Dear Ed Balls…

I see you’ve been speaking out today defending Labour’s record over the Vetting and Barring Scheme.

So I hope you don’t mind me raising again my own experience of trying to raise concerns with the Labour government over one particular detail of the scheme it introduced.

As I previsously wrote,

I emailed Sir Roger Singleton [see letter here] on 14 September about my concerns with the way the Independent Safeguarding Authority’s guidelines state that if someone has been found innocent in a court of law that does not mean they could have been completely innocent. Particularly given the many issues about the ISA’s remit, this choice of wording in their own guidelines is one of obvious concern.

I heard nothing so I emailed again on 16 October. On 19 October I was told by the Vetting & Barring Scheme Information Team that the issue had been passed to the Home Office. Again, I heard nothing further so I got in touch on 27 November. On 1 December the team apologised for the delays and said they would raise it with the Home Office again. I have not heard anything since.

I never did hear anything from the Home Office, although Sir Roger and his team did get in touch to apologise and say he would point out to the Home Office that it had failed to deal with the correspondence properly.

I did also write to my (Labour) MP, Jeremy Corbyn, twice asking him to ask the Home Office to reply. He didn’t reply to either letter. Nor did I get a reply even after a Labour local candidate in his constituency spotted my concerns and offered to pass them on (thank you Alex; the help was appreciated even if it didn’t produce the right result).

Perhaps in the spirit of learning what the Labour government didn’t get right, you and your colleagues could think again about this culture of ignoring relevant, concise and polite correspondence time and time and time again?

And if you bump into Jeremy Corbyn, perhaps you could have a quiet word?

Thanks.

Yours,

Mark

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

2 Comments

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarKatharine Pindar 31st May - 9:52am
    Thanks, Antony, that's very helpful, to learn of the EU's comprehensive suggestions for our industrial and economic strategy. There seems much to agree on in...
  • User AvatarPeter 31st May - 9:28am
    " A universal basic income is necessary to support those who fall on hard times." The above statement is untrue. Let me correct it. "...
  • User AvatarJohn Marriott 31st May - 9:24am
    @George Kendall I disagree with nothing you have written in your reply. However, I still haven’t figured out how you know what my view on...
  • User AvatarMatt Wardman 31st May - 9:24am
    This piece from Layla seems strangely out of touch, and even in parts from another planet. I'll just comment on two points. I am not...
  • User AvatarRichard Underhill 31st May - 9:12am
    Although the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland is a liberal party, their former leader David Ford told me that belonging to the Liberal Democrats is...
  • User Avatarmalc 31st May - 9:03am
    "A universal basic income is necessary to support those who fall on hard times. We must invest in education, health, social care and public services,...