Draft legislation to create a new safeguarding body has been re-worded to ensure that its rules are applied to the right organisations.

The Safeguarding Bill will give a statutory footing to a single Safeguarding Board, as opposed to the separate, non-statutory boards for children and vulnerable adults that exist now.

The bill also puts an obligation on organisations that work with children and vulnerable adults to consider safeguarding needs.

In the House of Keys last week, it underwent detailed scrutiny at the clauses stage.

Tim Baker (Ayre and Michael), who had expressed concern that, as written, it could place unfair obligations on the likes of hairdressers and shop proprietors, tabled an amendment to tighten up the wording.

He said the original wording ’effectively meant that any organisation that provided any services for children or vulnerable adults could be considered as a relevant safeguarding body’.

’The amendment simply tightens that definition to mean that, in order to become a relevant safeguarding body, a body has to either be providing services of a prescribed description or the body itself must be of a prescribed description,’ he explained.

’That gives the control of the process and the transparency so that organisations are not inadvertently caught up in becoming classified as a relevant safeguarding body.’

Mr Baker’s amendment was supported by Policy and Reform Minister Chris Thomas, who is in charge of the bill, and was backed unanimously by members.

A new clause was also introduced successfully, by Mr Baker.

It puts an obligation on the government to ensure that the new board and its committees are ’properly resourced in terms of access to legal, professional and other services to the extent that those are reasonably necessary for the proper performance of the body’s functions’.

Under the bill, the chief secretary would be responsible for appointing the board chairman, rather than it being an overtly political appointment.

Mr Thomas said: ’It is critical that the chair is independent and thus that his or her appointment is free from political interference.’

However, the Cabinet Office would be able to issue directives to the board.

’Presently there are no cases anticipated in which the Cabinet Office will issue a direction for the board,’ said Mr Thomas.

’However, for example, there might be a case involving the serious injury of a child or vulnerable adult where there is not a statutory requirement for the board to investigate it, but sufficient public concern to warrant an inquiry.’

The functions of the Safeguarding Board would include ’developing safeguarding policies and procedures, promoting an awareness of the need to safeguard, reviewing the effectiveness of safeguarding arrangements of relevant safeguarding bodies’, said Mr Thomas.

The bill is due for a third reading in the House of Keys today (Tuesday), before moving on to the Legislative Council for further consideration.