Children's charity attacks Tory leader's CRB comment
Cub Reporter
By Tania Mason
Charity Finance, UK: 8 October 2008
http://www.charityfinance.co.uk/home/content.php?id=2290
A children's charity has condemned a comment by Conservative leader
David Cameron that adults hosting youngsters on exchange visits should
not always have to undergo enhanced criminal records checks.
In his speech to the Conservative Party conference last week, Cameron
criticised the requirement for all hosts to be cleared through
enhanced CRB checks. The clip was broadcast on national television.
Cameron said the problem with the country was not Gordon Brown, but
Labour.
"They end up treating people like children, with a total lack of trust
in people's common sense and decency," he said. "This attitude, this
whole health and safety, Human Rights Act culture, has infected every
part of our life.
"Even foreign exchanges for students... you can't host a school
exchange any more without parents going through an enhanced Criminal
Records Bureau check."
==== 'Populist misuse of his position' ====
Jan Cosgrove, national secretary of the children's charity Fair Play
for Children, which was established in 1972 after two eight-year-olds
drowned for lack of safe playspace, accused Cameron of a "populist
misuse of his position".
"I know it is becoming fashionable in some ideologically-motivated
quarters to try to equate criminal records checks with some form of
alleged 'politically-correct' philosophy," she said. "If the leader of
the Conservative Party actually believes this, he is far off the mark.
"The CRB and now the new Vetting and Barring Scheme arose from actual
tragedies, involving the deaths of children. His party has given
support to this progress. Cameron needs to correct the appalling
endorsement he gave to the attacks on the CRB mounted in some media
and ideological quarters."
==== Action for Children 'supports checks' ====
Action for Children, meanwhile, made no specific reference to the Tory
leader, but confirmed its backing for exchange visit hosts to be
screened. Shaun Kelly, the charity's safeguarding manager, said:
"What we know of people who offend against children is that they often
seek roles which give access to this group.
"Services like exchange visits which involve children being away from
home and their usual support mechanisms, can make them more
vulnerable. In these circumstances, we support enhanced CRB checks as
they offer some level of screening of potential hosts."
==== New system for Scotland ====
Meanwhile, the Scottish government is proposing to scrap mulitple
criminal records checks and create one Protection of Vulnerable Groups
register.
The scheme will enable records to be updated automatically when
someone's circumstances changes, for example if they are convicted of
a crime.
The new streamlined system is intended to attract more people to
volunteering or working with children, by encouraging those currently
put off by the drawn-out checking process.
Simon Dean
> CHILDREN'S CHARITY ATTACKS TORY LEADER'S CRB COMMENT
> By Tania Mason
>
> Charity Finance, UK: 8 October 2008
> http://www.charityfinance.co.uk/home/content.php?id=2290
>
> A children's charity has condemned a comment by Conservative leader
> David Cameron that adults hosting youngsters on exchange visits should
> not always have to undergo enhanced criminal records checks.
>
> In his speech to the Conservative Party conference last week, Cameron
> criticised the requirement for all hosts to be cleared through
> enhanced CRB checks. The clip was broadcast on national television.
>
> Cameron said the problem with the country was not Gordon Brown, but
> Labour.
>
> "They end up treating people like children, with a total lack of trust
> in people's common sense and decency," he said. "This attitude, this
> whole health and safety, Human Rights Act culture, has infected every
> part of our life.
>
> "Even foreign exchanges for students... you can't host a school
> exchange any more without parents going through an enhanced Criminal
> Records Bureau check."
>
Surely CRB checks for this type of thing is nonsense. I mean, if the
parents really are a danger (and the potential for danger can't be
gathered from a CRB check if the crime hasn't been committed yet), then
surely the parents shouldn't even be looking after their own kids???
NOSP...@gmail.com
wrote:
Just a thought after seeing another post on here about employing young
folk..do employers need to get CRB checks if they employ someone under
18? ...and if not why not ? ( not that I'm advocating it )
Fred
Shouldnt all would be parents be crb checked before conception takes
place?
Retired
"Cub Reporter" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:556qe4p3q54sq5lt2...@4ax.com...
"Exchange Visit"
This implies that the UK child goes to stay with a family abroad (my
children both went to France and Germany)
Will the parents in France and Germany also be checked?
If not, why should the French or German child be "safer" than the British
child?
And who is responsible if something happens to the British child whilst
abroad?
B.
Webmanager_CritEst
> CHILDREN'S CHARITY ATTACKS TORY LEADER'S CRB COMMENT
> By Tania Mason
>
Indeed they did 'arise' from a couple (ignoring hundreds of others). I
have to say, Ms Cosgrove is quite wise, when she says:
"I know it is becoming fashionable in some ideologically-motivated
quarters to try to equate criminal records checks with some form of
alleged 'politically-correct' philosophy,""
... but, she is only partially correct ... it is much less justifiable
than that.
Of course, Cameron is a twat and fraud, too:
"This attitude, this whole health and safety, Human Rights Act
culture, has infected every part of our life."
.. he (and his party) has supported continuous infringements of HRs
throughout his career.
WM
Webmanager_CritEst
Yes, if their studies or responsibilities demand it.
WM
NOSP...@gmail.com
What does that mean ?
Alasdair
wrote:
>Surely CRB checks for this type of thing is nonsense. I mean, if the
>parents really are a danger (and the potential for danger can't be
>gathered from a CRB check if the crime hasn't been committed yet), then
>surely the parents shouldn't even be looking after their own kids???
Apparently Enhanced CRB checks include police gossip (they call it
intelligence) as well as hard facts.
--
Alasdair.
Webmanager_CritEst
Well, if they are on a college course which includes such contact or
if working in a job with such contact.
Age is no indicator of abusive potential.
WM
NOSP...@gmail.com
Not clear what you mean but a young person working in a shop with only
the owner there alongside, is in as much if not more contact than a
teacher in a school with a young person of same age so does that
employer need to get CRB checked? . Can you quote a source if this is
so .?
MM
wrote:
>Jan Cosgrove, national secretary of the children's charity Fair Play
>for Children, which was established in 1972 after two eight-year-olds
>drowned for lack of safe playspace, accused Cameron of a "populist
>misuse of his position".
She can bleat away until the rest of the sheep come home, but the
Tories WILL address the Nanny State, big time. Oh, her meal ticket is
under threat? Oh, dearie me.
MM
IanAl
Dream on. You should know by now, whoever you vote for, the government
always wins.
Alasdair
>She can bleat away until the rest of the sheep come home, but the
>Tories WILL address the Nanny State, big time. Oh, her meal ticket is
>under threat? Oh, dearie me.
>
>MM
Once theTories come into power, is there any evidence that they will
address the nanny state? It takes a lot of effort and parliamentary
time to repeal all the nanny state legislation which NuLab have put in
place durign their long reign.
--
Alasdair.
Gaz
That will be Labour Councillor "jan consgrove"?
Gaz
JNugent
And shouldn't all the neighbours be checked as well, just in case the kid
goes after a ball accidentally kicked over the fence? Or is invited round for
coffee?
MM
wrote:
David Cameron promised as much in the Tory Conference and he, Dominic
Grieve and others have passed frequent comments about the burdensome
and petty red tape that hogties British society.
Yes, I believe the Tories WILL do something to curtail the nanny
state, not least by sacking thousands of social workers and their
acolytes in the quangos so that the council tax freeze can be
implemented.
MM
Webmanager_CritEst
I meant exactly what I said.
If someone is in FE, (whatever their ages), studying health care,
education etc they will CRB checked This is also true for HE.
The same is true, if they are actually carrying out that job, but,
obviously this, 'caps the minimum age'.
Your best guidance, for the future, is here:
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2006/ukpga_20060047_en_1
Welcome to the Independent Safeguarding Authority
http://www.isa-gov.org.uk/
*****
Regulated and controlled activities
The Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 contains the legislation
to create
the new Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) and enact the Vetting
and
Barring Scheme. This factsheet explains the terms ‘regulated’ and
‘controlled’
activities used in the Act that will be introduced when the new ISA is
phased in.
………………………………………………………………………………………………
What is a ‘regulated activity’?
• Any activity of a specified nature that
involves contact with children or vulnerable
adults frequently, intensively and/or
overnight. (Such activities include teaching,
training, care, supervision, advice, treatment
and transportation.)
• Any activity allowing contact with children or
vulnerable adults that is in a specified place
frequently or intensively. (Such places include
schools and care homes.)
• Fostering and childcare.
• Any activity that involves people in certain
defined positions of responsibility. (Such
positions include school governor, director of
social services and trustee of certain charities.)
‘Regulated activity’ is when the activity is frequent
(once a month or more) or ‘intensive’ (takes place
on three or more days in a 30-day period).
How does ‘regulated activity’ work?
• Anyone providing a regulated activity must be
registered with the ISA.
• It will be a criminal offence, punishable by up to
five years in prison, for a barred individual to
take part in a regulated activity for any length of
time.
• It will be a criminal offence for an employer
to take on an individual in regulated activity
if they fail to check that person’s status.
• It will be a criminal offence for an employer to
allow a barred individual, or an individual who
is not yet registered with the ISA, to work for
any length of time in any regulated activity.
What does this mean for domestic
employees, e.g. private tutors and
care workers?
• It will be an offence for a barred individual to
take part in any regulated activity in domestic
circumstances.
• Domestic employers do not have to check an
individual they wish to employ – such as a
home tutor, nanny or carer – but the new
scheme will give them the opportunity to check
the status of an individual (with his/her
consent) if they wish to do so.
What is a ‘controlled activity’?
• Frequent or intensive support work in general
health settings, the NHS and further education.
(Such work includes cleaners, caretakers, shop
workers, catering staff, car park attendants and
receptionists.)
• Individuals working for specified organisations
(e.g. a local authority) who have frequent access
to sensitive records about children and
vulnerable adults.
• Support work in adult social care settings.
(Such jobs include day centre cleaners and
those with access to social care records.)
'Controlled activity' is when this type of activity is
'frequent' (once a month or more) or 'intensive'
(takes place on three or more days in a 30-day
period).
How does ‘controlled activity’ work?
• It will be a criminal offence for an employer to
take on an individual in a controlled activity
if they fail to check that individual’s status.
• An employer can permit a barred individual to
work in a controlled activity only if sufficient
safeguards are put in place.
In this factsheet the term ‘employers’ refers to
both employers and managers of volunteers. The
term ‘employees’ refers to both paid and unpaid
(volunteer) work/activities.
October 2007
Regulated and controlled activities (page 2)
Bar applies
(Duty on individual)
Individual must
be checked
(Duty on employers)
Barred individual
can be employed
Regulated activities
Employment and
volunteer settings
Regulated activities
Domestic employment
settings
Controlled activities
Employers With safeguards
http://www.isa-gov.org.uk/PDF/283896_ISA_A4_FactSheetNo3.pdf
*****
What exactly do you want me to source?
WM
Webmanager_CritEst
BTW, in your shopkeeper case, that is unlikely to be a 'Regulated
Position' ... it may be 'Controlled' .... but, never say, "never".
WM
Simon Dean
I presume all private hire drivers and bus drivers are checked too? I
presume anybody who works in a shop, or even in Burger King and places
like. There's danger everywhere.