An Open Letter to the Home Secretary On Powers of Entry Review

Today we have written to the Home Secretary and her Home Office Ministers to ask why the third progress report on the review of Powers of Entry has not yet been published.

The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 places a duty on secretaries of state to review the powers of entry they are responsible for and report back to Parliament within 2 years following Royal Assent. The also Home Office is required to provide updates on progress must be sent to Parliament every 6 months. The second progress report was published in July 2013 and the first progress report was published in January 2013.

The purpose of the review is to examine each individual power, and see if that power:

  • is still required or should be repealed
  • should have further safeguards added to it
  • can be consolidated with other similar powers, to reduce the overall number

Dear Home Secretary

I am writing to you to enquire why the third progress report on the review of Powers of Entry has not yet been published.

As you will be aware, under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 progress reports should be published by the Home Office on a six monthly basis, however it has been almost one year since the second progress report was published in July 2013. I would therefore be grateful if you could clarify why there has been a six month delay in publishing the third report and whether this means there will be a subsequent delay in secretaries of state reporting back to Parliament within the 2 year time period following Royal Assent.

Yours sincerely,

Emma Carr

Acting Director

CC: Lord Taylor of Holbeach, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Criminal Information and James Brokenshire MP, Minister for Security and Immigration and Norman Baker MP, Minister of State for Crime Prevention

Posted by on Jun 19, 2014 in Home | 3 Comments


  1. Mike Cunningham
    19th June 2014

    As with all Governments, dictatorships and any other group who think they know what is ‘good’ for us, it will be indeed a frosty Friday before they give away any power they have taken to use against the ‘suckers’ who were foolish enough to vote for them.

    Take one example, the RIPA stupidity. Those rules were passed because politicians stated they need them to fight terrorists and ‘extremists’. What do we end up with? A couple spied upon because the Council believed they had lied in order to get their child into a favoured school!
    Where I live, the Council has authorised RIPA investigations over two hundred times; with striking results! One prosecution for fly-tipping. Must be some sort of record for sheer waste of money!

    The one thing all politicians want is power; and, once achieved, it is the one thing they will never, ever, give away!

  2. kevin webb
    27th June 2014

    A slight error, I feel in Mike Cunningham’s otherwise good letter – the last line.
    Politicians sole aim is to be re-elected. The real miscreants are the senior civil servants and senior police officers et al. Those below are just ‘drones’; and do what they are told.
    I think it is up to right-minded people to target effectively. MPs do nothing.
    K Webb LLB JP 27/6/2014

  3. B Coyle
    27th June 2014

    It seems to me that in all these surveillance powers, they have been been given to the secret state by elected politicians who supposedly believe in Democracy. From the prevention of terrorism act 1981, which didn’t prevent anything, to Pace Act 1984, to RIPA, and numerous other Acts, the net effect has been to undermine the democratic rights of the British people. All these acts are fascist in their thinking, and also undermine the very democracy they are meant to protect. I believe all these acts should be abolished in order once again to live in a free society and not a surveillance society as the two are incompatible with each other. We should all work together to abolish them, and ensure we have no more Blunkett’s, whom Blair called a walking miracle, but whom I would call ‘a walking disaster’, or Howard’s, Brittan’s or Straw’s. We need men of strength and democratic ideals at the Home Office, not men like Straw!