I thank the Minister for his response. He is right to say that there may be a case for making a distinction between regulated and controlled activity, and for pointing out that the list of safeguards an employer can put into place to ensure that someone working in a controlled activity would not present a danger to children do not all have to be implemented for each individual employee. But choosing the most appropriate safeguards in any individual case requires a considerable level of expertise and understanding on the part of the employer. That is a deep concern of mine because while many employers will have such a level of expertise, others will not. They will not know which appropriate safeguards would make it safe to employ a barred person in a controlled activity. Given that, they may take the safe route and opt out completely by not employing the person at all.
Obviously my main concern is to protect children rather than look after the employment rights of someone who has got themselves on the barred list. At this point I need to reflect on what the Minister has said and consult on it.
Clause 18 agreed to.
Clauses 19 and 20 agreed to.
Clause 21 [Monitoring]:
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Walmsley
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 3 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
681 c259-60GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:54:15 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_319527
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_319527
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_319527