Police probes ‘should not trespass upon free speech’, chiefs told

Police chiefs have been told they are not the “thought police” as the shadow home secretary said officers should only be investigating non-crime hate incidents where there is a “real risk of imminent criminality”.

Chris Philp used a speech at a major policing conference on Wednesday to call for guidelines around the incidents to be rewritten.

The comments come as Britain’s top prosecutor reportedly said he “had no idea” what non-crime hate incidents were and “had to look them up” recently, as he cast doubt on their usefulness.

But speaking in Westminster on Wednesday, Mr Philp called on police forces to use “common sense”, arguing that changes would help “rebuild confidence” in policing and free up time to spend on fighting crime.

Debate over how the incidents are dealt with erupted after officers from Essex Police visited Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson to arrange an interview about a year-old tweet.

The force later said the interview was about a potential allegation of incitement to racial hatred online.

Mr Philp said commitments made by police last year to “always follow all reasonable lines of inquiry must be delivered in practice”, adding: “If we can get those detection rates rising, confidence and trust in policing will invariably rise with them. That is what the public expects.”

Anything that “distracts from that mission” should be “jettisoned”, he said as he turned to discussing non-crime hate incidents.

The shadow home secretary added: “Police should be concentrating on investigating and preventing crime and where speech or actions don’t meet the criminal threshold, in my view, it should only attract the attention and time of the police where criminality is likely to imminently follow.

“That is quite a high bar, and in practice, not one that is currently always being followed. Offensive speech is not the same as illegal speech.”

Probes should “not be directed at nine-year-old children involved in playground spats” or at “journalists discussing trans issues”, he said.

Mr Philp, who was policing minister when the code of practice for non-crime hate incidents was introduced last year, added: “I think the non-crime hate incident guidance should be rewritten and updated urgently to ensure that only where there is a real risk of imminent criminality, the police should get involved.

“So I call on the Government today to urgently ensure the guidance is updated, using legislation if needed, and I call on police forces to apply common sense and not waste time and resources looking at things unless there is criminality, or unless there is an imminent risk of criminality.

“I think that will help rebuild confidence in policing, and it will free up time to spend on crime.”

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has also said officers should use “a common sense and consistent approach” to recording the incidents.

According to the Times Crime and Justice Commission – a year-long project considering the most urgent problems facing police, prisons, courts and victims – director of public prosecutions Stephen Parkinson said: “I had to look up what on earth the term meant – I was puzzled by it”, when the debate swirled last week.

Mr Parkinson, who took over as boss of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) a year ago, also said he was not certain how such investigations were started, adding: “Even within the police service there has been some surprise at the level of non-crime hate incidents that have been investigated,” the newspaper reported.