The Southport school’s safeguarding lead said ‘the red tape is frightening’ after a number of services said Axel Rudakubana was not under their remit

On a quiet street in Southport, the sirens of an approaching police car pierced the stillness, a haunting sound that echoed the fears of a community caught off guard by violence. In March 2023, Cheryl Smith, the safeguarding lead at Presfield High School, made a desperate call to Lancashire Constabulary concerning a student who had seemingly vanished from sight. Axel Rudakubana, just 16, had not attended school in almost ten months amid troubling reports from his parents about his mental health. At that moment, Smith was grappling with an alarming reality: “The red tape is frightening,” she lamented, as she faced a maze of bureaucratic barriers that prevented her from ensuring Rudakubana’s safety.

A Fractured System

The story of Rudakubana has shocked a nation and ignited urgent discussions surrounding mental health services and child welfare protocols in the UK. Despite multiple reports of his disturbing behavior—including threats of violence and the purchase of weapons—various agencies claimed he fell outside their jurisdiction. “His case highlights a colossal gap in the safeguarding system,” noted Dr. Linda Patterson, a child welfare expert at the University of Liverpool. “When children are slipping through the cracks, we must question whether our systems are equipped to handle such complexities.”

Smith’s frustrations were compounded by an unyielding bureaucratic framework that left her feeling powerless. According to a report by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), nearly 80% of schools face similar challenges when attempting to reach children who are defined as ‘vulnerable’ but are not officially recognized as being in crisis. This troubling statistic prompted questions concerning the thresholds that determine when agencies step in to act.

Navigating Red Tape

In her call to the police, Smith detailed how every attempt to visit Rudakubana at home was thwarted by his parents, who claimed that his mental health needs prohibited any outside interference. “Every time we try and go over to the house…his mum or dad will come and say because of his mental health needs we can’t see him,” she explained to the police operator. However, when the call handler evaluated the situation, it did not meet the threshold for immediate police intervention, revealing a flaw in the policy that governs how welfare checks are conducted.

• Lack of agency communication: Agencies failed to share critical information about Rudakubana’s troubling behavior.
• Threshold issues: Many responsible organizations did not consider his case a pressing threat.
• Absence of safeguarding coordination: A holistic approach toward multi-agency collaboration was missing.

This issue was highlighted further by Dr. Samuel Lewis, a criminologist, who stated, “Effective safeguarding is often hampered by communication failures and lack of cohesive strategies among service providers.” The cumulative effect of these failures allowed Rudakubana to slip into deeper isolation and danger, culminating in a tragic incident that left three children dead and numerous others injured.

The Path to Violence

In the months leading up to the shooting at a Taylor Swift-themed dance party, it became evident that Rudakubana was descending into a cycle of violence and obsession. Authorities were aware of his past, which included bringing knives to school and having violent fantasies. Reports state that he had amassed a significant arsenal, including knives, machetes, and even components to potentially create the toxin ricin. Such alarming behavior raises critical questions about the monitoring of students with documented histories of aggression.

“Rudakubana’s case is indicative of broader societal issues,” said Dr. Michelle Hartley, a mental health advocate. “When young people display warning signs, we must have the infrastructure in place to act decisively. Every life lost is a stark reminder of what can happen when we fail in our duty of care.”

Failures in Intervention

The inquiry revealed that the tragic culmination of Rudakubana’s trajectory was not merely a failure of one individual or agency but rather a systemic inadequacy. As he continued to slip further from educational and social support, significant behavioral red flags were documented, but action was never taken. On March 21, 2023, after numerous unanswered pleas for help, Smith remarked, “Short of breaking in I don’t know how to see this kid.”

This desperate request exemplified the challenges educators face when trying to protect students, particularly those with complex mental health needs. With Rudakubana’s educational health and care plan effectively ceased by March 2024 and a troubling attendance record of less than 1%, the layers of neglect piled up, spelling disaster.

A Call for Change

The events that unfolded on July 29, 2024, remind us of the urgent need for a revamp in safeguarding procedures. As the inquiry probes deeper into the interactions between Rudakubana and various agencies, a consensus is emerging: it’s time for a transformative shift. Dr. Patterson advocates for a more integrated approach to safeguarding. “We need a dedicated task force that focuses on high-risk youth, facilitating inter-agency cooperation to share vital information promptly.”

With the first phase of the inquiry set to conclude in November, one can only hope that the haunting echoes of this tragedy will serve as a catalyst for systemic changes, ensuring that no child’s cries for help go unheard. In Southport, the scars of violence will linger, but they may also spur a movement towards protecting vulnerable youth from a system fraught with inertia and red tape.

Source: www.liverpoolecho.co.uk