Terms of Reference for all to see!

Discussion of the children's schools in the UK.
Shout
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Reality
Contact:

Postby Shout » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:33 pm

_____________________________________________________________
Last edited by Shout on Wed Nov 22, 2006 8:03 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Shout
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Reality
Contact:

Postby Shout » Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:42 pm

_____________________________________________________________
Last edited by Shout on Wed Nov 22, 2006 8:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

daska
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: UK

Postby daska » Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:02 pm

I'm afraid you missed my point. My father does not deserve the type of fallout that I expect from SES. What he may deserve from my sister and myself is a different matter and we will handle that in our own way and in our own time. I have shown him some of some of the inquiry information and he is genuinely shocked by the arrogance displayed in the behaviour of Mr Boddy and the Governors. He was adamant that I must make my feelings known.

User avatar
Keir
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am
Location: London

Postby Keir » Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:25 am

What were you all expecting...I mean seriously?.

This enquiry as it stands is a sick joke and I wholeheartedly agree with Shout's earlier point about being unpaid consultants!

The idealistic view that an enquiry - paid for and set up by (and given TOR by) a school that is run by an ex PR man, who is part of a philosophical organisation that smothers real debate and promotes top-down male chauvanist authority on what the truth is - would EVER REALLY DEAL WITH THE EMOTIONAL FALLOUT that was caused. Come on now, get real. The only way the organisations of the SES and St James will EVER sit up and take notice is if their INCOME is in danger of evaporating.

I do wonder if this idealism didn't have some roots in the fact that we were given a lop-sided view of the world and kept seperated from it as often as possible.

This Enquiry is designed to be a future puff piece for the school and possiblly as some future defence against the threat of real legal action. They know how to get their money's worth.

Whats that saying?...If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck!

The one thing that will stop me doing nothing is the fact that that is what they want me to do. FUCK THEM!

As this enquiry is more or less their patsy should we perhaps try them in the court of public opinion? Anyone know a newspaper editor?

FUCK THEIR ARROGANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!



:bad-words:

daska
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: UK

Postby daska » Tue Jun 14, 2005 9:20 pm

Speaking for myself: I was expecting exactly what happened.

I will be submitting a complaint. I will be forwarding the details to other pupils and parents (though I will not presume to instruct them that they must make a submission).

And when the report is produced and the school dismisses it as meaningless, flawed, water under the bridge etc. etc. etc. I might well complain again.

User avatar
ET
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:49 am
Location: Gloucestershire
Contact:

Postby ET » Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:30 am

Someone asked me a question yesterday, and it made me think:

What will happen to all the complaints we submit after the enquiry? Does anyone know? Is there any danger they could be passed to SES?

After all, no point in my asking to remain anonymous in the report if they then get hold of my submission and find out who I am!

I'm sure I'm just being paranoid (occupational hazard of being SES educated!) but can someone put my mind at rest?

:crazyeyes:

daska
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: UK

Postby daska » Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:26 pm

This is very much what was in the back of my mind when talking about my dad. There are numerous examples on this board that show what contempt SES has for personal, privileged and confidential information (and a good few stories, I know, that aren't on the board).

User avatar
Keir
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am
Location: London

Postby Keir » Sat Jun 18, 2005 12:00 pm

Sadly ET I think you may be right to be paranoid. Given the link between SES and ST J and Board of Governors and Headmaster I think it is highly likey that this information will find its way back to the SES - after all, the inquiry report is commissioned on behalf of the Board of Governors (who are senior members of.......)!!


Can Townend be compelled to respect anonymity of submissions? That I don't know. might be useful to find out as I think Christinne Betts is going to be scanning the BB for relevant posts that Townend will consider. Quite how they decide which ones are relevant I dont know. At this point I usually get cynical.

:drinking:

User avatar
ET
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:49 am
Location: Gloucestershire
Contact:

Postby ET » Sat Jun 18, 2005 2:39 pm

Well I guess we have to try and trust Townend to respect our wishes. I am asking in my covering letter with my submission to be kept anonymous in the report, and have explained exactly why, so hopefully he will respect that. As to what happens to our submissions afterwards, well, I guess we just have to trust him there as well.

It's so hard, isn't it? Everything about SES makes you so paranoid, and it's difficult to trust anyone. The only thing I can say is, if they don't respect our anonymity, or the submissions end up in SES hands, and the s**t really hits the fan in my family, then this won't be the last SES or this lawyer's firm hear of me. After all, I won't have much left to lose!

Good luck everyone! At least we have each other now.

User avatar
Keir
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am
Location: London

Postby Keir » Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:28 am

True. We have nothing to fear but Fear itself.



:grab:

chrisdevere
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: Battersea
Contact:

Postby chrisdevere » Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:49 am

Forget any right to being anonymous!

I received a letter from C betts, clearly pointing out that they would not be able to use my statment unless it could be shown to the complainants, obviously it has my name on it and even so reading it would still make it pretty clear who I was if my name was removed. I have taken the plunge and instructed them that they can use it together with statments off this site relating to my time at the school.

I must say I am amazed by the arrogance shown by the school and the SES. I completleyt agree with the earlier comments on this thread, that an inquiry has no real basisi unless all parties agree to its TOR. It strikes me that SES Schools action have so far actwed well, as a mouthpiece for all pupils and should have been consulted.

The timescales laid down and other restrictions clearly shows this to be nothing but a PR exercise for the SES.

An independent enquiry is required, it is foolish to belive any organisation will allow TOR that will cover areas where they know there were/are major problems.

Look at the Kelly inquiry. 20 years ago Blair/Cambell would have resigned before there was even an inquiry. 60 years ago a gentleman probably would have taken his own life, for the shame of such political lying and causing the destruction and death of a decent man. Nowadays they just come up with TOR that cover the areas they know they are safe on. Even though evidence came to light clearly implicating them. It was outside of the scope of the enquiry! Is it really any surprise the SES are doing the same?
Christopher de Vere
chrisdevere@hotmail.com

Gandalf
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 9:05 pm

Terms of reference

Postby Gandalf » Mon Jun 20, 2005 1:41 pm

Many of the terms of reference posted by ET (thank you) appear to still be predicated on an inquiry that is limited to the period form 1975 - 1985 (references to fading 20-30 year old memories etc. and statements such as only 3 teachers from that era are still employed). Can anyone enlighten me as to whether there is now a time limit or is the period of the inquiry from 1975 to the present moment?

Gandalf
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 9:05 pm

Terms of reference

Postby Gandalf » Mon Jun 20, 2005 2:09 pm

Keir makes the good point that all the governors are senior SES students. The St James web site does not seem to give out names.. Does anyone have an up to date list?

sparks
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 12:17 am

Re: Terms of reference

Postby sparks » Mon Jun 20, 2005 7:50 pm

The inquiry can consider complaints relating to any time period

Gandalf wrote:Can anyone enlighten me as to whether there is now a time limit or is the period of the inquiry from 1975 to the present moment?


The Governors original draft Terms of Reference (December 2004) specifically and clearly stated that the inquiry would only consider events from the period 1975 to 1985.

The Terms of refernence published by Townend contain many references to this same time period - presumably because much of his TOR are a 'cut and paste' job from the Governors draft, however, the current inquiry is into complaints relating to ANY PERIOD OF THE SCHOOLS HISTORY. THERE IS NO TIME BAR!!!

This may not be clear at the first reading of the TOR which is a rather confusing document containing a number of apparent contraditions....it is there if you look closely...

The Chairman should be at liberty to call on whomever he wishes for any assistance he may need as to the School regimes from 1975 onwards.


11. There followed a period of discussion and consultation following which it was agreed to widen the scope of the inquiry to include St James' Schools for boys and girls as well as St Vedast and to remove the time period of 1975 - 1985.


Hope this makes things clearer!!!

Shout
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Reality
Contact:

Postby Shout » Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:08 pm

_____________________________________________________________
Last edited by Shout on Wed Nov 22, 2006 8:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.


Return to “St James and St Vedast”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests