No sense of personal culpability.

cyfrifia Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:42 pm

Roger Ellis, former Chief Executive of Rochdale Council,
feels no sense of personal culpability.

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=11725&player=silverlight

Charly Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:21 am

I've just watched the video link and am amazed how that bumbling idiot got away with coasting along as chief executive for 12 years.
He knew nothing, he wasn't told anything was going on, and he didnt even know when working groups were set up to tackle the problem.
He refused to say what his pay-off was...claimed a confidentiality clause, why should there be anything confidential about how much tax payers money he was given?
Had he thought of re-paying the pay-off amount in the light of him not doing his job?
No, I am not personally responsible...so thank you very much for my over inflated salary and pay-off and for 12 years of an easy ride when I didnt have to get involved with anything going on in the town and if this hadnt have all blown up I could have still been milking the cash cow.
I thought Sara Rowbotham did very well with her evidence and she certainly shown a few people up for their uncaring and dismissive behaviour

Dalelad Wed Nov 07, 2012 10:44 am

At least he's gone now. We can only hope that things improve permanently following this, whilst the spotlight is on us.

Chill37 Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:16 am

Me too, But I suspect we have a long long way to go .

keithatrochdale Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:14 pm

Really, wasn't he paid big money to be in charge?

So if he cannot be held responsible for the actions of those working below him, what was he paid £150k per year?

And how much was his golden handshake?

Andy Zuntz seems to have almost disappeared from the scene, I wonder what he is up to?

Just found this; "Andy Zuntz is an enthusiastic supporter of Rochdale Development Agency. He is the deputy board member for the Chief Executive, Roger Ellis, and attends whenever Roger is unable to."

Interesting that they are both involved with the same project; this is surely not a case of jobs for the boys.

Guest Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:26 pm

Andy also retired earlier this year.

Charly Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:31 pm

Yes, rats and sinking ships come into mind. They should ALL be brought in for questioning as to why nobody knew anything and nobody did anything.
The woman on the video who was questioned said she had reported situations of abuse 103 times...103!How could Roger Ellis not have known..not even a whisper in the 'corridors of power', unbelievable

keithatrochdale Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:52 pm

keithatrochdale wrote:Really, wasn't he paid big money to be in charge?

So if he cannot be held responsible for the actions of those working below him, what was he paid £150k per year?

And how much was his golden handshake?

Andy Zuntz seems to have almost disappeared from the scene, I wonder what he is up to?

Just found this; "Andy Zuntz is an enthusiastic supporter of Rochdale Development Agency. He is the deputy board member for the Chief Executive, Roger Ellis, and attends whenever Roger is unable to."

Interesting that they are both involved with the same project; this is surely not a case of jobs for the boys.

How when I started this thread just after lunch (12;14pm) has my post suddenly appeared halfway down the thread?

And the now first post was posted 8.5 hours odd after mine?

Seems we have some selective editing going on here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Charly Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:00 pm

No Keith, a thread had already been started, you had started a second one on the same subject, I guess Admin has put the 2 together instead of 2 running side by side

No sense of personal culpability.
cyfrifia on Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:42 pm

keithatrochdale Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:15 am

Sorry, had not noticed the date.

Charly Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:57 am

keithatrochdale wrote: Andy Zuntz seems to have almost disappeared from the scene, I wonder what he is up to?

Just found this; "Andy Zuntz is an enthusiastic supporter of Rochdale Development Agency. He is the deputy board member for the Chief Executive, Roger Ellis, and attends whenever Roger is unable to."

Interesting that they are both involved with the same project; this is surely not a case of jobs for the boys.

I also found this Keith

Following Andy Zuntz retirement from his role as Executive for Rochdale Borough Council, he was officially appointed as the Chair of City West Housing Trust on 2nd June 2012

Atlas Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:32 am

O dear. A Trust with more money than sense. I wonder if they know the meaning of the word 'Trust'.

cyfrifia Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:06 pm

Mr. Roger Ellis, former Rochdale Borough Council Chief Executive, he who knew nothing, asked nothing, thought nothing, did nothing, may not be the only one who took huge amounts of money belonging to the people of Rochdale, by pretending to be a responsible 'public servant'.

He was at pains to project a gormlessness of personality to the Home Affairs Select Committee, rather at odds with some of his actually carefully worded, although muttered, replies. He does seem to have both the intelligence and the funds to take appropriate legal advice.

The job of Chief Executive of the council does involve a high public profile, and being very well paid both to be responsible and to take responsibility, which he wasn't and didn't.

On the facts presented, if we are to see justice, he should be charged with dereliction of duty in public office, if found guilty be required to repay the salary he took. All very sad, but, it is, and these matters must be progressed in order to eventually restore public confidence.

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/75145/mp-accuses-roger-ellis-of-perverse-pride

Guest Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:56 pm

Notwithstanding Mr Ellis has a lot to answer for, he was an officer of the council, the leader of the council is of course a political animal, and they seem to be getting off the hook here. What did those who led the council during these years do? Surely they too have a case to answer, given they are very quick to take the credit when something good happens and are always keen to stress the officers simply do their bidding. Or is this the eye opener that the general public need? That is, councillors are window dressing and its the officers who really run the show - as well as run rings round councillors.

Hinch Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:04 pm

I think the net needs to be cast much wider and without the three wise monkey guff.

A very, very bad week for Rochdale and more to come.

Much more...

Guest Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:59 pm

Sara Rowbotham emphatically stated to the Commons Select Committee that Councillor Lambert was clearly wrong, when it seemed he commented to the Manchester Evening News that the crisis intervention team did not always communicate with the police and Social Services about vulnerable girls.

As J's pointers, ‘Services’ management information was scrutinised not just by officers, but purportedly by members of the council.

Roger Ellis joined the Children’s Safeguarding Board by invitation when the Board was reorganised in 2010.

The borough solicitor can easily provide information on Mr Ellis’s payoff and Mr Ellis has now confirmed he is prepared to waive confidentiality… if the council will. There's a couple more payoffs of relevant interest from this year, as well.

RMBC’s Team of 4-5 Executives were involved together in their own monthly and quarterly meetings and it’s possible they should all be charged with dereliction of public duty. Surely they would also have contractual responsibilities to and for RMB Community Safety?

Which of the three subject threads is leading on what here scratch

SCR, Grooming-More Accused, or this one ....

cyfrifia Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:59 pm

Mojo Hill wrote:RMBC’s Team of 4-5 Executives were involved together in their own monthly and quarterly meetings and it’s possible they should all be charged with dereliction of public duty. Surely they would also have contractual responsibilities to and for RMB Community Safety?

Great damage has been done. If there are cases of dereliction of duty in public office involved, it is in the public interest that they are prosecuted. Not to do so leaves the opportunity wide open for the same thing to happen again.

Hinch Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:11 pm

Mojo Hill wrote:Sara Rowbotham emphatically stated to the Commons Select Committee that Councillor Lambert was clearly wrong, when it seemed he commented to the Manchester Evening News that the crisis intervention team did not always communicate with the police and Social Services about vulnerable girls.

Now, let's see. Who do I believe here. Colin Lambert, respected Leader of the Council, Roger Ellis, retired CEO who reached the peak of his career or Sara Rowbotham who nobody had ever heard of until the Inquiry?

Looks like Sara wins by three furlongs.

Next!

cyfrifia Mon Nov 12, 2012 6:30 pm

The circumstances make it hard to justify either the salary or the severance money. Contractual arrangements are a matter for R.M.B.C., but, R.M.B.C. has clear public responsibility to act firmly to resolve management and leadership failures, so that these failures cannot be repeated.

Guest Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:38 pm

Hinch wrote:

Next!

By 2011, the council was given a multi-agency recommendation to rescind the licences of certain individuals because the mini-cab firms were being used as a front for grooming, but that recommendation was rejected… a multi-agency recommendation to rescind licenses was not acted upon.

!

cyfrifia Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:50 pm

Because of that failure it was up to the wit and judgement of individual members of the public to decide which taxi firms to trust or use, and which not to trust or use. A wrong decision could lead to serious and tragic consequences.

cyfrifia Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:52 pm

As stated in the recent Commons debate on child sexual exploitation,

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 clarified that it is an offence to pay for the sexual services of a child under 18. The maximum penalty, depending on the child’s age, could be 14 years imprisonment or life imprisonment. The law is incredibly clear and strong on that.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm121113/debtext/121113-0003.htm#12111384001212

Social workers who dismissed young girls under 18 as 'making lifestyle choices' or being 'prostitutes' were so out of line, acting against the law, it's difficult to see how it could be argued that they should not be dismissed from their jobs. Even if they were well meaning but ignorant, and so have no 'sense of personal culpability' sadly, such 'social workers' are too dangerous. Have those people been sacked? Mistakes have consequences, there is a lot of clearing up to do, and, it needs to be seen to be done.

Charly Mon Nov 19, 2012 1:34 pm

cyfrifia wrote:, it's difficult to see how it could be argued that they should not be dismissed from their jobs. Even if they were well meaning but ignorant, and so have no 'sense of personal culpability' sadly, such 'social workers' are too dangerous. Have those people been sacked? Mistakes have consequences, there is a lot of clearing up to do, and, it needs to be seen to be done.

I remember the 'Satanic abuse' accusations on Langley where lots of children were taken off their parents, some never returned home.
The social workers had got it wrong that time too! but I dont think anyone lost their jobs...the only losses suffered were by the parents who lost their kids sometimes for months, sometimes permanently, and the children who were ripped from their families

cyfrifia Mon Nov 19, 2012 4:47 pm

The worst kind of social workers are criminal fake social workers that try to take children.
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/75355/appeal-for-information-after-pair-falsely-claim-to-be-social-workers

Police are appealing for information after a man and a woman falsely claimed they were social workers in Rochdale.

The first incident happened on Friday 9 November 2012 between 6.00pm and 7.00pm. A woman called at a house on Queensway, Castleton claiming she was a social worker and she had received reports of neglect.

She said she was there to take away her children and would start legal proceedings.

Bob Stewart (Beckenham): Last year, 532 children were abducted, about half of whom, it is estimated, were abducted by strangers. We do not know what happens to them; there are no statistics.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm121113/debtext/121113-0003.htm

Sponsored content

No sense of personal culpability.

No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Roger Ellis feels no 'personal culpability'

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.

Re: No sense of personal culpability.