§ Chief officers of police as defined in section 62 of the Police Act 1964 shall have power to divulge to local authorities and to their officers such information as they may possess concerning the criminal convictions of any person seeking to work in a community home or wishing to undertake the care of a child either as a foster child or by way of adoption.—[Mr. Hiley.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ 6.15 p.m.
§ Mr. Joseph Hiley (Pudsey)I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.
I feel that the Home Secretary and the Under-Secretary will be grateful to us for the new Clause. When anything goes wrong—things have gone wrong in the past and they may do so again—the authorities are always liable to be shot at and severely criticised for any shortcomings in this respect. It is true that once a man has been convicted and has served his sentence, that should be the end of his punishment. That is in accordance with the traditions of the country. The paramount interest, however, should be that of the child.
I am particularly thinking of people with psychological or sexual abnormalities who fairly often find themselves associated with young people. I do not seek to excuse or justify their actions. There are those, including, perhaps, many in this House, who say that such people cannot help this form of misdemeanour. Be that as it may, the first interest should be that of the child rather than of one who, unfortunately, has been in conflict with the police on former occasions.
I am certain that if the Clause were added to the Bill, it would be operated in such a way as not adversely to affect one who had previously been convicted, 1017 except as regards employment in a community home. If people of this nature are subject to these abnormalities, it is the Home Secretary's duty to write the new Clause into the Bill. For his own sake, I hope he will accept it.
§ Mr. Norman Miscampbell (Blackpool, North)I support the new Clause. One of the most distressing experiences when going to court to defend people who have been involved in offences against children is how frequently it has occurred before and the information either has not been passed on or has not been available to those who have employed them on a second occasion. It is a frequent and distressing occurrence in schools and institutions.
I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Pudsey (Mr. Hiley) that some would take the view that these offences are not just matters for punishment but are also matters which can be excused on medical grounds. I do not want to enter into that controversy. These offences are clearly different from other types of offence, when one can certainly say that once the person has served his sentence it is over and done with.
The person himself has to be protected from getting into temptation. Therefore, his protection must continue long after his sentence has been served. The children with whom he will come into contact on other occasions must be protected, and I am sure that this House will see that they are protected.
For these reasons, I hope very much that the spirit of the new Clause, even if the precise terms of its drafting are not acceptable, will be accepted. It would give valuable and much-needed protection to those who work in the new community homes which we are setting up, to those who run the community homes and have responsibility for the children in their care and, last but by no means least, to the children whom we send there and to whom we have an overriding responsibility to make sure that they are not subject to assaults of a disgusting and disgraceful kind.
§ Mr. ArcherFirst, let me apologise to the House for not having been here when the debate began on this new Clause. The expedition with which the previous new Clause was dealt with took me by surprise.
1018 This is an occasion when there is a conflict of fundamental principles. I would normally be very reluctant to seek to infringe the principle that when a prisoner has served his sentence he is entitled to his opportunity of rehabilitation without being constantly confronted by his past. Where he is seeking employment in a post of great responsibility or of great temptation, then, in my submission, it is an arguable proposition that his employer, however generous we should encourage him to be, should be informed of the position so that he should not be generous by being kept in ignorance of the relevant facts, and where those at risk are children, the right of the offender to a fresh start should not override the right of the authority to have available the information necessary to the proper carrying out of its functions and the exercise of its discretion. Where there is present some of the kind of offences mentioned by the hon. Member for Blackpool, North (Mr. Miscampbell), then, in my submission, it would be wrong to say that the right of a prisoner to a completely fresh start should override the right of the authority to be completely in the picture as to the exercise of its discretion.
Clearly, of course, the information which is available should be treated with the utmost confidentiality, and one can, one hopes, rely on the discretion both of police forces and of local authorities, but one does feel that it should not depend on informal tip-offs but should be through, if not statutory, at least formal official channels that this information can be given.
It may be that the power to give this information exists already. I see that my hon. Friend is nodding. I was not able certainly to discover any serious inhibitions on that power. If my hon. Friend can advise the House that this new Clause is unnecessary for that reason I would not seek to carry the matter further, but I hope that, if that is the position, my hon. Friend will take the opportunity to advise the House that in the view of his Department police forces ought to be at least ready to avail themselves of the powers which they have and ought not to feel inhibited in exercising them.
§ Mr. Elystan MorganI have the fullest sympathy with the sentiments expressed by 1019 the hon. Members for Pudsey (Mr. Hiley) and Blackpool, North (Mr. Miscampbell) and my hon. Friend the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. Archer), but the short answer is that this new Clause is superfluous. Chief officers of police are able at present to divulge to local authorities, and to other persons who have a legitimate need to know, information concerning the criminal convictions of a particular person. The extent to which in any particular case this information is divulged is, of course, a matter entirely within the discretion of the police, but I have no doubt that in exercising that discretion they bear in mind the particular duty which they have in the circumstances described by my hon. Friend.
Discussions have been held with the local authority and other associations about the risks involved with children in care by their coming into contact with persons who are known to have previous convictions for, say, sexual offences. Of course, these risks are inherent in the community home system which is being created by this Bill. It is the widely accepted view which emerged from those discussions that it must remain the responsibility of employers to make proper inquiries into the references and backgrounds of persons who wish to be employed with children.
Similarly, a local authority or other responsible organisation would make such inquiries, including inquiries of the police, as it thought necessary about a person who wished to become a foster parent of children boarded out under the Children Act, 1948, or fostered privately under the Act of 1958, or who wished to adopt a child. In the case of a person wishing to adopt a child, the second schedule to the Adoption (Juvenile Court) Rules, 1959, also charges the guardian ad litem with certain duties, including the duty to ascertain information about the suitability of the applicant. Similar provision exists in the County and High Court Rules. In all the three circumstances—care, fostering and adoption—the police are able at present, and will remain able in future, to disclose information at their discretion about criminal convictions to inquiring authorities and other persons, and the new Clause would add nothing to these existing powers.
§ Motion, and Clause, by leave, withdrawn.