Saturday, 28 November 2009

Prove your innocence!

Slowly we are all becoming suspects, all having to prove our innocence.

The ContactPoint database will, rightly, highlight children who are at risk but it will also categorise those who may possibly be at risk and also note the details of every other child just in case. It is intended that details will be removed when the child is 18, so, once all 11 million plus children are on the database, that will mean that over 600,000 records will be destroyed annually. Who will do this and do you not think there will be the temptation to keep them, just in case? Especially if the child has had contact with the legal system.

Then we have the DNA database which, rightly, contains the DNA of convicted criminals and those implicated in recent serious crimes. Then it also contains those whom the police consider 'dodgy', those who have committed minor misdemeanour's and those who just happened to be at the scene of a crime. These details are ostensibly only to be kept for 6 years, who is to delete the information and who will check that this is done?

Then there is the ISA vetting and barring register of 11 million plus adults who work with children or vulnerable adults. This contains, rightly, those convicted of abuse but also any false accusations or suspicions and all the rest, just in case. Agencies and employers that employ a range of people who just might come into contact with children or vulnerable adults will check their prospective employees, just in case. Do you think that anyone with a suspicion on their record will get a job?

We now have the proposal by ACPO Limited and the Home Office for yet another new law and order database – this one including individuals who are unconvicted, but against whom there exist unsubstantiated allegations of domestic violence. See here. And so it goes.

The logical conclusion is that there should be parental screening and only those deemed suitable should be allowed to bear and rear children.

Also, there should be a database of politicians and civil servants. But then who would compile it and what would be the criteria for being deemed unsuitable for the job?

No comments: