Police have been given greater powers to tackle disruption to the King’s coronation under new laws that come into force today, but the arrest of a man outside Buckingham Palace overnight has highlighted security concerns.
A precautionary controlled explosion was carried out outside the palace and the man was held on suspicion of the possession of an offensive weapon, the force added.
Officers said a knife was found on him but he did not possess a gun.
Image: Police officers on horses patrol on Wednesday
The arrest has highlighted concerns, as has an escalating series of road-blocking protests by the Just Stop Oil campaign group.
But police are alert to the potential for a much bigger threat from terrorists who could use the global live television coverage to publicise their aims.
Legislation that comes into force on Wednesday carries up to a year in jail for demonstrators blocking roads, airports and railways.
Anyone locking or gluing themselves to buildings or objects risks six months behind bars.
Advertisement
Police can also stop and search anyone they suspect is planning to cause disruption – one of the powers given royal assent by the King on Tuesday.
Details of the new laws were outlined in a Home Office letter sent to various protest groups, some of whom reportedly condemned the move as “intimidatory”.
Police will have assembled an intelligence database of likely demonstrators and in the past, ahead of major public events, have visited known individuals to try to ask them about their intentions.
Anti-monarchist Patrick Thelwell, 23, who was fined last year for throwing an egg at the King in York, is urging others to join him at a Coronation Day “Not My King” protest in central London, but has asked demonstrators not to bring eggs.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:29
Minister warns coronation protesters
It comes as Security Minister Tom Tugendhat said the government is “in no way complacent” about security surrounding the King’s coronation after the arrest outside Buckingham Palace.
He said he was “very proud” of the way the police responded to the incident.
Mr Tugendhat told Kay Burley on Sky News: “I’m very glad to see that the police reacted incredibly quickly, incredibly professionally, to the incident last night.
“We’re in no way complacent. And I’m very, very proud of the response that the police have done.
“The intelligence services, the police and others have been working on this extremely effectively for months.”
Buckingham Palace confirmed neither the King nor Queen Consort were at the palace at the time of the incident.
Scotland Yard said they are not treating the incident as terror-related.
Asked how much security for the coronation would cost the taxpayer, Mr Tugendhat was unable to give a figure.
He said: “It’s very difficult to pull that out as a separate figure for the simple reason that we’ve got an enormous amount of effort going in for a major incident like this in different parts of the country – because there are people getting together in streets, there’s people getting together in gatherings across the country because this is a moment of national celebration.
“What I think is worth looking at, though, is how much this is bringing to the country in terms of the number of tourists who are coming, the amount of attention that is coming and indeed, I hope, the amount of business that will be generated by heads of state and government and other business people coming to the UK at this time to see what we offer.”
Pressed on figures of at least £100m just for security, Mr Tugendhat said: “It’s not a figure that I recognise, sorry.”
He said: “Forgive me for not being able to break it down at this point.
“The reason I don’t want to do that is because there’s police forces around the country who are doing different things and answer slightly differently through their own different structures.”
He said he did not have a number for how much it was costing the Metropolitan Police, but added: “What I’ve been doing is making sure that the Met are ready, and that means preparing with them and the National Crime Agency and the intelligence services to make sure they have all the resources they need.
“We have spent an awful lot of time over the last several months preparing for any number of different threats because the reality is this is a very complex event.”
Rachel Reeves has not offered her resignation and is “going nowhere”, Downing Street has said, following her tearful appearance in the House of Commons.
A Number 10 spokesperson said the chancellor had the “full backing” of Sir Keir Starmer, despite Ms Reeves looking visibly upset during Prime Minister’s Questions.
A spokesperson for the chancellor later clarified that Ms Reeves had been affected by a “personal matter” and would be working out of Downing Street this afternoon.
UK government bond prices fell by the most since October 2022, and the pound tumbled after Ms Reeves’s Commons appearance, while the yield on the 10-year government bond, or gilt, rose as much as 22 basis points at one point to around 4.68%.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch branded the chancellor the “human shield” for the prime minister’s “incompetence” just hours after he was forced to perform a humiliating U-turn over his controversial welfare bill.
Emotional Reeves a painful watch – and reminder of tough decisions ahead
It is hard to think of a PMQs like it – it was a painful watch.
The prime minister battled on, his tone assured, even if his actual words were not always convincing.
But it was the chancellor next to him that attracted the most attention.
Rachel Reeves looked visibly upset.
It is hard to know for sure right now what was going on behind the scenes, the reasons – predictable or otherwise – why she appeared to be emotional, but it was noticeable and it was difficult to watch.
Speaking at Prime Minister’s Questions, Ms Badenoch said: “This man has forgotten that his welfare bill was there to plug a black hole created by the chancellor. Instead they’re creating new ones.”
Turning to the chancellor, the Tory leader added: “[She] is pointing at me – she looks absolutely miserable.
“Labour MPs are going on the record saying that the chancellor is toast, and the reality is that she is a human shield for his incompetence. In January, he said that she would be in post until the next election. Will she really?”
Not fully answering the question, the prime minister replied: “[Ms Badenoch] certainly won’t.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:58
Welfare vote ‘a blow to the prime minister’
“I have to say, I’m always cheered up when she asks me questions or responds to a statement because she always makes a complete mess of it and shows just how unserious and irrelevant they are.”
Mrs Badenoch interjected: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”
A total of 49 Labour MPs voted against the bill – the largest rebellion in a prime minister’s first year in office since 47 MPs voted against Tony Blair’s Lone Parent benefit in 1997, according to Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary University.
After multiple concessions made due to threats of a Labour rebellion, many MPs questioned what they were voting for as the bill had been severely stripped down.
They ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to Universal Credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.
Ms Badenoch said the climbdown was proof that Sir Keir was “too weak to get anything done”.
Ms Reeves has also borne a lot of the criticism over the handling of the vote, with some MPs believing that her strict approach to fiscal rules has meant she has approached the ballooning welfare bill from the standpoint of trying to make savings, rather than getting people into work.
Experts have now warned that the welfare U-turn, on top of reversing the cut to winter fuel, means that tax rises in the autumn are more likely – with Ms Reeves now needing to find £5bn to make up for the policy U-turns.
Asked by Ms Badenoch whether he could rule out further tax rises – something Labour promised it would not do on working people in its manifesto – Sir Keir said: “She knows that no prime minister or chancellor ever stands at the despatch box and writes budgets in the future.
“But she talks about growth, for 14 years we had stagnation, and that is what caused the problem.”
Prosecutors are considering whether to bring further criminal charges against Lucy Letby over the deaths of babies at two hospitals where she worked
The Crown Prosecution Service said it had received “a full file of evidence from Cheshire Constabulary asking us to consider further allegations in relation to deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital”.
“We will now carefully consider the evidence to determine whether any further criminal charges should be brought,” it added.
“As always, we will make that decision independently, based on the evidence and in line with our legal test.”
Letby, 35, was found guilty of murdering seven children and attempting to murder seven more between June 2015 and June 2016 while working in the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester Hospital and is currently serving 15 whole-life orders.
Image: Letby worked at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital
She is understood to have carried out two work placements at Liverpool Women’s Hospital, where she trained as a student, between October and December 2012, and January and February 2015.
Police said in December that Letby was interviewed in prison as part of an investigation into more baby deaths and non-fatal collapses.
A Cheshire Constabulary spokesperson said: “We can confirm that Cheshire Constabulary has submitted a full file of evidence to the CPS for charging advice regarding the ongoing investigation into deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neo-natal units of both the Countess of Chester Hospital and the Liverpool Women’s Hospital as part of Operation Hummingbird.”
Detectives previously said the investigation was looking into the full period of time that Letby worked as a nurse, covering the period from 2012 to 2016 and including a review of 4,000 admissions of babies.
Letby’s lawyer Mark McDonald said: “The evidence of the innocence of Lucy Letby is overwhelming,” adding: “We will cross every bridge when we get to it but if Lucy is charged I know we have a whole army of internationally renowned medical experts who will totally undermine the prosecution’s unfounded allegations.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:09
Three managers at the hospital where Lucy Letby worked have been arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.
Earlier this year, Letby’s lawyers called for the suspension of the inquiry, claiming there was “overwhelming and compelling evidence” that her convictions were unsafe.
Their evidence has been passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby’s legal team hopes her case will be referred back to the Court of Appeal.
The Crown Prosecution Service has said it is considering whether to bring further criminal charges over the deaths of babies at hospitals where Lucy Letby worked.
The CPS said it had received “a full file of evidence from Cheshire Constabulary asking us to consider further allegations in relation to deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital”.
“We will now carefully consider the evidence to determine whether any further criminal charges should be brought,” it added.
“As always, we will make that decision independently, based on the evidence and in line with our legal test.”
Letby, 35, was found guilty of murdering seven children and attempting to murder seven more between June 2015 and June 2016 while working in the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester Hospital and is currently serving 15 whole-life orders.
She is understood to have carried out two work placements at Liverpool Women’s Hospital, where she trained as a student, between October and December 2012, and January and February 2015.
Earlier this year, Letby’s lawyers called for the suspension of the inquiry, claiming there was “overwhelming and compelling evidence” that her convictions were unsafe.
Their evidence has been passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby’s legal team hopes her case will be referred back to the Court of Appeal.