House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Project CONTEST: The Government’s Counter- Terrorism Strategy Ninth Report of Session 2008–09 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 29 June 2009 HC 212 Published on 7 July 2009 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Home Affairs Committee The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (Labour, Leicester East) (Chairman) Tom Brake MP (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington) Ms Karen Buck MP (Labour, Regent’s Park and Kensington North) Mr James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Mrs Ann Cryer MP (Labour, Keighley) David TC Davies MP (Conservative, Monmouth) Mrs Janet Dean MP (Labour, Burton) Patrick Mercer MP (Conservative, Newark) Margaret Moran MP (Labour, Luton South) Gwyn Prosser MP (Labour, Dover) Bob Russell MP (Liberal Democrat, Colchester) Martin Salter MP (Labour, Reading West) Mr Gary Streeter MP (Conservative, South West Devon) Mr David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North) Project CONTEST Sub-committee membership Patrick Mercer MP (Conservative, Newark) (Chairman) Ms Karen Buck MP (Labour, Regent’s Park and Kensington North) David TC Davies MP (Conservative, Monmouth) Martin Salter MP (Labour, Reading West) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom. A list of Reports of the Committee since Session 2005–06 is at the back of this volume. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Elizabeth Flood (Clerk), Eliot Barrass (Second Clerk), Elisabeth Bates (Committee Specialist), Sarah Harrison (Committee Specialist), Darren Hackett (Senior Committee Assistant), Ameet Chudasama (Committee Assistant), Sheryl Dinsdale (Committee Assistant) and Jessica Bridges-Palmer (Select Committee Media Officer). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Home Affairs Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 3276; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]. 1 Contents Report Page Summary 3 Introduction 4 1 The UK’s Approach to Counter-Terrorism 5 Machinery of Government 5 Background 5 The Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism 5 Operations on the ground 7 Other departments and agencies 8 CONTEST: The Government’s counter-terrorism strategy 8 Creating and refining the strategy 8 “Prevent” 10 2 Transport infrastructure 12 Background 12 Transport for London 12 The July 2005 terrorist attacks 13 Preparation for the future 15 3 The Games of the XXX Olympiad 17 Background 17 The Olympic challenge 17 4 Conclusion 19 Formal Minutes 20 Witnesses 21 List of written evidence 21 List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 22 3 Summary The Government first created a coordinated counter-terrorism strategy in 2003. This was revised during 2008 and early 2009, during the course of our inquiry, and the ‘refresh’ of CONTEST was published in March 2009. CONTEST has four ‘strands’: Pursue, Prevent, Protect and Prepare. The Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism (OSCT), part of the Home Office, is responsible for CONTEST and is the Government’s lead unit on counter-terrorism. We have been impressed by the work which OSCT does, and by the dedication and professionalism of its staff. We also welcome the full and open nature of the latest iteration of CONTEST, and its determination to place as much information as possible in the public domain; however, we would urge the Government to make more of its many successes in countering terrorism. While we understand the constraints of the sub judice convention, we are concerned that the Government is imposing too strict a self-denying ordinance on itself and could be more open about the extent to which it is winning the battle against terrorism. One of the UK’s key points of vulnerability is clearly the Transport for London network. We are satisfied that lessons have been learned from the attacks of July 2005, and we accept that airport-style security will never be compatible with the demands of a mass transit system on the scale of the London Underground. However, the network remains extremely vulnerable and there is no room for complacency; the protection of the millions of passengers who use the Transport for London network every day must remain a high priority. The London 2012 Olympics will also be another critical area of vulnerability. We welcome the decision to move the Metropolitan Police’s Olympic Security Directorate to OSCT and we are reassured that the issue is being treated with appropriate gravity and priority. Engineering a successful and, moreover, safe and secure Games will be a litmus test for the Government’s counter-terrorism strategy. The UK continues to face a sustained and extremely grave threat from terrorism. After a slow start, the Government has done a great deal to improve its counter-terrorism structures and now has an impressive approach to the issue. However, more work remains to be done. The threats have not lessened significantly, nor do we expect them to do so in the immediate future. It has been said that “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty”. We agree. 4 Introduction 1. The Government developed its first comprehensive counter-terrorism strategy, known as CONTEST, in early 2003. Initially a slender document, it was an attempt to coordinate the pan-Governmental response to the emerging terrorist threat in the aftermath of the attacks on New York and Washington, DC, in September 2001. 2. The revised version of CONTEST was published on Tuesday 24 March 2009. It was a significantly larger document than its predecessor, in line with the Government’s stated desire to be as open as possible on counter-terrorism and security matters and to put as much information as possible into the public domain.1 In addition to the publication of a very full document, the Home Office is planning a series of events across the country to engage with and explain the strategy to groups, organisations and agencies who will be involved in its delivery. 3. On 25 November 2008, the Home Affairs Committee decided to appoint a sub- committee to examine the Government’s existing counter-terrorism strategy, from policy to delivery, and the ongoing work to ‘refresh’ the strategy and produce what was colloquially known as ‘CONTEST 2’. 4. During our inquiry, we held three evidence sessions. The first session, concentrating on threats to London’s transport infrastructure, was with Tim O’Toole, Managing Director of London Underground, and Nick Agnew, Safety and Contingency Planning Manager, Transport for London.2 We then took evidence from Assistant Commissioner Robert Quick, Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations, Metropolitan Police Service. Part of each of these evidence sessions was held in private, to allow us to explore issues of operational sensitivity. Finally, we held a wholly private evidence session with Charles Farr, Director-General, and Gillian McGregor, Head of Operational Support and Knowledge Management, Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism. We then agreed with the Home Office a redacted version of the transcript from the evidence session which we have published. 5. In addition to the oral evidence sessions, we visited Transport for London’s Network Operation Centre and the British Transport Police’s Force Response Centre London at St James’s Park, and the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism at the Home Office. We would like to thank everyone who helped with this inquiry. 1 HC Deb, 24 March 2009, col 170 2 Mr O’Toole announced in February 2009 that he would step down as Managing Director of London Underground at the end of April. 5 1 The UK’s Approach to Counter-Terrorism Machinery of Government Background 6. The UK’s approach to intelligence, security and counter-terrorism has traditionally been based on a division between internal and external threats. Beginning in 1909 and developing especially during and after the Second World War, the intelligence apparatus was founded on the twin pillars of the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, colloquially known as MI6) dealing with threats from without the United Kingdom, and the Security Service (generally referred to as MI5) tackling domestic terrorism. However, since the 1950s, the Cabinet Office has played a coordinating role in some respects; the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) has been based there since 1957 and provides the Cabinet with advice on defence, security and intelligence-related matters. 7. In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, DC, several countries re-examined and substantially re-ordered their intelligence and security apparatus. The United States, in particular, adopted a strongly centralising approach. Only a month after the attacks, President George W. Bush created an Office of Homeland Security, under former Governor of Pennsylvania Tom Ridge, which, the following year, became the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). DHS consolidated 22 separate agencies of the federal government, including the Coast Guard, the US Border Patrol, the Transportation Security Administration and the Secret Service. However, it should be noted that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) were, after some debate, excluded from DHS. 8. The US also carried out a degree of centralisation within its intelligence and security agencies.