‘Passporting’ is not acceptable to all

SIR – National Security Inspectorate (NSI) chief executive Tom Mullarkey presents a very cohesive argument in his case for ‘passporting’ the organisation’s Gold and Silver Award standards into the Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS) (‘Passport to The Promised Land’, SMT, August 2005, pp43-44).

Sadly, Tom’s views are fundamentally flawed. However much he would like a monopoly for his organisation, such a concept is simply unacceptable to the industry at large.

A great deal of time, effort and money has been spent in arriving at the conclusions concerning the ACS reached so far. Industry practitioners have been deeply involved at every turn. A vast amount of detail has been covered, and while Tom inserts the plea: “Please do not hold me to the fine detail…” early on in his discourse, the fact is that – as is often the case – the devil is in the detail. As yet, the final benchmark for entry has not been set so there is no certainty about comparisons between different awards.

The NSI lists 200 or so high quality companies operating under its inspection regime. Those are security companies who deserve to enjoy immediate recognition for their sterling commitment to excellence over many years.

However, there are at least 50 companies within the BSIA’s membership whose standards are equally high – and in some cases higher – but who choose to avail themselves of the services of another UKAS-approved inspection body. Are they to be denied the benefits of passporting?

As we stated at the beginning, monopoly is not an option. The NSI should not continue to damn other inspectorates with faint praise. There is room for everyone!

There is a very simple solution to this problem. Let all companies certificated by a UKAS-approved body – and which can be shown to meet the relevant British Standards for their part of the industry, and have completed the self-assessment workbook – enter the ACS on Day One. Then, within the initial 12 months of membership, they must demonstrate that they meet the proposed ACS standards (which are entirely different from ISO 9001:2000 and, therefore, do not make for easy comparison).

A monopoly is thus avoided, but credit is fully afforded to those companies exhibiting existing high standards.

That solution has been more or less on offer since before the NSI began its present lobbying campaign. We know for a fact that the NSI was aware of it.

In the wider interests of the industry and its practitioners, we urge the NSI to think again.