Parliamentary questions highlight the barriers facing many people with criminal records

Just before the current parliamentary recess, a series of written questions and answers focused on civil servants with criminal records. Philip Davies, Conservative MP for Shipley, submitted the question “how many civil servants in your department have a criminal conviction?” to numerous departments, receiving fifteen answers.  

Questions such as this risk embedding in society the stigma associated with criminal records, while the answers they led to shine a light on some inconsistent and concerning practice. 

Government departments have an inconsistent and concerning approach 

The range of answers given shows an inconsistent approach across government to employing people with criminal records. Each government department is an individual employer of civil servants, which goes some way to explaining the variation. However, the lack of central government guidance on the employment of people with criminal records is concerning. The government has done good work in relation to the employment prospects of people with criminal records, including the shortening of some spending periods in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act (2022) and work to support prison-leavers into work. This is undermined if government does not take the lead in promoting best practice in this area. 

Some government departments show a poor grasp of the criminal records system

The Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) responded with the claim that “no civil servants at DCMS hold a criminal conviction”. This suggests either a blanket ban on the recruitment of anyone with a criminal record or that DCMS are unaware that some convictions are not necessarily revealed even on enhanced DBS checks (owing to filtering rules). In either case, it is worrying that a government department felt able to give such a blunt answer to such a complex question. This does, however, illustrate that the criminal records regime is excessively complex and in need of reform – even a government department does not understand it as clearly as they should. 

Similarly, the Ministry of Defence stated that they do not “routinely employ people with unspent convictions”, with no reference to the kind of nuance and case-by-case approach that should be taken when considering criminal records. 

Blanket bans are unhelpful to both individuals (as they create disproportionate barriers) and to employers (as they can lead to well-qualified candidates being lost). 

Although not outlining a blanket ban, of particular concern is the tone adopted by two departments (Energy Security and Net Zero and Science, Innovation and Technology) who stated that information about a criminal conviction is “likely” to have an impact on someone’s suitability to take up a role. The burden should be on an employer having a clear justification as to why a particular criminal conviction is problematic, rather than starting from a position where this is assumed to “likely” be the case. Such a singular approach is likely to unnecessarily, and unfairly, exclude people with criminal records. 

Some better practice was revealed 

Most departments did not answer how many civil servants have a criminal conviction, noting that as the information is not held centrally there would be a disproportionate cost to gathering it. It is encouraging that this element of data protection was recognised. 

Other responses that highlight a better approach to using criminal records information in recruitment decisions include: 

• The Home Office would consider “a range of factors, including the nature of the position and circumstances of the offence”. 

• The Ministry of Justice consider factors such as “offence type and length of time since conviction”. 
• The Department for Education consider “the specific offences against the nature of the business” that person would be involved in. 
• “Role specific assessments” are conducted by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. However, they do also have a list of serious offences/sentences that would lead to someone being automatically rejected. 

A harmful focus on criminal records 

These questions hint at a suspicion of employing people with criminal records and highlight the barriers many people still face because of a past conviction. That they come from a serving MP highlights the scale of the challenge. This, along with some current pieces of legislation you can read about here, serve to deepen the stigma of criminal records. 

Criminal records information is not of legitimate public interest 

Such an interest in the criminal records of employees, especially when framed with no context whatsoever, suggests that criminal records information is of legitimate public interest. Instead, criminal records information is something that should only be handled on a need-to-know basis and informed by clear processes. The Information Commissioner’s Office is clear that criminal records data should be treated as sensitive data.

A conflation of people with criminal records and prison leavers

Numerous departments also flagged their involvement – albeit often limited – in schemes designed to provide employment opportunities for prison leavers. While such schemes are welcome, conflating all people with criminal records with prison leavers is unhelpful. Most people with criminal records have not served time in prison. If the focus is only on people leaving prison, the needs of the majority of people with criminal records risk being ignored.

We need change 

These questions highlight the need for change. 

Firstly, a change in attitudes. Employees’ criminal records status are not a valid point of public comment and having a criminal record need not preclude people from employment. There are mechanisms in place to stop people with specific convictions from taking up certain types of work (e.g. by the barring lists for regulated activities), but otherwise a more nuanced attitude is needed. 

Secondly, legislative change is needed to address these barriers. The criminal records regime in England and Wales is excessively complex and disproportionately punitive. Reform is needed to unlock the potential of the more than 12 million people in the UK with a criminal record. 

References

Written questions submitted by Philip Davies MP, including those highlighted here concerning criminal convictions of civil servants, can be found on the parliamentary website.