SOME Police Scotland officers have no vetting record, a watchdog has found.
A review of the force’s vetting procedures found no requirement for vetting for rank and file officers and staff to be repeated beyond recruitment checks.
His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary in Scotland Craig Naylor said this is a “significant risk” and called for all personnel to be re-vetted “at least every decade”.
He said: “I do not believe that any officers or staff should be able to go through the entirety of their service having only been vetted at the time of their recruitment.”
Police Scotland Deputy Chief Constable Alan Speirs said a re-vetting programme is being introduced.
READ MORE: Labour U-turn on North Lanarkshire leisure centre cuts
The His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland (HMICS) review found that before the single force was created in 2014, vetting was “varied, inconsistent and not always recorded effectively”, but since the late 2000s this has improved, and vetting currently conducted is of a “good standard”.
The report states: “No check nor review of officers and staff employed by the legacy forces was carried out when the new organisation began and some have no vetting record.”
There is “no clear process” for Police Scotland workers to advise of a criminal conviction or a significant change in personal circumstances such as a new partner or address.
It also found a “disproportionate” number of cases where the “appropriate refusal of vetting has been overturned and clearance granted”.
The watchdog flagged these historical cases to Police Scotland’s force vetting manager and the anti-corruption unit so they can assess risk and whether clearance remains appropriate.
Among 15 recommendations, Naylor called for a new law to be created by the Scottish Government to ensure a minimum level of vetting for all in Police Scotland and to enable the Chief Constable to sack anyone who cannot maintain suitable vetting.
He also called for annual integrity reviews to be held which would note any change in personal circumstances to help identify risks.
These changes should be prioritised above the random review of recruitment vetting for 3-5% of officers and staff, which Police Scotland has already announced, the watchdog said.
Naylor also called for vetting clearance to be reviewed following misconduct proceedings.
He said: “A thorough and effective vetting regime is vitally important to assess a person’s integrity and it reassures the public appropriate checks have been carried out on those who are placed in a position of trust.
“There is no doubt the public’s confidence in and the reputation of policing has been damaged by officers who have behaved inappropriately and broken the law.
“Significant steps have been undertaken following recent high profile cases in England to ensure that officers and staff have been checked and any risks identified, highlighted and managed appropriately.
“Losing intelligence to terrorists or serious organised criminals is a threat which Police Scotland rightly takes seriously but exposing a vulnerable person to an individual who wishes to harm them is, to me, abhorrent and steps need to be taken to provide assurance that the protection of the vulnerable is prioritised.”
READ MORE: BBC Breakfast cuts off as heckler shouts scrap the licence fee
The review followed Metropolitan Police officer David Carrick, 48, being sacked after being unmasked as a serial rapist.
HMICS independently reviewed 870 vetting case files which had been completed by Police Scotland’s force vetting unit staff between 2019 and 2022.
Speirs said: “The safeguarding of our values and standards has never been stronger and HMICS rightly highlights the high standards of our vetting.
“Over 5000 officers and staff are vetted to an enhanced level with annual reviews and we will ensure all roles have the right clearance levels.
“We’ve invested to enable additional checks for new recruits before they are sworn into office and, working with staff associations and unions, we are introducing a programme of re-vetting.
“We know the onus is on us to earn public confidence and will carefully review this report to identify any further improvements which can strengthen our vetting.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here