UK's child protection database delayed again
Government IT fail? Shurely not
The government's child protection database, which will have entries for 11.3 million people who have contact with children or vulnerable adults, has been delayed again.
The Independent Safeguarding Authority's system will now be fully-functioning by 26 July 2010 rather than 12 October. Legislation was introduced in 2006 after the Bichard report into the Soham murders. That investigation found that various government agencies had information about Ian Huntley which, had it all been put together, could have prevented him working at a primary school.
We failed to get any more information out of the Home Office beyond "IT problems". The official statement reads: "This scheme is built on existing strong safeguards and significantly more will start on 12 October but it is vital the scheme's final elements are properly designed, piloted and tested before they are introduced."
The scheme was originally meant to begin in autumn 2008 - it was delayed because of concerns about data security.
The ISA database includes a criminal record check as well as data from "List 99" which can include cautions and dropped charges. It will also include a list of those considered unsuitable to work with children maintained by the Department of Education and another list of those barred from working with vulnerable adults.
From July everyone on the scheme will be subject to continuous monitoring - the database will check all entries against any new information from police or other sources.
Registering on the database will cost £64 unless you are an unpaid volunteer. Staff moderating websites accessed by children also need to register. ®
"all you hypocrites will be whining about an invasion of personal privacy. Make your Daily Mail minds up."
Nope we are being pretty damned consistent - do you not think forcing people to sign up to yet another pointless database is yet another invasion of privacy?
How does this database help keep things private?
All in all - do you know whatthe word hypocrite means?
won't some *actually* think of the children?
Forget the whining or sarcasm that usually co-incides with this question, but since it is known* that the VAST majority of child abuse occurs in the home by either a parent or relative or close friend of the family - WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY ACTUALLY DOING TO PROTECT CHILDREN!??!?! FFS!!!
and I never resort to caps - these people make me madder than the tw@ who has just lied about ramming my car from behind and claiming it was my fault - and that's pretty angry I can tell you.
*I realise I'm supposed to quote a wiki source or something at this point, but does anyone NOT know this?
Flames, because whilst they fiddle, Rome burns. (no pun intended)
Liar, liar, pants on fire!
Quoth a mouthpiece: "This scheme is built on existing strong safeguards and significantly more will start on 12 October but it is vital the scheme's final elements are properly designed, piloted and tested before they are introduced."
My instinctive reaction was "more NuLab bullshit and lies". And I live in Canada, not under the thumb of NL. "Existing strong safeguards" my eye! The system will probably leak information like a clapped out sieve and be full of innumerable factual errors that cannot be corrected. The "properly designed, piloted and tested" line is revealed as a lie because NuLab's track record with IT is that nothing is ever done properly, nothing at all.
Do Mr. Brown and Mrs. Smith realize that they and their party have absolutely _NO_ credibility? That everything they or their underlings say is presumed to be lies forged by spin doctors? How can they look themselves in the mirror in the morning?
[Sadly, Firefox pre-fill tells me that I've already used this subject line at least once.]