Manchester Arena attack: Security services might have prevented bombing, inquiry finds
The security services were guilty of “a significant missed opportunity to take action that might have prevented” the Manchester Arena bombing, according to the chairman of the inquiry into the atrocity.
A report published by former high court judge Sir John Saunders, the third and final from his inquiry, looked at whether MI5 and counter-terror police could have prevented bomber Salman Abedi from carrying out the attack.
Inquiry latest: Bomber’s family held ‘significant responsibility’ for his radicalisation
The inquiry had heard Manchester-born Abedi had been on the radar of the security services for seven years before the bombing.
Twenty-two people died and hundreds were injured in Abedi’s suicide bombing at the end of an Ariana Grande concert on 22 May 2017.
Victims of the Manchester Arena terror attack
The report also covered the radicalisation of Abedi and the planning and preparation for the attack.
But the focus for many of the families of the victims has been the failings of the security services to prevent the attack.
In his report, Sir John said: “There was a significant missed opportunity to take action that might have prevented the attack.
“It is not possible to reach any conclusion on the balance of probabilities or to any other evidential standard as to whether the attack would have been prevented.
“However, there was a realistic possibility that actionable intelligence could have been obtained which might have led to actions preventing the attack.”
He said the reason for the missed opportunity included a failure by a Security Service officer to act swiftly enough.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Mother of Manchester Arena bombing victim says ‘forgiveness will never be an option’
‘Devastating conclusion’
The inquiry, he said, also identified problems with the sharing of information between the Security Service and counter-terrorism police.
“It remains quite impossible to say whether any different or additional action taken by the authorities could have prevented the attack. It might have done; it might not have done.”
Families of the victims described the report as a “devastating conclusion”.
In a statement they said: “Today’s report has been deeply painful to read, but also eye-opening. On the issue of the preventability of this attack, inevitably the report provides less information than we would have wanted. But it is now very clear that there was a failure to properly assess key intelligence about Salman Abedi; a failure to put it into proper context; and – most catastrophic of all – a delay in acting on it.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
How MI5 got Manchester Arena attack wrong
“As a result of these failures, at the very least, a real possibility of preventing this attack was lost. This is a devastating conclusion for us. The failures exposed in this report are unacceptable.”
They added: “It is clear that Salman Abedi should have been referred to Prevent (counter-terror programme). It is clear that the education system needs to be more vigilant in picking up signs of radicalisation. It is clear that Didsbury mosque turned a blind eye to extremism in its midst. Sir John’s report today contains many lessons; we must heed every one of them and make the necessary changes urgently.
“On 22 May 2017, thousands of people left their homes to attend a concert at Manchester Arena. 22 of those would never return home. Those killed and injured in this murderous attack had every right to feel safe and protected, but as this inquiry has demonstrated, they were failed at every level – before, during and after this horrific attack.”
Manchester Arena bomber Salman Abedi
‘Intelligence was not shared’
A number of MI5 and police counter-terrorism detective witnesses gave evidence behind closed doors during the 17-month inquiry. The sessions were held in secret in an effort not to compromise national security.
A summary of some of their evidence was later made public but the so-called “gist” did not reveal any details about the intelligence received by MI5 in the months before the attack.
But Sir John’s report identified the “principal missed opportunity” as two pieces of intelligence received by the Security Service in the months prior to the attack, “the significance of which was not fully appreciated at the time”.
Both of those pieces of intelligence, which were not disclosed in the report, were assessed to relate to “non-nefarious activity or to non-terrorist criminal activity” on the part of Abedi.
Neither piece of intelligence was shared by the Security Service (MI5) with counter-terror police in the northwest. If further investigative steps had been taken as a result of one of those pieces of intelligence, Sir John said, “this would have increased the overall prospect that the attack would have been prevented”.
The other critical piece of intelligence, Sir John said, “gave rise to the real possibility of obtaining information that might have led to actions which prevented the attack. We cannot know what would have happened, but there is at least the material possibility that opportunities to intervene were missed”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
MI5 ‘profoundly sorry’ attack not prevented
When Abedi returned to the UK from Libya four days before the attack, he said, that information could have led to his Nissan Micra, which contained the explosive, being followed by police.
When the second piece of intelligence was received, Sir John said, the Security Service officer should have discussed it straight away and written their report on the same day but did not do so.
“The delay in providing the report led to the missing of an opportunity to take a potentially important investigative action. I am satisfied that such an investigative action would have been a proportionate and justified step to take. This should have happened,” he said.
Sir John said the security service and police “underestimated the risk” of returnees from Libya because of their focus on those from Syria.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Father of youngest victim says MI5 apology is ‘insulting’
Abedi’s radicalisation
The inquiry identified other missed opportunities to intercept Abedi.
The Security Service had first received information relating to him in December 2010, he was treated as a “subject of interest” in 2015 and had contact with a convicted terrorist and “known radicaliser” Abdalraouf Abdallah.
Messages between Abedi and Abdalraouf Abdallah were not given to the security service by counter-terror police. They should have been, Sir John said, as this would have added to the picture about Abedi’s “actions and intentions”.
A meeting to consider further investigation of Abedi had been scheduled for 31 May 2017, nine days after the bombing.
In his report, Sir John said the Abedi family – father Ramadan, mother Samia and elder brother Ismail – held “significant responsibility” for the radicalisation of Salman Abedi and his younger brother Hashem. Hashem Abedi is serving a minimum of 55 years for helping to plan the attack.
“Salman Abedi’s radicalisation journey into operational violent Islamist extremism was primarily driven by noxious absences and malign presences,” Sir John said.
“Noxious absences included a prolonged disengagement from mainstream English education and parental absence. Malign presences included the ongoing conflict in Libya and engagement with a radicalising peer group.”
Hashem Abedi is serving life in prison for helping build the bomb
‘Missed opportunities’
Sir John’s first inquiry report, published in June 2021, focussed on security arrangements on the night of the bombing and highlighted a string of “missed opportunities” to intercept Abedi before he detonated his device.
His second report, published in November last year, was highly critical of the emergency service response. He judged that one of the victims, John Atkinson, would have probably survived had it not been for the inadequate response. There was a “remote possibility” that the youngest victim, eight-year-old Saffie-Rose Roussos, could have lived.
Read more:
The mistakes made at Manchester Arena as emergency services responded to the terror attack
The missed opportunities by security to stop Salman Abedi on night of Manchester Arena bombing
In his final report, Sir John said, Abedi “left behind no message to explain why he carried out the attack. The evidence I heard does not provide a definitive answer as to why he did what he did”.
He said the national security interest of holding some parts of the inquiry in private “has been particularly difficult for the bereaved families”.
He added: “I am sorry that I have not been able to reveal in my open report everything I have discovered. I know that what I have revealed, while increasing public knowledge, will raise other questions.”
Sir John made a number of recommendations in his final report.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Manchester arena bombing: What we learned from the inquiry
He said that no one should underestimate the “very difficult job” of security services, particularly with the emergence of lone actor terrorists whose activities are more difficult to track.
Dozens of so-called “late-stage attack plots” had been disrupted since the start of 2017, he said.
“Having said all that, if the Security Service or counterterrorism policing make mistakes, then these need to be identified and steps taken to put them right.”
MI5’s director general, Ken McCallum, apologised following the publication of the report, saying he was “profoundly sorry” that the Security Service did not prevent the attack.
“I deeply regret that such intelligence was not obtained,” he said in a statement.
(L-R) Salman Abedi and his brothers Hashem and Ismail
“Gathering covert intelligence is difficult – but had we managed to seize the slim chance we had, those impacted might not have experienced such appalling loss and trauma.
“I am profoundly sorry that MI5 did not prevent the attack.
“MI5 exists to stop atrocities. To all those whose lives were forever changed on that awful night, I am so sorry that MI5 did not prevent the attack at the Manchester Arena.”
We asked MI5 to speak directly to Sky News, but they declined.
Home Secretary Suella Braverman said she is “committed” to working with MI5 and the police to “do everything possible” to prevent a repeat of the “horrifying” attack.
Rishi Sunak’s closest parliamentary aide when he was prime minister has been charged along with 14 others with election betting offences.
The 15, also including a current Welsh Senedd member and a former police officer, have been charged with cheating related to bets placed on the timing of the 2024 general election.
They are due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court at 10am this Friday to face the charges.
Politics latest: China makes first statement after UK takes control of British Steel
The Gambling Commission said its investigation, which began in June last year, “focused on individuals suspected of using confidential information – specifically advance knowledge of the proposed election date – to gain an unfair advantage in betting markets”.
It opened the investigation after former Montgomeryshire MP Craig Williams, Mr Sunak’s former parliamentary private secretary, admitted placing a £100 bet on 19 May 2024 that the election would be in July.
Mr Sunak announced the general election would be on 4 July, three days after Williams, who was also an election candidate, placed the bet.
Williams, who was dropped as a candidate, admitted last June to placing a “flutter” on the election and said he “committed a serious error of judgement, not an offence”.
Current Senedd member, police officer and Tory campaign director charged
Among those charged is Russell George, a Conservative member of the Welsh Senedd, who returned to the front bench in October after stepping back from his role as spokesman for mid-Wales in June.
Over the weekend, the Welsh Conservatives re-selected him to be a candidate in the Senedd elections next year, but have now suspended him “pending outcome of the justice process”.
Russell George has been suspended as a Member of the Senedd. Pic: Welsh Parliament
Other notable people charged are former police officer Jeremy Hunt, Tony Lee, the Conservatives’ former campaign director, and his wife, Laura Saunders, a former Tory election candidate, and Nick Mason, the Conservatives’ former chief data officer.
Many others are, or were, also Conservative Party staff. The party has said those still working for them have been suspended.
A Conservative Party spokesman said: “The Conservative Party believes that those working in politics must act with integrity. Current members of staff who have been charged are being suspended with immediate effect.
“These incidents took place in May last year. Our party is now under new leadership and we are cooperating fully with the Gambling Commission to ensure that their investigation can conclude swiftly and transparently.”
Tony Lee was Conservative campaign director
Who are the 15 people charged?
• Simon Chatfield, 51, from Farnham
• Russell George, 50, from Newtown, Wales (suspended Welsh Conservative Senedd member for Montgomeryshire)
• Amy Hind, 34, from Loughton, Essex
• Anthony Hind, 36, from Loughton, Essex
• Jeremy Hunt, 55, from Horley (a former police officer, not the ex-chancellor)
• Thomas James, 38, from Brecon, Wales
• Charlotte Lang, 36, from Brixton
• Anthony Lee, 47, Bristol (known as Tony, former director of Conservative Party campaigning)
• Iain Makepeace, 47, from Newcastle Upon Tyne
• Nick Mason, 51, from Gillingham (former Conservative Party chief data officer)
• Paul Place, 53, from Hammersmith, London
• Laura Saunders, 37, from Bristol (Tony Lee’s wife and Conservative 2024 candidate for Bristol North West who was then dropped)
• James Ward, 40, from east London
• Craig Williams, 39, from Llanfair Caereinion, Welshpool
• Jacob Willmer, 39, from Richmond, London.
Labour candidate Kevin Craig was included in the investigation after placing a bet that he would lose his bid to become an MP, but was cleared of any wrongdoing in December.
Laura Saunders was the party’s candidate in Bristol North West and is the wife of Tony Lee Pic: Laura Saunders for Bristol North West
Ellie Reeves, chair of the Labour Party, said: “This is a very serious development. The British people will expect that anyone found guilty of wrongdoing faces the full force of the law.
“Kemi Badenoch must make crystal clear that anyone found guilty of using insider information to cheat the system to try to enrich themselves has no place in the Conservative Party. No ifs, no buts.
“Labour is turning the page on 14 years of Conservative chaos and scandal and we’re turning our country round through our Plan for Change. Only Labour can be trusted to deliver security for working people and the renewal Britain needs.”
Met Police investigation
After the Gambling Commission began its investigation last June, the Metropolitan Police opened an inquiry into whether any of the political figures or police had committed misconduct in public office.
In August 2024, the Met said they would not be charging any of them, but they remained under investigation by the Gambling Commission into whether they had broken criminal gambling laws.
UK
Rise in suicide attempts linked to HMRC tax crackdown as MPs criticise ‘sham’ review into loan charge schemes
Four more people have attempted to take their own life in relation to the loan charge scandal, which has left tens of thousands of contractors facing huge bills for tax their employers should have paid, Sky News has learnt.
HMRC has made 17 referrals to the police watchdog (Independent Office for Police Conduct) over the suicide attempts of 14 people, up from the 13 referrals of 10 people previously known about in October 2023.
The figures, revealed in response to a Freedom of Information request by Sky News, come on top of the 10 known suicides of people caught up in the controversial tax crackdown, which has alarmed MPs across the political spectrum.
The loan charge was announced in George Osborne’s 2016 budget and made freelancers liable for years of retrospective income and national insurance tax after being paid their salaries in loans.
Former Tory chancellor George Osborne
HMRC has been accused of harassing ordinary people who were victims of mis-selling, as the arrangement was widely promoted by lawyers, accountants and tax professionals in the 2000s and 2010s.
Labour has launched an independent review into the policy but campaigners have branded it a “sham” and “cover-up” as it doesn’t look at the principle of the loan charge, only ways to make people settle.
‘Trapped in an endless nightmare’
Father-of-three Ray Newton is one thousands of people who paid an umbrella company to manage his fees while working as an IT contractor for Barclays Bank from 2009-2010.
They paid him in tax-free loans on the assurance it was “completely above board”, but in 2016 he was hit with an unexpected HMRC bill of £16,000.
Ray Newton has faced demands for almost £60,000 from HMRC
Ray paid it off, but last year he suddenly faced demands for another £15,000 in income tax and £14,000 in interest that had been accruing the whole time without his knowledge. The “bombshell bill” also included £12,000 of inheritance tax on the loans despite them being classed as wages.
“Instead of going for the tax that was avoided they are going for the jugular,” said Ray, 70.
The bill arrived in the post after eight years of sporadic letters from HMRC saying Ray still needed to settle but not explaining why or by how much, often ignoring him when he inquired. It nearly destroyed him.
Ray attempted suicide over the stress of the loan charge
“I was literally begging – please tell me what it is I owe. It made me look as though I was a bad person… my wife actually left me and I got really in a state over this,” he said.
“I was having counselling, I was on antidepressant drugs, I was on sleeping pills. You know, my whole world was sort of falling apart. It was like being trapped in an endless nightmare.
“I did attempt suicide but I was stopped by a member of the public.”
Ray is now in a better place and is back with his wife, while HMRC has recently accepted the inheritance tax isn’t owed and giving him misleading or incorrect information.
But he is sceptical about the review.
“The government can’t afford or don’t want to afford the implications of a proper inquiry. This is going to be a whitewash.”
HMRC says it takes the wellbeing of all taxpayers seriously and is committed to identifying and supporting customers who need extra help with their tax affairs. It says it has made significant improvements to this service over the last few years.
Sky News spoke to several loan charge victims who said while they didn’t dispute owing tax, HMRC’s chaotic communication was making it harder to settle and move on.
“The impact has been devastating”
For father-of-two Stephen Bishop, the long drawn-out battle contributed to the breakdown of his marriage and led him to express suicidal thoughts.
He was told to join a loan scheme by the company which hired him and has since faced demands in unpaid tax ranging from £80,000 – more than he’d earn in a year – to £20,000 while a payment plan set up in 2018 was randomly cancelled.
It took many more years to reach a new settlement and after £18,000 was finally agreed upon, he was whacked with a £10,000 interest bill for the late payment.
Stephen Bishop says the stress of HMRC’s conduct impacted his marriage
HMRC continued to contact him after he requested to go through his accountant due to his deteriorating mental health, with an inspector even showing up at his door.
“I can honestly understand why so many people have taken their own lives over this. The impact has been devastating on me,” he said.
What is being reviewed?
Since 2016, HMRC has agreed 25,000 settlements with employers and individuals over their use of loan schemes, which will raise around £4.2bn in revenue.
However, over 40,000 people and 5,000 employers are yet to settle.
Labour promised an “independent review” in opposition, with Treasury minister James Murray saying the loan charge had “become a nightmare for ordinary people… who are the victims of mis-selling and face financial ruin”.
The loan charge has left many people facing financial ruin
After winning the election Mr Murray also attended a “harrowing meeting” where many loan charge victims “broke down in tears”, according to Greg Smith, Tory co-chairman of the Loan Charge and Taxpayer Fairness all-party parliamentary group (APPG), who suggested the “partial review” was down to “wilful ignorance or the bottom line” and warned it could lead to more suicides if people continue to face financial ruin.
Campaigners hoped the inquiry would look at the principle of retrospective tax legislation, the role of promoters who made profits from the schemes and HMRC’s conduct.
However, it will only examine the barriers facing those who have yet to settle and recommend ways for them to so do by the summer. And it is being run by former HMRC boss Ray McCann, leading some to question its independence.
‘Internal stitch-up’
Sir Iain Duncan Smith, former Tory leader and another long-term critic of the loan charge, called the review an “internal HMRC stitch-up… ran by an ex-HMRC honcho”.
He said the loan charge is a “disaster” made by the tax office for being slow to crack down on the loan schemes and the government should “draw a line under this and write the debt off”.
Sir Iain Duncan Smith
“It seems to me any MP that goes to be a minister of the Treasury gets taken prisoner by them. This should be a full-scale review where apportioning blame is part of this,” Mr Duncan Smith added.
Read more from Sky News:
Race to keep British Steel furnaces running
No evidence of ‘two-tier policing’ in summer riots, MPs say
In a letter responding to concerns of the APPG, Mr Murray said it would have been “irresponsible for the government not to acknowledge the challenging fiscal circumstances that we inherited” and “that is the context in which this review takes place”.
He also defended Mr McCann’s independence, saying the former president of the Chartered Institute for Taxation is “a highly respected figure in the tax world whose name was suggested by one of the loan charge campaigners”.
The government declined to comment further while the review is ongoing.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway