Today I will provide the Government's initial reaction to an inquiry that exposes a series of tragic failures from which we must learn
We do so in the shadow of the events of the 29th of July 2024
I will not name the perpetrator, nor dwell on the details of the crimes that saw three beautiful young girls murdered
the attempted murder of eight other children and two adults, and lasting physical and psychological harm to many more
I know I speak on behalf of the whole House when I say my thoughts today are with all those affected
In honour of them and the memory of three murdered girls, Elsie Dotstankum, B.B. King and Alice de Silva Aguiar
we must now act to prevent similar attacks. It was for that reason that my predecessor appointed Sir Adrian Forford to lead a full statutory inquiry
The inquiry's work has two parts. The first, which reported today, considered the decisions made by the agencies and services that interacted with the perpetrator
This included a range of institutions within the criminal justice system, as well as education, health care and local government
It also considered the actions of the perpetrator's parents. The findings of the inquiry are unsparing. Sir Adrian has uncovered systematic failures across multiple public sector organisations
The recording and sharing of information was poor. None of the agencies involved had a full understanding of the risk that the perpetrator posed
and many did not take steps to assess the risk that he posed to others
There was a failure by the agencies involved to take responsibility, and nobody was clear as to who was in charge
So the failure, because it belonged to everyone, belonged to no one
Where individuals missed opportunities to intervene, lessons must be learnt. But they did so within organisations that repeatedly passed the risk to others and where systemic failings existed
The perpetrator came into contact with the state on countless occasions. Lancashire police responded to five calls to his home address The police were called when he was in possession of a knife in a public place He was referred on several occasions to the multi safeguarding hub He came into
contact with Children's Social Care, the Early Help Service and Children's Mental Health Services
He was referred to prevent on three occasions. He was convicted of a violent assault and referred
to a youth offending team. All failed to identify the risk that the perpetrator posed
And so he fell between the gaps. The warning signs were missed, a growing history of violence and a clear and continuing intent to commit harm
In the Home Office, the focus falls on prevent and policing. Sir Adrian is clear that police should have progressed the perpetrator to the multi-agency Channel programme
Channel could have actively assessed and managed his risk. Instead, he was not deemed suitable because he had no fixed ideology
This ran counter to the guidance at the time, but the thresholds were unclear and the guidance was applied inconsistently
The perpetrator's multiple referrals were also considered individually, when they should have been seen as a cumulative and compounding risk
The perpetrator did not receive the correct interventions and his autism diagnosis meant that professionals focused far too much on his vulnerability
and far too little on the threat that he might pose to others
The horrific attack was itself evidence of the ease with which it could be concluded
There were no restrictions to stop the perpetrator from watching the violent content that inspired him
nor downloading instructions to make poison, nor viewing terrorist materials online. He was also able to bypass the safeguards that should have stopped him from buying and receiving dangerous weapons
These findings are devastating, but they are not surprising. Findings like these have been heard in inquests and inquiries before
This time, however, they must be a spur for change. The inquiry makes 67 recommendations. The government is reviewing these and will respond
to those which relate to national government this summer. I expect local agencies to do
the same Since this awful crime the government has already acted That begins with prevent Since the South Court attack the Home Office and Counterterrorism Policing have reviewed historical cases
to ensure that similar instances were handled correctly, with cases reassessed for any change in risk and managed accordingly
This Government has reviewed the prevent thresholds and published updated guidance. We've introduced a new prevent assessment framework with mandatory training for counter-terrorism case officers
Oversight of repeat prevent referrals has been strengthened, ensuring that cumulative risk is not missed
and that senior sign-off is required before a case is closed. And to prevent independent oversight of the whole system, we created an independent prevent commissioner
and I would like to thank Lord Anderson for so ably taking on that position on an interim basis
His term ends today, and I am pleased to say that I have appointed Tim Jakes as the new Prevent Commissioner who begins his role tomorrow
This government has also begun to place greater controls on a dangerously unregulated online world
The Online Safety Act requires companies to remove illegal content from their platforms
The Act is intended to limit children from encountering content that is legal but poses a risk of significant harm
But this is just the beginning of what can and must be done. The internet remains a dangerous place for children
and we are clear that tech companies have a moral responsibility to keep their users safe
But have no doubt that when they fail to do so, this government will intervene
which is why the government is consulting on whether to remove children's access to social media entirely
I can also announce today that we will legislate to prevent the spread of extreme violent content online
We have also made it harder for people to purchase weapons. The Crime and Policing Bill places new controls on the online sale and delivery of knives
We have banned the manufacture, purchase and possession of ninja swords and zombie-style machetes
and earlier this year we published new guidance mandating that any child caught with a knife must be referred to a youth offending teen
In the aftermath of the attack the Government commissioned Jonathan Hall Casey the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation to consider the legislative gaps exposed by this attack This identified an inconsistency that clearly needed addressing
Unlike terrorist attacks, if you are planning an attack without an underlying ideology
there is no crime on the statute book. Jonathan Hall therefore recommended the creation of a new
offence, and this legislation will also be brought forward as soon as parliamentary time allows
But the inquiry also identifies a wider issue. There are rising numbers of young men who are fascinated by extreme violence
Boys whose minds are warped by time spent in isolation online. This is a risk to us all
Where someone is vulnerable to terrorism, they can and should be managed through the PREVENT programme
However, where they are not, there is no clear approach to that risk
Today we publish the terms of reference for the second part of the Southport Inquiry
and it will face directly into this challenge. Sir Adrian will provide recommendations on the adequacy of existing arrangements
across all arms of the State for identifying and managing the risk posed by violence-fixated individuals
He will explore what specific interventions are required to reduce the risk to the public
He will also review the influence of the internet and social media
and the ease with which weapons can be procured. Sir Adrian begins this work immediately
and will present his final recommendations next spring. Madam Deputy Speaker, in the summer of 2024
an act of unspeakable evil took place in Southport. Nothing will ever heal the pain of those who survive
including the families who suffered unimaginable loss. Responsibility rests with the perpetrator
There was also responsibility within the family, The perpetrator's parents knew the risk he posed but did not cooperate with the authorities
And there is also responsibility on the state and on all of us here to learn the lessons from failures wherever they occurred
And the lesson is that the failures happened everywhere. We must ensure we do not find ourselves here again grieving deaths which should never have happened had the state and those who worked within it acted differently
Madam Deputy Speaker, that is our task and I commend this statement to the House