EDUCATION minister Martin Ozanne ‘misled’ people over the state of Le Rondin building. Former head Jane Stephens told an employment tribunal yesterday that he had repeatedly said that the school had been completed on time and within budget and was fit for purpose.

‘He has perversely misrepresented the condition of the Le Rondin building and he continued to do it here,’ she said.

Mrs Stephens’s comments were made during her closing statement on the 17th and final day of the hearing at which she claims the department sacked her unfairly in January last year.

‘What evidence did the minister have to confirm my suspension and dismissal? None at all.’

Deputy Ozanne’s claims that only ‘minor snagging’ was required had been proved false by the testimony of others at the hearing, she said,

‘When Le Rondin opened on 8 September 2005, it was understaffed, underresourced and unsafe.’

And she added that Deputy Hunter Adam, by failing to declare his family’s friendship with educational psychologist Sheila Hayward, had compromised his vote at the meeting at which he had supported Mrs Stephens’s dismissal. She had previously made a formal complaint against Mrs Hayward.

‘Mrs Hayward encouraged parents to make complaints against me and was the source of much of the gossip and misrepresentation that the management acted on.’

Mrs Stephens ‘absolutely refuted’ an allegation that special needs schools project director Yvonne Hodder had left the service because of her. She said Mrs Hodder had threatened her with action by the director ‘Derek Neale’ if she did not leave her post as head at Mont Varouf and move to the project team.

Mrs Stephens said Oakvale head Alan Brown had no documentary evidence to back up his claim that she would not let the nurse from Le Rondin work at his school. Mrs Stephens said she had evidence to prove that the opposite was true, and she had tried to help him.

Mrs Stephens added that she had done nothing to damage the education service and had tried only to improve it.

Crown Advocate Richard McMahon took more than three hours to read his closing statement on behalf of the department.

He said that a lot of what Mrs Stephens had said in her opening statement related to law that was not applicable in Guernsey.

‘This is an unusual case and I would not for one minute suggest otherwise,’ he said.

The majority of cases which previous employment tribunals had dealt with had involved issues of misconduct, redundancy and, occasionally, capability.

Mrs Stephens’s case involved none of those, therefore any guidance relating to disciplinary or capability matters was not applicable.

Events that had happened after her dismissal could not have affected the process that had led to the decision.

Advocate McMahon accepted that references to procedural matters would be part of the panel’s consideration if it chose to proceed that far.

Panel chairman Peter Woodward said a decision would not be made for at least four to six weeks.