---

Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL]

That is very helpful. I am sure that the board will consider all the other matters. That may be sufficient grounds for allaying my concern because a single uncorroborated professional concern would then be assessed along with lots of other matters. If there were two sets of professional concerns, that would weigh in the balance more on one side than the other. I still think that thought needs to be given to regulated activity providers so that they are aware that more note will be taken of a referral under circumstances in which more information is provided or more than one person is able to certify that there are professional concerns. Perhaps that can be addressed in guidance. I have fewer concerns about local authorities and their duty to refer because a series of checks and balances applies internally. I am not convinced that the duty on a local authority as a social services authority is really any higher. There is the harm test; the second condition is that the local authority thinks that the person, "““is engaged or may engage””," in regulated activity. That does not seem a very strong test. The person may engage in it in the future if that is the sort of thing in which he is interested.