It always happens, doesn’t it?
But Sir Roger Singleton, the chairman of the Independent Safeguarding Authority, said the scope of the database could increase significantly because companies would fear losing business if they did not have their employees vetted.
So it won’t just be the 11.3 million people who the Govt says have to get checked but another swathe of millions who think it in their best interests to get checked.
Say the total cost is £100 per check: not an unreasonable figure. There’s the direct cost, plus the time spent waiting, plus the time needed to fill out the forms etc. So that’s £1.1 billion to be spent, at very minimum (ie, not including the costs of those who volunteer to get checked). How long does a check last for? A year or two?
OK, so, now, how many kiddie rapes and murders do we think this is going to prevent?
Is the cost actually worth it?
Or should we simply scrap the whole scheme?
4 responses so far ↓
1 The Great Simpleton // Oct 27, 2009 at 9:50 am
No price is too high to pay for the protection of children…especially if its someone else’s money.
2 JuliaM // Oct 27, 2009 at 10:07 am
Scrap the scheme, and shoot the people who thought it was a good idea.
3 Brian, follower of Deornoth // Oct 27, 2009 at 10:42 am
I’d say hanging was a better idea, JuliaM. After all, hemp is carbon-neutral.
4 ukliberty // Oct 27, 2009 at 11:08 am
I hope would-be parents and their relatives and friends will be checked too. After all, if it spares just one child…
Leave a Comment