While she may be a professional in her field and can lay claim to working in the public service for over 40 years, Director of the Childcare and Protection Agency Ann Greene has never been shy about demonstrating her lack of tact and disingenuousness. It is therefore not surprising that she landed in a contretemps with her new superiors in what was probably their first real day on the job.
Public ventilation of the issue which saw Ms Greene being asked to proceed on 36 days leave has seen commentators deeming it bad form both on the part of Ms Greene and of her superiors. In the first instance it was said that Ms Greene brought the action on herself by her unacceptable conduct and in the second, the senior minister who acted to send her on leave had not followed the required protocol.
In a measured response to critics, Social Protection Minister Volda Lawrence said she was moved to act against Ms Greene after she verbally attacked Junior Minister Simona Broomes during a meeting and refused to desist when asked to do so by the senior minister. Prior to the verbal attack, Ms Lawrence noted, there was a familiarization tour of the agency during which Ms Greene had deliberately only introduced Ms Lawrence to the staff, ignoring Ms Broomes. It was later, during a meeting in her office, that Ms Greene was obstreperous in her approach to the junior minister.
Ms Lawrence said she hoped Ms Greene would use the period away from the office to reflect on her approach and that on her return there will be an improvement in the manner in which she relates and a willingness to cooperate. In fact, Ms Lawrence has given Ms Greene what is referred to in vernacular as a ‘bly’; she should have gone further and insisted that Ms Greene apologise both to her and to Ms Broomes before returning. If she does plan to return.
It was Ms Greene herself who signalled that a return was in question in a letter to this newspaper published on Monday last, in which she effectively called Ms Lawrence a liar. Disregarding the fact that she had ignored Ms Broomes during the tour of the agency, Ms Greene insisted that her behaviour was beyond reproach. She claimed that she “suggested to the Junior Minister, in conversational tone” that the remarks she had made during the elections campaign were hurtful to her and the staff of the agency. She said that what occurred would come to light “if a proper inquiry is conducted.” Ms Greene’s tone in her letter was one of belligerence and it gave credence to Ms Lawrence’s description of her behaviour as “grossly unprofessional, constituting insubordination, contemptuous and untenable.” Ms Greene was completely out of order and continues to be.
Ms Greene seems intent on holding herself up as a paragon of public service, but should be reminded that there is more to child protection than talking about it. And perhaps the job she holds requires more of a bleeding heart than a paragon. Ms Greene, who was appointed by Ms Priya Manickchand, the then minister of human services, is the only director the agency has had since it was established by an Act of Parliament in 2009.
Under Ms Greene’s direction, the agency has only partially carried out its mandate as set out in the Childcare and Protection Agency Act. The agency is supposed to oversee the creation of care facilities for vulnerable children, supervise homes and closely monitor adoptions; provide counselling and basic services for children in need of care and protection, including those under special vulnerabilities, like orphans, children infected with or affected by HIV and children with mental or physical disabilities; license and register private care facilities and orphanages and monitor same to ensure their compliance with standards and regulations. It has been roundly criticized for its failure to protect children in several instances, apart from those that would have been mentioned by Minister Broomes.
The agency and Ms Greene were damned by the poignant testimony of Neesa Gopaul’s grandfather in court in February this year, when he tearfully recalled that after a mere 4 weeks in his care, the Child Care and Protection Agency had allowed the now dead teen’s mother to take her and her younger sister back home. The agency had been investigating reports of abuse meted out to Neesa Gopaul, who was later murdered, stuffed in a suitcase and thrown into a creek.
Two years ago, three teenage girls who had run away from a private institution in Berbice, were picked up by the police and kept in custody at the police station for close to a month. They were subsequently charged with wandering. It then emerged that there had been no monitoring of this home and while an inquiry was conducted, the report and recommendations never saw the light of day.
In March 2013, Ms Greene had sought to publicly shame homes and orphanages at a seminar, when she called them out, in the presence of the media, for being rodent-infested, having appallingly unsanitary conditions and having their food stored improperly. What she did at the same time, however, was to reveal her own limitations since careful monitoring of these homes by her agency should have seen these shortcomings corrected. This is not to say that the agency has not helped children, it has. But it has been found sorely wanting in several cases.
Sometimes child protection requires putting aside the pen and paper, getting into the trenches and doing right by children as demanded by the situation they are faced with. This, unfortunately, has been the exception. It is time for this agency, in fact the entire ministry, to turn the page where children’s rights are concerned.
