the paper, she said: "It did not occur to me that the internal review might be relevant to the Victoria Climbie inquiry."

Platt, who declined to appear in person, said in the statement read by her lawyer Stephen Kovats, that she had been advised that the inquiry was interested only in communications between the Social Services Inspectorate and agencies and documents specific to Victoria’s case, and "was not concerned with material surrounding the production of the joint review or SSI inspection".

"With hindsight, I accept that the internal review was relevant to the inquiry. I sincerely apologise for not appreciating this earlier," she added.

The decision to carry out the review, which looked at the methodology of joint reviews, was made following the conviction for murder of Marie Therese Kouao and Carl Manning in January 2001.

Differences between the 1999 joint review and a SSI report in 2000 had emerged during the pair’s trial, prompting questions about the joint review process.

Platt said the SSI and the Audit Commission decided to conduct a joint internal review of the joint review, which would look at the methodology of the process "to see what lessons we could learn about the joint review process".

"It was not," she added, "designed to enable us or anyone else to second guess the joint review."

In January this year Platt contacted inquiry chairperson Lord Laming to tell him about the existence of the internal review, which had been carried out for "methodological and managerial purposes," suggesting that it might be useful for phase two of the inquiry.

At the end of the February it was sent to the inquiry, which then contacted Platt to inform her that it was relevant to phase one.