Roger Ellis feels no 'personal culpability'
Date published: 07 November 2012
Roger Ellis, the ex-chief executive of Rochdale Borough Council, which was criticised for staff "deficiencies" in a report by the town's safeguarding children board after nine men had been convicted of running a child sex ring in Rochdale, told a Home Affairs Select Committee he knew nothing of the abuse until the men's arrests in 2010 and feels no "personal culpability".
He told the committee as chief executive he had "felt a deep sense of responsibility" and was "embarrassed at the authority's failings", but not personally.
The council was criticised in the report for failing to help the victims,
"I don't feel any personal culpability based on the information that was available to me," he said.
Mr Ellis, who was chief executive for 12 years, said "clearly information was withheld" from him by staff.
"I did not know about these particular issues. I can't explain why I wasn't made aware [of] what was happening."
Mr Ellis, whose remuneration package was in excess of £150,000 per annum, left the authority in 2010. When asked if he received a pay-off, he told the committee he could not reveal the amount due to "confidentiality".
He agreed there should be a judicial inquiry into what had happened in Rochdale to find out "who had failed" the children.
Committee chairman, Labour's Keith Vaz, said he had recalled Mr Ellis and current chief executive Jim Taylor to get answers into why Rochdale Council failed victims of the child sex ring.
He told Mr Ellis it was "very disturbing" he did not know about the child abuse.
Local reaction to Mr Ellis' performance was scathing, Linda Phillips said: "I am amazed at how that bumbling idiot got away with coasting along as chief executive for 12 years.
"He knew nothing, he wasn't told anything was going on, and he didn't even know when working groups were set up to tackle the problem.
"He refused to say what his pay-off was, claimed a confidentiality clause. Why should there be anything confidential about how much tax payers money he was given?
"Has he thought of re-paying the pay-off amount in the light of him not doing his job?"
The hearing followed the findings of the review published by the safeguarding children board on 27 September.
Head of Targeted Services at the time, Steve Garner, did not attend the hearing due to ill health.
Rochdale Council said in a statement he will be co-operating with the inquiry by providing information and answering questions from the committee at a later date if required.
Mr Garner resigned from the council in October shortly after the publication of the report.
As well as finding front-line staff "deficiencies", the report also said council workers described the girls as making a "lifestyle choice".
Rochdale's safeguarding children board reviewed the work of local agencies, including the council, police and the Crown Prosecution Service, between 2007 and 2012, in safeguarding children at risk of sexual exploitation.
Comments
Oh please Mr Ellis, you were paid £150,000 a year and you have the bare-faced audacity to state "I did not know about these particular issues. I can't explain why I wasn't made aware of what was happening."
Linda Phillips comment of: "I am amazed at how that bumbling idiot got away with coasting along as chief executive for 12 years" is not strong enough by half.
Talk about taking money under false pretences.
Perhaps the Freedom of Information Act would reveal Mr Ellis' pay off?
Surely all of the RMBC Executive at that time should be questioned and held to task? After all they are highly paid.
I believe some of them are still there now.
The process will require a scapegoat, it is fashionable to bash public sector employees and wages and pay-offs, etc, not to mention we do demand a certain ability and aptitude from our politicians and public servants.
However, I can easily believe the chief exec didn't know every single heart beat of the borough he presided over, I would imagine it is impossible to do so.
Even if he did know, if the police and protective services weren't acting, then what do we expect this guy could have done?
A criminal court would be more apt for this level of irresponsibility.
What a shame Steve Garner wasn't able to be questioned due to "ill health". As he now knows the type of questions he will be asked he has time to get his script together.
The comment bumbling idiot in the report is exactly correct, everyone should watch Mr Ellis' performance on Parliament Live TV. The council is currently a dreadful place to work.
Roger Ellis should be ordered to repay any pay off and this should in turn be invested into the Social Services department.
Having recently been involved with Children's Social Services myself, the way they operated and handled my case and investigated false claims against me, which I have been cleared of, was appalling and made the whole process very frustrating.
Had common sense been used and a lot less of blaming the procedures and rules then it would have been a lot easier.
Sara Rowbotham's evidence to the committee was totally credible. She must be a very courageous woman.
If there was praise for a small department tucked away in a dusty corner of his empire then Mr Ellis would take credit and bask in the glory. But now it's the other way he doesn't know anything about it. Typical.
I bet he knew the details of what expenses he could claim and what level of pension pot he had coming. It's about time all management took one day a month to work at ground level to experience what their staff are doing, instead of getting consultants in.
The information was available to him. As head of RMBC he only had to ask but he never thought too. Used the old get-out clause of 'never ask no questions and you'll never be told no lies'.
Nobody asked any questions so nobody admitted to the problem. Ergo, they didn't have to do anything about it.
Oldest excuse in the book begins with the words: "I was not aware." Well for £150K per year he should have been. End of!
What sort of a pompous ass would dare to utter the fact that "I don't feel any personal culpability based on the information that was available to me"? Well we now know what sort of an ass would, yes, Mr Roger Overpaid Ellis, who apparently spent the majority of his 12 years tenure as RMBC Chief Exec ignoring the obvious and simply organising the sliding of Rochdale town centre, slowly, but surely down the proverbial toilet, oh and then taking the money and running - you couldn't make it up!
Here we have an ex-chief executive who says he knew nothing about this grooming of young girls. It is not surprising he should make a statement such as that. I have sent copy emails to him when he was in office only to find a returned message stating that my message had been "deleted without being read".
He did not do his job very efficiently while in post. Therefore, we can understand his comment “no personal culpability”. This is a disgusting comment from £150,000 paid employee.
The question should be asked was it more about political correctness than for the care of the victims?
Why did they ignore the victims and allow the abuse to carry on?
If heads do not roll then there is no justice for victims of the abuse and those at the top will just get away with it.
I am amazed by Lambert's comment: "the process will require a scapegoat" - what?! Scapegoat equals someone to be singled out for unmerited negative treatment or blame. If Roger Ellis truly did not know what was going on he showed a wilful ignorance and a disturbing lack of curiosity about an horrendous scale of events happening within his jurisdiction - and Lambert thinks that any blame attached to him would be unmerited! Lambert you're a fool!
Lambert says "it's fashionable to bash public sector employees and wages and pay offs, etc" - fashionable?! What planet are you on?
Lambert says: "I can easily believe the chief exec didn't know every single heartbeat of the borough he presided over." Heartbeat?! We're talking about over 50 children suffering appalling sexual abuse, and you think that is a mere heartbeat? And you say: "even if he did know what do we expect the guy to do?" What?! On £150K per year what would expect even if he did know? Are you serious?
Keith Vaz calls Lambert to the Select Committee!
Tomorrow's headline - if there's any justice!
Wonder how much he will claim "he was unaware of"?!
Rochdale MBC is full of incompetents.
Cuckoo spotter, I am very serious, if the protective child services and the police themselves did not take the appropriate action, then please inform us all what action the chief executive could have done that would have eradicated this child abuse.
Re public sector bashing, you should perhaps engage with all the main media outlets and the current political climate. To say you are unaware is mind blowing.
Have Your Say
Linda Phillips is quite right. "I knew nothing?" - over several years is not a credible defence. And why/how is Steve Garner getting away with not appearing before the Committee?
By chesters @ 07/11/2012 11:56:38