AGSVA’s rides forth to vet

I don’t agree that this is the rub – ehtics and integrity are checked and checkable via other sources – referees, employers, police records check – it is a holistic approach. Also the PSM is alive and well – having just undertaken refresher training.

I have no problem with updated material being provided to an agency when changing jobs, i.e. recent overseas trips or any other notifiable matter – but there can be no cogent need for a person to go through the entire process from the beginning, with re certified copies of everything. I mean, how often do you have to prove you were born.

There is clearly a lot of “this is the way we’ve always done it” about this.

Finally I would have thought that a person lacking in ethics and integrity could pose a threat to National Security – the potential for compromise is immense.

Well the PSM is gone.And remember your clearance is reliable upto the day it was issued after that day you may have undertaken activities that would deem you unfit to hold a clearance. That is why a lot of agencies don’t accept a clearance from another agency with out checking/ updating details etc especially the higher level clearances.

TheObserver said :

I would also comment that the higher a clearance, the more portable it should be – because when you get into the realm of ASIO checking, well, how many times do they have to tell different agencies there are no security issues with you.

It’s my understanding that while ASIO issues security advice (as it relates to national security), it doesn’t determine character suitability for clearances issued by other agencies. So, a candidate may not pose a threat to national security, but may be lacking in appropriate ethics and integrity. Therein lies the rub.

One would have thought that if a person had a clearance undertaken in accordance with the Protective Security Manual then unless there were compelling reasons why it should not be recognised (i.e. the person was in a clearance ‘after care’ situation) then it should be totally transportable from one agency to another. Some agencies will recognise a clearance, some do not.

I would also comment that the higher a clearance, the more portable it should be – because when you get into the realm of ASIO checking, well, how many times do they have to tell different agencies there are no security issues with you.

Anyhow, something that removes the duplication is probably a good thing.

eyeLikeCarrots said :

Even in the medium to long term, will this improve the horribly long wait for higher level security clearences ?

Not necessarily.

p1 said :

I assume that all the companies which used to hold all those contracts are now sacking excess staff, who are getting jobs with the new agency?

It is my understanding that they have already been hired and it is being administered by defence.

I assume that all the companies which used to hold all those contracts are now sacking excess staff, who are getting jobs with the new agency?

Even in the medium to long term, will this improve the horribly long wait for higher level security clearences ?

I understand some agencies are automatically extending their security clearances so that a backlog doesn’t develop in the initial establishment phase.