Local Government Lawyer

 

Local Government Lawyer


Local Government Lawyer


Local Government Lawyer

Government Legal Department Vacancies

Government Legal Department Vacancies



Newsletter registration

Subscribe

* indicates required
Practice/Interest Area(s) (tick all that apply)
Join our other mailing lists (tick to subscribe)

Local Government Lawyer and Public Law Jobs will use the information you provide on this form to send your requested newsletters and updates. Please tick the box below to authorise us to send the email newsletter(s) and alerts requested above.

You can change your mind at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in the footer of any email you receive from us, or by contacting us at info@localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk. We will treat your information with respect. For more information about our privacy practices please visit our website. By clicking below, you agree that we may process your information in accordance with these terms.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.

Jul 18, 2025

Smile for the Camera?

Annie Sayers gives an overview of the Family Justice Council’s Guidance on covert recordings.
Jul 18, 2025

ADHD diagnosis and disability

Does an ADHD diagnosis mean an employee is (rather than may be) disabled under the Equality Act 2010? That's the question the Employment…
Jul 17, 2025

Errors of law, materiality and remedies

A recent Court of Appeal case concerning “restocking notices” in forestry has wider lessons in relation to errors of law and remedies,…

July 17, 2025

What next for rent reviews?

Government plans to ban upwards only rent reviews have caught everyone by surprise, writes David Harris.

Jul 11, 2025

Turbulence ahead

The £205.2m Cardiff Airport public funding package is to be challenged under the Subsidy Control Act 2022. Jonathan Branton and Alexander…
Jul 11, 2025

PFI – a new era?

Melanie Pears explores the recent announcement by NHS England about the possibility of a private finance model for capital developments,…
Jul 09, 2025

Airport Subsidy Challenged in the CAT

Oliver Slater, Beatrice Wood and Steve Gummer dive into the latest Competition Appeal Tribunal subsidy control challenge, brought against…
Jul 03, 2025

AI, copyright and LLMs

What are the copyright and confidentiality issues arising from use of public and private Large Language Models (LLMs)? Justin Harrington…
Jul 03, 2025

FOI and communication

The Upper Tribunal recently considered the meaning of ‘reasonably practicable’ in s11 of the Freedom of Information Act. Jonathan Dixey…
Jul 03, 2025

Too much?

In the fourth and final article on a Court of Appeal judgment that involved an exploration of the law and procedure relating to challenges…
Jun 27, 2025

Closures of educational sites

The Court of Appeal recently refused permission to appeal in judicial review proceedings concerning the decision to close part of a school…
Jun 25, 2025

Public law case update Q1 2025

Kieran Laird and Sophie O’Mahoney offer a straightforward and concise overview of six public law and regulation cases from the first…

Must read

LGL Red line

Families refusing access to support

Is home a suitable option for residence and care for a vulnerable adult if their family refuses access to support? Sophie Holmes analyses a recent ruling.
Families refusing access to support

Must read

LGL Red line

Families refusing access to support

Is home a suitable option for residence and care for a vulnerable adult if their family refuses access to support? Sophie Holmes analyses a recent ruling.
Families refusing access to support

A new report by the Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel has highlighted a “concerning lack of focus” on race, ethnicity, and culture in safeguarding practice and reviews, and has called for Child Safeguarding Partnerships to “review their local strategies and approaches to addressing race, racism, and racial bias”.

The report, published last week (11 March), focused on 53 children from Black, Asian and Mixed Heritage backgrounds who died or were seriously harmed between January 2022 and March 2024, in order to understand the safeguarding needs of children from these ethnic backgrounds.

Report authors observed that although risk-assessment and decision-making is a “common theme” across all safeguarding reviews, their analysis highlighted specific issues in relation to race.

The report stated: “In 19 reviews risk had been at least partially recognised, but this had not translated into action. This included several examples about girls from Asian and Mixed Asian Heritages who made disclosures about sexual abuse, but these appeared either to have been disregarded as untrue or were not carefully followed up.”

In one review, family members had vocalised that they perceived practitioners to be racist.

However, the report found the review “appeared to distance itself from any possibility of racism” by noting that practitioners had been mindful of the ethnicity of the family.

The safeguarding review then concluded that the accusations were “groundless”, but “did not provide evidence about whether the claims had been investigated, or provide any detail about how that judgement had been made”, said the report.


The panel highlighted a “concerning” lack of focus on race, ethnicity, and culture in both safeguarding practice and reviews, noting: “this oversight has resulted in insufficient critical analysis and reflection on how racial bias impacts decision-making and service offers to children.”

Authors also identified a “pervasive silence and hesitancy” to address racism, warning that this makes the safeguarding needs of Black, Asian, and Mixed Heritage children “invisible”, both in practice and in the system for learning from reviews.

The report stated: “In failing to acknowledge race, racial bias and racism, the current system misses many opportunities to learn from incidents where Black, Asian, and Mixed Heritage children have been seriously harmed or died.

“This failure to see the totality of children’s lives or to scrutinise how racial bias may have affected decision-making leaves children vulnerable and at risk of harm, without the necessary support and protection.”

The report made the following recommendations for local areas to better protect Black, Asian and Mixed Heritage children:

  • acknowledging and Challenging Racism: local leaders should ensure that appropriate internal structures are in place to support practitioners to recognise, discuss and challenge internal and institutional racism.
  • empowering Practitioners: creating conditions that empower practitioners to have conversations with children and families about race and identity. This includes building skills and confidence and ensuring there are safe opportunities for self-reflection within teams and in supervision to acknowledge their own biases.
  • reviewing Local Strategies: Child Safeguarding Partnerships should review their local strategies and approaches to addressing race, racism, and racial bias in their work with Black, Asian, and Mixed Heritage children.

Responding to the report, Minister for Children and Families, Janet Daby said: “Racism and racial bias are completely abhorrent and should never be barriers to keeping children safe and families getting the help they need.

“I’m grateful for the Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel’s work to bring these injustices to light and I urge frontline professionals to challenge biases that could put children in harm’s way.

“More widely, this government’s Plan for Change is prioritising significant reform of the children’s social care system, driving better child protection and information sharing between education, health and social workers to stop vulnerable children falling through the cracks.”

Lottie Winson

Past issues

Local Government


Governance (subscribe)


Housing (Subscribe)


Social Care and Education (subscribe)

 


Place (subscribe)

 

Events

Events

Directory

Directory