The government will move to ban people from appealing if their working with children check is denied, after media reports highlighting cases where sex offenders and other criminals had been granted the checks on appeal.

So the article only seems to raise these two cases, and it’s not clear to me that either of these two people hurt any kids after appealing their check.

Is it just me or is this cooked? The right to appeal decisions seems fundamental to help reduce malfunctions or biases in a system. If the appeals process is too lax (doesn’t seem like it?) then strength it sure but wtf is this move?

  • jonne@infosec.pubEnglish
    1·
    3 days ago

    I mean, they ran through a bunch of terror laws based on the explosive caravan hoax, and nobody’s talking about repealing those despite that.

    For the child care stuff, the only things that I’ve heard that make sense are exchanging information between states so someone can’t just hop over the border to continue working with children (something proposed a decade ago after a previous royal commission), and having 2 pairs of eyes on the kids at any time. Everything else seems counterproductive.

    As for improving the working with children checks themselves, I guess we need to wait and see how this guy managed to get one, if there were previous complaints, etc.