A REVIEW of MP and MSPs’ security is taking place after the killing of Sir David Amess, which as it emerged yesterday is being treated as a terrorist incident.
The Conservative MP, a father-of-five, was fatally stabbed on Friday while he was meeting constituents in Leigh-on-Sea, Essex.
A 25-year-old British man arrested at the scene is being held on suspicion of murder.
Scotland Yard said the country’s most senior counter-terror officer, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Dean Haydon, has formally declared the incident as terrorism and said early investigations have revealed “a potential motivation linked to Islamist extremism”.
Yesterday Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer laid flowers at the scene of the stabbing.
Home Secretary Priti Patel, who also attended, said politicians “cannot be cowed” following the attack and that a review of security of MPs was being undertaken.
Holyrood’s Presiding Officer described the killing of Amess as “an attack on our democracy” and assured MSPs that the parliament will offer them additional security.
Alison Johnstone pledged that the Scottish Parliament would provide its elected members with any advice and support required and revealed she has spoken to Police Scotland, with the force indicating it will contact MSPs “as a matter of urgency” to discuss security arrangements.
It followed an announcement from the parliament’s corporate body that it would fund any security upgrades at MSPs’ constituency offices based on police recommendations.
Safety advice for holding surgeries was also reiterated, including sitting behind a table “so this can act as a barrier if necessary” and always letting relatives or colleagues know where they are.
In her letter to members, Johnstone (below) wrote: “Whilst all our thoughts are with Sir David’s family, friends and colleagues, it is understandable that at a time like this we reflect on our own work and the challenges we face.
“Representing our constituents is one of the greatest privileges of being a Member of the Scottish Parliament, but it is one that, sadly, can bring with it threats and fears for the safety of ourselves, our staff and families.”
A joint statement issued by all of Southend’s mosques condemned the fatal attack on Amess as an “indefensible atrocity”.
Faith leaders said the 69-year-old MP for Southend West was an “upstanding friend to our Muslim community” and attended key events, including weddings, mosque openings and the launch of the town’s first Muslim Scout group.
The statement said: “Sir David’s murder was an indefensible atrocity, committed on the grounds of a place of worship and we condemn it in the strongest possible terms.
“This act was committed in the name of blind hatred, and we look forward to the perpetrator being brought to justice.”
The incident, which happened five years on from the killing of Labour MP Jo Cox, has prompted renewed debate over the safety of politicians.
Some MPs continued to hold constituency surgeries yesterday, and others pledged it would not change the way they engage with residents.
A National Police Chiefs’ Council spokesman said every UK MP will be contacted by Operation Bridger, a nationwide police protective security operation established in 2016, to discuss their security arrangements.
SNP MP Joanna Cherry called for threats against MPs to be taken more seriously, pointing to a case earlier this year, in which a man – previously convicted of a knife offence – admitted sending abusive messages to her.
Conservative councillor Kevin Buck, deputy chairman of the Southend West constituency association, said he was against moving surgery meetings to Zoom.
Labour MP Naz Shah, who has previously been targeted with racist abuse, said there was “no right or wrong answer” over whether or not MPs should continue holding their surgeries.
She said: “I’ve had so many death threats, and it could have been any one of us. It’s really close to home. I just think you’ve got to respect every MP.
“Some will have the ‘Yes, we’re going to carry on’ view, and some people won’t feel comfortable.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here