Teachers in England face being banned if they fail to report evidence of children being subjected to sexual abuse under plans for new legislation announced by the home secretary, James Cleverly.
The new law would make it a legal requirement for healthcare professionals, teachers and others who work with children and young people to identify and pass on cases of possible sexual abuse.
It would also impose prison sentences of up to seven years on anyone who actively covers up evidence of child sexual abuse, and give police the power to block sex offenders from changing their names.
“Having listened to the voices of victims and survivors and reviewed the work of the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, we are working at pace to get a mandatory reporting duty for child sexual abuse on to the statute book,” Cleverly said. “We will continue to use all levers at our disposal to tackle this horrific crime and keep women and children safe.”
In its final report, the independent inquiry called for a legal requirement for professionals and volunteers working with children to report sexual abuse if they witnessed or were told about it by a child or perpetrator, or if they “recognised indicators” of it.
But school leaders said reporting requirements were already imposed on schools and their staff through the Department for Education’s statutory guidelines and safeguarding practices, inspected by Ofsted.
Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said: “School leaders take children’s safety incredibly seriously and invest time and funding in training and resources to support efforts to tackle all forms of child sexual abuse. They already have a range of statutory duties when it comes to safeguarding and are frequently inspected against these.
“However, schools rely on a wide range of other services when reporting concerns. We are concerned about the current capacity of services such as children’s social care and the police to provide children with the help they need should mandatory reporting lead to an increase in referrals being made.
“It’s vital the government provides these services with sufficient funding to ensure they can cope with demand and are not forced to raise thresholds for intervention.”
Daniel Kebede, the general secretary of the National Education Union, described the plan as “sensible”, but added: “A duty is one important part of the picture, but it’s also vital that all agencies are fully staffed so that agencies can share information, respond to children’s concerns and ensure access to regular training.”
Prof Alexis Jay, who chaired the independent inquiry into the handling of historic sexual abuse cases, also published her recommendations into improving safeguarding within the Church of England, proposing two new, independent charities to administer and provide oversight of safeguarding practices within the institution.
Jay’s report noted that safeguarding had been “weaponised” by some within the church as a pretext for removing people. Examples of matters referred to safeguarding included parishioners who were having extramarital affairs and a lay preacher who was accused of “praying too vehemently”. Jay said the church’s previous safeguarding investigations often did not include details of allegations, evidence, or a clear appeals process.
“This report makes clear that, overall, church safeguarding currently falls below the standards of secular organisations, with inconsistent guidance, data collection, accountability, professional practice and scrutiny,” Jay said.
“The only way in which all of these concerns could be addressed is by making the safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults truly independent of the church through the establishment of two separate charities, one with operational responsibility for safeguarding and the other to provide scrutiny.
“These charities should be funded by the church but structurally independent of them in order to ensure that safeguarding decisions are implemented in full, to provide truly independent scrutiny and to mark an unambiguous change of culture.”
