header-logo header-logo

Vetting system review

The head of the independent safeguarding authority is to clarify proposals announced last week for a vetting system for those working with children.

The head of the independent safeguarding authority is to clarify proposals announced last week for a vetting system for those working with children.

Speaking on the BBC Today programme, Sir Roger Singleton said that the system is necessary for the protection of children but agreed that some of the concerns raised over the system were valid.

“It’s quite reasonable for any parent to expect that if their school offers to provide transport… those people have been vetted to the point where there is no known reason why they should not work with children,” he said.

Sir Roger said he was surprised that some of the “legitimate concerns” raised over the scheme had not been voiced previously. Proposals for the scheme had first been set out three years ago in legislation. The introduction of the vetting system follows the recommendations set out in the Bichard inquiry following the Soham murders in 2002.

The NSPCC expressed support for the government’s plans, saying that the current criminal records checks were insufficient as they only revealed those people that had offended previously. The charity did however call on the government to clarify its approach.

“This new scheme must be introduced carefully, in a way that does not inadvertently penalise children, weaken community relationships, or provide parents with a false sense of security. The government must now provide clearer and more detailed information about the scheme and how it will work in practice,” the charity said.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll