Police spies, sex and lies: report finds undercover tactics unjustified

Published

2 years ago

June 29, 2023

admin

An inquiry into undercover police operations into activist groups has concluded the deployments were unjustified and would have been “brought to a rapid end” if the public had known what was going on.

Retired judge Sir John Mitting, the inquiry’s chair, is examining the conduct of 139 undercover officers who spied on more than 1,000 mainly left-wing groups.

Male police spies were later found to have formed sexual relationships, and even fathered children, with female activists who were unaware of their true identity.

The Met has apologised for the “enormous distress that has been caused” and said undercover operations had gone through “radical reform”.

However, it refused to confirm or deny whether disruptive protest groups were still being infiltrated today.

The interim report published on Thursday looks at the period between 1968 when the Special Operations Squad (later renamed the Special Demonstration Squad) was formed, up until 1982.

It finds that some methods used, including the use of dead children’s identities “would have been bound to have given rise to legitimate public concern and to embarrassment to the commissioner and to his police authority – the home secretary”.

The report also states: “Long term deployments into political groups inevitably required the undercover officer, male or female, to befriend members of the target groups and to enter into their personal and political lives.

“Putting to one side the risk that sexual relationships might develop, this intrusion into the lives of many hundreds of people in this era required cogent justification before it should have been contemplated as a police tactic.”

Sir John says: “None of these issues appears to have been addressed by senior officers with the MPS (Metropolitan Police Service) or by Home Office officials during this period.”

He says a report in 1976 conducted by senior Met police officers into the operations concluded that the work of undercover officers was of “extreme importance” in helping to police public order functions.

However, he finds that issues around the methods used were not examined.

While it is clear the government knew about these operations, what doesn’t emerge from the report is who at the highest level knew and signed off the tactics that Sir John says would have led to them being shut down.

Undercover unit ‘would have been shut down’

Sir John says: “If these issues had been addressed, it is hard to see how any conclusion could legitimately have been reached which would not have resulted in the closure of the SDS (Special Demonstration Squad).”

The report accepts that long-term infiltration of political single-issue groups could be justified “if its purpose was to prevent or investigate serious crime, including terrorist activity”, and notes such groups existed during the Cold War-era and the ‘Troubles’ in Northern Ireland.

In this first phase of the report, mostly covering the 1970s, it suggests three groups fell into this category, two not identified to the public in ‘closed’ evidence and the other being “(Provisional) Sinn Fein”.

However, it finds “the great majority of deployments by the SDS in this period did not satisfy either criterion”.

The principal purpose of infiltrating left-wing and anarchist groups was to control public order.

Under the Heath government (1970-74) the main concern was industrial unrest, and under Callaghan (1976-79) it was the infiltration of trade unions by the Communist Party of Great Britain and of the Labour Party by Militant Tendency.

While the report finds undercover policing did “make a real contribution”, it finds the same thing could have been achieved by “less intrusive means”.

Campaigners will have to wait another three years before the full findings are published, extending over a much longer period, to at least 2010.

But speaking after the first tranche today, ‘Jessica’ – who was tricked into a sexual relationship – said in a statement that the report revealed that SDS officers had used “racist, offensive and sexist language”.

“[It] shows the contempt with which they held campaigners – they had no guardrails, whether reporting on children or making salacious comments on people’s sexual activities,” she said.

Dave Smith, a trade unionist who was spied on, said thousands of construction workers had been blacklisted by employers as a result of police infiltrating meetings and picket lines.

He said it showed more wrongdoing by the Met and that “anyone involved in genuine civic society – trade unionists, environmental campaigners, political parties, that are perfectly legal” were seen as a legitimate target for surveillance.

In his “work in progress”, inquiry chair Sir John states: “Some issues are better addressed when all of the evidence about them is in, notably the impact of the conduct of male police officers on women deceived into sexual relationships with them, and on the families of the officers;

“The impact on the surviving relatives of deceased children of the adoption of their identity; and the purpose of gathering intelligence on ‘justice’ campaigns.

“For the same reason, I have also refrained from expressing any general conclusions about the attitude of police officers and managers within the unit towards deceitful sexual relationships during deployments.”

Met admits ‘legacy of hurt’

This will be a disappointment to campaigners already frustrated at the delays in the inquiry – launched in 2015 by then home secretary Theresa May and originally expected to conclude in 2018.

At the launch of this interim report, journalists were told many of the concerns – such as the impact on women by the conduct of male officers and the tactic of using dead children’s names – become “bigger issues in later years”.

Met Police said the report acknowledged some undercover work had been valuable in preventing disorder and that most officers performed their duties “conscientiously and in the belief that what they were doing was lawful”.

However, it conceded a “legacy of hurt” had been caused by the “unacceptable and immoral behaviour” of some officers.

Commander Jon Savell said in a statement that he wanted to “reiterate the apologies made to women deceived by officers into sexual relationships, to the families of deceased children whose identities were used by officers, and to those who suffered a miscarriage of justice because of the actions of SDS officers”.

He said undercover policing had been transformed “with greater regulation, professional codes of practice, and judicial oversight” and “bears no relation” to the 1970s.

But when questioned by Sky News he repeatedly refused to say if infiltration operations are still being used today in regards to protest groups such as Extinction Rebellion.

Mr Savell insisted undercover work was a legitimate tactic that “protects people from crime”, adding: “I appreciate that people are going to want to know what is going on right now, but of course it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to confirm or deny exactly what is happening right now because it would compromise it.”

UK

What is the car finance scandal – and what could today’s ruling mean for motorists?

Published

5 hours ago

August 1, 2025

admin

What is the car finance scandal - and what could today's ruling mean for motorists?

The UK’s Supreme Court is set to deliver a landmark ruling today that could have billion-pound consequences for banks and impact millions of motorists.

The essential question that the country’s top court has been asked to answer is this: should customers be fully informed about the commission dealers earn on their purchase?

However, the Supreme Court is only considering one of two cases running in parallel regarding the mis-selling of car finance.

Here is everything you need to know about both cases, and how the ruling this afternoon may (or may not) affect any future compensation scheme.

What is the Supreme Court considering?

The Supreme Court case concerns complaints related to the non-disclosure of commission. This applies to 99% of car finance cases.

When you buy a car on finance, you are effectively loaned the money, which you pay off in monthly instalments. These loans carry interest, organised by the brokers (the people who sell you the finance plan).

These brokers earn money in the form of a commission (which is a percentage of the interest payments).

Last year, the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of three motorists who were not informed that the car dealerships they agreed finance deals with were also being paid 25% commission, which was then added to their bills.

The ruling said it was unlawful for the car dealers to receive a commission from lenders without obtaining the customer’s informed consent to the payment.

However, British lender Close Brothers and South Africa’s FirstRand appealed the decision, landing it in the Supreme Court.

What does the second case involve?

The second case is being driven by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and involves discretionary commission arrangements (DCAs).

Under these arrangements, brokers and dealers increased the amount of interest they earned without telling buyers and received more commission for it. This is said to have incentivised sellers to maximise interest rates.

The FCA banned this practice in 2021. However, a high number of consumers have complained they were overcharged before the ban came into force. The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) said in May that they were dealing with 20,000 complaints.

In January 2024, the FCA announced a review into whether motor finance customers had been overcharged because of past use of DCAs. It is using its powers to review historical motor finance commission arrangements across multiple firms – all of whom deny acting inappropriately.

The FCA also said it is looking into a “consumer redress scheme” that means firms would need to offer appropriate compensation to customers affected by the issue.

An estimated 40% of car finance deals are likely to be eligible for compensation over motor finance deals taken out between 2007 and 2021, when the DCAs were banned.

To find out how you can tell if you’ve been mis-sold car finance, read the following explainer from our reporter Megan Harwood-Baynes.

How does the ruling affect potential compensation?

In short, the Supreme Court ruling could impact the scale and reach that a compensation scheme is likely to have.

The FCA said in March that it will consider the court’s decision and if it concludes motor finance customers have lost out from widespread failings by firms, it is “likely [to] consult on an industry-wide redress scheme”.

This would mean affected individuals wouldn’t need to complain, but they would be paid out an amount dictated by the FCA.

However, no matter what the court decides, the FCA could go ahead with a redress scheme.

The regulator said it will confirm if it is proposing a scheme within six weeks of the Supreme Court’s decision.

What impact could this have on lenders?

Analysts at HSBC said last year the controversy could be estimated to cost up to £44bn.

Alongside Close Brothers, firms that could be affected include Barclays, Santander and the UK’s largest motor finance provider Lloyds Banking Group – which organises loans through its Black Horse finance arm.

Lloyds has already set aside £1.2bn to be used for potential compensation.

The potential impact on the lending market and the wider economy could be so great that Chancellor Rachel Reeves is considering intervening to overrule the Supreme Court, according to The Guardian.

Treasury officials have been looking at the potential of passing new legislation alongside the Department for Business and Trade that could slash the potential compensation bill.

The Treasury said in response to the claim that it does not “comment on speculation” but hopes to see a “balanced judgment”.

UK

Full details of Heathrow’s plans for a third runway revealed

Published

5 hours ago

August 1, 2025

admin

Full details of Heathrow's plans for a third runway revealed

Heathrow Airport has said it can build a third runway for £21bn within the next decade.

Europe’s busiest travel hub has submitted its plans to the government – with opponents raising concerns about carbon emissions, noise pollution and environmental impacts.

The west London airport wants permission to create a 3,500m (11,400ft) runway, but insists it is open to considering a shorter one instead.

In January, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced that the government supports a “badly needed” expansion to connect the UK to the world and open up new growth opportunities.

But London mayor Sir Sadiq Khan is still against a new runway because of “the severe impact” it will have on the capital’s residents.

Under Heathrow’s proposal, the runway would be constructed to the northwest of its existing location – allowing for an additional 276,000 flights per year.

The airport also wants to create new terminal capacity for 150 million annual passengers – up from 84 million – with plans involving a new terminal complex named T5XW and T5XN.

Terminal 2 would be extended, while Terminal 3 and the old Terminal 1 would be demolished.

The runway would be privately funded, with the total plan costing about £49bn, but some airlines have expressed concern that the airport will hike its passenger charges to pay for the project.

EasyJet chief executive Kenton Jarvis said an expansion would “represent a unique opportunity for easyJet to operate from the airport at scale for the first time and bring with it lower fares for consumers”.

Thomas Woldbye, the airport’s chief executive, said in a statement that “it has never been more important or urgent to expand Heathrow”.

“We are effectively operating at capacity to the detriment of trade and connectivity,” he added.

“With a green light from government and the correct policy support underpinned by a fit-for-purpose, regulatory model, we are ready to mobilise and start investing this year in our supply chain across the country.

“We are uniquely placed to do this for the country. It is time to clear the way for take-off.”

The M25 motorway would need to be moved into a tunnel under the new runway under the airport’s proposal.

London mayor still opposed

Sir Sadiq says City Hall will “carefully scrutinise” the proposals, adding: “I’ll be keeping all options on the table in how we respond.”

Tony Bosworth, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, also said that if Sir Keir Starmer wants to be “seen as a climate leader”, then backing Heathrow expansion is “the wrong move”.

Earlier this year, Longford resident Christian Hughes told Sky News that his village and others nearby would be “decimated” if an expansion were to go ahead.

It comes after hotel tycoon Surinder Arora published a rival Heathrow expansion plan, which involves a shorter runway to avoid the need to divert the M25 motorway.

The billionaire’s Arora Group said a 2,800m (9,200ft) runway would result in “reduced risk” and avoid “spiralling cost”.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander will consider all plans over the summer so that a review of the Airports National Policy Statement can begin later this year.

It also comes after Sky News reported on a Heathrow Airport-funded group sending leaflets supporting a third runway to thousands of homes across west London.

The group, called Back Heathrow, sent leaflets to people living near the airport, claiming expansion could be the route to a “greener” airport and suggesting it would mean only the “cleanest and quietest aircraft” fly there.

Opponents of the airport’s expansion said the information provided by the group is “incredibly misleading”.

Back Heathrow told Sky News it had “always been open” about the support it receives from the airport. The funding is not disclosed on Back Heathrow’s newsletter or website.

UK

Man, 76, arrested on suspicion of administering poison at summer camp after eight children taken to hospital

Published

20 hours ago

July 31, 2025

admin

A 76-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of administering poison at a summer camp which led to eight children being taken to hospital, police said.

Police received reports of children feeling unwell at a summer camp in Canal Lane, Stathern, Leicestershire, on Monday.

Paramedics assessed eight children, who were taken to hospital as a precaution and have all now been discharged.

The suspect was arrested at the camp and remains in custody on suspicion of administering poison with intent to injure/aggrieve/annoy.

Detective Inspector Neil Holden said: “We understand the concern this incident will have caused to parents, guardians and the surrounding community.

“We are in contact with the parents and guardians of all children concerned.

“Please be reassured that we have several dedicated resources deployed and are working with partner agencies including children’s services to ensure full safeguarding is provided to the children involved.

“We also remain at the scene to carry out enquiries into the circumstances of what has happened and to continue to provide advice and support in the area.

“This is a complex and sensitive investigation and we will continue to provide updates to both parents and guardians and the public as and when we can.”

The force said it has referred itself to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) over what it said was the “circumstances of the initial police response”.