[LINK] Britain vetting visiting authors
link at fly.to
Thu Jul 16 19:15:15 AEST 2009
At 04:37 16/07/2009, Jan Whitaker wrote:
>[add to the list of unintended consequences --- or throwing out babies]
>Authors boycott schools over sex-offence register
The thing is with this 'Scheme' - when I take my children to the
local park, I can have anywhere from 10 to 30 kids aged 6 to 13 all
engaged in conversation with me about all kinds of topics they are
'taught' at school, but can't get answers from teachers or parents.
Recent topics, that left two other parents and myself feeling
terribly uncomfortable were as a result of "sex education" in the
primary school to 9,10 and 11 year olds.
Questions from 10-12 year olds included:
1. When is the best time to first have sex
2. Can you have sex with anyone the first time
3. Where can you have sex, cause mum will kill me
4. Does sex hurt more when you are younger
Of course my biggest issue is kids talking about "it's ok to have sex
if you are under 12 cause you can't get pregnant" as a result of poor
sex-ed in the schools.
I've taken this up with the Chief of Police who shares my concerns,
the Education team and the Child Services teams at Local Government
who say they have a "No Response" policy.
Sadly many of the children will also tell me that they wish they had
parents like my kids. Take them to the park, spend time with them
etc. Most of the kids are "left to their own devices" at too young
an age. When you hear "mum and dad just go out from Friday night
till Sunday getting drunk and dad goes to the pub week nights and mum
just has her boyfriend over and gets drunk" you know things are wrong.
Only 2 of the 27 children last Sunday had positive things to say
about their parents.
One child was telling me about (excuse me for possible slight
exaggeration but I got lost in the description) her step brothers
step fathers uncles step sisters nephew who is her counsin's brother.
When you see a pregnant mum around the area, you aren't sure if to
ask "Hows the Father" or "Who's the father" - either way the answer
is going to likely have similar outcome "Oh he's in the past." Hmm,
less than 9 months in the past.
Even after a Local Council meeting one night where I raised the issue
of 6 year olds wandering the park (across the road from the meeting)
on their own all night, I was talking with 2 Councillors and 2 other
adults when a 6 year old came up to me, at 9:30 PM saying "Hello
Leah, what you up to?" - I demonstrated the issue by saying hello,
asking the child's age introducing the child to the people and asking
what he was doing at 9:30 PM on a school night in the park and streets.
The British Authorities are worried about Peadophiles in schools, yet
kids are vulnerable in the parks and streets from 6 PM till as late
(in my experience) as 3 AM.
I doubt any person who had designs on attacking a child is going to
have any desire to get the kids in a school when they can walk the streets.
Thankfully it's a fairly safe area, and the Chief of Police and I did
agree that many of the children are street wise, and the majority do
behave above their years, often looking out for each other.
But that doesn't stop groups of 3 or 4 girls aged 10-12 running up to
me being chased by someone else screaming "we're being bullied" regularly.
The scheme will fail, because even the Murders that the Scheme came
from, occurred outside the school and really were not related to the
persons job at the school. The two girls who were murdered, aged 12,
were walking the streets unsupervised by their parents a considerable
distance from their homes.
I also know a lot more about that event, the Chief of Police was
involved in the investigation and the issue that the Policing region
that the Perpetrator previously lived in had many reports made, but
as the Killer then moved out of that policing region and changed his
name, the former region was unable to provide information because of
Data Protection Act barriers.
The problem here is though, that anyone with a genuine activity comes
in contact with the police, you have to be 'Vetted' and "Criminal
Bureau Checked" - which will only demonstrate you are NOT, by the
name you provide, previously convicted.
For someone who has been, you just change your name. Change your
region. The Data Protection Act protects you from being required to
give your former details!
Changing the law however would be in conflict with other laws that
protect victims, refugees and other people, who are in greater
numbers, that need to change their names for any variety of reasons,
for the betterment of their life.
Knee jerk reactions are, sadly common.
Anyway, hope that puts some perspective on the issues.
[P.S. You can find info about the scheme at:
The new Vetting and Barring Scheme, involving the Independent
Safeguarding Authority (ISA), will have a major impact on the
recruitment and monitoring practices of people working or
volunteering with children.
Update on Phasing of Vetting and Barring Scheme (VBS)
Audience: Senior managers of children's workforce (and vulnerable
adults workforce, as applicable)
Since January, the new Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) has
taken barring decisions on new cases referred under current barring
schemes Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA), Protection of
Children Act (POCA) and List 99).
Child Matters -
and Barring Scheme
This page is no longer available
The page you are looking for has either been moved or was out of date
and has been archived. To find up-to-date information on related
subjects, search by keyword using the function above, or browse the site.
More information about the Link