Source · Select Committees · Home Affairs Committee

Recommendation 1

1 Not Addressed

The interim report of Sir Andy Cooke, His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary, concluded that...

Conclusion
The interim report of Sir Andy Cooke, His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary, concluded that West Midlands Police had been subject to “confirmation bias” in their assessment of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans. We agree with this judgment; our inquiry has found that despite a wealth of evidence available regarding the Amsterdam disorder, West Midlands Police relied on inaccurate information on the behaviour of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans in reaching a view of them as unusually high-risk. It is difficult to pinpoint exactly why this inaccurate narrative took hold, but it is clear that West Midlands Police failed to do even basic due diligence on the information they received. This included false information that was generated by AI. West Midlands Police also failed to retain contemporaneous notes relating to matters central to their decision making. In addition, West Midlands Police continually emphasised that it was this unique risk from the Maccabi Tel Aviv fans which led to the recommendation to ban away fans, and not local community tensions, despite evidence of risk emanating from local communities in Birmingham. The initial attempt by West Midlands Police to downplay the role of local community tensions was unbalanced and ultimately served to undermine confidence in both the decision and the force itself. (Conclusion, Paragraph 13)
Government Response Summary
The government response discusses Safety Advisory Groups and a review of their guidance, but it does not address the conclusion regarding West Midlands Police's actions and confirmation bias in relation to Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.
Government Response Not Addressed
HM Government Not Addressed
Safety Advisory Groups are multi-agency forums that provide expert advice to local authorities and event organisers on public safety matters. Safety Advisory Groups are non-statutory bodies and do not take binding decisions; responsibility for licensing and enforcing safety at sports grounds rests with local authorities under the existing legislative framework. Within this context, Safety Advisory Groups play an important role in assessing risk and supporting the safe delivery of events. A review of Safety Advisory Group guidance is being undertaken by the Cabinet Office-owned UK Resilience Academy and will result in the publication of new guidance. This new guidance aims to provide consistent expectations for event organisers while supporting Safety Advisory Group members to offer clear, evidence-based, and operationally credible advisory guidance. Ensuring Safety Advisory Group members are equipped to challenge effectively is key, and that ability to challenge can be strengthened by enhancing guidance to Safety Advisory Groups on good practice. The new guidance considers where escalation routes may be required. At present, Safety Advisory Groups provide non-binding advice and there is no mechanism or expectation for formal escalation to central government, reflecting their locally-led role and the operational independence of policing and local authorities. The Government recognises the Committee’s concern that, in rare cases, Safety Advisory Group decisions may have wider community or political implications. Through the UK Resilience Academy review, consideration is being given to whether a clear and proportionate mechanism is needed for Government to engage with Safety Advisory Group recommendations in such circumstances. Establishing any escalation process would require agreement across government on key issues, including thresholds for escalation, decision- making responsibilities, and how any intervention would operate in practice. These considerations are closely linked to the question of whether, and how, certain events might be designated as nationally significant. At this stage, we do not recommend introducing a formal escalation mechanism until these issues have been fully explored by cross-government partners and stakeholders, including the appropriate balance between local referral and central oversight. Ongoing work, including the UK Resilience Academy’s review of Safety Advisory Group guidance and His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services’ inspection of police contributions to Safety Advisory Groups, will inform this consideration.