The repeal of the above legislation passed in 2006 which created the Independant Safeguarding Authority. This act was passed with the intention of having one single authority to vett the backgrounds and approve individuals working with vulnerable groups and children. I would like to see the back of this law for 4 reasons:

1) The vetting procedure only covers formal arrangements, so for example if I wanted to volunteer in a school I'd have to undertake the checks, but if I wanted to help the old lady next door out I would be OK to do this. This is ALL IRRESPECTIVE of my background and if I was a criminal could still expose others to criminal activity.

2) The act duplicates other background checks run by CRB and the local police, all with very wide powers any way, and leads to a consequent duplication cost and risks with data redundancy, difference and inaccuracy.

3) It is far to intrusive, foraying into people private lives which means that THIS INFORMATION CAN BE USED BY THE STATE for purposes other than it's intended use.

4) It is not subject to Judicial control and oversight in the form of Warrants and it does not actually lead to criminals being brought to account, just prevented from working with vulnerable people in a formal context but otherwise PERFECTLY FREE to offend elsewhere.

5) It leads to disrespect for the law and the belief that it is about the states ability to violate peoples privacy rather than the protection of vulnerable people from criminal or otherwise deviant activity.

Why is this idea important?

It would allow the existing checks to be used more effectively, information to be kept local to the people concerned rather than transferred all over the public sector and it would focus the minds of all on the laws true purpose-the protection and prevention of harm to the vulnerable AND the holding of criminals to account as one package as opposed to simple prevention with no criminal accountability and the violation of the legitimate privacy of the citizen.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.