We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

It is not even to protect the children, apparently

Well, I cannot say I am remotely surprised.

An estimated 11.3 million people – including parents who join school rotas to take pupils to sports events – already face having their backgrounds checked to allow them to work with children.

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.

It is really hard to know how a satire publication like the Onion or Private Eye can make a living these days.

20 comments to It is not even to protect the children, apparently

  • Jonathan

    Just another way for the state to collect information on everyone and introduce ID cards by the back door, as a matter of ‘ convenience’ of course.

  • Derek W. Buxton

    What utter stupidity, a make-work plan for another set of jobsworths. Why is this man still in charge?
    How close can we get to a police state before people begin to realise where we are going? Singleton is obviously touting for a peerage of some sort.

  • cjf

    Yes, indeed, the perfect place to hide paedophiles,
    in the agency claiming to ‘control’ them.

    Three branches of government, executive, legislative,
    judicial ? No. Actually it is unincorporated (organized crime), incorporated (business), and their collective council, what-is-called-government.

    Wherever you go in the US (at least) you may be asked
    about your arrest record, not your conviction record.
    Arrest=guilt (of not being connected) Proving innocence
    or even false arrest, does not matter. You’re either connected, or a non-person.

    This is not quite universal. National data banks and centralized authugity will make it so.

    The many connections between organized crime, gov’t
    and business, have left a ‘plausable deniability’ gap.

    Regretfully, for the majority, the gap is between their ears.

  • “Sir Roger also disclosed that the sensitive information gathered about those on the database would be kept indefinitely, even if they left the relevant professions, because it could be useful for any subsequent applications. ”

    A system that was developed with privacy as a goal would allow data to be exported to a digitally signed file, and the signature checked and data re-imported. This file could be given to the successful applicant then the data deleted from the database. It could remain valid for a decade, at least. This would reduce re-keying and provide evidence that a successful application was made previously.

    This seems an obvious design to me. It may have faults, but the flat assertion that data is needed for this reason does not ring true.

    General purpose programmer

  • MarkE

    If I decide not to apply then I may suffer the “cost” of not being allowed to work with children or vulnerable adults (given some of my colleagues that could be a problem, but I’ll deal with it). I also imagine I would have to declare my lack of a valid CRB check at every opportunity.

    Does that mean no one will ever sit a screaming child next to me on a long flight?

    (yeah, I’m a hypocrite, I never complained when it was my children spoiling someone else’s flight)

  • MarkE – that’s a genius idea, next time there is a load child near me on the train of flight I may have to lean over to the parent/flight attendant/who ever seems appropriate and point out to them that I am not in fact CRB checked.

  • Midwesterner

    It is a transition step on the way to requiring central planning authority permission to have children.

  • llamas

    MarkE wrote:

    “Does that mean no one will ever sit a screaming child next to me on a long flight?”

    Back in the days when I was back and forth across the pond like the Clapham omnibus, I used to get rid of over-familiar fellow-travellers by telling them that I was in the – ahem – adult leisure products business. Made them melt away, especially the women.

    Sounds like there’s an excellent opportunity here for a patch or T-shirt that says ‘Failed my ISA check’. People would run screaming in all directions. As Sartre observed, hell is other people, and this seems like a fine way to ensure solitude if that’s what you want.

    Ban guns, yet gun crime still doubles. Ban knives, yet knife crime still explodes. Ban Anti-Social Behaviour, and yet thuggery and brutish savagery still abounds. Ban prejudicial thoughts and intolerant speech, and yet watch the BNP rise as never before.

    But background checks will stop the kiddie-fiddlers, won’t they?

    It’s nothing but theatre. Just as KF’s learned to flock to the Boy Scouts and the Catholic church – because that’s where their potential victims are concentrated – they will learn to slip past the ISA checks. Radar doesn’t stop incoming aircraft – it just makes them find a different route. The only problem with this sort of theatre is that we’re all paying for the tickets, whether we want them or not, and the price can be pretty steep.

    Hasn’t anyone yet figured out a civilly-disobedient way to cripple this insane Panopticon?



  • Sunfish

    Wherever you go in the US (at least) you may be asked about your arrest record, not your conviction record.


    Asked by whom?

    And in what context?

  • The obvious reductio ad absurdum, is that it will become necessary to pass a CRB check to become a parent; to wit, “fail the test and have any children taken into care and undergo compulsory sterilisation”.

    Hmm, is that *actually* absurd?

  • the other rob

    llamas – I fear that ‘Failed my ISA check’ potentially suffers from the twin drawbacks of being too obscure (especially for Americans) and being untrue (if, in fact, one has never submitted to the process).

    Perhaps “Not allowed to work with children” might be more effective?

  • MarkE

    I was in the – ahem – adult leisure products business

    Thank you Llamas, with your permission I will remember and use that should the need arise. At present I commute weekly (weakly – it’s an early flight) to Dublin; it is a short flight and there are not usually many children or talkative neighbours (this week is a school holiday both ends so Monday wasn’t great), but who knows where I will be when this job finishes.

  • Paul Marks

    Clearly everyone in Britain is soon to have detailed “background checks” and will be “closely monitored” in all their activities.

    This will prevent “discrimination” between some people being subjected to all this and some people not being subjected to it. If some people are slaves – all people must be slaves.

    Of course the children will also have a report written about them after every lesson (not every term – after every class). This is already happening and is sending those teachers who are not statist minded into total despair.

    And children will be monitored in all aspects of their lives and “development” so that the govenment can “help” them in all things. And, no, sending your children to private school will not avoid these things.

    Freedom is dying in Britian – it is as simple, and as brutal, as that.

    I would advise anyone who can to leave.

  • llamas

    cjf wrote:

    ‘Wherever you go in the US (at least) you may be asked
    about your arrest record, not your conviction record.’


    To be much-more direct than Sunfish, I call nonsense on this assertion.

    Anyone who has even a suspicion of the right to ask this question of you – doesn’t need to. He/she already has LEIN or MCJDC or whatever, right there in the Crown Vic.

    If a copper asks you about your arrest record, it’s not to find out what your arrest record is – he/she knows, or will know, that without having to ask you. They’re trying to verify how truthful you are. Just like the copper who asks you ‘how’s your driving record?’ He/she had your driving record on the screen before the lights even came on. He/she is trying to determine how much of a line of BS you are trying to sell.

    If anyone else asks you this question, you are at liberty to answer any way you please – from a complete description of all your arrests and convictions, with case numbers if you know them, all the way to a polite invitation to pound sand.

    So the application for the lease asks ‘have you ever been arrested?’ Answer as you like – the only criminal background check that they can access will not reflect arrests, only convictions. If that.

    So I don’t know where this idea comes from that the US is filled with people asking you about your arrest record in ways which would have the slightest impact on your life.



  • Mr Ecks

    “Clearly everyone in Britain is soon to have detailed “background checks” and will be “closely monitored” in all their activities.2

    Background checks are a danger–but,with a state spending 200 thousand million a year more than it can thieve off its victims, (many of whom won’t be able soon to pay the rip offs any more) how are they going to afford the monitoring?. ZaNu are now expelling all the filth in them like a dying man emptying his bowels but most of it won’t stand. Blu=Labour will run with some but they can’t afford it anymore than ZaNu can.

  • Bod

    I think the current pols are way, way beyond The Onion or Private Eye, and are now gambolling around in Viz territory.

    Viz is incidentally celebrating its 30th birthday.

    Not that I was ever a reader, of course.

  • Nuke Gray

    the joke is, those who engage in the most breeding ARE the ones who should be denied children! Hard-line muslims are soon to outnumber Kaffirs! Take a look at population trends, and either breed or emigrate!

  • 6079SmithW

    “Hasn’t anyone yet figured out a civilly-disobedient way to cripple this insane Panopticon?”

    Posted by llamas at October 27, 2009 06:18 PM

    Stop paying taxes.

    “I would advise anyone who can to leave.”

    Posted by Paul Marks at October 28, 2009 03:24 PM

    And go where? Know any way off this planet and any better ones?

  • Steve

    Idiotic, completely ineffective and, of course, it will be incompetently administered. Care in the community is now the same as incarceration in an asylum.

  • Paul Marks

    “Go where?” – just about anywhere.

    For example, a friend of mine recently went to live in Austria.

    Austria is traditionally a big government country (the Austrian School of economics had a lot of local examples of statism to look at – even though this school of thought holds that economics is logical not empirical). But he has found life in Austria more free (and more sane) than life in Britain.

    “But I bet he came from a nasty bit of Britain” – not at all, he came from York. A very nice bit of Britain.

    If I has marketable skills (I do not), I would be off to the first place I could get a job – even if I could not speak the local language.

    I am serious – things are going to get very bad here.