A Working with Vulnerable People Checking System for the ACT

Checks cannot remain valid indefinitely. While all registered people will be required by law to self-disclose new criminal offences to the checking authority, background checking must be undertaken periodically to minimise the risk that new offences have not been disclosed.
While shorter registration periods would reduce the risk of a person with a recent relevant criminal offence maintaining a registration, the length of validity of checks impacts on the cost of operating the checking system and the administrative overhead applicable to registered people (i.e. registered people would need to reapply for registration more frequently).
There has been a trend towards extending the period of validity of registrations in other Australian jurisdictions. Checks in Qld, WA and Vic are valid for 2, 3 and 5 years respectively.
It is proposed that checks in the ACT will remain valid for a period of five years.
 

At a minimum, background checking will include a national criminal history check. The information contained in a national criminal history check is the same information currently obtained by employers or organisations conducting their own background checks.
There are however other types of available information that may be useful in determining whether or not there is a risk that an individual may harm a vulnerable person, including:
• criminal charges; • factual information concerning the circumstances of individual criminal cases; • Apprehended Violence Orders; • Child Protection Orders; and • past employment records.
It is important to remember that background checking is concerned only with estimating risk and is not tantamount read more  …

One of the key challenges in developing a background checking system is to indentify the groups that checking will aim to protect. The discussion paper proposes that ‘vulnerable people’ will include all children (people under the age of 18) as well as certain vulnerable adults. Advice received from key stakeholders during preliminary consultations has indicated that simply listing broad groupings of adults as ‘vulnerable’ would be considered patronising or offensive to some people in the ACT. An alternative option would be to link extant vulnerability with the receipt of social services that are associated with alleviating any disadvantage or vulnerability. Under this type of definition, adults would only be considered vulnerable upon the acceptance or use of such services. The following definition is proposed in the discussion paper: • “Vulnerable Adult” refers to people aged 18 or over that access services in the ACT, as defined under Regulations, to alleviate the effects of physical, social, financial and/or psychological disadvantage. The range of services that could be considered for inclusion is addressed in a separate question. Do you have any views on who should be considered vulnerable in the ACT community?
 

It is proposed that checking will generally apply to employees and volunteers who are in contact with vulnerable people as part of the provision of certain services. A summary of the services proposed for inclusion is presented below.
____________________________________________ SERVICES FOR CHILDREN Child Protection and Community Services Youth Justice Child Care Services Educational Institutions Accommodation Services Health Clubs, Associations or Movements Religious Services & Representatives Transport Services Coaching and Tuition of Any Kind Counselling and Support Services Overnight Camps School Crossing Services Commercial Entertainment or Party Services Specifically for Children Commercial Gym or Play Facilities Specifically for Children Commercial Photography Services Specifically for Children Commercial Talent or Beauty Competitions Specifically for Children Other as prescribed __________________________________________  read more  …

While it is a reasonable aim for checking to apply broadly with a minimum of exemptions, there are some circumstances in which checking may be ineffective, inappropriate or might have the effect of diminishing services available for vulnerable people.
For these reasons it is proposed that checking will not be required for:
• people who provide regulated services in the ACT on no more than 7 days in any 12 month period; • volunteers aged less than 18 years; • volunteers who are ‘closely related’ to a vulnerable person who ordinarily participates in that regulated activity; • people who are ‘closely related’ to each (and every) vulnerable person they have contact with; • people who are participating in an activity on the same basis as a vulnerable person (i.e. participating as an equal rather than as a service provider); • sworn police officers (who have not been suspended); • secondary school students on work experience placements; and • people volunteering in State and National events.
More information on each of the proposed exemptions can be obtained at Section 8.4 of the discussion paper.
Do you have any comment on the range of proposed exemptions? Are there any other exemptions that should be considered?  

Please post any views you have on other issues not addressed elsewhere.