| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The Deputy Speaker: My Lords, I should point out that if Amendment No. 145 is agreed to, I cannot call Amendments Nos. 146 and 147 because of pre-emption.
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 145:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, Amendment No. 145 is grouped with Amendments Nos. 177, 178 and 179 in my name and with Amendments Nos. 146, 147 and 152 in the name of my noble friend Lord Swinfen who communicated with me before he left the Chamber earlier this evening. The amendments are concerned with some of the groups eligible for enhanced criminal record checks when the measures in this Bill come into force.
First, part of amendment No. 145 deals with the gaming industry, and clarifies the sections in the Gaming Act 1968, the Lotteries and Amusements Act 1976 and the National Lotteries etc Act 1993 to which the provisions for enhanced criminal record checks will apply. This amendment also enables enhanced checks to be made where an application has been made by an individual who is applying for a licence, registration or certificate under these Acts, or who has been appointed as a director or employee of a body which already holds such a certificate. In effect, this means that not only will the existing directors and staff of a gaming body be eligible for enhanced checks at the time when a licence, registration or certificate
Secondly, the other part of Amendment No. 145 and Amendments Nos. 177, 178 and 179 enable the provisions for enhanced criminal record certificates to be extended by the Secretary of State by means of regulations. It is our intention to specify those who work with particularly vulnerable adults.
During our previous consideration of this issue I listened with great care to the forceful arguments put forward in particular by my noble friend Lord Swinfen and by the noble Lord, Lord Rix, who also communicated with me before he left the Chamber this evening. They have been doughty campaigners for vulnerable groups. In Committee I expressed much sympathy with the views of noble Lords who wished to see the scope of enhanced checks extended to cover vulnerable adults as well as children and undertook to come forward with an amendment which would seek to better protect those groups from those who abuse their positions of trust. The reason why this is being done by way of a statutory power rather than by stating on the face of the Bill which groups this measure will apply to is that we want to ensure that we get it right. I have sympathy with those charitable groups who work with vulnerable adults and the vulnerable generally who wish us to clarify which groups we specifically have in mind, but I am afraid that I am not yet in a position to do that. This is a complex matter. I assure noble Lords that we intend to consult widely with interested parties, including the charities involved, on the difficult question of which groups of vulnerable adults most need this extra protection. We believe that taking a power in this Bill to enable the provisions for enhanced checks to be extended is the right way forward. In the meantime, vulnerable groups will not be left exposed. As soon as the measures in the Bill come into force those who already work with vulnerable adults will be eligible for full criminal record checks which will include details of spent and unspent convictions and cautions, as will those who appoint, dismiss, manage or supervise such workers. I believe that this is a sensible measure which will allow us time to evaluate the effectiveness of enhanced criminal record checks before we widen their scope and assess carefully which groups of vulnerable adults most need this extra protection.
The noble Lord, Lord Rix, and my noble friend Lord Swinfen have told me that they accept the Government's amendments in this regard. Therefore, I apprehend that if my noble friend Lord Swinfen had been here he would not be pressing the amendments in his name on the Marshalled List.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lord, we welcome the Government's recognition of the force of
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendments Nos. 146 and 147 not moved.]
Baroness Blatch moved Amendments Nos. 148 and 149:
On Question, amendments agreed to.
[Amendments Nos. 150 to 152 not moved.]
Clause 105 [Enhanced criminal record certificates: judicial appointments]:
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No.153:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank moved Amendment No. 154:
Page 42, line 11, leave out from ("that") to end of line 22 and insert ("person--
(a) in the course of considering the applicant's suitability for a position (whether paid or unpaid) within subsection (2A) or (2B), or
(b) for a purpose relating to any of the matters listed in subsection (2C).
(2A) A position is within this subsection if it involves regularly caring for, training, supervising or being in sole charge of persons aged under 18.
(2B) A position is within this subsection if--
(a) it is of a kind specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State, and
(b) it involves regularly caring for, training, supervising or being in sole charge of persons aged 18 or over.
(2C) The matters referred to in subsection (2)(b) are--
(a) a certificate for the purposes of sections 19 or 27(1) or (5) of the Gaming Act 1968 (gaming);
(b) a certificate of consent for any purpose of Schedule 2 to that Act (licences);
(c) registration or certification in accordance with Schedule 1A, 2 or 2A to the Lotteries and Amusements Act 1976 (societies, schemes and lottery managers);
(d) a licence under section 5 or 6 of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993 (running or promoting lotteries).")
1 a.m.
Page 42, leave out line 44 and insert ("person.").
Page 42, line 45, leave out ("body which") and insert ("person who").
Page 43, line 18, leave out ("body") and insert ("person").
After Clause 105, insert the following new clause--
(" . An applicant for a certificate under sections 104 and 105 shall be exempt from paying the fee required by section 104(1)(b) and section 105(1)(b) if he is--
(a) a childminder registered under the Children Act 1989;
(b) seeking registration as a childminder under the Children Act 1989;
(c) a member of a household where registered childminding takes place for whom a police check is required under the Children Act 1989.").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, Amendment No. 154 is of rather different quality from that which we have just been discussing. I believe that its purpose is plain; namely, to exempt from the payment of fees for enhanced criminal record certificates those who are involved in child minding. At Committee stage on 2nd December when we discussed the amendment moved by the noble Lord, Lord Weatherill, for the waiving of fees in respect of charities, many noble Lords were concerned about whether the financial provisions of the Bill had been properly thought through. It is one thing for the Government to decide that the cost of these provisions should not fall on the exchequer but on individuals or organisations; it is another for those affected to find the money that is likely to be involved. Your Lordships took the view by a narrow majority that it was right to waive fees in respect of charities. My amendment seeks to put before the House the desirability of making exemptions in another field.
I can anticipate what the Minister will say about the cost of the Bill and of this amendment. I want to limit myself simply to saying that the organisations principally representing child minders are deeply concerned about the consequences of the Bill. I refer to the views of the National Childminding Association
Those noble Lords who are close to these matters fully understand the very important role that registered child minders fulfil. Those who are responsible for them and anxious to represent them and to draw attention to their concerns take the following view of the provisions of the Bill as drafted.
First, the Bill will act as a disincentive to registration and increase the number of unregulated carers of young children, thus compromising their safety. Secondly, it will reduce the number of registered child minders, many of whom already find it difficult to make a living because of the high costs and expenses and low earnings, and therefore make good child care even more difficult to find. Thirdly, as a result of these factors it will threaten the good practice advances that have been made as a result of the Children Act 1989.
I do not want at this hour to discuss in detail the role of child minders or indeed how they are financed. I say only this to those who were not aware of it. Registered child minders in the United Kingdom are self-employed, independent child care providers. In that respect, detached as they are from the public service, they no doubt satisfy the wish of government to see more and more of our social provision out effectively to tender. They presently pay a fee of £10 to the local authority to register, and a further annual inspection fee of £7.50--although the Department of Health has just notified the association that these fees will increase by 25 per cent. from the beginning of next month.
The associations strongly believe that it is essential to have the checks provided for in this Bill. There is no argument at all about that. Indeed, as I have said before, there is no conflict of view in this House in respect of these clauses of the Bill. However, it is plain that if indeed some provision is not made to help child minders by avoiding the payment of these fees, then there is a threat to the whole profession as it has developed and to the safety of children in registered care.
I recognise that the Government will be very reluctant, and I know that the Minister will give no undertaking whatever this evening even to examine the amendment I am moving; however, I want to place it on record that I believe this is another respect in which, despite the long consultation period, which I fully recognise, the full consequences of the provisions in the Bill were not thought through. The fact that it has a number of virtues, particularly in Clauses 103 and 104, does not make it any less difficult for those whose job it will be to implement the provisions of the Bill.
I hope that the Minister will indicate her concern and sympathy for the child minders who are put in this position and indicate, if she will, how she believes they will get over the payment of a fee which, although it may seem small to noble Lords, can be
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page