Parents who ferry children must have anti-paedophile checks

[Invisigoth]

Wtf is happening to the UK? I almost think I'll wake up and it's some giant prank based on 1984.


--------------------------------------------------




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6169054/Parents-who-ferry-children-must-have-anti-paedophile-checks.html

Parents who give lifts to other children from sports and social clubs face prosecution if they fail to register with the Government’s new anti-paedophile database.



Any formal agreement to ferry youngsters to and from the likes of Scouts, dance classes or local football matches, even if only once a month, will fall under the Government’s new Vetting and Barring Scheme.



It means anyone who fails to register and have their backgrounds checked faces a fine of up to £5,000 and a criminal record.



Parents who help children read in class or those who host foreign pupils as part of school exchange trips will also have to be vetted by the new Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) and undergo criminal record checks.
School governors, dentists, pharmacists, prison officers and even dinner ladies are among the huge list of people who will now fall under the scheme, which starts to be rolled out next month and will eventually cover 11.3 million people.
Anyone who is paid for their efforts will also be charged a £64 fee to register, although unpaid volunteers are exempt from paying.
Critics warned the system, the largest database of its kind in the world, is disproportionate and will put people off volunteering or carrying out public duties.
It has been set up in the wake of the Soham murders and is aimed at stopping paedophiles getting access to children or inappropriate people working with vulnerable adults.
It is the first time the true scope has been revealed and will cover even those with the briefest of contact with children.
The Information Commissioner’s Office, the data watchdog, fears such a large database will present a security risk to people’s personal details.
Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: “Children’s safety is paramount but we are in danger of creating a world in which we think every adult who approaches children means to do them harm.
“The creation of the world’s biggest checking system is a disproportionate response to the problem it is trying to solve.”
Chris Grayling, the shadow Home Secretary, added: "We all understand the need for proper protection of our children but this new regime has the potential to be a real disaster for activities involving young people in the UK.
“We are going to drive away volunteers, we'll see clubs and activities close down and we'll end up with more bored young people on our streets.”
Under the scheme anyone in regular contact with children or vulnerable adults in England, Wales and Northern Ireland will have to register with the ISA, a Home Office sponsored body, and have a criminal records check.
It will also cover anyone who can influence those working in such posts, such as the country’s 300,000 school governors.
Parents who make informal agreements among themselves will not have to register.
The Daily Telegraph told earlier this week how the scheme will even take into account lifestyles, relationships and beliefs when assessing an individual’s background.
There is also concern that so-called “soft intelligence” such as unproven allegations will be used in assessments.
Two hundred case workers based at the ISA in Darlington will collect information passed to them by the police, professional bodies and employers and rule on who is barred.
The Home Office anticipates up to 45,000 people will be barred from working with children or vulnerable adults, including some currently in jobs, once the scheme is fully rolled out – compared with around 25,000 currently.
Anyone barred who then tries to work in a sensitive job faces up to five years in prison. Employers knowingly hiring a barred individual face up to six months jail.
The move has already been subject to criticism, including from Philip Pullman, the author, who said the database was "corrosive to healthy social interaction" and has pledged to stop visiting schools to carry out readings in protest.
David Green, director of the think-tank Civitas, warned it may even make employers complacent and rely too much on the system instead doing their own “due diligence”.
A Home Office spokesman said the rules for parents were "a commonsense approach", adding: "The UK already has one of the most advanced systems in the world for carrying out checks on all those who work in positions of trust with children and vulnerable adults.
"Set up in the wake of the Soham murders, the new Vetting and Barring Scheme will, from October this year, ensure these regulations are even more rigorous."

[sheytanelkebir]

paedo-files.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcnQDYnGtS8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRZo8CHsgp8&feature=related

[nemowork]

On the plus side a lot of people who work or volunteer with children are suddenly finding out theyre being eyed up as potential paedophiles and having to provide documented proof that theyre not at about the same time everybody is getting thoroughly sick to the back teeth with expensive Government projects and Government claims of competence and good management.

Basically it sounded good in practice, a lot of people who were incredibly gung ho for this scheme are getting cold feet now theyre seeing how its going to be implemented and theyre already backpedalling fast.

[LineDoggie]

And keeping Pedophiles and Murderers, Drug Dealers away from Children is bad exactly why again?

[Noons86]

I'm all for protecting kids, but can someone say "overkill"?

[void]

And keeping Pedophiles and Murderers, Drug Dealers away from Children is bad exactly why again?

Because there are reasonable levels of caution and there is bat-sh*t crazy levels of paranoia, this proposed scheme falls squarely in the latter. "Think of the children" cannot be used to justify arbitrary laws, as you seem to be proposing. There are schools now where parents cannot attend sporting carnival days to support their kids because the schools fear they may be infiltrated by paedophiles (I'm serious). There was a case recently in Brazil where a man was arrested because he kissed his daughter. The whole "guilty until proven innocent" approach to "protecting the children" is stupid. Having to prove youre not a paedophile in order to pick up your kids and maybe your friends kids from Scouts or from sports day is beyind stupid.

When kids are being taught and live in an environment where every adult is considered a potential paedophile, that cant be a good for their psychology.

[CamoDeafie]

And keeping Pedophiles and Murderers, Drug Dealers away from Children is bad exactly why again?
agreed......that said, I am a little worried.....

it doesnt seem to provide a set of criteria other than "criminal" to bar the person........if the criteria for being a criminal is failing to pay a ticket, or being behind in taxes, it can theoretically be used to bar the person from ever being around children.....now this is a mite extreme, but its a government... :roll:

oh yeah. failing to register=automatic barring and criminal record.......:bash:

[MichaelF]

The United Kingdom: Where you go on a Government list if you aren't a child molester...

[nemowork]

And keeping Pedophiles and Murderers, Drug Dealers away from Children is bad exactly why again?

The main problem is that previously schools could get a reference against the Police/Home office list of *** offenders and convicted criminals, obviously like any Government list it had lapses and inaccuracies but it was useable.

Huntley got through because while he had allegations he had no convictions for child abuse, to be effective the new list would have to include all alleged offences which is getting into some very dodgy legal territory.

Theres also some questions being raised about your right to appeal if you ever are put on the list.

So duplicating previous systems at added cost while including basing hiring and firing on rumours and allegations is making people uncomfortable.

[Hollis]

It is already done (similar) in the States. Finally someone figured out that pedos are predators. Often their victims are in the 100's. Volunteer organizations do not check the back grounds normally. That makes it easy for a pedo to be with potential victims.

[XShipRider]

Ah, the mention of women and/or children brings out only the very best in our elected officials. I'd mock the absurdity of this legislation but we in the US will probably follow suit with some level of similar federal check/registry.

[nemowork]

Looks like i was wrong, Huntley WAS convicted and on the *** offenders register and should have been barred from his Caretaker/janitor job.

Unfortunately the offence he committed was done on girls from a seperate school lured into his girlfriends house because they vaguely knew her and not connected to that job.

[hank2222]

so that mean if i ask my helen who lives next to me to pick up my kids from school she has to have that background check just to do that flavor ...that bs.

[Geezah]

The United Kingdom: Where you go on a Government list if you aren't a child molester...

Exactly.

They should do what they do here, and have all ****** predators listed on a database(that is accessible online for all to see) like you would find on the Sheriff's Department website.

Name and shame those that have commited the crime, not those that are law abiding!

[RIPTIDE]

Exactly.

They should do what they do here, and have all ****** predators listed on a database(that is accessible online for all to see) like you would find on the Sheriff's Department website.

Name and shame those that have commited the crime, not those that are law abiding!
I have a better idea...

http://www.surplusandoutdoors.com/images/product/main/ROPE-9MM-ACC258.jpg

[brainplay]

It is already done (similar) in the States. Finally someone figured out that pedos are predators. Often their victims are in the 100's. Volunteer organizations do not check the back grounds normally. That makes it easy for a pedo to be with potential victims.


Oh, errr. Former CPS agent here. I'm going to have to disagree with your statement there. Pedo victims are usually 1 or 2 and a majority of the time related in some way. The Catholic priests make headlines but for the most part they're a minority. Chances of being abducted by one were less than being struck by lightning as well. Extreme minority there but definitely headline worthy. God, the number of false-positive calls on that subject were just crazy (*shakes fist at recent divorced couples).

I just don't get why they don't have a *** offender database that can be searched like we have here. Anyone can do it with a regular computer and here in Texas all school visitors had to have their license run through the machine (finally a use for the magnetic strip) which takes 2 minutes to confirm if on the database.

This is doing is arse backwards and expending more money and resources than necessary. Jeez we all already know how long some background checks can take.

[Hollis]

^^ the stat came from those who where incarcerated into a correctional treatment program. I am not sure what the threshold for being as treatment facility is. Also my memory may be faulty,, no surprise there.

Thanks for the heads up. Oregon has a online search too. Sadly that is sometimes not enough.

A NCIC check may not show what is needed. With our system of plea bargaining, a person can make it through the holes in the system.

[Noons86]

Generally a *** offender registry is better, but its only weakness is that it can't warn people about first-time offenders. This database idea is ridiculous, but I can see the argument that no parent wants their child to be the reason someone was put on the registry.

[INAT]

Wtf is happening to the UK? I almost think I'll wake up and it's some giant prank based on 1984.





It's part of the New World Order legislation.They use the protection of children,terrorism and national security concerns to pass through laws that would have been possibly resisted in the old order.

[Henry's Fork]

Im proabaly far off base and neanderthal sounding.

Second time *** offenders should all be taken out to meet Mr. 9mm to the face. Yet another bunch of useless trash we love to waste resources and millions upon millions on.

[Geezah]

I have a better idea...

http://www.surplusandoutdoors.com/images/product/main/ROPE-9MM-ACC258.jpg

If only it were legal to do so.............

[Kit]

Paedofinder General must be at work again
http://www.youtube.com/v/1yL_U5gSaT0&hl=en&fs=1&

[Bitogno]

One or two years ago in UK a county wanted single male walking in parks to justify why they were walking alone in the park. UK is becoming crasy with anti-paedophile laws, the result is a lot of organisations can't find volunteers to help them with children because it is to hard to be accepted. As a French I am quite suprised because we don't have such laws and it seems there's not more paedophiles histories.

[theholeinthedonut]

Maybe it would be better to start locking away known paedophiles instead of bothering decent people. I still have hope for the time after the last ****ing Hippie has passed away and PC will be out of style once again.

[Lov3ll]

so that mean if i ask my helen who lives next to me to pick up my kids from school she has to have that background check just to do that flavor ...that bs.

No read the article not the headline
"Any formal agreement to ferry youngsters to and from the likes of Scouts, dance classes or local football matches, " it's the first line m8.


Exactly.

They should do what they do here, and have all ****** predators listed on a database(that is accessible online for all to see) like you would find on the Sheriff's Department website.

Name and shame those that have commited the crime, not those that are law abiding!

Agreed but this whole thing looks like just another way for the government to get a bigger list of names, fingerprints etc.
One other problem with this idea was when I believe it was the News of the World had their anti-pedo campaign where they started naming alleged pedophiles a lot of innocent people who might have looked similar got attacked also a few Paediatricians also got attacked, personally I believe it's worth the risk.

[void]

One or two years ago in UK a county wanted single male walking in parks to justify why they were walking alone in the park. UK is becoming crasy with anti-paedophile laws, the result is a lot of organisations can't find volunteers to help them with children because it is to hard to be accepted. As a French I am quite suprised because we don't have such laws and it seems there's not more paedophiles histories.

I think this phenomenon comes about because "think of the children" is a really easy way to score political points. If your opponent wants to introduce such a law, you almost HAVE to support it even if it is stupid, because to do otherwise would be political suicide; just think of the attack ads: "John Smith is weak on paedophiles, how can you vote for him? think of your children!"

This combined with a generally high number of politicians in the UK who think they know better than you whats good for you means that said politicians have no effective opposition to their crazy stupid ideas on certain issues such as this.

[CMNot]

This is not going to pass into legislation.

The uproar has been pretty distinct. Basically, every UK citizen in accordance with that wanted legislation would be a pedophile until proven otherwise. lulz.

[Geezah]

Agreed but this whole thing looks like just another way for the government to get a bigger list of names, fingerprints etc.
One other problem with this idea was when I believe it was the News of the World had their anti-pedo campaign where they started naming alleged pedophiles a lot of innocent people who might have looked similar got attacked also a few Paediatricians also got attacked, personally I believe it's worth the risk.

Actually, I don't think listing those that have not commited a crime is worth the risk.
Why should innocent people be made to get on a friggin database for being law abiding or is it once again that the law abiding suffers due to the actions of a few.

Over here, I can go onto the Greene County Sheriffs website, go to *** offenders, punch in my address, and it will pull up all listed *** offenders in a .5/1/2 mile radius, which ever I choose. It will have their name, address, picture and their offence. To me this is far greater than telling me my neighbour is hasn't commited any crimes.

[brainplay]

Im proabaly far off base and neanderthal sounding.

Second time *** offenders should all be taken out to meet Mr. 9mm to the face. Yet another bunch of useless trash we love to waste resources and millions upon millions on.


You'll first need to define which *** offenders. *** offense can be public lewdness including getting busted for having *** in your car with your girlfriend parked at a local park. Once you weed those out to just the child *** offenders you have to further weed out the predators from the consensual horndogs.

Biggest problem we're seeing right now is more and more underage females engaging in consensual *** with older men. At first I figured this might be the 18yr old senior in HS with his 15yr old sophomore girlfriend. Nope, more and more teens are seeking older guys to get it on. And now with "sexting" on the rise its getting even more complicated. Mind boggling crazy stuff in this world now.. :cantbeli:

Once you weed those out you're down to the real sicko's who are mostly banging their relatives or friend's kid. Majority of which are those with immediate access to the kid. Priest scandal was the exception to that but then you see the kind of immediate access they have which is similar to what I mentioned about the relatives.

The *** stuff was too complicated sometimes. Too much he said she said. Easier to work with assault and violence cases believe it or not.

[nemowork]

Over here, I can go onto the Greene County Sheriffs website, go to *** offenders, punch in my address, and it will pull up all listed *** offenders in a .5/1/2 mile radius, which ever I choose. It will have their name, address, picture and their offence. To me this is far greater than telling me my neighbour is hasn't commited any crimes.

We have one, its not available to the public but schools can apply to check somebody for a criminal record.

Its fairly simple but from what i understand its a bit slow.

The idea of a publicly available register has never got a foothold because of possible human rights laws and the adverse publicity of the News of the Worlds anti-paedophile campaign mentioned above. Hordes of angry...sorry, concerned parents rampaging round the streets and burning down a paedeatricians office kind of made the Government and Police nervous of what might happen.

The big problem for new laws is misunderstanding. People in places of responsibility have been getting overzealous and stopping parents taking photos at schools, water parks and so on. Theres been a lot of those sort of stories, including one where the Police officer responsible for the Chapman/Wells case and catching Ian Huntley was tackled about not taking photos unless he had permission from every other parent whose child was on the pitch.

Add that to the whole fuss about how anti-terrorist legislation for national security is being used by local government to catch fly-tippers, Dole scroungers and people who put their bins out early and the vast cost overuns and people are not happy on the subject.

The government seems to have backed off the idea, theyre in the middle of their scheme to rebrand Gordon Brown as the saviour of western capitalism while the conservatives are drooling asset strippers who'll steal your puppy, they dont want a major stink to derail that.

[Lov3ll]

Actually, I don't think listing those that have not commited a crime is worth the risk.



Was referring to the register been made public.