CCPAS supports Government vetting plans

Last week Balls asked ISA chairman Roger Singleton to report by early December whether or not the balance was right in defining what activities should and should not be covered by the scheme.

Ministers and charities have strongly criticised the vetting scheme, which would affect adults who drive their children's friends to clubs or events on a formal basis.

David Pearson, Chief Executive of CCPAS, said he agreed with Mr Balls when he said there had been some "inaccurate and misleading reports about the operation of the new arrangements".

"What is important now is that the Singleton Review does not provide some sort of fig leaf, or excuse, which leads to many of the essential and well thought-through reforms encapsulated in the VBS being watered-down or jettisoned," he said.

Mr Pearson said any difficulty with the scheme lay in its complexity and could be easily overcome if the government provided clearer and more concise information on how it works.

"Most people currently do not understand how it will work, so some individuals and organisations are using the confusion to advance their own agendas by fermenting a kind of ‘moral panic’ amongst media and commentators," he said.

“In all of the misinformation a number of key issues have been ignored. Much emphasis has been laid on children’s work, and especially in parents transporting children to sporting events, for example.

"But the fact is that private arrangements between parents are not covered under the scope of the scheme, so parents in this position have absolutely no need to register.”

The VBS is based on the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, which in turn has its roots in the 2004 Bichard Inquiry Report into the Soham murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in August 2002.

The original Bill was debated extensively in both Chambers of the House, where it received cross-party support.

Mr Pearson added: “It is unhelpful and surprising, therefore, that politicians across the spectrum have been so critical and ignorant in relation to what the VBS is.

“By contrast, people need to understand that the scheme will significantly enhance our ability to protect children and those who are vulnerable. Instead of being checked against a number of government lists of those deemed unsuitable for working with children or vulnerable adults, the VBS represents a major improvement.”

CCPAS said the current CRB disclosure was just a "snap shot in time", meaning that if an individual to commit an offence the day after the disclosure is received, an employer would not get to know about this information. Even where employers undertake regular re-checks, these usually take place every three years or so.

Under the VBS, conversely, should an individual commit offences against children or vulnerable adults and be removed from the scheme as a result, then any employer with a legitimate interest in the individual will be informed immediately.

Mr Pearson concluded: “There is no doubt whatsoever that the VBS represents a major step forward in safeguarding children and vulnerable adults. We urge Mr Balls not to be deflected from this important, timely and thoroughly worthwhile reform by a combination of private interest and general ignorance. In particular, the Singleton review must not be allowed to dilute these proposals.”