The checks that HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) undertake are required to assess individuals against a range of legislative requirements and security related factors that are pertinent to anyone working within a HMPPS environment. We are aware of an increase in onboarding timescales and are taking action to address this.

Both our third-party provider Sopra Steria Ltd (SSL) and HMPPS are employing flexible resource allocation and overtime to mitigate delays. Recruitment to the vetting team has also been prioritised, and the additional resource is now helping to reduce the backlog of cases awaiting clearance. HMPPS is working with SSL and providers to improve assessment of future recruitment activity, to ensure any spikes or increases can be managed appropriately.

Additionally, HMPPS is exploring all available opportunities for efficiencies, including by digitalising processes that were previously manual and conducting vetting checks in parallel with other parts of the onboarding process wherever possible.

We are taking all available opportunities to improve the timeliness of our vetting and onboarding process without compromising the safety and security of the organisation.

Whilst we acknowledge the impact lengthened timescales may have on staffing levels across the prison estate, Personnel Security Vetting is the first line of defence in the screening of people working for or on behalf of HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS). Our processes must be defensible, consistent, legal, and fair with a clear focus on protecting the public and maintaining public confidence. We carefully screen criminal histories, unethical behaviour, or reputational risks, which could damage stakeholder trust and organisational image. Our processes demonstrate due diligence and commitment to security, which builds confidence but which in turn, take time to complete.

HMPPS is taking forward recommendations from the 2022 His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Police, Fire & Rescue Services report: “An Inspection of Vetting, Misconduct and Misogyny in the Police Service”. This programme contains modernisation of existing processes and protocols to strengthen vetting across the organisation and to raise the defence level against unsuitable individuals entering the organisation. Recent events, such as the murder of Sarah Everard by a serving police officer, have shone a spotlight on vetting, making it more important than ever that we ensure our policies, processes, and practices are up to standard, by:

• Ensuring our processes are robust;

• Working closely with colleagues in other areas of HMPPS; and

• Taking action to address lessons learned and recommendations from national reviews such as the Angiolini report and the Baroness Casey review.

Security vetting is vital in HMPPS to ensure individuals can uphold the security and integrity standards expected of their role and ensure that prisons and probation remain safe for rehabilitation to take place. Whilst we acknowledge and understand the difficulties posed by lengthened vetting timescales, we remained committed to security, building confidence and providing rehabilitative services.

The number of individuals currently awaiting completion of security and vetting checks prior to commencing employment within His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) was 14,694 as of 18 May 2026.

This figure reflects the full onboarding pipeline, covering candidates from the point at which they receive a provisional offer and enter pre-employment checks, through to the completion of all security and vetting processes and a final decision being made on their case. It therefore includes individuals at different stages of the process, not solely those awaiting a decision at a single point in time.

The Ministry of Justice does not centrally hold sufficiently robust or complete data to accurately report on the length of time individuals have been awaiting security and vetting clearance across all stages or providers. Vetting and pre-employment checks are undertaken through a combination of HMPPS, Shared Services Limited (SSL), and other parallel processes. As a result, a consolidated and reliable breakdown of waiting times, such as those exceeding three, six, or twelve months, is not available, and therefore unable to be provided.

The number of individuals currently awaiting completion of security and vetting checks prior to commencing employment within His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) was 14,694 as of 18 May 2026.

This figure reflects the full onboarding pipeline, covering candidates from the point at which they receive a provisional offer and enter pre-employment checks, through to the completion of all security and vetting processes and a final decision being made on their case. It therefore includes individuals at different stages of the process, not solely those awaiting a decision at a single point in time.

The Ministry of Justice does not centrally hold sufficiently robust or complete data to accurately report on the length of time individuals have been awaiting security and vetting clearance across all stages or providers. Vetting and pre-employment checks are undertaken through a combination of HMPPS, Shared Services Limited (SSL), and other parallel processes. As a result, a consolidated and reliable breakdown of waiting times, such as those exceeding three, six, or twelve months, is not available, and therefore unable to be provided.

The Employment Relations Act 1999 (Blacklists) Regulations 2010 prohibit the compilation, usage, sale or supply of blacklists. The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 contain exclusion grounds which allow contracting authorities to exclude suppliers from procurements where their tender does not comply with labour law or where the supplier is guilty of grave professional misconduct. A breach of the Blacklists Regulations on a particular tender would render the supplier liable to exclusion and a breach more widely may amount to grave professional misconduct.

In all cases, individual departments and other public sector bodies are responsible for their own decisions on these matters

The Procurement Bill introduced by the Government, currently in the final stages of debate in Parliament, builds on and clarifies the exclusions measures in the existing regime. This includes specific measures enabling the exclusion of suppliers for labour market misconduct and professional misconduct.

The average time for a new prison officer recruit to receive a full security check in 2017 is 46 calendar days. This is for new officer recruits who are recorded as starting work in a Prison (data up to the end of September 2017), who applied between the 1st January and 30th September 2017.

Blacklisting is an appalling practice and that is why we brought in the Blacklists Regulations in 2010 to make certain that it is illegal. Any business, whether it works on public contracts or not, should comply with the law of the land. We expect them not to break data protection law, trade union law or the Blacklists Regulations when planning or undertaking work for the public sector or anywhere else.

Since the Opposition debate on blacklisting on 23 January 2013, Official Report, column 330, no evidence has been presented to Government to show that blacklisting of trade unionists is ongoing. There have been a lot of accusations, but we have not yet received any evidence that blacklisting continues. We continue to urge anyone who has such information to get in touch with the appropriate authorities.

Similarly I am not aware of any evidence that the Blacklists Regulations are not doing their job.

In line with well-established policy, when they came into force in 2010, the Blacklists Regulations were not retrospective and were not intended to be. Where it has

been proven that construction companies have previously used the Consulting Association blacklist, they need to ensure that employees and investors can have confidence in their current practices.

More generally, public sector procurers are required to comply with EU treaty principles of openness, transparency and non-discrimination when awarding public contracts. In addition, contracts over certain thresholds (around £4.3 million for works contracts) are subject to detailed rules set out in EU directives and implemented by the Public Contracts Regulations 2006, which set out in detail how the contract must be conducted.

Under EU procurement rules, public procurers must also exclude suppliers from bidding for public contracts when they have been convicted of certain offences including conspiracy, corruption, bribery and fraud.

Where a supplier or other interested party finds an instance of what they believe to be poor procurement practice, they can raise it with the Cabinet Office's Mystery Shopper Service.

Full details of the scheme can be found at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mystery-shopper-scope-and-remit

The Scottish Affairs Select Committee is continuing its own investigation into blacklisting and Government will be looking carefully at their final report as well as any other evidence submitted. Where there is evidence that blacklisting is currently being used in any sector of the economy, the appropriate authorities will be asked to carry out a full and thorough investigation.

We are also aware that there are some ongoing cases currently before the courts, and will be interested to see the outcome of these.

I can confirm that the Information Commissioner has been in contact with both HMRC and DWP for assistance in tracing individuals on the Consulting Association database. DWP are taking the lead in providing this assistance.