I don't think Jill Baker should be made the scapegoat here. The people who are really culpable for failing to protect Demi are the social workers who were directly involved and knew about her situation.

I don't agree with Jill Baker's every decision - notably in regard of St. George's - but the attack upon her personal integrity and competency from a handful of opposition councillors more interested in cynical politicking and opportunistic tub-thumping should be seen for what it is.

I do not blame Baker for the death of Demi and it would be wholly wrong to get rid of one of Salford City Council's best senior officers when stability is much needed and the blame lies with those who knew about Demi but failed to act, and who kept more senior figures who would've intervened (like Baker) in the dark.

It could be argued that Baker should've known about Demi - and it's easy to say that in hindsight - but the reality is that Baker can only operate on the basis of the information she is given (or not given) in any particular instance and she is dependent on the judgement and integrity of social workers at the sharp end.

If I thought Baker should go I'd say so but I really don't. It is the social workers at ground level who knew about but failed to protect Demi who should be out of their jobs.

The social workers are always the first to be blamed, yet if you knew any (I do) you wouldn't believe the huge caseload they have to take on. With the best will in the world, they cannot remember every detail about every family in a city as big as Salford.

What is needed to help social workers do their job is excellent systems, control and management. Childrens Services have failed in their duties - if you look at the criticism in the Serious Case Review you'll see that once Demi was left in the case of Karl McCluney a series of steps were placed in motion that could not be stopped.

If you look at the findings of the Serious Case Review:-
• Delay in relation to service provision
• Lack of clear planning, decision making and application of case analysis
• Missed opportunities based on available information to move the case into child protection processes from the point of Child D’s birth and at several stages throughout her life
• Failure to respond to referrals from close and extended family members and other referrers who wanted to remain anonymous but who had knowledge of Adult A and Child D
• Lack of establishing who was involved with Adult A and had caring responsibilities for Child D
• No cross referencing of or challenge to Adult A’s different explanations of events to different professionals
• No consideration of the impact of Adult A’s lifestyle on Child D’s development
• The focus of the work being on Adult A and not Child D
• No or infrequent access to Adult A’s flat and
• Failure to follow procedures

They are all damning of Childrens Services as a whole, no one individual can be blamed for those failings. Ultimately, Jill Baker and Councillor John Warmisham (Lead Member for Childrens Services) should be held accountable.

Baker should be sacked and Warmisham should be replaced by the Leader of the Council.

I must disagree. I see no case for sacking Baker - and especially so if no action is to be taken against the social workers on the front line!

I'm well aware of the difficulties of social work. The whole system is now built upon such a lot of evil, misguided, politically correct ideology which runs counter to common sense and the best interests of children. Most of the best social workers have been driven out of social work altogether - (and good would-be social workers struggle to get in) - because much good and effective social work has been destroyed by the imposition of perverse PC notions of 'tolerance', 'respect', 'equality' and 'diversity'.

We could have a long and very interesting debate about the state of social work in the UK today and what needs to be done to sort out the mess, but it won't bring back Demi, and neither will sacking Jill Baker.

The call for Baker to go is no more than an opportunistic and cynical stunt from a few opposition councillors who want to make easy capital and make themselves look good by pointing the finger and talking tough.

I note that it is you, Steve Middleton - one of the more vocal Salford Liberal Democrats active on the internet - that is repeating parrot-like the sack Baker mantra on behalf of your puppet-masters.

It really is lamentable how quick Salford's Lib Dem leadership so often is to make knee-jerk [and what it thinks are] populist demands whilst failing to address the real issues, or make a case for its demands backed up by sound evidence and analysis, or offer viable alternatives for the future.

If there is a case against Jill Baker personally which might seriously merit her dismissal - I have yet to hear it.

General criticisms of the whole of Salford's childrens' services - however valid - do not automatically by association render Baker unfit for office.

If the Lib Dems have any specific arguments to make against Baker personally as to why they view her position as untenable then the Lib Dems should make those arguments public.

I remember the time that Norman Owen got into trouble over comments he made about Barbara Spicer at election time. Norman was found to have been in the wrong but was basically let off with a reprimand and no further action was taken against him. But he just never learns the lesson.

Salford Lib Dem calls to sack Baker are more about the Salford Lib Dems mouthing off to get some attention rather than any genuine belief that sacking Baker would be either justice or a significant step towards improvement.

Salford Lib Dems ought to grow up and put forward their detailed and considered recommendations on what now needs to happen to improve child protection in Salford, rather than indulging in the folly of its lynch mob mentality.

I know that we're 'all het up' lately in the wake of the MPs' parliamentary expenses scandal, and I know that there is widespread public scepticism of and antipathy towards local and national government - and much of which is justified - but Jill Baker is no Hazel Blears!

Jill Baker is not a bad apple and nor is she the villain of the piece in the tragic set of circumstances which led to the death of Demi.

If you think otherwise you really should make the case against her personally and say why she should be sacked rather than anyone else.

Going back to the analogy of MPs, I recall how recently you Steve (and other Lib Dems) have lamented on blogs how you've felt unjustly 'tarred with the same brush' as corrupt MPs just because you are also a party political person. With that in mind, may I suggest you and other Salford Lib Dems rethink whether your calls for Baker to be sacked for the failings of others for which she had no personal responsibility (or even for some systemic failures) are proportionate, sensible and warranted - particularly in light of concern for the ongoing welfare of vulnerable children in Salford.

And let me leave you with this... far from improving Children's Services in Salford by sacking Baker, I've no doubt that the forced and untimely departure of Baker would result in chaos and decline. With the exception of her stance on St. George's, Baker has really done a very good job overall for Salford's kids in her time at the top. Salford has many deeply engrained social problems and it would be worse off without Baker - many others who might be in the post would not be nearly as good.

Richard Cravath your a disgrace! You launch into attacks on other politicians on any lame excuse! If its not a rant about YOUR views on how bad the morals are in everyone but for you ! Yes we know if everyone was a radical christian and television was censored to death, nobody outside of marriage ever had sex and women knew their place then we could get rid of all the homosexuals and extradite all the Islamics and the country would be wonderful wouldn't it!

What on earth I am supposed to make of the previous comment I do not know!

I know there is now a growing band of 'muck-spreaders' going about the internet trying to smear me - presumably with the aim of preventing me from becoming the next MP for Salford and Eccles - but I am surprised that you appear to think that I'm any more likely to engage with such nonsense on the Salford Advertiser's website than I am on the various less frequented websites with lower editorial standards which relate to Salford and upon which the 'muck-spreaders' have unsuccessfully attempted to bait me.

Jill Baker should go.
She got to take responsibility for the dept she heads. Her dept fails to protect, the vulnerlble ignores the fact that our teens are "criminalised" for stupid misdemeanors to meet police targets, condones school expulsions for things deemed hardly more than a bit of horseplay. God help the kids of Salford-summers coming and the witch-hunt will be on to get them all off the streets before 6.30pm..its no wonder every kid you talk to hates authority. All going on on Jill Bakers watch!