Part 1


Part 2


And here is the article by Jonathan which Tom mentioned in part 2 of the interview. It sets out MandateNow’s concerns about the #CSAinquiry

Overview – The amendment was withdrawn following this assurance from Lord Bates for the Government :

“I can therefore advise the House that we will now hold a full public consultation on the issue of mandatory reporting. We will consult broadly on the advisability, risk, nature and scope of any reporting duty, including questions on which forms of abuse it should apply to, and to whom it should attach. I should emphasise that the Government will look at all the responses they receive with an open mind. It will be a thorough, open and transparent consultation with a rigorous evaluation of the responses. Although hitherto the Government, like the Opposition, have taken the view that we have concerns about the specific wording of this amendment, we are entering into this consultation in good faith, in our desire to evaluate the evidence that comes forward.”

Baroness Walmsley has been assiduously busy with her amendment judging by the number of peers supporting it. These included : The Lord Bishop of Durham, Baronesses Brinton, Finlay, Hollins, and Benjamin. The one voice against was Baroness Howarth, a director of the  The Lucy Faithfull Foundation. The objects of this charity are stated on the Charity Commission website. Object #1 of 5 is:  TO FURTHER THE ASSESSMENT, PSYCHOLOGICAL REHABILITATION, TREATMENT, EDUCATION AND CARE OF PERSONS WHO HAVE COMMITTED OR ARE LIKELY TO COMMIT SEXUAL OFFENCES AGAINST OTHERS, ESPECIALLY CHILDREN. Lady Howarth’s speech  is grounded on misapplied research that is used by this charity and others to dismiss mandatory reporting as a key component in a functioning child protection framework.

This is a link to the Amendment 43 in Hansard detailing the proposed legislation 

Here is a link to a transcript of the debate with sections of interest highlighted

BBC News online reported the debate here

We await publication of the terms.

Baronesses Walmsley and Hollins have submitted an amendment to the Serious Crimes Bill (Section 43) to introduce law requiring staff who work in ‘Regulated Activities’ to report concerns about the welfare of children [and vulnerable adults] to the Local Authority. The detail of the amendment is here and the debate will be broadcast live just follow this link. Transmission from the chamber starts at 2.30pm. Section 43 is likely to be first on after initial pocedures and may start around 3.10pm or shortly thereafter.
The Amendment can be seen in the Marshalled List S.43 following Clause 65.

Baroness Hollins is a cross-bencher and therefore has no party whip which might assist the amendment towards a vote on the day. If is achieved the ‘naysayers’ will be revealed. The Clergy in the Lords support the amendment. If you are motivated to take to social media between now and the debate to lobby for support, this could be helpful. Labour supports the principle of Mandatory Reporting but it has produced no proposals. The Government does not want MR but proposes nothing to make the failing system work.

To gain a greater appreciation of why #MR is so important to a functioning child protection system in institutional settngs – take this link

Brought to you belatedly and finally. Wonderful speech from Jonathan Fryer (Tower Hamlets).

And the motion carried for Mandatory Reporting and is now LibDem policy.

Lib Dem Conference policy debate (F18) moved by Baroness Walmsley (see embedded film) sees LibDems vote for the introduction of Mandatory Reporting.

You can read Lady Walmsley’s speech by clicking here.

[Click on debate agendas for larger version]

The Observer trailed the debate under the headline ‘Call for school and care home staff to have legal duty to report suspected child abuse.’

The Barnardo’s statement of the 18th September on mandatory reporting starts by expressing the universal sentiment that covering up abuse is wrong and shameful. The statement continues “We believe that it is time to change the law so that organisations face criminal proceedings if they cover up abuse.”

This bears a striking similarity to the flawed proposal from the NSPCC in its mid-August Policy Briefing to which MandateNow responded here.

What Barnardo’s has not addressed is the essential requirement that staff who have reasonable grounds for a concern about the welfare of a child, must be supported when they report it to the Local Authority. For there to be a chance of transforming the quality and culture of child protection in Regulated Activities, which is presumably what all of us seek, support for this very difficult early action is absolutely essential. (more…)