ASA rules that 'Go home or face arrest' Home Office adverts "unlikely to incite or exacerbate racial hatred "

"106 arrests last week in your area*"

The asterisk at the end of this statement related to a footnote in small print at the bottom left-hand side of the advert which clarified that the figures referred to, "30 June - 6 July 2013 covering Barking and Dagenham, Redbridge, Barnet, Brent, Ealing and Hounslow."

Beside the footnote ran slightly larger text: "We can help you return home voluntarily without fear of arrest or detention".

Large text above this, on the right-hand side of the poster said:

"Go home or face arrest".

"Text home to XXXXX for free advice, and help with travel documents".

The advert was subject to 224 complaints, "including from groups which represented migrants in the UK, legal academics and the Labour peer Lord Lipsey."

These complaints were refined into five issues, with ASA upholding complaints that the use of "in your area" was inaccurate, as the adverts were shown all over London, and that the qualification in small print at the bottom of the poster was illegible to a passer-by reading the the side of a van.

However, ASA failed to uphold the other three issues, relating to complaints that the poster, "was offensive and distressing, because it was reminiscent of slogans used by racist groups to attack immigrants in the past"; that it "could incite or exacerbate racial hatred and tensions in multicultural communities"; and that it "implied that arrest was the automatic consequence of remaining in the UK without permission."

The Home Office's response to the first two issues was that the use of the text, "In the UK illegally?" made it clear that the adverts, "did not address those who had submitted applications for asylum, those with leave to remain in the UK or naturalised British citizens."

It defended the third point on the basis that the poster offered voluntary departure as an alternative to arrest, with the ruling agreeing that the poster "was not misleading in that regard".

On the other two issues where complaints were not upheld, ASA accepted the Home Office's justifications, ruling that the advert, "was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence or distress" and "did not contain anything which was likely to condone or encourage violence or anti-social behaviour".

Labour Peer Lord David Lipsey, mentioned in the ruling among those who made complaints, has reacted angrily to the decision:

“This ruling convicts the government of misleading the public. Taxpayers’ hard-earned cash has been squandered on paying for government ads which tell porkies. Perhaps the Home Office should be rechristened the Ministry of Propaganda.”

“I do not ask for Theresa May to resign. I ask for her to apologise, fully and frankly and if possible sincerely, for the outrage that she and her department have perpetrated. And I guess she may also want to apologise to her Coalition colleagues, who were clearly kept in the dark about the adverts.“

A small, pyrrhic victory came in ASA's conclusion that the advert "must not appear again in its current form", with the Home Office being told to make sure it had "adequate substantiation for their advertising claims and that qualifications were presented clearly."

Critics of the adverts at the time they were introduced included business secretary Vince Cable and UKIP leader Nigel Farage, although an 11 August YouGov survey found that 55 per cent of Brits were in favour of the adverts in the weeks following their arrival.