School wants CRB check to let dad watch rugby match

9:00am Saturday 29th September 2012 in News

Neil Park with his son George who he wasn’t allowed to watch play rugby Neil Park with his son George who he wasn’t allowed to watch play rugby

A SCHOOL has banned parents from watching their children take part in sports events – unless they are cleared by the police.

Dad Neil Park, 54, of Oakhurst, fell foul of the new policy at Isambard Community School when he was turned away on Thursday evening as he tried to watch his 12-year-old son George play rugby for the school.

He was told that to watch the game, despite him being a parent of a player, he needed to produce a police CRB form– which shows the holder has no criminal record relevant to being near children.

“I was turned away from the school because I had not been CRB checked,” said the father-of-five.

“I couldn’t believe it. Govern-ment guidelines state that parents are allowed to watch games. But any strangers can be questioned and requested to show the appropriate paperwork, which is fair enough.

“George was really upset by it all. What are they going to stop you going to next? Parents’ evening? The school play?

“Or what if England under 16s are playing at the County Ground , will they ask all fans there to be CRB checked?”

The school says it has implemented the rule because of fears strangers can get into the rest of the school from the playing field.

A spokesman said: “It is with regret that from now on we will be unable to accommodate parents wishing to spectate at our sports fixtures unless they are in possession of an up-to-date Swindon Council CRB check.

“At Isambard we take safeguarding very seriously and because of this we are unable to leave gates open for access to sporting venues at anytime during the school day.

“The current access arrangements are frustrating for both Isambard staff and parents and have recently resulted in reception staff and PE staff being on the receiving end of verbal abuse from parents who have become frustrated trying to get into or out of the school.”

Other schools do not want to impose such a policy. Lydiard Park Academy head Clive Zimmerman said: “We don’t have that policy here because there are always staff supervising the children.

“We think it is important that parents can support their children.

“We had our inaugural hockey game at the Link Centre this week, and half of that stadium was filled with parents which is fantastic.”

A spokesman for Kingsdown School said: “We don’t have a policy, pupils are not left unattended during sports games as a member of staff is always present.

“When going to away games we would adhere to the away school’s policy.”

Any parents who want to contact the Isambard about a CRB check should email carterel@isambard.

swindon.sch.uk

Comments(29)

Robh says...
9:50am Sat 29 Sep 12

A spokesman said: “It is with regret that from now on we will be unable to accommodate parents wishing to spectate at our sports fixtures unless they are in possession of an up-to-date Swindon Council CRB check."

surely this in direct contradiction to government policy.

Report this post »

RichardR1 says...
10:26am Sat 29 Sep 12

Complete lunacy.

Report this post »

Scottie68 says...
11:37am Sat 29 Sep 12

This sums up the mentality of the school

Report this post »

The Vetting Company - Swindon says...
11:50am Sat 29 Sep 12

As a professional body and lead signatory for the Criminal Records Bureau we do not normally comment upon newspaper articles such as this one however, if the report is fully accurate, we believe it is only right to comment upon apparent misconceptions held by both employers and public regarding the issue of CRB (Criminal Records Bureau) Disclosures.
Firstly, a CRB Disclosure is only an employment tool to enable employers (or volunteer bodies) make informed recruitment decisions when the employment (position) offered involves close contact with children.
Secondly, the term “cleared by the Police” is a misnomer because the Police do not make the actual employment decision for which a CRB Disclosure certificate is issued. The Police are however , expected to contribute to the information shown on a CRB Certificate from (relevant) information they hold about an individual which is then considered by the employer when making their informed recruitment decision.
Details of any previous convictions or cautions are obtained by the CRB themselves from the Police National Computer (PNC) which are shown on the CRB Disclosure certificate.
The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (which came into effect on 10th September 2012) re-defines activities whereby an employer can lawfully ask for an Enhanced CRB Disclosure for persons they employ (or engage) in a regulated activity with children under 18 years.
Generally, these activities are teaching, training, instructing caring for or supervising children.
Under current legislation a CRB Disclosure is only relevant and valid for the employment (or voluntary work) for which it was issued – hence this is the reason for cases when individuals have gone through the process for different employers and then end up with a copy of the certificate from each individual Disclosure check.
A CRB Disclosure should be viewed similarly as a motor car MOT in that it is only accurate at the time of issue and is issued in respect of only one employment. Therefore, a CRB Disclosure should not be viewed as a blanket licence to work with children because there may have been confidential information given to the employer which is not recorded on the individual’s own copy certificate.
There are also Basic and Standard Criminal Record checks available but these are not relevant in cases involving contact with children.
It is our view that the School concerned are not entitled to seek CRB Disclosures on parents merely watching children play sport per se and they should consult with Swindon Borough Council who are their CRB Registered Body for more detailed advice.
However, the school are entitled to conditionally limit access to their property subject to their own internal policies but reliance upon a previously issued CRB Disclosure, which would have been previously issued for an un-associated employment, is not recommended.
For more current information relating to Regulated Activities have a look at: http://www.homeoffic
e.gov.uk/agencies-pu
blic-bodies/crb/abou
t-crb/crb-pofa-2012/
ra-children/

Report this post »

Oik1 says...
12:20pm Sat 29 Sep 12

Let's hope someone who know's someone else in charge at the school see's the above post.
"A spokesman said: “It is with regret that from now on we will be unable to accommodate parents wishing to spectate at our sports fixtures unless they are in possession of an up-to-date Swindon Council CRB check."

As someone who's been CRB checked for the reason of teaching youngsters in a voluntary role, I've never read or seen anything more ridiculous.
The school needs to get a grip on the real world, I'm sure there are far more pressing problems or even dangers for the pupils than adults watching their children taking part in a sport.

Report this post »

LordAshOfTheBrake says...
12:51pm Sat 29 Sep 12

Absolutely disgraceful behaviour by the school.

Its no wonder parents get abusive when faced with such idiotic bureaucracy!

All the parents should now get a check and ensure that the school is liable for paying for it and it is school policy for them to need one simply to watch their own children playing sport!

Report this post »

cherryblossom says...
1:50pm Sat 29 Sep 12

This is Isambard all over.....maybe they should concentrate more on the issues within the school?

Report this post »

faatmaan says...
5:11pm Sat 29 Sep 12

watch from behind the school fence if possible with binoculars if necessary, not illegal, this shows the duplicity of this well intended legislation, but the ineptitude of implemintation, where possibly a parent has expressed a desire for nobody to watch their child, will this follow through into older life where nobody will be allowed on recreation grounds without suitable clearance to watch children of similar ages play for registered teams or practice ?

Report this post »

water says...
6:43pm Sat 29 Sep 12

How can a school ban parents /relatives /friends from watching young people play sport I thought as a society we were meant to be encourging young people to keep fit and healthy, this is ridiculous there has got to be some trust in people.
Come on Isambard please use some common sense all this does is make families and pupils angry.
Other schools are not going to want to visit for a competitive game if no parents can support their children.

Report this post »

RichardR1 says...
6:47pm Sat 29 Sep 12

It seems they cannot do what they are asking if you read the post above. Perhaps a parent with a bit of cash should legally challenge them. Watch then change the policy then.

Report this post »

timt1964 says...
8:36pm Sat 29 Sep 12

id have told them to b****r off.its statistically proven that a lot of child abuse is done by a person in a position of trust.the meaning of jobsworth just took on a whole new meaning,come on isambard a bit of common sense please.

Report this post »

house on the hill says...
9:31pm Sat 29 Sep 12

I think everyone agrees this is completely crazy, presumably on this basis the parents could insist in seing the CRB checks of those looking after their children?

SBC are rubbish at CRB checks anyway, there are dozens of staff who deal with the vulnerable and children who havent had a CRB check in years. I heard of one housing officer who hasnt had a CRB check in over 20 years and yet they come into contact with families and vulnerable adults pretty much every day. maybe someone would like to invesitgate that!!!!!

Typical double standards from those who should be more responsible but clearly dont know the meaning of the word!

Report this post »

rachael mattey says...
7:06am Sun 30 Sep 12

The Advertiser has, as usual where schools are concerned, not let the truth get in the way of a good story. The ban on parents was as a result of aggressive and abusive behaviour by parents and the refusal of a number of parents to comply with arrangements for keeping children safe. However a number of parents volunteer to help with fixtures on a regular basis and these are subject to CRB checks. This is not a new policy but has been in place for over a year. The reporter was told this but chose not to include it in the story.

Report this post »

Scottie68 says...
10:00am Sun 30 Sep 12

This has been taken from the Isambard Newsletter sent to all parents

Spectating at Isambard Sports Fixtures
**Important Information**
A reminder that parents wishing to spectate at our sports fixtures
MUST be in possession of an up to date Swindon Borough
Council CRB check. If you wish to spectate at a sports event the
following procedures apply.
Parents wishing to come and spectate regularly at fixtures need
to contact Miss Carter (carterel@isambard.s
windon.sch.uk). Miss
Carter will send you the relevant links to the CRB site or ask for
proof of your current CRB if it is from Swindon Borough Council.
(Getting this is free but may take 2-4 weeks)
Once your CRB has been granted you will be able to enter and
leave school signing in via reception if you wish to attend a
sporting fixture.
Unfortunately if you do not follow these procedures we will be
unable to grant you access to the school

Report this post »

RichardR1 says...
10:39am Sun 30 Sep 12

Has it not been explained by The Vetting Company that the school, Swindon Council cannot do CRB checks on parents who are simply there to watch their offspring.

Perhaps Russell could throw some light on this as a Barrister.

Report this post »

RichardR1 says...
10:44am Sun 30 Sep 12

This is the Ofsted advice to schools on visitors;

'Checks for visitors
Are Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks required for all visitors or volunteers to schools and colleges?

Visitors Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks are not required for visitors. Visitors do not have unsupervised access to children.
Volunteers Checks are required only for those who have regular and unsupervised access to children and young people. Under the terms of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 where a volunteer is being adequately supervised, they are not considered to be working in regulated activity however often they do this, and the school does not need to request a CRB check. The Department for Education will shortly be publishing guidance to help schools decide what level of supervision would be considered adequate.
For the purposes of an Ofsted inspection, schools (and colleges) should be able to explain the rationale for those who have been checked and those who have not. The key criterion for checking volunteers is regular unsupervised contact with children.'

It seems no matter how the school try to dress this up they are not following Ofsted guidelines.

Report this post »

swindon_mini says...
11:43am Mon 1 Oct 12

Red Tape and Backside Covering, as they are responsible for the Children and not the Parents during school hours!

Anyway the CRB system is flawed, it might prevent people who are known to the Police or Social services working with Children, but does not stop those that are not. You can't expect your Teacher NOT to abduct your child!

Report this post »

John Smith II says...
1:42pm Mon 1 Oct 12

There appears to be a contradiction between the comments at 07:06 and 10:00 on Sunday 30th. Based on the posted newsletter it would appear that stated school policy at the time of publication of the newsletter was that a CRB check was necessary for parents to watch their child play in a school sports fixture. I think that the majority of right thinking people would consider a policy of this severity to be a serious over-reaction - is this a school or a prison?

Interestingly the school have posted a message on their website which claims that this is a 'small story' and that the school is 'disappointed' that local newspapers have 'made such a big issue" out of the story. The school ends their statement by apologising that the media was given 'out-dated information' before the story went to press.

It looks to me as though the school has back-tracked and one or more employees need a bit of media training...

Report this post »

house on the hill says...
1:51pm Mon 1 Oct 12

This story actually made the National Sunday papers for the jobsworth of the week award. It is a little surprising though that they are forced to have a CRB check to weed out the 0.01% of the population who may be at risk and as others have said who knows what goes on behind closed doors of those who just havent been caught yet!!!!!
PC gone mad but then common sense was abolished years ago.

Report this post »

Captain T says...
2:04pm Mon 1 Oct 12

I'd play the school at their own game and demand to see a copy of every CRB certificate from every teacher and supervisor employed, on the grounds that 'my child will only access the school after reassurance that all staff engaged in the duty of teaching or supervision have received appropriate clearance and as the parent, I am satisfied that my child will be in a safe and secure environment'
Put that to the school and see what they come back with. As a parent, how can you be 100% sure that the teachers have all been CRB checked? As someone mentioned earlier, most child abuse cases involve a person employed in a position of trust.

Report this post »

Sundial says...
3:46pm Mon 1 Oct 12

Let us make this clear. The story is wrong. The school playing fields can be accessed in one of two ways-through the school or via the entrance off of tadpole lane. Parents would not be able to access the playing fields from the school side without having the school gates continually left open. This would allow anyone (including non-parents) to gain entry to the school whenever they liked. I am sure parents would be the first to complain if random strangers were wondering around the school during school hours. What parents have actually been asked to do is access the playing fields from tadpole lane instead which is what most people do when using the facilities outside of school time for community based clubs.

Report this post »

The Real Librarian says...
3:58pm Mon 1 Oct 12

Sundial says...
3:46pm Mon 1 Oct 12


Given that the post at 10.00 on Sun 30th seems to prove you wrong, have you got anything to suggest you are right?

Report this post »

The Real Librarian says...
4:01pm Mon 1 Oct 12

My advice to Neil Park at this point would be to apply to be a govenor at Isambard and have his say then.

http://www.swindonad
vertiser.co.uk/news/
local/9934497.Help_m
ake_a_difference_as_
a_school_governor/

Report this post »

actually read the article says...
6:48pm Mon 1 Oct 12

It actually reads as 'during the school day' which would mean you then had to
access to the whole school so a CRB check would be right at this time. Very few parents actually support their children at matches as I have witnessed. What a shame people cant be glad for the good that the school does and not the minor things which go wrong - a classic state of the country - find a story to shock and forget all the good stuff and lets hope none of you or your children have the misfortune to suffer abuse and be grateful for any CRB policy however ridiculous it may seem to you - I for one would always be grateful for any safeguarding of my children.

Report this post »

kaspont says...
9:03am Tue 2 Oct 12

On a morning when I awake to the news that a 5 year old girl has been abducted, the best our local rag can do is lambast a local school for puting the safety and security of our children as a high priority.

They have a duty of care to our children when they are on site, and if they feel that CRB checking brings that reassurance then so be it.

If they havent followed the rules then it is not for Neil Park or the Swindon Advertiser to put them right!

In Today's paper Neil is quoted as feeling attacked by the schools response ... well pucker up Neil!! Why don't you let the school and staff get on with the job of educating our children.

To the Swindon Advertiser ... please can you focus on promoting the positive works that our schools provide. Isnt it sad that the Lantern parade on the 24th October will not have front page coverage!!!

Report this post »

RichardR1 says...
9:25am Tue 2 Oct 12

I think the last two posters haven't read the comments very well.

The neither the school or Swindon Council have the legal right to CRB visitor let alone they be parents under these circumstances. The Ofsted guidelines and legislation are quite specific.

We have seen similar with schools refusing to allow parents to video or take photos and school concerts and nativities etc, using the same reason, but then stating parents can buy a video of the event produced by an 'outsider'.

Report this post »

The Real Librarian says...
9:48am Tue 2 Oct 12

actually read the article says...
6:48pm Mon 1 Oct 12
- I for one would always be grateful for any safeguarding of my children."


I have a child and of course I want her to be safe, but at the same time, I don't want ludicrous, stupid and illegal measures implimented which undermine the quality of her life.

Report this post »

John Smith II says...
10:31am Tue 2 Oct 12

kaspont wrote:
On a morning when I awake to the news that a 5 year old girl has been abducted, the best our local rag can do is lambast a local school for puting the safety and security of our children as a high priority. They have a duty of care to our children when they are on site, and if they feel that CRB checking brings that reassurance then so be it. If they havent followed the rules then it is not for Neil Park or the Swindon Advertiser to put them right! In Today's paper Neil is quoted as feeling attacked by the schools response ... well pucker up Neil!! Why don't you let the school and staff get on with the job of educating our children. To the Swindon Advertiser ... please can you focus on promoting the positive works that our schools provide. Isnt it sad that the Lantern parade on the 24th October will not have front page coverage!!!
I don't see the relevance of the point regarding the abduction of the young girl in mid-Wales. According to the BBC website she was playing near her home, not attending a supervised sporting event on school property.

I sense a degree of paranoia - perhaps 'kaspont' is a reader of the Daily Mail?

Report this post »

Oliver_Donachie says...
8:43pm Wed 3 Oct 12

Still not entirely clear if this instruction still stands after the recent "clarification" sent out.

http://snag.gy/1noAN
.jpg

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree