HKA
j
CONFIDENTIAL
POSITIVE VETINY
NOTE FOR THE
LICE
47
HMOCS: ELIGIBILITY FOR CONSIDERATION FOR EMPLOYMENT BY HMG
1.
Mr Ricketts and I attended a meeting with the Cabinet office, Security Service and MOD to discuss the implications of security vetting for the prospects of HMOCS members and their dependants to obtain jobs with HMG post-1997.
It is clear that the Security Services have very firmly
concluded that they will not be able to undertake proper
checks post-1997. They have several reasons for this:
2.
3.
Vetting requirements vary for different branches of the Government. For the FCO most positions require PVTS; for the MOD most positions would require PVS and quite a number PVTS. For the Armed Services most positions would not require PVS, but some certainly would. There was nobody from the Home Office present so we were unable to determine at what level police officers might have to be positively vetted. I shall write to the Security Division in the Home Office (which does vetting for the police) a Mrs Ursula Wiffen.
4. The Security Services said that if they were unable to do a check they would stamp the relevant form "no check possible". Along with this goes a caution that this does not/not mean a negative assessment should be assumed. However they did acknowledge that if the Security Services so stamped
emp.hmg.ADM
SLM
CONFIDENTIAL
THIS IS A COPY
THE
AL HAS BEEN
LUNDER
FOI EXEMPTION NO. 27(1)...
4012)