Theresa May accused of 'cover up' over censored report Chris Bryant, the shadow immigration minister, said: "This cover-up and the failure at our borders provide yet more dents in this government's much-tarnished credibility. If Theresa May thinks Mr Vine's report would imperil national security or provide ammunition for illegal migrants, she should share the full report with the Home Affairs Select Committee and ourselves and explain why the full report cannot be published without masses of redactions. This is a cover up to hide her own failings. He added: "What this last month has shown is a government that is resorting to high-profile "van man" style gimmicks on immigration to mask the fact that they are not getting the basics right. Theresa May should publish the full report as a matter of urgency. Otherwise the British public will doubtless conclude that the Government has something to hide. Keith Vaz, chairman of the Commons" Home Affairs Select Committee, said: "I am concerned that the Home Secretary has decided to redact part of the findings related to the "Lille Loophole," despite John Vine finding that some were still able to reach Britain using this method. The committee has been assured in the past that the loophole would be closed. The withholding of information prevents us from properly holding the Border Force to account. It is the first time the Home Office has used powers to redact one of the chief inspector's regular reports, although some passages were edited from a special report commissioned by Mrs May last year. The powers allow the Home Secretary to remove sections from the inspector's reports if she believes their publication would be "undesirable for reasons of national security" or to protect an individual. Fifteen redactions were made from today's report, including several tables of figures. One of Mr Vine's seven recommendations for action by the Home Office was deleted completely. Nigel Farage, the UKIP leader, said the redactions were "extremely concerning," adding: "We have to ask what on earth are they hiding?" Alp Mehmet, vice-chairman of MigrationWatch UK, said: "Security concerns may have led to some of the redactions in the report but it is difficult to see this as the reason for all of them. My concern is that we are drifting back to discredited old ways of covering up embarrassing information. It has been done in a very ham-fisted way. The chief inspector's report examined the working of British border controls in France and Belgium which were expanded in the early 2000s to combat problems from the Sangatte refugee camp near Calais. The controls allow British officials to check passports and carry out security checks before passengers reach British soil, preventing them from lodging asylum claims in this country. Mr Vine's inquiry found staff shortages in France are causing significant problems. "It was clear ... that staff and managers felt that resources in Calais were stretched at times," says the report. The Calais Chamber of Commerce told us that the traffic problems at the port of Calais were often caused by Border Force not deploying sufficient staff. It adds that the French government made a formal complaint to the British Ambassador about "delays being caused by Border Force" following one incident in January last year when queues at Coquelles - the Eurotunnel terminal outside Calais - stretched nearly two and a half miles. The report also reveals border staff at Calais stopped fingerprinting illegal immigrants found hiding in the back of lorries more than three and a half years ago, even though the information could be crucial if the foreigners later reach Britain and make an asylum claim. Mr Vine said it was "surprising" that fingerprints were not being taken and urged the agency to launch a review. On the "Lille Loophole" - which involves passengers on certain Eurostar routes attempting to evade passport controls - the report appears to contain figures on the numbers of illegal immigrants entering Britain through this route. However, the table has been redacted. But the report does say: "With the recent increase of passengers attempting to enter the UK illegally, that St Pancras has increasingly been required to operate as an additional control point to prevent unlawful immigration." A Home Office spokesman said: "In accordance with the UK Borders Act 2007 the Home Secretary, in consultation with the independent chief inspector, is required to redact any material which, if published, would be prejudicial to the interests of national security. These take the form of visible redactions in the report laid before Parliament. He added: "Border Force has already addressed many of the issues raised in this inspection and will look at all the recommendations in detail as part of our continuing drive to improve performance."