Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Peterborough ET site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Concern over criminal checks on councillors



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
06 October 2008
CRIMINAL checks to stop unsuitable people working with children or vulnerable adults could soon be carried out on elected Peterborough city councillors, a report has revealed.
If implemented, elected members would be brought in line with council officers, who are Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checked every three years.

Although only at its proposal stage, the plans have already been met with some concern by some councillors about how the checks will be carried out.

The plan was introduced to the council's scrutiny committee meeting by monitoring officer and council solicitor, Helen Edwards, following recommendations by the standards committee.

She said: "At the moment the council has no policy at all, but we did carry out one on an ad-hoc basis. We wouldn't expect members to be having unsupervised access to children."

As it stands, the council carries out CRB checks on elected members in line with the minimum requirements of the bureau and in recent years, 29 councillors have been checked. The council says none of these checks "aroused a cause for concern".

However, original plans to universally check all councillors had been shelved because it was found to be against a number of acts, including the Human Rights Act 1998.

Instead, each elected position will be risk-assessed to determine the level of contact with children and vulnerable adults.

Mrs Edwards said: "Rather than create a new policy we would attach elected members to the existing one for officers.

"Risk assessment will take place towards the end of this year to see which ones will need to be CRB checked. We can then carry them out as required.

"What we are saying is that we are going to carry out risk assessments and we are working towards forming a criteria. But we will not be over zealous and we will take a sensible view on this."

The plans were agreed in principle by the committee, but scrutiny member Cllr Nick Sandford raised his initial concerns.

He said: "It's not sufficient to say that some councillors will have some contact with children and vulnerable adults."

The fact that the council has no power to disqualify a councillor for a positive result was also raised by Cllr Sandford at the meeting.

He added: "Even if the council finds a councillor has a previous conviction then there is nothing we can do about it."

The plans will now be drawn up into a draft policy, which will then go back to the council before it is put in place, which could be as soon as January.

The full article contains 431 words and appears in Peterborough ET newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 October 2008 11:45 AM
  • Source: Peterborough ET
  • Location: Peterborough
 
Prev
1
Next
1

trottz,

peterborough 06/10/2008 14:42:12
Here's a thought for Nick & all your greedy chums....

How about, hold it now..... RADICAL THIS ONE....

DO NOT LET CONVICTED BENEFITS THIEVES BE COUNCILLORS AT ALL.

What sort of message does this send to everyone?? It's OK to steal money from the tax payer & state, we'll still give you a 2nd in command on the Council....!!

LOUSY BUNCH OF LEACHES...PERIOD
2

Bodie,

06/10/2008 14:51:17
The only councillors who will be worrying about CRB checks are the ones with something to hide. Those with convictions for serious matters should not hold any office full stop. Minor traffic infringements might be forgiven but matters involving any type of fraud or any other offence of a serious nature should preclude anyone from getting such a position.
3

Veritas of Peterborough,

06/10/2008 19:15:22
I have never thought that checks were the answer. It is a matter of establishing good procedures, both to protect the vulnerable against possible abuse, and to protect the helpers against possible false accusations and indeed, for their general protection and safety.
This needs to be thought through. CRB checks are a kneejerk response. In any case, as the advertisements warn, past results are not necessarily a guide to future performance.
Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.