Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Andy B]

If it stops even one child from being harmed, molested or worse then it has to be a good call.

Isn't it the case that more kids are abused by a family member/friend than leaders of scouts/sea cadet/etc.
CRB checks for all potential parents then!  :-?

[Marks DTM Calib]

....... from helping with the scout group and volunteering at the heritage centre...... ......

I don't know how you find the time .......work, here, playing trains & scouts too?     

I dont help with the scouts any more, it was getting silly once it got to the point where you needed a written risk assesment for showing them how to put a tent up or cook on an open fire. Knives were banned for anything, you needed a 2 day training course to do axe and saw work and the badges all changed from traditional scouting stuff to the sort of thing you did at the local sunday school!

[Marks DTM Calib]

I see your point and respect it, but I also stick by what I said, even if just one child was kept safe because of this...

Reality will probably mean that it will result in more......children will have to walk un-attended to places, more will be on the street and as a result more open to the real 'nasties' in this world.

Its the typical knee jerk reaction from some over paid judges report on a one off incident!

The even more crazy thing is that this is being linked to the Soham murders.....where 2 unaccompanied children were lured into Huntleys house.....totaly un-related to the proposed legislation!

[Varche]

Another example of a sledge to crack a nut and also how Britain is going down the pan.

Whilst it is important to protect our kids surely there has got to be a more effective method than this. I say this as someone whose nephew stopped going to the scouts because of the scout leaders advances to him.

There wasn't public outrage over scout halls, church halls etc now having to pay "water rates" and probably go out of business.

When will Joe Public stand up and be counted!

Varche

[LJay]

If it stops even one child from being harmed, molested or worse then it has to be a good call.

You can't be that naive as to think that someone who has the intention to harm a child will be CRB checked surely? :-?

It's just a money making game, easy money to be made from honest people.

I've currently got 2 checks and object to paying for the same thing each time!

[Dishevelled Den]

Another example of a sledge to crack a nut and also how Britain is going down the pan.

Whilst it is important to protect our kids surely there has got to be a more effective method than this. I say this as someone whose nephew stopped going to the scouts because of the scout leaders advances to him.

There wasn't public outrage over scout halls, church halls etc now having to pay "water rates" and probably go out of business.

When will Joe Public stand up and be counted!

Varche

Sage words indeed Varche

[Dishevelled Den]

I see your point and respect it, but I also stick by what I said, even if just one child was kept safe because of this...

Reality will probably mean that it will result in more......children will have to walk un-attended to places, more will be on the street and as a result more open to the real 'nasties' in this world.

Its the typical knee jerk reaction from some over paid judges report on a one off incident!
The even more crazy thing is that this is being linked to the Soham murders.....where 2 unaccompanied children were lured into Huntleys house.....totaly un-related to the proposed legislation!

The practical result of this ass-covering culture that has been allowed to flourish in this country.

We're finished, thanks to a group of faceless, spineless, gutless and ball-less officials.

[HolyCount]

As Nick so rightly pointed out --- all the checks reveal is (if you pass) you haven't been CAUGHT !!!   B. all with what you actually DO !

They do nothing at all to enhance child safety.

[Ratty]

The more I read this thread, the more I realise my original thoughts were flawed. naive? no, I just think that the idea is a good one but as the majority of posts on here say it does appear to be a money making one rather than one of safety.

Trust me, my first involvement in a debate on here and I get flamed     

[LJay]

The more I read this thread, the more I realise my original thoughts were flawed. naive? no, I just think that the idea is a good one but as the majority of posts on here say it does appear to be a money making one rather than one of safety.

Trust me, my first involvement in a debate on here and I get flamed     

Fair play for coming back and reviewing your thoughts!

[x.ray]

hey everyone this is not about the nanny state.
its about protecting children.
yes most abuse is familiar. that is people who are known by the child or its family.
people who abuse children come in all shapes sizes, classes,proffessions. they do not all wear long macs.
if you have a crb then it has a unique number and can be used for numerous purposes.
what the new changes are about is bringing all the information held by different agencies together, from the soham enquiry.
list 99, schedual 1 list etc along with intelligence.
yes its sad that in our society this is neccessary but about 1 million kids have been abused and this includes by vicars scout masters,police judges etc

[Banjax]

Parents who regularly drive children for sports or social clubs will have to undergo criminal record checks or face fines of up to £5,000 under new rules.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8249020.stm

Nanny state rears her ugly face again 

totally agree Nickbat - it's getting to be everyones guilty until proven innocent nowadays - wasn't it meant to be the other way round?

[x.ray]

no parent who regularly drive kids to clubs will not be affected unless its a formal process arranged through the club.
if its a group of parents who agree amongst them selves to take it in turns to transport the kids then they are not included in these arrangements

[amigov6]

I(n my younger years...(yeah yeah) our colletive Fathers took turns to drive us to & from swimming lessons, Sea Scouts etc on a regular basis. Not sure if this qualifies.
   It's a hard one to call. The majority are well intended folk with no desire to interfere with children but there's always the chance of one bad apple. :-/

[x.ray]

no if was just a group of dads agreeing to share the work load it would not apply.
if however it had been organised by the swimming club or sea scouts then it would.
i have been following the debate for sometime. to my amazement a group of childrens authors who visit schools were outraged and refusing to have checks. these are people who make thier living from children. how much troble is it really.
child abuse is not new. its that we as adults are more aware and prepared to listen to and belive children. and the systems do work.
we can never prevent all abuse or stop cases like baby p but that does not mean we should stop trying