Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL]

We have intentionally sought to make the definition of regulated activity wide to provide protection for the greatest number, including those employed under direct payment and all those working in community care services who have close personal contact with vulnerable adults. We are especially keen to ensure that adults receiving direct payments are protected under the new scheme, and the Bill will ensure that that happens. For the first time ever, direct payment recipients will have access to the same vetting and barring scheme as other members of the vulnerable adults’ workforce and will have the option of vetting their staff, should they so wish. In response to the amendments tabled by the noble Baronesses, Lady Walmsley and Lady Sharp, it is clear in the definition of a vulnerable adult in Clause 43 that direct payment recipients are covered by the Bill. The definition of regulated activity has been drawn widely and will include those providing services to direct payment recipients. We are confident that the activities described in paragraph 5(1) of Schedule 2 are wide enough to cover all the activities that a direct payment recipient may employ someone to do. For flexibility, however, we have the power to add to that definition should service delivery dramatically change in the future. Anyone who is barred will be committing an offence if they work for a direct payments recipient. That means they will not be able to care for, advise, guide, teach, treat or give assistance to a direct payments recipient. As noble Lords will be aware, the purpose of direct payments is to put individuals in control of the care and support they receive. It is therefore right that they should decide whether or not to make a check, and we will support them in that decision. We have had a very strong steer following consultations on our Green Paper, Independence, Well-Being and Choice, that adults want to manage their own risk. Through guidance, and the direct payment support services that exist in most councils, we will help them to make an informed choice. We must, as the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, pointed out so eloquently yesterday, be mindful of basic human rights principles and proportionality. Balance and proportionality are key to this Bill. In response to the noble Lord, Lord Laming, I do not believe that it would be proportionate to require all individuals who come into contact with vulnerable adults to go through the vetting and barring process; indeed, he recognised that. Neither would it be proportionate for individuals on the barred list to be prevented from working in all jobs that bring them into contact with vulnerable adults. For example, a cleaner in a daycare centre may work under supervision and have minimal contact with vulnerable adults, and it would not be proportionate to prevent some people on the barred list from undertaking that role. It is important that the scope of the bar is proportionate to the potential risk presented. We have sought to provide the greatest levels of protection where we know the incidence of abuse is greatest. Therefore we have provided for care homes, which are establishments where vulnerable adults are always present, to have the highest level of protection. Vetting and barring checks will be mandatory for all individuals working in care homes, whatever their role. We do not think the same arguments apply to daycare, for example, which covers a wide range of services provided to older and disabled people. It can be provided in a variety of ways by the local council, a voluntary sector organisation or by a local religious organisation. Very often daycare is provided in a community setting where a range of other activities take place. However, I emphasise that those who undertake a caring or supporting role in community care settings, including day care services, will be covered by the bar. As the noble Lord recognised, it would not be proportionate to bar a receptionist in a community setting because a daycare group meets there once a week, but we have provided in Clause 19 for those posts to be covered by controlled activity. We will issue guidance to try to ensure that employers in all care settings make checks on those staff who are not undertaking regulated activity but who have opportunity for contact with a vulnerable adult or access to their personal information. An employer will be under a duty to have regard to such guidance, issued under Clause 20, in relation to the steps they should take when employing individuals to engage in a controlled activity. That will include checking barred status and conditions that should be met if the employer decides to employ an individual who is barred. I believe the Bill provides the right balance between protecting vulnerable adults and placing unnecessary burdens on the workforce. We have to ensure that the regulatory burden is not so great that people are unable to get the services they need. We have ensured that those sectors where the highest levels of abuse occur are provided for within the definition of a regulated activity. I would therefore ask noble Lords to withdraw their amendments.