NO2ID

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles ... myths.html

How public reaction forced Ed Balls to revise child safeguarding scheme

Vetting and barring: a user's guide
Posted: 09 October 2009
writes Corin Williams

The Vetting and Barring Scheme launched this week after a wave of public criticism and occasional hysteria. Corin Williams looks at its workings

The introduction of the Vetting and Barring Scheme (VBS) for people working with children and vulnerable adults should have been relatively straightforward. Drawn up after the Bichard Inquiry into the Soham murders (see panel, right) and having passed through parliamentary scrutiny with relative ease, the system, which launched this week under the control of the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA), promised to close loopholes and improve public protection.

But that failed to take into account hysterical newspaper comment ("pure madness" according to one) after rumours emerged of parents having to be vetted if they gave a lift to their friends' children, while high-profile authors including Philip Pullman threatened to stop school reading tours if they had to register.

...

What is the government doing to clarify how the scheme works to stop more scare stories emerging?

Singleton's review is due to be published in December. "I have the opportunity to clarify how intrusive or not the scheme should be," he says. "Ed Balls asked me to suggest amendments, if necessary, on where the current regulations draw the line on who should be included in the scheme and also on who should be barred.

"We're looking at the wide range of groups and interests that have expressed support and the wide range who have expressed dissent. I am inviting people to elaborate on their concerns, including the readers of Community Care."

...

Roll-out of vetting and barring

Oct 2009
Vetting and Barring System launched, replacing previous barring lists

Dec 2009
Deadline for Sir Roger Singleton's review into the scheme

July 2010
ISA registration scheme for new employees becomes available

Nov 2010
Registration becomes compulsory for all new employees and volunteers in regulated activities

Jan 2011
Phasing-in of scheme for existing employees starts

July 2015
Compulsory registration for everyone working in regulated activities who has not previously undergone a check

Yet they do absolutely nothing about the abuse within the so-called 'care' system whilst removing thousands of children each year in the UK secret family courts for Forced Adoption with complete strangers; sicking

Brian Gerrish 'child stealing by the state'

From the article linked to by the OP:

Much of the criticism seems to stem from perceived vagaries in the original legislation, which states that anyone working "frequently or intensively" with children or vulnerable adults should have to register with the ISA.

They aren't 'perceived' vagaries at all; the legislation is widely drawn:

"Definition of 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.)" [1]

I.e. pretty much anything that involves children or vulnerable adults.

"'Regulated activity’ is when the activity is frequent (once a month or more), ‘intensive’ (takes place on three or more days in a 30-day period) or overnight." [1]

Concerns have also been expressed over whether the "balance of probabilities" civil burden of proof, used by the ISA to assess whether someone poses a risk, could lead to people being barred based on unsubstantiated allegations.

Um... the ISA isn't a court, they won't be concerned about the civil standard of proof. Jebus. The standard of proof referred to here is intended as an analogy, not as a legal mechanism by which someone is properly assessed and, if appropriate, convicted. And no-one will have their day in court in which to provide their side of the story to a neutral and informed decision-maker - I have no doubt that the authorities will err on the side of caution for the sake of the children.

I'm sure there was some over-egging the pudding, but the law is widely drawn; it seems a bit much to expect parents, carers, famous authors etc to hope that aren't required to submit to the scheme.

[1] http://www.crb.homeoffice.gov.uk/faqs/v ... cheme.aspx