It's interesting that various posters on this thread have different ideas about what a register could be used for. To me, that proves that the government haven't thought it out at all, and I do question their motives.
Surely they should start by identifying a perceived problem, then establish whether it actually is a problem, then look at a range of solutions and assess each candidate to see how well it would address the problem? Instead, we are just presented with a tool (a register) and are expected to GUESS why we might want it. I really feel like I'm watching the home shopping channel here. It makes me wonder whose pockets are being lined.
Don't we have better uses for taxpayers' money than to create some nebulous register and trust that once we have it, a worthy use will be found for it? I can think of much better ways to spend a big pile of cash. If we are worried about safeguarding, for example, how about spending money to reduce the workloads of social workers so they can actually intervene effectively with the children already known to them? It isn't as if SWs are sitting around twiddling their thumbs. Or if we are concerned about education, we could invest this money in the horribly underfunded SEN system, where we know it will make a difference.
It's rather bizarre that we are being asked not, "What shall we do about such-and-such well-evidenced problem?" but instead, "Shall we have a register?"