---

Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [Lords]

I am very happy to respond to that point, not least because it is pertinent and relevant to the debate. It also follows on from comments that the hon. Gentleman made in Committee. As the hon. Gentleman rightly says, the Home Office is undertaking a consultation, particularly around the subject of violent and extreme pornography, and it is our intention as a consequence to feed that in through guidance to the IBB. It is important that we do that, and that there is a direct link between the work being undertaken by the Home Office. I assure the House that that is the case. Amendments Nos. 113, 119, 121 and 128 respond to the debate on standards of proof that took place in Committee, when I clarified that the balance of probabilities applies to deciding matters of fact. The amendments make clear that a two-stage test applies in discretionary barring cases. In cases being considered because an individual has engaged in behaviour that has harmed a vulnerable person—I refer Members to amendments No. 113 and 121—the IBB must first be satisfied that the individual has engaged in relevant behaviour, before going on to consider whether it is appropriate to include the individual in the list. In respect of individuals who are considered to present a risk of harm to the vulnerable, the IBB must first be satisfied that the individual poses a risk of harm, and then go on to consider whether that risk justifies including the individual in the list. Amendment No. 139 ensures that the court is under a duty to inform an individual who is convicted of an automatic barring offence that the IBB will bar him as a result, putting the convicted person in no doubt from the earliest possible moment. Amendment No. 98 provides that an order under amendments No. 120 and 129 should be subject affirmative resolution procedure. Amendments Nos. 120 and 129 were discussed earlier. They allow the Secretary of State to specify by order the criteria that must apply in considering whether it is more appropriate that the IBB or Scottish Ministers should consider a person’s case. Amendment No. 112 gives the IBB a power to make ex gratia compensation payments to any individuals who are adversely affected by IBB maladministration—a point that was made in Committee by the hon. Member for Brent, East (Sarah Teather). Finally, new clause 23 and new schedule 4 create a new clause and new schedule specifying powers to transfer individuals from existing barred lists to the new children’s and vulnerable adults’ barred lists. Paragraph 1 of the new schedule allows the Secretary of State to require the IBB to advise him on decisions under the current schemes. That will help a seamless transition to take place. Paragraphs 2 and 3 relate to children and vulnerable adults respectively, and enable the Secretary of State to make an order setting out the procedure to be followed for transition and to ensure that the IBB can be required to include automatically, or consider for inclusion, anyone included in the current lists. I commend these amendments to the House.