Police face weeks-long delay before they can reveal suspects' nationalities
Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, is urging forces to give more information about suspects' nationalities and migration status after Reform accused Warwickshire Police of a 'cover-up' over the rape of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton.
However, an official rule change on when foreigners can be publicly identified as suspects has been delayed because of a review that is not expected to be published until the autumn.
It came amid criticism of the Government's broader strategy on illegal migration, after Ms Cooper was unable to say whether a new deal with the French would allow small boat migrants to be deported this month.
Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, warned that the deal was 'wide open to abuse' because France does not have to share any data on who is coming to Britain – meaning new arrivals could include criminals and terrorists.
Ministers have asked the Law Commission, an independent advisory body, to update guidance on contempt of court rules, which currently prevent police or officials from giving details about suspects.
The review, commissioned in February, is not expected to report until the autumn, and a change in guidance for police forces could be implemented weeks after that.
Without an urgent change, ministers fear a repeat of the riots that followed the Southport stabbings last summer, while Downing Street has said police should be more 'transparent' about their suspects.
There is concern among law enforcement officials and in Whitehall that public debate about crime by migrants and the threat of violent protests at asylum hotels will culminate into a summer of 'disorder' on the streets.
Ms Cooper told the BBC on Tuesday: 'We do want to see more transparency in cases, we think local people do need to have more information.'
One police leader told The Telegraph that while the previous system of 'saying as little as possible in order to preserve a fair trial' had worked well in the past, the rise of social media had 'driven a coach and horses' through that approach.
He said the absence of information all too often created a vacuum, which was filled by mis- or disinformation, and said the risk to public order meant police must provide more information.
The review of police protocol follows inaccurate speculation on social media of the Southport attacker's identity last year, with users alleging that Axel Rudakubana was an illegal immigrant.
George Finch, the 19-year-old Reform leader of Warwickshire county council, on Monday accused the Government of covering up alleged crime by migrants in Nuneaton, claiming that the two men charged with the rape of a 12-year-old girl were Afghan. That claim has not been confirmed by police.
There is not currently any guidance issued to forces about disclosing the ethnicity or immigration status of an individual on charge.
The rules state only that a suspect should be named unless there is an exceptional and legitimate policing purpose for not doing so, or if reporting restrictions apply.
Philip Seccombe, the Warwickshire Police and Crime Commissioner, has said that any release of information by police should 'follow national guidance and legal requirements'.
The review of the guidelines on contempt of court was commissioned by Ms Cooper, Shabana Mahmood, the Justice Secretary, and Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, earlier this year.
The Law Commission's review is expected to find that police officials and ministers should be allowed to reveal more information about suspects in cases where there is a 'threat of serious public disorder'.
However, despite a request from ministers to publish new guidelines 'as soon as feasible', the body is not expected to report for some weeks.
The delay has effectively left police forces defenceless against accusations of a cover-up, while Downing Street is urging them to make more information available.
Another senior officer told The Telegraph any change to the rules would create new issues for the police because they do not routinely collect nationality and ethnicity data unless it is relevant to an investigation.
'The police's job is about gathering evidence and I can see some real practical difficulties in requiring forces to provide extra information,' the officer said.
A Home Office source said: 'Not only are we deporting foreign criminals at a rate that Chris Philp and Robert Jenrick never managed when they were in charge at the Home Office, but we are also publishing far more information about that group of offenders than the Tories ever did.'
Sir Keir is separately facing criticism over the one in, one out migrant deal agreed with Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, under which migrants who come to the UK illegally are meant to be swapped for people in France who have a legitimate asylum claim in Britain.
The Prime Minister announced on Monday that the process of deporting the first Channel migrants under the deal will begin within days.
But Mr Philp said the details of the agreement, published on Tuesday, show it will be a 'lawyer's paradise' that will make it too easy for migrants to stay.
The agreement states that people who have made 'clearly unfounded' claims under the Human Rights Act will not automatically be deported, meaning lawyers will be able to create lengthy delays.
The agreement states that anyone claiming to be under the age of 18 will be able to stay in the UK.
Mr Philp said that because Britain does not carry out robust age checks, it means that people in their 20s who could they are under 18 could be allowed to stay.
In addition, under the deal France will not have to hand over any data on the people they are sending to the UK, meaning they could be criminals or terrorists.
'This deal is unworkable and wide open to abuse,' he said.
'It's exactly what we've been warning about – a bureaucrat's dream and a lawyer's paradise set to prevent people ever being returned to France.
'There are no numbers specified, presumably because they are so small they would embarrass the Home Secretary. France won't even tell us any information about who we have to accept back, so they could be criminals or terrorists, and we wouldn't know.
'This is a pathetic deal, which simply won't work. No wonder this Government has presided over the worst channel crossing figures in history.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
11 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Victoria Starmer received £650 tickets for Royal Ascot - despite the Prime Minister paying back more than £6,000 worth of gifts just last year, reveals Richard Eden
She's been described as a 'reluctant' political spouse because of her rare public appearances, but Victoria Starmer is, it seems, anything but reluctant when it comes to accepting freebies. Her husband, Sir Keir Starmer, has disclosed that her attendance at a horse racing event last month was thanks to a gift from Ascot Racecourse. This week, the Prime Minister updated his entry in the parliamentary Register of Members' Financial Interests to record that he accepted £650 worth of tickets from the Berkshire racecourse. The entry states: 'Name of donor: Ascot Authority (Holdings) Limited. Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Tickets and hospitality for three family members (value approximate), value £650.' Sir Keir did not join his wife at the King George Racing Weekend event. It is thought that he was preparing for his talks with Donald Trump, whom he was due to meet after the US President's trip to Scotland. Lady Starmer, 52, an NHS occupational health worker, was pictured enjoying the warm weather in a bright orange sundress as she attended The King George and Queen Elizabeth Stakes at the racecourse. Sir Keir's acceptance of the freebie is surprising as last October he paid back more than £6,000 worth of gifts and hospitality he had received since becoming Prime Minister, following a backlash over donations. That included nearly £2,000 for four tickets to Doncaster Racecourse, as well as six Taylor Swift tickets and a clothing rental agreement with a high-end designer favoured by Lady Starmer. It came after Sir Keir and other cabinet ministers faced weeks of criticism for accepting freebies from wealthy donors. The Prime Minister said it was 'right' for him to repay the cost of some gifts. Asked about the donations, he said his Government would bring forward new principles for donations 'as until now politicians have used their best individual judgement to decide'. He said: 'I took the decision that until those principles were in place it was right to repay these particular payments.' Sir Keir has committed to tightening the rules around ministerial hospitality and gifts to improve transparency. Earlier, a Downing Street spokesman confirmed that the ministerial code would be updated and will include 'a new set of principles on gifts and hospitality' commissioned by Sir Keir. MPs are allowed to accept gifts from donors but have to declare these on the register of MPs' interests. It's the spiritual home of cricket and now Lord's is for sale – well, at least small pieces of it. Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) is offering its members the chance to buy chunks of turf from the north London pitch for £50 each. 'At the end of the 2025 season, we will be resurfacing the famous outfield on the Main Ground at Lord's for the first time in 23 years,' explains an MCC email. 'To raise funds for the MCC Foundation, and to aid future development of the cricket field, we are offering all members the chance to own a piece of Lord's turf.' One louche member tells me: 'I normally buy my grass in Camden Town.' Anneka (and jumpsuit) is back in black Anneka Rice once revealed she had a 'shrine' to the jumpsuits she used to wear on 1980s hit TV show Treasure Hunt and even hired them out for hen parties. Clearly, the presenter has saved a few of them for her own nights out. Rice, 64, slipped into a black jumpsuit for the opening night performance of Secret Cinema's Grease: The Immersive Movie Musical at Evolution in London this week. The Welsh-born presenter returned to our screens last year for the revival of 1990s reality series Challenge Anneka, but it was cancelled after just three episodes due to low ratings. Dame Mary Archer is not just 'fragrant' – as a judge called her in her husband Jeffrey's 1987 libel trial – but extremely fit as well. I hear the 80-year-old is to join five other dames in running a charity relay race next month. 'The Great Dames are dusting off their trainers… and generally limbering up to run in Cambridge's famous Chariots Of Fire race,' she says, referring to their team name. Each woman will run a 1.7-mile loop before passing over the baton. 'The beneficiary is Roald Dahl's Marvellous Children's Charity,' she says. 'The funds raised will go directly towards establishing a new Roald Dahl Nurse.' Francesca saddles up in style ITV's perkiest presenter, horse racing pundit Francesca Cumani, is determined to prove she'd be a stylish dresser whichever century she happened to be born in. The mother of two attended the Goodwood Regency Ball – where guests were transported back to the 19th century – wearing a floor-length red dress from vintage fashion for hire store Constantine Rex. 'In full costume at the Goodwood Ball with this handsome pair,' Cumani, 42, wrote of fashion stylist Sarah Byrne, pictured left, and racehorse trainer Stephanie Easterby, pictured right, next to this photograph taken at Goodwood House, the Duke of Richmond's ancestral seat in West Sussex. Middleton's answer to ruff days at work Some might say he's barking, but James Middleton has called for companies to let employees bring their dogs to work. The Princess of Wales's brother claims it would boost productivity. 'Dogs in the workplace should be a generic 'yes' unless there is a very good reason to say 'no',' says James, 38, who runs dog food firm James & Ella, named after him and his late first dog. 'I started the business during the pandemic and the whole team works remotely. 'When we all get together, there are dogs everywhere and I really believe they increase productivity. Ideas come from those 15-minute breaks, taking them out to the garden.'
Daily Mail
11 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
NSW cop reveals chilling reason officers touch your car boot when they pull you over
A NSW police officer has explained the deliberate reason why officers touch a vehicle after pulling it over -and it's all about safety. Sergeant Steven Planinic told listeners of Nova FM 's Fitzy and Wippa with Kate Ritchie that officers often leave their fingerprints on a car before walking back to their patrol vehicle, and it's no accident. The explanation came after a listener named Gemma from Parramatta asked: 'Why is it when you've pulled someone over you tap the car and leave your fingerprints as you walk off back to your police car?' she asked. He confirmed the move is about leaving fingerprints on the pulled-over vehicle. 'I'll let you use your imagination as to why we would leave bits of ourselves on someone's car,' he said. The sergeant went on to explain that if something goes wrong and the driver flees, 'you've left something, a marker on that car that they can't refute.' Mr Planinic confirmed the 'deliberate' act was not just about a police officer's safety. He also revealed the simple move is used to make 'sure the boot's secured so that no one jumps out of it'. He was asked whether a driver should drive through a red light to make way for a police car approaching quickly from behind. The officer confirmed drivers should only ever move out the way if they can do so without crossing the line. Mr Planinic is the founder of Beat the Blue, a yearly event which gives drivers the opportunity to face off against NSW Police Force highway patrol officers. The event returns on Saturday and takes place at the Sydney Motorsport Park.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Keir Starmer must let in sunlight to avoid further lobbying scandals
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton long ago predicted that lobbying would be 'the next big scandal' to hit politics, warning of the dangers of what happens behind closed doors. 'We all know how it works. The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear, the ex-ministers and ex-advisers for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way,' he said in 2010. It was somewhat apt that despite introducing the first real oversight for lobbyists, the former prime minister was caught in just such a scandal after he departed from office. Despite a repeated cycle of scandals involving what Lord Cameron spoke of, lobbyists have continued to work in the shadows. As this newspaper has exposed, the Starmer government is facing serious questions over 'cash for access' after businesses were approached by a Labour group offering private meetings with 'an influential Labour figure'. The Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF), which is run by lobbyists from Bradshaw Advisory along with an advisory council of senior party figures, has offered businesses the chance to meet 'key policymakers' to help 'shape the discussion'. The forum has offered sponsorship packages for potential clients, including breakfast meetings for almost £9,500. Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the Treasury, has spoken at an LIF event. • Labour 'leaving public in the dark' about payments from lobbyists Although the LIF insists that the sponsorship money is used to cover costs, the group declined a request by The Times to disclose details of which companies had sponsored events at what cost until its next annual report. The Labour Party too has declined to say which senior figures had attended any LIF meetings. Yet undercover reporting has shown Gerry McFall, director of the forum alongside his leading role at Bradshaw Advisory, boasted of meetings between his clients and senior figures in government, including Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary. There is a clear problem here that must be addressed. The Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists, which was set up during Lord Cameron's premiership, governs lobbying and is supposed to ensure it is transparent and open. Businesses who regularly engage in lobbying, known as 'consultant lobbyists', are required to register their activities. Yet the LIF was not required to register as it did not fall under this category: in-house lobbyists who are employed directly by companies, think tanks or 'forums' are not required to register. This must be addressed: all lobbying activity should be recorded, along with the details of who exactly is meeting which ministers. That being said, ministers should show more common sense. Mr Jones should have done due diligence before speaking at an LIF event. The same goes for Mr Reynolds, the minister most exposed to the potential influence of businesses. The lack of records charting his meeting with a Bradshaw Advisory client at a Labour conference highlights another flaw in transparency rules, which does not require ministers to report meetings at such events not deemed to be in a ministerial capacity. Even if the party insists it was instead 'held in a political capacity', Mr Reynolds should have realised that he should strive for transparency. • How we exposed Labour's cosy links to lobbyists None of this is to say that all lobbying is inherently bad, or that onerous restrictions are required. It is essential to good policy making that ministers hear from businesses — particularly a government that has as little private sector experience as this one. But it must be done in an open and transparent manner, something lacking at present. According to an analysis by the Chartered Institute of Public Relations, registered Westminster lobbyists account for just 0.5 per cent of registered lobbyists across a host of similar countries. If Sir Keir Starmer is to avoid further such scandals, he must strengthen the oversight. By letting in as much sunlight as possible, it will go some way to curtail any sense of wrongdoing, real or perceived.
