News, views and top stories in your inbox. Don't miss our must-read newsletter Sign up Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

British cosmetics giant Lush has sparked outrage with a new campaign accusing police officers of being "paid to lie" and "spying" on innocent people.

Critics have accused the Poole-based firm of being "anti-police" and smearing officers - and customers and supporters of police have called for a boycott of the chain.

The campaign is meant to call attention to Lush's claims of "intrusive, abusive, political policing" - including women being tricked into sexual relationships for the sake of investigations - and for major changes to a public inquiry into undercover policing.

But it appears to have backfired into a PR disaster as it has angered customers and current and former police officers, who have complained that it is a "disgrace" that wrongly and unfairly paints all cops as corrupt.

Lush has defended the campaign - which has been reported to the Advertising Standards Authority - and denied claims that it is "anti-police".

(Image: LushLtd/Twitter)

The campaign includes window displays featuring the slogan "Paid to lie", along with police tape and a split image of a man wearing a police hat and a nose piercing.

It uses the hashtag "spycops" on social media and is due to run through most of June after its launch on Thursday.

The campaign takes aim at undercover policing and in particular the activities of secretive Special Demonstration Squad of the Met Police, which infiltrated protest groups from the 1960s to the 1990s.

The chain is supporting women who it says were tricked into sexual relationships with undercover officers, drawing attention to "human rights abuses" against them, and pressuring the government to make the inquiry more transparent.

A police investigation - Operation Herne - was set up in October 2011 to look into allegations made against the SDS, including using dead children’s identities.

(Image: Bristol Post/SWNS.com)

Police were forced to apologise and pay out £425,000 to a woman who had a child with Special Branch detective Bob Lambert, who was working undercover and spying on a protest group of which she was a member.

The Undercover Policing Inquiry into undercover policing in Britain is now taking place, but is still in its early stages despite opening three years ago.

Lush declined an interview request to discuss the public outcry, and instead sent a Mirror Online journalist a link to a press release on its website.

In it, Mark Constantine OBE, Lush's co-founder and managing director, said: "Confidence in the police will never be restored until this public inquiry does its job”.

An article on Lush's website says it has partnered with activists from two groups - Police Spies Out of Lives (PSOOL) and Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance (COPS) - who have lost confidence in the inquiry over claims of secrecy and derailment.

(Image: elliotdarby/Twitter)

The article told how a female activist was in an intimate, five-year relationship with a man who suddenly disappeared, and she later learned he was an undercover cop.

The article says the officer had infiltrated an activist group called the Colin Roach Centre, in Hackney, north London, which had exposed corruption and systemic racism within the Met Police, as he pretended to be a fellow activist.

It adds that activists - mostly women - who were friends with or dated undercover officers, while unaware of their true identities, felt betrayed and have been left traumatised by the "spy cops", and are demanding answers.

Lush has been responding to the campaign's critics on Twitter, writing: "To clear this up, this isn't an anti-police campaign, it's to highlight the abuse that people face when their lives have been infiltrated by undercover police."

But it appears the message may have been lost in head-turning window displays and social media images, as many feel the campaign is unfair to police.

West Midlands Police Crime Commissioner David Jamieson slammed the campaign, calling it "crass" and saying it was written by an "inexperienced" PR consultant.

He said: "This is a crass and insensitive campaign. Police officers put their lives on the line day in day out.

"Lush have needlessly waded into a highly complex area."

(Image: PA)

He added: "This firm relies on the police to do their job tackling shoplifting and other crimes against businesses.

"This is a puerile and immature campaign, clearly written by an inexperienced PR consultant.

"I will certainly be considering where I buy Mrs Jamieson’s bath bombs from in future. Others may do the same."

Che Donald, vice-chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, is among those who have blasted the campaign and urged Britons to boycott Lush.

He tweeted: "This is very poorly thought out campaign @LushLtd & damaging to the overwhelmingly large majority of police who have nothing to do with this undercover enquiry.

"I will now clear my house of any of your products and my family and friends will never use them again. #FlushLush".

Lynne Owens, director general of the National Crime Agency, added: "Undercover policing is a highly specialised & regulated tactic undertaken by brave officers to protect the public from the most serious offenders.

"I’d encourage @LushLtd to visit @NCA_UK to receive a contemporary briefing."

Chief Inspector Mike Evans, local policing commander for Chester and surrounding villages, tweeted on Friday: "Woke up this morning and sighed seeing the @LushLtd marketing campaign.

"Then I opened an email from my night Sgt detailing how one of our cops jumped into a canal at 4am this morning to save a young girl intent on taking her own life... 99% of our cops are absolute heroes."

Former police officer and Crimewatch presenter Rav Wilding backed the boycott calls.

(Image: PA)

He wrote: "Good morning @LushLtd.

"Your page claims you 'make mums proud' yet you have a current campaign like this?

"That simply means I won’t step foot in your shops in future. Police work their backsides off for us all. I know that and thank them all."

Retired police officer Peter Kirkham called on customers to bin any Lush products they have at home, using the hashtag "FlushLush".

He wrote to his 12,000 Twitter followers: "Dear @LushLtd Your anti police advertising campaign is an utter disgrace.

"It stereotypes ALL police officers as corrupt & includes some fundamental misrepresentations of the facts.

"I trust that you will never again seek police assistance if you are the victims of crime."

He added: "If you support the police, especially at this time when they're under attack from all sides & struggling to maintain any police service at all, you may wish to boycott @LushLtd over their appalling campaign.

"Check your cupboards too, and #FlushLush if you find any of their stuff!"

(Image: Getty Images Europe)

Full statement from Lush defending campaign This is not an anti-state/anti-police campaign. We are aware that the police forces of the UK are doing an increasingly difficult and dangerous job whilst having their funding slashed. We fully support them in having proper police numbers, correctly funded to fight crime, violence and to be there to serve the public at our times of need. This campaign is not about the real police work done by those front line officers who support the public every day - it is about a controversial branch of political undercover policing that ran for many years before being exposed. Our campaign is to highlight this small and secretive subset of undercover policing that undermines and threatens the very idea of democracy. There is an age old understanding that our government and public institutions are there to protect and preserve the rights and safety of the public. In the case of these secretive undercover units, their work went well beyond the boundaries of acceptable police tactics and is now the subject of an ongoing public inquiry, which was instigated by Theresa May during her time as Home Secretary when the scale and scope of the breaches of protocols started to become clear. This public inquiry needs help from the public to keep it on track and ensure that this one opportunity for full honesty and disclosure is not lost or squandered. All citizens should be concerned when human rights are abandoned by those in power. The police themselves have admitted in their public apology to seven of the females deceived into long-term relationships with police spies, that these actions were "a violation of the women’s human rights, an abuse of police power and caused significant trauma”. In a recent court case the police admitted the actions amounted to "inhumane and degrading treatment" breaching Article 3 of the European Declaration of Human Rights. Those victims are now asking that the public inquiry demands that the undercover units release a full list of the undercover names used by their operatives, release a list of which campaign groups were targeted, and also that they release the information and data entries they hold on individuals whose lives and homes were infiltrated during these operations. Without this full disclosure there is no way of knowing the full extent of what happened during the dark years of this renegade secret policing operation - and that full disclosure might not happen unless the public demand it.

Christine Fulton, whose police officer husband Lewis was stabbed to death in Glasgow in June 1994, told how she was "appalled" after learning of the campaign.

She wrote on Twitter: "As the widow of a police officer murdered on duty I am appalled at the campaign by@LushLtd the police service should be supported and respected.

"Who do Lush call when they have a shoplifter, their staff are abused or their stores broken into? Hang your heads in shame."

In response to Lush's claims that the campaign wasn't anti-police, one Twitter user wrote: "No @LushLtd It *is* an anti-police campaign.

"The reaction of thousands of people tells us that. Being generous, it may have been an inadvertently anti-police campaign.

"But if I inadvertently step on someone’s toes, it still hurts. Some sort of rethink may be in order?"

The Advertising Standards Authority said on Twitter: "We've received complaints about the @LushLtd police campaign and are currently assessing the complaints. Lush are not under investigation at this stage."

(Image: Rex Features)

Earlier, the agency had responded to one critic on Twitter: "We've received complaints around this so we'll be investigating - no view until after we've had a chance to investigate properly though."

Lush explained on its website how it has partnered with the PSOOL and COPS groups "to get their message spread further" through the campaign.

The groups have started an online petition asking new Home Secretary Sajid Javid to make major changes to the inquiry, set up in 2015 by then Home Secretary Theresa May, to improve transparency.

They wrote: "The public inquiry is in danger of collapsing due to secrecy and derailment.

"We urge you to listen to the victims and instruct a panel of experts to assist the Chair, extend the inquiry to Scotland, disclose the cover names of the officers, the names of the groups they spied on and release the personal files of victims."

Lush stores are stocked with postcards that customers can sign and send to the Home Secretary to back the campaigners.

Releasing the information will allow more people to come forward with evidence at the inquiry, which only covers England and Wales, the campaigners argue.

The article on Lush's website states: "Without the names being released, the campaigners say it will be impossible for people to come forward to give any evidence about the activities of those individuals."

Rebecca Lush, charitable giving coordinator at Lush, said in a statement: "When Theresa May launched this public inquiry we all hoped that the truth about this scandal would finally be exposed and that the disgraceful police tactics would be examined.

"Instead, the public inquiry Chair is making the inquiry more secretive and is granting the police anonymity in secret hearings. It is time the Home Secretary listened to the victims and appointed a diverse panel to hear the full evidence."

A spokesman for The Undercover Policing Inquiry said: (The inquiry) was set up due to serious and widespread concerns about the behaviour and the use of undercover police officers.

"Its task is to discover the truth about undercover policing across England and Wales and to assess the adequacy of the legal and policy framework under which it is and has been conducted.

"The Inquiry is wholly independent of the police and has the authority to investigate any aspect of undercover policing, from 1968 to the present day.

"The work of the Inquiry is uniquely sensitive. Never before has undercover policing been subject to the rigour of independent public examination. The conduct of undercover deployments and associated interference with the private lives of members of the public are both central to the Inquiry’s investigations.

"The Inquiry’s work will be rigorous and objective. Where possible the Inquiry will take evidence in public, although in some circumstances matters will not be able to be heard in public, for example where to do so would give rise to a risk of harm to an individual.

"The preliminary stages of the Inquiry will soon be complete and the preparation for the hearing of evidence about undercover deployments are now commencing.

"These preparations will involve the Inquiry gathering evidence both from undercover police officers, and from members of the public affected by the deployments.

"The hearings are expected to begin in June 2019, and to continue for about 2 years.

"The strategic review sets out the dates on which it is intended that the evidence gathered will be considered and heard."

In a statement Lush defended the campaign. They said: "This is not an anti-state/anti-police campaign. We are aware that the police forces of the UK are doing an increasingly difficult and dangerous job whilst having their funding slashed.

"This campaign is not about the real police work done by those front line officers who support the public every day - it is about a controversial branch of political undercover policing that ran for many years before being exposed.

"Our campaign is to highlight this small and secretive subset of undercover policing that undermines and threatens the very idea of democracy.

"There is an age old understanding that our government and public institutions are there to protect and preserve the rights and safety of the public."