As the government gets ready to overhaul the social work sector, Researching Reform has created a petition calling on the government to make registration with new monitoring body, Social Work England, a legal requirement for anyone engaging in social work.

At the moment not everyone who is carrying out social work needs to register with an independent monitoring body. Despite there being a large range of titles used by social workers, the current guidelines only cover people calling themselves a ‘social worker’, which is what’s known as a protected title. This loophole means a significant portion of social workers engaging in a variety of social work roles are not required to register.

You may think that only minor social work roles are affected by the current registration policy, but that’s not the case. Titles like senior practitioner are not protected, although the duties and responsibilities of a senior practitioner are complex and require many years of social work experience to perform. It isn’t possible to quantify how many social workers inside the system are practicing unregistered, because no one holds that information, and there is no one place offering a full breakdown of the number of social work related titles and roles that are currently unprotected. We would invite the government to do this work, during its consideration of the submissions it received on its recent consultation, which Researching Reform also took part in. We also invited the government to make registration a legal duty for everyone engaging in social work.

At the moment, if a service user wants to make a complaint about a social worker acting under an unprotected title, the only option they have is to make a complaint through the local authority. This process is not impartial and often leads to families’ concerns being brushed under the carpet at best, and at worst suffering a backlash within their case resulting in the family or any children involved being unjustly penalised for raising concerns.

The only other option open to service users applies when a social worker lies about their position or registration status, as outlined in the the Health And Social Work Professions Order 2001, under article 39(1) which reads:

Offences 39.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), a person commits an offence if with intent to deceive (whether expressly or by implication)— (a) he falsely represents himself to be registered in the register, or a particular part of it or to be the subject of any entry in the register; (b) he uses a title referred to in article 6(2) to which he is not entitled; (c) he falsely represents himself to possess qualifications in a relevant profession.  

Whilst the social care sector may not welcome this petition, it is part of an important drive to rebuild the sector’s image. If everyone engaging in social work is visible and accountable, the sector can start to weed out malpractice and negligence, which are largely responsible for the poor view the public has of social work in England.

If you’d like to sign the petition, you can do so here. 

A petition on Change.org calling on the government to remove Children and Families Under Secretary Nadhim Zahawi has racked up almost 2,000 signatures. Two more petitions were submitted on Parliament’s own Petitions site, but were rejected because the site does not allow petitions asking for government ministers to be sacked.

Zahawi came to the public’s attention after he attended the President’s Club dinner, which was widely condemned for its appalling treatment of waitresses and hostesses working at the function, and its controversial non disclosure agreement which prevented employees from talking about incidents of sexual harassment at the venue. The club has since shut down, but question marks remain over Zahawi’s attendance after an Urgent Question in the House of Commons revealed inconsistencies in Zahawi’s statements about the event.

The petition reads:

“Nadhim Zahawi has been reprimanded by Chief Whip, Julian Smith, for attending the men only The Presidents Club fundraiser where hostesses were subjected to groping and lewd comments. Mr Zahawi claims that he left the event early but has admitted to having attended the event in previous years.

TheyWorkForYou.com statistics show that Mr Zahawi generally votes against laws to promote equality and human rights and has consistently voted for University tuition fees.

Mr Zahawi also called for cuts to Child Benefits and Child Tax Credits and for them to be stopped after two children. Zahawi said: “Capping welfare by family size would save billions.”

Even though Mr Zahawi states that he “felt uncomfortable” at the men only fundraiser, why would somebody who felt it was acceptable to go to a men only event be the right person to speak for children and families?”

Whilst the President’s Club scandal continues to plague Zahawi – his constituents are still demanding answers to questions , which he is refusing to give – his income and connections are raising eyebrows as well. Listed as the second richest MP in Britain, largely due to his involvement with an oil company operating inside Iraq, Zahawi was also a former adviser to David Cameron, and counts Michael Gove as one of his closest friends. Tipped to be a government official by Cameron in 2013, tensions rose between the pair after Zahawi suggested an amnesty for illegal immigrants. David Cameron publicly hit out at Zahawi over the comments, during an EU summit,  telling attendees it was not a policy he supported.

No stranger to controversy, Zahawi was also accused of supplying oil to Islamic State by Iranian media outlet, Press TV in 2017. Zahawi took the broadcaster to court and later won damages for libel after the judge claimed that Zahawi had been a victim of fake news.

His voting record too, makes for compelling reading. Zahawi has consistently voted against legislation promoting equality and human rights, a sticking point particularly after the President’s Club fiasco. He has also voted against an investigation into the Iraq war, more specifically, “against an investigation into the contrast between public statements and private actions in the run up to the Iraq war”.

Zahawi’s election to the role of children and families lead is an unusual one. Unlike his predecessors, Zahawi has not been given a full Ministerial role. As Parliamentary Under Secretary, which is the lowest of three tiers of government minister in the United Kingdom, Zahawi is subordinate to Ministers of State, who in turn answer to Secretaries of State. An uncharitable quote by the Duke of Devonshire who served in McMillan’s 1957- 1963 Conservative government, sums up the title:

“No one who hasn’t been a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State has any conception of how unimportant a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State is.”

Whilst some news outlets at the time of Zahawi’s appointment suggested that the diminutive title was a reflection of the government’s lack of interest in child welfare, the truth is more likely to center around Zahawi’s own credentials and the reasons behind his elevation to a government department position.

And as a junior government official, Zahawi will be very keen to please the Conservative cabinet and do whatever it takes to secure a position as a fully fledged minister.

Many thanks to Oeillade for sharing the petition with us.

As promised in our earlier posts about the Meningitis B petition which asked the government to give the vaccine to all children, we’re sharing the date for the Parliamentary debate about the vaccine and surrounding issues, which has just been confirmed.

The debate has been scheduled for 25th April, 2016 and can be watched on Parliament TV. 

You can watch it live or catch it after it’s aired, as the very clever comms team over at the Parliament Website will be providing a video of the debate and a transcript, once it has taken place (which we will share with you once they email it over).

A petition which hopes to be published next week, (it is still going through the Gov Petition Website’s vetting process), will be inviting people to vote NO on the UK leaving the EU, on grounds that it would be a security risk to do so.

The text for this petition, which is not visible yet on the petition website is added here:

Prime Minister, David Cameron is currently fighting to cut migrant benefits for those entering the UK ahead of a referendum which seeks to renegotiate Britain’s membership of the EU. Cameron’s benefits proposals were flatly rejected by Brussels in November last year, and continue to be a major obstacle to negotiating acceptable terms within the EU membership debate.

And whilst economic advantages are usually cited when discussing EU membership, a new set of arguments has surfaced, this time focusing on Terror and national security.

Former director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer has publicly expressed the view that David Cameron’s move to opt out of the EU would put the UK at risk of further acts of Terror and would compromise its ability to respond swiftly to criminals, including those involved with child abuse networks, and cross border paedophiles.

In the Guardian article we link to above, Starmer highlights some benefits of EU collaboration citing Europol, the European police office, in the fight against child abuse. On this point, he says: “[A recent] UK-led operation across 12 countries dealt successfully with a very large child abuse network.. At least 230 children were at risk, including 60 in the UK, and the operation led to the arrest of more than 180 offenders, 121 of whom were arrested in the UK.”

The petition above seeks signatures on much the same grounds.

If you agree with the petition, you can sign here, but please note that as per the Gov Petition website’s terms and conditions, only UK residents and British citizens will be able to do so. 

What do you think? Is EU membership essential to developing effective relationships with other European states in the fight against child abuse and other forms of crime, or will leaving the EU make it harder to track and apprehend cross border criminals?

You can see the EU Referendum Act 2015 here.

More about the EU Referendum Act and when it received Royal Assent.

With thanks to Justin for kindly sharing his thought-provoking petition with us.