---

Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL]

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 15 and 16. As noble Lords will recall, there was no part of the Bill that was subject to more difficulty than what has come to be known as the ““frequency test””. For the application of the bar, the concern previously put to us was that even very brief or occasional contact with a barred person constitutes a risk too far, not least because of the difficulty of defining ““very brief”” or ““occasional””. We listened carefully to those views, and Amendments Nos. 16 and 31 reflect the revised view, supported by all parties, that we should prevent a person on a barred list from engaging in regulated activity and make it a criminal offence for an employer to engage them even where the activity is brief or occasional. We do recognise, however, that in an emergency it may be necessary for a barred individual to engage in a specific regulated activity and that to criminalise them for doing so would be wrong. Amendments Nos. 15 and 30 create a defence where a barred individual has to engage in regulated activity to prevent harm and where there is no one else around that could engage in that specific activity. That is intended to cover only a very limited range of situations where, for example, a doctor barred from working with children has to administer first aid to a child who has had an accident in the street. Amendments Nos. 203 and 224 are designed to ensure, for example, that a barred parent would be able to enter a school to attend their child’s parents’ evening, or that an individual on the adults’ barred list would be able to visit their sick mother in a care home. However, a barred person who carried out an activity in a school, for example, with the opportunity for contact with vulnerable groups, would be prevented from doing so where the activity involved work, paid or unpaid, in connection with the purposes of the school. While a barred person will now be barred from regulated activity of any duration, the requirements to check and to be subject to monitoring should still apply only when the amount of contact is above a certain threshold. Amendments Nos. 200, 202, 219, 223 and 236 set out the circumstances in which the requirements to check and to be subject to monitoring kick in. They ensure that activities that take place overnight will be regulated activity. They also define contact taking place on three or more days in a 30-day period as regulated activity. These circumstances are referred to in Amendment No. 236 as the ““period condition””. Similar revisions are made to the definition of controlled activity by Amendments Nos. 74, 75 and 82. That means that employers will be required to check, and individuals will need to be subject to monitoring, if they are working in, for example, a conference crèche for children that lasts for three days or longer. Similarly, a volunteer helping out at a school campsite would need to be subject to monitoring if they were looking after the children overnight. It will be optional for employers to check individuals engaged in regulated activity lasting for less time than those circumstances specified in the period condition. Beyond those situations, the requirements to check and to be subject to monitoring will still apply when an activity is carried out ““frequently””. Frequently will take its normal meaning and, as has been said previously in this House, guidance will set out the Secretary of State’s broad interpretation that the term will cover activities that are carried out once a month or more often. However, to provide a measure of protection for employers and individuals who have followed this guidance, Amendments Nos. 22, 42 and 54 require the court to take into account the extent to which employers and individuals have followed the Secretary of State’s guidance when imposing penalties for a failure to comply with the regulated activity requirements. The amendments meet concerns raised in this House about the definition of ““frequently”” and its practical effects. I believe that they will be welcomed. Moved, That this House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 15 and 16.—(Lord Adonis.)