Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Southport Attack

Tuesday 28 January 2025 · 2 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Ministerial Questions addressed concerns over the Southport attack on 2025-01-28
  • The Government emphasized adherence to contempt of court laws to ensure the trial did not collapse
  • Criticism was raised regarding the creation of a vacuum for misinformation due to lack of information disclosure

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Liz Twist Lab Blaydon and Consett
Crime & Law Enforcement Parliamentary Procedure
Context

Following the Southport attack, crucial details about the case could not be revealed to prevent trial collapse. However, some social media users were sharing information that should have been restricted by contempt rules.

Question

When the tragedy of Southport happened, crucial details about the case could not be revealed to ensure that the trial did not collapse and the vile perpetrator did not walk away as a free man. However, some on social media were playing by different rules. Does the Secretary of State think that our contempt rules are fit for the modern world?

Answer from Shabana Mahmood (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

My hon. Friend raises an important point. The Government would not say anything that would risk collapsing this trial. The media followed the law, and so did everyone in this House, but the same was not true online. As the Prime Minister has said, this challenge clearly must be addressed. The Law Commission is reviewing contempt laws. We will look closely at that work and consider these issues in the round.

Partly answered

How: Will Look Closely, Under Review

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Robert Jenrick Reform Newark
Justice & Courts
Context

The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation has noted that by failing to provide basic information to the public, misinformation spread which could have been prejudicial to the trial. This raises questions about the adequacy of current contempt rules in an age where social media is a primary news source.

Question

Contempt of court laws are guardrails that ensure fair trials. Does the Justice Secretary accept that by failing to provide basic information to the public, which had been disclosed in previous cases and would not prejudice a trial, the authorities created a vacuum for misinformation to spread? Misinformation could itself have prejudiced the trial. As most people consume news through social media, saying nothing is not cost-free. Will she commit to reviewing this issue now rather than waiting for the Law Commission?

Answer from Shabana Mahmood (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

There will always be differing views among lawyers about what can and cannot be said. It is right that the Government took their own position and that we did nothing that could risk collapsing the trial. I agree with the shadow Secretary of State that the online world poses a significant challenge to our contempt laws. That is why that is already being looked at. As there is a piece of work already under way, I do not want to pre-empt where that could land. The Law Commission has a good track record of considering major law changes. Because of the inquiry and the fast-moving nature of these things, I will keep this area under close review myself.

Partly answered

How: Underway, Will Keep Under Review

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)