Source: Ofsted published on this website Tuesday 9 April 2024 by Jill Powell

His Majesty’s Chief Inspector, Sir Martyn Oliver, today announced that he has appointed Dame Christine Gilbert to lead an independent learning review into Ofsted’s response to the tragic death of Ruth Perry.

The independent review was among the measures detailed in Ofsted’s response to the Coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths report, published in January. The review will consider:

the actions Ofsted took in response to hearing about the death of Ruth Perry

Ofsted’s communications, its engagement with stakeholders and information-sharing within Ofsted regarding the incident

the support Ofsted offered internally to staff, including inspectors, and how its approach was informed by clearly defined policies

The review will not examine the inspection of Caversham Primary School in November 2022, nor the judgements it made.

Dame Christine spent 18 years in schools as a teacher and secondary headteacher, and has worked in London boroughs as both director of education and chief executive. She served as Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector at Ofsted from 2006 until 2011, during which time she brought 3 different inspectorates together to create a new organisation. She has led or participated in several service reviews, mostly in education but also including Baroness Casey’s review of the Metropolitan Police, published last year. 

Dame Christine will begin her review this month. She will have access to relevant internal records and be able to speak with any member of Ofsted staff she chooses. She will also have the opportunity to meet Ruth Perry’s family and speak to them about the review. Ofsted will assist Dame Christine in obtaining any specialist advice she requires, such as in the areas of mental health and well-being.

Dame Christine will produce a written report on her findings later this year. The report will include any recommendations for changes to Ofsted’s internal policies and processes for responding to tragic incidents. Ofsted will respond to these recommendations as part of the wider response to the Big Listen.

Dame Christine Gilbert said:

The death of Ruth Perry was a deeply sad and shocking event. Ofsted has accepted that it is vitally important for it to learn from this tragedy and has asked me to help them do that.

I intend to take a very detailed and thorough look at all areas of Ofsted’s work – from the moment the Caversham inspection ended, through to the conclusion of the Coroner’s inquest. I will scrutinise the approach taken and advise on future actions and revisions needed to improve Ofsted’s policies and processes for dealing with any tragic incident.

Importantly, I will hear firsthand from the family of Ruth Perry to gain a better understanding of the impact of Ofsted’s work. I would like to thank them in advance for agreeing to engage with my review.

Sir Martyn Oliver said:

“I am very grateful to Dame Christine for agreeing to lend her valuable experience and expertise to leading this important review. She has a wealth of experience in schools, in inspection, and in undertaking a range of reviews. I have no doubt that her insights will help us to reflect on, and learn from, our response to Ruth Perry’s death.

“I look forward to receiving her recommendations for improving our policies and practice. Her review will complement the findings from our Big Listen and help us build an Ofsted that is trusted by the professionals we inspect and regulate, as well as the children, parents and carers we are here to serve.”

Ofsted has published the full terms and conditions for the review.

Source: General Medical Council (GMC) published on this website Thursday 4 April 2024 by Jill Powell

Case examiners and other fitness to practise decision makers at the General Medical Council (GMC) now have more discretion to close complaints following updates to its guidance.

The changes to the medical regulator’s Guidance for decision makers when violence and dishonesty may represent a lower risk to public protection, are part of its commitment to assure fairness in its processes through more efficient and proportionate investigations. 

Decision makers will now be able to weigh the full circumstances of a concern earlier in the fitness to practise process to assess the overall risk to public protection including to public confidence in the profession– meaning some concerns may not need to be investigated or referred to a tribunal. 

Concerns that fall under the guidance are those that are minor in nature and did not impact patient care. Allegations of violence and dishonesty which raise a risk to public protection, including where there is a history of repeated behaviour, will continue to be investigated.

The GMC engaged with patient and doctor representatives, including medical defence organisations, who provided feedback on the changes and whether it would be proportionate to investigate certain concerns. 

Examples of concerns that, under the updated guidance and if there were no aggravating factors, would no longer need to be investigated include:

• A doctor giving false details to a market research company, in order qualify for free products.
• A doctor pushing a colleague out the way following a heated argument. 

Anthony Omo, General Counsel and Director of Fitness to Practise at the General Medical Council, said: 

‘This updated guidance is in the interests of both patients and doctors. We know doctors find being under GMC investigation very stressful, and it is important to us to do all we can to minimise that. 

‘This more flexible and compassionate approach to regulation is tailored to the risk posed by each individual case. The changes will avoid unnecessary investigations where the doctor does not pose a risk to public protection or to the public’s confidence in the profession. 

‘Complainants can also find the process difficult – this more proportionate approach will see matters, where there is no risk to the public, dealt with more swiftly. Patients can still have confidence that public protection is at the heart of all our work. Dishonesty and violence are serious matters, and we will continue to investigate concerns, and, where appropriate, refer to a tribunal.’

The guidance comes into effect on Thursday 4 April and more information can be found on the GMC’s website.

Source: Ministry of Justice published on this website Monday 8 April 2024 by Jill Powell

The law could be updated to make it easier for organisations to offer sincere apologies to those who have been wronged following the launch of a government consultation today (8 April 2024).

The Compensation Act, which became law in 2006, made it easier for public institutions, private companies and their employees to apologise, without admitting liability in civil proceedings.

Section 2 of the Compensation Act 2006 states:

“An apology, an offer of treatment or other redress, shall not of itself amount to an admission of negligence or breach of statutory duty. It aims to encourage those defending claims not to be deterred from offering apologies by a perception that doing so would constitute an admission of liability”.

Yet almost 20 years on, there is little evidence this has encouraged businesses to use apologies more as form of reparation – leaving many victims without proper closure and a sense they are unable to move on with their lives.

Often, organisations and individuals remain reluctant to apologise because of concerns it may be interpreted by the aggrieved party, or insurers, as an admission of fault. Changing the law to make this clearer could remove barriers - perceived or real - to apologising, while broadening the scope of the law would allow people to express regret and offer more earnest apologies.

Ministers are also considering how best to refine current laws following a recommendation from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) that apologies could and should be offered by employers for the actions of current or former employees – known as vicarious liability. This would encourage the likes of schools, care facilities or hospitals to offer apologies for abuse carried out by an individual at these institutions.

Justice Minister, Lord Bellamy, said:

“The place of apologies in the justice system is becoming increasingly important, and this Consultation will explore ways of strengthening this role, not least to enable victims to find closure and move on with their lives.”

The IICSA heard that in many historic child sexual abuse cases, an apology by an institution was seen as equally – or more – important than compensation by victims.

As part of the IICSA investigations, they spoke to survivors from the privately-run Bryn Alyn home in Wrexham, where children were abused for decades up to the 1990s, as well as Forde Park school in Devon.

Comments from those surveyed included:

• Witness A23: “an apology…would have been priceless to me, and worth more than any amount of money”
• Witness A24: “I now realise that an apology or acceptance for what I had been through is worth more than any amount of compensation.”
• Witness A6: “I was not at all satisfied with the civil process or the outcome of the case. There was a payment of damages; however, there was no apology and my abusers were not held to account.”

For more information on the findings of the independent inquiry visit: C.11: Apologies, explanations and assurances - IICSA Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse

The consultation follows a Private Members’ Bill introduced by John Howell MP to allow an apology to be given that is genuinely and sincerely meant without creating a legal liability. This bill did not complete its passage through Parliament before the end of the 2019-21 session, but the Lord Chancellor confirmed the Government would consult on the issue when Parliamentary time allowed.

John Howell MP said:

I am delighted that this has come forward. It should be the mark of both a mature democratic society, and, of its dispute resolution system, that an apology, whether made publicly or privately, can and should be allowed to be meaningful, and, helpful rather than simply a necessary yet tokenistic gesture.

It is hoped more apologies at an early stage will resolve disputes much more quickly.

The independent inquiry also found that in the clinical negligence sphere especially, sincere, unreserved, and meaningful apologies can avoid litigation altogether – sparing victims the further protracted trauma of a lengthy court battle.

The consultation proposals do not force those defending a claim to offer an apology. It also reserves the rights of either party to pursue further legal action even when an apology has or has not been offered. 

The consultation will run for 8 weeks and close on 3 June 2024.

Source: Department for Education published on this website Wednesday 3 April 2024 by Jill Powell

  The Prevent Duty in higher education (HE): training and guidance for practitioners provides training materials and guidance for:

• those with a responsibility for ensuring compliance with the Prevent Duty in higher education (HE)
• staff of HE institutions
• any other members of HE institutions

This update had added a link to 'Explaining Prevent to staff and students in higher education'.