Standards for police vetting checks
Bichard Inquiry · The Bichard Inquiry Report · Issued 22 June 2004 · Addressed to: HMICFRS, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
HMIC should develop, with ACPO and the CRB, the standards to be observed by police forces in carrying out vetting checks. These should cover the intelligence databases to be searched, the robustness of procedures, guidance, training, supervision and audit.
Bichard Inquiry, The Bichard Inquiry Report · 22 Jun 2004 Source PDF →
Response — verbatim from government
●Home Office
The Home Secretary made a statement to Parliament on 22 June 2004, the day the Bichard Inquiry Report was published, accepting all 31 recommendations in full. The government stated it was "in principle, accepting Sir Michael's main recommendations and will act on them immediately." Implementation led to the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 and the creation of the Independent Safeguarding Authority (now the Disclosure and Barring Service). By February 2007, 21 of the 31 recommendations had been fully or substantially completed. See Hansard, 22 June 2004.
Home Office · 22 Jun 2004 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
- 1 Feb 2025 · Home Office DBS introduced digital identity verification using UK passports. Completing its 2020-2025 strategy with automation of Standard and Enhanced checks. Source →
- 8 Nov 2006 · Home Office Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 received Royal Assent. Established the legislative framework for comprehensive vetting and barring checks for those working with children and vulnerable adults. Source →
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.