Keir Starmer and Yvette Cooper have set out a blunt message to rioters that they will end up in prison – but the policing response needs to step up in parallel with this robust rhetoric. It is incredible that after the outrageous threats against mosques and attacks on hotels, and other assaults, this disorder has still not been brought under control. There are fears of further violence today. This week’s riots constitute the worst public order challenge since the London riots of 2011, or perhaps even since the Miners’ strike of 1984-5. It’s time to restore order to Britain’s streets.
The willingness to believe lies is a symptom of decaying trust
There are difficult questions that need answering, not least why so many of those involved in the disorder – and their online supporters – were all too ready to believe malicious sources falsely claiming the Southport assailant had arrived on a small boat. There is now talk, once again, about tackling disinformation online. But the willingness to believe lies is a symptom of decaying trust in official channels. Government, the media and the police need to have a hard look at their own communications and whether they may have contributed to this mistrust, even from the best of intentions.
Many believe the authorities’ priority is to preserve community relations at all costs, including by damping down discussions of particularly sensitive crimes; and that many of the media outlets cooperate. This might not be the case but there is a pattern here. Much of the current messaging focuses exclusively on the far right as the perpetrators, but less on the intimidating ‘counter protests’ involving groups of masked men. We have seen a Home Office Minister, Jess Phillips, confronted with footage of a female journalist being intimidated feeling the need to set context, tweeting ‘the facts of why people are congregating’.
There are also claims that the way disturbances are policed has varied hugely. The police have faced questions that their handling of incidents like Harehills in Leeds – where there was widespread disorder after a child was taken into care – or the unrest between Bangladeshi groups in Whitechapel, looks different from the way the current riots are being tackled. Further back, there was a stark contrast between the policing of Black Lives Matter protests and anti-lockdown demonstrations. Claims of two-tier policing are serious and need to be given a proper response.
We don’t yet know much about the rioters. We are talking about high hundreds, maybe a couple of thousand criminals involved nationwide. Some will have been motivated by simple looting, rather than anything organised or ideological, but some will have political motives. If they are disaffected by the political process they are not alone, following an election with near record low turnout. Policy Exchange has been looking at the non voters – who they are, and why they didn’t vote. Overwhelmingly the impression comes that people who didn’t vote couldn’t see the point, didn’t believe voting made a difference. Some may have thought violence was more likely to work.
The threat of violence weighs heavily on public order decisions. When I worked on the Public Processions Act in 1998 in Northern Ireland, a new parades commission and codes of conduct were set up to disguise the ultimate reality that the balance of threat now decides whether a parade continues or not. Things are similar in London today with the policing of pro Palestinian demonstrations – really large and threatening groups are managed carefully; smaller counter demonstrations can be dealt with altogether more brusquely.
This is a dangerous path, risking the state losing the respect of many of its citizens. The new tough line signalled by Ministers is welcome – providing it is now dispensed equally to all.
From my experience of working in government from the successive standoffs in Drumcree in Northern Ireland during the 1990s, through to the London riots of 2011, there is huge pressure at times like this to rush to instant analysis and policy. There are already demands for action against platforms like X/ Twitter, calls to ban organisations like the English Defence League (EDL) and talk of deploying counter-terrorism powers. Officials will be crafting options for short term trade-offs between ‘communities’, dispensing carefully balanced goodies. And then the inevitable independent review will take place.
This kicks issues down the track, which is why it is such popular advice for ministers. But there are consequences to this inaction, not least the prospect of heading towards Balkanising the country along the depressing pattern of parts of Northern Ireland. Ministers and police need to avoid seeking to broker local policies with ‘community leaders’ of dubious legitimacy, or even tacitly accepting communities seeking to self-police in the face of threats. On this basis who are the ‘community leaders’ they should be dealing with in white working class areas? Tough and visible policing and government for all has to be the answer.
We are seeing a dangerous and relentless drift towards identity politics. Once you divide the population into ‘communities’, parts of the majority ‘community’ beginning to see itself as a persecuted group is the pernicious, but logical end point. If anything good comes out of the last week, it would be the government reflecting very hard about the risks of inflaming this process further through its legislative programme, and returning to the simple principle of equal treatment of equal citizens.
Catch up on the latest Spectator TV:
Comments