[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Well I thought it was cases like this that were supposed to be the ones that the new form of CRB was supposed to cover(not people's child care arrangements for job sharing or grandparents caring for their own grandchildren).

i think ( looking through the ton of papers they sent out on this lol ) from the way i read it if its part of say a charity run service then they would need to be but if the school bit be it sunday school or other faith based school is run for less than the stated 12.5 hours it comes under the same rules as other parents looking after your kids for no reward

personally even though i don't support the stop smacking campaign i would still insist on the people running those things being CRBed but then again maybe the parents know the person running the school personally

and although my faith doesn't run these sort of schools we do sometimes run bible studies at a members home for younger ones and there we wouldn't CRB but we do have rules on there being at least two adults present and it mostly wouldn't be one to one tuition

---------- Post added at 16:29 ---------- Previous post was at 16:27 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

Here are the clues we need to focus on.

Mr Balls was last week urged to close a legal loophole

and

Lib Dem schools spokesman David Laws, who is spearheading the campaign to close the smacking loophole

We can take that as David Laws urged Mr Balls last week to close the loophole.

I'll help you out when I have time

so again its really about this anti smacking campaign and not about any particular faith groups who are acting with in law as it stands

and one a lot of us wont want changed to try and erode our parental authority in law even further