Seven national media home affairs editors and correspondents have sent a letter of protest to the Home Office complaining that the release of the 361-page Sarah Everard report was used as a day to “bury bad news” on immigration.
The letter, shared with Press Gazette, said that a slew of documents and 13 reports were published later in the day on Thursday which reflected poorly on the way the Government is handling immigration and asylum. These included news of a £6bn overspend by the Home Office on dealing with immigration and asylum, including £5.4bn on hotels and migrant support.
The letter complains that the events of Thursday, 29 February, were part of a pattern of behaviour from the Home Office press office dating back more than year.
A spokesperson for the Home Office said in response: “We have delivered on our commitment to publish the 13 outstanding reports that were delayed as quickly as possible, as the Home Affairs Select Committee and others have called for.”
And they noted that publication of the reports in question, which were critical of the Home Office, reflected transparency.
Matters have got worse since meeting with PR chiefs in March 2023
In March 2023 journalists met officials from the Home Office to discuss what they saw as failings in the department’s communications operation. And now they say that matters have got worse.
Journalists from the Daily Mail, Times, Express, Guardian, Telegraph and PA Media have all signed the joint letter.
They are concerned about documents being released late in the day, meaning journalists do not have time to properly analyse them before print and broadcast deadlines.
Press Gazette understands that requests for information from journalists are often met instead with statements of the Home Office’s achievements in a particular policy area.
The letter states that the Home Office activities were “disparaging to the memory of Sarah Everard and an insult to her grieving family”.
Echoes of infamous September 2001 ‘good day to bury bad news’ memo
The letter says: “It seems clear to us that the press office attempted to hide damaging disclosures about the department behind what you believed would be a smokescreen provided by the Angiolini Inquiry into Miss Everard’s murder.
“In 2001 Jo Moore, a special adviser to the then secretary of state for transport, suggested the September 11 terrorist attacks offered a ‘very good day to get out anything we want to bury’.
“Your actions yesterday appeared even more cynical, for the following reason.
“You sought to obscure one set of failures by the Home Office with a second set of failures, for which the department is also ultimately responsible.
“It was not an opportunistic seizure of an external event, as in 2001, but a calculated manipulation of a news ‘grid’ which you oversee.
“Outside Whitehall, in any normal walk of life, actions such this would be the basis for disciplinary action, castigation or deep shame.”
Meeting requested to improve situation
Detailing the other reports which were released later in the day on Thursday, the letter says: “Dozens of documents were published yesterday as part of the quarterly immigration statistics, the National Audit Office published its report into Rwanda asylum scheme spending and then, after 4pm, you published more than 900 pages of reports by the former independent chief inspector of borders and immigration.”
The journalists say that issues have got worse and not better since a meeting to discuss “persistent and deep-seated problems with Home Office comms” was held in March last year with Home Office director of communications Rob Hall and Home Office head of news Craig Saunders.
The letter states: “Press notices, other documents and statements are still issued late in the evening, or not at all. Some press officers remain reluctant to take ownership of media inquiries or to see the process through to a satisfactory conclusion.
“Yesterday’s publication of the 13 reports by David Neal all at once – despite the department holding them back for up to 11 months – is only the most egregious of many examples.
“We request a meeting to discuss what could potentially be done to improve matters.
“But we are not optimistic about the prospects for change.
“In our view, the Home Office press office is not fit for purpose.”
The letter is signed by:
- Daily Mail home affairs editor David Barrett
- Times home affairs editor Matt Dathan
- Home affairs journalist Lizzie Dearden
- Daily Telegraph home affairs editor Charles Hymas
- Daily Express home affairs editor Michael Knowles
- Guardian home affairs editor Rajeev Syal
- PA Media home affairs correspondent Flora Thompson.
Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog
