DBS ( formerly CRB ) . New extended checks.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

(Belarus isn't in Europe, btw)

I agree, but not necessarily for the reason you had in mind. Europe as a continent does not exist. Look at a physical map of the world, and it's clear that unnamed continent of Eurasia exist. Otherwise, it's entirely "suggestion". If Europe is a continent, so is the Indian sub-continent.

Still, the Olympic Committee got it right:

5 continents:-

North America
South America
Africa
Oceania
Eurasia

[ahinton]

Israel is in the Eurovision Song Contest too

Well, no one has presumably forced it to participate therein(!). I regard Israel as being in Europe as well; it is not yet a Council of Europe member state but it is a Council of Europe observer state; the extent of its participation, remit and those things to which it is a signatory, see http://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/israel .

[Beef Oven!]

No. It's judges of the ECHR (appointed by each country) together with the justice miniters (from each government) - who of course are elected - who oversee the ECHR. Beaurocrats might be found among the civil servants who administer the Council's decisions.

Judges on the ECHR are appointed, not elected. And the Justice Ministers are NOT elected, they are appointed. Our one, Simon Hughes was appointed in the UK to his position, not elected. And they are appointed to the EU body, not elected.

It means that they are unelected bureaucrats.

Unelected, as I said.

[Beef Oven!]

I regard Israel as being in Europe as well

I guess that's why they are in the Eurovision Song Contest. Why else?

[Pabmusic]

Judges on the ECHR are appointed, not elected. And the Justice Ministers are NOT elected, they are appointed. Our one, Simon Hughes was appointed in the UK to his position, not elected. And they are appointed to the EU body, not elected.

It means that they are unelected bureaucrats.

Unelected, as I said.

I never intended 'elected' to apply to judges, but rather to ministers.

Now, tell me - are there any other circumstances in which you'd call a government minister an 'unelected beaurocrat'? (Even though they can of course be unelected. In theory, the Prime Minister might be unelected.) As for judges, under what circumstances would you call judges 'unelected beaurocrats' - except for this one?

[ahinton]

I guess that's why they are in the Eurovision Song Contest. Why else?

Sure; however, you assert that Belarus is not in Europe, yet it, too, participates in Eurovision, as do another dozen nations that are not yet EU member states, namely Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Switzerland, Iceland, Norway, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and Russia.

[teamsaint]

Has the EU in fact got anything to do with the 2006 and its recent implementation in schools?

( Dave 2002, sorry if I missed your point earlier, the perils of reading andposting on a phone !)

[Barbirollians]

Our judges are all unelected too - and thank God for that look at the appalling US abuses of the justice system by judges pandering to popularity and not the law .

The judges are appointed by the member states .

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Deleted. I'm talking rubbish.

[MrGongGong]

The CRB would not be entirely useless. It's absolutely essential. Employers need to know if prospective employees have convictions that would make their engagement inappropriate, particularly where services to vulnerable people are concerned. References are important too. But I acknowledge that it is not possible to weed every potential danger out.

Going back a little

To clarify
Harold Shipman would have had no problem getting a CRB, neither would Ian Huntley (who's crimes sparked the whole thing off)
Before the CRB system those of us working with vulnerable people used to get "police checks" which were essentially the same thing (but took much longer and cost more)
YES, employers DO need to know if people have convictions that would make their employment inappropriate BUT the way we go about it often seems clumsy and counter productive.

The whole 'industry' that has sprung up around these things is fairly ridiculous, it supposedly costs £30/£40 ish for a check to be made and takes several weeks YET if you are stopped by the rozzers they ask you what your name is, what your address is and ALL the information is instantly available to them. SO how much per button push?

[Beef Oven!]

Going back a little

To clarify
Harold Shipman would have had no problem getting a CRB, neither would Ian Huntley (who's crimes sparked the whole thing off)
Before the CRB system those of us working with vulnerable people used to get "police checks" which were essentially the same thing (but took much longer and cost more)
YES, employers DO need to know if people have convictions that would make their employment inappropriate BUT the way we go about it often seems clumsy and counter productive.

The whole 'industry' that has sprung up around these things is fairly ridiculous, it supposedly costs £30/£40 ish for a check to be made and takes several weeks YET if you are stopped by the rozzers they ask you what your name is, what your address is and ALL the information is instantly available to them. SO how much per button push?

Moving forward

To clarify
CRB/DBS checks are absolutely vital in protecting vulnerable people - but they take 2/3 weeks to process, which feels too long. I agree with you about that.