Statement by Donald Lambie, leader and senior tutor of the School of Economic Science.
"Since the publication of the report by Mr James Townend QC earlier this year, I have spoken with various former pupils of St James and St Vedast and also with teachers, governors, parents and other relatives of pupils. As a result of those conversations I feel it is important to express my thoughts, not least because my predecessor, Leon MacLaren, was so instrumental in originally setting up the schools...
"First and foremost, I am extremely sorry that there was any mistreatment of children in the early years at St James and St Vedast and that this caused unhappiness and distress to a number of former pupils. I apologise for any part played by the School of Economic Science in that.
"In founding St James and St Vedast, Leon MacLaren had in mind the best possible principles for the care and education of all the children attending them. Those principles did not include or condone the mistreatment of children and plainly it is wrong that any such thing occurred.
"Since they were established, the schools have helped to educate many fine young men and women, and the original vision has been supported by a great deal of dedicated work and generosity. As independent assessments confirm, all the St James Schools are happy and vibrant and doing an excellent job. Everyone concerned remains totally committed to helping all pupils to develop in the best possible way. I therefore reiterate that I am deeply sorry that in the early years of the schools there was any mistreatment of pupils. I hope that the process of reconciliation that has been started will be of help in this situation. I will assist with that in any way that is practically possible."
This was posted on the iirep.com website yesterday. I think that it is an unprecedented moment for the School - the admission that it makes mistakes, and that it does not create moral laws but lives under them. I think the apology creates a new environment in the School. A lot of people, I am sure, are going to leave in the near future, because this new environment will be intolerable to them.
But I'm hopeful.
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Apology
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Well done, Donald Lambie. A brave and well considered move and one
which fulfils a promise he made to former pupils of St James. What other
unresolved issues are there?
Unresolved issues? Surely the value of the action should be reflected in the outcome from the action, i.e. the reaction from the people to whom the action is addressed and the reaction from the people in whose name the action has been carried out. This apology, is personalised "I feel it is important to express my thoughts" but is made on behalf of every past and present member of SES "I apologise for any part played by the School of Economic Science in that". From the viewpoint of an SES member who does not have full knowledge and understanding of the history of the day schools this apology might be bewildering or excessive. From the viewpoint of an ex-pupil this apology might be satisfactory or, without actions to back it up, might be viewed as meaningless or even insulting. Unless everyone understands the issues and is satisfied with the actions taken to resolve them then surely at least one issue remains unresolved.
I think you're absolutely right, anonymous. We need the right words, the right thoughts, the right intentions and the right actions all together.
Such an apology can only be one aspect. Or a part of one aspect - maybe a unilateral statement can only be symbolic. There will have to be many more conversations in many different places before there can be a real resolution.
A unilateral statement from Lambie is certainly symbolic... but the power he wields over the schools is obviously a major 'unresolved issue'. Especially in light of the '96 report and associated correspondence which has just been put in the public domain by Marco Goldschmied.
There's no denying it, although at the same time I would be careful of taking MG's word as gospel. He had his own agenda.
I'd agree with that V - definitely an odour of sour grapes and spurious claims to the moral high ground. If he felt that strongly why didn't he actually do something? But, given that, it's illuminating just the same...
Post a Comment