The College of Policing is Holding a Consultation on the Disclosure of the Nationality and Ethnicity of Criminals. Left-Wing Charities are Urging Their Supporters to Object. We Need to do the Opposite

In August, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) announced an “interim” change to its rules on what it tells the public about crime and suspects. In particular, the new guidance recommends that police forces “should confirm the nationality and/or ethnicity of the suspect or defendant… in high profile or sensitive” crimes, where there is “a policing purpose in doing so… a related risk or impact on public safety such as rising community tension… [and] a significant level of media or social media interest”. Those same new guidelines make it clear that it “is not the role or responsibility of the police to verify a suspect’s immigration status”, leaving that for the Home Office to handle. 

However, a group of 60 radical left wing charities and organisations including the Runnymede Trust, Social Workers Without Borders, the Migrants’ Rights Network and Black Lives Matter UK have begun coordinated lobbying to scrap this “interim” embrace of transparency and restore a culture of secrecy. These activists have written an open letter to the Home Secretary and the Chair of the NPCC in which they say that disclosing the “ethnicity and nationality of suspects… is having a devastating impact on our country”.

In reality, these are perfectly sensible changes, even if most of us would prefer the universal disclosure of ethnicity, nationality and immigration status in all cases. These new rules came about because of mounting pressure following the Southport attack. In the initial aftermath of Axel Rudakubana’s horrific killings the police insisted that the suspect was “a 17 year-old male from Banks in Lancashire, who is originally from Cardiff”. In that void, rumours swirled, contributing to great anger in the local community and ultimately to riots. People know when important information is being withheld.

Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s advisor on terrorism, recognises this. He said at the time: “In the digital era, if the police do not take the lead in providing clear, accurate and sober details about an attack like Southport, others will. Social media is a source of news for many people and near-silence in the face of horrific events of major public interest is no longer an option.”

Similarly, when we’re told that “a man” is wanted by the police for a sexual assault, rape or other serious crime – or, worse, a “woman” when in fact it’s a biological male – we recognise the deceit, and the obvious practical problem. How are the public supposed to help?

The letter from the left-wing NGOs is very revealing. The authors note that they compared media articles from 2023 and 2025 and found that “the term ’asylum seeker’ in articles on serious crime increase by five times during these timeframes”.

An obvious explanation for this is that asylum seekers are committing a lot of violent, horrific crimes which were not a feature of British society when it was more ethnically homogenous. Of course it’s a matter of public interest if men we choose to allow in to our country – or haven’t kicked out when they’ve arrived her illegally – are killing people like Rhiannon Whyte or Gurvinder Johal. Of course it’s a matter of public interest if the man charged with the killing of Wayne Broadhurst was granted asylum. Of course it’s a matter of public interest if an asylum seeker like Hadush Kebatu sexually assaults a schoolgirl. 

It is also absolutely a matter of public interest if particular ethnicities and nationalities are more likely to commit serious crimes, particularly dangerous ones. Our migration policy should be grounded in facts and should seek to keep British people safe. 

Runnymede et al profoundly disagree, obviously. They say that disclosing such information “is extremely dangerous and may be seen to encourage the public to perceive ethnicity and migration status as significant factors in the commission of crime”. 

The authors go on to insist that there is “no credible academic evidence to support this perception”. Of course there isn’t. The question itself has been so toxic for so long that no mainstream academic has dared touch it, and it’s hard to imagine a British university’s ethics committee approving such work. What data we do have on arrests, prosecutions and convictions show that certain ethnic groups are substantially more likely to commit particular crimes.

For instance, research conducted by the Centre for Migration Control reveals that the “foreign-born arrest rate is 34% higher than that of the British-born population”, and Ministry of Justice data obtained by the Telegraph shows that foreigners are convicted of up to 23 percent of sexual offences.

The left-wing charities don’t care about the truth though. Their letter goes on to object to the new guidance because it “contravenes longstanding norms”. It’s remarkable how respectful activists become of traditions once they’ve created them. The authors conclude by demanding that disclosure of ethnicity and nationality ends “as a matter of urgency”. 

They’ve also gone further, urging their supporters to make submissions to the NPCC consultation on these changes, clearly hoping to create the impression of broad support for secrecy. 

I would urge every Daily Sceptic reader to take a look at the new guidelines on disclosing suspects’ identities, and if you have time the much more detailed consultation document. In particular the “enhanced collaboration between communications professionals and family liaison officers” and proposed “stronger requirements for supporting victims and families who find themselves in the public eye”.

Then complete the online form. Many people who want reality hidden from us will be doing so. If we believe in truth and honesty from the state then we have to make our voices heard too.

David Shipley has sold fork lift trucks, worked in corporate finance, produced a film and served a prison sentence for committing fraud. He has worked as a prison inspector and now campaigns for prison reform, as well as being an investigative journalist.You can find his website here.