UK Parliament / Open data

Protection of Freedoms Bill

Proceeding contribution from Diana Johnson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 11 October 2011. It occurred during Debate on bills on Protection of Freedoms Bill.
Goodness, it is like the Health and Social Care Bill all over again! At this point, perhaps I should move on and speak to the Opposition amendments. I genuinely believe that the protection of children and vulnerable adults is a matter of concern to us all, in all parts of the House; we want to make sure that we get this right. That is why the Labour Front-Bench team tabled the amendments, based on the advice of experts in the field and in response to the organisations that are asking for information to be made available to them so that they can do the right thing and keep children and vulnerable adults safe. I am worried by the Minister's reluctance to acknowledge some of the important issues. The taxi driver example I provided is a real-life example that was pointed out to me yesterday. It applies to someone who, I accept, is not working in regulated activity. The standard criminal record check is the one normally used for taxi drivers, but this person was working with children on an irregular basis, despite the clear allegations that the person had wanted to abduct children in the past. The taxi company, which acted perfectly reasonably in the belief that this was a person with no convictions, allowed him to go out and ferry children around once or twice a month. What he had done was on his record, but the taxi company did not have access to the information. Many people would be worried to know that such information was not made available to an employer who was trying to do their best.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

533 c241 

Session

2010-12

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top