Reading through the Bill proposals again, it strikes me in light of recent activities that the government really does not value the parent in any shape or form, it would seem that if you have a criminal past, domestic turmoil or just a plain ol' wayward child, you as the parent will pay and pay and pay yet more.

It is of note that on the government's website it boldy states that of 4500 public consultations, TWO THIRDS are upheld from children, this is ludicrous in the extreme, next minute the government will be consultng our loved ones on defence matters and fiscal policy.

Why not families as a whole? Why is it that parents are so maligned by the government for a very small minority of people who do indeed harm their children?

What is even more worrying, is that according to Ian White's report in 1992 and further information from other sources the minister responsible for putting this together should not be involved in any matters concerning children, let alone public office.

It would appear though that the ministers first loyalties are NOT to the people who placed her in power, NOT to the children committed to her charge but solely to Social Services as a whole and we at the RPSSUK wonders if there is more to this.

Union intervention maybe...?

Why do we need a new database for children?

Wouldn't it have been better to take an existing framework, streamline it and make it accessible to agencies that need it?

Under current child protection legislation, if its a child protection issue or query, then most doors are open anyway, this government is obsessed with databasing and criminalising its subjects and who will have access the RPSSUK asks, who?

Business Interests, perhaps? One of the biggest drawbacks on the ID card is that companies are already vying for access rights, insurance companies, medical benefit companies, in fact any company that could claim a need to view the database will have the oppurtunity to buy its way to your life.

Currently though, if I had the money or the inclination, I could access a disclosure company and if I pay the extra fee I can have anything I want on a person, all I have to do is say this person will be working with children

Already, the system stinks

Whatever happened to the privacy of the child though, or the family even?

The new database will have details of a very private nature of the child itself as well as the family members involved, if a father for instance has a 10 year old minor conviction, then any disclosure company can allow this to be known... to ANYONE, this is the back door to peoples lives and many people will suffer because of it, this will have an impact on the child if the family cannot gain employment, lead to poverty even maybe create the situation for domestic violence and abuse in the home.

As with the ID cards, NOT ONE COMPANY should have access to these files and that includes charities as well who are also expecting to be included in the loop.

But all the times the government are having their palms greased by corporations with vested interests in gaining access to your private details, well your information is up for grabs and very soon so will your childs.

One last thought on this particular subject is will it lead to supply and demand for paedophiles who will remain hidden in the system?

It is a GOOD thing that people with criminal records for child abuse should wear that around their necks for the rest of their lives, however is it a GOOD thing that social services have access to the CRB for all aspects of a persons life?

We think it a point of discrimination that a person convicted in the past for a minor crime or offence, juvenile even, should have his details passed between all members of the agency when it is unrelated, historical and discrimantory too.

Would it also not give social services MORE ammunition to take control of a person's life?

An example that a person attacked in a pub as a teenager used something more than reasonable force to defend themselves, he is convicted and fined but to all intents and purposes he did not start the fight and was provoked.

Social Services WILL not say this though, the person in question will have rehabilitated but social services will be there...

"A violent person, incapable of controlling themselves, a danger to society, a danger to his family"

It would seem Hodge has great plans for social services, her own private army maybe? Who knows....!

Recently it was announced that a 15 strong team of associations and org's are putting increased pressure on the point of allowing social services to have executive powers over schools, this is very alarming in that education should be educators and pass on concerns to social services, however if social services gain executive power over schools, does that herald the day when teachers will teach under the whip of a social services administrated school?

However, anti conspiracy theorists, hold on, there's more....

When recently at a family court in the south west, upon a conversation with a senior practicioner from some department or other, the matter of the Bill came up, he seemed most confident that social services would also gain executive powers over the Police as well, "surely not" I retorted, yet the SP explained that if the police in a child related matter refused to play social services game, then their new powers would be able to allow them to take over the case and command the police in the matter.

I explained though there was no provision as yet in the Bill for this, "There will be", he answered, "There will be...."

The police are experienced evidence gatheres and criminal deducer's, their evidence quality is usually quite high and way above the useless offerings that social services give to the family division, there is considerably less doubt with a police mans evidence usually.

At least the Police do not belong to a radical union that punishes it's member's for whislteblowing criminal activity, corruption in the police is at an all time low whilst in social services, its on a near vertical climb...!

The current climate is that sefl policing of departments exists, instead of Hodge and co looking at this terrible imbalance, what do they do?

Create safeguards and forms of discipline in a national policy....?

Not on your life, she has given yet MORE power to the departments, they will be less culpable than they are now and with Lord Phillips judgement last year preventing parents sueing social services for false allegations and abusive treatment (a very suspicious judgement in my view...), sufferers from abuse by the department will have less rights, less retribution and less standing.

Now lets take this a stage further, lets look at it with what David Blunkett is bringing in with cutting crime Bill, by removing the defendants ability to see the case before them, by giving the prosecution 24 hour resources that will be denied to the defendant, what chance does anyone have?

It will become the point that if social services say you are guilty, it will be a matter of a swift case and BANG you are guilty! and with government administered appeals, you will never prove your innocence.

Or as in Hitler's Germany, a pointed finger or a whisper in the right ear, drumhead courts and instant conviction maybe????

Sorry, that already exists in the UK, well the anonymous phone call that brings about a EPO and removal of your child, stands to about the same thing really...!

As a law abiding citizen and a loving parent, it should not affect you.... BUT...

Its not as simple as that, is it?

Any crime you have in the past or in the future will impact heavily on social services way of dealing with you, lets take a "for instance here"

When David Blunkett has removed summonary offences and replaced all with arrestable status, you are walking down the street and your child drops a ice cream wrapper on the street, you didn't notice anything until you find yourself arrested for it, charged, sentenced/fined etc.

Now you have a criminal record!

(It could be anything, speeding, RTA, failure to pay council tax, TV Licence, mix up on computer etc).

It wasn't your fault and you would have chided your child for doing so but it's too late.

Your child now has a file heading under "Child of Criminal"

Now your child could kick a ball through a window or bullied at school, bunks off to avoid injury or humiliation and under the new rules, a child of a criminal will be tagged...!

Now as a parent you are unaware of these things, children do withold information like this but you will be charged for abetting truancy. Whatever the child does you will be an Abetter

Social Services will intervene.

They will notice file "Child of a criminal"

They will notice "deviant behaviour of child" e.g. Truancy

They will plaster it on you as an abusive parent

They will take your child into CARE

See how it COULD go????

Now lets take another view...

What if the above happened and your child was injured, say by tripping down the stairs or maybe falling of the wall whilst playinig, gains an injury that could have been witnessed by a thousand people, where will you stand?

If the Doctor who examines it states they are satisfied that there is no abuse, is this good enough for social services??

NO

Social Workers see abuse where other's don't, any fan of the Harry Potter series of books will understand the character Professor "Mad Eye" Moody, who sees danger in his dustbins, a good majority of social workers have this same thing, they see abuse EVERYWHERE and hospitals will be legally bound to disclose all data to them.

EPO, foster care, freeing orders, criminal charges, destruction of family, all on the whim of some person who is totally inept or malicious in intent.

Unlike the Scottish office that has promised to consult with parties other than social care agencies and hopefully will remember their promise to us and PACT group, the government has NOT consulted with ONE opposing group, it has taken the viewpoint of the professionals only, a third of its public consutatives were adults yet how many professional injustice groups were asked their opinions?

Even though we are aware of Sir Nicholas Chambers and his team monitoring us, the government cannot deny our existance yet when have we been asked for our views to inputting safeguards?

SWEPT UNDER THE CARPET??

PACT Group and others report the same, because we will NEVER be asked, according to the BASW all complaints levied are MALICIOUS which is utter rubbish, if this were the case then why so many upheld in higher courts, by the Ombudsman and the ECHR.

It brings me onto the matter of the ECHR and the Bill itself in that we at the RPSSUK believe the government are going to abolish the convention in this country and that is borne out by Lord Phillips judgement last year in claiming retribution through courts against false allegations by social services.

This government has absolutely no intention of anything except paying lip service when it comes to the ECHR Convention, it's stance already says so but with the judgement last year and the impending bill, there is no way the Bill could be introduced without breaching the ECHR under Articles 6,8,10 and 12.

The HRA 98 is a waste of time giving no-one any fairer justice than any other court, the ECHR is a court that does and will find for the sufferer and for this the government will seccede from it in time and any one in need of its services will have to suffer unchampioned.

The RPSSUK is extremely disturbed by the judgement mentioned, it takes away a right to protest at unlawful, illegal or immoral behaviour by a public body, it sends a message to the public body, do what you like to these people, it makes people fear social services and it makes people fear being parents.

And as for making the majority of the public consultations children, what a swiz.... its a bit like asking my cats what I should have for tea....!

RPSSUK