---

Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL]

My Lords, we are grateful to my noble friend and other noble Lords for how they have raised the issue, and have great sympathy with the objectives that they have sought to achieve. I can give him the assurance that he seeks—that we will set out the expectation in both the code of practice and booklets targeted specifically at individuals making decisions on behalf of family and friends, in the terms that I described earlier. I shall now speak to Amendments Nos. 1, 12, 14, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 30 and 31, which together repeal the disqualification order regime and provide for it to be succeeded by the new vetting and barring scheme created by the Bill. By removing the courts’ ability to make disqualification orders and ensuring that the new scheme provides an equivalent and equally robust replacement, the system for vetting and barring unsuitable adults will be further simplified and more effective at safeguarding children. Disqualification orders are made only by senior courts, such as the Crown Court, and are available when an offender has been convicted of specified offences against children. The court uses different presumptions depending on the age of the offender and the sentence received. When an adult offender receives a ““qualifying sentence””, a sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment or more, a disqualification order must be made unless the court is satisfied that it is unlikely that the individual will commit any further offence against a child. When a juvenile offender receives a qualifying sentence, a disqualification order must be made if the court is satisfied that it is likely that the individual will commit a further offence against a child. In other cases, where an adult or juvenile does not receive a qualifying sentence, a disqualification order may be made if the court is satisfied that the offender is likely to commit a further offence against a child. The disqualification order bars offenders from working with children and covers the same scope as the bar which applies to those on List 99 and the Protection of Children Act list, which will be replaced by the new scheme. The offences which trigger consideration of a disqualification order are listed at Schedule 4 to the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000, as amended. These offences will, in almost all cases, be included in the list of specified offences for automatic barring under the provisions of this Bill. This is the means by which we will ensure that the coverage of the scheme is no less than that of the disqualification order regime that it replaces. The mechanism by which the CRB can identify those who have committed the specified offences, as set out in Amendment No. 24, would be a frequent search of the police national computer for all those with new cautions and convictions for specified offences. The Criminal Records Bureau currently searches the police national computer at least once a day for relevant information, and this would be utilised to ensure that the CRB is aware of new offences within a short space of time following a conviction or a caution. The new scheme will not only be able to bar automatically those in respect of whom a disqualification order can currently be made but also bar in cases where a disqualification order cannot currently be imposed; for example, in relation to those who are cautioned for offences and those who are convicted in magistrates’ courts. The new provision to bar following conviction or caution for certain offences applies also to the vulnerable adults list. I need hardly say that running a judicial-based barring scheme alongside an administrative barring scheme involves considerable duplication which is not in the public interest and we are seeking to eliminate that duplication. We also intend to make transitional arrangements to cover those who are already subject to disqualification orders. Any amendments required to do that will be introduced in the other place. I beg to move.