More vetting required for adult volunteeers

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Postie, Sep 11, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Not sure if this has been covered elsewhere but the nanny state has now just gone too far. I've been listening to radio 4 and it seems that from next year peopie who volunteer to drive kids to and from clubs will also need a vetting check if they do it regularly - which is apparently once a month!!

    madness - all adults are now criminals by default and I as a parent can no longer exercise my own judgement about who I consider suitable to transport my kids. Dear God why not just take eveyone's children away on the off chance we are all paedos.

    Apparently it is all OK though because it is only a one off check that will last forever - which in my view makes it pointless and an uneccessary expense that will in fact have no value.

    The Daily Mail is not normally right but I think their concerns are quite right.
  2. Havent read the article. But this is redolent of "ticks in boxes". After the tick is in the box, if things go awry, the system can be blamed and everyone involved can be held non accountable.
  3. someone has to pay for every CRB check,it makes money fior the Government,
    if you can be bothered to troll through the accounts just released CRB accounts here
    they seem to pay good wages as welll :wink:
  4. It seems a little ludicrous that they protect the identity of convicted sex offenders and then criminalise lawful members of society.

    I shall continue to transport my childrens friends to scouts, swimming pools etc because when I am absent on duty, they return the favour.
  5. Two things struck me from today’s interview.

    Firstly it was stated that the checks would be “free”. Wrong! It will take someone’s time to process the checks, and that person will be paid by the taxpayer. I have a lot to do with FoI requests at the moment & the amount of management time spent on them can cost more than the amount being questioned.

    Secondly Humphreys had the spokesman wriggling like a worm with the following exchange:

    JH: So the government is now going to decide who is fit to be with children? (or words to that effect)

    Spokesman: No, the body will be independent.

    JH: But who appoints the body?

    Spokesman: The chairman of the body will appoint the members.

    JH: Who appoints the chairman?

    Spokesman: The chairman will be independent.

    JH: Yes, but who appoints him?

    Spokesman (after some hum-ing & haw-ing): Ministers.

    Had to rush for my train at that point, but as usual I was not surprised. I’m increasingly worried by the control that the Government is trying to put on our children with the Early Years syllabus, encouraging them to inform on parents on “elf ‘n’ safety” or environmental issues & now this which could be used to ensure that no-one off-message can have access to kids.
  6. All this will achieve is a reduction in the amount of people prepared to put time and effort into activities for kids.
    They were talking about quarter of the adult population having to be vetted on the radio this morning, at a cost of £64 a head.
    The presumption of innocence has long gone in this country, now we must be suspicious of everyone and everyone must prove their innocence in a advance.
  7. Unfortunately InVinoVeritas, the criminal seems to be alot more protected than the victim in this country now days with new identities, nice wings in Butlins, sorry prison and so on.

    My old man coaches rugby for my little brothers team and has been subject to these type of checks for years, back to 16 years ago when he was coaching my football team. The difference in that time is unbelieavable now though, he says the authorities have produced an almost fear climate where by at rugby training he just lightly pushed two of the lads along (not a shove, just helped them along) and another coach, without meeting him I'd say would be a wet spineless type said 'Ooh you can't touch them like that'.
    Therefore they've created something where there seems to be no difference between touching in an inappropriate sense, and touching them full stop.
  8. I am all for restrictions and safe guards. I am actually, in my views on security and law and order fairly right wing. BUT, this for me is the same as the National ID cards scheme. It will cost a fortune, and provide us with no benefit at all. I can not see any positive points to this scheme at all. In fact, if anything, it might give us false assurances.

    MrsBazzinho "Darling, you know the guy taking ladyminime to school is covered in blood and carrying an axe and three dismembered heads?"

    Bazzinho "Thats okay darling, he had a government certificate to prove he is safe with kids, so I didn't ask about the other stuff"
  9. Based on your time in prison learning how easy / hard it is?
  10. It is also nice to see that other comments, unproved accusations or basic rumour mongering supplied can now be taken into account by those involved in this database too. As has been said earlier we are now guilty by default it seems, and have to pay to be declared innocent by a Goverment that seems to be hell bent on recreating the days of the Stasi. In fact with this I think we are virtually there.

    Shortly people will no longer volunteer, and why should they when it will cost 64 quid ??
  11. I am raging that I can no longer privately agree to take a friend's child every week to a club without the check or face a £5000 fine. Madness, parents have now totally lost their ability to decide who looks after their children - arrrrgh.

    Children will now have it confirmed that all adults are dangerous unless they have a certificate that is useless once issued.

    edited for mong typing.
  12. Utter madness. I can understand this check for adults that WORK with children or around children for long periods(Paid work i mean... I.e. teachers / caretakers). But they rest is madness...

    Whatever next... Age aparteid? Adults not being allowed on the same bus as kids... or on the same street?

    I don't see the job of government as trying to mitigate every conceivable risk.

    This government gets more Orwellian by the week.
  13. Not personal - had mates that have been in who have been fine.

    Point being - look at Bulger's killers - cost the tax payers millions giving them new identities, housing them, keeping them hidden etc.
  14. Right.

    Just checked the detail of the scheme, and the plan is it will work like this:

    You pay a one-off charge of £64 (as a registration fee) unless you are an unpaid volunteer.
    It only applies to organised activities - so not just taking kids to schools / scouts / swimming baths.
    Once you are registered there is an immediate check of your suitability against police records and "soft intelligence" (i.e. the type of intel they had on Huntley).
    Because you are registered, if any new information comes in they can then bar you from working with kids from that point.
    If you don't register, then you can be imprisoned etc.

    That all sounds reasonable and laudable, except for:

    1) Oh good, a centralised government ran collection of personal data and highly sensitive data that if it is incorrect OR if it gets out could absolutely ruin your life more than almost any other data
    2) Reliant on a bunch of civil servants with all of their usual abilities to completely and utterly fcuk up everything they touch
    3) Who the hell will vet that the information is correct? And what is the extent and weightin on the soft intelligence? How long before the body responsibile decide that they need to also have financial information? Or web access information / web sites visited? How do you appeal against or get copies of your information?
    4) Who is to say that the information is up to date? As per my previous post, it wont stop people who have never been convicted / questioned / caught from hurting a child and getting away with it.
    5) The costs of this scheme and running this agency will SPIRAL out of control. CSA anyone? NOMS? NPfIT? etc. etc. etc.
  15. Nah mate - that is the wrong point. It is not supported by this instance fella. You are talking about being easy on criminals - the above story is about potentially making more of us feel exactly like those criminals. It is actually a very invasive nasty right wing piece of legislation. In fact, if it was applied, it would mean that people like the murderers of Jamie Bulger would be banned from ever volunteering at a kids club.