Government rejects Statement of Mr Jones as unjustified and untrue
The Social Services Agency notes with deep regret the incorrect letter from Mr Duncan Jones published in yesterday's written press, and reported by GBC today.
Mr Jones, who was a team leader in the Social Services Agency says that the Agency's claim that the case to which his letter refers was fully investigated is untrue. That statement is not true.
Mr Jones also says that the Agency's statement that it acted swiftly and responsibly whenever allegations of neglect or abuse have been made, and that all cases have been properly investigated, is untrue. This statement also is not true.
The case to which Mr Jones is referring involves three care workers against whom an allegation was made by a service user. The three care workers were suspended from work following the allegations, and remained suspended for nearly three months while the allegations against them were investigated by the Chief Executive of the Agency and two Civil Service social workers. The conclusion of the investigation was that formal disciplinary action was not warranted. A written caution was nevertheless issued. Even this caution was subsequently withdrawn following a review of the case by the Chief Secretary, as head of the Civil Service, since the findings of the investigation did not warrant even a caution.
The Social Services Agency repeats its statement that all allegations that involve the welfare of service users are fully and properly investigated, and where indicated by the evidence, appropriate action taken. The Social Services Agency also repeats its statement that its first priority is the welfare of service users, as demonstrated by the lengthy suspension of three innocent employees while the allegations were investigated.
The Agency accordingly rejects the unfounded and inaccurate statement of Mr Jones, who is an ex-employee of the Agency, apparently aggrieved by the fact that he did not agree with the results of the investigation conducted by his professional colleagues. This is not a proper basis to impugn the truth of a Government Statement.
Home 
