By Hayley Robinson

Criminal Records Bureau checks for 45 posts at Swale council have been defended.

The searches are intended for people working with children or vulnerable adults such as care workers, but the authority was accused in a recent television news report of carrying out unjustified CRB checks for posts including harbour controller, assistant beach cleaner and park ranger.

Cabinet member for performance Cllr Mike Cosgrove (Con) (pictured) pointed out several posts – including the harbour controller and assistant positions – no longer require the checks but admitted the council had been overzealous.

He said: "We put our hands up to that, but we did it in good faith. It was our view that a number of our frontline staff would come into contact with children or elderly people and it would be better for us to know about their backgrounds.

"There is an issue over balance.

"We agree social workers and teachers should have CRB checks but if the majority of, say, volunteers don’t come into substantial contact with children or vulnerable adults, they shouldn’t need checks.

"However, I think there are one or two jobs in the public sector where if you are a parent or a carer you would just like a bit of reassurance.

"I would like a reasonable debate about it rather than it being hijacked by everyone saying this is an infringement on people. Local authorities don’t like taking risks.

"They spend people’s money on providing a good service. It is desperately important if you send your child off swimming on a Saturday morning, you want them to be safe."

He added that the checks are not done to prevent past offenders from getting jobs.

"If [an employer] requests a CRB check, a list of past offences come up and it’s for the judgement of the employer to say ‘are these still relevant’?

"For example, if someone applied for a primary school job and they had driving convictions at 18 that aren’t serious, you might not think it’s relevant, but if there was a case where someone had been convicted of assaulting a child you would think ‘no, I don’t want that person working for me’."

A Home Office spokesman said: "The criminal records regime is under review to ensure that an appropriate balance is struck between preserving civil liberties and protecting the public."

A Freedom of Information request from the Sittingbourne Messenger has revealed four people with convictions were employed by Swale council between January 1, 2009, and November 1, 2010. A breakdown showed one employee working in leisure received a caution in October 2001. An employee in the sports development department was reprimanded in 2004 for common assault.

Another sports development employee was reprimanded in 2006 for assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The same person received a warning in 2009 for common assault. Their casual contract has ended.

Another employee in the sports development department was reprimanded in 2007 for attemped /common assault. They also received a warning in 2008 for theft. Their casual contract has ended.

The council carried out 78 CRB checks between January 1, 2009, and November 1, 2010, at a cost of £2,808.