Rigorous vetting needed

The disclosure that almost 4,000 people who applied for sensitive State jobs working with children were disqualified, because they have criminal convictions, is grounds for alarm rather than complacency.

The vetting system is obviously inadequate, because a criminal record is essentially the only criterion being used by the new Garda vetting unit set up in January to screen applications for posts dealing with children.

In the case of clerical abuse a great many of the more notorious offenders exposed in recent years did not have criminal records. Indeed, they were essentially moved around to ensure theyat did not get such records.

This move-the-abuser policy was designed to placate the families of victims with the assurance that it would not happen again. But, of course, it did happen again and again, somewhere else with someone else’s child.

The current vetting system is little more than a cosmetic exercise. Teachers are not subject to the clearance procedure, for instance, neither are community workers, part-time workers, or applicants from abroad, other than from Britainthe United Kingdom.

Just because people are only in part-time positions does not render them any less likely to abuse children. Hence a full, rigorous vetting system should apply to everyone seeking a position with children.

The system should be much more thorough than merely checking criminal records. Child support groups have been calling for a system that would seek to identify not just convicted abusers, but also potential abusers.

Of course, this raises issues about the civil rights of innocent people who might fall into the category of potential abusers.

If it comes to a conflict of rights, however, there is little doubt that society would prefer that the most serious consideration should apply to the rights of likely innocent victims.

Around one in 10 abusers have criminal records, which means that 90% do not. Thus we are actually

relying on a system that seeks to protect children by merely trying to weed out just 10% of the likely offenders. This is obviously a crazy system.

Unless our vetting procedures are improved there is a real danger that this country will actually attract abusers that fit into the 90% who do not have criminal records, according to Owen Keenan, the chief executive of Barnardos.

In Britain and Northern Ireland the Government sets standards for the organisations dealing with children, while Mr Keenan contends that the reverse is true here. Our organisations essentially tell the Government what standards are required.

The Minister for Children Brian Lenihan states that there is an onus on employers to protect children by

using good interviewing techniques, validating references during recruitment, and ensuring proper supervision after recruitment, but the Government can no longer shirk its responsibility in this areas, as it has done over the decades.

It is not enough to have plans to include teachers, community workers and part-time workers within the vetting scheme. It should also include the checking of employment records of applicants. This should be done now as a matter of urgency, not at some yet to be chosen date in the near or distant future.