The Police (Vetting) Regulations 2025
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
4G Right of appeal against decisions in respect of police candidates
(1) A police candidate may appeal against a decision of a vetting authority mentioned in regulation 4F(1). (2) The appeal must be made to a person nominated by the vetting authority (“the vetting appeal decision maker”) who— (a) has the appropriate level of knowledge, skills and experience to carry out the appeal, and (b) was not involved in the decision appealed against. (3) The only grounds of appeal under this regulation are that— (a) the decision was unreasonable; (b) there is evidence that could not reasonably have been considered as part of the decision which could have materially affected the decision; (c) there was procedural or other unfairness which could have materially affected the decision. (4) On completion of the appeal, the vetting appeal decision maker must make a written report to the vetting authority setting out its decision and providing detailed reasons in writing for its decision. (5) Before making any decision to add or vary a condition to which the police officer’s vetting clearance is subject, the vetting appeal decision maker must consult with the vetting authority. (6) The vetting authority must uphold the decision of the vetting appeal decision maker.
4G Right of appeal against decisions in respect of police candidates
(1) A police candidate may appeal against a decision of a vetting authority mentioned in regulation 4F(1). (2) The appeal must be made to a person nominated by the vetting authority (“the vetting appeal decision maker”) who— (a) has the appropriate level of knowledge, skills and experience to carry out the appeal, and (b) was not involved in the decision appealed against. (3) The only grounds of appeal under this regulation are that— (a) the decision was unreasonable; (b) there is evidence that could not reasonably have been considered as part of the decision which could have materially affected the decision; (c) there was procedural or other unfairness which could have materially affected the decision. (4) On completion of the appeal, the vetting appeal decision maker must make a written report to the vetting authority setting out its decision and providing detailed reasons in writing for its decision. (5) Before making any decision to add or vary a condition to which the police officer’s vetting clearance is subject, the vetting appeal decision maker must consult with the vetting authority. (6) The vetting authority must uphold the decision of the vetting appeal decision maker.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
How this law is officially changed
Solon does not know this law's official route yet. The proposal is recorded all the same, and the route appears here once its source is added.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.