There is a world of difference between close and constant, and occasional. There is a further concern that could be raised about those who are deemed to be in supervision. Were things to go wrong—and in the best of all possible worlds, there will tragically be such occasions—we must consider those who will be deemed to have been in a supervisory capacity, where they must rely on their judgment about the individual. Some people have referred to the manipulative: they are deadly.
Furthermore, I refer to a quote in connection with a case involving a member of the Scouts. When I spoke to a young person who had come into contact with this predator, the young person said: "““We worked out that he was the one who looked for the child with no friends””."
I am concerned that if in the future we are going to rely on somebody being in a supervisory capacity, they need protection from any allegation at a later stage that they failed to supervise.
Protection of Freedoms Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 6 December 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Protection of Freedoms Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
733 c639 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:29:31 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_792340
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_792340
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_792340