.
I can’t see this happening. I would have thought in the case of a sex offence the police would be duty bound to inform their school and any youth organisation/group they were in, purely in terms of safeguarding on both sides. Could you imagine the media fall out if something happened and they hadn’t said anything.
Other offences would probably not be such a priority, but I doubt we wouldn’t hear through the grapevine or facebook etc.
[quote=“glass half empty 2” post=3804]I can’t see this happening. I would have thought in the case of a sex offence the police would be duty bound to inform their school and any youth organisation/group they were in, purely in terms of safeguarding on both sides. [/quote]I don’t know what the police’s obligations might be or how closely such a person may be watched or restricted subsequently but I’ll tweak the scenario slightly - Kid aged 16, has left school and family has moved to a new area due to adverse publicity. Kid joins local cadet unit.
These things can slip through the cracks and for all I know the police are not permitted to pass on this private information to other organisations - was this not why we’ve needed to re-invent the CRB/Disclosure system so that new offences are notified immediately to employers/organisations?
I can’t see this happening. I would have thought in the case of a sex offence the police would be duty bound to inform their school and any youth organisation/group they were in, purely in terms of safeguarding on both sides. Could you imagine the media fall out if something happened and they hadn’t said anything.
Other offences would probably not be such a priority, but I doubt we wouldn’t hear through the grapevine or facebook etc.[/quote]
I’m afraid your view is a little naive - the communication is simply not that good. We had a presentation from the Child Protection Officer last year or the year before who gave us some interesting stats from when the CRBing of 18yr olds in teh Corps started. Some of the offences whihc came to light were pretty high-order and no-one bothered to tell the ACO.
Every offender who is on the register has an Offender Supervisor (the title changes for each constabulary but the role is largely the same) who is responsible for monitoring the “well-being” of the offender, but also oversees the movements of them, it is the offender who reports to the supervisor when they are going anywhere abroad or elsewhere in UK for 2 nights or more. They also should know all of the connections the offender has, such as if they go to school/college/university, but weirdly it’s not a legal requirement for the offender to tell the supervisor where their place of work is, though many supervisors ask on an informal basis. With regards to situations such as being a member of the ATC, I would strongly believe that the supervisor should inform the Sqn of the offender’s situation, however this might not happen. Supervisors tend to manage a heck of a lot of offenders and the offender may (wrongly) just never tell them they are a cadet; therefore resulting in a break-down in communication
Indeed the CRB will then catch them out should they still be around at 18.
Unless there is a reason in law why an individual is barred from participating in a particular activity; cf Firearms Act 1968 Section 21; then the police will only be able to offer “advice” on the matter. This will not include the basis on which that “advice” is offered. The individual in question should be made aware by the police that “advice” has been given and be offered the opportunity to discuss the matter with the officer who provided it.
If the individual wishes to continue you are then in a position to ask them for a full disclosure of the facts, authority for the police to provide verification and; if you wish; an explanation as to why they did not reveal the matter earlier.
exmpa
I’ve had chat with my mate who was a probation offender manager until last year dealing with high risk cases.
He said sex offenders have to inform people where they work, rest and play and if they get a sopo (this will normally last 3 yrs although could last 5) it will outline these in detail and they can also be subject to something called marac, where high risk cases are discussed with different bodies. If they are under 18 they have the same. He said that they have detailed interviews with police and offender managers or youth offending case workers and these cover absolutely every aspect of their lives. The police workers attached can call at anytime of the day or night and if they’re not where they said they were or are found where they shouldn’t be, it can be do not pass go as he referred to it. He said that of all the people he works with sex offenders are the most compliant. He also said it surprised him how many youngsters were handed over from youth offending with 2 or more years on their order. He said that membership of something like youth groups would be practically impossible as many teenage sopos forbid unaccompanied association with certain age groups, using the internet and phones can be monitored.
As for other things, I suppose it’s what is regarded as high order. I stll doubt that if it was serious we wouldn’t know.
Child protection is important I think it is up to the organisation to make a judgement based on the facts, you don’t get the facts if the person’s history is not disclosed.
If I had a cdt coming up to 18 who had nicked a bike at 11 I would expect HQAC to ok him and would fight for that.
However if a cadet had violent/sexual offences flag up, that is a very different situation.
Also I believe our new Cadet Code of Conduct requires Cdts to tell their CO/staff asap if they get conviction, whilst that is just a code of conduct, we are asking for the info immediately.
Lets be honest, CRB checks should be binned because they are ineffective, let alone a breach of EUCHR! Can’t think of a comparable alternative, or if one is possible though.
BPR.
IMHO a CRB is very much like a MOT certificate - only valid on the day of issue.
My concerns about CRB clearances and cadet service are that if a cadet gets to 18 and has not got a valid CRB or attended a BASIC course, they are suspended from active squadron involvement.
It is likely that if this happens it is probably down to poor admin by a member of adult staff so why are we penalising cadets - we are a youth organisation, we are there or should be for our cadets.
And yet, a new member of staff can have a pending CRB ( or whatever it is called this week) and still be allowed to attend albeit supervised.
I really feel direction we are taking is becoming one of regular employment and less of a voluntary youth organisation.
[quote=“397k” post=9783]My concerns about CRB clearances and cadet service are that if a cadet gets to 18 and has not got a valid CRB or attended a BASIC course, they are suspended from active squadron involvement.
It is likely that if this happens it is probably down to poor admin by a member of adult staff so why are we penalising cadets - we are a youth organisation, we are there or should be for our cadets.
And yet, a new member of staff can have a pending CRB ( or whatever it is called this week) and still be allowed to attend albeit supervised.
I really feel direction we are taking is becoming one of regular employment and less of a voluntary youth organisation.[/quote]
Unfortunately we are living in world instigated by kiddy fiddler behind every lampost/tree scaremongerers and these checks are here to stay. As a result anyone who wants to work employed/voluntarily with children is automatically doing so for nefarious reasons. The only light at the end of the tunnel is transferable checks, although they aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on.
As for 18 year old cadets the Corps has backed itself into the corner you describe, when comparing the approach taken with new staff, and won’t change it’s process. For my money the whole approach to cadets wanting to stay in the Corps over 18 is over the top administrative nonsense.
Mind you the approach they take when existing staff “time out” on the “locally” set expiry for clearance, nearly caused meltdown a couple of years ago and required a change of policy.
I’ve got friends who work in school and local government youth organisations and if their clearances expire they don’t get suspended they just don’t work unsupervised. However they tend to have admin teams that are on the ball that just give them a form or call them to do it online. Not the daft system we’ve had in the Corps of CO/adj having to look to see if someone is due and then ask for a form, which can take 2/3 weeks to arrive.
Ignoring that dribble, to answer the OPs question; no it’s not a breach of human rights. The system works perfectly fine now assuming you engage with the process and don’t fight it.
We should welcome that we have a deterrent to those bad people. Without it we wouldn’t have a scooby do who was trying to join. Sure, it’s a wide net and it doesn’t catch those who haven’t surfaced yet but that’s where experienced staff vigilance steps in.
Don’t forget your responsibilities folks. Child Protection is a very serious business. J
[quote]397k wrote:
My concerns about CRB clearances and cadet service are that if a cadet gets to 18 and has not got a valid CRB…they are suspended from active squadron involvement.
…And yet, a new member of staff can have a pending CRB ( or whatever it is called this week) and still be allowed to attend albeit supervised.
[/quote]
Nope - staff and cadet DBS procedure now identical:
[quote]HQAC P Letter 01-13 (dated 31 Jan 13) wrote:
d. Cadets aged 18 and over. Potential staff cadets whose continued service past their 18th birthday has been approved by their OC Wing, may continue to attend ACO activities provided that their completed application for a criminal records check has been submitted to EA(D)S, CH. However, they are not permitted unsupervised access to cadets under the age of 18 until their criminal records check clearance has been confirmed by EA(D)S, CH. [/quote]
So, as long as they have done BASIC and have applied for DBS, cadets are not suspended pending receipt of DBS checks.
If your Wing are doing that, they are behind the curve and in breach of current policy.
Cheers
BTI