Feeds

back to article Overzealous anti-paedo scheme not dead yet

Volunteers and those working with children will only need to undergo intrusive vetting of their private lives in future if they work in "sensitive posts" or "have intensive contact with children or vulnerable people". That, at least, is the claim made by the Telegraph, in an exclusive on the "demise" of New Labour’s much- …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Anonymous Coward

uselessenglish

Wont someone think of the children. Forget common sense, just look after the kids!

3
2

I don't need a title to reply

I hope that you are joking? If you are not, please answer me, why should the entire population suffer these lunatic processes for the sake of a slight reduction in risk? It is parents' responsibility to look after their children, not mine, and not the Government's. You cannot make life totally safe, this is a foolhardy mission that has been undertaken for far too long.

0
0
FAIL

Am I a threat?

I bought Modern Warfare 2 for the PC yesterday. Quite disappointing single player campaign... Was finished in a little over 5 hours. Far too linear.

Anyway, does that suggest a propensity to shooting up airports? Or is it blowing up airports as the Russians suggest? Or shooting up schools as the Americans suggest(ed after Columbine, Re: Doom).

I guess I should resign, seeing as I'm such a threat to the children at the schools I've worked in for six years.

Fail.

6
1
Happy

WHAT!!!

SHOULD BE STRUNG UP...

No judge, No Jury... just a rope over a branch

everybody knows that anybody that plays MW2 is a just a Pedo in waiting.

6
0
Coat

How about some accurate reporting?

It wasn't just anti-paedo, it also looked at vetting those who worked with vulnerable adults. (Yer granny fiddlers, care home workers nicking pensions etc.)

Whether or not it was a good thing I'll leave for others, but not once did I see any mention of this point, especially as a significant chunk of those who would have had to register would have had to have done so on that basis and that a good 50% of the effort of setting up the scheme was in that direction.

Still, the Telegraph et al managed to avoid that point, so no reason to think that El Reg would bother stooping to that level of accuracy. Not that, you know, you'd have to do anything more strenuous like reading the published guidance documents, or ringing (or emailing!) the Home Office press office...

/mines the one with the list of Manifesto Club members in the pocket...

1
16
Gold badge
FAIL

Inaccurate?

Ok then, explain why justifying it on "Oh noes think of the ${pet_disadvantaged_group}" is any better than "Oh noes think of the children"?

Kneejerk, fundamentally flawed bollocks is still kneejerk, fundamentally flawed bollocks, however you dress it up.

19
0
Silver badge

@durandal

Which bit of "have intensive contact with children or vulnerable people" did you not understand?

If I recall correctly El Reg has always pointed out the vulnerable people angle, maybe you become too excited after the children part and lack concentration to continue.

4
1

This post has been deleted by its author

Bronze badge

You missed another vital detail

The previous government's definition of "vulnerable adult" was vague enough to cover everyone.

If you have worked with people and not been vetted then you have broken the law, thankfully the law is being shelved due to shitness.

3
0
Bronze badge

Chip and tag system

Starting in Jan 1,2012 every immigrant to the UK will need to be chipped and tagged , Aug 2, 2012 every one in the UK will need to be chipped and tagged . Tourist will only need to be chipped if they are from a friendly country .

3
0
Silver badge

Spot the future crim

>as well as interests that might statistically indicate a propensity for future real-life violence

Like being interested in politics means you will ultimately end up being done for expenses fraud, insider dealing, share cons, perjury

15
0
Alert

Stupid Stupid Stupid

I am CRB checked by my company as it is an easy background check.

I am enhanced CRB checked as I am involved with running a Nursery

I am CRB checked as I am a volunteer driver for the local hospital

And yet when I volunteered to assist cooking duties for my son's Scout group camp, I was turned down as I was not CRB checked.

11
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Stupid Stupid Stupid

I am not now, never have been nor ever will be CRB checked. You can bend over if you wish but if I can't take a job because of my stance then I know who'll be losing most. Now if only everybody else thought the same...

6
2
Anonymous Coward

The good point.....

Of VBS was that it was intended to do away with the nonsense of having to be checked for every organisation every year, or so, with a single registration that would then be monitored and kept up to date.

The bad point was that the system was seen as a method of total assurance of a person, want a nanny, check their registration and off you go. Most of the consequences of such a system, fell on deaf ears of those in fear of Bishard. You would have landed up with a system that monitored virtually everybody in the country, so a sane scaling back can only be a good thing, but sadly we live in a world where we still have to have this kind of system.

Mind you the concept will only really work if Police and Court systems are integrated with the process, which they aren't really, and won't be for a while.

BTW - The company I work for automatically does a CRB check on everybody who joins, and very, very few of us work with children or vulnerable adults, and I don't see that changing, it's a risk thing.

0
5
Big Brother

Re : AC

While I can understand a continuing desire to pay the mortgage and buy the weekly shopping, do you really think that this is acceptable? To be CRB checked when you don't require it for your job?

6
0

acceptable?

Well, no. It is an unacceptable intrusion, so who you going to complain to? HR department who thought it up? You boss who wants to be sure no-one with any record works for him? Or you MP who voted on it because he didn't want to be accused of being soft on crime?

1
2
Black Helicopters

Interests?

"interests (such as violent erotic films) that might statistically indicate a propensity for future real-life violence" - statistics from where?

Studies come and go on issues like this. While I don't expect Plod and/or the Government to be smart enough to point that out, I thought El Reg might.

Or has my violent-erotica-addled brain missed something?

2
0
Bronze badge

*Might* statistically indicate, not does, because it's bullshit.

The problem is that these statistics are inevitably biased in some way or other. Example: The much hyped case of a member of the vatican claiming to have seen research proving homosexuality caused child abuse? Here's how it works:

Take 100 people, 50% are gay, the remainder are not. 50% of each of these groups are peados. Okay, now assume we're in a society that frowns on both of those things and thus there is a motive to want to appear non-gay non-peado. 20% of every group are good liars.

Suddenly, the ratio goes 20% gay non-peado, 20% gay peado, 20% non-gay peado, 40% non-gay non-peado.

There is no correlation, we have established in defining the example that gays are no more likely to be peados than non-gays, but purely by society's influence this study reads that gays have a 50% chance to be peados compared to non-gays having a 33% chance. This gets to a vatican official who doesn't understand science and WHAM!

This method of experimental bias exists in any study seeking to prove links between two types of people that society looks down on.

3
0
FAIL

Oh, God, not more of this.

There is just so much wrong with what the VBS is being said to be going to do that it's almost as bad as the original.

"it should also attempt to predict (and exclude) those likely to do so in future. This it would do by collating details of minor crimes committed, as well as interests (such as violent erotic films) that might statistically indicate a propensity for future real-life violence."

So, hasn't anyone told the civil slave drivers, sorry servants, that statistics work very well for huge groups but are abysmal on individuals.

The hairy arsed biker, while he may enlarge a child's vocabulary with words that the parents might object to, might be the one to die protecting that child from the mild clerk who 'just flipped'.

And how are they going to judge my "interests (such as violent erotic films)"? Am I going to have to submit to weekly visits from the DVD police? Will my collection of Hammer Horrors earn me a life long ban from being within the same county as a child, or just a sympathetic look from the examiner?

And how about being a member of the BBFC? _They_ watch all sorts of films, nearly all don't even have a certificate. Hang those perverts.

Who on Earth thinks that they have the right to judge what I _MAY_ do? By what standard do they think that they have the intelligence or foresight to adjudge that I _MIGHT_ be a danger?

And who on Earth put a clause into the act saying that MPs and Local Councilors don't need to be vetted. Most of those bastards need vetting in the veterinary use of the term.

Years ago I stopped updating my first aider qualifications. Now I'll watch a person die rather than even try to help them. Try and sue me for doing something I'm not (now) qualified to do.

This is the result of all of these 'protection' schemes. People have stopped volunteering in droves. There aren't the youth clubs or associations any more as there isn't any one to run them. There aren't the male school teachers because men have been driven away from the profession because of the absolute belief that men are a danger and women aren't.

13
0
WTF?

@Wommit

"Years ago I stopped updating my first aider qualifications. Now I'll watch a person die rather than even try to help them."

Really ? Do you honestly mean that, or is it just a (arguably mindless) comment during a rant ?

1
5
Alert

First Law of First Aid

Don't do anything. Call an ambulance. If you can't call an ambulance, don't do anything until you have worked out how.

Don't rely on anyone else to... That way you can't be sued by the victim's family for not calling an ambulance when they die or suffer something other than a recoverable injury, despite your best intentions....

And this is taught in First Aid Courses...

6
0
Silver badge

Hold on

That paragraph WAS talking about the old VBS, wasn't it? That colon-contract that started it off was a little confusing, but that's how I read it. If petty crimes won't be on the new one, presumably non-crimes won't either.

0
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

column A+ column B /2

I let mine expire for a similar reason. Rule number one in first aid is "damned if you don't, damned if you do". The first thing you learn is to announce everything you do very loudly to have witnesses; count very loudly etc etc. You are *required* to do the basic checks but you can't afford to do it the fast and efficient way as if something bad happen you must assume that you WILL be sued, so your first consideration must always be to make sure you will have witnesses, and ones with a good memory. Assisting a person in a life-threatening situation is stressful enough as it is, sod that.

As a general member of the public you are only required to call for help, so I'll do just that. I'd join the Red Cross or something, but I lack the time. Why do you think paramedics, the Red Cross people etc ALWAYS go by pairs, at least? Witnesses.

1
1

Re : First Law of First Aid club....

"And this is taught in First Aid Courses..."

Some sensible advice in that which is hardly new, agreed, but what is not taught in first aid courses, last I looked, was that you should never do anything - which is what Wommit seemed to be proposing, and what I was objecting to. There are too many obvious counter arguments to that to make any sense.

0
0
Silver badge

@Tim

"you should never do anything"

That's actually what non-trained people should do. Always. In the training they tell you to not less untrained people touch the victim, even to "help".

That's also what you can't do when you have a certification. You could end up in the brown 'n smelly. Non-assistance etc.

But if you intervene you MUST make sure there will be witnesses ready to testify that you did everything by the book, or you'll end up even deeper in. Only said witnesses don't know what's in the proverbial book, hence the "announce everything you're doing", "speak clear and loud" etc...

That's how it was were I obtained my last certification, before I let it slip because thanks, but no thanks.

There are only 2 ways to help without ending up completely screwed for helping:

- not being a certified anything: just call the emergency services

- being a certified whatever: work within an organisation, and never alone.

0
1

Re : Tim Parker

Sorry, anybody who has a fit / MI / accident within my sight had better hope that my mobile has a good signal and enough battery. Because that's as far as I will go.

No, I won't watch them die. I'll walk away. I've watched too many people die already.

As for witnesses, you can bet that there will be a number of them videoing the situation on their phones.

Even an experienced trauma doctor wouldn't stand up to that sort of post accident examination.

0
0

@ElReg!comments!Pierre

> "you should never do anything"

> That's actually what non-trained people should do. Always.

Indeed, except for obvious exceptions, but this person was trained - and actually would prefer to watch someone die than help *at all*, *ever* - that is my objection. I'm aware of the first aid advice to some degree so i'm not picking at that, even though folk are propounding it in an overly simplistic manner in the interest of brevity - all I wanted to hear was a confirmation, or denial, from the OP that they would not do anything to prevent a death, no matter what.

0
0

@Wommit

"Sorry, anybody who has a fit / MI / accident within my sight had better hope that my mobile has a good signal and enough battery. Because that's as far as I will go."

Fair enough. Cheers

0
0
Thumb Down

Your last point is untrue

"Why do you think paramedics, the Red Cross people etc ALWAYS go by pairs, at least? Witnesses."

Dunno about Red Cross, but there are plenty of paramedics/EMTs working solo in the UK. They work as First Responders, in cars or sometimes on motorbikes.

1
1
Silver badge

@ Tim and Amazon

@Tim:

"Indeed, except for obvious exceptions"

NO. EXCEPTION. Not trained == keep your hands off. Period. Just call for help. It takes a trained person to tell if it's safe to have a victim handled by an untrained person. The logical loop should be obvious to any Reg reader.

You might think you're helping by dragging someone away from the fire, but you might really just have dislocated their spine to "save" them from superficial burns. HANDS OFF.

@Amazon Wageslave

"there are plenty of paramedics/EMTs working solo in the UK. They work as First Responders, in cars or sometimes on motorbikes."

Would they be, by any chance, professionnals acting on behalf of an institutionnal body? And as such, covered by their employer for any mishapp? As opposed to certified individuals acting on their own behalf, because they are requested to (being certified), but not legally covered by anyone or anything, and stark naked in court? I was in the latter category (as the Red Cross people are, AFAIK, hence the "2-or-more" rule). It is anything but comfortable. I bet your sexy motorbike-mounted "First Responders" are in the former category (not easy by any count, mind you. They are still heroes by Holliwood standards. But still a tiny bit less risky).

Now re-read my former posts in that light, you might understand me better.

0
1

The usual.

Serious issue / (politicians + journalists + world + dog) = expensive Fail.

3
0
Silver badge

What if . . .?

"criminal record checks being sent first to the individual being checked – to allow them to check and challenge inaccuracies before misinformation is passed on to a potential employer"

What if you've moved and someone has a peek at your mail?

2
0
Silver badge
FAIL

Or even....

What if ID thieves or blackmail rings determine what these envelopes look like and intercept them out of your mailbox after the postman drops them off?? What if corrupt postmen start delivering these letters up to local bad guys in return for a % of the profits??

If you want a distraction from the everyday family/job/bills routine, there's nothing like having your personal data in the hands of the ruthless and mercenary!

1
0
Jobs Halo

sad

It is sad that people are trying to predict who might commit an offense against children. I can imagine a future that all parents must be licensed to have children. Perhaps being interested in soap operas would disqualify you as a parent. With all this over protection of children, world wide child abuse grows at an alarming rate in spite of this over zealous approach to prevention. I just got through watching a downloaded wiki-leak about some soldiers "lighting up" a child in Iraq. If you really want to stop child abuse, stop all the senseless wars that are going on. Then you can go one step further by sending aid to countries where children are starving to death. That would do a lot to prevent child abuse

8
1

Predictive power

"It should also attempt to predict (and exclude) those likely to do so in future."

Well, that's simple enough. Statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of those who abuse children or the elderly are members of their family, or close and trusted friends. So a simple suggestion presents itself. If the goal is to protect children or the elderly from those statistically likely to harm them, the first thing to do is keep their family members, close relatives, and other trusted folks far, far away, right?

6
0
Grenade

"members of their family, or close and trusted friends."

"Statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of those who abuse children or the elderly are members of their family, or close and trusted friends."

Very true, and often overlooked, courtesy of the tabloid madness.

You forget to explicitly mention the local religious Father figure (the dodgy ones are usually Catholic, aren't they, statistically speaking?)

1
0

regretfully

you are absolutely right. The proportion must be around 97% to 3% as far as i know. That is probably why it is so important to concentrate on the 3 percent and collect data as if there is no tomorrow.

0
0

Suits me!

@Franklin "If the goal is to protect children or the elderly from those statistically likely to harm them, the first thing to do is keep their family members, close relatives, and other trusted folks far, far away, right?"

Keep my kids and family as far away as possible please! I might get some bloody peace then.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Scrap the lot

CRBs are a hinderence to everyone except the people they are supposed to stop, they were brought in because of huntly (who would have been found out if his employer had bothered with references) and they have done nothing to stop the likes of "little teds" and the various other abuse cases that are coming to light which have involved people who have been checked by these schemes. Volunteers find it a nightmare, job seekers find it a nightmare (it can take 3+ months for a CRB to come through), everyone except the people it is supposed to stop. These schemes also create an ever increasing population of unemployable people who can't even do good by volunteering anymore. These schemes also do nothing to stop the government sponsored neglect and other issues which are common in the public sector which is now full of people who are only interested in reducing "risk" basically by doing nothing and pushing everything onto other departments as soon as possible creating a merrygoround on which vunerable people find themselves stuck.

Scrap the lot!

0
0
Thumb Down

Intensive?

Have they changed the definition of "intensive" they were previously using? It was just seeing children once a week. If this is still the definition, the whole thing is still totally ridiculous.

It's like OFSTED, where "satisfactory" mean "not good enough", whereas everywhere else it means good enough. Fiddling the definitions of words can easily make things sound much better than they are.

1
0

sports and lawn maintenance

The VBS is being used by many businesses and councils as a way to hire cheap foreign labour as they know they cannot vet immigrants. As budget cuts bite more and more low paid jobs are requiring extended VBS checks.

Also there is still the problem of teachers working at schools who because of unfounded complaints by pupils now fail to pass the VBS. This does not stop them from working as a teacher in thier current post but does mean they cannot accept promotions or move to another school. The VBS has and is still destroying the careers of many good teachers because "hearsay" is considered enough to bar anyone.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.