Yeah, the title here should be changed. The Home Secretary is actually arguing that end-to-end encryption should not be permitted. From the article:

"Referring to Whatsapp's system of end-to-end encryption, she said: 'It is completely unacceptable. There should be no place for terrorists to hide.'"

The article's headline is "WhatsApp accused of giving terrorists 'a secret place to hide' as it refuses to hand over London attacker's messages." That's misleading/inaccurate to begin with. But the way it's been shortened here just makes it completely inaccurate.

Arguing that someone should give you something is much easier to communicate than arguing that someone should redo its tech to be able to give you something.

Policywise it is beneficial to conceal your own knowledge about their technical barrier and frame it in the easiest way possible to produce the highest public pressure.

Which is probably what this telegraph journalist did fall for.