The problem is that the barring information is not made available. The point of our new clause is to ensure that barring information relating to individuals judged to be a threat to children should be made available when someone applies for a CRB check. That is the point.
The Minister made a point about locus and about employers and voluntary groups making judgments using their own common sense. Of course we want people to do that; of course we want people to take responsibility for their actions, but I fail to understand why the Minister will not allow individuals, organisations or employers to have all the information, so that they can make proper decisions about who they employ and who they allow to volunteer in their organisations.
I shall divide the House on new clause 18, which deals with revealing barred status when a CRB check is applied for, and I shall also press amendment 111 to clause 66. As we have discussed, the vast majority of people in this country would be horrified to know that the Government no longer wish to put serious criminals on a barred list to protect children. Even at this late stage, I ask the Minister to think again about whether that is the way the Government want to go.
Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.
The House divided: Ayes 224, Noes 295.
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.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
533 c241-2 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:24:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771632
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771632
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771632