CRB's (move from CODE)

Inland paddling
User avatar
Grumpy Fisherman
Posts: 1403
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:41 pm
Location: Leeds, UK
Contact:

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by Grumpy Fisherman » Thu Aug 19, 2010 9:21 am

Scots_Charles_River wrote:Up here I could apply for one in my own name and by myself. But my employer did. I have a copy of it.
http://www.disclosurescotland.co.uk/what-is-disclosure/

Nick
I find it very telling that while applying for the British Civil Service (read: England, read: Whitehall), my disclosure required for my application was done through Disclosure Scotland and not CRB. If the same Civil Service which runs the CRB chooses not to use it that seems to tell a pretty damning story.

Dave McCraw
Posts: 575
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 3:10 pm

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by Dave McCraw » Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:46 pm

Scots_Charles_River wrote:
Dave McCraw wrote:Ideas like this are rife in society and make very little sense. Yet, I'd argue in a practical sense that it's already happening, with fewer people to jump through the hoops there are inevitably fewer opportunities for children to enjoy.
There is definitely no drop in teacher course applicants or numbers due to our system of checks for Child and Vunerable adult Protection. Budget cuts for schools/centres/councils have reduced opportunites more than any form of CRB/CP checks. This is since 94 when I started teaching.
But then, it's hardly surprising that someone who wants to work with children should accept an extra hoop to jump through, is it?

What's more corrosive is the effect it has in general (I suppose I'm not talking solely about disclosure here)... When I learned to paddle not so very long ago, I spent at least as much time going on trips with random people's parents or other active adults, as I did on "club" trips. There was a whole bunch of people going paddling often, and it was great.

But myself, I wouldn't be comfortable having any minor on the water with me, unless they were with their actual parent. How has this come about, when on the face of it I should be keenly putting back in what I got out (and am even a coach, although by now a lapsed one)?

BaldockBabe
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 11:55 am
Location: Hertfordshire
Contact:

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by BaldockBabe » Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:30 pm

Dave McCraw wrote: But then, it's hardly surprising that someone who wants to work with children should accept an extra hoop to jump through, is it?
quote]

That's the problem. I don't want to work with children, but it seems that if I do my Level 1 I will be assumed to be a child abuser until I have proved that I am not just so that I can coach in an adults only environment.

It seems that I should not bother with coaching qualifications, continue coaching casually, and save my club's money!

User avatar
shanclan
Posts: 1026
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 12:57 pm
Location: Monmouth
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by shanclan » Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:56 pm

Dave McCraw wrote: What's more corrosive is the effect it has in general (I suppose I'm not talking solely about disclosure here)... When I learned to paddle not so very long ago, I spent at least as much time going on trips with random people's parents or other active adults, as I did on "club" trips. There was a whole bunch of people going paddling often, and it was great.

But myself, I wouldn't be comfortable having any minor on the water with me, unless they were with their actual parent. How has this come about, when on the face of it I should be keenly putting back in what I got out (and am even a coach, although by now a lapsed one)?
Reading this makes me really sad and it is the way a lot of people are being forced to act.

It also prompts a point that hasn't been raised so far. Parents used to be actively involved in what their kids did. They were doing the activities themselves or they stayed and watched. There weren't that many activities that were just for kids. Most sports had junior sections if you were lucky.

Now, there are quite a few parents who treat sports clubs as creches. They drop the kids off and then come and pick them up at the end. If people are bothered about protecting their children, they should get more involved.

User avatar
MatSav
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 11:27 am
Location: Feltham, Middlesex
Contact:

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by MatSav » Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:11 pm

BaldockBabe wrote:...Would it [a CRB check] have stopped the Soham Murders? Unlikely, Ian Huntly had been suspected but never arrested or convicted of some sexual offences, thus they wouldn't have shown up on his CRB check and rightly so, as he had not been found guilty of these offences.
It would have been impossible for anything to show on a CRB Check of Huntley. They weren't available when he was appointed as the Caretaker.

BaldockBabe
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 11:55 am
Location: Hertfordshire
Contact:

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by BaldockBabe » Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:11 pm

MatSav wrote:
BaldockBabe wrote:...Would it [a CRB check] have stopped the Soham Murders? Unlikely, Ian Huntly had been suspected but never arrested or convicted of some sexual offences, thus they wouldn't have shown up on his CRB check and rightly so, as he had not been found guilty of these offences.
It would have been impossible for anything to show on a CRB Check of Huntley. They weren't available when he was appointed as the Caretaker.
I know! The point was that even if they were available it wouldn't have helped, so what is the point of them?

User avatar
DaveBland
Posts: 3657
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Calgary Canada
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by DaveBland » Fri Aug 20, 2010 7:20 pm

I'm not so sure I agree...
I have a six year old daughter and I'm a pretty easy going father. Certainly not living in fear of her being molested by her carers.
But I'd still only feel comfortable leaving her either with someone I knew well enough to trust, or if I didn't know them, a carer who had had some level of checks done on them. I agree the system may be very flawed and with big loop holes in it. It may cost too much money too, but surely there has to be some sort of assurance to a parent? If something did happen and I discovered there had been no due diligence...
The other point is that at least if there are checks, even not very good ones, it still acts as a deterrent for those with convictions.

But the checks aren't the issue. It's the additional costs involved that mean less and less opportunities for kids to get out and do things.
The real problem boils down to a lack of prioritising outdoor activities for kids. If the government really recognised the value and wanted to support getting as many kids out as possible, they would put the money behind it and make it happen.

It's even more clear to see when you compare it to the encouragement and level of opportunity for kids out here. A whole season ski pass for my daughter is $20. Mine is $500. Now that's focussing on encouraging kids to get active.
dave

Scots_Charles_River
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:10 pm

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by Scots_Charles_River » Fri Aug 20, 2010 7:43 pm

DaveBland wrote:I'm not so sure I agree...
I have a six year old daughter and I'm a pretty easy going father. Certainly not living in fear of her being molested by her carers.
But I'd still only feel comfortable leaving her either with someone I knew well enough to trust, or if I didn't know them, a carer who had had some level of checks done on them. I agree the system may be very flawed and with big loop holes in it. It may cost too much money too, but surely there has to be some sort of assurance to a parent? If something did happen and I discovered there had been no due diligence...
The other point is that at least if there are checks, even not very good ones, it still acts as a deterrent for those with convictions.
Agreed.
DaveBland wrote:But the checks aren't the issue. It's the additional costs involved that mean less and less opportunities for kids to get out and do things.
The real problem boils down to a lack of prioritising outdoor activities for kids. If the government really recognised the value and wanted to support getting as many kids out as possible, they would put the money behind it and make it happen.
Up here, the SCA do the checks for free. There is cuts, cuts and cuts in the Public sector.
DaveBland wrote:It's even more clear to see when you compare it to the encouragement and level of opportunity for kids out here. A whole season ski pass for my daughter is $20. Mine is $500. Now that's focussing on encouraging kids to get active.
Sounds good, like the French system where a local gets a very cheap season pass.

User avatar
DaveBland
Posts: 3657
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Calgary Canada
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by DaveBland » Fri Aug 20, 2010 7:53 pm

Sounds good, like the French system where a local gets a very cheap season pass.
Ah, that's just those Frenchies looking after their own! This is more about a recognition of the importance of Kid's activities, be it Tennis, Ice Hockey, swimming, gymnastics, kayaking... whatever. They are all cheap or free for kids. As a result your average Canadian [in Calgary at least] is fit as a butchers and very skilled in about 10 sports and teenage crime problems are rare.
On the down side if you're an unfit scrawny get like me, it's easy to get a complex...
dave

Jon_Brown
Posts: 220
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:13 pm
Location: Bath

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by Jon_Brown » Fri Aug 20, 2010 9:39 pm

I know! The point was that even if they were available it wouldn't have helped, so what is the point of them?
I would say that if Ian Huntley was 10 years younger (so that everything was acting out now rather than culminating 8 years ago) and of course the findings Bichard Inquiry had still been implemented - He (Huntley) would have been very unlikely to be employed. Remember that an enhanced CRB checks on not only convictions but also Cautions, Reprimands and Warnings in England and Wales.
and
• held by local police forces and other agencies, relating to relevant non-conviction information;
• held on lists maintained by the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA);
• other data sources such as British Transport Police; the Royal Military Police; the Ministry of Defence Police;
• Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO) - if you have spent any time living in Scotland.
http://www.crb.homeoffice.gov.uk/about_ ... lable.aspx
http://www.crb.homeoffice.gov.uk/guidan ... _info.aspx

Don't forget that following the announcement of Huntley's conviction, it emerged that various authorities were aware of allegations, from a number of sources, that he had committed one act of indecent assault, four acts of underage sex and three rapes.

The only one of these allegations that resulted in a charge was a rape, for which he had been remanded in custody, but released when the Crown Prosecution Service ruled that there was not enough evidence for a conviction.

Finally it's worth remembering
The CRB is there to protect Vulnerable Adults as well as children.
A free of charge CRB check will be issued if you can meet the volunteer criteria:

The Police Act 1997 (Criminal Records) Regulations 2002 defines a volunteer as:

* "volunteer" means a person engaged in an activity which involves spending time, unpaid (except for travel and other approved out-of-pocket expenses), doing something which aims to benefit some third party other than or in addition to a close relative.

Scots_Charles_River
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:10 pm

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by Scots_Charles_River » Fri Aug 20, 2010 9:50 pm

DaveBland wrote:
Sounds good, like the French system where a local gets a very cheap season pass.
Ah, that's just those Frenchies looking after their own! This is more about a recognition of the importance of Kid's activities, be it Tennis, Ice Hockey, swimming, gymnastics, kayaking... whatever. They are all cheap or free for kids. As a result your average Canadian [in Calgary at least] is fit as a butchers and very skilled in about 10 sports and teenage crime problems are rare.
On the down side if you're an unfit scrawny get like me, it's easy to get a complex...
It encourages the kids in the local areas to be active. It always amazes me how the smallest of villages in France still have a tennis court and astro turf pitch. My council has free Outdoor Learning for children, although they have a handful of staff for 50 schools.

Nick

PS My cousin emigrated to Calgary, climbs and MTBs.

User avatar
DaveBland
Posts: 3657
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Calgary Canada
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by DaveBland » Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:10 pm

Good point. "those Frenchies" do get it right most of the time.
Does Cuz Paddle?
dave

Scots_Charles_River
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:10 pm

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by Scots_Charles_River » Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:30 pm

DaveBland wrote:Good point. "those Frenchies" do get it right most of the time.
Does Cuz Paddle?
Don't think so. Alpine Ice and Rock with summer Downhill biking. Seems to enjoy it. Says he has a humidifer in his due to the dry climate.

Nick

User avatar
James G
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:44 pm
Location: Ellesmere, Shropshire

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by James G » Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:07 am

I'd like to counter the idea that these checks are free for certain groups or in Scotland. The cost for these checks is not always borne by the individual being checked, or by the organisation doing the checking, but the cost does still exist. This cost will either be met by higher taxation or by draining money out of other public services (such as those that help the victims of child abuse). Not to mention the cost to the voluntary and paid sector of thousands of man-hours spent filling in paperwork when they could be getting on with their job.

There are only two ways to reduce these costs. One is to stop the checks altogether, the other is to simplify the system so that it requires much less admin time (e.g. having one central database that can simply be accessed with a password, much as the ISA was planning to create).

We have a similar problem in Wales, where people are very happy about getting "free" prescriptions, bilingual publications and an extra layer of government. But just one of the hidden costs is that schools recieve around £500 less per student per year (That's about a quarter of a million pounds per year for a small secondary). The extra "free" bits often make the news and, unfortunately, people rarely look at the damage being done elsewhere by draining cash from other sectors.

James

Bards
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 11:23 am
Location: Dorset
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by Bards » Sat Aug 21, 2010 11:09 am

James G wrote:people are very happy about
James G wrote:bilingual publications
Yes - some are indeed very happy that an indigenous population is able to access valuable information in their own first language. 'Very unhappy' wouldn't even come close if this basic right was ever targetted by either Cardifff or Westminster... and quite what justifies it's use in highlighting the poor structure of the CRB system, I really can't see.... surely it does that for itself! Waste and inefficiency in the CRB system are undeniable, but the general idea still has considerable worth; stirring other guff into the debate is far more in parallel with the counter-productive CRB overcomplication than the example chosen...

Cau dy geg, Saes ;-)

User avatar
James G
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:44 pm
Location: Ellesmere, Shropshire

Re: CRB's (move from CODE)

Post by James G » Sat Aug 21, 2010 11:47 am

Hi Bard,

The point is that all these things come from the same pot of money. People are very happy to look at the good bits (including the advantages of a centrally funded CRB system) and simply assume that if it's centrally funded they aren't paying for it, when the fact is that they are.

I have no issue with bilingualism (or free prescriptions, or the Welsh assembly, or centrally funding CRBs, or any other publicly funded service) as long as people weigh up that which must be lost in order to provide them and that the majority agree that the gains in one area are worth the losses in another.

The thing that justified the use of bilingualism in this argument was because it is different to England or Scotland, it costs money and I happen to know of another public service that the money comes from. I didn't single it out (you did that), but used it alongside other examples of the same thing that I know about. I certainly did not argue against bilingualism in Wales. In fact I believe that I said that people (by which I meant the population of Wales) where happy about it (although that is perhaps less than true about many individuals in the area that I teach).

James G

Post Reply

Return to “Whitewater and Touring”