Tuesday, 15 September 2009

An Invitation For Sir Roger Singleton

The head of a government scheme to vet adults who work with children has hit out at criticism of the initiative.

Sir Roger Singleton, chairman of the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA), said people need to "calm down" and consider the issue "rationally".
Oh, wow. Way to pour oil on troubled waters petrol on a burning fire…
Sir Roger, whose agency will run the vetting scheme, said: "We need to calm down and consider carefully and rationally what this scheme is and is not about.

"It is not about interfering with the sensible arrangements which parents make with each other to take their children to schools and clubs.

"It is not about subjecting a quarter of the population to intensive scrutiny of their personal lives and it is not about creating mistrust between adults and children or discouraging volunteering."
It might not be about those things.

But, as numerous people have now told you (not that you should have needed telling…) it is, indisputably, going to lead to those things.

It is inevitable.
He added: "It is about ensuring that those people who have already been dismissed by their employers for inappropriate behaviour with children do not simply up sticks and move elsewhere in the country to continue their abuse.

"And it is about bringing an end to the need for repeated CRB checks which so many people have found irritating. ISA registration is a one-off process for a single fee."
Or, to translate: “Shut up, you mindless serfs, and pony up the money so your betters can have a cushy lifestyle running a pointless quango. What do you expect me to do to make a living, work…?”

To sum up, here’s a short pier:


Go take a long walk off it…

10 comments:

James Higham said...

But, as numerous people have now told you (not that you should have needed telling…) it is, indisputably, going to lead to those things.

Yes because things are always given to the Pod people in departments to completely stuff up.

Deadbeat Dad said...

Sanctimonious morons like Singleton are destroying civil society in this country.

He's a nonce, pure and simple. The only effective treatment for his compulsion to fiddle with our kiddies' lives would be the vigorous insertion of a large sharp object up his rectum. Repeatedly. Until the cunt expires.

woman on a raft said...

There's a longer political tail on it than that, Sir James.

It is commonly acknowledged in lefty circles that the killing of James Bulger was a pivotal moment for Tony Blair. He was genuinely disgusted that two boys could abduct and torture a third to death, but then so was everyone else. He used it, however, to make political capital and began the 'broken society' narrative. That, of course, was before he was party leader.

When Hamilton conducted the Dunblane Massacre, despite some of the wilder theories which emerged even then, it became a national symbol of the Conservatives losing their grip. Some truth in that. The Conservatives lost the 1997 election for many reasons, and Dunblane was amongst them. It was evidence of the broken society. If such things could happen in Dunblane, what must it be like in the cities?

The young Tony Blair was able to use public revulsion for a political aim - that of removing firearms from the civilian population - but the legislation had started under the outgoing Conservative government. Note - there was widespread support for the legislation.

In 2000 the death of Victoria Climbie (and Lauren Wright) gave Blair the excuse to introduce a host of measures, gradually transferring ownership of children from their families to the state. The Wiki sums up the events tolerably well. The process had begun, though, under the Conservatives in the 1989 Children Act. Again, there was widespread public support.

By 2002, the Soham Murders were almost an "oh shit" moment for the government. This really was not supposed to happen. The public were furious that the criminal checks system appeared to have failed.

It did fail, but it failed worst in that if Huntley had been prosecuted and banged-up for having intercourse with a minor when it might possibly have made some difference in his life, then maybe he wouldn't have killed anybody. Thanks to the earlier Gillick ruling (confirmed in the CoA by Lord Woolf) a 13 year old can give meaningful consent to intercourse, making it very difficult to convict Huntley. On the other hand, at least the CPS could have tried.

The public went ballistic and demanded Something Must Be Done.

It was unreasonable of them. The bottom line is, the girls went in to a house where a murderer lived because they knew his girlfriend.

Had he been a shelf stacker at Budgens, or a mechanic at the garage, or an agricultural worker, or a roofer for a building company, they would have been just as dead. He didn't kill them in the course of his work; it was in the ordinary course of social life. He just happened, coincidentally, to be a school caretaker.

The trouble with that logical conclusion is that it requires anybody who is related to someone who works with children to be regarded as a potential offender.

Anonymous said...

This is a nice little earner for somebody (party donor or am I being just a teensy bit cynical?) Over the last 12 months I have had 9 (yes nine) of these damn things (enhanced CRB checks) why can they not be transferrable or have an expiry? After all it's not as though somebody may lie on their CRB form, oh sorry, Ian Huntley did just that...
TTFN :)

JuliaM said...

"...because things are always given to the Pod people in departments to completely stuff up."

And also because, as WoaR points out, sometimes it's a 'perfect storm' situation too...

"Sanctimonious morons like Singleton are destroying civil society in this country."

Indeed. Which is why I'm not hopeful for a change of government.

Too often, the ones making policy now aren't even IN government...

JuliaM said...

"The Conservatives lost the 1997 election for many reasons, and Dunblane was amongst them. It was evidence of the broken society. If such things could happen in Dunblane, what must it be like in the cities?"

And now, 'Dunblane' happens every year. Just not all at once, and not such young children.

"The public went ballistic and demanded Something Must Be Done."

Ahh, the perils of telling a government already keen on control freakery that 'Something Must Be Done'..

"Over the last 12 months I have had 9 (yes nine) of these damn things (enhanced CRB checks) why can they not be transferrable or have an expiry?"

This new one is supposed to alleviate that. I'm not convinced it will work any better than any other government scheme..

Deadbeat Dad said...

"Too often, the ones making policy now aren't even IN government..."

Quite, Julia.

The diffusion of power through the exponential growth of quangos and fake charities is one of the most toxic developments of the NuLab era, which neither the Conservatives nor the LibDems has any urgent interest in addressing; either of them would simply ensure that these were quietly populated with their own place(wo)men, I fear.

Joe Public said...

And if an anonymous allegation of inappropriate behaviour by Sir Roger was made to the police, I guess he'd fail, SOLELY ON THAT BASIS, a CRB check.

Then it'd be embarrassing to have as head of the Safeguarding Authority a person not trusted with kids.

Anonymous said...

The people who will lose out as a result of this, will be most of our children.

If your kids get home from school and you are still stuck in town by a transport strike, neighbours will be worried about welcoming them in to wait for you and giving them the traditional milk and toasted teacakes.

If your youngster wants a sleepover party, you will have to get registered before her friends arrive.

Numerous well meaning people who would otherwise have set up helpful and educational initiatives, will lose interest. There goes the local history society, the neighbourhood engineers, the nature conservation group, the accountant who helps run the school savings bank. None of them get paid, not even their expenses. Facing them with an insult like this doesn't exactly help.

And work experience in local businesses seems to be going down the tubes also. We used to have some good arrangements around my area, lots of employers supported short-term placements for youngsters of 14-plus. Now very few are prepared to put up with this barrage, they won't allow their regular staff to be subjected to vetting.

Of course, while all this is going on, the children who are at real and significant risk are watching their mother's latest "boyfriend" walking though the door and making himself right at home, with no checks whatsoever because we don't want to be "judgemental" do we?

Von Spreuth said...

"It is not about interfering with the sensible arrangements which parents make with each other to take their children to schools and clubs.

No, and anti terroriam meassures were not about intefering with how much rubbish you put in your bin either BUT....