The much (and rightly) maligned "child register" will (it seems) exclude the details of children with famous or violent (or famously violent) parents, thus highlighting the fears over the lack of security for databases of this type.
What am I missing though? The purported use of this database was to track children who were at risk of abuse. Surely by excluding the details of those with violent parents, the database no longer does what it was ostensibly set up to do.
So two lessons we can take away: 1) large databases aren't secure enough for politician's children to feature on them and 2) the child register is not there to help children in abusive households. What other, ulterior motive could there be..?