🔗 Share this article

The ex child welfare advocate has told the pandemic investigation that the administration should say sorry to children for the damaging mistakes and policy errors it made during the pandemic.

Cycle of Fatalism Among Officials Led to Failure to Help Children

Giving testimony to the inquiry’s public hearing, the former commissioner said that a cycle of fatalism within ministers meant the government did not manage to do enough to support children.

She argued that the prolonged lockdowns and education shutdowns were responsible for the surge in psychological, wellbeing and conduct difficulties still being experienced children and young people.

“The children and young people who experienced the Covid pandemic – some of whom will now be adults and some of whom are just starting their education – are owed a official sorry from the government leader in the legislature once the inquiry has released its final report,” Longfield said.

Official Sorry Would Acknowledge Avoidable Mistakes and Harm Inflicted

“An apology would provide the authorities an opportunity to formally acknowledge the avoidable mistakes and the damage that was done to numerous children’s wellbeing, schooling, health, development, and safety, following choices that were made by the administration at the time in the pandemic years.

“It would be a opportunity to apologise, and to assure that lessons truly shall be learned, should there be another pandemic or national emergency in the years ahead.”

Children’s Interests Came Behind to Pubs, Shops and Adults

Longfield stated her advice or views were rarely requested by the government throughout the pandemic, and told the investigation that the interests of children often “were placed after in the line to pubs, retail outlets, theme parks but also grown-ups, the whole time”.

Welfare Services Provision Reduced Throughout Crisis

Longfield was especially disapproving of the government’s choice to drop several elements of social care provision throughout the pandemic, including diluting standards for visits to at-risk youngsters.

Limitations on visits and the increasing reliance of virtual meetings enabled certain families to evade or conceal their living conditions, she suggested.

“Households, if they chose to, could easily see how they could hold the interview in a neat, very clean area, and the rest of the house might not be the identical,” she said.

The lower requirements implied welfare professionals were not able to talk to vulnerable children without their parents present, or to speak with additional family members who might have worries.

Absence of Inventive Thinking in Schools and Social Work

The former commissioner said she was frustrated that the government did not manage to use any form of creative problem-solving around schools and child protection that different sectors of the public sector, like the NHS, had utilised to address challenges.

“There was no the kind of emergency response that hospitals received, in schools. So many things could have been done differently concerning maintaining education access but they weren’t.

“In the same way with child welfare, [the government] moved directly to an outcome around diluting duties,” she added.

After-Effects Still Being Felt Children

Longfield stated the after-effects on the youth were still being felt, referring to the twofold increase in persistent absence from school, the 80% increase in support schemes provided for children with special needs, and a 300% increase in autism spectrum diagnoses among children since prior to the pandemic.

She said the data “is completely conclusive on the increase in virtually every indicator of [increased] vulnerability, from before the pandemic to now”.