Ambitious responses to extreme violence after Southport attack never happened - because of cost
The Southport Inquiry has heard about Home Office plans that weren't funded
Ambitious responses to tackling extreme violence in the wake of the Southport attack were not taken forward by the Home Office because of cost, a public inquiry has heard.
The Southport Inquiry was set up after Axel Rudakubana murdered three girls at a dance class in July 2024.
It is hearing evidence on how the risk from violent-fixated individuals can be managed.
Issues identified by a Home Office unit
On Monday, the hearing was told a Home Office unit had identified key issues with the challenge of non-ideological extreme violence (NIEV) ahead of a meeting with the cabinet secretary in June last year.
The issues, set out in a report, included limited evidence on the scale and scope of the problem.
The report also said multi-agency frameworks were not adequate for managing cases, there was uncertainty about effective interventions and there was no clear ownership across law enforcement.
The unit also reported that the online environment was increasingly acting as an accelerant and enabler of NIEV.
Jonathan Emmett, from the Home Office, said: "The intent behind putting any note of that type together, and that note specifically, is absolutely to get at the strategic issues and not to shy away from them in any sense."
The inquiry heard the unit set out four "high ambition responses" to the issues.
It proposed a serious and sustained effort to reduce the risk in the online environment, and prevention partnerships to reduce the pool of extreme violence risk.
It also proposed a national prevention gateway backed by effective multi-agency systems, and strengthening the anti-terror programme Prevent to handle a sustained surge and broader range of referrals.
According to the report, all of the responses would require more money to be delivered.
Details of what the responses would involve were redacted in the copy of the report shown to the inquiry.
Cost and the spending review
The inquiry was told the Home Office, in anticipation of the spending review, recognised that work would instead need to focus on cost-neutral improvements in the short term.
Counsel to the inquiry Nicholas Moss KC said: "It does seem on the face of the record that what were described as 'high ambition responses' were deliberately not taken forward at this time because of the limitations of funding in the then cycle of the spending review?"
Mr Emmett replied: "Yes, that's correct."
Mr Moss quoted former prime minister Sir Keir Starmer's statement following the conviction of Rudakubana, in which he said there were questions about the accountability of the Whitehall and Westminster system.
Sir Keir had said: "Southport must be a line in the sand."
Mr Moss said: "It might be said by some outside observers that sentiment doesn't sit entirely comfortably with an acceptance that the spending review meant that high ambition responses would need to be, at least for the moment, put on hold?"
Mr Emmett said part of the context for the decision-making was that it was understood the inquiry would be making its own strategic recommendations in due course.
Review found a confused picture
The inquiry also heard about a Home Office review, carried out in May last year, which looked at how violence-fixated individuals were managed.
It found a confused picture, with inconsistencies in implementation and a lack of understanding of the behaviours and profile of the group.
The report found the system ran the risk of allowing cases to fall between the cracks.
Mr Moss described it as a somewhat bleak but candid assessment of the scale of the problem, and Mr Emmett agreed.
The first phase of the Southport Inquiry found the attack could and should have been prevented.
Nine-year-old Alice da Silva Aguiar, six-year-old Bebe King and seven-year-old Elsie Dot Stancombe were killed in the attack.