Vetting law should define key terms, committee told

A DEFINITION of what constitutes “ad hoc” contact with children and vulnerable adults should be included in the legislation on vetting people who work with them, TDs and Senators have been told.

A group of 17 organisations, including Swim Ireland and the GAA, made submissions to an Oireachtas committee on the Bill to establish a national vetting bureau.

The Government has said the Bill would place existing vetting procedures in many sports and recreational organisations on a statutory basis.

Among the submissions received by the Oireachtas committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, which published its report yesterday, were recommendations that definitions such as “ad hoc”, “occasional” and “voluntary” should be properly defined.

Chairman of the committee Fine Gael TD David Stanton said concern had been expressed about occasional, voluntary and ad hoc contact with children and whether this should be exempt.

The submissions pointed out that a person with a hidden intent needed only occasional access to “groom” or initiate the development of a relationship, the report said.

Committee member Senator Ivana Bacik of Labour said while the report identified a number of key issues and recommendations, it was vital that the new bureau be properly resourced.

She said many organisations were ahead of the State in implementing guidelines on protection, particularly in not allowing unsupervised access to children and vulnerable adults.

However, she added, issues such as the need to report on minor convictions such as road traffic offences had also arisen and it had been suggested that such offences be expunged from an individual’s record over time.

The committee’s report on the submissions will be given to Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform Alan Shatter who is to consider its recommendations.

In some areas the report did not make recommendations, but referred consideration of issues to the Minister.

One scenario put forward was where a couple, following vetting, were deemed suitable to foster a related child or vulnerable adult.

Questions were raised about what would happen when a new partner entered into the family and assumed the role of foster carer.

It was said the exemption could see the new partner not being vetted and so the care recipient could be placed at risk.

Another issue raised was in relation to exchanges of vetting information between the State and foreign institutions.

It was noted in the report that while there was good co-operation between Ireland and Britain, some European countries did not provide information.

It was also pointed out that due to legal and cultural differences, what might be considered an offence in this jurisdiction may not be considered an offence elsewhere and therefore might not be disclosed.

The report paid tribute to the Garda vetting unit. It said the legislation should not result in the unit being “overwhelmed”.

MAIN POINTS VETTING REPORT:

* Sufficient resources are required to prevent delays in vetting which result in delays in the employment of care-givers.

* Anyone with access to confidential information on children and vulnerable adults should be vetted in addition to those who have direct contact with them.

* Everyone seeking employment with care-giving organisations should be vetted, not just those who have contact with children or vulnerable adults.

* The definition of “premises” should be widened to include private residences, particularly where some smaller organisations are run from home.

* Previous convictions for offences such as minor road traffic offences should be expunged over time.

* Consideration should be given to a reliable form of sharing vetting information with other jurisdictions.

* Vetting should be “portable” to allow a positively vetted individual move from one organisation to another without undue delay.