Parliamentary activity

Answering body: Home Office

The Government remains committed to protecting the public from the threats posed by dangerous substances that could be misused to cause serious harm. As part of this responsibility, the Government keeps the framework that governs explosives precursors and poisons under regular review to ensure that it remains effective, proportionate and responsive to any evolving risks.

Today I announce the Government's intention to launch a six-week public consultation regarding proposed amendments to the Poisons Act 1972. This process will seek views from the public on several changes that are intended to strengthen public safety and national security and is expected to launch during the Conference Recess.

The proposals support the Government’s commitment to respond decisively to the findings of the Southport Inquiry, particularly by strengthening controls where substances present a clear risk. They also form part of a broader approach to reducing access to means of harm in a proportionate way.

Overview

The consultation follows ongoing policy development and consideration of the current legislative framework in light of evolving threats, lessons learnt from recent incidents, evidence provided to public inquiries, and wider concerns regarding the accessibility of certain hazardous substances.

The consultation will invite views on a number of proposals, including:

the introduction of controls on materials containing the highly toxic plant-derived substances ricin and abrin, in particular castor beans and rosary peas;

the reclassification of sodium nitrite from a reportable poison to a regulated poison above a specified concentration threshold;

the regulation of explosives precursors sodium nitrate and potassium nitrate above specified concentration thresholds;

amendments to specified concentration thresholds of already regulated explosives precursors sodium chlorate, sodium perchlorate, potassium chlorate and potassium perchlorate; and

a range of technical and operational improvements to the underpinning framework, including updates to licensing arrangements, record-keeping requirements and existing concentration thresholds.

The Government recognises that many of these substances have legitimate commercial, scientific, agricultural, educational and recreational uses. The purpose of the consultation is therefore to assess the potential impact, proportionality and deliverability of any proposed changes before decisions are taken. No final decisions have been made at this stage. Consultation responses will help inform the Government's consideration of whether legislative changes should be brought forward.

The consultation proposes a range of options, from maintaining the current arrangements through to a broader package of reforms. Responses will help determine the most effective and proportionate approach to managing the risks presented by these substances while supporting legitimate users and minimising unnecessary burdens on business. The consultation will be supported by targeted stakeholder engagement, to ensure that a balanced and well evidenced view is obtained.

Consultation

The consultation will be available on GOV.UK and accessible for six weeks. It is intended to:

gather further evidence on the impacts of the proposed measures across affected sectors, including businesses, suppliers, online marketplaces and individual users;

improve understanding of the nature and scale of legitimate uses;

test the proportionality and seek insight into the practical implications of any proposed controls or thresholds; and

inform final ministerial decisions ahead of any legislative changes.

Following the consultation period, the Government will carefully consider responses and publish a summary of the findings. Subject to the outcome of the consultation and subsequent ministerial decisions, any necessary legislative changes will be delivered through secondary legislation.

Explosives precursors and poisons legislation is reserved in Scotland and Wales, and officials will continue to engage with the Devolved Governments throughout the consultation process. Northern Ireland authorities will be engaged as appropriate, recognising the distinct legislative context.

Protecting the public is the first duty of Government. This consultation represents an important opportunity to ensure that the legislative framework governing dangerous substances remains effective, proportionate and responsive to current risks, while continuing to support legitimate use.

Upon publication, a copy of the consultation will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Answering body: Home Office

I would like to update the House on the report commissioned by the Home Secretary and published today by the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation into law in the wake of the Southport attack.

The barbaric murder of three young girls in Southport last Summer is a scarring moment in our history. We think of those little girls, Elsie Dot Stancombe, Bebe King and Alice da Silva Aguiar, whose lives were devastatingly cut short. We think of their families’ agony. And we think of those who survived the attack but live with physical and emotional scars.

In January, the perpetrator was sentenced to 52 years in prison for his horrifying crimes. It is highly likely he will never be released.

As the Prime Minister said, the responsibility for this barbaric act lies with the vile individual who carried it out, but that provides no comfort.

When the Home Secretary addressed the House on this matter in January, she set out the next steps the Government would take – including on establishing a public inquiry, on reforms to Prevent and on the legislative framework.

The inquiry will examine the issues raised in this case but also wider challenges around the rising levels of predominantly young men and boys fixated with extreme violence who may pose a risk to society. We are moving swiftly to set up the inquiry. It is expected to begin within weeks, once we have completed the important consultation with the families and victims. We intend to announce further details by the end of this month.

Within the wider Prevent system, we are learning lessons to get ahead of this changing threat, and to ensure we have the early intervention capabilities we need to keep the public safe. The Home Secretary has previously announced new measures to strengthen Prevent decision-making.

Since then, we have extended Channel multi-agency support to new cohorts, launched new pilots to ensure those below Prevent thresholds get the support they need, and appointed an interim Prevent Commissioner to bring robust independent oversight.

The appalling attack in Southport terrorised an entire community. The police and CPS determined that it was not an act of terrorism under the legal definition of terrorism set out in the Terrorism Act 2000, because there is no evidence that the perpetrator’s purpose was to advance a political, religious, racial, or ideological cause. The court accepted that conclusion.

However, we should be in no doubt about its seriousness. The judge described the attack as ’equivalent in its seriousness to terrorist murders’. And as the Prime Minister and Home Secretary have set out, this case comes against a backdrop of growing numbers of cases of violence-fixated individuals and young people being drawn into extreme violence and radicalisation.

The Met Commissioner has warned of “young men who are fixated on violence… grazing across extremist and terrorist content”, whilst Five Eyes counter-terror partners have also warned about growing radicalisation of minors.

The most significant terror threat remains from Islamist extremism, followed by extreme right-wing activity, and we must be continually vigilant against these ideological threats.

But we also need to ensure that the legal framework is strong enough to respond to extreme violence where ideology is not apparent or is less clear.

In the light of this serious and growing problem, the Home Secretary announced to Parliament in January that she had asked the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation to examine the legal framework around terrorism and the powers available to tackle this kind of extreme violent attack. The Reviewer has published that report today.

Firstly, we are grateful to the Independent Reviewer for his thorough analysis of the terrorism framework in response to this horrific attack and his important conclusion which the Government accepts that the law does need to change to respond to the rise in extreme violence in cases where ideology is unclear or cannot be proven.

Jonathan Hall KC concludes that the legal definition of terrorism is already wide and should not be changed any further. The Government accepts his conclusion.

However, the Independent Reviewer considers there is a gap in the wider criminal law. The Prime Minister has been clear that if the law needs to change to recognise this new and dangerous threat, then we will change it – and quickly.

The Reviewer notes there is no offence currently for possession of an article in private with intent to carry out a mass casualty attack, or other offence of extreme violence.

We are grateful for his consideration of this point and his conclusion that this point is already being addressed by a new measure, currently before Parliament in the Crime and Policing Bill. This will make it an offence to possess a bladed article with intent to cause unlawful violence and applies whether the possession is in public or private.

The Reviewer also concludes that within existing criminal law, ‘there is a real and not theoretical gap for lone individuals who plan mass killings’. On that basis, he recommends that Government consider creating a new offence where an individual intends to kill two or more persons and prepares for such an attack. We accept and strongly support this recommendation. I can confirm we will fix the legislation to close the gaps identified.

Finally, the Independent Reviewer draws attention to the challenges of communicating transparently and effectively following an act of extreme violence in the digital age.

It is a cornerstone of our democracy and our tradition of trial by jury that trials are fair, and justice is served. For that reason there have long been restrictions on what can be said before and during a trial.

However, the tragic events in Southport in July last year showed how social media is putting those long-established rules under strain, especially where partial or inaccurate information appears online.

That’s why the Home Secretary, the Lord Chancellor and the Attorney General have asked the Law Commission to expedite elements of their ongoing review into Contempt of Court, and why Counter Terrorism Policing are also already considering what information can be released in the aftermath of major incidents.

The Government has been clear that we wish to maximise transparency and ensure that public authorities are able to take into account the wider risks to public safety to counter misinformation and disinformation. We are grateful to the Law Commission for agreeing to accelerate their consideration of this important issue and will carefully consider their findings when they are published later this year.

I would like to reiterate our thanks again to the Independent Reviewer for his comprehensive report and contribution to our efforts to fully learn the lessons of this terrible case. As the Home Secretary has already set out, today’s report is an important step in the search for answers, and to tackle horrific acts driven by a fixation on extreme violence.