Scrutiny to fight again for tribunal of inquiry into Education appointment
ANOTHER bid will be made to get the States to back a full tribunal of inquiry into the appointment of the head of curriculum and standards after Scrutiny was thwarted in its attempts to investigate what happened.
In July, the Guernsey Press revealed serious concerns about the level of political interference in the appointment process during April.
The States rejected Scrutiny’s call for a tribunal and since September it has been trying to gather all the information it needs to have someone else review what happened but says ‘very little’ progress has been made.
‘The committee has acted in good faith in trying to progress an effective review, but now firmly believes that this option is unlikely to result in the publication of a transparent, meaningful and conclusive report that represents value for money,’ it said in a statement.
‘Due to data protection and other legal concerns, the committee has not been able to gain access to the complete set of documents in un-redacted form. Further, a recent modification to the Data Protection Law has potentially created further difficulties regarding the publication of a full and frank report at the end of the review.’
The estimated cost of the independent review it was trying to carry out would be approximately £150,000.
A tribunal of inquiry would, in the committee’s view, cost approximately the same, but would not encounter many of the issues related to an independent review.
‘My committee believes that a tribunal of inquiry is now the only course of action to deal with this matter,’ said chairman Chris Green.
‘Despite my committee’s best efforts the independent review has faced significant obstacles at every turn, particularly in terms of data protection which have brought us to the conclusion that the only effective resolution would be a tribunal of inquiry.
‘My committee hopes that the States Assembly will support its second submission of the policy letter to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion.’
A tribunal would have formal powers to gather evidence and compel witnesses to cooperate.
The investigation could examine whether there was undue political interference in the appointment procedure, which unfolded with resignation threats from Education president Matt Fallaize after his preferred pick was not chosen by the appointment panel.
The States HR representative was so disgusted with the process she resigned and the successful local candidate pulled out weeks after accepting the job and putting plans in place for it.
Problems with the appointment came to light only after an email from Deputy Fallaize was published by the Guernsey Press.
Subsequently, some of those on the appointment panel have also gone public with concerns.
