Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Annette Brooke (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill (HL).


Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [Lords]

I endorse the comments of the hon. Member for Amber Valley (Judy Mallaber), whose amendment I support. Getting round to the introduction of adequate protection in relation to the internet has taken time, and we need to be proactive in that area. Without doubt, tracking devices have two aspects to them. The aspect that relates to parents getting information is entirely good. The downside, however, is that in the wrong hands such devices have potential for the setting up of some very unpleasant crimes. It is now time to introduce into regulations a process that, eventually, can be used for licensing. Many amendments have been tabled for consideration today, and in so far as they respond to the points made on Second Reading and in Committee we must welcome them. Whether we have the time to scrutinise the brand new amendments, however, is a real issue. If it has suddenly been decided that we must consider foster parents, which sounds fairly obvious, what other groups have we forgotten? Can we really put the Bill to bed tonight and feel that we have done a thorough job? I do not think so, and I am very concerned about that. Getting to grips with the vast number of Government amendments has been an enormous burden for a relatively small party such as ours. Having said that, I particularly welcome the amendment relating to language schools, on which my hon. Friend the Member for Torbay (Mr. Sanders) made an excellent contribution on Second Reading. I also have language schools in my constituency, and he and I will feel happier as a result of the amendment. There has also been responsiveness to the points made in Committee about prison and probation officers, which is important. New clause 1 specifically mentions private fostering, which sounds good in theory. However, given that the Government have never conceded to amendments tabled by Front Benchers from both main Opposition parties that would require a registration scheme for private fosterers, how will the information about the Bill be communicated to those who are privately fostering? At the moment, there is no way of tracking down everybody who is involved in private fostering. Therefore, we have a Bill that puts an enormous burden on and potentially criminalises such people, but no way to ensure that they even know about the Bill. It leapt off the page to me that private fosterers were an obvious group for attention.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
450 c1246-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disability Children Disclosure of information Conditions of employment Criminal records Devolution Fees and charges Electronic surveillance Foster care Governing bodies Information Internet Local government NHS Northern Ireland Recruitment Older people Mental capacity Pornography Monitoring Staff Powers of attorney Offences against children Scotland Registration Vetting Schools Vulnerable adults Sexual offences Regulation Safety Wales Voluntary work Independent Safeguarding Authority
Legislation
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk