TO put it bluntly, Peter Mullen is a cantankerous old curmudgeon who is stuck somewhere in the Edwardian era when the sun always shone, there were no mobile phones and the lower classes knew their place.

It is a therefore a surprise and delight to read his column this week (Echo, May 31), in which Rev Mullen is sickened by the latest turn of events in the Sharon Shoesmith saga.

Fighting her dismissal after the appalling murder of Baby P, the tot supposedly in the care of Haringey’s social services, the former director showed no contrition or shame.

The Children Act 2004 says that two departmental heads in each area should be held responsible for failure of the care of children. These are the Director of Children’s Services (DCS) and the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services (CMCS).

Following Baby P’s death, councillor Liz Santry, the CMCS, resigned; Mrs Shoesmith, the DCS, did not.

The recent court ruling on Mrs Shoesmith’s dismissal accepted completely the damning report into the failures of her department, but held her dismissal had suffered certain procedural lapses. Nowhere does the judgement suggest she should keep her job.

Shoesmith’s triumphalism on the steps of the court following the judgement is, as Rev Mullen says, nauseating.

I am reminded of the resignation of Lord Carrington way back in 1982. The then- Foreign Secretary, a true gent, when asked why he had resigned following the invasion of the Falklands, replied: “Well you can’t go on as though nothing has happened.” These are words Mrs Shoesmith might consider.

Rob Meggs, Hartlepool.

COLIN MORTIMER seems to be more concerned about who ought to be pilloried than the fact that in Haringey Baby P was killed at home in spite of many visits by professionals.

I agree with his impression of Ed Balls who, when I see him interviewed, gives me the impression of a man who is arrogant in the extreme.

Obviously, mistakes were made. Judgements made by professionals were wrong and procedures were deficient. It seems to me that Mrs Shoesmith lacked the leadership qualities she should have had as the holder of the post she had.

Clearly, it must be right in some instances for a child to be taken into care, but from what I have seen of untutored opinions of what social workers do they can be condemned whatever they decide.

When there has been an untoward incident there needs to be a full inquiry. Lessons need to be learned and heeded.

But whenever there is another incident, there is a lynch mob standing ready to be stirred up by irresponsible journalists.

I marvel that people still want to take up the post of social worker.

It does not help that sometimes politicians, who are mainly concerned with reelection, will act in a manner which they think will make them popular; rather than do the right thing after mature consideration.

Geoff Bulmer, Billingham.