This morning the BBC had an exclusive story from the NSPCC. They have at long last shifted their position on making it a crime to cover up child abuse and have come out with a very half-hearted and confusing policy. I call it “safeguarding light.” Instead of making it the duty of everybody with the care of children in a regulated institution (like a school) to report to the Local Authority any child abuse or serious suspicion of child abuse, as I am advocating, they are saying that the duty should be on only those “closed” institutions where children are away from home, such as children’s homes, hospitals or prisons and only where there is “known” child abuse.

I was lined up to go into the studio to expose this for the poor apology for policy that it is but was cancelled at the last minute “because we’ve run out of time because of the football result last night”. However, in the prime spot at 8.10 there was a long discussion between Alan Wardle of the NSPCC and a chap called Alan Wood, president of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, who felt that everything is OK now and we don’t need to do anything. So by removing me from the discussion the BBC shifted the debate from “Is this enough?” to “Should we be doing anything at all?”

I am concerned that I did not get a chance to take part in the debate this morning. I would have hoped to raise the fact that there are 8 million children in education in this country. The NSPCC’s policy would protect less than a million of them. That won’t do. And it’s nonsense. By including only “known” child abuse they are putting the judgement as to whether abuse has really happened onto the shoulders of a boarding school head teacher or a care home manager instead of where it should be – with the Local Authority Designated Officer or children’s services who have experience in dealing with and investigating these issues. And by restricting it to “closed institutions” they are putting different duties on teachers doing exactly the same job in different schools. They are also excluding places like churches and sports clubs where, as we know, there have been many problems in the past. By putting the duty on everyone in “regulated activity” we would be empowering and protecting whistle-blowers who would be able to say that they have no alternative but to report what they know, or what a child has told them.

My amendment to the Serious Crime Bill, which will be debated next Tuesday, would do this and would make exemptions for doctors when dealing with a patient in a professional capacity and for confidential helplines such as Childline. But when children disclose abuse to Childline they are often encouraged to go and tell a trusted adult. They will only have the confidence to do that when they know the adult will do something to make it stop. Nothing less will do!

* Joan Walmsley is a Liberal Democrat member of the House of Lords