Angela Rayner is facing calls to apologise after accusing Nigel Farage, leader of the Reform UK party, of spreading “fake news” in the wake of the Southport attacks. Farage’s comments, which raised questions about the alleged attacker’s potential links to terrorism, were dismissed by the Deputy Prime Minister, who urged politicians to avoid stoking “conspiracy theories”.
However, it has since emerged that Axel Rudakubana, the 18-year-old responsible for the murders of three children, had been referred to the Government’s Prevent anti-extremism programme on three separate occasions. Police also found an al-Qaeda training manual and ricin at his home.
Farage, speaking the day after the tragedy, asked: “Was this guy being monitored by the security services? I just wonder whether the truth is being withheld from us. I think it is a fair and legitimate question.” Rayner responded by accusing him of leaning into “fake news online” and prioritising divisive rhetoric over community cohesion.
On Wednesday, Farage said: “I was right all along. This man was known to the authorities, and the truth was withheld. As the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation confirmed, the public should have been told the truth without damaging the trial. This is an appalling cover-up, and I deserve apologies.”
The controversy surrounding Rudakubana’s case has fuelled wider debates about transparency. The decision not to disclose his links to terrorism at the time of the attacks has been blamed for sparking nationwide riots that resulted in more than 1,200 arrests.
Rayner is one of several MPs accused of discrediting Farage over his remarks. Labour MP Kim Johnson described him as “the voice of the EDL in Parliament”, while safeguarding minister Jess Phillips accused him of exploiting the tragedy for political gain.
Criticism extended beyond Westminster, with figures such as Tobias Ellwood, Tom Tugendhat, and former MP Anna Soubry condemning Farage for “stirring up racial hatred”. Campaign groups like Stand Up to Racism also weighed in, with Carol Vorderman calling him an “apologist” for street violence in a widely shared post.
Many have accused the Government of using contempt laws to obscure the terror links in the case. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp has called for an inquiry into “what the Government knew and when” and “why it wasn’t disclosed”. On BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Philp cited Jonathan Hall KC, the UK’s Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, who remarked in October that “there’s a fair amount you can put into the public domain” without prejudicing a trial. Hall also warned that withholding information risks allowing “other voices, particularly in social media, [to] try and fill it”.
Nick Timothy, former joint chief of staff to Theresa May and now Conservative MP for West Suffolk, accused the Government of a “cynical masterclass in obfuscation”. Timothy questioned whether ministers avoided using the term “terror” for fear the public might draw conclusions about Rudakubana’s ideology. He criticised Rayner’s dismissal of the links as “fake news”, arguing it had only deepened public mistrust.
The Southport tragedy has become a focal point in broader debates about the limits of free expression, the role of political discourse, and the balance between transparency and public safety in the aftermath of terror-related incidents.
