Talk:Emma Harrison (businesswoman)/Archives/2013

Page Move

I moved the page from Emma harrison a4e per WP:NAME. If the article is to be developed into more than a resume-type article it seems appropriate to have a correct title for the article. delirious & lost ☯ ^TALK 06:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Allegations Harrison is a "Poverty Pimp"

I think a link to web resources which allow participants of Ian Duncan Smith's apparent 'slave labour' training courses to describe their criticisms (such as <http://www.workprogramme.gb.net/poor/a4e> ) would be useful to the general public who are trying to read around the subject of this lady's business, particularly taxpayers who are a) paying for the scheme and b) who face being displaced from their own jobs by unpaid 'trainees'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.235.34 (talk) 00:32, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Whitewash?

You appear to be misrepresenting A4e press releases as fact. According to your entry, Emma herself started the investigation into fraud by her employees - you cite a BBC source, but this states that A4e told them they instigated the investigation (they would, wouldn't they?). Is it actually true? According to the Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9099338/MP-requests-Serious-Fraud-Office-investigation-into-A4e.html),it was an MP (Fiona MacTagart: Slough) who contacted the Serious Fraud Office and reported the matter. The article should be edited to reflect this independent and impartial source, rather than citing what the BBC appear to have read on the A4e website. Harrison only set up an inquiry into a subcontractor AFTER she'd been reported herself. The way the matter is currently presented is very, very misleading.

I've revised the article to reflect what the Telegraph reports. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Fined for Data Protection Act Breaches

Are there any precedents for a firm who have already been fined £60,000 by the ICO for failing to protect the personal data of trainees ever being awarded another government contract to help 'vulnerable people' like the mentally handicapped? Source of information is the Information Commissioner's Office itself(<http://topnews.co.uk/217222-ico-slaps-hertfordshire-council-and-a4e-hefty-fines>). It seems relevant to include this information - particularly as she is being held up as a female exemplar to the business community, and has been awarded a CBE.80.42.235.34 (talk) 00:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)BarbaraCastle80.42.235.34 (talk) 00:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but 'Freedom' is unlikely to be considered a reliable source for this - see WP:RS. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

You misread my post: anyway, here is a link from the ICO office itself: <http://www.ico.gov.uk/~/media/documents/pressreleases/2010/first_monetary_penalties_press_release_24112010.ashx>.80.42.235.34 (talk) 01:01, 24 February 2012 (UTC)BarbaraCartland01:01, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Evidence of Fraud

Would this be an appropriate place for former trainees to cite actual acts of fraud which this lady and her company are being accused of committing? There are several blogs online, but none which allows former slave labourers to cite example 'fiddles' which they have been told or encouraged to practice, to help this lady accumulate her massive wealth and a CBE. Few members of the public who have not been forced onto these 'workfare' schemes actually understand what it is like to be told to forge a CV entry, or get your benefits cut off and risk eviction - background examples might help them understand why she has become such a hated figure, even amongst JobCentre staff.80.42.235.34 (talk) 00:04, 24 February 2012 (UTC)BarbaraCastle80.42.235.34 (talk) 00:04, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely not - this isn't a blog. This talk page is for discussions relating to article content, and we have to rely on published reliable sources for this. Anything not relevant to our article may be deleted - and unsourced allegations of fraud etc will be. See WP:NOTFORUM for our policy on this. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

'This lady' has not been accused of any wrong doing whatsoever, I am currently editing this BLP as it is so undue.82.31.236.245 (talk) 14:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

'This lady' has been accused of many things - see the sources cited in the article. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:06, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Accusations and allegations are not proof of wrong-doing and have no place in a BLP, cite me one source that alleges that Harrison has been investigated, charged or convicted of any crime and we can add it. 82.31.236.245 (talk) 15:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

She resigns

From the BBC:

Emma Harrison has stepped down as chairman of her welfare-to-work firm A4e, she has said in a statement.

It comes a day after she quit her role as the government's 'family champion' amid a police probe into irregularities at the Slough-based company.

Time for an update? 93.167.82.216 (talk) 18:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Reasons for A4e closing operations in Germany

A4e were, according to a blog written by Emma Harrison, highly successful in several EU countries, yet appears to have closed down its German operation before the UK fraud allegations were made:do any of the media stories indicate the fraud allegations include operations overseas? The firm appear to be beneficiaries of the EU Social Fund, I wondered if these were involved in the Police investigations?79.70.229.1 (talk) 18:16, 26 February 2012 (UTC)twl79.70.229.1 (talk) 18:16, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Attempting to Tie In Harrison to Allegations of fraud is not on.

Attempting to tie in Harrison to fraud is completely unacceptable, I'll re-write the section to reflect that.82.31.236.245 (talk) 15:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Please base your rewrite on reliable sources - and note that several newspapers have explicitly linked Harrison's resignation with fraud allegations. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

You mean like this: In February 2012 it was revealed that Harrison was paid a £8.6 million shares dividend in 2011, in addition to her £365,000 annual salary, with the majority of this funded by the taxpayer.' The cite makes no mention of any of that at all instead refers to the fraud allegations against four former employees.82.31.236.245 (talk) 15:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

How does that relate to allegations of fraud? It doesn't, and we don't say that it does. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

It's an example of incorrect cites and the fraud allegations are NOT against Harrison but former employees and as such have no place in her BLP.82.31.236.245 (talk) 15:23, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

That is nonsense. It is correctly cited for what it states. And by the way, the police have made it clear that not all their investigations concern these particular individuals anyway. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

And those cites do not state anywhere that Harrison has committed a crime, in fact anything to do with A4E belongs on the A4E page and not in her BLP.82.31.236.245 (talk) 15:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Our article does not state that Harrison has committed a crime either. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

You mean wiki's article of course, but editors have made allegations and cited to material that doesn't reflect what was actually written about her. As I have stated in a different talk section any allegations of fraud by ex-A$E employees belongs on the A4E page not in someone else's BLP unless they themselves are directly connected.Twobells (talk) 15:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The sources we cite clearly link Harrison's resignation with the fraud allegations. They don't suggest that Harrison was involved in fraud, and neither does our article. The police are apparently still investigating, and it is clearly wrong to take unsubstantiated assertions by A4E that the only persons involved are 'former employees' as fact. We don't know one way or another. (And of course I mean Wikipedia's article - what else could I mean?) AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:57, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

And the second paragraph clearly states that, it doesn't need it's own section for something not directly connected to the person concerned, again Harrison has not been investigated, charged or found guilty of anything nor has any rep source even alleged that she has, anything more is undue weight and insinuation. With respect anything else belongs (as I wrote previously) on the A4E page. ATwobells (talk) 16:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Removal of all A4E allegations from BLP

Any criticisms of A4E and fraud by ex-employees belong on the A4E article not in the BLP a an ex-chairman. I suggest that the only mention is of her resignation and the reason why, that is neutral. 82.31.236.245 (talk) 15:32, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Given your repeated attempts to spin the article in Harrison's favour, I have to ask - are you connected with her in any way? If so, you should probably read WP:COI. In any case, I'd strongly advise you to stop editing the article, and instead discuss revisions on this talk page - you have probably already violated WP:3RR and are in danger of being blocked from editing. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:34, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Your ideological bias is showing, I have no interest in Harrison one way or the other but was shocked and dismayed at the article's utter disregard for NPOV. The reality is that anything to do with A4E fraud belongs on A4E's wiki page, Harrison has been accused of no crime and from what I can gather not even an substantiated allegation of wrong-doing. The details of her resignation including cites are already right at the top of the article in the second paragraph, anything more is just undue weight.Twobells (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Please read WP:CIVIL. And how can we make clear why she resigned without referring to the allegations concerning the company she was chair of at the time? Harrison's notability relates to A4E, she resigned as a result of these allegations. This is going to be a rather strange article if we don't explain it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The second paragraph makes it quite clear that she resigned as a result of two issues, investigations of fraud by former employees and the dividends she received as chairman. BTW please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Central_aspects_of_BLP this is core BLP stuff. Twobells (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it's pretty clear that had there been no controversy she would not have resigned. I think it's fair to say she resigned following the controversies. Harry the Dog WOOF 16:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Given the edit-warring over this article, it is difficult to say anything much regarding a particular paragraph. As for the essay Twobells links, it is exactly that - an essay. And not a particularly useful one, in my opinion. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Well you could add a controversy section but tbh I believe it would be removed as undue weight, remember wikipedia isn't a gossip column however, extreme controversy is allowed in context but it needs to be extremely exceptional. http://encyc.org/wiki/BLP#The_BLP_policy_on_Wikipedia.2C_as_it_exists_today Twobells (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Reporting that the police are investigating a company in relation to allegations of fraud isn't 'gossip'. Neither is pointing out that the subject of our article resigned as a result of these allegations. The only 'gossip' I've seen here that actually relates to article content is the claim that the fraud (if indeed it took place) was confined to 'former employees' - though I'd categorise this as spin rather than gossip. As for encyc.org, what the hell has that got to do with anything? AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that saying "On 24 February 2012, Harrison announced her resignation as Chairman of A4e following the controversy..." is perfectly factual, especially given her statement. It doesn't say that she was involved in any fraud or other wrongdoing. This is her article, not the company's. There is so far no indication that she was personally involved in any wrongdoing, so her BLP should not suggest that. It is covered on A4e's own article. Harry the Dog WOOF 16:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Location of Derbyshire Mansion - Company Asset or Private Dwelling?

Her Derbyshire mansion is here <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thornbridge_Hall_171166_2c9ad802.jpg> - she has some 39 mortgaged properties listed at Companies House - does anyone know if Thornnbridge Hall is listed as part of A4e assets, or is privately owned? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.223.243 (talk) 17:26, 2 March 2012 (UTC)