Author: Nick Tiratsoo

The two most often asked questions about the child abuse at Whitefield: why was it allowed to happen, and why did the truth take years to establish?

October 29, 2026 Whitefield 0

When people first read about Whitefield, they often end up by asking the same two questions: how could the child abuse at the school between 2014 and 2017 have been allowed to happen, and why did it take until October 2021 for the full truth to start leaking out? What follows attempts to address both these questions by looking, first, at the reasons why in 2014-17 knowledge of the child abuse failed to become public; second, the way that Whitefield and its partners reacted when Ofsted inspectors issued a report in March 2017 revealing the misuse of the ‘calming rooms’; and, third, what happene... »

LBWF responds to its critics over Whitefield with what looks like an attempted smear plus manipulation of the Freedom of Information Act. Can this be for real?

October 19, 2026 LBWF spin 0

Two days ago, I sent the e-mail reproduced below to Cllr. Paul Perkins, the council Leader. It speaks for itself. It is certainly disappointing to find that the Greens are not stamping out the kind of tactics that have been practised by Labour for many years. Where is the ‘new kind of council’ that they promised? Where is the ‘decisive break with the past’? It seems to be business as usual.   17 October 2026  Dear Councillor Perkins, I am writing to you about two matters stemming from recent public interest in the Whitefield child abuse scandal. On 3 October 2026, Andrew Kersley published... »

Fifteen reasons why the Whitefield Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review is not fit for purpose

September 30, 2026 LCSPR, Whitefield 0

The Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review (LCSPR) about Whitefield seeks to address ‘two central questions’, which are ‘How and why these events occurred?’ and the contingent ‘How can the WF SCP [Waltham Forest Safeguarding Children Partnership] be assured that improvements in multi-agency practice and systemic changes since 2017 have significantly reduced the likelihood of recurrence?’ (para. 1.21). What follows concentrates on the first of these questions, and shows that the answers which the LCSPR offers seem flawed. The evidence which supports this conclusion is summarised under four br... »

,

‘How others see us’, an occasional series, No. 3: J.K. Rowling on ‘Creasyism’

September 9, 2026 How others see us 0

»

Private Eye reports that LBWF is England’s third most complained about council, while LBWF admits its own complaints procedure is so bad it brings ‘financial and reputational’ risks

August 17, 2026 Ombudsman 0

The latest issue of Private Eye (no.1681, 07/08-20/08/26) includes the following: Coincidentally, the LBWF 2025-26 Annual Governance Statement (AGS) has just been published, and this gives a dismal picture of how LBWF handles its own complainants. The AGS starts with the frank admission that ‘the current level of overdue complaints across both Stage 1 and Stage 2 does not meet the standards set out by the Ombudsmen, nor does it align with the level of customer service the council expects to provide to its residents’, and then goes on to explain why this is happening: What’s even more alarming,... »

New research reveals that LBWF repeated its failings over Whitefield many times elsewhere, suggesting it has had a more general child safeguarding problem than previously ever admitted

August 7, 2026 child safeguarding, LCSPR, Whitefield 0

As hitherto reported (see links), the recent Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review (LCSPR) of child abuse at Whitefield during 2014-17 concludes that (a) there were various problems with the pupils’ statutory education, health and care (EHC) plans; (b) some of the LBWF staff involved in the case lacked professional curiosity, and adopted the wrong focus; and (c) LBWF had worked with the other safeguarding agencies in a way which was ‘fragmented and lacked co-ordination’. The LCSPR provides no broader context for these failings, which is a pity, because a search through the relevant sources ... »

, ,

The Whitefield Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review (3): Leigh Day now pursuing civil claims including against the London Borough of Waltham Forest, and related press coverage

August 2, 2026 LCSPR, Whitefield 0

(1) Part of Leigh Day’s press release, posted on 30 July 2026: (2) Marco Marcelline in the Waltham Forest Echo, dated 30 July 2026: https://walthamforestecho.co.uk/2026/07/30/council-buried-whitefield-abuse-report-after-schools-legal-threat/   (3) Jonathan Ames in The Times, dated 31 July 2026:   (4) Noel Titheradge, the journalist who firsts broke the Whitefield story, for the BBC, dated 31 July 2026: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq89757z9vyo »

,

The Whitefield Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review (2): more confusion and controversies

July 31, 2026 LCSPR, Whitefield 0

Further to an earlier post (see links) there are two additional points that are worth making about the contents of the Whitefield Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review (LCSPR). The first concerns what appears to be some confusion about basic facts. At paragraph 1.2, right at the start of the document, the LCSPR describes how, in 2014-17, children were locked in the ‘calming rooms’ for ‘prolonged periods of seclusion’, and subject to ‘inappropriate physical restraint’ and ‘other restrictive and harmful practices’. Plus, it continues, this went on without a... »

,

Burnham-ism: a warning from (Waltham Forest) history

July 23, 2026 Independent Panel, LBWF spin, The BNI, Uncategorized 0

Yes, definitely, let’s devolve power and money to the localities, because ‘communities know better than anyone else what’s right for them’. Power to the people! What could possibly go wrong? Well, if this story is to be believed, plenty. In the early 2000s, the government gave LBWF many millions of public money to help the most deprived neighbourhoods in the borough. Now read on. Postscript It’s important to add that the police did not act on my complaint, and accordingly it should be underlined that none of those mentioned in this article were found to have engaged in any kind of illega... »

The Whitefield Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review (1): what it says, what it – very regrettably – overlooks, and why it fails

July 20, 2026 LCSPR, Whitefield 0

This post looks in some detail at the recently published Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review (LCSPR) regarding the historic child abuse at Whitefield School (or, to give it its formal title ‘Learning from the past: The use of restrictive practices, including seclusion, in a school for children with additional needs’). First, a couple of observations about how the LCSPR was set up and then actioned. There has been some confusion about timings, but the following is the current best guess. LBWF and partners decided to set up the LCSPR in August 2024; the then Leader, Cllr. Grace Williams, an... »

,