---

Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL]

I am grateful to all noble Lords who half supported my amendment, and to those who spoke to what my noble friend Lord Laming referred to as the ““next best”” amendments, which seem to have carried more weight with the Minister than mine. However, as this is Grand Committee, one cannot possibly think in terms of a Division or anything of that kind. I will withdraw the amendment, but before I do so I cannot say that I was totally reassured by the figures given by the Minister. I thought it a reasonable figure that there were 221 on the list for children, of which 200 were also on the list for vulnerable adults; but it is slightly questionable that, the other way round, only 178 of the 380 individuals on the list for vulnerable adults were also on the children’s list. That means that 202—more—were deemed suitable to work with children. I would have thought that slightly questionable but there we are. It fills me with a degree of perturbation, and therefore the requirement for read-across between the list for children and the list for adults must somehow be placed firmly into the Bill. Would the Minister be kind enough to see a small delegation of those noble Lords who tabled these amendments at some time before Report, in which case perhaps it could be thrashed out in the department’s offices to a successful conclusion?