An open letter to the Football Association from NSPCC CEO, Peter Wanless. Dear Mr Dyke, The Adam Johnson case has pulled into sharp focus the way child protection and safeguarding is considered by some football clubs. This is even more worrying when you consider the importance football plays in the lives of many young people and the responsibilities players have as role models. Johnson’s behaviour throughout this sordid affair has been inexcusable and made worse by his not guilty pleas which forced his young victim to suffer the harrowing experience of giving evidence in court. However, the NSPCC’s concern lies not in the behaviour of a single individual – although that is itself horrifying – but in the approach taken by Sunderland Football Club when confronted with a serious child protection issue. We are worried this could be a cultural problem within football as a whole and find it concerning clubs may not see incidents such as these as a child protection issue. This is not only about one rogue player that behaved badly, but a club that seemingly did not have child protection priorities embedded into their culture. It was not equipped to handle these allegations and seemingly did not deal with them appropriately, or indeed seriously. Furthermore, it is concerning if this is being forgotten by a club at the top level of football. We acknowledge the FA’s safeguarding team spoke with Sunderland in April 2015 and confirmed Johnson did not have any roles with the club involving a position of trust with children. However, more broadly they should have considered the impact of this on the club as a whole in relation to its broader responsibilities. But there is no denying, as both a Premier League and England star, he was in the spotlight and a trusted role model to young people. Clubs should be reminded of the high profile their players hold, be aware of their organisational safeguarding responsibilities to young people and be prepared to act decisively. We would like to work with the FA to hammer home the message that this kind of behaviour should not be tolerated at any level and certainly not brushed under the carpet. We look forward to your response and would be happy to meet to discuss working more closely together to ensure your strong measures are embedded into the culture of every club in the country. Yours sincerely, Peter Wanless CEO, NSPCC
And the Mags continue to employ and play someone who made a 13 year old child pregnant. Oh the irony..
Their letter has echoes of the all police forces being systemically racist, some maybe, but not the whole body. I would have thought the NSPCC had bigger fish to fry but to me they are just using this as a way to make more publicity against personalities, no matter how insignificant . Wonder if they wrote to the grand Imam about Muslim attitude to white girls.
Sadly at the end of the day the stark reality is a ' immature sporting celebrity' has created a newsworthy story that has taken the onus and spotlight away from the ongoing endemic and awful systematic child abuse that is rife in all aspects in our society- this tragedy is happening on a daily basis - and it also needs to be addressed
Thanks for sharing that JC. I think we've already clarified that Maggie Byrne, the CEO had taken the hit on that. That being the case, she accepted that the decisions made at that point in time weren't in the best interests of the club, and on that basis, given what has happened since, that she should take the bullet. I don't see the point of view of pushing forward statements by the NSPCC that everyone agrees with. But, it's Good Friday eve. So I don't give a more a monkeys!
That's a pretty disgusting statement. Are you aware that you have just committed libel unless you can produce some tangible proof of your allegation? If you have one shred of proof whatsoever, I implore you to post it so I can forward it to the police. I neither agree nor disagree with the statement. It's pretty vague. He's carefully chosen his words so as not to point the finger at anyone in particular and make it into a generic "child abuse is bad imo" letter. I just thought it was worth a share.
Cardew the **** got his big stick out again I see. If the CEO of the NSPCC was so concerned he wouldn't be taking 50p out of every pound donated for his greedy self. That's why I ****ing despise charities. The directors take the biggest cut. Basically they're corporations that get away with paying tax like Costa Coffee.
A mate of mine worked one summer for a charity in London. Some of the bosses had to go to a meeting outside of London, when there was a train strike. I said they should have hitched, given that every penny they get is supposed to be helping the needy. My mate replied that obviously I was being sarcastic, but more realistically they should have simply changed the date of the meeting. You know what they did? Hired a PRIVATE PLANE. I too am deeply suspicious of charities. As my mate put it "no profits, just huge salaries for the directors".
Well that surprises me not one jot mate. I watched a Dispatches documentary a while back & they reckoned that the average charity takes 70p in every pound donated to pay the directors.
Spot on Billy. I've just e-mailed my mate to ask the name of the charity. "Name & shame" and all that!
I watched a Dispatches documentary a while back & they reckoned that the average charity takes 70p in every pound donated to pay the directors Googled his salary and in 2014 it was 162,000 - I used to have charity donations on monthly direct debit until I found out what the senior execs were making its a piss take
How the **** does he survive on that? I used to have charity direct debits every month. It starts off at £4 & they end up never off the phone trying to get you to up it. In the end I ****ed them all off.
Says the ****er who focuses on criminals who have lived or worked in Sunderland and never seems to have anything to discuss about an actual match ever. Six in a row. Nine without defeat. **** off!
Pass this one on as your obviously our social concience with regards to the child abuse cover ups An open letter to Mr Wanless (nspcc), We would like to work with Parliament (and the establishment) to hammer home the message that this kind of behaviour should not be tolerated at any level and certainly not brushed under the carpet. We look forward to your response and would be happy to meet to discuss working more closely together to ensure your strong measures are embedded into the culture of parliament and the establishment.
Just to confirm what has been said about charities and their chief execs. A close friend lost her husband to cancer some years ago and because of the support and help she got from the MacMillan Foundation she became a helper in the local charity shop. As December approached she and about ten other staff were told that the regional director and wife would be in the NE and a Christmas party would be at Lumley Castle for a medeival night. She declined but later found out that the Director had stayed at the Gosforth Park Hotel and had attended about five other functions over a week or so. All expenses paid and cost no barrier. She gave it up not long after.
This is just not true is it? If the CEO of the NSPCC was so concerned he wouldn't be taking 50p out of every pound donated for his greedy self. It's just not true… John…
