I've just come down from a meeting on the top floor of City Hall where child protection issues were discussed by people involved in youth work. A representative from the Home Office gave a presentation on the Independent Safeguarding Authority.
It was a very professional presentation by someone clearly on top of their brief but it was also clear from the questioning that the sector most effected by the proposals hadn't been properly informed.
If the professionals in this field are confused by these plans how on earth will everyone else be expected to understand them? It would be so much better if the current CRB system was improved, streamlined and simplified before adding an extra layer of bureaucracy to the process.
Extremism taskforce after Woolwich
5 hours ago
Posts
2 comments:
I have also been to various presentations on CRB/ISA, and have been conducting a lively dialogue with the various civil servants who have the unfortunate task of trying to implement this.
Frankly, nobody really understands even how the system is supposed to work, let alone the deeper implications under ECHR6 and ECHR8. Much of the detail is made up "on the hoof" in telephone calls and radio programmes and is contradictory and vague.
To take but one example, if say three parents get together just outside an orchestral rehearsal venue to take their three respective budding under-18 musicians in a car to next month's concert, then ISA probably doesn't apply. But if they were introduced to each other by the "transport liaison" secretary of the orchestra, they probably would.
The preceding paragraph is real; doubtless you can make up countless examples.
But even if this all becomes clear within a year a two, ISA will crumble because of the huge number of appeals resulting from "false-positives": cases where a official in Darlinton, for example, either (i) refuses to accept a not-guilty verdict in a criminal court, or (ii)accepts as cogent anonymous (to the vetee) neighbourhood gossip (passed on by a social worker) or delusional rantings made within a psychiatric hospital (passed on by a nurse).
Ultimately this is going to wind up as ECHR6 test cases, because of the denial of a right to a "fair trial". For example, ISA accepts the outcome of disciplinary hearings with no right to legal representation as "competent body" findings of fact. There may be ECHR8 cases because of disclosures to or from the Family Courts or other forums for discussion of family allegations.
Last week I spoke to an underling at ISA on the phone about this sort of stuff. Frankly, it is obvious that ISA is already dysfunctional and probably dead, and just needs politicians to put it out of its misery, perhaps disguised by a spending cutback or other parliamentary fig-leaf. This would better than waiting for humiliation under EC law.
"the sector most effected"
it'd be good if the mayoral ambassador for youth had a handle on basic english grammar.
Post a Comment