Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has unveiled plans to introduce a new criminal offence targeting the planning of mass attacks that are not ideologically motivated, in what she described as a necessary step to close a “gap in the law” and strengthen pre-emptive protections against violence. The proposed legislation, announced in July, is intended to align the response to non-terrorist threats with existing counter-terror laws, granting police the authority to act earlier and more decisively against individuals preparing attacks.

• Yvette Cooper
• Counter-terror

Currently, British law allows for life imprisonment in cases where individuals plan attacks with a terrorist purpose. However, there is no equivalent standard for non-terrorist motivations, even when the actions involve similar levels of planning and potential harm. Cooper noted that the law had not kept pace with the evolving nature of threats. “There are individuals who may be planning serious acts of violence but who do not fall under current terrorism legislation because they lack ideological or political intent,” she said.

• British law
• Terrorism legislation

Under the new proposal, police would be empowered to intervene based on preparatory acts such as researching weapons, scouting potential locations, or developing logistics for an attack—regardless of whether the suspect is linked to an extremist movement or cause. The aim is to disrupt plots at an earlier stage, replicating provisions that already exist under counter-terrorism laws but broadening their application to cover ideologically neutral threats.

• Counter-terrorism

The reform follows growing concern about self-radicalised individuals, particularly adolescents, who may be influenced by violent material online but act outside traditional extremist frameworks. One case cited frequently in discussions around the new law is the 2024 Southport attack, in which Axel Rudakubana killed three teenage girls. Rudakubana had previously been the subject of a referral to Prevent, the government’s counter-extremism programme, but the referral was not pursued as he did not meet the criteria for intervention based on terrorist ideology.

• Axel Rudakubana
• Prevent

A government review led by Lord Anderson, serving as Interim Independent Commissioner for Prevent, concluded that there was “profound confusion” within agencies over how to manage individuals who pose a threat but do not fit established categories of ideological extremism. In his Lessons for Prevent report, Anderson wrote, “The pathways into violence are increasingly fragmented. The law and our intervention mechanisms must reflect this complexity.”

• Lord Anderson
• Prevent

Cooper’s proposed legislation is now being framed as one of the most significant changes to Britain’s security framework since the introduction of the Investigatory Powers Act in 2015. While the government has stressed the need for robust safeguards to protect civil liberties, it maintains that early intervention in cases of potential mass violence must not be hindered by technicalities over ideology.

• Britain’s security
• Investigatory Powers Act
• Civil liberties

“We cannot wait until someone crosses the arbitrary line of ideological motivation before we can take action,” Cooper stated, emphasizing that the goal is to stop violence before it occurs, not merely to respond in its aftermath.

The Home Office is expected to bring the new bill before Parliament later this year.

• Home Office
• Parliament