Mahmood orders urgent security review after killing of Ann Widdecombe

Protective security means the arrangements used by the state to protect people whose public roles may expose them to danger. The review will examine protection for politicians, royal family members, elected representatives and other prominent figures. It matters because threats now include terrorism, extremism, state threats, harassment and intimidation.

The announced support can give eligible political figures access to a named police officer. It can also provide help with wider security measures. The immediate expansion covers former MPs, peers and party spokespeople. The broader group identified includes party leaders who are not MPs and former members of devolved parliaments.

The system is being reassessed because existing protection may not be adequate for those most at risk. Sir Stephen Lovegrove will examine how arrangements work and whether resources are used effectively and proportionately. The review will consider general arrangements, not individual cases.

Following Ann Widdecombe’s killing, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced two major changes. First, police support will immediately be extended to political figures who are not currently MPs. Second, the government will conduct an independent, root-and-branch review of state-provided protective security.

The immediate support includes former MPs, peers and party spokespeople. They will receive access to a named police officer and assistance with wider security measures. The wider review will consider protection for royal family members, ministers, MPs, locally elected representatives and other prominent people in British politics. It will be led by Sir Stephen Lovegrove.

The changes respond to a broader threat picture, including terrorism, extremism, state threats, harassment and intimidation. Lovegrove will assess whether protection is adequate, funding is effective and proportionate, and decisions respond consistently to risk. The review will not assess individual cases.

The article identifies five groups of political figures who could receive expanded or available police support: former MPs, party leaders who are not MPs, peers, former members of devolved parliaments and party spokespeople. Mahmood specifically announced immediate support for former MPs, peers and party spokespeople.

The support is intended to provide access to a named police officer and help with wider security measures. This extends protection beyond people currently serving in Parliament. It reflects concern that threats can affect former politicians, political leaders and prominent representatives as well as sitting MPs.

Harassment and intimidation are widespread among candidates. The Electoral Commission found that 55% of candidates experienced some form during the May local elections. The same proportion reported it at the 2024 general election. These figures strengthen the case for reviewing protection and making responses more consistent with threat and risk.

Sir Stephen Lovegrove, a former UK national security adviser, is conducting the independent review. Its purpose is to test whether current arrangements provide adequate protection for people facing the greatest risks. The review covers prominent public figures, including politicians and members of the royal family.

Lovegrove will examine how existing security is provided. He will assess whether funding and other measures are being used effectively and proportionately. He will also consider how decisions are made, and whether decision-making is consistent when officials respond to different levels of threat and risk.

The review comes as the government describes a more dangerous environment involving terrorism, extremism, state threats, harassment and intimidation. It will examine the protective system as a whole rather than individual cases. Its findings could shape how the state allocates resources and decides who receives protection in future.

Ann Widdecombe was found dead at her Devon home on 9 July after sustaining serious injuries. Joshua Kerry has been charged with her murder. The case placed renewed attention on the protection available to prominent political figures, including people who no longer serve as MPs.

Kerry is also accused of online reconnaissance of prominent people and institutions. Prosecutors allege he travelled to Reform UK leader Nigel Farage’s south London home on 19 April 2025 and tried to break in. Mahmood said that, regardless of the investigation’s outcome, it was clear that protection for people who serve was insufficient.

The government therefore expanded police support immediately and ordered a wider review. The stated purpose is to confront threats from terrorism, extremism and state actors, alongside harassment and intimidation. The review will examine general arrangements, funding and decisions, rather than judging either individual case.

The new review is broad and system-wide. Sir Stephen Lovegrove will assess protective security provided by the state to people in public life, including royal family members, ministers, MPs, elected representatives and other prominent political figures. It will examine how protection, funding and decisions operate across the system.

By contrast, Robert Buckland’s separate review concerns the murder of Sir David Amess MP. Its stated focus is the security of MPs in their constituencies. That makes it narrower in subject, concentrating on constituency work rather than the full range of public figures and protective arrangements.

The two reviews therefore address different but related concerns. Lovegrove’s review asks whether the wider system is adequate, effective, proportionate and consistent. Buckland’s review examines constituency security for MPs. The article does not state whether the reviews will share evidence, publish findings or produce the same recommendations.

Special protection helps people perform public roles despite risks such as terrorism, extremism, state threats, harassment and intimidation. The article links these threats to democracy and the country’s way of life. Protecting politicians and other prominent figures therefore protects both individuals and the institutions they represent.

The government’s approach combines practical security with proportionality. Police support can include a named officer and wider security measures. Lovegrove will examine whether protection is adequate, whether resources are used effectively, and whether decisions respond consistently to threat and risk. Those checks help match protection to genuine danger rather than status alone.

An open democracy still requires public figures to remain accessible and accountable. Security should reduce danger without unnecessarily separating representatives from communities or discouraging political participation. The article’s evidence of harassment affecting 55% of candidates shows why the balance matters. The review is intended to strengthen defences while keeping responses proportionate and consistent.