Southport child killer Axel Rudakubana received the second-longest life sentence in English history and the government does not ever want to see him released, Downing Street has said.

Sir Keir Starmer’s official spokesman said ministers “share the public’s disgust at [Rudakubana’s] barbaric crimes” but said imposing a whole life order (WLO) was not possible because of international law.

Politics Latest: Starmer ‘would welcome’ phone call with Trump

The 18-year-old was jailed for life with a minimum of 52 years on Thursday for the murder of Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, Bebe King, six, and Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, in July last year at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class.

However, the sentence prompted calls for a change in the law on WLOs, which are usually only imposed on criminals aged 21 or over but can be considered for those aged 18 to 20 in exceptional circumstances.

WLOs ensure that an offender will die behind bars, whereas a life sentence imposes a minimum term that must be served in prison before they are eligible for parole, with convicts then remaining on licence if they are released.

Rudakubana was 17 when he launched the attack, and his sentence is the second-longest tariff on record after Hashem Abedi, the brother of Manchester Arena bomber Salman Abedi, Downing Street said.

Abedi was sentenced to at least 55 years in prison for his part in the bomb attack that killed 22 people – a life order not being possible at the time because he was under 21.

Reforms passed by the Tories extended WLOs to young killers aged 18 upwards at the time of the offence.

Downing Street said on Friday ministers were not looking at further changes, claiming they were prevented from doing so by UN laws.

The spokesman did not name which acts the government was bound by, but Article 37 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states that people under 18 should not be imprisoned for life with no chance of ever being released.

He said the government did not want to see Rudakubana leave prison and it was “likely he will never be released”.

Baby serial killer Lucy Letby and Sarah Everad’s killer Wayne Couzens are among the 70 people currently serving WLOs.

Those calling for a change in the law include Patrick Hurley, the MP for Southport, who has asked the attorney general to review Rudakubana’s jail term under the unduly lenient sentence scheme.

Outrage over the case has also promoted calls from two Reform UK MPs, Lee Anderson and Rupert Lowe, to bring back the death sentence, which was abolished in the UK in 1969.

Number 10 said there were no plans to bring it back, citing parliamentary votes in recent history which have rejected capital punishment.

The government has launched an inquiry into the stabbings, which aims to give families “answers” about what happened in the lead-up to the attack.

Read more:
Police investigation continues
The 14 minutes of terror
Victim’s parents describe horror

The prime minister has also said he will look at changing the law to recognise the “new and dangerous threat” of lone attackers not driven by one ideology.

It has emerged that Rudakubana was referred to the government anti-extremism scheme – known as Prevent – three times before the murders due to a fixation with violence.

He was also in contact with the police, the courts, the youth justice system, social services and mental health services.

Earlier, the UK’s most senior police officer warned thousands of young men were obsessed with violence, and called for this to be looked at as part of the review.

Rudakubana was sentenced after earlier pleading guilty to the murders, along with the attempted murders of eight other children, who cannot be named for legal reasons, class instructor Leanne Lucas and businessman John Hayes.

He was also convicted of having a knife on the date of the killings, production of the deadly poison ricin, and possessing information likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing to commit an act of terrorism.

Judge Mr Justice Goose said he would have been given a whole life term if he had been nine days older.

The judge also said he “must accept” that the prosecution had made it clear the attack did not meet the legal definition of an act of terrorism because there was no evidence of attempting to advance a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.

But he added: “His culpability for this extreme level of violence is equivalent in its seriousness to terrorist murders, whatever his purpose.”