Please find below a speech made by Labour Cllr. Michelle Fenner to the Thanet District Council Cabinet meeting held on 12th February 2009:
"I’d like to refer to page 9 of the TDC Child Protection Policy document.
'Thanet District Council is committed to ensuring that all employees and Members who work directly or indirectly with children and young people have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities'.
As elected Members we are often in contact with children and young people. We may have to go into people’s home and we may have access to some private information. When constituents request the help of their Ward Councillor they assume that they can do so in total confidence.
Should we Thanet councillors not therefore, as Kent County council members do, undergo Criminal Records Bureau checks?
School governors are also CRB checked and they don’t receive any salary nor allowance.
If we really mean to protect and safeguard children, then this policy must include CRB checks for all elected members. Precisely because we are talking about the protection and safeguarding of children, it would be money well-spent and I am sure the taxpayers would agree.
Failure to agree this by the TDC Cabinet will give the impression that they have something to hide and it will damage the trust of the general public in elected members and in the administration of TDC. It also be a clear case of leading members saying to staff - do as I say and not as I do".
Cllr. Michelle Fenner (07766 452552)
Shadow Cabinet Member for Healthy Communities and Safe Neighbourhoods.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
David
As I recall, this conversation has been "around the houses" several times and the advice we have been given is that as councillors are not "employees! of the council and are private citizens, then it is up to the councillor to arrange his or own CRB check. I think the other par of the advice was that the CRB check is role/job specific and as such the broad remit of a councillor doesn't fit the "tick boxes", or something similar. I'm happy to be corrected though if you have more accurate and legally informed information!
This is rubbish gesture politics although consistent with the Labour obession with big brother command and control.
The CRB check mechanism is designed to help protect the vulnerable in society from those who would otherwise have substantial unsupervised access.
This simply isnt the case for the case for the majority of TDC councillors.
If individual councillors have a role that puts them in such a position then current best practice advice is of course that they should undergo a check.
http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/BathNES/councilanddemocracy/councillorsdemocracyandelections/councillorsinformationandadvice/Becomingacouncillorinmay2011.htm
To try and CRB all councillors would need to be done twice yearly if information is to be retained as such advice must be shredded after six months to comply with data protection leglisation. The cost of such a check is not insigificant and could not be warranted in these asture times
Hello, is there a county election due,? old stories, its worse than repeats on ITV. Dave, please come up with new stuff, not regurgitated old chestnuts
Posted on Thanet Strife
Apologies for the late response to your posting on 8 Feb, but I have been on a short hol.
You should be more balanced in your reporting of events. Cllr Clark was also found to be offensive and disrepectful by the Standards Board, www.standardsboard.co.uk, and the allegation was not brought as a counter claim by his wife. My understanding is that she has never involved the standards board for the months of bullying and harrasment that she went through, instead she involved her union.
I have to agree with other bloggers comments that had the boot been on the other foot, then the Labour Party Political Machine would have been baying for blood, but someone seems to have unplugged it on this occasion. It would appear that the Cllr in question even went to ground and wouldn't assist in any preliminary investigation.
I also believe that it took over a year and a half for this matter to be resolved, and it was only when the unions threatened action that it was brought to a conclusion, wherein Mrs E recieved an apology for the behaviour of said Cllr.
You have every right to blog your opinons BB, but just make sure that they are balanced. "Mauwice" may say things that he shouldn't at times, but at least he is up front, not sneaking around in the background, having nasty little jibes at people over a matter of months. Incidently, this matter with Mrs E had, apparently, been logged some time before the WG fiasco, so it could hardly be called retaliation.
Methinks " Mauwice" may have been set up at the WG to react, funny that, just before the elections!!
Simon,
there are several issues here, firstly the question of whether Councillors are 'employees' ,most agencies regard Councillors as employess as does the Council and deducts income tax and national insurance accordingly, for housing benefit purposes being a Councillor is regarded as being 'employed' as does the Benefits Agency for State Benefits, the Job Centre also regards Councillors as being employees' although the Independant Remuneration Panel gives guidance on what should be regarded as voluntary and what should be work is mostly ignored by these agencies.
I dare say that as a person with an involvment in cyber crime issues you have to have some kind of check, a lot of Councillors are school governors and are required to be CRB checked, I currently have three seperate CRB checks in place for various things I am involved in, (and thats a bit silly when one should cover me for all three!)
My PERSONAL view is that we as Councillors should lead by example and be CRB checked, this is of course also regarded as best practice and as such should be adopted without further debate.
But Michael I feel it would be impossible to make it a condition for all candidates in an election to agree to a CRB check if they became elected. Are we trying to say that only CRB 'Clean' people are entiltled to be elected?
I have no personal problem with CRB checking, but the system does need to be practical.
Ken,
you must realise that once elected an automatic check is made on your status in regard to what benefits you are receiving and then a slightly deeper one to see if you are actually entiteled to them, a full CRB check is only one step further than that.
The only people who have something to fear from these checks are those that have something to hide in much the same way as those who are opposed to ID Cards need to hide something.
You only have something to fear from the law if you have something to hide ? Give me a break ?
Was that true in apartheid south africa ? I suspect those of non-white colouring would say no.
The USA pre civil rights movement, I guess black folk would say no.
Homosexual people before buggery ceased to be a crime ?
Jews, Unions Members, Religious minorities across the world ?
Your arguement that those against ID cards have something to hide is stupidly short sighted. We may have a mostly inept and hence mostly harmless government now, it isnt guaranteed to remain this way.
Mike
From what I can see this remains a very gray area and a matter of personal choice on the part of a councillor. The advice we have received suggests - as has the earlier comment on this thread - that a CRB check for councillors is of little benefit.
Until I receive proper advice to the contrary I will, like most other councillors concentrate on other matters.
Mike, I know about the checks that are carried out, but I am not aware that a CRB check is done, if it were I would be happy, but why do we have to have one for every post we hold, unless its to pay the home secretary's housing allowance?
Organisations are only allowed to request a CRB check for a volunteer who comes into regular contact with vulnerable clients (as defined above).
The contact must be regular or part of the volunteer’s “normal duties”.
Very occasional or one-off contact between a volunteer and your vulnerable clients is not likely to justify a CRB check.
One example of a role that can be checked is where a volunteer will be caring for, supervising, training or in sole charge of people aged under 18. For volunteers working with vulnerable adults, the threshold is whether the individual is providing ‘care services’ to them. ‘Care services’ does include social care, but again this does not mean that occasional contact with a vulnerable person justifies carrying out a CRB check.
The legal definition provided in the Police Act means that groups such as homeless people, older people or asylum seekers do not automatically fit the legal definition of a ‘vulnerable adult’. It also means that contact with the general public does not automatically require a CRB check.
How do councillors as opposed to councillors who are school governors or councillors with responsiblities in the social service arena meet this definition ?
Also if you blanket check councillors what exactly are you going to do if a councillor fails the check ? You are not empowered to sack him.... You going to out him or her or what ?
All in all a dumb idea.
Ooh, another political joke there from a political joke.
Has the double blue band form scheme ended then ? You used to just go to Ramsgate nick get an application form, fillit in, get someone to sign across the back of passport sized photos etc send it with a ten quid fee and get a Scotland Yard CRO letter back ... the double blue band letter saying no criminal record.
I last did it 1998 I think.
Has it all changed now ?
welcome to Gordons Police state, more CCTV cameras than any where else in Europe, DVLA cameras monitoring motorists every move, DNA and Medical records open to Government departments, prisoners out early to live amongst you all yes your neighbour could be a house with early release prisoners in, DG am MF advocating CRB checks to complete Big Brothers totl hold on the population, ORWELL was near the mark but even he would not have known how far this "looney" government would encroach in private lives,welcome to Gulag Britain, DG as your local Commissar
It costs money and takes up police time to do CRB checks. Let's not waste either of these precious commodities on grumpy old Councillors who aren't likely to be in 1:1 contact with children. Focus resources where they are most likely to have an effect. Make sure all of your youth workers are properly checked.
Post a Comment