Police vetting 'too inconsistent'

Huntley killed Holly and Jessica while working as a school caretaker

More consistency is needed in the way vetting decisions are made, the head of the Criminal Records Bureau has said.

Vince Gaskell has been giving evidence to the Bichard Inquiry into how police checks on Ian Huntley failed to reveal previous allegations made against him.

He told the inquiry vetting processes varied between police forces and called for a "greater degree of consistency".

The CRB reviews employers' applications for police intelligence information when people are being vetted for a job.

The checks on Huntley, 29, were made in December 2001, before the CRB was introduced.

Mandatory check

He was appointed as Soham Village College caretaker after police vetting checks showed no trace of previous allegations against him, which included four suspected rapes.

There Huntley murdered 10-year-olds Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in August 2002, but his past only emerged following his conviction in December last year.

In the main, people would be acting with precaution Vince Gaskell CRB head

Anyone who wants a job where there will be substantial, unsupervised, regular and sustained contact with children must face a police check.

But a decision also has to be made as to how detailed the disclosure vetting check should be.

In some CRB guidelines caretakers fall under the standard vetting category which raises details of any conviction, cautions, reprimands and warnings recorded on the Police National Computer.

Use caution

But Mr Gaskell said when confusion or concern arises about which check should be carried out, most organisations will err on the side of caution and apply for an enhanced check.

Enhanced checks include local police intelligence information from the areas lived in by the applicant over the previous five years.

Mr Gaskell said: "In the main people would be acting with precaution and applying for enhanced not simply because of the guidance but because of the nature of the employment."

"When employers are in any doubt whatsoever they are routinely, in my view, taking the option of applying for enhanced disclosure," he said.

It is very important that individuals' rights are protected Amanda Brown NUT

Mr Gaskell added he would expect other checks such as following up references to be carried out to help assess potential risks.

It is hoped a new local police system to flag up intelligence nation-wide will be working by the spring.

But inquiry counsel James Eadie said operations had to be tightened up before the national cross-referencing system is rolled out.

He said relevant allegations, not just convictions, should be flagged up.

False accusations

Teachers unions said school staff should have to undergo enhanced checks before getting a job, in their submissions to the inquiry on Friday.

They said checks should be mandatory because of the huge importance of child protection.

But the National Union of Teachers said it was important not to overlook the fact that teachers are sometimes falsely accused of offences.

The NUT's Amanda Brown said: "The union is particularly concerned to ensure that people who are a danger to children are not able to work with them.

"But we do think it is very important that individuals' rights are protected as well."