1-20 of 228 results for subject:Vetting
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.291 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.01 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Vetting
- We searched for
- subject_t:Vetting OR subject_t:Blacklisting OR subject_t:"Positive vetting" OR subject_ses:93418
Type
House
Session
More
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what background checks were carried out on Johnson Kane, the co-founder and chief executive officer of the Education Fellowship Trust, in advance of schools being transferred to that multi-academy trust.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what background checks were carried out on Johnson Kane, the co-founder and chief executive officer of the Education Fellowship Trust, in advance of schools being transferred to that multi-academy trust.
It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many prospective AFCH instructors (a) failed the Army Staff and Leadership School (ASLS), (b) arrived at the ASLS without disclosure and barring service (DBS) clearance and (c) completed ASLS without DBS clearance in each of the last five years.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many prospective AFCH instructors (a) failed the Army Staff and Leadership School (ASLS), (b) arrived at the ASLS without disclosure and barring service (DBS) clearance and (c) completed ASLS without DBS clearance in each of the last five years.
In the last five years no instructors from the Army Foundation College, Harrogate have failed the Army Staff and Leadership School (ASLS) course.
Information on those arriving and completing courses at ASLS without Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) clearance is not held centrally and can be provided only at disproportionate cost. All permanent staff posts at Army Foundation College, Harrogate require DBS clearance. I refer the hon. Member to the answer my hon. Friend the Minister for Defence Veterans Reserves and Welfare (Mark Lancaster) gave on 9 December 2016 to Question 56016 to the hon. Member for Bridgend (Mrs Moon).
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time for a Disclosure and Barring Service application to be processed from (a) Camberwell and Peckham constituency and (b) London was in each of the last five years.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time for a Disclosure and Barring Service application to be processed from (a) Camberwell and Peckham constituency and (b) London was in each of the last five years.
The total number of applications to the Disclosure and Barring Service issued to people living in (a) Camberwell and Peckham constituency and (b) London that have taken more than 60 days to process in each of the last five financial years are listed in table A below.
The average time for a Disclosure and Barring Service application to be processed from (a) Camberwell and Peckham constituency and (b) London in each of the five financial years is listed in table B below.
Table A:
| Camberwell & Peckham | London | ||
| Total disclosures despatched | Disclosures taking more than 60 Days | Total disclosures despatched | Disclosures taking more than 60 Days |
2012/13 | 14,467 | 274 | 681,931 | 9,883 |
2013/14 | 14,082 | 682 | 666,318 | 22,721 |
2014/15 | 14,144 | 1,769 | 701,169 | 68,264 |
2015/16 | 13,957 | 2,364 | 713,438 | 94,907 |
2016/17 to 31-Jan-17 | 12,205 | 2,528 | 624,040 | 101,721 |
Table B
| Camberwell & Peckham |
| London |
|
| Total Disclosures Despatched | Average Turnaround Time (days) | Total Disclosures Despatched | Average Turnaround Time (days) |
2012/13 | 14,467 | 12.28 | 681,931 | 11.13 |
2013/14 | 14,082 | 14.83 | 666,318 | 12.79 |
2014/15 | 14,144 | 19.87 | 701,169 | 17.3 |
2015/16 | 13,957 | 26.62 | 713,438 | 21.87 |
2016/17 to 31-Jan-17 | 12,205 | 37.78 | 624,040 | 30.49 |
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many Disclosure and Barring Service applications from (a) Camberwell and Peckham constituency and (b) London took more than 60 days to process in each of the last five years.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many Disclosure and Barring Service applications from (a) Camberwell and Peckham constituency and (b) London took more than 60 days to process in each of the last five years.
The total number of applications to the Disclosure and Barring Service issued to people living in (a) Camberwell and Peckham constituency and (b) London that have taken more than 60 days to process in each of the last five financial years are listed in table A below.
The average time for a Disclosure and Barring Service application to be processed from (a) Camberwell and Peckham constituency and (b) London in each of the five financial years is listed in table B below.
Table A:
| Camberwell & Peckham | London | ||
| Total disclosures despatched | Disclosures taking more than 60 Days | Total disclosures despatched | Disclosures taking more than 60 Days |
2012/13 | 14,467 | 274 | 681,931 | 9,883 |
2013/14 | 14,082 | 682 | 666,318 | 22,721 |
2014/15 | 14,144 | 1,769 | 701,169 | 68,264 |
2015/16 | 13,957 | 2,364 | 713,438 | 94,907 |
2016/17 to 31-Jan-17 | 12,205 | 2,528 | 624,040 | 101,721 |
Table B
| Camberwell & Peckham |
| London |
|
| Total Disclosures Despatched | Average Turnaround Time (days) | Total Disclosures Despatched | Average Turnaround Time (days) |
2012/13 | 14,467 | 12.28 | 681,931 | 11.13 |
2013/14 | 14,082 | 14.83 | 666,318 | 12.79 |
2014/15 | 14,144 | 19.87 | 701,169 | 17.3 |
2015/16 | 13,957 | 26.62 | 713,438 | 21.87 |
2016/17 to 31-Jan-17 | 12,205 | 37.78 | 624,040 | 30.49 |
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether instructors at all phase 1 training sites where people aged under 18 are present are required to have disclosure and barring service clearance; and if he will make a statement.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether instructors at all phase 1 training sites where people aged under 18 are present are required to have disclosure and barring service clearance; and if he will make a statement.
The Armed Forces take their responsibilities toward all their people extremely seriously, particularly where those personnel are under the age of 18. Disclosure and safeguarding checks are one aspect of our safeguarding provisions for those in the 16-18 age group. There is no legal requirement for disclosure and safeguarding checks to be carried out on all instructors at all phase 1 training sites, but the Department's policy is that such checks should be considered by the employing authorities of all Phase 1 and Phase 2 establishments.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time taken to process checks by the Employer Checking Service is.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time taken to process checks by the Employer Checking Service is.
The published service standard for the Employer Checking Service is 5 working days but the average processing time between 01/11/2011 and 28/02/2017 was 4.5 working days.
My Lords, there is currently no legal obligation within the whistleblowing framework for prescribed persons to investigate a disclosure made to them. The call for evidence in 2013 identified that whistleblowers did not have the confidence that their reports of wrongdoing were being investigated. The Employment Rights Act 1996, as...
My Lords, there is currently no legal obligation within the whistleblowing framework for prescribed persons to investigate a disclosure made to them. The call for evidence in 2013 identified that whistleblowers did not have the confidence that their reports of wrongdoing were being investigated. The Employment Rights Act 1996, as...
My Lords, I am very grateful to the Minister for appearing so fresh and alert at the Dispatch Box. She certainly has the upper hand on me, given that we finished near midnight last night and we were in the same positions across the Dispatch Box. The rest of you...
My Lords, I am very grateful to the Minister for appearing so fresh and alert at the Dispatch Box. She certainly has the upper hand on me, given that we finished near midnight last night and we were in the same positions across the Dispatch Box. The rest of you...
My Lords, I thank the Minister for her detailed explanation. I am slightly fresher because I did not have a late-night assignment in this House last night and I want to try to clear up some confusion in some of the points that she made.
The Minister talked about annual reviews...
My Lords, I thank the Minister for her detailed explanation. I am slightly fresher because I did not have a late-night assignment in this House last night and I want to try to clear up some confusion in some of the points that she made.
The Minister talked about annual reviews...
My Lords, I am rather glad that the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, referenced our late hour last night, because I am not sure that I will be able to answer all the questions that have been put to me this morning. However, I will do my best to answer at...
My Lords, I am rather glad that the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, referenced our late hour last night, because I am not sure that I will be able to answer all the questions that have been put to me this morning. However, I will do my best to answer at...
Lords motion to approve. Agreed to on question.
Lords motion to approve. Agreed to on question.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the warning from the Local Government Association that reductions in the central government-provided education services grant may result in some local authorities potentially being unable to meet legal obligations to schools, such as checking staff for criminal records and ensuring that...
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the warning from the Local Government Association that reductions in the central government-provided education services grant may result in some local authorities potentially being unable to meet legal obligations to schools, such as checking staff for criminal records and ensuring that...
As announced at the Spending Review, we will be removing the Education Services Grant general funding rate from 2017-18. We recognise that local authorities will need support with this change, which is why we have introduced a new transitional grant worth £125m in 2017-18. We have also amended regulations to allow local authorities to use other sources of funding to pay for education services for maintained schools once the ESG is removed from September 2017. Local authorities are allowed to retain some of their maintained schools’ Dedicated Schools Grant so that they can continue to deliver the statutory duties they carry out on behalf of maintained schools previously funded through the Education Services Grant general funding rate.
If local authorities cannot agree with their maintained schools on the level of funding to retain, local authorities have recourse to the Secretary of State.
Funding delivered through the ESG retained duties rate, which funds duties that local authorities hold in respect of all schools, is not being removed. In 2017-18, this funding has been moved into the Dedicated Schools Grant and paid to local authorities on a per-pupil basis. From 2018-19, this funding will be allocated to local authorities through the central school services block.
Motion to approve. Agreed to on question.
Motion to approve. Agreed to on question.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the (a) procedures and (b) timescales are by which findings of not guilty are entered into the criminal record database; and at what point a person found not guilty receives a clear Disclosure and Barring Service check.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the (a) procedures and (b) timescales are by which findings of not guilty are entered into the criminal record database; and at what point a person found not guilty receives a clear Disclosure and Barring Service check.
HM Courts & Tribunals Service is responsible for ensuring that case outcome and sentence information, including whether the defendant was found guilty or not guilty, is sent to the police for inclusion on the Police National Computer (PNC). The average time taken to send case results to the police in the financial year 2015/16 was 1.3 working days.
The Ministry of Justice has no further involvement in Disclosure and Barring Service processes and is a matter for the Home Office.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether there is a specified timeframe in which the Disclosure and Barring Service is required to process a certificate renewal application.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether there is a specified timeframe in which the Disclosure and Barring Service is required to process a certificate renewal application.
Criminal record certificates issued by the Disclosure and Barring Service do not expire after a specific period of time and do not include a renewal date. A certificate has no set period of validity. Information revealed through a Disclosure and Barring Service check reflects the information that was available at the time of its issue. Disclosure certificates are primarily designed to be used by an employer at the point of recruitment for a particular position.
Some roles and some employers require the person concerned to “renew” their Disclosure and Barring Service check at specific intervals. The person can do that either by applying for a new certificate or by using the Disclosure and Barring Service Update Service.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the findings of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants study of the impact of the right to rent checks on migrants and ethnic minorities in England.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the findings of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants study of the impact of the right to rent checks on migrants and ethnic minorities in England.
The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants’ report includes findings about discrimination in relation to the Right to Rent scheme, but the Government’s view is that JCWI does not provide clear evidence that discrimination has arisen as a consequence of the scheme. However, the Government takes this issue seriously, and officials will meet with JCWI in order to discuss the findings in their report.
The Government’s own evaluation of phase one of the scheme, in parts of the West Midlands, found no evidence of discrimination in terms of outcomes for prospective tenants.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 2 December 2016 to Question 56016, on Army Foundation College vetting, what proportion of Ministry of Defence civil servants employed at Army Foundation College, Harrogate (a) currently hold valid Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) clearance and (b)...
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 2 December 2016 to Question 56016, on Army Foundation College vetting, what proportion of Ministry of Defence civil servants employed at Army Foundation College, Harrogate (a) currently hold valid Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) clearance and (b)...
All Ministry of Defence Civil Servants currently employed at Army Foundation College hold DBS clearance and since August 2015 all new civilian staff have held clearances before they commenced work at the college.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 2 December 2016 to Question 56016, on Army Foundation College vetting; how many permanent staff arriving at Army Foundation College, Harrogate without Disclosure and Barring Service clearance were (a) returned to their previous unit and (b) subject...
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 2 December 2016 to Question 56016, on Army Foundation College vetting; how many permanent staff arriving at Army Foundation College, Harrogate without Disclosure and Barring Service clearance were (a) returned to their previous unit and (b) subject...
Since April 2014, 93 military staff due to be employed by Army Foundation College, Harrogate arrived without Disclosure and Barring Service clearance; of these 21 have been subject to a supervisory plan and 72 were returned to their previous unit to await the required clearance. Since August 2015 all those subject to a supervisory plan have not been permitted to be part of a training team.
I beg to move,
That this House has considered blacklisting in the construction industry.
This debate relates to a secretive, insidious and shoddy practice that has brought shame on our construction industry. As shadow Secretary of State for Business, I initiated a lengthy debate in the main Chamber on the issue in...
I beg to move,
That this House has considered blacklisting in the construction industry.
This debate relates to a secretive, insidious and shoddy practice that has brought shame on our construction industry. As shadow Secretary of State for Business, I initiated a lengthy debate in the main Chamber on the issue in...