Conservative Conference 2010: NSPCC calls for 'middle way' on vetting and barring
Ravi Chandiramani
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
The NSPCC is urging the government not to abandon the vetting and barring scheme in its entirety in reviewing the initiative.
"The review of the vetting and barring scheme is concerning because it had put essential safeguards in," said NSPCC head of public affairs and campaigns Diana Sutton at a Conservative conference fringe meeting. "We need to come to a simple middle-way solution and not throw the whole scheme out."
The Home Office launched a review of the scheme in June to bring it back to "proportionate, common sense levels".
The scheme was designed as a response to the Bichard Inquiry into the Soham murders by Ian Huntley, which called for better information sharing by police and vetting organisations.
Sutton also urged the Munro review of child protection to now focus on the recommendations on child health made by Lord Laming in his 2009 report, which were not implemented by the last government.
These included enabling accident and emergency staff to tell if a child has recently visited A&E or is subject to a child protection plan; improve the skills of children’s health workers to deal with child protection; and that children’s services, police and health services have protected budgets for the staffing and training of child protection services.
"Frontline services to protect children in the health service and in schools are very important," she said.
She said the charity was lobbying for a legal duty on social workers to see children independently from parents.
Sutton also said the review of the function of England’s children’s commissioner presented an opportunity to refocus the role towards implementing the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
But on the government’s "big society" vision of community groups providing help and support, she said this was "not an alternative to statutory services" when it comes to child protection.
"One child dies at the hands of abuse and neglect every 10 days. Governments might change but child protection doesn’t."
The Home Office launched a review of the scheme in June to bring it back to "proportionate, common sense levels".
The scheme was designed as a response to the Bichard Inquiry into the Soham murders by Ian Huntley, which called for better information sharing by police and vetting organisations.
Sutton also urged the Munro review of child protection to now focus on the recommendations on child health made by Lord Laming in his 2009 report, which were not implemented by the last government.
These included enabling accident and emergency staff to tell if a child has recently visited A&E or is subject to a child protection plan; improve the skills of children’s health workers to deal with child protection; and that children’s services, police and health services have protected budgets for the staffing and training of child protection services.
"Frontline services to protect children in the health service and in schools are very important," she said.
She said the charity was lobbying for a legal duty on social workers to see children independently from parents.
Sutton also said the review of the function of England’s children’s commissioner presented an opportunity to refocus the role towards implementing the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
But on the government’s "big society" vision of community groups providing help and support, she said this was "not an alternative to statutory services" when it comes to child protection.
"One child dies at the hands of abuse and neglect every 10 days. Governments might change but child protection doesn’t."