Boris Johnson’s anti-corruption tsar has piled renewed pressure on Cressida Dick after describing the findings of an inquiry that called the Metropolitan police institutionally corrupt as “horrifying”. The prime minister’s anti-corruption champion, John Penrose MP, said it was vital that new measures be considered in the wake of last week’s bombshell report into the unsolved murder of Daniel Morgan to prevent police closing ranks in the future. Last week, an independent inquiry set up to review the notorious death of the private detective in 1987 accused Scotland Yard of decades of cover-up, corruption and incompetence. It concluded that the Met had been more interested in protecting its reputation than solving the murder. The intervention of Penrose, who presides over the UK’s national anti-corruption strategy, is noteworthy because one of his primary focuses is the “insider threat” within police – corruption among officers. Although the force has since apologised for its failings, Morgan’s son yesterday rejected the gesture, adding that the commissioner should consider her position. “I don’t accept their apologies. We’ve heard enough apologies,” said Morgan, who was four when his father was murdered. He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “It’s time for action now and I’m not sure whether they are, with what they’ve said, the right institution and the right organisation to get to the bottom of all these allegations.” The inquiry into Morgan’s murder censured the Met commissioner, concluding that Dick – Britain’s most senior police officer – had personally placed “hurdles” in the way of attempts to uncover the truth. Dick says she has “no intention of resigning”. The Met has yet to fully respond to the myriad corruption allegations surrounding the murder of the 37-year-old, who was found in the car park of a south London pub with an axe embedded in his head. Last night, a police source said no date for a response had been set, only that it was “likely to be in the coming weeks”. After digesting the 1,256 pages of the inquiry’s findings, Penrose told the Observer: “This is a pretty horrifying report. I and other anti-corruption campaigners will be looking at whether we can contribute with suggestions on how to stop respected and important institutions like the police from closing ranks if mistakes are made, so victims know they will always get justice.” Prof Robert Barrington, from the centre for the study of corruption at the University of Sussex, said that since the report’s publication on Tuesday, the Met’s response had been troubling. Another independent review, this time looking at corruption throughout the Met and not just the Morgan case, was required, said Barrington. He added: “I can’t think of another report in the last 100 years in Britain which has been so damning about corruption in a public institution. I’m not seeing from the Met an absolute acceptance of the problem.” Senior figures in Labour share similar concerns and hope Dick will face further investigation. The support of Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, for the commissioner has perturbed some within the party. “There’s lots of unhappiness about it,” said one senior MP. A member of Keir Starmer’s frontbench team said: “[The leader’s office] think Labour calling for resignations just rallies the Tories.” Meanwhile, unease is growing over why details of a separate wide-ranging investigation into corruption in the Metropolitan police have not been published as promised – almost a year after it was concluded. The investigation began in 2018 following allegations of racism, interference in investigations and failing to look at allegations of wrongdoing by officers within the Met’s own anti-corruption unit. Led by the Independent Office for Police Conduct, Operation Embley concluded in July 2020 and found no officers had any case to answer. Last October, it promised to publicly share a “summary” of its investigation and “learning recommendations”. Nothing has yet been published, but an IOPC source said the issue could be explained by the amount of “admin” required in notifying the number of officers involved in the investigation, and that it was hoped the details would be published at the end of July or August. The delay will raise fresh questions over the watchdog’s ability to maintain trust in the police. A statement by home secretary Priti Patel on the Morgan report criticised the IOPC, stating “questions remain about its ability to hold the police to account”. Other questions over a willingness to tackle corruption have also emerged after the UK government withdrew from a major study on corruption released a day before the Morgan report. The Global Corruption Barometer measures the proportion of a country’s citizens who believe their government and public institutions are corrupt. Sources say the Home Office failed to stump up funding to be involved in the study, which has run since 2003, and – in its most recent report last week – gauged the views of 40,000 Europeans on corruption. Figures behind the study said they were frustrated at the Home Office’s decision as it followed a string of corruption allegations involving the Tory government, including claims of cronyism over the awarding of Covid contracts, “cash for access” and the secret lobbying by former PM David Cameron over Greensill Capital. Steve Goodrich of Transparency International, which coordinates the study, said there was a lack of data measuring whether UK citizens felt that political and public institutions in the UK were corrupt. “We’re really frustrated because it would be very useful to have that evidence,” he said. In her statement on the Daniel Morgan inquiry, Patel addressed broader corruption issues by citing the Group of States Against Corruption, which she said had recently published a report “demonstrating good progress in UK law enforcement to prevent corruption”.