Sex offenders banned from schools

Statement by Ruth Kelly

Now this may be a no-brainer, but why was it, prior to the cases that hit the headlines in the past week deemed acceptable for a cautioned (remember, offence admitted) or convicted sex offender to teach in a school, work with children, or vulnerable adults?

Kelly has appointed the former head of Barnado's to chair the committe responsible for administering List 99, whch has to be a bold step forward considering that she outsourced the management of it to PPP/Axa who in turn placed a doctor with no clinical experience of paediatric psychology in charge as part of a DFES cost-cutting exercise, and also, the cynic in me believes, a distance-placing exercise for when the wheel inevitably fell off.

so here we have a List 99 appeals panel headed by a private company's inexperienced doctor allowing appeals such as a teacher with a fixation on young boys in y-fronts to teach only over-14 year olds because he appealed using the Human Rights Act finally being handed over to someone who might actually know what they are doing, but still distanced fromthe department in a "it's not our fault if it goes wrong" kind of way.

With declining standards in schools, city academies failing, the University system discredited and over-burdened, and now 10 convicted sex offenders teaching in schools I have to ask the question: Why does Ruth kelly still have a job?
Again its a no-brainer. BLiar needs her to help back his controversial Education reforms. No doubt if voting wasn't forthcoming, he would have sent one of the 'Whips' to her mystical chapel demanding her resignation.
If I were David Cameron, I'd be demanding her resignation before even hinting I might back the education reforms because there's no way BLiar's getting them through without Tory support.
Shouldn't ALL offenders be banned from teaching kids?
Sex crimes is bad, but would you want your kids being taught by someone with a conviction for fraud or violence?
I wonder if there are any convicted murderers working in schools....
I would think it would depend on the crime and circumstances itself. Would I'ld be bothered if my child's home ec teacher had convicted for criminal damage ten years ago for example? What if another teacher had an unfair conviction for example - an ABH conviction when defending themselves against a sexual or racial attack? I know one person with that last circumstance hoping to train kids in sport.

Going back to Ruth Kelly, I notice that she mentioned that those with child abuse cautions or convictions won't be able to teach kids but what about working with kids such as teaching assistant, caretaker, bursar, etc? Will this also cover those who do private tutoring as well?

Similar threads

Latest Threads