Improvement plan not enough to turn around Oakhill STC

This is a remarkable recommendation on its own terms: if public funds are to be handed to multinationals for the care and deprivation of liberty of children who have (or are alleged to have) broken the law, the very least they can be expected to do is run law-abiding institutions. Coming seventeen years after a 15 year-old child, Gareth Myatt, was restrained to the point of unconsciousness, and then died, in another G4S-run secure training centre, it is beyond intolerable. 

A former child in care, Gareth stood less than five feet tall and weighed just six-and-a-half stone. Before he collapsed, he told the three G4S officers forcibly holding him down that he couldn’t breathe; he was told if you can speak, you can breathe. A document was produced at Gareth’s inquest showing that G4S restraint trainers had given themselves nicknames such as Breaker, Mauler, Crusher and Clubber.

An examination of 52 incidents of restraint in that same G4S-run child prison the year before concluded there “were clear signs of potentially lethal events”, 65 per cent of the time. 

When I ran the Children’s Rights Alliance for England, we sought a court order to make the Ministry of Justice go through the records of G4S and Serco and identify those individuals who may have been unlawfully restrained as children. We didn’t succeed in obtaining the order, though the High Court found the two companies had run unlawful restraint regimes for at least a decade. The judge said our charity had “served well the interests of those for whom it is concerned by shining a light into a corner that might otherwise have remained in the dark”. Having abuse acknowledged is only ever the first step; it’s ultimately government ministers upon whom children in custody rely for protection.  

Then there was BBC Panorama’s 2016 exposé of serious child mistreatment in Medway secure training centre, also run by G4S. “[I] properly tried to break his skull” and “I’m just going to hit him. Fact” were among G4S officers’ boasts captured on undercover footage. G4S went on to announce it would sell its children’s business, including the contract for Oakhill. Its former children’s homes are now run by a separate company (G4S’s management went with them). The contract for Oakhill remains with G4S as a subcontractor of STC Milton Keynes Ltd, and lasts until 2029. Yet it has not  received a good inspection report since March 2016 (following an inspection in November 2015). 

As well as unlawful use of force, the latest inspection confirms that G4S has not followed child protection procedures required by statutory guidance. This was among the very serious allegations a whistleblower brought to my charity in September, which we believe led to the inspection. As we await the government’s response to our call for a judge-led inquiry into these latest human rights abuses, we may ask ourselves: if G4S was a family, rather than a private company, would the state be sending vulnerable children to its care? I think not. 

Carolyne Willow is director of children’s rights charity Article 39