Commons Chamber

Monday 3rd November 2025

(began 7 hours, 57 minutes ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
14:48
14:48
14:48
14:49
14:49
14:50
14:50
14:51
14:51
14:52
14:52
14:53
14:54
14:54
14:55
14:56
14:56
14:57
14:58
14:58
14:59
15:00
15:00
15:00
15:01
None Portrait Q7. What steps he is taking to reduce the time taken to procure drones for the armed forces. (906127)
-

Jonathan.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Question number seven. Mr. Speaker. Minister. With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to answer
15:01
15:02
15:02
15:03
15:03
15:04
15:04
15:05
15:05
15:06
15:06
15:06
15:07
15:08
15:08
15:08
15:09
15:10
15:10
15:11
15:11
15:12
15:12
15:12
15:13
15:13
15:14
15:14
15:14
15:14
15:15
15:15
15:16
15:16
15:17
15:18
15:18
15:19
15:20
15:20
15:22
15:22
15:22
15:23
15:23
15:23
15:25
15:25
15:25
15:26
15:26
15:27
15:28
15:28
15:28
15:29
15:30
15:30
15:30
15:31
15:31
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:33
15:33
15:33
15:34
15:34
15:35
15:35
15:35
15:35
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:37
15:38
15:38
15:38
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:40
15:40
15:40
15:41
15:41
15:41
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:43
15:43
15:44
15:45
Hilary Benn Portrait Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the verdict and the trial of soldier F.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Secretary of State. I thank. The honourable member for his question. The trial of soldier F concluded on the 23rd of October with a not guilty verdict. The Ministry of Defence rightly provided him with legal and pastoral support. I am the pastoral support. I am the Secretary of State for defence have, of course, noted the judgement, but I do not think it appropriate to be I do not think it appropriate to be drawn on the particulars of these independent legal proceedings.

The House will recognise that it was also a difficult day for the also a difficult day for the families of the 13 people shot dead on Bloody Sunday, in circumstances on Bloody Sunday, in circumstances that the former Prime Minister, Lord Cameron described as, and, I quote, unjustified and unjustifiable. I'm sure the sympathies of the whole House sympathies of the whole House remain with them. We all understand the continuing pain felt by the continuing pain felt by families and communities in Northern Ireland and across the United Kingdom as a result of the United Kingdom as a result of the Troubles, and the government remains committed to establishing a legacy process which can provide legacy process which can provide answers for families who are still seeking to find out what happened to their loved ones.

We will also always remember the dangers faced by our brave soldiers, police and others who served during the time of Operation Banner and tried to keep people safe while always remembering, especially at this time of year, the ultimate sacrifice made by those who gave their lives in doing so. Their service will never be forgotten, and we owe them a profound debt of gratitude. It is, however, Mr. Speaker, important to note that the soldier f case, of course, involved no role for either the government or the last one.

These were independent proceedings which were ongoing before the Legacy Act 2023, and they were not halted by that legislation. Mr. speaker, decisions by the prosecution service in Northern Ireland are always taken independently in light of the individual facts and circumstances, and we should all respect that independence. A prosecution can only ever be brought when the evidence presents, in the view of prosecutors, a reasonable prospect of a conviction, and where it is in the public interest to proceed. I also recognise that all those affected by the Troubles, including veterans, want a system that is fair, balanced and proportionate.

That is what the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill is seeking to put in place with a new Legacy Commission and strong protections for veterans, which were not included in the last government's Legacy Act, which offered a false and undeliverable promise on immunity to our Northern Ireland veterans. These measures will provide what the three UK Veterans commissioners have called for, not immunity from the law, but fairness under it. Yeah.
15:48
Alex Burghart Portrait Alex Burghart MP (Brentwood and Ongar, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you for granting this Urgent Question, Mr. Speaker. I, too, want to begin with a thought for the families left bereft on by the events of that day in 1972. It was a Conservative Prime Minister who 15 years ago said to this House, what happened on Bloody Sunday was both unjustified and wrong. On behalf of our country, I am deeply sorry. He did so, of course, after the publication of the Saville Inquiry, which took 12 years and cost in today's money, about £325 million.

What is pertinent now is that even after such an extensive inquiry, there has been no conviction. Indeed, Judge Patrick Lynch told Belfast Crown Court that the evidence fell well short of the standard required. He said the 53 year old statement cannot be cross-examined, nor can I assess the demeanour of a sheet of A4 paper. This goes to the heart of what my party argued when passing our legacy act. As time goes by, it becomes vanishingly difficult to obtain convictions. The 1998 agreement was 27 years ago.

The ceasefires 31 years ago. And this, of course, has implications for the government's Troubles Bill, which will reopen many such cases, cases where there are no prospect of resolution but only of ongoing legal process, with almost no possibility of bringing terrorists to court, but which ultimately leave open the likelihood of ever more vexatious complaints against our veterans. Claims like that thrown out by the High Court in Belfast last month, in which the judge described the challenge as utterly divorced from reality, but not before a former special forces soldier had to endure four years of investigation.

Last week, it was reported that a similar case from 53 years ago may soon go on trial. No wonder that on Friday, SAS veterans had a letter in the Financial Times in which they said that legacy has become an industry that keeps wounds open while rewriting history. So we ask the Secretary of State to think again.
15:50
Hilary Benn Portrait Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)
-
-
Yes. honourable member for that. And the fact that he referred to the Saville Inquiry because it was, of course, that long running inquiry that finally brought in the eyes of the families of the 13 people shot dead. Some truth and some justice, in which led the former Prime Minister to make his apology. He is absolutely right when he says that with the passage of time, I think the phrase he used was it is vanishingly difficult to obtain convictions.

And most of the families, not all, but most of the families that I have met who lost loved ones recognise that fact. But he also has to acknowledge that the Legacy Act, with its offer of immunity to additional with its offer of immunity in return for statements that the Legacy Commission regarded as truthful and credible, which could have given immunity to terrorists. And that is why the immunity that the last government sought to put in place was rejected by victims and survivors groups in Northern Ireland, was opposed by all of the political parties in Northern Ireland, and was found by the courts to be incompatible with our human rights obligations.

And therefore, as I've said to the House before, and I have said to him. It was no basis for trying to help those families to find the answers that they are looking for. That is why we need a different approach building. I grant him on the establishment of the Legacy Commission, because I took the decision that we would not abolish it, but reform it. That is what the bill that we will debate shortly seeks to do. And I look forward to being scrutinised by the House.

Thank you very.
15:52
15:53
15:54
Al Pinkerton Portrait Dr Al Pinkerton MP (Surrey Heath, Liberal Democrat)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

for moving forward, and I hope the House will recognise that too. Al Pinkerton Liberal Democrat spokesman. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and can

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and can I thank the Secretary of State for his responses so far? We welcome the resolution of this trial and the clarity that the law has afforded, and in doing so, also extend our deepest sympathies to the families who still seek justice and answers. The 2023 Legacy Act may have been driven by the instinct to protect veterans. However, it failed to comply with our international legal obligations and through its conditional immunity, created a false equivalence between those who valiantly served in the British armed forces and those involved in acts of terrorism.

That approach was both morally wrong and offensive to veterans and victims alike. The violence carried out by terrorist organisations during the Troubles caused deep suffering across Northern Ireland, and we believe that upholding the rule of law must apply to all, without exception. But that prosecution should never become persecution. This case focuses our attention back on the government's new deal, with a new attempt to deal with the legacy of the past. Is the Secretary of State absolutely confident that the bill will deliver strong enough protections for British veterans? What has he done to try and secure support from veterans organisations, and what has he done to ensure that victims and families can finally access the truth and justice that they deserve?
15:55
15:56
15:57
15:58
15:58
15:59
16:00
16:00
16:01
16:02
16:03
16:03
16:04
16:05
16:06
16:07
16:08
16:09
16:10
16:11
16:12
16:13
16:13
16:14
16:15
16:15
16:16
Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon MP (Strangford, Democratic Unionist Party)
-
-
So it would indeed be possible for them to refer the case into the Commission.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Secretary of State, I first of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Secretary of State, I first of all, the current interest as served in Ulster Defence Regiment and also in Ulster Defence Regiment and also for some 14.5 years, the ruling was expected as there was no additional evidence that twice held to be not evidence that twice held to be not fit for prosecution, and others have referred to. That seems to me hard to understand how you pursue something you do not have the criminal investigation and the evidence sorted in advance. It is clear that the state must address clear that the state must address the way forward and provide certainty for those service personnel who know they served honourably and impossible honourably and impossible conditions, yet they live with the sword of Damocles hanging over their head, waiting to have their their head, waiting to have their service used as a tool by Republicans to to make it seem they were fighting a dirty war, when were fighting a dirty war, when quite clearly they weren't.

So will the city state send the message today that the state will not sign off of the narrative that our troops, the RUC and Ulster Defence Regiment were ever anything other Regiment were ever anything other than honourable men and women putting their lives on the line for us, and that they will be protected
16:17
16:18
16:18
16:19
16:20
16:21
16:22
16:23
16:24
16:25
16:25
16:26
16:26
16:27
16:27
16:28
16:29
None Portrait Ministerial statement: Response to the Huntingdon train attack
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

demonstrates. Right. We will let the front
16:29
16:29
Shabana Mahmood Portrait Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With your permission, I would like to make a statement on the horrific events that took place on the East Coast Main Line on Saturday evening. I am sure I speak for everyone in this House when I say that my thoughts today are first and foremost with the victims, with their family and their friends and all those who experienced this terrifying attack. My deepest thanks go to the emergency services, the British Transport Police, Cambridgeshire Police, Cambridgeshire Fire and Rescue and the East of England Ambulance Service.

The speed of their response, as well as their skill and professionalism were exemplary here. I would also like to pay tribute to the breathtaking bravery of those on the train itself, including the heroic acts of the passengers and train crew who intercepted the attacker. I would like to draw particular attention to one member of the on board crew who ran towards danger, confronting the attacker for a sustained period of time, and stopped his advance through the train. He put himself in harm's way, suffered grievous injuries as a result, and remains in hospital today in a critical but stable condition.

On Saturday, he went to work to do his job. Today he is a hero and forever will be. Mr. speaker, there is now a live investigation into what happened on Saturday night and the events that led up to it. I am therefore limited in what I can say today without putting successful prosecution at risk, and I am sure that all here agree that there must be one priority right now, and that is bringing the person who committed this horrific crime to justice.

However, I will share what facts can at 7:42 p.m. on Saturday evening about an incident on a train travelling from Doncaster to London, with reports of several stabbings on board. The quick thinking of the driver saw the train diverted to Huntingdon station within eight minutes of the first 999 call, police had boarded the train and brought the attack to an end. Ten people were taken to hospital by the ambulance services, eight of whom had life threatening injuries. A further individual later self-presented at the hospital.

Three people have now been discharged, whilst eight remain in hospital. I know that everyone in this House wishes them the swiftest and fullest recoveries possible, and I would like to thank the staff at Cambridge University Hospital for their life saving care. I can confirm, as was reported over the weekend, that Operation Plato, the national police identifier for a terrorist attack, was declared. However, it was rescinded once the incident had been contained. The British Transport Police remained the lead force in this investigation.

They stated yesterday that while counter-terrorism policing were initially involved, they have found, and I quote, nothing to suggest, that this was a terrorist incident. At the scene. The police made two arrests. Since then, one man has been released who we now know was not involved as of this morning. The other one, Anthony Williams, has been charged in relation to the events in Huntingdon. He has been charged with ten counts of attempted murder, one count of possession of a knife and one of actual bodily harm.

He has also been charged with a further count of attempted murder and possession of a bladed article in relation to events on a Docklands Light Railway train in the early hours of Saturday morning at London's Pontoon Dock and Cambridge. Cambridgeshire police have in the last few hours reported additional earlier sightings and possible further offences, as is standard practice in these cases, they have now referred themselves to the Independent Office for Police Conduct. The iOPC, for independent scrutiny of their handling of these reports.

For now there is a there is little I can say about this man and his past, beyond confirming that he is a British national and was born in this country, and that he was not known to the security services, counter-terror policing or prevent. I know this House and the public will have many unanswered questions today about who this attacker was, and about the events that led up to the attack. Those questions will be answered, but it will take time. The police and prosecutors must be allowed to do their work.

Since Saturday's attack, the British Transport Police have increased their presence at key points in the transport network, though it should be noted that their operational assessment of the risk posed on our trains has not changed as this was an isolated attack. It was also, of course, a knife crime. This government is committed to halving knife crime within a decade and progress has been made. This year we have taken 60,000 knives off of our streets, banned zombie knives and ninja swords and seen a 5% fall in all knife crimes, including an 18% reduction in homicides by knife.

I know that ideas have already been suggested about how policing should change in response to this event. Once the facts are known, we must examine what more might have been done to stop this horrific attack from ever occurring, and whether there are measures that we must now take to better protect the public on our streets and on our trains. However, that must be done when all of the facts are available to us. Madam Deputy Speaker, the thoughts of the whole House are today with the victims of this horrific crime, their families and their friends, and all affected by what happened on Saturday night.

The sickening act of the man who committed this crime was the very worst of humanity. But the actions of those who responded, who ran towards danger to save the lives of people they did not know, was the very best of us. I know we all share in paying tribute to their extraordinary bravery today, and I commend this statement to the House today. Philp.
16:36
Chris Philp Portrait Rt Hon Chris Philp MP (Croydon South, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank the Home Secretary for advance sight of her statement. Our thoughts are with the victims of this appalling attack and their families. As the Home Secretary quite rightly said, I join her in paying tribute to the emergency services who responded so fast and to the brave interventions by members of the public and the train staff that prevented an even worse tragedy from occurring. They are truly heroes. This attack has horrified and shocked the whole nation.

People simply travelling by train were indiscriminately attacked. The horror the passengers experienced will likely stay with them forever. Anthony Williams has now been charged, as the Home Secretary said he had been involved in previous incidents in Peterborough and in the early hours of Saturday morning was also allegedly involved in an attack on the Docklands Light Railway in London. Will she confirm, as I have been told, that police in London knew Williams identity following that and if so, were Cambridgeshire police informed so they could track him down? In essence, I'm asking, were there any opportunities to have prevented this from occurring? The Home Secretary said that Williams was not previously known to the security services, counter-terrorism, policing or prevent.

Can she also tell the House if Williams was previously known to the police more widely, or to mental health services? Mr. speaker, this all comes just weeks after a murderous Islamist terror attack on a Manchester synagogue and just days after the horrendous murder of Wayne Broadhurst by an Afghan asylum seeker, both using knives. Although homicide has thankfully fallen by about 15% since 2010, and as the Home Secretary said, knife crime has fallen in recent years. Every homicide and every knife attack is one too many.

I saw together with the police minister, the grief this causes at the funeral of a 15 year old girl, Elianne Andam, murdered in Croydon just over two years ago. So speaking in general, not in relation to this incident. Does the Home Secretary agree that knife crime and knife homicide are still too high? And we must do yet more? Does she agree that more knife crime offenders should go to jail? This is important because when offenders are in jail, they of course can't attack the public.

Does she agree? We need to ensure more people who carry knives, especially where they use them to threaten others, are jailed. I know of course there are pressure on prison places, but by deporting more of the 10,000 foreign nationals in prison, we could create more space. Madam Deputy Speaker, we also need to take more knives off our streets, and that means we have to dramatically increase the use of stop and search. A study this year by Professor Lawrence Sherman, the Met's former chief scientific officer, found that raising stop and search levels in London to 2011 levels would lead to a one third reduction in knife homicide.

Some people complain that stop and search is used disproportionately in relation to some groups, but when measured in relation to the offending population, the disproportionality disappears, as set out by recent Policy Exchange study. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, we should triple the use of stop and search to get knives off our streets and introduce year round surge policing in the top 5% of high crime hotspots, which will, of course, include many train stations. We must also use technology more. There is work underway at the Home Office, which I know about to develop technology to scan for knives at a distance, which it is hoped can distinguish knives from keys or mobile phones.

And this, of course, could help police rapidly identify those carrying a knife in a public place. I wonder if the Home Secretary could provide an update on that development work, either straight away or, if you prefer, perhaps in writing later, because I really do think it could make a big difference. Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, retrospective and live facial recognition can also identify wanted criminals, including those involved in knife crime in Croydon town centre. The borough, which the police minister and I represent in Parliament in the last couple of years, around 200 wanted criminals, including two wanted rapists and others guilty of knife crime who would not otherwise have been caught, were arrested using live facial recognition and crime in Croydon town centre, including knife crime, has gone down as a result.

The images of innocent Passers-by Lee and automatically deleted addressing civil liberties concerns. So I do hope. I really do hope the Home Secretary agrees, and the police minister agrees that rolling out this technology nationally will have a dramatic impact on improving public safety, and it will certainly have my full support if they choose to do that. Madam Deputy Speaker, I know everyone in this House wants to see knife crime eradicated more today, I'm sure, than ever before, so I hope the House will also support the tough steps needed to eradicate knife crime, because we owe the victims of these appalling crimes actions as well as words.
16:42
Shabana Mahmood Portrait Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)
-
-
Century. can I thank the Shadow Home Secretary for his remarks and in particular, as he opened his response? I know that the bravery of all of those who faced this attack on Saturday is something that has unanimous support across this House, and I thank him for the spirit in which he reflected that. He will know in relation, as I said in my opening statement, in relation to the events in Peterborough, they are now the subject of an iOPC investigation.

It's important that I don't say anything that seeks to get ahead of that, but I'm sure all of those questions will be answered in the fullness of time. And it is standard practice where there has been contact with police in the run up to an event like this, that those matters are referred to the iOPC to investigate and consider. He'll also know that I can't say anything in relation to the suspect who's been charged and any prior history, or indeed any mental health issues, because that would also be facts that are material to any future court proceedings, and it would be inappropriate for me, or indeed anybody else in this House to comment or speculate on those matters today.

And I would just ask that the words of the speaker at the opening of this part of our session are remembered as we pose questions today. I agree with him that knife crime is far too high. This government is impatient to do everything it can to eliminate knife crime. It's why we've set ourselves an ambitious target. And we're pleased to have made some progress. Though I agree with him that there is still much, much more to be done, and I hope on knife crime in particular, instead of playing politics across this House where there is consensus, we are all able to work together in the spirit of trying to bring down the scourge of knife crime in in our country.

As I say, the numbers have gone in a positive direction and I hope he will welcome that and work with us as we seek to make more progress. He referred to sentencing in particular. I do have to say, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think it's disappointing when members opposite do not reckon with the scale of the crisis in our prison system. This government inherited a prison system on the brink of collapse. It has meant difficult decisions ever since we have entered office, in order to prevent this country from running out of prison places entirely.

He will know that this government has deported more foreign national offenders since our term of office than was the case in the previous record. Under the previous government. Despite deporting record numbers of foreign national offenders. The the scale of crisis in the prison system means that there are still more prisoners coming into the system than there have been places. And it is important, therefore, that the sentencing reforms are seen in that context. He will know, though, that it is the case that those who are in possession of a knife, and who have been using that in a threatening manner, do attract the majority of those people, do attract reasonably lengthy prison sentences.

When we know more about the circumstances of this particular case, we will know if there are other lessons for us to draw and other areas of policy for us to consider. He referenced stop and Search, and he, I think, lamented the issues around disproportionality. I hope I'm not, you know, putting too much of a spin on his remarks. I would just gently remind him it was a former Tory Home Secretary in the first 2010 to 15 Parliament that started speaking about disproportionate use of stop and search powers and changed the rules around stop and search to reflect the disproportionate use of that power.

Back then. That has been the record of the previous government, but I hope he will recognise that the police already have the power to use, stop and search indiscriminately, where the intelligence suggests that that is required. That is an operational decision for police chiefs and of course, the decision as to whether to stop and search someone where there are reasonable grounds and suspicion is an individual operational decision for individual police officers. This is a well-used power. It is a well understood power.

It is an important power that is in our arsenal for tackling criminal criminality. And this government fully supports its lawful use. Let me also say on facial recognition, it's this government that will very soon be consulting on a new legal framework to underpin the use of live facial recognition. He will know that when his party was in power, it was left to individual police forces and I believe it was South Wales and the met who first rolled live facial recognition out, face lots of legal challenges.

As a result thereof. The government did not then change their policy, but this government will consult on a legal framework so that all police forces across the country can use live facial recognition technology, confident that they will not find themselves defending those decisions in court in the future. And I've also supported the roll out of 1010 specific live facial recognition units across the country, and will look to do more as well in the coming months in relation to scans for knives.

Let me just say to him on tech more broadly, I think there is much more that we can do to use emerging, new and emerging technology in order to help us tackle this type of criminality. And I'm happy to write to him about our current plans, but I will be setting out more in terms of our broader position in the coming coming weeks. Madam Deputy Speaker, knife crime is a terrible, terrible crime. It claims far too many lives in our country.

It is important that we keep doing everything we can to bear down on on the damage that knife crime causes and provide pathways for those who get caught up in the carrying of knives. That is an important bit of policy that we will carry on working on. But in relation to the attack that we are talking about primarily today, I do urge the House that before we draw broader policy conclusions, we wait until more of the facts are known. Cadbury.
16:48
Ruth Cadbury Portrait Ruth Cadbury MP (Brentford and Isleworth, Labour)
-
-
Thank you. her remarks, and also the Secretary of State for transport, who's here today on her for her comments on the media this morning. And I share, as all members of this House do, their concern for the victims and their families and her recognition of the heroism of so many in this tragedy on Saturday, on behalf of my colleagues on the Transport Committee, I would like to pay particular tribute to all the staff of Avanti West Coast and Network Rail who responded so quickly, and in particular to the train driver who reacted so promptly to get the train to Huntingdon in order that the emergency services could meet it, and also to the on board staff member who is on, who is in hospital after protecting passengers.

Now, I know that people may be nervous of travelling by train now, and I thank the work, the government and the police services have done to ensure additional police presence at our rail stations. As I saw at Waterloo, as I came on my way in here earlier. Now, given that the Home Secretary said the British Transport Police have said that the their operational risk, their operational assessment of the risk posed on our trains has not changed as this was an isolated attack.

Will the Home Secretary assure me that any long term changes to security on our rail services will be considered very carefully? And once the full facts of this incident are known and not rushed into without considering the potential downsides that may impact on the ease of travel by train. Thank you.
16:50
Shabana Mahmood Portrait Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)
-
-
Well, I thank my honourable friend for for her question. It's always a balance in terms of ease of travel for millions of people every single day and making sure that people are safe. And of course, this government, the Transport Secretary and the rest of government will make sure that any, any arrangements we have, whether we remain with the current arrangements or anything that might change in the future, always strikes the right balance. That's the most important thing. But for now, based on our current understanding of this attack, the risk assessment has not been has not changed.

And although we're providing more reassurance to people so they feel safe getting on the trains in the aftermath of this attack, at this point, there are no proposals to go further, but we will of course, review that once

**** Possible New Speaker ****

more if the facts are known. Liberal Democrat spokesperson Max Wilkinson. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This attack has left 11 people in hospital, one of them a member of the train staff who is in a critical but stable condition. My critical but stable condition. My party's thoughts are with all those affected, the victims, their loved ones and everyone who witnessed such a shocking event. We also want such a shocking event. We also want to thank the emergency services and rail staff for their swift response, as well as the passengers who
16:51
Max Wilkinson Portrait Max Wilkinson MP (Cheltenham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
as well as the passengers who intervened to prevent further harm after this sort of incident. Madam Deputy Speaker, it is vital the police are given the time and space they need to establish the full facts. That is ever more difficult due to the rapid spread of disinformation online. In the immediate aftermath of these sort of attacks. Within hours, social media was flooded with speculation over the ethnicity and race of the perpetrator, inciting racist and Islamophobic comments. And when communities were still reeling from the horror of this attack, certain political figures on the hard right, including members of the Reform Party, were already seeking to exploit the incident for political gain.

Desperate to involve themselves in the tragedy, they reached for their dog whistles. They threw around baseless opinions on levels of crime. When facts were available, they were shamelessly trying to turn tragedy into yet another excuse to whip up fear and sow division. The shadow Home Secretary's comments today also veered into that realm. Never, never is an opportunity to blame foreigners missed that is, beneath contempt at moments, at moments. Like that, at moments like this, those who aspire to leadership must calm fears and attempt to unite, not inflame, tensions.

Does the Home Secretary share my view that while knife crime must be tackled forcefully, it's important that all of us must respond with arguments grounded in fact rather than trying to stoke fear? Can the Home Secretary confirm whether the government holds data on violent incidents involving knives or sharp instruments, where three or more victims were harmed in a single incident? If so, what is the trend over the past two years or any other time frame the Home Secretary has data for.

And finally, the Home Secretary has said that the individual was not known to anti-terror police or prevent. But when the facts are known, will she confirm that proper lessons will be learned about individuals who may pose a risk, be it as a result of mental health issues, an obsession with extreme violence, or other relevant factors? relevant factors?
16:53
16:55
16:55
16:57
Ben Obese-Jecty Portrait Ben Obese-Jecty MP (Huntingdon, Conservative)
-
-
Ben Obese-Jecty yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah. My thoughts are with the victims of this terrible tragedy to the Lner crew member whose heroic and selfless actions placing himself in harm's way, saved lives at the cost of his own safety, and who remains in a critical but stable condition to the other four victims who remain in hospital with stab wounds, and to the four who were discharged yesterday, as well as those who bore witness to the attacks and will still be processing their own experiences.

I would like to place on record my praise for the emergency services response to Cambridgeshire Constabulary, whose unarmed response officers and firearms officers were able to place Anthony Williams in custody within eight minutes of receiving the 999 call to Cambridgeshire Fire and Rescue Services, our air ambulance services and to the East of England Ambulance Trust for their incident response and for getting the casualties to Addenbrookes Hospital, also to the train driver, Andrew Johnson, and signalling staff whose speed of thought in moving the train onto the suburban line from the high speed line meant that the train could make the unscheduled stop at Huntingdon, a decision that curtailed the attack by several crucial minutes, allowed the police to apprehend the suspect and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

undoubtedly saved lives. Yeah. The swift action of all those involved prevented a horrific involved prevented a horrific attack from being far, far worse. I'm sure the Home Secretary and indeed the whole House would wish indeed the whole House would wish to share in my sympathies for those impacted by this horrific attack and my pride in the conduct,
16:58
16:59
17:00
17:01
17:02
17:02
17:03
17:04
17:05
17:06
17:07
17:08
17:08
17:09
17:09
Shabana Mahmood Portrait Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)
-
-
Well, can I thank the honourable gentleman for for his question and for his remarks? My experience over the weekend in terms of the different police forces and different emergency services who responded to this attack, is actually that they worked together very well, and I was very pleased to see that level of coordination, especially when different forces are responsible for different things. But, you know, at the start of this incident, counter-terror police were supporting the investigation that was stood down.

But if it needed to be stood up again, I know that that would have been almost instantaneous as soon as the request was made. So my my initial experience of and impression of the collaborative working has been very positive. And I do pay tribute to everyone involved in that over the weekend on information sharing. I will take that away because I think that and reflect on what he said. It is important, especially when there's such a huge incident taking place in the country with lots of information going out through different forms, that we make sure that there is complete coordination.

If he has any specific concerns in relation to this incident, I'd be very happy for him to write to me and I will ensure that I respond. But I will pick up that conversation with the NPC and others as well. And look, let me just reassure him on Stop and Search. I think this is a very valuable tool that the police have. I will always want to see it used wherever it is appropriate to do so. My understanding and my conversations with police so far suggest that from from their operational perspective, the powers they have work quite well.

But of course I will always be open minded and be willing to look again at any of these issues. Should the advice from police change, or should the experience that we have of the way that the powers are used change as well? well?
17:11
17:12
17:13
17:13
17:14
17:15
17:15
17:16
17:16
17:17
17:17
17:18
17:18
17:19
17:19
17:20
17:20
17:21
17:21
17:21
17:21
17:22
17:22
17:22
17:23
17:24
17:24
17:24
17:24
17:25
17:25
17:26
17:27
17:27
17:27
17:27
17:27
17:27
17:27
None Portrait Legislation: Public Office (Accountability) Bill: Second reading
-

Public Office (Accountability) Bill Second Reading.
17:28
Keir Starmer Portrait Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer MP, The Prime Minister (Holborn and St Pancras, Labour)
-
-
Now Minister Prime Minister to move Second Reading.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. I beg. To move that the bill be now read a second time before I come to read a second time before I come to the bill. Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to put on record in this House want to put on record in this House my own tribute to the police, the first responders, and in particular to the heroic actions of both the driver and members of staff on board the Doncaster to London train, board the Doncaster to London train, where such a violent, horrific attack took place this weekend.

We all share in the revulsion of this all share in the revulsion of this shocking incident, but there's no doubt that their collective action, their brave action, saved countless lives and I know the whole country lives and I know the whole country is grateful for that. Madam Deputy is grateful for that. Madam Deputy Speaker, 36 years ago, 97 men, women and children went to a Liverpool football match in Sheffield, an FA Cup semi-final, an Sheffield, an FA Cup semi-final, an occasion of joy and they never came home to their families.

Madam home to their families. Madam Deputy Speaker, I invite the House just to reflect on that simple statement of fact. What that might feel like. Nearly 15 years ago, when I was Director of Public Prosecutions, I met many of the Hillsborough families during the independent panel led by Bishop James Jones. I will never forget what they told me. Their testimony, painful to tell, painful to hear, including the testimony of Jenny Hicks, who told me how she and her husband drove their two teenage girls to the game that day.

They had to drive back later with an empty back seat. Every single story, every single experience, painful to the core, unimaginable to the core. And so, Madam Deputy Speaker, before I come on to the bill and the contents of the bill, I want to begin this debate with a simple acknowledgement, long overdue, that the British state failed the families and victims of Hillsborough to an almost inhuman level here. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, those victims and their families, their strength, their courage, their refusal to give up a determination no matter what was thrown at them, to fight for people they'll never know or meet, to make sure that they never go through something like this again.

They are the reason we stand here today with this bill. They are the reason why it will be known as the Hillsborough Law, and they are the reason, Madam Deputy Speaker, why we say clearly again, what should have been said immediately that their loved ones were unlawfully killed and that they never bore any responsibility for what happened in Sheffield that day. And we say it from this dispatch box today because, Madam Deputy Speaker, the entire country knows what happened next.

You know, we often call Hillsborough a tragedy, but it's more than a tragedy because the disaster was not down to chance. It was not an accident. It was an injustice. And then further injustice piled on top. When the state subjected those families to endure from the police lies and smears against their loved ones, while the central state, the government aided and abetted them for years and years and years. A cover up by the very institutions that are supposed to protect and to serve.

And Madam Deputy Speaker, it is nothing less than a stain on modern history of this country. And yet, can we truly say that Hillsborough was an isolated example? No, because there's also the horizon scandal. Grenfell tower infected blood, the grooming gangs, Windrush and more besides. And Madam Deputy Speaker, we should also be blunt that there's a pattern common to all these scandals that time and again, the British state struggle to recognise injustice because of who the victims are, because they're working class, because they're black, because they're women and girls.

That is the injustice that this bill seeks to correct, and I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hope it commands the support of the whole House. Yes. My right honourable friend. I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will. It's grateful. There are. Would he agree? There are. A. Couple of things. otherwise.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

otherwise. Excellent Bill. The first is an. Acknowledgement of. in.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in. Covering up many of the wrongs that happened. And the second is a national. Oversight mechanism, something that will ensure that when recommendations are made that they are carried out. Prime Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful for the intervention, and of course, we must acknowledge the role the media and others played in this. This was and others played in this. This was a cover up at so many levels. And in relation to oversight mechanisms, in relation to oversight mechanisms, I don't think this bill is the place for that. But I do agree with the proposition that where there are inquiries, there needs to be a are inquiries, there needs to be a better way of ensuring that the follow through on those inquiries.

I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will. The Prime Minister has listed a litany of scandals where there has litany of scandals where there has been cover up. Would he reflect and include in that the Chinook disaster, where there has been repeated attempts to cover up the truth, the state of the aircraft truth, the state of the aircraft that was sent out that night, in which we lost so many valued members of our intelligence service. Isn't that something that now are wrong, that now needs to be right?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank you for raising that? This bill is obviously intended to deal with all the situations where deal with all the situations where there needs to be a duty of candour, with consequences. If that isn't with consequences. If that isn't adhered to. So I'll just make some progress. I will take further interventions. So, Madam Deputy interventions. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, let me now turn to the bill itself and first of all, to bill itself and first of all, to the duty of candour.

There are three parts to this. First, a new statutory duty of candour. Mr. speaker, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Hillsborough Independent Panel Hillsborough Independent Panel Bishop James Jones, found that over 100 statements by junior police officers have been deliberately altered to remove evidence unfavourable to the South Yorkshire Police. 100 statements have been Police. 100 statements have been deliberately altered. Madam Deputy Speaker, I don't think there's anyone in this House who could possibly disagree that we must never let anything like that ever happen again.

It is a disgrace. And

**** Possible New Speaker ****

happen again. It is a disgrace. And the bill before the House will tackle it. I'll give way. Jim Shannon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Jim Shannon. Can I commend the Prime Minister and government for bringing this bill forward? I think it enhances all the to see the content. Does the Prime Minister not agree that with the right of social media, there is more public scrutiny than ever before and less trust in the institutions? The bill and the Prime Minister's outlining is an opportunity to begin that journey of restoring public trust. And we must be mindful that nothing less than accountability can be acceptable.

The public understands the mistakes can be made, but they cannot and should not forget when

**** Possible New Speaker ****

cover ups take place. Intervention and the the bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Intervention and the the bill. The legal provisions to ensure this can never happen again as a matter of law. But I've been clear and of law. But I've been clear and I've said to the families on a number of occasions, it's the culture as well that has to change. culture as well that has to change. The culture has to change. So the bill is the architecture, but the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

culture has to change of the state. Yes, of course. I'd like to thank him for giving way. Charlotte Hennessy, whose way. Charlotte Hennessy, whose father, Jemmy Hennessy was unlawfully killed at Hillsborough, has had conversations with the Prime Minister where he has assured her that the law does not need to her that the law does not need to be watered down and will be delivered in its entirety. She's in the chamber today. Will he make

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the chamber today. Will he make that promise in this House today? Yes, absolutely.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes, absolutely. I made that promise. I, I look the families in the eye. I made that promise, and I meant it. And I say it again from this dispatch box. This bill will not be watered down. This bill will not be watered down. This is such an important re orchestrating of the relationship between the state and its citizens. between the state and its citizens. It will not be watered down. I'm very pleased to be able to affirm that from this dispatch.

I'll take

**** Possible New Speaker ****

one more and then I'll press on. Can I thank the. Prime. Minister for giving way? Does he.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Agree that one of the most powerful lessons. From Hillsborough, and indeed. The other. Grenfell and post Office scandals. Is that truth.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is that truth. Delayed is justice denied? And that while this bill rightly places a duty of candour upon public. Authorities, it.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Must also compel ministers themselves to uphold that same. Duty when addressing this House, so. That accountability begins at

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the very top. Including the misleading information that. Was given. From that dispatch. Box by his minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Box by his minister. Last week in relation to. The hooligan. Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Maccabi Tel Aviv fans. I really think with the families here in the House, with us.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

here in the House, with us. Order Prime Minister, I was trying to pay close attention, but I may have missed it. We do not I may have missed it. We do not accuse each other of misleading information at the despatch box, so information at the despatch box, so be mindful of the language that one is using. Prime Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is using. Prime Minister. Thank you. I also think that we owe the families a better way to have this debate than descending into party political point scoring. And I hope we can continue the And I hope we can continue the debate in that in that way, because this bill will tackle that injustice so that when tragedy strikes and the state is called to account, and inquiries, inquests and other investigations, public officials from police officers to the highest offices in the land will be subject to that duty, which means that an injustice like this can never again hide in some dark corner of the state.

Madam Deputy Speaker, failure to comply. Failure, therefore, to act with candour, transparency and frankness, will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now carry criminal penalties, including being sent to prison. Yes. I am very.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Grateful to the Prime Minister and as a sponsor of the honourable member for Liverpool and East Derby's Private Member's Bill, I Derby's Private Member's Bill, I fully welcome this Bill's introduction and I welcome that. Protections include criminal offences of misconduct in public life. Could the Prime Minister assure me and others, that these new offences will be able to be applied retrospectively?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

applied retrospectively? No, they won't be able to, but that's not a deficiency of this bill. That's a long standing bill. That's a long standing constitutional rule. It's about what moves in terms of offences that move forward. But but can I that move forward. But but can I just make this point? Because I do think it's important the these measures will apply across the United Kingdom. And, and I would United Kingdom. And, and I would like to place on record my thanks to the devolved governments for to the devolved governments for their collaboration on this.

I can also announce the government intends to bring forward an amendment to extend the duty to amendment to extend the duty to local authority investigations in England, which will make sure that when an inquiry or investigation is set up by a local authority, for example, the Kerslake inquiry into the Manchester Arena bombings, the Manchester Arena bombings, there can also be the duty of cooperation and candour in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

search for the truth. I will. Extremely grateful.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Extremely grateful. To the Prime Minister for giving way, and I recognise the strength of the case that he's making. He will understand the interest the will understand the interest the Intelligence and Security Committee has in clause six of this bill, which provides for certain which provides for certain exemptions for those who work for the intelligence agencies. What it then says is that those people should report internally, within their organisation, information that may be of use to an inquiry or investigation.

Would he give some thought to how the government might develop the concept of what then happens to that information about happens to that information about which the bill is broadly silent, and he will understand that many will be concerned to ensure that will be concerned to ensure that when information is reported internally within the intelligence agencies, it nonetheless finds its agencies, it nonetheless finds its way to those who should have it in order to make a reassurance of what the government is seeking to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the government is seeking to achieve. I think more broadly in this bill. I thank him for that intervention. Obviously, a lot of thoughts been given to given to that particular issue of the security and intelligence services. What the bill therefore does is to be clear that the duty applies, but has a different way of applying it. has a different way of applying it. And I think that gets the balance right. And obviously there are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

various national interest to public interest to protect. In so doing, I will give one. I'm very grateful to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm very grateful to. The Prime. Minister for giving. Way. And I. for.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Bringing. Forward this, this bill. This represents. An epic. Struggle by the Hillsborough. Families and there to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Families and there to. Be much admired and praised. But this will. Extend beyond. This as. As the Prime Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As the Prime Minister. Has said. Can I thank. Him on behalf. Of the families who suffered great loss under the auspices of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

great loss under the auspices of the Tees Valley NHS trust? Christie Harnett, Nadia. Sharif and Emily Moore. As they were.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As they were. Lacking that duty. Of candour when those terrible tragedies. Struck and and I.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tragedies. Struck and and I. Hope that. He can give. Consideration to a full. Judge led public.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Judge led public. Inquiry because they are in. Search of truth, justice. And accountability. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I thank him for that legislation. But they're more than that. They're a changing of the nature of the relationship of the state and its duties to its people. And that is so important. Yes, this is the this is the legal architecture, but something much bigger than this has to be put in place. I will take this intervention. I'll come behind.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

welcome. This bill. Could I ask him. To. Reassure me and my constituents

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Reassure me and my constituents that those organisations which are contractors to public authorities contractors to public authorities and public bodies, are covered by the provisions of this bill as well, because it's important that their because it's important that their responsibility is defrayed to other bodies, that they too, are captured by the clauses in this bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

by the clauses in this bill. She anticipates my next point, but I will make and then I'll take the intervention from behind, the intervention from behind, because we have to recognise that some scandals are such as the Post Office horizon scandal, the boundaries between the public sector and the private sector are complicated. And clause four in this bill applies the duty to some private bodies for that very reason. private bodies for that very reason. In answer to a question, in particular those delivering public functions, those with relevant functions, those with relevant health and safety responsibilities, as well as relevant public sector contractors.

So in the Home Office, in the Post Office case, Fujitsu for example, for that very reason, because we have to recognise that it's blurred and we need to make sure that the duty extends

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sure that the duty extends appropriately. Yes I. Will. Yasmin Qureshi no, I'll give way here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the Prime Minister for giving way. He knows.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He knows. That for over two decades. The legal system. Failed to provide truth and justice. To the Hillsborough.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Families. And it was only a non-legal process that Hillsborough Independent Panel. That finally set

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Independent Panel. That finally set justice. And accountability.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does he see any prospect, therefore, of us, including. In the legislation, at a later stage, legislation, at a later stage, provision to ensure that the Hillsborough Independent Panel type Hillsborough Independent Panel type process can be offered to families who are involved in future

**** Possible New Speaker ****

who are involved in future this. Long. Standing failure. Of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

criminal justice system and the justice system to offer truth and accountability quickly to families. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Can I start by thanking her for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I start by thanking her for her work on this over many, many years? And she makes a really powerful point about the powerful point about the independent panel. I first met Bishop James Jones 15 plus years Bishop James Jones 15 plus years ago now, and I genuinely think he was amongst the first to listen properly, knowing what listening means to those that were giving evidence to his panel, which is why he was so well received and respected in the report that he made.

And we will certainly give consideration as to whether panels

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of that, like in future, can serve a useful purpose. I'll take the other intervention. I thank.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Prime Minister for giving way, and he's been very. Generous in taking all our questions, and I want. To congratulate.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To congratulate. Him. For introducing this particular. Piece of legislation. But can I just ask if the duty

**** Possible New Speaker ****

But can I just ask if the duty all. Investigations. Including

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Investigations. Including statutory. Inquiries. And that the command responsibility. Must personally responsibility. Must personally rest with those in charge and not simply the institutions.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

simply the institutions. It does apply to non-statutory inquiries, so her point is covered within the bill. Madam Deputy within the bill. Madam Deputy Speaker, I'll press on the second part of the duty of candour is a professional duty of candour for all public servants, because the all public servants, because the Nolan principles of public service, honesty, integrity, accountability, selflessness, objectivity, openness and leadership, they're not some kind of optional extra, but the kind of optional extra, but the very essence of public service itself.

So every public authority will now be legally required to adopt a code of ethical conduct based on these principles, and set out consequences for staff who do not comply, including disciplinary

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sanctions up to and including gross misconduct. Yes. Thank you, Prime Minister, for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Prime Minister, for giving way. This piece of legislation is a huge step for transparency, for accountability and transparency, for families who and transparency, for families who face what feel like must feel like the most impossible of circumstances. Some of those families are living in my families are living in my constituency and next door in Corby, who are still trying to get clarity about the possibility of dumped about the possibility of dumped toxic waste and contaminated land causing health complications. So could the Prime Minister spell out could the Prime Minister spell out how this bill will ensure that any public official who abuses their power and tries to cover it up will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be held accountable here. Yes, I can confirm that and I want to emphasise the point again, because it it is so significant because it it is so significant that out of the most unbelievable suffering, these families, these suffering, these families, these victims have pushed for a change that took far too long but will now that took far too long but will now benefit and safeguard people that they will never meet, they will they will never meet, they will never know.

And I find that kind of campaigning humbling and we thank them for it. Madam Deputy Speaker, I'll just make a bit of progress and then we'll take further interventions. Finally, in relation to the duty of candour, it's underpinned by a new criminal offence of misleading the public, which is aimed squarely at public servants who wilfully mislead the British people in a reckless, intentional or improper way. Cases like Hillsborough, where lies and dishonesty from the state grievously harmed the very people it was supposed to serve.

And that must never happen again. But Madam Deputy Speaker, the bill is not just about the duty of candour itself, because anyone familiar with how justice failed families and victims must also recognise that the lack of parity in our legal system played a significant role. Yeah, I remember Margaret Aspinall, who I met many years ago now, who's with us today, telling me that she had to scrape together every last penny for legal representation, including the money paid out by insurers for the death of her son James, who at the time was pretty much the same age as my son, who comes to football with me.

That's what she had to do. And we have to recognise that injustice piled on the other injustices. Yes, of course.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm very grateful to the Prime Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister. this. House in. Welcoming this. Important legislation.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And welcoming and aligning. Myself to all the points the Prime Minister. Has made? Will the Prime Minister also join me in paying tribute to my honourable friend, the member for Liverpool West Derby, for his tireless

**** Possible New Speaker ****

West Derby, for his tireless campaign to push for this law to reach the statute books. Here, here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here, here. And and the Prime Minister is absolutely right. Grieving families have faced the might of the state have faced the might of the state alone, forced to crowdfund lawyers while public bodies hide whole legal armies. Does he agree that by guaranteeing legal aid at the inquest, we can finally end those David and Goliath battles for justice once and for all?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

justice once and for all? Here. Here, here. Well, can I absolutely extend

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, can I absolutely extend that tribute to the member for Liverpool West Derby, who I think was at the game and has campaigned tirelessly in this place and beyond this place to help us get to the position today where we can introduce this bill. So I do pay tribute to and I'm very pleased to tribute to and I'm very pleased to do so from this dispatch box as we introduce this important legislation, I'll just make some progress. I will come to the honourable member, but because, Madam Deputy Speaker, on the question of parity, what happened and happens in so many cases is that families either have to scrimp and try to find the money for legal representation or have none.

And what are they met with at inquests and inquiries? The Hillsborough families were met with this. The working people who have had to save for justice. They were met time and again by armies of state funded lawyers, the deep pockets of the state, taxpayer money harnessed for the explicit purpose of fighting against justice. So this bill aims to correct this inequality. So justice and the state serve all with a new duty on public authorities to engage lawyers at inquest inquiries only where necessary and proportionate, and to ensure that their representatives behave with the sensitivity and respect that victims and their families deserve.

Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill will also ensure that no bereaved family has to face an inquest alone, with the largest expansion of legal aid in a decade

**** Possible New Speaker ****

granting access to free legal aid for all inquests. Where the state is an interested party. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

So that working people like Margaret and the Hillsborough families will never again be faced families will never again be faced with such inequality on legal representation, or, as in many

**** Possible New Speaker ****

cases, simply left with none. I promise. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I thank the Prime Minister, speaking very powerfully about families and about the human stories, and I commend them for the number of human stories that he has actually talked about today in this actually talked about today in this place. Would he therefore agree to meet with the families of the Chinook disaster, when 29 lives were lost and two pilots wrongly blamed? These families have been consistently refused. Even a meeting with ministers, officials meeting with ministers, officials and indeed prime ministers that have gone before.

Will he do the right thing and meet with them and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

right thing and meet with them and Also. I think there may have been meetings and if not, we'll get meetings and if not, we'll get meetings set up, I will do. I'm being told there will be one, but I being told there will be one, but I will take on board what she says and make sure there are the appropriate meetings and an update as to exactly what form and when as to exactly what form and when they'll take place. But Madam Deputy Speaker, this rebalancing of legal representation is a fundamental change in the balance of power in our justice system, and I genuinely hope that across the House, the whole House will support it, because, Mr.

Speaker, Madam Deputy Speaker, taken together, the measures in this bill can be a landmark piece of legislation, and I'm determined, as I've already said, in intervention, having given my word to the Hillsborough families, having worked in partnership with them on this legislation, that this bill will not be watered down. And when it is in statute, it will rank as one of the great acts of this Labour government, a moment where the tireless campaigning of working people to right a historic wrong was finally recognised in this place and made our country better.

That is all the campaigners have ever wanted. This has never been just about Hillsborough, about their families. It's always been about everyone. And Madam Deputy Speaker, if if they were to come down to this despatch box, I won't extend the invitation because I suspect they readily would. I know because I've heard them from despatch boxes like this many times before. I know what they would say. They would say, you must keep going. This is not done until it's done.

And I want to therefore put on record in this House my deep gratitude to everyone who has worked with us on the journey to this point, the Hillsborough now, Hillsborough Law, now to the honourable members for Liverpool, West Derby, Widnes and Halewood, Sheffield South East who were all at the game and indeed to so many honourable members from across Merseyside, past and present as well, of course, to the mayors of Liverpool and Manchester, all of whom have never stopped fighting for this bill to inquest, who facilitated so much of the engagement.

So we could be a government that listened to Bishop James Jones, who chaired that crucial Hillsborough Independent panel, countless other campaigns that this issue touches on, many represented in the gallery as well here today. But most of all, Madam Deputy Speaker to Margaret, Steve, Charlotte, Sue, Jenny, Hilda and every single member of families affected by Hillsborough. I know that what they really want is not thanks or acclaim. They want change and they've waited 36 long years for change.

And so, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is my honour as Prime Minister to have brought the Hillsborough Law before this House and to open today's debate. It should never have taken this long. But we are here now and we must get it over the line. A legacy of justice, change and national renewal for the 97. That is what we are here to deliver today. And I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

beg to move that the bill now be read a second time. The question is that the bill be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the bill be now, read a second time, and I call Mullan.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mullan. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Today is the day that first and foremost at the front of our minds foremost at the front of our minds will be one group of people, some of whom join us in the gallery. Those harmed by the state, those Those harmed by the state, those misled by the state, those lied to by the state, but those same people by the state, but those same people who refused to accept that, who would not take no for an answer.

Those people who knew the truth, Those people who knew the truth, the truth of what happened to them and to their relatives, and who fought on to make sure everybody else knew it as well. The movement toward greater accountability and transparency in public life owes transparency in public life owes everything to them. The Hillsborough disaster stands as an example that many of our constituents will perhaps think of.
17:57
Kieran Mullan Portrait Dr Kieran Mullan MP (Bexhill and Battle, Conservative)
-
-
constituents will perhaps think of. First, 97 lives were lost on the 15th of April, 1989, and many others were profoundly affected. As a Prime Minister so powerfully articulated as the Prime Minister also pointed out, among them a member of this very House. The member for Liverpool West Derby. He was 16 years old at the time and was a spectator at the match. He's been an unrelenting advocate for those that shared the horror of that day with him and what happened afterwards, as if the tragedy of those events was not enough, what followed served only to compound it over generations.

In the decades that followed, despite multiple inquiries, reviews and inquests, the truth of what happened remained obscured by lies by a cover up. We would all wish to be able to say that this is the only example of institutional defensiveness, of cover ups, of the reputation of organisations being prioritised. Over what? Over doing what was right. But as this House sadly knows, it's not. Between the 1970s and early 1990s, thousands of UK patients contracted HIV and hepatitis after receiving contaminated blood, blood products and tissues.

Reflecting on the findings of his inquiry into the matter, Sir Brian Langstaff said quite simply that people put their faith in doctors and in the government to keep them safe and their trust was betrayed. Experimentation, deception, cover up and there are more examples. We've all been shocked to hear the trauma and the experiences of our postmasters and their families as they were ruthlessly pursued by the Post Office and the CPS over many years, with the failure of successive governments to exercise their oversight to protect them.

We've seen other failures in healthcare, in policing, in housing, others well known, others not so well known, whether 97 lives are lost or just one. The impact on families is lifelong and severe. The themes have been consistent. The resistance of the state to accept its wrongdoing, the aggressiveness of the state in responding to challenge, the willingness of individuals working for the state to put themselves first over the people they're expected to serve again and again, David and Goliath battles have played out as the resources of the state in all its forms have been deployed against innocent people, innocent victims.

As we reflect on the proposed measures before us today, it's sensible to consider the changes that have been made in this area on legal representation, the means test for legal help and representation, inquests for applications to the exceptional case funding scheme has been removed, and we've seen a steady number of applications over recent years. Measures were introduced to promote candour in policing when the offence of police corruption was created in 2017 and in the health service, the duty of candour was introduced following the Francis Inquiry into catastrophic failings in health at Stafford Hospital and through part two of the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024, we legislated for the creation of an independent public advocate whose role is to ensure victims and bereaved families are properly supported and represented after major incidents, but a desire to do more has remained.

Bishop James Jones report the patronising disposition of unaccountable power reflected on the experiences of the Hillsborough families and set out key lessons for public bodies. It called for the bereaved to have proper participation. Inquests where public authorities are represented and identified other key areas for reform, which, alongside work by the Law Commission, has provided a key basis for the bill before us. However, it should be noted that Bishop James emphasised that legislation alone is insufficient. As mentioned, a statutory duty of candour already exists in parts of the public sector, particularly in the NHS, but question marks remain over the success of its implementation.

The lesson is clear legal change must be accompanied by cultural change, but in principle we welcome the aims that underpin this bill, which is what which is what we're asked to consider at Second Reading. But of course, it's always incumbent on this House, no matter how laudable the aim to reflect and consider whether the legislation we pass is as good as it possibly can be, and that we can avoid any unintended consequences. It's no secret that despite a very long standing commitment to bring legislation of this nature forward, they themselves wrestled with how appropriate this bill should be, one that members scrutinise very closely.

If members take a look at schedule four, members and our staff are quite rightly listed as being on the extensive list of public servants, that will be in scope. Quite rightly, we'll be able to look at the implications of the bill and reflect on it, how it might interact with our work, where contention and disagreement are often at the heart of our work and decisions. And as such, there are a number of questions and points for consideration I'd like to raise for the government.

Firstly, I'll be sure that the language used in the bill will provide the necessary legal clarity to underpin its successful operation. It makes use of terms like reckless and seriously improper. It states that the act is designed to ensure that public authorities and public officials, at all times before they perform their functions in the public interest. As a further example, how often do we disagree in this House on what constitutes the public interest? How often do we question the truth of what's being said? While superficially that might seem obvious, but the examples we've considered today are at the forefront of our minds, the failure to act in the public interest is clear and unquestionable, but in other situations, we might be left with conflicting views as to what the public interest is.

How will we differentiate between interpretation of the public interest and whether it doesn't allow individuals to escape from the measures being proposed by this bill? We've seen too often government decisions that the government considers to be in the public interest, challenged repeatedly and often, often successfully, in the courts and individual public servants will have their own views of what is or isn't in the public interest. We'll need to consider that. And how will this bill be utilised by campaign groups who wish to legally challenge the government in support of what they consider to be in the public interest? That's not to say that we can't make this bill work, but we need to consider its terminology carefully.

Part of the bill deals with the misconduct in public office, and represents one of the most significant changes to the way we hold public officials to account under these proposals, the common law offence of misconduct in public office will be replaced with two new statutory offences seriously improper acts and breach of duty to prevent death or serious injury. This follows recommendations by the Law Commission, which suggested the current offence be replaced with a clearer statutory provision, which is less broad and easier to interpret.

The opposition fully recognises that this is an area of the law in need of clarity, but the common law offence, for all its many imperfections, has provided at least flexibility as a means of addressing serious misconduct that might not fit clearly into an approach based on specific statutory offences. So I would be grateful for the government's reassurance on that point. Will the government also share its view about the reduction in the maximum penalties from life imprisonment, as available under the common law offence to between 10 and 14 years under the statutory offence? Misconduct in public office strikes at the heart of public trust in government and the rule of law, we must ensure that the penalties available to the courts reflect that seriousness.

But perhaps the area where I would most welcome assurance is in considering whether the measures in this bill will fall most squarely, most strongly on the right shoulders in its critique of the existing legal framework for misconduct in public office, the Law Commission said there was a concern that it tends to be used primarily against relatively junior officials, rather than the more serious decision makers that members of the public might more readily expect to be held criminally accountable. Of course, public servants, no matter how junior, are accountable for their actions.

But how can we be sure these measures will ensure accountability goes all the way to the top, not least because we all know that influence and power can be exercised over junior staff without there ever being an email, a written instruction, any proof junior staff in an organisation with the wrong culture can come to understand what is expected of them, and that there are consequences if they don't comply. Whatever we might be able to regularly prove in a court. To conclude, Mr. Speaker, I know this bill will be deeply welcomed by campaigners and members who have long called for some of its measures.

I mentioned one particular member at the start, but I know across different causes and different constituencies, MPs on both sides have challenged these issues. The principle of what the government is trying to do is the right one to stop again, seeing the voice of the state and public bodies drowning out the voice of our constituents, whether through use of resources or misconduct. We all know the fallibility of the state and the ways in which the wrong people take the wrong decisions, for the wrong reasons, for their self-interest to protect themselves, to protect their organisations.

No bill alone can guarantee against this. And perhaps there are ways in which this bill can be improved. But the opposition welcome the start of its consideration, and we stand ready

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to play a constructive role. Here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call Marie Eagle. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This is the first time that any This is the first time that any government has brought forward legislation to tackle what went wrong at Hillsborough, and it's a wrong at Hillsborough, and it's a fulfilment of a Labour manifesto commitment, a commitment by my right honourable friend the Prime

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister, and I congratulate. Him. For it. I rise to support the legislation. The duty of candour with effective sanctions and equality of arms are all good. They equality of arms are all good. They will make a difference. But I think the Bill should also seek to boost the powers and capabilities of the the powers and capabilities of the office of the new Independent Public Advocate. And I want to explain why I was first elected to this House in May of 1997.

And I've been making speeches about the Hillsborough disaster and its Hillsborough disaster and its aftermath ever since that time, more than 28 years ago. But the more than 28 years ago. But the disaster happened a full eight years before even I was elected all years before even I was elected all that time ago, and I got to know some of the bereaved families. As a trainee lawyer in Liverpool, only a trainee lawyer in Liverpool, only a year after the disaster in 1990, as they sought to recover damages for
18:08
Maria Eagle Portrait Rt Hon Maria Eagle MP (Liverpool Garston, Labour)
-
-
nervous shock. This was a way of reaching a legal finding of culpability against the police. culpability against the police. They didn't want to make money. They wanted the police to accept the blame that they should have the blame that they should have accepted. This is one of a number of legal actions that were ongoing at the time, and I worked on some at the time, and I worked on some of these cases at the direction of my principal, who was on the steering committee of solicitors steering committee of solicitors conducting that civil litigation.

I didn't have conduct, but I was familiar with matters and met some familiar with matters and met some of the families at the time. Now, some of those bereaved families became constituents of mine when I was elected in 1997. And indeed some of the very first meetings I had with constituents as an MP had with constituents as an MP after my election were with members of the executive of the Hillsborough Family Support Group. Then it was Trevor and Jenni Hicks, Then it was Trevor and Jenni Hicks, Hilda and Phil Hammond and Doreen Jones, who between them lost five Jones, who between them lost five family members at Hillsborough.

Four of them were my constituents and three of them still are all and three of them still are all these years later. And I think that my long and close involvement with some of the families gives me some some of the families gives me some insight into what went wrong, and I've got some observations. My first observation about the disaster, and I've alluded to it already, is that the legal system, the entire justice system, showed itself to be totally unable to deal properly with the aftermath or even fulfil its basic functions in the face of a national disaster.

This disaster unfolded live on TV. We all saw what happened, and it was at a very high profile national event. There was a large appetite in society to get to the bottom of what had happened. The interim report of the public inquiry by Lord Justice Taylor had, within four months of the disaster occurring, correctly identified the loss of police control as the main cause of the disaster, excoriated South Yorkshire Police for their attempt to evade responsibility for what occurred by trying to blame Liverpool fans, and told them to modify their behaviour.

That is what where truth and accountability could have been established. But South Yorkshire Police simply ignored the public inquiry finding and used all subsequent legal proceedings, all paid for out of public money, with expensive lawyers doing the job and most notably at the first inquest, to redouble their efforts to evade responsibility. So eight years of legal action had failed to get to the truth. By the time I was elected in 1997, and there was no justice for those involved, particularly for those who, as we now know, were unlawfully killed at Hillsborough.

There wasn't a sniff of accountability for those whose gross failings had led to the disaster, or for those whose subsequent behaviour in blaming the victims and survivors led to so much anguish over so many years for so many families and survivors. This is despite the fact that every possible kind of legal action had been undertaken in that time. None of them worked. Once the justice system gets it wrong and appeals don't succeed, it's almost impossible to get it right.

Subsequently, using the same system, it seemed like the truth didn't matter to the justice system. The justice system was content to settle on a lie with inquest verdicts of accidental death, no criminal or disciplinary proceedings for those at fault. It was content to allow the perpetrators to peddle the appalling falsehoods that Liverpool fans being drunk, late and ticketless were what caused the disaster. This was a South Yorkshire Police cover story. This was what the systematic changing of police statements was aiming at establishing as the truth.

This effort failed spectacularly at the public inquiry and was repudiated within four months of the disaster. But the justice system allowed the perpetuation of this mendacious false narrative by those who'd been identified as at fault. Senior South Yorkshire Police officers. So the inquest, the first inquests, allowed ongoing reports in the newspapers for over a year about the inquest proceedings firmly to establish the false narrative in the public mind as to what was true. It was as if the public inquiry and its findings had never happened.

So those who caused the disaster were retired early on. Enhanced Pensions Society got the impression that the disaster was about football hooliganism, and the unlawful killings were said to be just an accident. Despite the findings of Lord Justice Taylor in the public inquiry, that's where the justice system and the lawyers and judges got us to. The way I see it, the justice system might properly be said to have failed in all respects and at every turn, in the most appalling miscarriage of justice imaginable, the legal system failed.

Multiple lawyers, judges and causes of action failed, failed to get to the truth, failed to do so in a timely fashion, and failed to make those responsible accountable. It failed bereaved families, it failed the survivors, and it failed those who had died. So to the extent that this bill suggests that more lawyers and equality of arms before the law is enough to guarantee truth and justice, I say it is not enough. That is one of the main lessons of Hillsborough to me, and I say it as a lawyer because I am indeed a lawyer.

So it's a good thing that there's an equality of arms to be set up in legal proceedings. It's a good thing that families can get the help that they need, and I support this. But does not that guarantee truth, justice or accountability? Now, I've met many families bereaved by public disasters, not just those affected at Hillsborough, the Mid Derbyshire families, the Alder Hey organs scandal families, Manchester Arena bombing families and they all want pretty much the same thing. They want the truth.

They want it as quickly as possible. They want accountability for those at fault, not official cover ups. They don't want any other families to go through what they've endured. They all say that they want lessons learned and what went wrong put right for the future. Now that it's simple, it's not too much to ask. It's the three tests by which I judge the adequacy of legislation which sets out to learn the lessons of Hillsborough, including this legislation. Now, let me just say briefly, Madam Deputy Speaker, I was a sponsor of the Public Authorities Accountability Bill, introduced in 2017 by Andy Burnham, who which was the precursor to this legislation.

I can see nothing wrong at all with having a duty of candour in statute. It helps get across to public officials, subject to it the importance of telling the truth to inquiries and investigations, and that their function should be carried out with candour, transparency and frankness. I would have hoped they would have all known this anyway, but apparently some of them need to be reminded. And I note that this legislation takes rather more pages over establishing a duty than the original bill.

But I've got no doubt that these changes and their import will be fully scrutinised in committee, and we can understand fully what the intention is. I know there'll be significant interest in this legislation, not only in this House, but in the other place, the Public Authorities Accountability Bill. Andy Burnham bill is something that Bishop James Jones, in his 2017 report, the Patronising Disposition of Unaccountable Power, about the lessons learned from Hillsborough, recommended enacting, along with his 24 additional points of learning.

However, lying liars are going to lie, and whilst I am not convinced that this legislation been in place at the time of Hillsborough, that the cover up wouldn't have been attempted, I am gratified to see, and it's certainly the case, there would have been more opportunities to punish those caught lying when they were caught, and I think that the more serious punishments in this bill for breaching the duty of candour are a good thing. But would it have stopped the cover up, or the long years of agony endured by families and survivors? We have to take this opportunity.

It'll be the only one to enact legislation that has a chance of achieving this now. I've spent the last few years trying to tackle the way in which we deal with the aftermath of disasters from a slightly different angle. Since 2016, I've been introducing to this House the Independent Public Advocate Bill, which I've worked on with Lord Wills. In the other place. He's been introducing it there since 2014. This followed on work we did with some Hillsborough families and those affected by other disasters prior to drafting our bill.

It arises out of the following insight. Just as the legal system fails repeatedly in the aftermath of disasters, the Hillsborough Independent Panel, established in 2009 by the Labour government of Gordon Brown after the 20th anniversary of Hillsborough and reporting in 2012 under the Conservative government, which had allowed it to complete its work. Despite the era of austerity, thanks in large part to Theresa may, this succeeded spectacularly and finally had the truth established in the public consciousness that the South Yorkshire Police had tried to cover up for all those years.

The fans were not at fault. The police caused the disaster. Many of those who died could have been saved had they received timely medical assistance. The police engaged in an appalling cover up and set out to deflect blame from themselves onto fans, including by attempting a wholesale revision of police witness statements to better reflect the cover up story and to erase any statements which seemed to point the blame at senior officers. They also took blood alcohol readings, even from the children who died, and the youngest was ten.

Let's remember to try and smear them as somehow at fault. There were shocking revelations in the report, and it led to the immediate reappraisal of the public view of what had occurred. It led to an apology to the families by David Cameron, the Prime Minister of the day, and the striking down of the accidental death inquest verdicts, which were eventually substituted with unlawful killing verdicts. But not before South Yorkshire Police had again tried to tell their cover up story over an agonising two year legal process.

For the second inquests. This was a terrible ordeal for families and only concluded in 2016. Now the Hillsborough Independent panel was not a legal proceeding. It was about the transparent release of documents, freedom of information and a narrative account arising out of the study of the documents. There weren't lawyers involved. The Bill I kept introducing to this House was to enable a public advocate, in the event of disasters, to assist families to get to the truth much sooner by being able to replicate such a process.

But at a much earlier stage in the aftermath of disasters. I believe this will promote the telling of truth at a much earlier stage, because shining the light of transparency on the activity of public officials in the aftermath of a disaster will torpedo cover ups before they can get very far and at a significantly lower cost to the public purse and faster than our justice system has shown itself. Able to manage the Hillsborough Independent Panel did it in two years, and they did in two years, what the justice system had failed to do in 24 years.

I think this kind of proceeding has the potential to enable families to sidestep the years of overlapping legal actions they get caught up in after public disasters, and I think it will be a useful addition to the armoury of families who want the truth quickly, accountability quickly, and lessons to be learned. I think that families bereaved by public disasters should have an option of asking for such a process at a much earlier stage in the aftermath, and it should be up to them if they want it to be done.

A version of the Independent Public Advocate was enacted by the previous government towards the end of its time in office, and appoint and an appointment to the office has been made by the current government. However, I do not believe that she has sufficient powers or sufficient resource to do the job my bill envisaged. I may well try to explore in committee where it is in order. What can be done about that? I believe provisions on the independent public advocate would increase the range of options for bereaved families in the aftermath of public disasters like Hillsborough.

It would mean that families have a greater choice about how to take forward their efforts, and it would be a good addition. The truth quickly accountability, not cover up justice for those affected. Lessons learned and swiftly implemented so no one else has to suffer the same way. This is what families want, and this bill must be judged on how well it promotes those those aims. I think it will do so very well.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hey, members can see that this debate is heavily subscribed. So when I get to backbenches, speeches will be limited to six minutes and I now come to the Liberal Democrat

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I now come to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, Jess Brown-Fuller. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And it's a privilege to follow the honourable member from the honourable member from Liverpool Garston. Thank you. Very impassioned speech and shining a light on a broken system since 1997. light on a broken system since 1997. Today is her day as much as it is the day for for all those the day for for all those campaigning for change, on the 15th of April, 1989, fans of Liverpool Football Club undertook what Football Club undertook what everyone would assume would be a routine pilgrimage to watch their team play Nottingham Forest in the team play Nottingham Forest in the FA Cup semi-final, and it would be anything but that.

As everyone will know, that match at Hillsborough know, that match at Hillsborough Stadium would descend into carnage and commotion, causing a mass crush
18:20
Jess Brown-Fuller Portrait Jess Brown-Fuller MP (Chichester, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
and commotion, causing a mass crush in the fence sections housing Liverpool supporters. It led to 97 fatalities and hundreds of injuries, as well as immeasurable trauma for the families, friends of the victims and left a dark mark on our nation's history. The Hillsborough disaster is now talked about in schools, but is not just a moment consigned to our history books. It served as a catalyst for change, which we finally see brought here today. Immediately after the disaster, questions were asked about how and why such a tragedy could occur, and immediately the path to truth was blocked by people in positions of power and trust.

What is abundantly clear now is a system was in place that allowed the narrative lies aimed at protecting the public bodies who bear responsibility. For those fans attending the match. In the days and weeks that followed, blame was pinned on the Liverpool fans. The victims by sections of the media stories were fed to journalists by those who were ultimately found responsible for the disaster stories, which undermined inquiries into the events. The false allegations of drunkenness and hooliganism painted a dark stain over the victims and their families, which hindered their attempts to grieve, seek justice and prevented any meaningful learning from the tragedy.

For many, many years, conditions within the public bodies and the justice system provided the perfect environment for a coordinated cover up, one designed to absolve the South Yorkshire Police of blame and protect their own. Their actions led to decades of delayed justice, denied the that the stadium's dangerous design was well known and people with limited resources pushed, forced to push back against state institutions fighting against a system which was stacked against them at every turn. And I pay tribute to those campaigners, many of whom I know are here today, for their courage and perseverance.

Over 36 long years, their efforts have brought us to this point where we can begin to level the playing field for countless others affected by other miscarriages of justice, from the Post Office scandal to infected and affected blood Grenfell nuclear weapons testing, pelvic mesh, the treatment of LGBT veterans, and so many others. Countless individuals who have lost their lives or livelihoods or suffered life changing injuries. These scandals have been uncovered despite the best efforts of public institutions to keep them buried, institutions that should have been transparent and accountable instead used public money to protect their reputations and deflect blame.

Every single victim deserved better. This bill is long overdue, but it will finally allow basic values of fairness to be restored within our justice system. A duty of candour providing a basic but essential level of transparency and fairness, alongside a duty for public officials to act with openness when dealing with public investigations, are vital steps. Supported by the Liberal Democrats and across the House today, this bill also offers a crucial opportunity to push for cultural change within public organisations outside of this legislation, and it marks a shift away from defensive, inward looking approaches that prioritise reputation over responsibility and goes towards an open learning culture that puts the public first and learns from mistakes rather than concealing them.

Public bodies should welcome these reforms as it is a means to rebuild public trust and avoid the drawn out, costly legal processes that have so often characterised past scandals. The imposition of two new statutory offences firstly, for those who fail to follow the duty of candour, and secondly, for those who mislead the public while in office, are welcome and necessary additions. They will serve as consequential reminders for those in public office of their primary duty to the public beyond self-interest. Whilst the introduction of proportionality and cost effectiveness is a welcome step that will not only increase fairness but also ensure that taxpayer money is never spent silencing victims.

The extension of Non-means-tested legal aid to bereaved family inquests is also long overdue. Greatly needed. For too long, the system has been weighted against ordinary people seeking justice. Those seeking to bring these scandals into the light have faced well resourced and highly motivated public bodies intent on protecting their reputations, so ending the need for large scale public fundraising will ensure that everyone, regardless of wealth, has an equal opportunity to be heard. However, as a party, we do believe there are gaps in the legislation as it stands and we will, of course, engage with the government throughout the bill's stages collaboratively and constructively.

So in relation to legal aid, we're concerned that the measures are too limited as they only support the families of bereaved victims, those seriously injured, or in cases like the horizon scandal, where many victims lost their livelihoods and cannot afford legal challenges, would still face burdensome legal aid tests. These individuals individuals are not currently supported in the bill, and there is precedence already from the infected blood scandal and the infected blood scandal and the Post Office scandal for legal aid. Beyond just those bereaved families, there are also instances of misconduct that should be captured within this legislation.

Officials turning a blind eye to wrongdoing, even if not actively partaking, should be held accountable. It also fails to address day to day decision making outside of formal settings. We've seen an increasing number of cases where communications on services such as WhatsApp have gone missing prior to investigations. For example, during the Covid inquiry. These represent major gaps in accountability and must be included in future investigations. Where we know we move into a world where we do use these these services more frequently in work life, many of these scandals have come to light because of the brave work of whistleblowers, individuals who've shared information at great personal risk, standing up against entrenched power structures.

The Liberal Democrats have long called for strengthening of whistleblowing protections to ensure that wrongdoing within organisations and public bodies is swiftly exposed and brought to justice. We are therefore calling for the UK's whistleblowing framework to include anonymous reporting, legal representation, funding and a statutory duty on organisations to foster a speak up culture. And, as in our manifesto, we're calling for an independent office for the whistleblower, which would be transformative in enforcing standards for whistleblowing cases. We'd also like to see the bill implemented immediately after Royal Assent.

Campaigners such as those at Hillsborough Law now have fought for years to ensure these changes are enacted. Victims should not wait a moment longer for this legislation to be introduced. And finally, a concern I think shared across the House and reflected in Honourable members opening statements is the lack of redress regarding the media. In many of the scandals discussed today, the amplification of falsehoods and the blaming of victims has been a recurring issue. In the case of Hillsborough, it was the sun that conspired with South Yorkshire Police to spread the lie that it was the fans responsible.

Media regulation remains largely unchanged since the original Leveson inquiry, despite its recommendations. The second part of that inquiry, which would have examined the relationship between the press and the police precisely the issue in cases like Hillsborough was never completed. This government, I know calls for integrity and Labour have promised Leveson to in the past. Much more needs to be done to strengthen accountability, transparency and openness, including within social media companies and the Molly Rose Foundation, who campaign on suicide prevention, have correctly pointed out that despite recent powers on disclosure targeting social media companies, these organisations have significant commercial and reputational incentives to delay and obstruct investigative proceedings.

So in this regard, we support their calls for an amendment to this bill, which would extend the duty of candour to social media companies, ensuring that these organisations can be held to account in the same way. And it would be helpful if the Minister could confirm if that is in scope for this bill. We are all familiar with the many failings at the heart of public institutions in recent years, failings brought to light by brave individuals prepared to speak out against organisations that should have been trustworthy.

Many of those campaigners are here to see the law finally progress today and as this legislation progresses, the improvements in public standards, accountability and transparency that will spare others from the suffering that they had to endure will be to their credit. So I thank them and we look forward to scrutinising the bill further and ensuring it delivers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for our public services and our citizens going forward. Thank you. Justin Madders.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Justin Madders. Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. It's a privilege to be here. Today debating.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A bill that's been decades in the making. And before I begin, I want to join those who've already spoken to pay tribute to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

spoken to pay tribute to the tireless campaigning of the Hillsborough survivors. And those who have lost loved ones in the disaster. They've been

**** Possible New Speaker ****

ones in the disaster. They've been through an. Unimaginable ordeal spanning decades. But they. Have throughout. Shown remarkable courage,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shown remarkable courage, dedication and tenacity to deliver justice for their loved ones. And even after the truth about the even after the truth about the tragedy emerged, families have not stopped campaigning. They've long called for systemic change.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To stop anything like. This happening again. We as a country owe a great. Debt. Of gratitude to their efforts because without that, we would not be debating this bill today. As someone who grew up in a part of someone who grew up in a part of the world that has lived under the shadow of Hillsborough, I know how much this means to my constituents, not least to the families of those not least to the families of those that have lost loved ones.

So I'm proud that we have acted on the pledge that we made to implement pledge that we made to implement this as a law. And this bill today addresses the key problems that we have identified time and again. And have identified time and again. And how do we judge, ultimately whether this bill is a success? Two words, Madam Deputy Speaker. Never again. This is the standard against which this bill must be held. Never again should victims be wrongly blamed by the state for their deaths.

Never again can we allow public bodies,
18:32
Justin Madders Portrait Justin Madders MP (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough, Labour)
-
-
which are meant to protect us, to lie in order to protect their own reputations? Never again must reputations? Never again must ordinary people fight tooth and nail against a seemingly endless resources of the state just to get resources of the state just to get to the truth. Because, as we've heard already, Hillsborough is not by far the only example of by far the only example of scandalous cover ups that have emerged in recent years. It's a well rehearsed list and it gets well rehearsed list and it gets longer every year.

Inflated blood, post office, Grenfell, nuclear test veterans, and many, many others veterans, and many, many others that we've debated in this place. So the test is that we don't add to this list. And when tragedy strikes this list. And when tragedy strikes again, when serious mistakes are made, the truth and accountability are on display immediately. And are on display immediately. And let's be clear, legislation is only the starting point for this. As the Prime Minister said, a culture Prime Minister said, a culture change is also required.

Firstly, establishing a legal duty of establishing a legal duty of candour that requires bodies to act proactively, promptly and with full disclosure to assist inquiries in questionable investigations is a huge step forward. But that has to be delivered in practice and that be delivered in practice and that is the real challenge that we face. All too often. We've seen it in this place, haven't we? Institutions act defensively, Institutions act defensively, obfuscate and focus on protecting themselves when placed under scrutiny. With the guidance

**** Possible New Speaker ****

provided by codes of ethics and the. Threat of criminal sanctions, bodies and those working inside them should be forced to refocus, them should be forced to refocus, forced to put the public and their safety as the number one priority, safety as the number one priority, not to lie, and to actively support investigations inquiries. That is what the public expect institutions to be doing already. While it should never have been required,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

should never have been required, this bill will enshrine that basic principle into law at long last. But as we've seen in. The NHS.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The NHS. This is easier said than done. It's nearly ten years since the freedom to speak up guardians were freedom to speak up guardians were introduced, and from what I can observe, there is still a long way to go to ensure that the good intentions behind that initiative intentions behind that initiative are truly embraced across the board. Only in the last week, I've been contacted by several people contacted by several people currently working in the NHS who believe their concerns have not been listened to, or they have been on the end of mistreatment because on the end of mistreatment because they have spoken out.

So legislation is one thing, Madam Deputy Speaker. Culture is another, Deputy Speaker. Culture is another, and I suggest changing the culture is something that needs leadership and buy in from every single person, and buy in from every single person, across every single part of every. Single organisation. I just want to Single organisation. I just want to say something about equality before the law, so that victims are no longer browbeaten by lawyers in their quest for the truth, because I have some concerns about how that will work in practice, because when a public body is looking at something serious under this bill, which inevitably will be, they will want the most senior representation they can get, and the public body can afford that hundreds of pounds an hour for their lawyers, they will instruct them.

That's clearly going to be well in excess of existing legal aid rates. So in that scenario, who is going to tell the public body that they have to choose cheaper lawyers? How would your equality before the law be achieved, especially if authorities only have to have regard to these principles? We need an overarching, independent way of monitoring this and ensuring that recommendations from inquests and inquiries are effectively publicised and their implementation is monitored and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

delivered, ideally with progress reports from this and to this place. The honourable member I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable member I certainly do. I'm grateful. In particular, clause six relates to the intelligence relates to the intelligence agencies and there is an exemption for those who handle material that for those who handle material that falls within the definition of security and intelligence. Our constituents will want to be constituents will want to be certain that these organisations have oversight. Would he agree with me that this could be an additional

**** Possible New Speaker ****

me that this could be an additional power for the Intelligence and Security Committee? The. Honourable member for his

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Honourable member for his intervention? That's an interesting suggestion. I think a lot of members are concerned about how this will relate to the security this will relate to the security services, and we've had many examples in the past of where they have done things that we would have done things that we would rather have not happened. So I think that's something that as the bill progresses, I hope there'll be some good dialogue about an some good dialogue about an appropriate way to deal with those quite difficult balances got to be quite difficult balances got to be achieved.

I just want to also raise a couple of concerns about clause 11 and the offence of misleading 11 and the offence of misleading the public, and the requirement there for there to be harm to a victim could significantly reduce victim could significantly reduce its effectiveness, which aims to deter cover ups and obfuscation. And in relation to clause 11, part two of the act. This goes on to define who is included within a public body, and it specifically excludes the devolved body, but also both houses of Parliament.

And I know that's because there's a long standing convention that parliaments deal with their own affairs, but I'm concerned that actually sends out a very negative message about our responsibilities in this matter. And of course, Parliament has allowed in the past other bodies to become involved in the way it does business with the independent complaints and grievance procedure, for example. So there is precedent there for us to look at that. Again, I think we should all be treated equally before the law, because when trust and confidence in our institutions is at an all time low, it is important that we are seen to be all equal before the law.

And it is, I think, really hard to underestimate the impact of the changes this bill can deliver, but it should also apply to everyone equally. Repeated examples of scandal and state cover up are corrosive to trust and and in addition, for those who want to sow divisions. So we've got to get this right. This moment can be a stark change in the way we deal with these issues, but we've got to deliver it. Once it becomes law, we've got to be consistent and vigilant to ensure that the bill's good intentions are delivered.

That needs, as I said, Madam Deputy Speaker, a profound cultural shift and hopefully it will restore trust in our democracy and our institutions. And when we actually have this conversation, in future,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we will be able to say that it should never happen again and that we can be confident that it won't. John Glen. Thank you, Madam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. On Saturday.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The 15th of April, 1989, I visited my grandfather. I was. A. 15 year old boy, and he'd been

**** Possible New Speaker ****

15 year old boy, and he'd been taken into hospital a week or so before after a heart attack, and he was a former chief constable in Wiltshire Police. And his immediate and clear response to what happened and clear response to what happened that day was to say that the police were at fault. Two days later, he were at fault. Two days later, he died and we never followed it up. But that conversation has had a But that conversation has had a profound effect on me.

And over the years since, when I aspired to come
18:38
John Glen Portrait Rt Hon John Glen MP (Salisbury, Conservative)
-
-
years since, when I aspired to come to this place and I have seen what has happened, it is truly lamentable that the British state failed to come to terms with what actually happened, and I listened to the speech from the Prime Minister and the member for Liverpool Garston with a degree of humility at their determination to change what has happened in this country over many, many scandals. Now, I wanted to make a small contribution this evening to reflect on my exposure to the infected blood scandal.

When I was in office as a minister until last year, and I would also want to pay tribute to my successor, who I think has done an excellent job to take forward in the spirit of a cross-party consensus on this issue, what what was required. I completely support the principle of the legislation being put before the House this evening, and I am totally clear about the inadequacy of existing mechanisms to hold public officials to account. Over

**** Possible New Speaker ****

18 days I visited 40 groups. Who had.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Been affected and infected through the as part of the infected through the as part of the infected blood scandal. And every single one of those people that I spoke to had had a negative experience with officialdom at some point during their time trying to seek justice their time trying to seek justice for themselves or for their loved ones, and it was profoundly ones, and it was profoundly depressing to think that despite all the apparent determination of all the apparent determination of government after government, minister after minister, we were minister after minister, we were still dealing with it 40, 50 years after the scandal had occurred.

It after the scandal had occurred. It is a tragedy that we can no longer rely on common law offences, and we have to move to a statutory regime have to move to a statutory regime which codifies expectations. But I do believe that this legislation do believe that this legislation will bring greater scrutiny and interrogation of the acts and interrogation of the acts and omissions of public bodies. But I do want to make a point about do want to make a point about public inquiries.

They have grown significantly in number in recent years. As of last month, there are a record 25 public inquiries open. Between 1990 and 2025. 87 public inquiries were launched, compared with just 19 in the previous 30 years. Yet despite their proliferation, enquiries often fail to deliver timely justice or prevent future tragedies. In fact, they are taking longer than ever to conclude. And so I do hope that as part of the response to those facts, we collectively examine what we think should happen in public inquiries.

They can't be shut down by accountable government ministers. They rely on the the Chair to shut it down. I was looking at the infected blood public inquiry, and I'm not casting any doubt over the integrity of the Chair, Sir Brian Langstaff, but upwards of £150 million has been spent on that inquiry, and I just feel it's really wrong that we in this House sent here to do a job of work in whatever, whatever area of, of government have got into the habit and into the practice of delegating more and more responsibility for resolving matters to arm's length bodies and public inquiries in the belief that it will create a more

**** Possible New Speaker ****

virtuous and correct and timely outcome. On that point.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'd be very happy to give way. My honourable. Friend, agree that the one of the main purposes of this Bill is the main purposes of this Bill is to stop the cover ups and save the public purse money.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

public purse money. I absolutely do, and I sincerely believe that it will be likely to believe that it will be likely to achieve that. But we also mustn't miss the opportunity to reflect on what is going wrong with these. what is going wrong with these. This principle of not taking responsibility for wrongs that have happened more proactively. And I really do my exposure through that really do my exposure through that infected blood compensation scheme just taught me that over 40 years just taught me that over 40 years there had been deliberate attempts to slightly change the emphasis in responses to give a concession on a responses to give a concession on a little bit of compensation here and a little bit of compensation there.

a little bit of compensation there. And the truth is, the costs of that delay were not only primarily and most importantly, massively made worse for the victims, but they've also cost the the public purse enormous sums of money. And so I welcome this legislation. But I would ask the minister when she when she responds to actually address this point. And when we look back to what Bishop James Jones said in 2017, the patronising disposition of unaccountable power, what a powerful phrase that should, I think, humble all of us and help us all to ensure that whatever provisions, whatever definitions, whatever candour, transparency and frankness means that it is enforceable, that it is meaningful, and that we can actually avoid some of the absolutely appalling outcomes which have been so horrendous in terms of undermining the authority and confidence that the general public have in this place and in our government.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well done, John Peter Dowd. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. Today is the culmination of over Today is the culmination of over three decades of determined advocacy and persistence by a search.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

search. Of. Social justice, many of whom are in the gallery today. And the Prime in the gallery today. And the Prime Minister is referred to by name. Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to put on record my thanks and admiration on record my thanks and admiration to all those who, in many cases, have put their own lives on hold in
18:44
Peter Dowd Portrait Peter Dowd MP (Bootle, Labour)
-
-
have put their own lives on hold in their search for justice, justice, justice denied for so long to so many people. It shouldn't have taken this long. And we are yet still not quite there. But a significant. Milestone has been reached. And can I thank the Prime and.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For. His commitment to ensuring that this bill won't be. Watered down, and.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Watered down, and. To the ministerial team as well. The time has arrived to deliver on the promises made to the. Families the promises made to the. Families and friends of the victims of so many scandals that have damaged the many scandals that have damaged the integrity of so many of our institutions, but simply those institutions involved in cover up institutions involved in cover up disingenuous, disingenuity, duplicity, deceit, manipulation, artifice, contrivance, silence, amongst other descriptors, have amongst other descriptors, have been found wanting to say the least.

Hillsborough the post office. In fact, the blood, Grenfell Tower, fact, the blood, Grenfell Tower, Windrush, Orgreave, the Manchester Arena and no doubt many others. And they have dishonoured those institutions. But not, of course, necessarily all the many dedicated people who work in those institutions. And I'm pleased that my right honourable friend, the Home Secretary, has also given his Home Secretary, has also given his commitment that the bill will not be watered down. And I'm also pleased that ministers have given a pleased that ministers have given a commitment to work with families to improve the Bill as it passes.

But improve the Bill as it passes. But the bill is not an end in itself, per se. The will, of course, be the drafting of the code of practice for public officials that will also need input from families to ensure that the provisions of the act will be built upon. And that's been referred to by the honourable member for Honiton and Sidmouth and, of course, the Right Honourable Member for Kenilworth and Southam. I think it's fair to say that after so many years of disappointment and disillusionment, campaigners have every right to be guarded, cautious and possibly sceptical as the process runs its course.

But I know that many members in the House and the other House will examine this bill closely, with commitment and with passion. Madam Deputy Speaker, I started by putting on record my thanks to the campaigners and I reaffirm that. And of course, I'd like to now put my record. Thanks, thanks on the record to other campaigners, including lawyers, Associated Professionals and so many others who have been there all the way. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, as a blue, I rarely, if ever, in fact never thank a red for anything.

But, Madam Deputy Speaker, as long as we keep it in this chamber and it doesn't go public today, I'll make an exception or two. Firstly, I read hon. Member the friend, my honourable member for for West Derby, who has, along with another read the Liverpool Metro Mayor Steve Rotheram. I'm getting a bit anxious now, worked to push this process along in partnership with families, but I know the input and guidance from a blue Manchester Metro mayor, Andy Burnham, has been

**** Possible New Speaker ****

invaluable. Dare I say it? Liverpool two, Everton one but it's still not. Full time.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It goes without saying that my right honourable friend the member for Liverpool Garston has also been a long standing advocate for this a long standing advocate for this legislation. A contribution today is witness to that tenacity, as her is witness to that tenacity, as her work has been over decades in this House. On this matter, Madam Deputy House. On this matter, Madam Deputy Speaker, Liverpool FC's legendary manager, Bill Shankly said, quote, for a player to be good enough to play for Liverpool, he must be prepared to run through a brick prepared to run through a brick wall for me, then come out fighting on the other side.

Madam Deputy on the other side. Madam Deputy Speaker, the survivors and families of the victims of those scandals I mentioned above and others have faced and broken through so many brick walls and are here, remarkably still playing. And I remarkably still playing. And I hope they fight as now at last come towards an end. And I hope this legislation will be a living legislation will be a living monument to all those who have lost lives, livelihoods, loved ones and lives, livelihoods, loved ones and freedom.

Madam Deputy Speaker, thank you very much and thank you

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to all the campaigners to whom we owe so much today. Tom Morrison. Thank you, Madam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. That day. In September 2012 remains vivid in my memory. The day the in my memory. The day the independent panel chaired by Bishop James Jones finally confirmed that public officials had hidden the
18:49
Tom Morrison Portrait Tom Morrison MP (Cheadle, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
truth about the Hillsborough disaster. It was a day the families had waited for so long, a day they had worked tirelessly, tirelessly to bring about. It was the first day that their persistence prevailed, the first breakthrough in what would become a chain reaction that led us here today. Now, during this time, I was a councillor in Liverpool, and I remember knocking on doors that evening and being met with absolute relief on people's faces. The tide was starting to turn and the families came that day to speak to the council.

The emotions in that room were among the strongest I've ever experienced. For the first time, the families felt that power could be held to account and that justice might possibly be one day served. But to this day, no one has been held accountable for the Hillsborough disaster. The 97 and their families are still living without the justice they deserve. And yet the families remain selfless, motivated by the greater good, working to protect others in the future. People unknown to them. The campaign has continued for three decades, but it must have felt like a lifetime.

The truth has taken so long to uncover that key campaigners like Ann Williams, Phil Hammond, Rose Robinson and Barry Devonside are sadly no longer here to see this legislation come before the House. But their fortitude and determination is nothing short of astounding. They have mine and the nation's most utmost respect to be wrongly and publicly shamed, smeared and blamed for the tragedy of such scale is something that no one can imagine experiencing. And then to face the institutions of the state in court, without the means to professionally navigate the law.

And our complex judicial system is nothing short of devastating to face. Public bodies can effectively silence citizens having to find millions of pounds to stand up against those bodies is simply unacceptable. To not only endure lying, victim blaming, delays and denials for years, but to passionately oppose it takes unwavering strength, and what the fans and their families endured is all too familiar to many of us across this country. This bill is not only about one place or one group of victims, it's about how we can hold power to account those who have suffered, both directly and indirectly, from state driven scandals mentioned here today are familiar with those feelings of powerlessness, grief and justified anger.

The infected blood scandal is just one example of unimaginable suffering. People who endured not only physical harm, but haunting social stigma and lasting damage. Children as young as seven being told that they would die, some losing multiple members of their family, only to be left in social isolation, not to mention a serious lack of transparency in years of delays, with many dying before any justice or compensation ever began. Sir Brian Langstaff rightly calls the delays for the blood scandal, victims and injustice all on its own.

Now, no government can be allowed to act on serious state failures behind closed doors without a legal duty of candour. People bravely seeking justice must no longer be ignored and pushed aside by successive governments. It is admirable that those affected by multiple tragedies since Hillsborough, have continually come together to fight for prevailing and lasting change. The Hillsborough Law now group is a formidable force, and yet it shouldn't be this way. People should not have to sacrifice their lives to see change.

Successive governments should not be pushing back and dragging their feet at every turn. This bill should have been introduced to this House far, far before the 36th anniversary. Now, if this bill had been placed 36 years ago, all the pain, trauma, repeated legal proceedings and investigations would never have happened. And I join the Hillsborough Law now. Campaign inquest, the Law Society and numerous other groups who have expressed their relief that this law will finally be put into place. And whilst compensation for these scandals is crucial, it is the justice and change that victims and the British public want to see.

That is why this bill is a victory for sufferers of all state caused scandals in our recent history. It is owed to each and every one of them on its journey through this Parliament. We all must ensure that it retains its strength. But more can be done. We can push for stronger whistleblowing protections, robust enforcement mechanisms, Non-means tested legal aid for survivors a Leveson inquiry to hold the media to account. This bill will ensure that silence in the face of wrongdoing will no longer prevail.

Public organisations will no longer be able to place reputational management above the truth. This bill will be a legacy to the 97 who never came home, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

their families who will never walk alone. Thank you very much, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. And this has been a long time coming. We finally got long time coming. We finally got the bill in front of us here in Parliament that in the eyes of those who matter. And this has up in the gallery today, some of them, it's worthy of the name Hillsborough Law. It's a huge achievement. And as others have achievement. And as others have already said, it's a result of a lot of hard work and campaigning by a lot of people.

The fact that
18:55
David Baines Portrait David Baines MP (St Helens North, Labour)
-
-
a lot of people. The fact that victims have had to fight so hard just to get to this point shows exactly why this bill is needed. Nobody should have to fight the state for truth and justice over the death of a loved one. Nobody. The way that the Hillsborough families have fought for so long is inspirational, but it's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

unacceptable. They should never have been put through it. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Madam Deputy Speaker, I was just nine years old when Hillsborough happened. I can vividly recall the news and images coming through that day. I can remember seeing the TV reports and the national newspapers reports and the national newspapers in the days and the weeks that followed. And I remember most of all the shocking speed at which all the shocking speed at which completely false allegations were invented and deliberately spread invented and deliberately spread about the victims and those ordinary fans who tried to help them.

I remember the lies that were them. I remember the lies that were told about innocent men, women and children who simply went to watch a children who simply went to watch a football game. Lies that were told, encouraged and believed by people at the time in positions of power, at the time in positions of power, including in this place whose duty was supposed to be to protect was supposed to be to protect ordinary people. Those lies stuck. They piled insults and further harm They piled insults and further harm on top of unimaginable pain, grief on top of unimaginable pain, grief and loss.

It's taken 36 years to get to this point today, to have the Prime Minister introduce this the Prime Minister introduce this bill in this place. With the government so clearly committed to delivering this law and to delivering a worthy legacy for victims not just of Hillsborough, but of other scandals such as Grenfell, the Manchester Arena attack, Orgreave and the Infected Blood Scandal, and so many more that could take up the rest of my time mentioning to pay tribute to those victims, survivors and the families not just in words, but in action to better protect ordinary people now and in the future.

I've met and known families who were affected by Hillsborough. One of them, Margaret Aspinall and her family, and Margaret's in the gallery today. Her daughter Kerris, a lifelong friend of my wife. I've seen the impact it's had on their family. They live and breathe it to the to this day and time and again, innocent, ordinary people have been treated appallingly while at their most vulnerable, the state which should be there to protect them and to serve them as too often deliberately got in their way, obstructed justice, and protected itself instead of the victims.

I've always said that I can't, and I won't support anything called the Hillsborough law. If the Hillsborough families didn't feel it was worthy of that name. So I'm delighted that they do support the bill in front of us. I'm also pleased to hear that. Comments. So far, all the talks of strengthening the bill, not watering it down, but it's not perfect and there are areas for improvement. There will be can strengthen the bill that's been raised by the Hillsborough Law now campaign group. Many of them, as I said, who are in the gallery today.

And I want to mention one in particular, Debbie Kane, who isn't here. But I've known Debbie for many years, and she's one of those tireless campaigners who's worked tirelessly for years to get to this point. And I want to thank Debbie for everything she's done here. The campaign group want to make sure that the duty of candour applies consistently to all public authorities, including security and intelligence services. They're asking for certainty about the commencement of the bill, insisting, not unreasonably, that it should come into force upon Royal Assent, not at some unspecified later date.

Absolutely. There are enhanced whistleblowing protections specific to disclosures made under the new duty of candour. They are concerned about the current wording regarding harm, which is limited to identifiable victim. As we know from numerous examples, public deceit can cause institutional or systemic harm rather than individual injury, and we do need clarity about that. I'm sure that, and I want to be clear from right now, from this moment, that the process must result in a stronger bill, not a weaker bill.

Too many people have had to fight too hard for too long just to get to this point, and we've got to see it through and get it right. This is no time to be timid. We were elected with a mandate to deliver this, to do it and to do it properly. The victims of Hillsborough and too many other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tragedies deserve nothing less here. Sorcha Eastwood.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to begin today echoing the thoughts of so many people across the House by paying tribute to the Hillsborough families. I am an MP representing the constituency of representing the constituency of Northern Ireland and I do have to confess, I am a red. But we heard of your plight and we took that plight on as our own. And I can't see up in the gallery, but Margaret see up in the gallery, but Margaret and everybody else up there, we are thinking of you and holding you in our heart today.

This is your day and what you have managed to do has not just reverberated throughout not just reverberated throughout Liverpool and the whole of the United Kingdom, but the world. You have set the gold standard, and it have set the gold standard, and it is a standard that we should never have expected you to pay to lose have expected you to pay to lose family members at any time is extremely traumatic, but to lose extremely traumatic, but to lose them in the way that you lost your loved ones and the subsequent cover
19:00
Sorcha Eastwood Portrait Sorcha Eastwood MP (Lagan Valley, Alliance)
-
-
loved ones and the subsequent cover up and other members have mentioned this today. It is not just simply about the statutory organisations

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and their response, but also the role of the press. Here, here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here, here. Last summer, whenever this House sat for the first time, the Prime Minister said that this was going Minister said that this was going to be a government of service. And I really do believe that this today is the best example of that so far. This bill is all about service to This bill is all about service to people and service to community. Whenever I entered Parliament last year, I found a kindred spirit and year, I found a kindred spirit and my friend, the honourable member for Liverpool West Derby, and this is personal to me and my is personal to me and my constituents because we have many people in Lagan Valley and Northern Ireland impacted by the infected Ireland impacted by the infected blood scandal, and my constituents are some of those families.

But this is about a pattern, and some

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this is about a pattern, and some others have referenced this today. And I will just say it out loud. is. A.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A. Strong element of class within this. People do not understand. If this. People do not understand. If you have been brought up, raised by the state, for want of a better the state, for want of a better word, reliant on them for financial and other support. And if someone tells you to take a pill because you've got morning sickness you've got morning sickness whenever you're pregnant, you take the pill, you take the pill, and you believe that you will be OK.

And when people start to ask questions, you don't ask why I'm so many women across the UK took that pill. Thalidomide, primodos, sodium valproate. Aggressions against women as they were labelling the Ockenden report. So many issues littering across our culture and our United Kingdom, and the pattern is always the same transgressions against people who sometimes don't even know how to raise the alarm. If you were to ask the person on the Clapham omnibus, do you know what the Public Interest Disclosure Act is? Do you know how to utilise your rights in regard to that piece of legislation? They're going to look at you.

They're going to turn around and say, I'm not going to tighten the boss. And that is a cultural phenomenon. And it is a cultural phenomenon that persists because we have such inequality within this country, inequality in terms of housing, in terms of education, we can see a huge social gulf widening every day. And why should we be surprised? Whenever people who are done wrong by the state feel that they have nowhere to turn because they can't even see themselves, that they have been done wrong? This is a matter that transcends politics, and it has been heartening today to hear that echoed right across this House.

This is not a matter of party politics. This is a matter of representing our constituents to the best of our ability. This is why this legislation is so important. It represents the UK government finally, recognising that honesty and transparency are not optional virtues. They are the foundations of justice. Just today in the Northern Ireland Assembly, my colleagues have spoken to one of the biggest scandals of our time the cervical smear scandal in the Southern Trust, which takes in part of my constituency and Lagan Valley 17,000 women have had their smear tests read incorrectly.

Two of them have already passed away. Erin Harbinson and Lindsay Courtney, both young mothers, and they are still waiting today for adequate responses as to why that happened. And that's just one part of the UK. But another reason why this is so important and personal to me or my constituents in Lagan Valley the Conroy family. And I'm really, really grateful to my friends and members from Northern Ireland for mentioning the case today of flight Zulu Delta 576. 29 people on board were killed.

There were no survivors. But what happened afterwards should and is a stain on the corporate body of the UK. It shouldn't be materially relevant, but the fact that all of those people on board gave their lives in service to protecting people, and they were paid by the state denying justice, but saying that the Air four special Forces pilots were wrong, they just said they were wrong. That was it. Nothing to say were it not for the persistence of the families of Flight lieutenants Rick Kirk and Jonathan Topper, those families would have walked away today.

But it wasn't until over a year ago where a documentary aired, and that's how some of the families found out that actually the files relating to the Chinook crash are saved for 100 years, 100 years. Now, I understand, due to the reasons for the people on board that craft, we can get round that through a public immunity certificate. But those families deserve answers. And if this government is serious about this, this should be the first test case

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to say that this I will. I'm grateful to the honourable member for giving way, and at member for giving way, and at present it's not obvious what public servants should do if relevant material cannot be disclosed because it's of an intelligence or security nature. At the very least. Does she think that strengthening the reach of the Intelligence and Security Committee might help to bring some oversight of the sort that her constituents

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of the sort that her constituents and my constituents would expect? Absolutely. I call Ian Byrne.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call Ian Byrne. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. This moment carries immense weight for me and for so many others here me and for so many others here today, for all those who've lost loved ones, those who carry the loved ones, those who carry the scars, and those who survived but never recovered from the trauma of being dragged into a state cover up. being dragged into a state cover up. Because this bill is not just about legislation, although that is vital.

It's about legacy. It's about truth. It's about justice and accountability. Three ways the establishment have resisted at establishment have resisted at every turn, three words we are forced to place at the heart of forced to place at the heart of this bill. And let me speak briefly as to why I have fought so hard for those words, like so many of the those words, like so many of the Hillsborough in 1989, like so many a witness to cover up unfold, 97 innocent men, women and children were unlawfully killed, countless more lives shattered.

But the tragedy was only the beginning. The cover up that followed was deliberate. A calculated attempt to
19:08
Ian Byrne Portrait Ian Byrne MP (Liverpool West Derby, Labour)
-
-
rewrite history and shift the blame onto the victims. Let us never forget what the Chief Constable of forget what the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police admitted in 2012, after the Hillsborough Independent panel. In the immediate Independent panel. In the immediate aftermath, senior officers sought to change the record of events. to change the record of events. Disgraceful lies were told, which blamed the Liverpool fans for the disaster. The statements were altered which sought to minimise altered which sought to minimise police blame.

And I saw this with my own eyes because I sat beside my my own eyes because I sat beside my dad, who was seriously injured, elsewhere in the Liverpool office of Elkin Abrahamsson, who's here of Elkin Abrahamsson, who's here today and one of the architects of this bill, along with Pete Weatherby when he received his Weatherby when he received his revised statement, the anger, dismay, betrayal. He felt reading dismay, betrayal. He felt reading the lies written in his name is something I will never, ever forget and why this means so much to me.

and why this means so much to me. It took 23 years for South Yorkshire Police to admit the scale Yorkshire Police to admit the scale of its cover up. And yet by 2020, 31 years after Hillsborough, no public servants had been convicted, public servants had been convicted, no police officer disciplined. In fact, Norman Bettison, who was fact, Norman Bettison, who was absolutely central to the cover up, not only escaped sanction but was rewarded with a knighthood for his efforts, a title he disgracefully retains to this day.

So yes, we got the truth, but justice now. And that is why we here today. The bill must be ready for the 97. He was unlawfully killed. It must be wary of all who have suffered at the hands of the state. That covers up its failures. And I want to thank everybody who has helped to reach this point today. There's so many to name, so many sitting here today, so many be sitting at home watching this on the TV and some no longer with us.

And I pay tribute to the campaign group behind Hillsborough Law now the Hillsborough Families and Survivors The Truth About Jane nuclear test veterans, contaminated blood campaigners, Post Office Horizon scandal victims, Covid 19 bereaved families for justice Grenfell United, the FBU, Manchester Arena families campaigns and of course inquest all have faced the same wall of silence, the same institutional defensiveness, the same decades long fight for truth and the pain that brings. And that's why this bill must not be watered down.

It must include every extent of the measure promised by Ministers, including the duty of candour that applies to all inquiries, including local and parity of funding enshrined as a clear principle on the bill. Because time and time again, grieving families have faced the full might of the state, armed only with determination. While public bodies deploy teams of lawyers to protect reputations and shield those responsible. The imbalance is grotesque and absolutely deliberate. Let's be clear the establishment will try to weaken this bill.

They will say it's too complex, too costly, too disruptive, but what they really mean is too effective because it threatens their impunity. The scale of state cover ups should shame this House, for this place has, over the years, played a key role in their creation and concealment. But today that can change with this bill as it passes through Parliament. I and others will examine it line by line to ensure it remains fit to bear the name Hillsborough. And Madam Deputy Speaker, while I thank the government for getting us here today, I must raise a few issues that need to be addressed at the Bill Committee report stage.

The bill rightly creates both corporate and individual duties, so fundamentally important when we look to avoid another Grenfell. Section two five requires the person in charge of a public body to take reasonable steps to ensure compliance, but it does not make the chief officer or executive liable. Without that individual accountability, the deterrence of command responsibility is lost and the culture of the cover up. Your time to end may continue. So I urge MPs in this place to press the government to strengthen this provision.

Also, the government recognises the statutory duty of candour to change the culture of cover ups because of giveaways.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I want to thank him. Pay tribute to my honourable friend for all the work he's done for years to all the work he's done for years to help get us to this point. It's incredible. Would he agree with me? He's listing some things that need to be strengthened. The bill and I completely agree with him. Would he agree with me that this this is the start of a process? This is just

**** Possible New Speaker ****

start of a process? This is just another step on the journey. It's not the end by any means. Ian Byrne member makes a fair

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Ian Byrne member makes a fair point. This is a great start, but there's a long way to go yet. We keep our foot to the pedal so the government recognises the need for government recognises the need for the statutory duty of candour to change the culture to cover ups. Madam Deputy Speaker, candour is not incompatible with national security. The duty to tell the truth must apply to everyone, truth must apply to everyone, including in telling intelligence agencies. Carve outs for individual officers, undermine this bill and frankly, have no place in legislation about candour.

Accountability will improve the performance of our security performance of our security services and surely enhance our safety, not lessening. The government have been offered a government have been offered a simple amendment to fix this issue within the new bill by the lawyers connected to Hillsborough Law now, connected to Hillsborough Law now, and ensure that accountability. I urge the government to support it. Colleagues, we did not get here without a long collective effort from so many, and we must continue that same collective efforts to ensure truth, justice and accountability are finally, finally enshrined in law.

This bill must honour those already wronged by the state and those who fought for justice on their behalf, and those who might come after us. But it must also mark the beginning of the end for the suffering of innocent working class people dragged into the vortex of a state cover up. Madam Deputy Speaker, my message remains crystal clear anything less than a Hillsborough Law delivered in full would be a further betrayal of the 97, and indeed unworthy of the name Hillsborough.

And we all in this place and those watching will carry on relentless until we get that legacy here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Seamus Logan. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This bill certainly is long

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This bill certainly is long overdue. I previously contributed to the excellent debate in Westminster Hall, secured by the Westminster Hall, secured by the honourable member for Liverpool West Derby, and he's just made another fantastic contribution to another fantastic contribution to this campaign. He's been a tireless campaigner for justice since the disaster in 1989. The SNP support this Bill and we will work with the UK government to change the culture UK government to change the culture of secrecy and cover up, which for far too long has characterised too much of our public life.

Scotland much of our public life. Scotland and the rest of the UK are well served by the exceptional dedication and commitment of our dedication and commitment of our public officials, who work every day to keep our communities safe. However, it is right that we should However, it is right that we should be able to trust that those who serve in a public role fulfil very high standards of behaviour and
19:14
Seamus Logan Portrait Seamus Logan MP (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, Scottish National Party)
-
-
high standards of behaviour and conduct throughout their careers. The sad reality is that when failures are discovered or were discovered, far too often the wagons were circled rather than good faith efforts being made to provide transparency and justice. So often in my own career in health and social care, I witnessed public bodies and senior executives responding to adverse events in defensive ways, declining to offer apologies to to avoid financial cost, and seeking to hide the truth to protect careers.

But the buck stops in this place, ultimately. So to reiterate, the SNP, Scottish Government is supportive of the aims of this Bill and has been engaging closely with the UK government on this legislation, including how it may be extended to Scotland and which Scottish legislation will require amendment. If so, emotional and legislative consent will be presented to the Scottish Parliament for debate. In the meantime, public servants are, of course, expected to continue to follow all existing codes, professional and legal obligations until this bill is fully implemented.

The SNP government has already taken legislative steps to introduce a duty of candour in areas of public life in Scotland, but this Bill must now be the catalyst to change organisational culture for good across these islands. Now turning to the Bill itself, I fully agree with the member for Chichester. The bill would benefit from the establishment of an office of the whistleblower, and that's got to be one of the outcomes of the eventual passing of this legislation. Now, in relation to the measures dealing with enforcement and compliance, we fully support these.

But the key question is when will we see an end to cover up to denial of vesication and defensiveness? The provisions of this law must extend not only to intelligence services, but also to their individual officers. It must make clear that there is a single, clear point of accountability for chief executives of public bodies and other leaders in their command responsibilities. As the draft currently stands, some legal experts believe the wording here may be weak, and there is a case for reviewing and strengthening this part of the bill.

We welcome the proposed codes of conduct in relation to proposed standards of ethical conduct and the extension of the law to private bodies with public service, health and safety responsibilities. Clause five of the duty of candour allows for a prison sentence of up to two years. This could be unduly lenient when one considers some of the more serious scandals. The inclusion of the concept of victim harm in clause 11th May not be as helpful as it sounds, as it would potentially exclude those who, for example, simply falsify statistics for whatever reason and therefore are not directly necessarily creating any specific victims.

The wording here, I believe, could be reviewed. We welcome the commitment to equality of arms in court proceedings, ensuring victims and their families have full recourse to legal aid. Too often in the past, the absence of public funding has been an insurmountable obstacle. mat Deputy Speaker and I agree here Winchester already made this point. This bill makes no reference to newspapers or other media outlets, some of which are up to their necks in law breaking, as demonstrated by the Leveson Inquiry.

As members will know, Livingston two was meant to investigate the relationship between the press and the police and was cancelled by the Cameron government. As a result. There is little or no accountability in this area. There is still deep hurt in Liverpool at the conduct of some editorial staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper all those years ago. There are other examples of misconduct and even lawbreaking. Can this bill provide some solutions in this area relevant to the media, and if not, how does the government intend to address this issue? Finally, as I've already alluded to at the outset in relation to devolved matters, there is a clear need to work proactively with devolved administrations in relation to legal provisions which will require amendment.

There have been so many examples in recent times of an utter failure to consult, liaise or communicate in relation to the devolved administrations. It cannot happen in this instance, and I do hope that going forward, we will see maximum cooperation in these matters. So on behalf of my party, we and I stand ready to make a constructive contribution as this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Bill passes through its next stages. Thank you Paula Barker. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to support this bill. I want to start. By thanking the Prime Minister. For delivering. On our manifesto promise of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On our manifesto promise of letting the Hillsborough Law before this House today. As a Liverpool MP

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and someone who had family and friends at Hillsborough, who fortunately all came home, I would not have. Accepted anything.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Accepted anything. That was. Not accepted. By the families. And I know that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I know that. My neighbouring colleagues feel the same. I am grateful, as I know the families will be, that the Prime Minister confirmed he will Prime Minister confirmed he will accept no watering down of the bill as it completes its parliamentary passage, and I sincerely hope that those in the other place have heard those in the other place have heard that pledge loud and clear. I also want to pay tribute to my constituent, Mark Corrigan, who was constituent, Mark Corrigan, who was in the public gallery today, along with many of the family members of the 97.

Mark's brother, Keith
19:19
Paula Barker Portrait Paula Barker MP (Liverpool Wavertree, Labour)
-
-
the 97. Mark's brother, Keith McGrath, was one of the 97 who was unlawfully killed at Hillsborough. His parents, Mary and Joe Corrigan, fought all the way to the end for truth and justice and demonstrated the strength, dignity and resilience of all the families. Our city on the banks of the Mersey is one that knows about solidarity, love and empathy. We are a city that has one another's back, and we know all too well that an injustice to one is an injustice to all.

And I can proudly say, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the bonds that were forged in the fire of the 15th of April, 1989 are as strong today as ever. As I have said previously, in this place, Scousers have long memories. We shall never forget. We will continue to mourn our lost loved ones, and we will always fight for truth and justice, opposing those who continue to spread the appalling lies of that fateful day with every fibre of our being. And on that point, Madam Deputy Speaker Margaret Aspinall, who lost her son James, as Hillsborough has said, and I quote today, Hillsborough Law is finally debated in Parliament.

But justice won't be done until the son, too is made to answer for its abuses. The Prime Minister promised us that he would see this through. It's time for him to deliver the justice he promised to build on today's vital achievement by making Leveson two a reality, and ensure the media is held to account for its role in state failures and cover ups. The sun, appallingly played a key role in the cover up of the Hillsborough disaster by working with the South Yorkshire Police to spread lies about what happened and hide the truth.

The bill before us does not contain any references to Leveson two or the role of the press, and is exclusively focussed on public officials and authorities. As welcome as that is, and I note, the Prime Minister is no longer in his place, but I would be grateful if he could update the House. Madam Deputy Speaker, as soon as possible, if he will consider establishing a public inquiry into the relationship between the police and the sun. Yeah, and also, if he will keep his promises by meeting with victims of press abuses and working with them to introduce further legislation to tackle press standards and corruption.

If any small flicker of light can come from the darkness of Hillsborough, it must be protection for succeeding generations. From the pain and anguish of the lies, the misinformation and cover ups we witnessed and suffered from for over three decades. I welcome the fact that this law will ensure that families bereaved by public disasters are treated far better and don't have to fight for decades.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I welcome the duty of candour. Although I can hardly believe we must legislate for people to tell the truth. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. The fact is has taken over three decades to get to this point is a decades to get to this point is a grotesque abdication of responsibility of those in this place. To those who we represent, place. To those who we represent, those who don't possess the levers of power, and those with little resource, or than their collective resource, or than their collective and determined voice. So when we say never again for Hillsborough, say never again for Hillsborough, we are not just referring to the tragedy itself.

We are also saying never again. For Grenfell, the never again. For Grenfell, the Manchester Arena attack, the horizon scandal, nuclear test horizon scandal, nuclear test veterans, the infected blood scandal and so many more. If the law does not place itself on the law does not place itself on the side of ordinary people, good and decent people, it will only consign decent people, it will only consign itself as a hobby tool for the privileged and powerful in safeguarding their own interests. safeguarding their own interests.

We should never just hear the voices of those in this place, but

**** Possible New Speaker ****

voices of those in this place, but those of the people who do not walk these corridors of power. Amen.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amen. Let us give power to them. Let us elevate their voices, because anything less is an injustice. Madam Deputy Speaker, we need to pass this bill in full for the families, for the victims, for the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

survivors. Justice for the 97 year Tessa Munt. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I draw the House's attention to my register of interests, and in particular, my role as vice Chair particular, my role as vice Chair of whistleblowers UK, a not for profit organisation. The bill before us introduces new obligations of transparency and obligations of transparency and frankness on public authorities and officials, leaving them nowhere to hide from public scrutiny of their hide from public scrutiny of their actions. These aims. I absolutely applaud there's been an offer to applaud there's been an offer to strengthen the bill, and I have a contribution which stems from an over a decade of listening to over a decade of listening to whistleblowers.

The UK has no proper law for whistleblowing and for protecting whistleblowers.
19:24
Tessa Munt Portrait Tessa Munt MP (Wells and Mendip Hills, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
for protecting whistleblowers. Section 43 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, introduced by the Public Interest Disclosure Act of 1998, gives a measure of protection from detriment to workers and employees who make what are termed public interest disclosures. However, that provision treats such detriments as essentially employment matters. It does not once use the word whistleblowing or whistleblower, nor does it extend beyond workers and employees. It's highly technical, puts all sorts of barriers and difficulties in the way of workers and employees who make public interest disclosures focuses exclusively on the employment context and rarely, if ever, leads to any wider investigation of the substantive matters about which the worker or employee makes a disclosure.

The Public Office (Accountability) Bill misses an opportunity. It could and should have recognised the important role played by whistleblowers in ensuring accountability. The whistleblower is, or should be every CEO, every board, and every minister's best friend. Whistleblowers want to see an end to crime, corruption and cover up. They don't want to be fired for raising their concerns. Almost everyone will recognise the major scandals where whistleblowers have reported what's happening again and again, and they've not been believed, or worse, they've been invited or forced to leave their roles.

The case against whistleblowers is all about protection of reputation and the imbalance of power, and I recognise entirely what the member for Lagan Valley has said earlier. Explicit recognition was given to the role of whistleblowers in the ten Minute Rule bill introduced by the Member of Parliament for Liverpool West Derby on the 9th of July, 2025, with the support of the Hillsborough victims. Clauses two, five, one and nine in that ten minute rule bill contained provisions which would have been of huge significance in advancing the protection of whistleblowers.

For the first time in legislation, the bill gave explicit recognition to whistleblowing, a word which has hitherto not featured in the legislative lexicon. The ten Minute Rule Bill took the present concept of public interest disclosures, and sought to extend it beyond the employment employment law context, extending whistleblower protection to all who blow the whistle, many of whom will be outside the scope of employment law. If that bill had proceeded, whistleblowing as a legal concept would have broken out of the confines of employment law.

It would be easy for the government in clause nine, which requires public authorities to publish codes of ethics, to take their bill to sorry to take over the provision in the earlier bill into their bill requiring public authority codes of ethics, ethics to recognise the need to protect whistleblowers. It's both deeply disappointing and unfortunate that it does not. And I'll ask the Minister to address that point and amend the bill in her mission to strengthen it. If that were to happen, that would be a start.

But it needs further reform first. That would only it would only apply where potential wrongdoers of public authority within the scope of the bill. Second, such protection as would be given would arise only indirectly through the existence of a code of ethics. Thirdly, the bill would lack teeth to deal with breaches of the code of ethics, and fourthly, there would still be no mechanism for investigating and following up the wrongdoing which a whistleblower might have uncovered. There remains an urgent need to set up the office for the whistleblower to extend the scope to include contractors in the private sector, which has already been mentioned sector.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

But may I remind, may I. May I remind my honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

May I remind my honourable friend, the scope of this bill, please. Tessa Munt. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was seeking to pick up the Minister's intention spoken earlier and the Prime Minister's intention and the Prime Minister's intention to make sure that this bill was as strong as it could be. So the. I'll strong as it could be. So the. I'll go back and say that the scope should include contractors in this private sector, as well as the private sector, as well as the public sector, which was mentioned earlier, to provide real legal teeth and to ensure that wrongdoing is fully investigated and wrongdoers are brought to account.

I would ask the minister if she would meet with me and whistleblowers to explore the scope of this bill. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Anneliese Midgley. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. That day in.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That day in. April 1989 will never leave us. Fans went to the match and.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Fans went to the match and. Never came home. They were not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

lost. They were unlawfully killed. Authorities protecting themselves. Decades of denial,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

themselves. Decades of denial, distortion and lies oppress slandering the dead. And the grieving.
19:29
Anneliese Midgley Portrait Anneliese Midgley MP (Knowsley, Labour)
-
-
A cover up and systematic failure of the state that. Cut deeper and lasted longer than anyone could have imagined. And still not one successful prosecution. That is why we are here today. That is why the families and survivors continue to fight. We have all seen their courage and their determination, and I cannot express. What it means to be in this place with so many of the Hillsborough families, with us Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

One of them. Is Margaret Aspinall. She is from. Highton and she has asked me from. Highton and she has asked me to say some words on her behalf. She has repeated many times to the Prime Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Prime Minister. And the Attorney. General that the group want the Hillsborough law to be delivered in Hillsborough law to be delivered in its entirety. With no changes or

**** Possible New Speaker ****

system. That is so much fairer for families who have lost a loved one

**** Possible New Speaker ****

families who have lost a loved one in a state related death. Today. It is the perpetrators who get the. Help while the victims.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the. Help while the victims. Get a massive cover up. It must

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Get a massive cover up. It must never again be a one way system to deliver on. That promise means delivering the Hillsborough Law in delivering the Hillsborough Law in full. That means imposing duties on chief officers rather than corporate bodies. This matters, Madam Deputy Speaker, because it Madam Deputy Speaker, because it should have been a duty on the Chief Constable, Peter Wright, rather than South Yorkshire Police, rather than South Yorkshire Police, making the misleading the public offence impractical and ineffective offence impractical and ineffective by requiring proof of harm.

That means bringing forward an amendment on combined and local authority inquiries, without which the result could be the intelligence services failing to properly provide the full facts into inquiries and, in the case of the families of those who tragically lost their lives in Manchester Arena. Attack called institutional defensiveness and a lack of candour from MI5. As this bill progresses, the families and the members of this House will continue to watch the Hillsborough Law is exactly what this government will deliver.

Margaret son James Aspinall died at Hillsborough. He was just 18. She was forced to accept £1,200, which was supposed to represent compensation for James's life. £1,200 for the life of your son. She was forced to cash it against her will because she couldn't find the money to pay her share of the family's legal costs. She said making a lover like myself accept a pittance to fight a cause. The guilt of this has lived with me for years, and that hasn't stopped because since the Hillsborough verdict, other families have been made to beg for legal aid.

Madam Deputy Speaker Charlotte Hennessy is a constituent of my right honourable friend the member for Alyn and Deeside, who was a government whip, does not have the opportunity to speak today and tell her story. Charlotte was just six when her dad, Jemmy Hennessy, went to the match and never came home. Jemmy was 29. He was a plasterer, a man of morals, and he looked good. A family man respected for 23 years. Charlotte was told that he died of traumatic asphyxiation. It wasn't until 2012 that she learnt the truth.

Her dad was found alive on that pitch. A police officer testified he felt life and give him see. Jemmy was carried to the gym where he was supposed to receive medical support. He was declared dead, but he wasn't dead. He was still alive when he was zipped into a body bag. He vomited inside it. The pathology report was false. Jemmy didn't die in the crush. He died from inhalation of his own gastric contents. Can you imagine dying like that? Can you imagine knowing that your dad died like that? Charlotte told me the agony of living with an official lie.

But she has fought to piece together her dad's truth. And she told me a Hillsborough Law with the duty of candour is imperative. It must stop corruption and prevent any other family from going through the pain that we went through. It is right that the government have attempted to match the courage of the families and to be bold, but Hillsborough is not a one off. Again and again the state fails. Those who need the most protection justice for the 97, but also for every family who has or might one day face the nightmare.

We cannot let them down. This bill must be delivered in full with no watering down, and I look forward to the Minister promise, as the Prime Minister did to us from the dispatch box today, that this will be the Hillsborough Law, that it will be strong enough to protect every victim of state failure, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

finally deliver justice for the 97 Jim Allister. Thank you, Madam Speaker, in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Speaker, in welcoming this bill, I am very mindful of the tenacity and courage mindful of the tenacity and courage of the campaigners who got us to this point. Campaigners outside and this point. Campaigners outside and inside this House who can take some comfort from this bill today. And I trust that this is a bill that will live up to its promise. As I live up to its promise. As I mentioned in my intervention to the Prime Minister, I trust, for example, it will bring justice to the families who have been treated the families who have been treated to cereal cover ups in respect of that appalling incident.

But there are issues about this bill. I want to probe. This bill declares in its
19:36
Jim Allister Portrait Jim Allister KC MP (North Antrim, Traditional Unionist Voice)
-
-
to probe. This bill declares in its very first clause that the purpose of this act is to ensure that public authorities and public officials, at all times, at all times, perform their functions with candour, transparency and frankness, and in the public interest. But is it at all times, because we discover within this bill that the only criminal sanction is if you do not show candour, transparency and frankness to a public inquiry or a public investigation, where in many cases there already would be the threat of perjury.

So where is the commitment of ensuring candour at all times? I want public officials.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The minister wants to intervene. I'm quite happy to take it. Yes. I welcome the intervention by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I welcome the intervention by the honourable gentleman. The bill literally says there is a duty of candour at all times.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

candour at all times. And then it goes on in Subclause

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And then it goes on in Subclause one Subclause two to tell us how it does that. And it says there are does that. And it says there are five ways in which it is done. The first one is imposing a duty on public authorities and public public authorities and public officials to act with candour, transparency and frankness in their dealing with inquiries and investigations, and imposing investigations, and imposing criminal liability for the breach of that. That's the only criminal liability that arises for breach of duty, of candour.

The second way is duty, of candour. The second way is to impose an ethical code on public authorities. And then but no new criminal offence. If you breach the ethical code. None whatsoever. Then ethical code. None whatsoever. Then it was in C, D and E, imposing criminal liability of public authorities and public officials authorities and public officials who mislead the public in ways that are seriously improper, imposing are seriously improper, imposing criminal liability for serious, improper acts by individuals holding public office for breaches which prevent to prevent death or serious injury, and then making provision about party inquiries about legal aid.

Prime Minister told us that this act applies across the whole United Kingdom. Sadly, it does not. The extent clause. At clause 24 makes it plain that the last three I've just read out do not apply to Northern Ireland or to Scotland. This Bill applies only in its entirety to England and Wales, and that means that clause 11, for example, which is an important cause because it does create a criminal offence. The offence of misleading the public does not apply anywhere but in England and Wales.

Why should that be? Why is this bill not drafted? Why is this bill not drafted in such a way that those clauses apply to the whole United Kingdom? And then we deploy the mechanism of legislative consent from the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Assemblies of Scotland and Wales? Yes, sir. Thank you very much.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. The member may or may not be aware that in order for that to happen, in order for those sections happen, in order for those sections to apply across the UK, the Scottish Government would have to agree to a slow motion or a legislative consent motion that would allow this place to legislate for Scotland. Justice is devolved for Scotland. Justice is devolved to the Scottish Parliament. It has been since the Act of Union and before, and it is something that is before, and it is something that is valued, so there would have to be that agreement.

It isn't something that can be laid at the feet of this minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this minister. That's exactly. What I said, Madam Deputy Speaker. Why isn't this bill include that on the basis of a include that on the basis of a legislative consent motion? There could be a legislative consent motion sought from Stormont and from Edinburgh. And by that means we could have uniformity across the United Kingdom. That is the United Kingdom. That is the mechanism for doing it. But the starting point is to make that clause applicable across the United clause applicable across the United Kingdom and then have the legislative consent motion to enable that to be enforced.

That is that is how Parliament works with the devolved institutions. Members can shake their heads as much as they like. But I was a member of a devolved institution. I know that's how it works. And that emphatically

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is how it works. Yes. The member was a member of the Other place instrument. I too was a Other place instrument. I too was a member of the Holyrood Parliament, but I was also the Minister for Parliamentary Business for three and a half years. It was my responsibility to take through legislation in that Parliament and to oversee the Sewel convention. to oversee the Sewel convention. And I can assure him that is not how it happened.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

how it happened. many. Times.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Times. Many, many times in the Stormont Assembly bills which are passing Assembly bills which are passing through this House, which included measures such as new criminal offences, were subject to a offences, were subject to a legislative consent motion of which then give consent, were to proceed. then give consent, were to proceed. That mechanism could equally be used here. And my question is my used here. And my question is my question to my question to the House is this if this act is House is this if this act is delivering the duty of candour by the five steps set out in clause the five steps set out in clause one Subclause two, how can do that for the whole United Kingdom? If

**** Possible New Speaker ****

three of those steps do not apply throughout the United Kingdom? Yes, a good way. I'm grateful for the honourable member for taking an intervention. This isn't a debate about about the Constitution. What this is a debate about is about duty of candour. And I agree with him that the intention is that all nations in the United Kingdom will be bound by this. However, he will be fully aware of the devolved competencies for Scotland and Northern Ireland in this case.

We are having positive engagement with both nations and that is the intention of the Bill, and I would just like to remind the honourable member to maybe bring the debate back to exactly what this bill is about with the families in the gallery today.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I hope, therefore, that the Minister, when she comes to reply, will indicate that, subject to will indicate that, subject to legislative consent, she will indeed make this a bill which applies across the whole United applies across the whole United Kingdom, because my my constituents, my constituents are entitled as anyone else to the same duty of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

anyone else to the same duty of candour that arises elsewhere. Yes. Thank the honourable member for giving way. And he is making a very giving way. And he is making a very powerful point. The Minister referred to the devolved competences. Would he not agree competences. Would he not agree with me that this Parliament is sovereign, and this Parliament on many occasions has intervened in many occasions has intervened in laws in Northern Ireland that are devolved, and therefore it is upon this government to do the right

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this government to do the right thing and make this all applicable to Northern Ireland. I agree absolutely, and many times has that happened. But, you times has that happened. But, you know, if we are serious about saying on the basis of equal citizenship across this United citizenship across this United Kingdom and that's what it is to belong to United Kingdom, if we're saying there's there's a basis of equal citizenship, then the duty of candour that we're giving to candour that we're giving to England and Wales should equally be given to all of the United Kingdom.

I welcome it for England and Wales. I welcome it for England and Wales. I welcome it as far as it goes in Northern Ireland, but it does not go far enough. And I'm disappointed at the reticence of the government to accept that this bill, like any other bill, could be improved and it would be a mighty step forward to improving it, to ensure, to ensure that it does indeed give that duty of candour across the United Kingdom. I would if I hadn't run out of time.

So I do say to the government, yes, let's go with this bill, but let's make it a better bill that gives the same rights right across this United Kingdom.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Kim Johnson thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise in support of this bill today as the MP for Liverpool Riverside, as a very proud Scouser and as the Chair of proud Scouser and as the Chair of the APPG on the Miscarriage of justice, because, as we all know, this Hillsborough stands as one of this Hillsborough stands as one of the greatest miscarriages of justice this country has ever seen. justice this country has ever seen. This bill is about simple, powerful idea, truth and justice.

Two words
19:44
Kim Johnson Portrait Kim Johnson MP (Liverpool Riverside, Labour)
-
-
idea, truth and justice. Two words that should underpin our systems of power. But from Hillsborough to Orgreave to the Manchester Arena tragedy. Shrewsbury 24, Grenfell Windrush. We know that too often this simply isn't the case. For decades, working class communities and the families who have lost loved ones have had to fight tooth and nail against institutions that were meant to protect them, only to find those same institutions closing ranks to find themselves facing delay, denial and deceit. This bill and the Hillsborough Law it seeks to deliver is about ending the cycle once and for all.

But let's be honest that progress didn't happen by chance. It's down to tireless efforts of families and campaigners who refuse to give up. And I pay tribute to those families and campaigners who were in the gallery, but also to those who fought very hard, who are no longer with us. They have kept this issue alive when others try to move on and bury it. But I also want to say thanks and a tribute to my good friend, the member for West Derby and Garston, Steve Rotherham and Andy Bernard for the work that they've done on bringing this bill so far.

Hear, hear. But we know that this bill, even with the best of intentions, may face obstacles. We've already heard about the possibility of being watering down in the other place. We all know how things work in Westminster, and while it's welcome that the government have brought it forward, we also being warned that it might be watered down, its blunt, its bite blunted and its meaning diluted. But it is on this House, on all of us here today, to ensure that we fight back against that.

On that shocking day in 1989, 97, innocent people were unlawfully killed. What we must recognise the injustice didn't end that day. The real scandal began in the days, the months and the years that followed when the machinery of the state turned on the victims and the families statements were altered. Blatant lies were printed on the front pages, particularly by the scum newspaper. Families were smeared and forced to relive the trauma for decades just to prove what they already knew, that their loved ones were not to blame.

That is why we need a Hillsborough law, a statutory duty of candour on all public officials so that truth is not optional and cover ups are impossible. Because if that duty had existed in 1989, those families might not have had to wait 36 years for justice in that duty. If that duty had existed, perhaps we would not have seen the same playbook used again at Grenfell or grave with infected Blood scandal, the Post Office, Windrush and so many more that you've heard in this chamber this afternoon.

We owe it to those families and to every family who has suffered injustice at the hands of the state to make sure it never happens again. And that's why I also want to take this opportunity to recognise the Cammell Laird workers who were unjustly imprisoned in 1984 for standing up for their rights, and who struggle remains a stain on our history and are yet to receive justice. My good friend, the former member for Birkenhead, is a staunch leader in this campaign, and I'd like to thank him for his incredible work because their case, like Hillsborough, shows exactly why accountability in public office matters.

Because when the state closes ranks, it's ordinary people who pay the price. This bill must establish a legal duty of candour on public officials, a duty to tell the truth, to cooperate fully with investigations and inquiries, and to act in the public interest, not for self-interest. It must ensure parity of legal funding for bereaved families, because justice should never depend on your postcode or your pay packet, it must deliver real accountability with real consequences for those who lie, mislead or obstruct justice.

Because if we have learned anything from Hillsborough, it's that words without consequences are meaningless. Madam Deputy Speaker, I'm forever honoured to represent my home in this House, a city that has lived and breathed this fight for many more than three decades, a city that knows what institutional failure looks like and what courage, solidarity and persistence can achieve in the face of it. For the people of Liverpool, the fight for justice has never been abstract. It is deeply personal. Born out of tragedy, betrayal and unbreakable demand for truth, we are a proud city, proud of our history, our culture, and above all, our sense of solidarity.

The campaign for justice after Hillsborough helped shape our modern identity a fierce refusal to be silenced, a stubborn loyalty to the truth, and an unshakeable belief in collective action. Liverpool has shown this country what dignity looks like in the pursuit of truth. Now it's time for this country to show Liverpool that has learned the lessons. I urge colleagues from across the House to support this Bill. Support with strength and integrity. The people of Liverpool across the UK expect from us and fight for every detail until it's over the line and passed into legislation.

Let's make the truth and justice and accountable, not just pass away today, but enshrined in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hillsborough Law forever. Thank you, Madam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. It has been a massive privilege to have all the families of here with us today. families of here with us today. Without them being here today, this law would not be passing today. And I stand, I rise to support that. I want to I want to also thank the West, the my honourable friend for
19:50
Gill Furniss Portrait Gill Furniss MP (Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough, Labour)
-
-
West, the my honourable friend for West Derby and my honourable friend for Garston, spooks and all and all my Liverpool Edward Leigh and people behind me who have worked so hard over the years. The failure to hold public officials accountable when they are at fault has been the foundation of innumerable scandals in our history. Just a few are Orgreave. Windrush, Grenfell nuclear test veterans, infected blood victims, post office workers and many, many more. All of them have suffered at the hands of the state through no fault of their own.

Yet to our eternal shame, their suffering has been compounded by indifference, inaction and in some case, malice by the very bodies that are meant to serve and protect them. The need for change is clear. It is vital that we have a Hillsborough Law worthy of the name, and I am really pleased that this bill will meet those standards, because I am absolutely certain that my colleagues on the Bill Committee and my colleagues in the other place will ensure that that happens.

Introducing a Labour a Hillsborough law was one of what is one of the most important manifesto commitments myself, and I strongly appreciate that the government has already affirmed that it will resist any attempt to alter that bill down. And I've already said how I believe my colleagues and friends will be will be going about that. As the Member of Parliament for Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough. I know that many of my constituents will strongly welcome this commitment. On April the 15th, 1989, we became we welcome.

We were home to the country's biggest sporting disaster. At the time. I lived just around the corner from the football ground. I've never forgotten that day. I went out to buy a card for my best friend's birthday. I walked down my street just after this had happened, when people were coming out and I found at my local shops, there was one telephone box. There must have been 80 to 100 people queuing up at the side of that box in complete silence.

Not a word was being spoken amongst them as I carried on to going, going home, it became apparent there were people just walking around our community. They were completely dazed and traumatised by what they had seen

**** Possible New Speaker ****

happen on that day. Please. I'd just like to place on record my thanks to the people of Sheffield after you were absolutely magnificent in how they looked after the Liverpool fans who were, as you said, had no way to phone home. And it was a it was an home. And it was a it was an unbelievable human kindness that day from the people of Sheffield to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the fans of Liverpool Football Club. Thank you. OK. Yeah. Yes. To continue, my neighbours and community were neighbours and community were opening their doors to people to give them cups of tea because they give them cups of tea because they were clearly, clearly in shock and also to let them use their telephones to tell their loved ones that they had survived. At that point in time, I was about nine and a half months pregnant. My daughter was born on May the 1st.

Every year was born on May the 1st. Every year when it comes to that date, I think of those who did not have their of those who did not have their daughter at home, whereas I was lucky enough to have my baby. It's lucky enough to have my baby. It's for Sheffield. I think. I would say it's a very emotional day to day, or it is for me anyway to remember or it is for me anyway to remember how it was to remember that that happened in the city that I was born in and that I love.

And I am pleased that the little bit. And thank you to my honourable friend from West Derby, that the few little bits that we could do did mean something to them. And I will be ever proud of my constituents who did that. The Bill well, it the bill. It's long overdue. And, you know, I apologise to people for being long overdue because we should have done better, really, in the past. This is something that has been going on for a long time, whereby public bodies do not think they're accountable.

And that's why in the title today it says accountable. And I think we are now bringing home to people out there, people who work in other areas that they have always been accountable. But we're just reminding them, again, aren't we? And we're making sure that there will be consequences for people who think that it doesn't apply to them, including prison sentences. That is only right. I feel today that we are putting right the wrongs that have been long with us in our society, and I agree with people who have said this is working class, this is having a go at working class because we don't know any better.

They can't, they haven't got any money, they can't go and get easily a legal aid. You know, you don't even exist now. And that to me, I would like to think today is a celebration of people who have campaigned tirelessly over the last 36 years, because without that, we would not be here today. You guys were really tenacious, the friends of and have kept on going and telling everyone what was wrong. And I absolutely concur about the sun.

I would never, ever and never have bought a copy of that paper after that day because the part that they played in, played in this absolute tragedy should have an open inquiry so we can all know how

**** Possible New Speaker ****

they actually collaborated with one another to to. Absolutely Prime Minister as

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely Prime Minister as well. To absolutely make sure that it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To absolutely make sure that it looked like people were drunk, people were out of their heads with stuff people had caused that when they already knew that, that it was they already knew that, that it was their fault. Let us never, ever have this sort of episode again. have this sort of episode again. And I really think that this is the way that we are going to get through that, and that this will go down as history, as a moment when really the truth, the truth became true about it, about this.

And I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

true about it, about this. And I will finish there. Thank you. Hey, Andy Slaughter. Thank you very. Much, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'd

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Much, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'd like to welcome this legislation and thank the government for bringing it forward. It's a result of years of committed campaigning, led by the families of victims and the survivors of Hillsborough, many
19:57
Andy Slaughter Portrait Andy Slaughter MP (Hammersmith and Chiswick, Labour)
-
-
the survivors of Hillsborough, many of the worst corporate miscarriages of justice, from infected blood to Grenville, would have been exposed years, even decades ago, if this bill had become law sooner. The bill requires the state and its agents to tell the truth about their misconduct and provides rights to the victims, not least the right of representation on fair and equal terms in inquests and inquiries. So let us celebrate a landmark piece of legislation that, like the Human Rights Act and the Freedom of Information Act under the last Labour government, gives power to the citizen and makes the state accountable.

But let us also look for ways to improve the bill before us by strengthening what is in the bill and adding what is left out. I welcome the duty of candour in clause two, which requires public authorities and officials to act with candour, transparency and frankness. Clause four extends the duty of candour to bodies or individuals who are not public authorities or officials, but who had a relevant public responsibility. But it requires a direct contractual relationship with the public authority.

This will mean that subcontractors or subsidiary companies would not be caught by the duty of candour, and I think that is wrong. Clause 11 introduces a new offence of misleading the public. It is a strong test that the bill also contains exemptions and caveats that may that may make it less comprehensive or effective. Firstly, the harm test in clause 11 is unnecessary. The object of the clause is to prevent the public being misled. This that may cause harm to an individual, but that should not be a requirement.

Preventing reliance on wrong information is an end in itself. Secondly, the carve out for the security services is too broad. Schedule one to the bill exempts not only legitimate safeguards such as national security, because a general exemption to intelligence officers at all levels up to and including director. Thirdly, clause 11 provides an exemption from the offence of misleading the public for acts done for the purposes of journalism. However, the scope of this exemption is unclear. For example, does it extend to individuals being interviewed as well as those conducting the interview, or to public officials who also, for example, publish news columns or host news programmes? We know too well from Hillsborough that the actions of the media can lead to injustice for victims.

Yet. Yet aside from this exemption clause 11, the role of the media has been overlooked by the bill. South Yorkshire Police defamed the Hillsborough families and survivors, but they did not do so alone. Their lies and smears were promoted by several newspapers, most notably The Sun. It was the culture and the connections between the newspapers and the police which enabled this to happen, and there is no evidence this has changed. Justice for South Yorkshire Police were protected by the sun after Hillsborough.

The Metropolitan Police were responsible for astonishing oversights in its investigations into phone hacking at news UK. This cultural complicity was due to be investigated by part two of the Leveson Inquiry. Margaret Aspinall, who was here today, was among those due to give evidence to Leveson. Her son died at Hillsborough. He was only 18. Margaret has written powerfully in the Liverpool Echo today about the need for this bill, and for the press to be held to account. I'd like to voice my support for the expansion in legal aid for inquests, which will be brought in by the bill.

The bill provides that families will be eligible for non-means-tested legal aid. If a public authority is an interested person at the inquest. I would appreciate clarity from the Minister on how this expansion legal aid will be funded. What is the estimated cost of providing representation at inquests and inquiries, and how will this be funded? Will it be, for example, from existing budgets? Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will mention a couple of provisions which I think should be added to the bill.

There is no mention of the independent Public Advocate. It would be good to hear from the government how it thinks. That office for which the Lord Chancellor has just made an excellent appointment in the person of Cindy Butts, can work to support victims through the bill, and there is no national oversight mechanism provided for in the bill, despite a widespread support for this as a necessary guarantee of the successful implementation of public inquiries and prevention of future death reports, a national oversight mechanism, which has been proposed by the charity inquest, which I know has been working very closely with the the Hillsborough families would ensure that recommendations from inquests and inquiries are effectively publicised and their implementation is monitored.

Too often the recommendations of inquiries sit on shelves and are not implemented, and no one goes back to see that that happened. And that oversight mechanism is a major exception from this bill, and I hope the Minister may address that point when she when she winds up the debate. So I invite them to respond to the points I raised this evening and during the course of this bill. It's an overdue, but no less welcome piece of legislation that the whole House should wish to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

improve and enact. Following the next contribution,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Following the next contribution, I will be reducing the time limit to five minutes. So on a six minute time limit. Abtisam Mohamed.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

time limit. Abtisam Mohamed. Thank you. Deputy Speaker, as the member for Sheffield Central, I the member for Sheffield Central, I approach the Second Reading of this bill with pride that we have finally come here, but with the deepest of frustration and sadness at the time taken for it to get at the time taken for it to get here. Like my friend, my hon. Sorry, the honourable friend for
20:03
Abtisam Mohamed Portrait Abtisam Mohamed MP (Sheffield Central, Labour)
-
-
the honourable friend for Brightside and Hillsborough, many of my constituents in Sheffield Central will be pleased that we are finally here and they, I am sure, will stand in complete solidarity with the families affected. For over three decades, our city was part of a tragedy that repeatedly scarred families and communities who live far beyond South Yorkshire. 97 lives were not only lost at Hillsborough, they were unlawfully killed and instead of those lives being honoured and mourned, the families of the 97 instead had to swallow their grief and fight decades of institutional just injustice, indifference and denial.

The failures weren't limited to what happened on that day in April 1989. They continued for months, years and decades into the future. Wave after wave of betrayal for families already living with unimaginable pain of losing their loved ones. Wave after wave of betrayal by those in leadership positions who just closed ranks. Wave after wave of betrayal by the media, leading to cover ups, delays and dishonesty. But with this bill today, we can say that this will never happen again to anyone.

Because while bereaved families have sought justice for their loved ones, the cover ups have continued. Grenfell. Horizon. Horizon. The infected blood scandal. Just to name but a few. Time and time again, families have watched as the same play, same playbook is used to smear working class communities and protect those at the very top. It's right that Hillsborough families have pushed hard for non-means tested legal aid because whilst those who covered up benefited from benefited from the public purse to fund their legal fees, families had to scrimp, save and borrow just to enter the legal system on the same footing.

So I'm pleased that this bill will ensure that there will be change, and that that change will start now. Fair access to justice means no victim will be left to fight the state alone, and with the duty of candour. Public bodies must act truthfully. They must support investigations, and they must behave in line with the Nolan principles of integrity. So now, when things go wrong, when tragedy strikes, lessons must be learnt, not buried. This is the Hillsborough law, and I thank my hon.

My honourable friend the member for Liverpool West Derby and Liverpool Garston for their tireless efforts to ensure that those lessons are protected in the Bill. Their legacy to the bereaved families and the bereaved families is the legacy that will be remembered. Their tireless campaigning has resulted in the change at the very top, and their relentless fight has forced the government and public institutions to abandon a culture of cover up. There must be accountability and there must be no dilution.

And at the bottom and the heart of this, there must always be justice for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the 97. Year. And on a five minute time limit.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And on a five minute time limit. Dame Nia Griffith Aiden let me, at the beginning of my remarks Claire Hughes tribute.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hughes tribute. To all those who have fought so hard for this day, the Hillsborough families who fought and fought and fought for 36 years. And I pay particular tribute to Margaret Aspinall for her feisty and determined campaigning. It is hard to believe it's taken this long. In fact, it's scandalous and I pay tribute to all those who fought tribute to all those who fought against cover ups and lies to get to the truth. Those hounded and
20:06
Nia Griffith Portrait Dame Nia Griffith MP (Llanelli, Labour)
-
-
even criminalised by the Post Office Horizon scandal and those infected and affected by the contaminated blood scandal. Now, I wholeheartedly welcome this bill today. Within just over a year of Labour taking office. And I know that my right honourable friend, the Prime Minister is absolutely committed to seeing this bill on the statute book. I will not allow it to be watered down in any way. Now, I remember back in December 2023, which was already six years on since the Bishop James Jones published his Hillsborough report that we finally only then got the Conservative government's response.

I remember going to the briefing meeting fully expecting the then Justice Secretary to say that the government would be introducing a Hillsborough law. I was bitterly disappointed to find Conservative government ministers talking about a voluntary charter, but my disappointment was nothing. Nothing compared to the grief and the anguish, the frustration, the anger, the disbelief, the despair. The Hillsborough families have been left feeling time and time again at the cover ups, the obfuscation, the procrastination. And when we come to the contaminated blood scandal, the Post Office horizon scandal, the cover ups, the failure to listen to those experiencing the issues meant that there were new victims.

And the case of the Post Office Horizon scandal. People who need never have become victims, hardworking postmasters and mistresses who were subject to the appalling mental anguish of feeling that their beloved communities, and indeed members of their own family, did not believe them. And we know how tragically that ended for some. And with the infected blood scandal, there were people who need never, never have been infected. In brief, tragedies happen and mistakes are made, but a different culture. A willingness to admit mistakes.

A workplace environment which treats those who speak up, and whistleblowers as constructive, critical friends, not troublemakers. A culture driven by expectation of a duty of candour could so often prevent further victims and suffering today. Finally, we are welcoming a bill that introduces a new duty of candour a full Hillsborough law to force those in public office to cooperate fully with investigations with tough penalties, including prison for those who fail and which guarantees legal aid funding to enable those affected to challenge public institutions.

Now, I was pleased that, in keeping with another of our manifesto promises, back in July, the then Home Secretary announced the Orgreave Inquiry. Can my honourable friend the Minister advise us to whether this Hillsborough Bill become law in time to be applicable to that inquiry? And further to that, amidst rumours of boxes of relevant police papers being destroyed, is there anything that she or her Cabinet colleagues can do even before the bill becomes law? To prevent potential evidence being destroyed? Yeah. Now, other colleagues today have referenced that appalling front page of the sun headlined The Truth, where they allege that fans had stolen from the deceased and had abused police officers, and the sun put the blame for the disaster on the fans.

The sun knew perfectly well that what they said was anything but the truth. It was an outrageous attack on Liverpool fans. There was nothing short of a cover up for the police. So whilst we're introducing a bill today to bring in a duty of candour for our public sector workers, and I do not want to do anything to delay or confuse that in any way. Nevertheless, sooner rather than later, we should be addressing the fact that there is no duty of candour for the media. For 36 years, the sun has escaped all accountability for its contribution to the cover up.

Even today, there are no independently enforced standards for the press, which would end parts of the media's ability to conspire with the authorities to mislead the public. The fact is that Ipso falls well short of Leveson. Part one requirements for independent and robust press regulation. As a result, there's nothing to prevent a cover up perpetrated by the press from happening again today. So whilst I congratulate the Prime Minister and my colleagues in government on today's bill, I would urge them to heed the call that Margaret and is making today to introduce further legislation to make good on Leveson, to bring in tougher regulation of the press and stop certain elements of the press from destroying innocent people's lives.

As we say in Welsh, Mid

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Derbyshire don't be satisfied with the good. If we can do better. Clive Efford.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Clive Efford. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This legislation is long overdue. And looking back at the scandals where the state has deceived the people, some of which go back to the aftermath of the Second World the aftermath of the Second World War, we see a long list of how the great British state has let down people, that it's there to serve. people, that it's there to serve. In all these scandals of the state versus the people, it is ordinary people who had to fight long and
20:11
20:12
20:12
Clive Efford Portrait Clive Efford MP (Eltham and Chislehurst, Labour)
-
-
50s. Hillsborough it took 36 years and the list goes on. All of these demonstrate that there is something wrong at the heart of our state, that the state places itself above the people. It will not allow the people. It will not allow itself to be seen to be wrong, and worse, refuses to offer redress for its wrongdoing. I co-chair the its wrongdoing. I co-chair the Haemophilia and Contaminated Blood All-Party parliamentary Group, one of the worst examples of where the of the worst examples of where the state deceived people over many decades.

At the start of his May decades. At the start of his May 2024 report, Sir Brian Langstaff, Chair of the Infected Blood Inquiry, sets out the depth of the state's deception. How the state knew as early as the mid 40s the dangers early as the mid 40s the dangers posed by transfusions of plasma and the consequences. The risk of spreading infections through spreading infections through transfusion was known in the early days of the NHS, yet this did not days of the NHS, yet this did not result in research or any attempts to ensure that blood was being sourced from safe providers, and sourced from safe providers, and the state doubled down on its denial, whilst continuing to use products that put people at greater products that put people at greater risk.

Sir Brian goes on to accuse the state of a catalogue of failings, deliberate lies and obfuscation. He exposes the scale of the deception, how the state failed to carry out research to make products safer, which could have saved lives and reduced infections. This, in turn led to products not being HIV free at the Treloar's school, pupils with haemophilia were given contaminated blood blood products as parts of experiments. This is probably the most chilling part of this whole scandal.

In their own words, the former pupils of Treloar's called themselves human guinea pigs. What is worse is that the pupils were told that they had glandular fever. Their families were told not to tell anyone it was HIV. The lack of a duty to tell the truth allowed the state to ignore the needs of these victims and their families. They were offered no help, support or counselling. The silence allowed the state to avoid being held to account, something we've seen again and again in the Hillsborough story.

The horizon post Office story and all the rest. This has to stop. And this bill will give us a will at last give a voice to victims. Whilst candour in public officials is welcome, this bill fails to impose a similar duty on our media. We have seen time and again a significant section of our national media collaborate with officials which has obstructed justice, misled the public and led to harassment of survivors and their families. Perhaps the most devastating example is the role of the sun in respect of the Hillsborough tragedy, where the paper directly conspired with South Yorkshire Police to accuse fans of causing the disaster.

I hope this bill that this bill passes through all its stages, as sorry as this bill passes through all its stages, that we can address this omission. Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome this bill. We can. We here as MPs, come to speak truth to power on behalf of our constituents. Now, our constituents will have the power to force, have the right to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

force power to speak truth to them. Yeah. John McDonnell.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

John McDonnell. I pay tribute to all the campaigners, but I want to pay special tribute to the Scouse MPs who in the last few months put who in the last few months put their foot down and said they're having nothing but the Hillsborough Bill and I want to thank them on Bill and I want to thank them on all our behalves. I want to raise a point with regard to this duty of candour, transparency and frankness candour, transparency and frankness and duty to operate the public interest.

I would like from the despatch box to someone to make despatch box to someone to make that clear, that there's a duty to co-operate with the complainants or
20:15
John McDonnell Portrait Rt Hon John McDonnell MP (Hayes and Harlington, Labour)
-
-
co-operate with the complainants or the victims in the pursuit of truth. And I say that not about a historic event, but an event that's happening today. It's called the Mighty Inquiry, and it's the inquiry into the undercover operation that was taking place on a number of our campaigns. And where there is a belligerent fight in that inquiry for the authorities, for the police and the intelligence services, not to tell the truth. I'll explain briefly. 28 years ago, almost to the day, my constituent, young Asian lad Ricky Reel, went on a night out with his mates in Kingston upon Thames and he went missing.

Never came home. That we now know he was. He was racially abused. A week later we found his body in the river. The police inquiry was appalling and we were begging for police. We were begging for police resources to be applied and they were applied. We discovered later they were applied to surveil our campaign. We had police officers undercover, surveilling our campaign, not investigating the case. We were told, well, that don't worry, we weren't really surveilling you. You were collateral damage, collateral invasion of privacy.

It was told. Then we met with the workers who were being blacklisted. So we said our blacklist support group. We discovered that the police and intelligence services were surveilling them and providing information to employers so that some never again worked in their lives. And then, of course, we were working with the Stephen Lawrence inquiry as well, and we discovered a hero, a police officer called Peter Francis, who in this House came and he was part of the unit that undertook the surveillance.

And he actually said, what went on? He blew the whistle. What's happened at the mighty inquiry? He's giving evidence. My constituent, Mrs. Reel, is giving evidence. And the Lawrences and others are. The campaigners are. But the police now, who were core to this are refusing to attend. They're claiming STD. They're claiming that they're so unwell they can't provide the evidence. And as a result of that, we're not going to get to the truth unless there's overpowering duty in this legislation forcing them to cooperate.

Because people have said this is about class, it's also about race. You know, the Lawrence family were surveilled upon why? To provide information to the media, to discredit them in the Ricky Reel campaign, it became farcical. We went to the Metropolitan Police, said, you've now admitted you were surveilling us. We would like to see the actual documents about that surveillance. And we sat there and we were each given our own copy, but it was redacted to such an extent.

There was maybe a sentence or a word. And to be frank, we fell about laughing, but we got up to take them out and we were told you couldn't. And the reason we couldn't is because we might have put them all together and made sentences. That's how bad it was and became farcical. And we still not got to the truth of the full files. And we're still calling for another investigation. So this is highly relevant today. We want a duty. It isn't just about telling the truth.

It's about cooperating with those who are complaining and those who are victims. And until we get that spirit of cooperation, I don't think we'll ever get to the point where we can hold officials and others to account. I have to say as well, I am worried about the way in which the intelligence services will be treated differently, because surveilling the blacklisted workers in particular, was a rare mixture of police, Special Branch and others. I'd like to see how they could be held to account under this legislation, which almost gives them private guarantees that even whistleblowers will never actually be heard, generally in public, in a way that we can expose what goes on.

So there'll be a lot more, I think, to talk about on this legislation and to to amend it. And I'll make the final point that's been made by Honourable friend. I remain angry about the sun. I remain bitterly angry about their role and what they did. And we were promised Leveson part two, and we've dropped it. I don't think there's any justification, if anything good could come out of this debate today, maybe the government will reconsider. We'll have some part two, and we'll have prevents the rol of the sun.

But I have to say, if they're so good, then can you

**** Possible New Speaker ****

imagine how horrendous it would have been? And with an immediate five minute time limit, Gordon McKee

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaker. On a sunny spring afternoon, Linda Howard watched her husband Linda Howard watched her husband and son walk down the path from our House. Even now, decades later, she can recall the details of that can recall the details of that morning with perfect clarity. Young Tommy pestering his dad to be able to join him at the football match, to join him at the football match, his mum not wanting him to make the trip to Sheffield but in seeing the anticipation in his eyes, unable to anticipation in his eyes, unable to say no and break his heart.

So as she said goodbye and watched them walk down the path, Tommy turned to walk down the path, Tommy turned to wave one more time. She didn't know it in that moment, but it would be the last time because her husband and son were heading to a disaster. Their lives would be cruelly taken Their lives would be cruelly taken in a tragedy caused by a failure of
20:20
Gordon McKee Portrait Gordon McKee MP (Glasgow South, Labour)
-
-
care, of control and of courage. An instinct as the crisis deepened, not to act, but to look away. 97 people lost their lives in the Hillsborough disaster, and thousands more lost trust because of the events that happened after. Because the same instinct that led to inaction on that day led to deceit. In the days that followed, the fans of Liverpool Football Club smeared as a gang of drunks. The grotesque implication that somehow the dead were responsible for their own demise.

The grieving mothers, brothers, fathers and sisters treated by the police not as bereaved family but as accomplices to some indescribable crime, taken to a gym hall, forced to look through photographs of the dead to find the fate of their own family. Hillsborough, you see, was not just a collapse of a crush barrier. It was the collapse of trust. A moment when public officials saw their fellow citizens not as people to be protected, but as problems to be managed. I am ashamed to say that this is not unique in our history.

Just ask the grandmother who came to this country on a boat, contributed for decades, only for the state to turn around and tell her she was no longer welcome in her own country. Or the tenant who warned that their building was unsafe but found their home engulfed in flames before they found anyone who would listen. The local businessman, who held together a community only to find that the output of a faulty computer system was treated with more deference by the authorities than his own word and honest reputation.

These are not isolated stories. They are the same story. What was described by the Right Reverend James Jones in his report as the patronising disposition of unaccountable power, a posture that has no place in a just Britain, because power without accountability is not strength, it is corruption. And in a true democracy, the state exists to serve the working class widow on the Wirral just as much as it exists to serve the chief constable of a police force. That's the binding promise of justice in a democracy that together we belong to a country to which we each contribute, and in return by which we are treated equally.

It's the promise also of the movement to which I belong that 100 years ago said working men and women no longer require a patronising disposition, but instead representatives of themselves, people to bestow power on the powerless, to impose on all of those who hold state authority a duty of candour. That is what this legislation before us today does. It instils in the public contract an immovable commitment that the truth shall sit above all else, regardless of consequence. The people of this country do not demand perfection.

They understand the inevitability of mistakes, but what they cannot accept is a state that obscures the truth from its own people. We cannot bring back the victims of Hillsborough. We cannot erase the years of pain or decades of denial. But we can make sure that no grieving family ever again has to fight its own government for the truth. So that when the next mother watches her son walk down the path, she can know that if tragedy does rear its ugly head, her country will stand with her, not against her.

In the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

fight for justice. Lorraine Beavers. Thank you, Madam Deputy Chair.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Chair. It is an honour to stand in this House today, to speak in support of
20:24
Lorraine Beavers Portrait Lorraine Beavers MP (Blackpool North and Fleetwood, Labour)
-
-
House today, to speak in support of the Public Office Accountability Bill. What so many of us know as the Hillsborough Law. Madam Deputy Speaker. This bill was born out of a state sponsored injustice against working class people. It was forged from the courage and persistence of those families, ordinary working class people who refuse to be broken by the weight of injustice. They didn't have privilege or power on their side. What they had was solidarity and an unshakeable belief that the truth matters.

For too long, people in this country have felt that when the system fails them, when those in power get things wrong, sometimes with devastating consequences, no one is ever truly held to account. Families are left to fight for decades just to be heard. This bill begins to change that. The new duty of candour says to every public official, you work for the people of this country. And when something goes wrong, you tell them the truth. No more cover ups, no more protecting institutions over people's lives.

It will make honesty and legal duty and create criminal offences for those who mislead the public or obstruct investigations. That matters, Madam Deputy Speaker, because we've all seen the cost of denial from Hillsborough to Grenfell, from Post Office scandals to infected blood. This bill will help to end that culture once and for all. The extension of legal aid at inquests and inquiries finally levels the playing field. No more families having to crowdfund or face state funded lawyers alone in the fight of their lives.

It gives ordinary people a fair chance, a voice and the power to hold the state to account. This is real accountability. This is democracy in action. But if we truly want a culture of honesty, we must protect those inside the system who dare to speak up when something is wrong. Whistleblowers are often the first to see the cracks, and too many have paid for their integrity with their careers. Honesty should never cost someone their job, their home, or their peace of mind.

If we want this law to work, we must make sure whistleblowers are protected. Their concerns are investigated and their courage valued. When I think about what this bill means, I of course think about the Hillsborough families standing year after year inside and outside of Anfield, saying simply justice for the 97. This bill honours their fight. It says never again will ordinary people be treated as a problem, when all they did was tell the truth. For working class families across Britain, this bill is a promise that truth will no longer depend on wealth, that justice will no longer depend on power, and that the voices of ordinary working class people will never again be drowned out by the machinery of the state.

It's a bill that finally says, no more cover ups, no more lies. No more hiding. Just truth, fairness and accountability. And that, Madam Deputy Speaker, is what the Hillsborough families fought for. It's what the victims are. So many injustices have fought for. So on behalf of those families and on behalf of every whistleblower who has spoken up and behalf of every working class person who just want everywhere, who just want a fair hearing and an honest government. I am so very proud to support this bill.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. I thank the government so much for bringing government so much for bringing this much needed vital bill to the this much needed vital bill to the House, and it shows what a Labour government can actually do and how a Labour government can affect change. It was really positive to hear the Prime Minister this hear the Prime Minister this afternoon say that there would be an absolute guarantee that the bill an absolute guarantee that the bill would not in any way, shape or form be diluted.

And that's really be diluted. And that's really important to everybody. But, you know, it's not a day for know, it's not a day for celebration. It's a day far too long in coming. It's not just about
20:29
Ian Lavery Portrait Ian Lavery MP (Blyth and Ashington, Labour)
-
-
long in coming. It's not just about history. It's about justice. It's about class. It's about the truth. The tragedies we've all lived through, the Hillsborough disaster, Orgreave, Windrush, Grenfell, the Post Office horizon scandal, the contaminated blood scandal, plus many, many, many more that are not isolated events. The symptoms of a deeper sickness. A system that protects power over people, reputation over responsibility and privilege over truth. In each case, working class lives were treated as expendable.

Innocent people were pitted against institutions that closed ranks, denied wrongdoing, and delayed justice, sometimes for decades. It Hillsborough. In 1997, Liverpool fans lost their lives not by accident but because of institutional indifference. They were branded hooligans, not victims, by officers who held deep seated prejudice against working class communities. Madam Deputy Speaker, it's about legacy. It's about truth. It's about accountability. And it's not just about the bill today because we see it today in this chamber.

You know that this was like people turning a blind eye to what happened in these myths. It's not turning a blind eye, for heaven's sake. It's about huge, detailed, organised, orchestrated, deliberate cover ups using taxpayers billions of pounds against ordinary working people. And you know what? It's been mentioned that the Chief constable got a knighthood, hasn't received any form of discipline whatsoever. 97 people killed. Not one person has been taken through the courts and prosecuted, but given a knighthood.

What an absolute disgrace. Madam Deputy Speaker, it's a huge disregard of indifference to working people. They were allowed to trample on the graves of the victims in the belief that they could do whatever they want, because they were the ones with the power, and they were the ones with the influence. It cannot be allowed to continue. And we've got to remember, justice means justice. Who indeed met these decisions? Who? What police officer? Shut the blinds, put the coffee on the table and say that.

Right. OK. Over 97 people sadly passed on, but we're going to make it really wasn't our fault who then signed it off, because I think every one of these injustices, by the way, goes a lot further than just the police officers. People in the public sector at the very top. It's got to have had a ministerial sign off, I'm afraid, because it wouldn't happen. I support this bill in its entirety, entirety. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think no more delays. Justice for all.

This is a long overdue bill, of which, again, I fully support.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yasmin Qureshi. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm proud to support this important bill and to pay tribute to the Hillsborough families whose courage and determination have brings this this moment. Their decades of struggles have changed our country struggles have changed our country and created a chance to ensure that no family ever again has to fight for truth alone. This bill is about truth, fairness, and accountability.
20:33
20:34
20:34
Yasmin Qureshi Portrait Yasmin Qureshi MP (Bolton South and Walkden, Labour)
-
-
Primodos, whose families I've been honoured to represent and campaign for in this House for the last 13 for in this House for the last 13 years. I've stood here many times before to raise this issue and to lead debate, because this is not a lead debate, because this is not a new story. The scandal has been known about for decades. What has known about for decades. What has been missing is not information, but honesty. Primodos was a home but honesty. Primodos was a home pregnancy test given to 1.5 million pregnancy test given to 1.5 million women in Britain until the late 1970s.

It was linked to miscarriages, stillbirths and babies born with life changing disabilities. Yet the families were disabilities. Yet the families were not met with transparency but with not met with transparency but with denial. In 1967, Doctor Isabel Gay published a research in nature showing a possible link between showing a possible link between hormone tests and birth defects. Rather than being supported, she Rather than being supported, she was dismissed and discredited. Both the Manufacturers Sharing and the Committee on Safety of Medicines Committee on Safety of Medicines near off the risk.

The committee issued a notice in 1975 warning a possible link and yet another 1 in 1977, confirming that the link had been established. Yet Primrose was not withdrawn until 1978, and the woman who had already taken it were never told the truth. That was not candour, it was concealment. Decades later, the pattern repeated. In 2017, the government's own Commission on Human Medicine established an expert working group, which concludes that there was no causal association between primodos and the harm wording that was added later.

After pressure from senior officials, firmly shut out, evidence, was excluded and regulated defended themselves instead of admitting failure. Then in 2023, those same families were forced into court against Bayer and the government. Despite the independent Cumberlege review, which had occurred after the 2017 Expert Working Group, it confirmed that avoidable harm had occurred, but their case still collect before trial and the reason is they were threatened with 11 million illegal costs if they refuse to withdraw.

But it was David versus Goliath battle. Ordinary families facing the full legal force of the state and the global cooperation. This Bill could hope to change that. It establishes the duty of candour, a due to assist investigation and the principles of parity of arms, and it seeks to ensure that families not denied justice because they lack resources, but the duty of candour must apply fully to all investigation, including independent panels and not just statutory inquiries. Command responsibility must rest with those in charge, not with the institutions.

And the offensive meeting the public must not be weakened by the need to prove individual harm. As I said towards the end of this, this bill is really important and I hope it doesn't dilute. And I hope that people like Primodos, people who suffered will get due justice.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Liam Conlon Speaker. Can I start by saying it was fantastic to have Hillsborough Law campaigners in the gallery today? I've worked for them for several years before I came to this place and was elected here, and I did so on behalf of victims of the Ballymurphy massacre, one of the worst atrocities of the the worst atrocities of the Troubles. I'm a relative of one of the victims, Father Hugh Mullan, a the victims, Father Hugh Mullan, a Catholic priest who was unlawfully killed by the by members of the Parachute Regiment.

It took my Parachute Regiment. It took my dad's family 50 years to have the words entirely innocent put on public record. And in the intervening years, people try to smear you as a gunrunner, obfuscate on justice. And that is a pattern on justice. And that is a pattern we see repeated across so many of the stories we've heard today. Madam Deputy Speaker, we should not Madam Deputy Speaker, we should not forget why this law matters. All the campaigners and campaigns supporting Hillsborough Law are supporting Hillsborough Law are often distinct Hillsborough infected blood, Grenfell horizon, the Covid 19 bereaved families, the Covid 19 bereaved families, Windrush victims of the Troubles and many more.

These are events which span across decades, which span across decades, involving different arms of the state in different parts of the UK. The circumstances and consequences The circumstances and consequences of each differ greatly, but after the event, when families began to sought justice, each often faced similar challenges and circumstances, which included, first, the smearing of innocent victims as guilty. Second, the closing of ranks amongst authorities, shutting off routes to justice, and third, a legal system where the scales of justice are stacked in favour of the state.

The human consequences of this are severe. Mr. Kelleher, a victim of the Post Office Horizon scandal from Bromley where I represent, found his own children mistrusting him after he was unable to clear his name. His marriage almost broke down and he contemplated suicide. Madam Deputy Speaker, this government has the potential to put an end to these obstacles and create a turning point in transparency, accountability and justice in public life to ensure that Mr. Kelly's experience and those of so many other families is never repeated again.

That means full parity of arms at inquests, putting an end to David versus Goliath battles in court, where the state, flanked by an army of lawyers, takes on families who have scraped together. For a single barrister, that means a full duty of candour, with proper consequences for those who fall foul of it. And it means creating an obligation for full disclosure, ensuring that public bodies are wired to help families achieve justice, not to pull, rank and protect their own. I thank the Prime Minister today for his reassurance that this bill will not be watered down and for his work, the work of the Justice Secretary and the Attorney General in the other place, driving this bill forward and for the work of my honourable friend the member for Liverpool West Derby, for his Liverpool West Derby, for his tireless campaigning on this issue.

Passing this bill will lead to a rebalancing in the relationship rebalancing in the relationship between state and citizen. We have fulfilled the purpose. We will also have fulfilled the purpose of power have fulfilled the purpose of power to give it away, and will have empowered families to pursue the settlement they want. In conclusion, I would like to thank again every I would like to thank again every campaigner and family for their work on this Bill and to finish work on this Bill and to finish with an Irish proverb as well.

Our Rafaela, a warrior. It is in the Rafaela, a warrior. It is in the shelter of each other that the people live. And I know that the Hillsborough families have done, Hillsborough families have done, and many other families have done today, is to provide shelter for others for many years to come.
20:40
20:41
Richard Burgon Portrait Richard Burgon MP (Leeds East, Labour)
-
-
Then shadow Home Secretary, the honourable member for Hackney

**** Possible New Speaker ****

somewhere or other. Apologies for not knowing. She's been forgotten too many times in this place, but I put that times in this place, but I put that to one side. So the shadow Home Secretary calling on Theresa may to introduce a Hillsborough Law in the aftermath of Grenfell. So I commend this Labour government for bringing forward this legislation. A duty of forward this legislation. A duty of candour. New criminal offences for failing to uphold that duty. Expanded legal aid and a parity of representation to end the David versus Goliath nature and inquiries.

versus Goliath nature and inquiries. These are all big steps forward. Of course, there will be areas where the bill can be strengthened, and I the bill can be strengthened, and I hope to play my part in ensuring as it goes through this House, it is improved. But fundamentally it's a good bill and must remain so as it passes through this House. But on passes through this House. But on that point, I want to send a very clear message today to anyone hoping to water this bill down as hoping to water this bill down as it passes through Parliament.

Do not try it. Far too often in this country, politics has acted as a dam, holding justice back rather than helping justice to flow. Class than helping justice to flow. Class and power imbalances and yes, racism have repeatedly denied racism have repeatedly denied people justice in the face of state abuses. The truth sacrificed to protect the powerful Hillsborough Stephen Lawrence Grenfell the Post Office scandal, Bloody Sunday, Orgreave these are all examples of times when the state used its immense power not to deliver truth and justice, but to block truth and justice.

Year after year, in all those cases, the state was accused of a cover up by those affected. Distrust sewn. Justice delayed is justice denied. And we do know that there are forces who didn't want this bill today to get this far and who don't want it to go forward in this form, who don't want the scales of justice tilted in favour of working class people. So I welcome the Prime Minister saying that there will be no watering down of this bill.

But if any civil servants, members of this House, those in opposition in the House of Lords or in the media or others within the machinery of the state attempt to dilute or derail this bill. They will have the fight of their lives on their hands, and we will use every power at our disposal, including naming and shaming, under parliamentary privilege. If we hear of any attempts to water down this fundamentally important bill, let this be a rare moment when this House delivers legislation we can all be proud of.

Martin Luther King once spoke of how the arc of moral the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice. It hasn't felt like for so many families. Let's make sure it does. By supporting this bill and making it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

law, it's been too long. Today's an important day. For Lizzi Collinge. Thank you,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker. today. Is not an historical problem.
20:44
Lizzi Collinge Portrait Lizzi Collinge MP (Morecambe and Lunesdale, Labour)
-
-
It's something that my constituents need right now. I've already spoken in this place about baby Ida Locke, who died after failings in her care and the incompetent investigation and lack of transparency that followed. And today, I want to talk about another constituent of mine, Vicky. Vicky had autoimmune diseases. She had regular treatment for these, often needing steroids. In 2021, Vicky fell pregnant and had a flare up which was treated with steroids. Not long after, she tragically suffered a miscarriage.

Days later, she was admitted to hospital with severe abdominal pain and increased heart rate, and she began to deteriorate. The differential diagnosis was either an infection or a flare up of her autoimmune disease. She kept getting more poorly. She was treated with antibiotics but not given any steroids. Her care was fraught with errors. Her lipids were scored incorrectly. The right tests were eventually requested, but not carried out in a timely way. A pharmacist spotted that she'd missed crucial medication, but nothing was done.

According to her family, the doctors got caught in a loop of circular thinking. They focussed on sepsis and Covid, even when there was another possibility, particularly with her history of autoimmune problems, because there is a rare but known complication of autoimmune diseases called h h h. H is a massive overreaction of the immune system, which causes hyperinflation, damaging, hyperinflammation, damaging vital organs. If the hospital had listened to Vicky and done a bone marrow test earlier, this could have been identified and it's possible it could have been treated successfully.

But once they'd finally decided to do this test, a test that only takes ten minutes to give results, it took 18 hours for it to actually be done. The bone marrow test confirmed Vicky had HLH. 24 hours later, she died. Vicky knew she was having a flare up. She told them, but she wasn't listened to from her hospital bed. She'd actually written a letter of complaint to the health service. And then just a week later, she was dead.

And now her family just want the truth to be recognised because in their experience, it hasn't. And their experiences echo those of Ida's parents. And the pain is compounded because the family had felt she was in the right place to be cared for. They trusted the hospital to get it right. Now we know that no one goes into work in healthcare to do harm. But doctors and nurses are humans. They will make mistakes, and it's very difficult to admit that you have harmed someone.

So we need to create institutional cultures where people feel able to speak up, to raise concerns, because mistakes are often one offs. But what's not one off is the institutional, institutional response to these tragedies. The institutional response of cover up. And it's a part of a wider, long standing pattern of poor culture and weak accountability. And what harmed families tell me in the wake of these tragedies is it's not necessarily the mistake itself that causes so much harm to them. It's the cover up.

It's the denial. Families, instead of grieving their loss, are forced to fight for the truth. So my hope, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that this law will protect victims and their families from this prolonged trauma. Families like Vicky's and like those who lost loved, loved ones at Hillsborough, parents like Ryan and Sarah Locke. They deserve honesty, accountability and humanity from the very start because that is how

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we rebuild trust. Yeah. John Grady Deputy. Speaker, I focus on chapter two,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaker, I focus on chapter two, which provides a public bodies must operate in accordance with the highest ethical conduct. And this
20:48
John Grady Portrait John Grady MP (Glasgow East, Labour)
-
-
highest ethical conduct. And this is something that is very, very important to my constituents in Glasgow, very shortly after I was elected, I met with a mum and dad at one of my surgeries. They want to know how their beloved child died whilst being treated as an in-patient in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. They know they cannot get their beloved child back. They just want to know that lessons have been learned so that other families do not suffer the same anguish every day, they wrote to NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde two months after the death of their child.

The first response was less

**** Possible New Speaker ****

than candid. They asked for proper investigations. One partial report was issued ten months. After their.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

After their. Child's death. The second report was completed over two years after their child's death. That report their child's death. That report itself is concerning. The NHS cannot identify one of the doctors involved in that child's treatment. involved in that child's treatment. They cannot source two nurses involved, so they were not involved, so they were not interviewed. How can it be that the NHS cannot identify three people who worked in a hospital on the day who worked in a hospital on the day in question? Even now, two and a half years after the death of their beloved child, they do not have beloved child, they do not have answers.

I have tried my best to help this family. Madam Deputy Speaker, I've pressed the NHS to complete the long delayed report and meet with the family. And and meet with the family. And despite this, I'm afraid, Madam Deputy Speaker, this grieving family have been treated family have been treated appallingly. And so I welcome the provisions of chapter two of the bill. They are seriously needed, bill. They are seriously needed, and I am not the first to raise concerns about the transparency and openness of NHS Greater Glasgow and openness of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

My friends, I'm a Sarwar and Jackie Baillie have repeatedly raised serious concerns about institutional cover up. I agree with them and join them in calling for a radical change of culture and their support for Milly's law. With a public advocate system. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, if I may, I'd like to ask a couple of questions about the bill and its application in Scotland. The bill contains three criminal offences that are not replicated in Scotland. This is quite proper because, as we heard earlier, criminal law is a matter for the Scottish Parliament and not this place.

But it would be interesting to know what the Scottish Government's position is on that. Clauses 18 and schedule six concern public inquiries, and the provisions are designed to ensure that the conduct of public authorities and their legal teams are fair and reasonable, in particular to ensure the equality of arms that we've heard so much about eloquently. The law relating to public inquiries in Scotland and England is broadly the same, so I'd be grateful if the Minister could explain why the schedule six provisions do not extend to Scotland.

Schedule six also makes provision about the expansion of legal aid and again, quite properly, this does not apply to Scotland, but I'd be grateful if the Minister could explain, if she could, the Scottish Government's position, because my concern is simple. Madam Deputy Speaker, it is the family in Glasgow should be able to have the same rights as a family in Newcastle upon Tyne when trying to get the truth from public authorities, if I may, I close by paying tribute to the Hillsborough families. They are the embodiment of the greatest of human qualities, immense courage in the face of the most terrible grief, determination to get to the truth, determination for every possible lesson is learned from Hillsborough.

Determination that the law is changed to protect people, people they will never meet and never know. I admire them greatly. Each of us owes these families the greatest of deaths. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Doctor Marie Tidball, thank you, Madam Deputy. Speaker. I was nearly five years.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I was nearly five years. Old when the Hillsborough disaster happened, less than half a mile away from my Penistone and mile away from my Penistone and Stocksbridge constituency. My mum had just had my baby brother and was on maternity leave, so I
20:52
Marie Tidball Portrait Dr Marie Tidball MP (Penistone and Stocksbridge, Labour)
-
-
was on maternity leave, so I vividly remember watching the coverage of the horrendous tragedy transfixed to the screen, mainly the school where my mum worked at the edge of the Parson Cross estate was near the grounds. Seeing the horror of her realisation that some of her families might have been at the match was deeply upsetting. The images of the treatment of the fans by the police are etched on my memory forever. My baby brother, now a grown 36 year old man, the measure of the lifetime it has taken to get the justice for the 97 fans who lost their lives at the Hillsborough disaster.

Today really is a historic day. I'm proud to be stood here in this moment as a Sheffield Labour MP as part of the Labour government, which is introducing the Hillsborough Law to this House. I am proud too, that we have a Prime Minister who has made making this law his personal mission. The landmark legislation will help to close a chapter on some of our nation's darkest days. The bill before us will be transformative. As someone who followed closely the evisceration of legal aid and with it, the access to justice under the Conservative government in coalition.

I am immensely proud that this bill includes the largest expansion of legal aid in a decade for bereaved families, providing non-means tested help and support for inquests. The Bills criminal sanctions for the most significant breaches, including for misleading the public in a way which is seriously improper under the new offence it creates. I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Give way. I thank my honourable friend agree with me that this will be particularly important for people who have been disabled by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

gross negligence. I do agree, and I would say

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do agree, and I would say alongside the Equality Act passed by the last Labour government in this House and its public sector this House and its public sector equality duty, we will have created a shield and a sword for those a shield and a sword for those disabled people. Trust in public life is a delicate and precious thing. The duty of candour on all thing. The duty of candour on all public services within this bill provides the scaffolding for this provides the scaffolding for this to be held up.

Public servants must always tell the truth about always tell the truth about anything to do with their jobs, or face the consequences in doing so, face the consequences in doing so, as required by this bill, it lays strong foundations to build cultural change throughout the cultural change throughout the public sector, placing public bodies under a new duty to promote the ethical conduct of their staff. the ethical conduct of their staff. This law is for the 97 who lost their lives, but it is also for all their lives, but it is also for all of those who fought for justice when they'd been betrayed by the authorities that were meant to authorities that were meant to protect them.

The changes this bill makes will ensure truth and justice are never concealed again, and brave families never again are left fighting endlessly for that truth. And anyone caught trying to hide that truth will face the full force of the law. To Margaret Aspinall, the brave bereaved families and the hundreds of campaigners who brought us to this moment. Thank you for the decades of work you have done. We all owe you a debt of gratitude. I commend this bill with my whole

**** Possible New Speaker ****

heart to this House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to welcome this Bill and to commend to welcome this Bill and to commend Ministers for the work done on it. And in particular, I want to pay tribute to Merseyside colleagues who've done so much to get us to who've done so much to get us to where we are today. Now, this bill is about restoring people's trust in the people that serve them, whether that's in Westminster, Liverpool or Bolton. Trust that the truth will be told when things go truth will be told when things go wrong.

Trust that when things do go wrong that those responsible will wrong that those responsible will be held to account and trust that government at every level works for them, not against them. Now, when I speak to people in Bolton West, the impression is often the same impression is often the same they're tired of people in public office covering up instead of being held accountable for their.
20:57
Phil Brickell Portrait Phil Brickell MP (Bolton West, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Honourable friend give way, I will give way. I thank. My honourable friend for. Giving way. Does he agree that one of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does he agree that one of the central reasons for public disillusionment and outrage is that there are either no successful prosecutions, or very few in cases of egregious state failure? And does he agree that unless

**** Possible New Speaker ****

wrongdoers pay a price in a scene to pay a price. Then this. Impunity may persist. And that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Impunity may persist. And that the duty of candour and the two new statutory. Offences will help overcome this malaise.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, my honourable friend speaks to the two new offences at sections five and 11 in the Bill, sections five and 11 in the Bill, and it's absolutely vital not only that this bill is passed, but that the authorities have the powers the authorities have the powers they need to make sure that the contents of the bill are enforced. When I speak to people, they want honesty, they want fairness, and they want those in power to live by the same rules as everyone else.

the same rules as everyone else. That's why this bill matters. Because behind it lies some of the darkest chapters in our recent darkest chapters in our recent history, which we've already heard about in the chamber today. Grenfell Hillsborough, the Horizon scandal, infected blood. The list is far too long, and each one of those cases represents lives ruined those cases represents lives ruined not just by a single mistake, but by a culture of denial, by institutions that closed ranks institutions that closed ranks instead of coming clean.

Now, given the time constraints, let me turn the time constraints, let me turn to the contents of the bill. It will create a landmark duty of candour on public officials, alongside a new and important statutory misconduct in public office offence. Both will be vital measures in ensuring the scandals of years past can never again be repeated. Fundamental to this bill is the new requirements for public authorities to have a code of ethics. As my honourable friend the member for Glasgow East mentioned before me, that will start to rebuild the moral foundation of public service that too many people believe has been lost.

I would like to put on record my thanks to my honourable friend the member for Pontypridd, who has already generously engaged with me on a number of points related to this bill. So I hope the government will consider three small, novel but important changes I wish to propose as this bill goes to committee. First, the bill uses two different definitions of what counts as a public authority. Now, there may be a good reason for this that the Minister can speak to in her wind ups, but for the duty of candour and misconduct in public office offences, elected representatives such as local councillors, mayors and ministers are included as per schedule two, part two.

But when it comes to the requirements of a code of ethics, it excludes them as per schedule two, part three. That does feel inconsistent, and I worry, risk diluting the message that we're trying to send, which is that everyone, no matter their position, is held to the same standards because my constituents expect everyone in public life, from the Cabinet table to the council chamber, to live by the same principles of honesty and decency. Second, may I suggest we look again at putting the ministerial code and the Prime Minister's independent adviser on ministerial standards on a statutory footing.

This is a simple measure previously recommended by the Committee on Standards in Public Life in its 2021 report on upholding Standards in Public Life. It is a simple way of making sure that the rules which govern ministers today can't be swept away by less scrupulous governments tomorrow. Third, on the misconduct in public office offence, can the Minister clarify why the government has elected to set the bar quite so high? The current wording in part three says that a jury must consider, and I quote, the nature and degree of any benefit obtained by the person, whether for themselves or another person, as a result of the act.

Seeking to be corrupt is not better than successfully being corrupt. So I hope the Minister will look afresh at the relevant clause in the bill. Indeed, the Law Commission has called for a definition along the lines of intending to get a benefit, and, as I can recall from more than a decade tackling corruption. Section six of the Bribery Act from 2010 uses the phrasing intend to obtain or retain business or advantage in the conduct of business. Aligning the definitions, importantly, would make it easier for prosecutors to hold bad actors to account.

Nonetheless, this bill is a huge step forwards in this government's mission to return politics to service, so I'm proud to support the bill this evening, and I look forward to working with colleagues across the House to make it a strong, fair and future proof as it can be.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hear, hear. Sarah Smith. Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. It is a privilege to witness and speak as

**** Possible New Speaker ****

privilege to witness and speak as this landmark bill is given its Second Reading. As others. Have remarked.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Have remarked. This day is a testament to the courage, resilience and awe inspiring fortitude of the bereaved families. Of the 97 Liverpool fans unlawfully killed at Hillsborough, who shall never be forgotten. But I also want to pay tribute to the many members of this House who have many members of this House who have been involved, some who sit here today and others who probably time came up here before they were able to see this important progression of this crucial legislation, and particularly the powerful speeches we've heard the campaign the member we've heard the campaign the member for Liverpool West Derby has seen through with such courage, and also
21:02
Sarah Smith Portrait Sarah Smith MP (Hyndburn, Labour)
-
-
through with such courage, and also some of the speeches from the members for Liverpool Garston and Liverpool Wavertree. It has been said that grief is just love persevering and their pursuit for justice and truth. Due to this, love has persevered through decades. This bill will ensure a lasting legacy. On top of that, that's already been built for those who, tragically, just did not return after simply attending a football game. But it will also benefit us all, and we owe the families, as many have said, such a deep debt of gratitude in straightforward terms, I see this bill as stating on the statute that truth can never be discretionary.

It is an intrinsic and legal duty of being in public office and within public service. It has not been an easy road to get to this point, and I do commend the Prime Minister on delivering on a promise he personally made, regardless of any institutional resistance, because we cannot let truth ever be concealed again. No future family should have to fight a system for answers or be retraumatized by a process fuelled by years of Bishop James Jones eloquently entitled the Patronising Disposition of Unaccountable Power.

I particularly welcome measures in the Bill that go beyond the fundamental new duty of candour, and offer assistance to families facing an inquest which will ensure a parity of representation between them and the state. Where a public body is to be legally represented. Let us not forget at the first Hillsborough inquest, families received no funding or for legal representation, whilst senior police officers were represented by five separate legal teams, bringing an end to this imbalance of power will support the inquisitorial nature of any legal proceedings and, I hope, offer protection against any efforts of a public body to intimidate or withhold information.

But, Madam Deputy Speaker, one area I would like to see considered is how we can best ensure any learnings and recommendations from inquests or inquiries are implemented, given the honesty and integrity this bill mandates will further help coroners establish the facts and come to conclusions about what events or actions could or should have been prevented. Families want their painful stories to enact change, but the learning can only lead to change if the public bodies have to act. I want to briefly finish on a wider cultural point.

I don't think anyone would deny that public trust in our politics and public institutions is at a very low level. Scandals have eroded trust as public bodies and public officials have been misled people and frankly, hidden the truth to protect themselves rather than the public. This bill provides an opportunity to restate that public, to restate that public services are here, to be on people's side. My constituents and all the communities we serve deserve to feel safe and supported to regain legitimacy.

The public need to know that the words and evidence from our public officials and bodies can be trusted. I hope this bill will lead to greater integrity and further person centred reform to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

public services, which I know this government is committed to building. Josh Newbury.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Josh Newbury. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It gives me great pride as a Labour MP to speak in this debate on an
21:05
Josh Newbury Portrait Josh Newbury MP (Cannock Chase, Labour)
-
-
incredibly important bill that will write further historic wrongs stains on our nation's history. I know that whilst my constituents hold a range of views on many issues, they are united in expecting public servants and institutions to act with honesty and transparency. The bill before us today draws a line in the sand, signalling a landmark shift in responsibilities placed on those who serve our communities. With this bill, we can finally say that when the state fails and public servants do not live up to their duties, the men and women of this country will not be left fighting for the truth.

The duty of candour is about truth telling when the truth is inconvenient, even incriminating, and it is about ensuring that the power of the state can never again be used to conceal wrongdoing, distort justice, or silence ordinary people. As an MP representing a former mining community, the memory of the Battle of Orgreave still looms large. On the 18th of June 1984, hundreds of striking miners gathered to picket peacefully. What followed was a ruthlessly planned violent confrontation between police and miners. 95 were arrested and charged with offences including riot and violent disorder.

Many of these prosecutions collapsed when it became clear that the officer's statements were almost identical and not credible. But still those men were vilified and for 40 years have lived with the scars, physical and mental, and felt the crushing weight. As the families of the 97 have felt of justice denied. In July, the government announced a statutory inquiry into Orgreave, to be chaired by the Bishop of Sheffield. That announcement was so welcome, but three months on, many in our communities are desperate for news.

Last week, myself and fellow coalfield MPs met with the Orgreave Truth and Justice campaign, who reminded us that with many miners having shorter life expectancies due to the gruelling and dangerous work they did underground, every day that goes by could mean lost testimony that will be crucial to the inquiry. As with Hillsborough, when it comes to Orgreave, the duty of candour could have prevented a generation of injustice and could even have disincentivized the culture of cover up. That same principle of truth, transparency and accountability applies just as powerfully to the press this morning in the Liverpool Echo.

Margaret Aspinall, who has been such a powerful figurehead for the Hillsborough Families Campaign for justice, said unequivocally that justice for the 97 will not be fully done until we have proper press regulation and accountability for the lies that were told by the sun. She is right. We owe it to everyone who has had their lives torn apart by press intrusion or misinformation to take action. I think of Paul Dodge from my constituency, who became a symbol of humanity in the seven over seven attacks.

Honourable members may remember the harrowing image of a woman clutching a burn mask to her face, being guided towards an ambulance by a man. That man was Paul, and although he hates the word, Paul was a hero that day. But in the months that followed, Paul found his phone had been hacked by news of the world journalists. And we will remember the denials and warm words that were uttered throughout the public furore over the phone hacking scandal. It's now been more than a decade since the Leveson inquiry exposed the corrosive culture of impunity in parts of the British press.

The second phase of that inquiry would have investigated the relationship between the press and police, but it was shamefully abandoned by the previous government. Instead, the big papers created their own regulator, the Independent Press Standards Organisation, which has never found a newspaper and has found in favour of complainants in only 0.3% of cases. Now that we are 12 years on from Leveson and in an age of social media, action against press intrusion needs to look different. But the principle of an impartial, independent watchdog is perhaps even more relevant now than it was in 2013.

I hope this is something that is under active consideration by the government, whether it's the families of Hillsborough, the miners of Orgreave or my constituent Paul. We owe them meaningful, permanent change. This bill offers us a chance to do that, and I hope and believe that it will be the start of much more to come.
21:09
Jessica Toale Portrait Jessica Toale MP (Bournemouth West, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Jessica Toale. Thank

**** Possible New Speaker ****

you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'd like. To start by paying tribute to the many honourable members and campaigners who have never stopped fighting for truth and accountability. We've had many powerful contributions in the powerful contributions in the chamber today, outlining a painful litany of cover ups and scandals where individuals and families have been betrayed by the very institutions that were meant to protect them. But this this bill is protect them. But this this bill is also for those suffering who we only now are beginning to see and that be recognised.

My constituent, Jan Hall, is a des daughter. Des was an anti-miscarriage drug invented here in Britain and prescribed between 1939 and the prescribed between 1939 and the late 70s. It was marketed as a wonder drug, but even as evidence wonder drug, but even as evidence that this drug caused harm emerged in the 50s and was later linked to in the 50s and was later linked to cancer in the 1970s, it continued to be prescribed to these women. Madam Deputy Speaker, this is Madam Deputy Speaker, this is potentially one of the biggest pharmaceutical scandals in British history and something that no doubt history and something that no doubt this bill will shine a light on.

Now Jan's mum Rita was prescribed des. She died at the age of 32 with des. She died at the age of 32 with breast cancer when Jan was still a toddler. Jan suffered health problems her whole life, including cervical cancer, and now her daughters Beth and Hannah have had a series of gynaecological problems. We know that women who took des face around 30% higher risk of breast cancer. Their daughters exposed to the drug, have 40 times the risk of rare vaginal and cervical cancers.

They also face infertility issues. On top of that, sons show increased risk of genital abnormalities and infertility. This is an intergenerational issue, and we're now seeing grandchildren like Beth and Hannah suffering complications, with research only beginning to uncover the scale of the inherited harm. And these women have fought for decades for the recognition of the justice that they deserve. But for too long they have been ignored. Now, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency has admitted it misled the public for more than a decade.

Now imagine if a duty of candour had existed for Des victims. Imagine if the MHRA, the Department of Health and pharmaceutical companies, had been compelled to disclose what they knew when they knew it. Generations of women might have been spared devastating illnesses. Families would have been spared grief, and trust in our institutions may have been preserved. Now, the Hillsborough Law is not only a matter of legal reform, this is also a matter of trust. If the public cannot trust the state to tell the truth when things go wrong, then the social contract is broken and the Hillsborough law gives us a way to rebuild it.

I'd like to conclude by welcoming the Prime Minister's personal commitment to this issue, and the reaffirmation that he will not water down the principles that give this bill life to all the families still waiting for justice. This bill is for you. Let the Hillsborough Law mark the moment when we say, finally and decisively

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that justice delayed must never be justice denied. Brian Leishman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Brian Leishman. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. And firstly, I'd like to record the respect I have like to record the respect I have for my honourable friend from Liverpool West Derby for all he has done on the Hillsborough Law. His done on the Hillsborough Law. His relentless campaigning on it is equalled by his dedication in fighting another political injustice, that of food insecurity. It's fair to say that his community, the Labour Party and this place is the Labour Party and this place is stronger for him being in it.

Madam Deputy Speaker, what a catalogue of Deputy Speaker, what a catalogue of injustices, cover ups and scandals our nation has seen. There are too our nation has seen. There are too many for me to mention in the short time that I have, but the common theme is that working class communities always seem to be the victims. 41 years on and people are still waiting for justice from the premeditated beatings handed out at Orgreave. 36 years on, and families Orgreave. 36 years on, and families and survivors that we've heard from today, including my honourable friend, are still waiting for friend, are still waiting for justice and accountability of what happened that day at Hillsborough.

happened that day at Hillsborough. And eight years on from Grenfell. The memory of the 72 victims and their families and friends still wait for justice. Incredibly, there are approximately a quarter of a million people who will go to bed tonight in buildings with the same flammable cladding surrounding them. How on earth can we sit in this place and allow that to be the case? Because I'll tell you, if it wasn't working class people that died in those buildings, then a lot more than what has been done so far would have been done by now.

Madam Deputy Speaker. Furthermore, on Grenfell, the fire brigade and the firefighters attended the scene are now suffering from serious health consequences because of their incredible recovery efforts. They too deserve answers and justice. And crucially, the protective And crucially, the protective equipment that will keep them safe from carcinogenic materials that they are exposed to in the line of duty. But it is only right that my duty. But it is only right that my final comment is addressed to the Hillsborough families here in Parliament today.

And for those watching back home, you have waited so long for what is just. I am truly sorry that it has taken this truly sorry that it has taken this length of time. You have shown that change is possible and that more often than not, it comes from pressure applied from the general public and not this place.
21:15
21:16
Catherine Atkinson Portrait Catherine Atkinson MP (Derby North, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

obstruction and obfuscation. The persistence of I will give way. My honourable friend makes a very powerful.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

very powerful. Point about. The. Obstructions that. Families and individuals still face. There's a individuals still face. There's a family in my constituency that, for the last 18 months, have methodically uncovered failings in the care of their father. In hospital, he sadly died. And yet the failings that they have uncovered were ignored by the medical examiner, were ignored in the pathology report and were not adequately addressed by the hospital trust, and as a result, the family have been unable to secure the accountability they seek for their father's death.

Does my honourable friend agree that the duty of candour that this bill compels will begin to rebalance that relationship between individuals like my constituents and public bodies? So, my honourable friend makes a powerful point that there are still so many families fighting for justice. And it is the persistence of families who have been fighting for justice, who have brought us to this moment. And we all owe them our thanks and our action. And I feel privileged to have so many colleagues who fought alongside them for so long.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to welcome the expansion of legal aid in this bill because after years of cuts to legal aid, it is heartening to see the extension of legal aid to all families at inquests where public authorities are involved. As a barrister, I represented parties inquests, including families, and I know how difficult inquests can be for families, even when they have legal representation and even when they get answers that help them to come to terms with what happened. But to understand and navigate the coroners courts and understand its processes, to secure the information and the documents needed, and to have the confidence to ask questions without legal representation, particularly when you see the public authorities you're trying to get answers from, supported by their legal teams, has been an inequality of arms faced by families for too long.

Well said. This isn't just about funding, it is about fairness. And this bill helps to correct the balance so that families at least have representation to. It gives them an advocate. It gives them a guide. It gives them a voice. And it's not just compassionate. It is essential to justice. And I fully accept that injustice can still happen even when there are lawyers, but not having representation in those circumstances is an injustice in itself. And this bill changes that.

I also want to welcome that this bill introduces new statutory criminal offences, because that sends such a powerful message that cover ups will no longer be met by dismissal, it will be met by criminal sanctions. And this is a vital deterrent and a long overdue shift in accountability. Because yes, mistakes are made and humans in the in the moment. But later on there are choices. Are the errors acknowledged, or do people attempt to double down and persist in a false narrative? If you acknowledge the error, then yes, you may be sacked, but if you cover it up, you won't just be sacked, you will face going to prison.

Yes, and this bill empowers the front line of our public service to say no and report it. If they're pressured to participate in a cover up. Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill reflects the hard won lessons of decades of campaigning. It will not undo the pain of the past, but it will help to prevent future injustice by strengthening legal aid, by empowering grieving families and introducing meaningful criminal sanctions for cover ups. This legislation begins to rebalance the scales, and it sends a clear message that truth must come before reputation.

Accountability must come before self-preservation, and it ensures that families will not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be left to fight alone. Hitchin Paul Waugh. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
21:20
Paul Waugh Portrait Paul Waugh MP (Rochdale, Labour )
-
-
This legislation is all about a fundamental rebalancing of power between the state and the citizens that it's meant to protect and to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

serve. We've heard powerfully today from many members. About the. Hillsborough families and their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hillsborough families and their enduring quest for the truth. I'd like to add, just briefly, the nuclear test veterans to that list of campaigners for justice, including my constituent, 88 year old John Morris. When John was stationed on Christmas Island in 1956, he was told British troops 1956, he was told British troops were building a new runway. In reality, they were testing nuclear weapons. But the weapons that were intended to keep Britain safe from the Soviet threat were far from safe from the men who were out in the South Pacific, as they were effectively treated like lab rats with little or no protection from harm.

John is.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

harm. John is. One of just. 22,000 British troops who were exposed to radiation while on exposed to radiation while on service in the 1950s, and who have campaigned for years about the cancers and other side effects they cancers and other side effects they endured. John's son Stephen, died at just four months old from birth defects. For 50 years, John and his wife faced repeated indignities. They were wrongfully questioned about the. On the suspicion of about the. On the suspicion of murder of their son, they were denied information about how and why their son had died, and they why their son had died, and they were denied John's own medical records.

Finally, a coroner's report was revealed which suggested Stephen's lungs may not have formed properly. John himself has had cancer and has had a blood disorder since he was 26 years old. John sent me a message today. Great news about the Hillsborough Law Poole for us vets. It's very positive because it will make our lives much easier in getting the answers we demand. He's pleased that the Prime Minister in September agreed to meet him to discuss the issue further, and is currently looking forward to that meeting.

But there's another Rochdale resident whose campaign I hope will also benefit from this new legislation. 83 year old Sylvia mountain, who used the pregnancy drug test Primodos, which has already been mentioned by some of my hon. Friends, gave birth to her son Philip in 1963, but Philip died of birth defects just 22 days after he was born. Today, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the actual anniversary of the day her baby died 62 years ago, Sylvia was told by doctors at the time to stop being hysterical, and there's been no medical records that exist to explain her son's death.

But many other women who were prescribed primodos also suffered similar birth defects in their children, as well as stillbirths and miscarriages. Victims of Primodos test are still waiting for answers. For more than half a century, these families have faced a culture of concealment, settlement of suppressed evidence, of misleading official conclusions and of denial of responsibility. John and Sylvia, two Rochdale pensioners in their 80s whose lives have been overshadowed by tragedy and loss in very different ways, but very similar ways, personify the decades of injustice that this legislation is intended to prevent from ever happening again.

I pay tribute to both of them for their resilience in the in the face of unspeakable tragedy and suffering, and I'm proud to have them as my constituents. John and Sylvia want the state to recognise its responsibilities before it's too late for them, and too late for others like them. It's in their name and all the other victims of state power and cover ups that I welcome this landmark Hillsborough bill today, a bill that it's taken this Labour government to make a reality.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Which brings us. To the wind up's Mike Wood. Here, here, here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here, here, here. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The bill before us today is the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

result of decades of. Campaigning and struggle by families fighting for answers and families fighting for answers and the thoughts and hearts of all of us in this House, regardless of party affiliation or, of course, party affiliation or, of course, with the 97 victims of the Hillsborough disaster and their families. The tireless work of families. The tireless work of those families is ultimately responsible for uncovering the truth about Hillsborough and truth about Hillsborough and delivering an element of justice for the victims, whose memory was tarnished by the unwillingness of some individuals in the authorities to tell the truth.

This bill is to tell the truth. This bill is testament to to the valuable work done by Bishop James Jones and his done by Bishop James Jones and his independent panel for which which we're truly thankful. And it is in we're truly thankful. And it is in no small part down to the effective campaigning of the honourable gentleman for Liverpool West Derby gentleman for Liverpool West Derby fighting for those who joined him in going to Hillsborough on that terrible day in April 1989, but who
21:25
Mike Wood Portrait Mike Wood MP (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire, Conservative)
-
-
terrible day in April 1989, but who lost their lives due to the terrible decisions made by the stadium operators and West Yorkshire Police? Hillsborough stands as one of the most obvious and harrowing examples of the British state's failure. Sorry, South Yorkshire Police and harrowing examples of the British state's failure to remain accountable, truthful and candid. Unfortunately, it is not the only such example. In recent years, the Post Office Horizon scandal, the infected blood scandal, the families of pub bombing victims in Birmingham and Guildford who have been denied justice following miscarriages of justice resulting from police misconduct.

The failure of the British state to properly acknowledge and tackle the rape and grooming gangs which have terrorised communities across this country. Each and every one of these failures undermines the British public's faith in their government, and each was a scandal made worse by institutional attempts to hide from their responsibility, putting their own reputations and interests ahead of transparency and justice. In the clearest possible examples of abuses of power, calls for greater candour and accountability are legitimate and welcome, because those of us in this place must always remember that our sole duty is to serve the interests of the British people, and to do right by them.

And so I thank all of those honourable and right honourable members who have contributed to this Second Reading debate. And I welcome Prime Minister's confirmation that the government will table an amendment to extend the duty of candour to cover local inquiries. A clear gap in the Bill as it was originally introduced. Now the honourable member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough spoke about the often heard cry of never again. And with this bill we must make sure that this bill, when it enters the statute books, turns that desire into a reality.

My right honourable friend the member for Salisbury raised legitimate concerns about the effectiveness and administration of some public inquiries. Concerns that I know are shared by some ministers within the government, and the honourable lady from Llanelli spoke about the need for a change in culture that goes beyond just legislation, so that taking responsibility, rather than covering up failings becomes the norm, not just the legal requirement. The honourable gentleman for Eltham and Chislehurst reminded us of the outrageous experimentation on disabled pupils at Treloar School and the lengths that authorities went to hide responsibility, and hopefully some of these measures will be of some help to them.

The honourable members for Morecambe and Lunesdale, Glasgow East and Bournemouth West spoke movingly about how failings in the NHS were made worse by a lack of openness and families feeling that they simply w the honourable gentleman for Rochdale reminded us of the long, long battle fought by nuclear test veterans. However, as noble as this bill's intentions may be, we must be ever vigilant to the unintended consequences of well-intended laws. So as this bill proceeds through the House, as we hope it will, we will scrutinise it closely in order to minimise the potential harms that may arise.

In particular, we must make sure that this bill does not inadvertently create a situation in which government and public services can no longer function effectively, not because they are falling foul of the bill, but because they fear they may be falling, falling foul of the bill if its provisions are applied in ways very different to those that I know the government intends. So we must be able to clarify how this bill will interface with existing legal and disciplinary frameworks, including the Civil Service Code.

We must clarify how new expected standards of ethical conduct will interface with those and other frameworks, and we must have a clear definition of what it means to mislead the public. Now, under this bill that's charge of misleading the public carries criminal sanction. And we obviously recognise some of the safeguards that are put in place, but they are not as tightly defined as they might be. And if politicians are to be able to effectively represent the public, then we must be absolutely certain that this definition is watertight, because otherwise this bill may give rise to a situation in which legitimate decisions made by ministers are subject to politically motivated lawfare.

We rightly expect our parliamentarians, officials and ministers to speak honestly, truthfully and with integrity, integrity, whether in this chamber or outside. But clause 11 three A by defining dishonesty in terms of falsehood, concealment, obfuscation or other means risks leaving prime ministers, other ministers and even constituency MPs a constant risk of vexatious complaints. Now, we may differ about the adequacy and even accuracy of some of the responses that the Prime Minister gives us at PMQs, but those disagreements must be a matter for the ballot box rather than for the courtroom.

We must also have a clear definition of the public interest. The idea on which so much of this bill rests because in our political system, the public interest is not for bureaucrats or judges to decide. The public expresses its will through the democratic process. It elects Members of Parliament to implement that will on their behalf, and so can the government. Be sure that the definition of public interest in this bill will not conflict with efforts made by future governments to implement those democratic wishes? It would be profoundly dangerous for any single government to attempt to define the public interest in a way that binds future governments, without giving sufficient weight to the role that the public itself plays in determining and articulating that interest.

Madam Deputy Speaker, at their best, public inquiries offer opportunities to genuinely learn rather than to seek retribution, to establish what happened and how, so that action can be taken to stop such events being repeated. More harm being done to more people, more lives being lost unnecessarily, and more futures being stolen away so that the oft repeated words never again, of which the honourable gentleman for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough spoke so well, can actually have some meaning. But that can only happen with honesty, openness, and a degree of trust.

In short, with candour from all of those involved. If this bill can help to achieve that, then it is well worth supporting. And that is why, while we will work to tighten some parts at later stages to make sure that it operates properly, we will be supporting this bill

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tonight. Minister Alex Davies-Jones. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a. Genuine, true privilege to close this Second Reading debate of the this Second Reading debate of the Public Office Accountability Bill. The Hillsborough law introducing this bill is a huge achievement. But I echo the Prime Minister when I say that this bill was not born I say that this bill was not born here in Westminster. It was born out of heartbreak, out of unimaginable loss, out of the unimaginable loss, out of the tireless courage of those who refused to be silenced.

Some of refused to be silenced. Some of those extraordinary people have been with us today in the gallery. been with us today in the gallery. And to them I simply say thank you. The whole country owes you a debt The whole country owes you a debt of gratitude, and I want to pay particular tribute to Hillsborough particular tribute to Hillsborough Law now, to Nathan, to Pete, to Elkin, to Deb, to Claire, and to Elkin, to Deb, to Claire, and to Debbie, who have all given their Debbie, who have all given their time, expertise and passion to this government to ensure that we deliver the best possible Bill and deliver the best possible Bill and to the family members who lost loved ones at Hillsborough, who met with us over the summer, who shared their pain, and who have rightly held us to account every single step of the way.

Margaret Aspinall, Charlotte Hennessey, Sue Roberts, Steve Kelly, Jenny Hicks and Hilda Hammond, as well as those members who have stood shoulder to shoulder with them, specifically my friends, the honourable members for Liverpool Garston, Widnes and Halewood, Liverpool West Derby Knowsley and my very good friend, the member for Birkenhead, who chaired the all-party group for nine years and I know it has personally been a significant pain for her not to speak in this debate today, but I know that she is with us and she sat in the front bench today.

The genesis of this bill is the fight of the Hillsborough families, but it goes much further. This bill is for anyone who has experienced an injustice, for anyone who has had to fight against the state to be heard, and for anyone who has had to demand the
21:36
Alex Davies-Jones Portrait Alex Davies-Jones MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Pontypridd, Labour)
-
-
truth, when it should have been given freely. At its heart, this given freely. At its heart, this bill is shaped by lived experience. I also want to thank inquest for their tireless work and for holding their tireless work and for holding that vital family listening day back in February, with families from a range of campaigns. We heard from a range of campaigns. We heard from so many of them personally about why the changes in this bill about why the changes in this bill are so essential, and the real difference that this will make in people's lives, and why.

Access to people's lives, and why. Access to legal aid for inquests, where the state is an interested person is so vitally important. I want to thank the families of Ruth Perry, Matthew Copstick, Anne Connor Sparrowhawk Copstick, Anne Connor Sparrowhawk for sharing their experiences with us and highlighting the importance of this to Hillsborough Law. Now Grenfell United the subpostmasters affected by the horizon scandal. affected by the horizon scandal. Those affected by the infected blood scandal. Truth about Zain and blood scandal.

Truth about Zain and sadly, so many others. I cannot thank these groups enough for their thank these groups enough for their time and for inquest for the report that they produced. It has shaped not only this bill but wider areas of policy, and that is why it is so important that victims voices and those with lived experience are at the heart of what we do in government. But this bill is not only for the major scandals that have scarred our nation and made the news.

It is also for individual families, and we heard many of those stories here tonight. For the ordinary people who find themselves facing the full force of the state alone. The Prime Minister has already set out why the expansion of legal aid is so important. But I also wanted to share a story, the story that shows why this bill is needed so urgently. In September, I had the pleasure of meeting with Will Powell, a father who has been fighting for answers for over 30 years, and I am proud that he is with us today.

He has been fighting after the death of his son, Robbie in 1990. Robbie was just ten years old when he died of Addison's disease. After Robbie's death, it became apparent that the doctors had suspected he had the disease and without Will's knowledge, a test to confirm this diagnosis had been requested, but not completed. That meant Robbie did not receive the treatment that could have saved his life. Will and his family have been fighting for the truth ever since.

They've been fighting for the truth about what went wrong and why this happened. Nothing can bring back Robbie. Nothing can bring back those we lost in Hillsborough. Grenfell horizon infected blood. But what we can bring is truth at the heart of every campaign. Every struggle is love. Love for those they lost. Love that has become action. Love that has determined to make sure that no one else suffers as they have, and that there is lasting change. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank you for giving way, and I commend her for paying tribute to William Powell, who has campaigned for justice for his son, Robbie Powell, for 35 years. Robbie died Powell, for 35 years. Robbie died as a result of medical negligence and William Powell has done so much to secure this legal duty of to secure this legal duty of candour. And it's right that he's acknowledged here in this debate, but he is still waiting for a public inquiry into his son's death.

Can she say whether or not she Can she say whether or not she believes this case meets the conditions for a public inquiry, which has been described as the which has been described as the worst cover up in NHS history, and a call that has been backed by the former Parliamentary and Health

**** Possible New Speaker ****

former Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. I thank him for that intervention and for introducing me intervention and for introducing me to Will Powell earlier this year. I know the Secretary of State for Wales has also met with Will Powell, Wales has also met with Will Powell, but the honourable member will know that for an inquiry to be granted here, that is the decision of the here, that is the decision of the Welsh Government. And I know that he is having conversations with the ministers there.

Madam Deputy ministers there. Madam Deputy Speaker, every single life lost is someone's whole world, and I am so honoured to bring forward this bill honoured to bring forward this bill and to represent the families who have so tirelessly campaigned for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it. But as we have heard, this is just the beginning. The Minister. Give way. I will not give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Give way. I will not give way. I've got quite a lot to get through. I want to put on record my commitment as a victim's minister to continue to listen, to provide a to continue to listen, to provide a voice for victims. And I will do everything in my power to make sure that when this bill leaves that when this bill leaves Parliament, it does so as the strongest bill possible. That is strongest bill possible. That is why the government will bring forward an amendment to make clear on the face of the bill that the on the face of the bill that the duty will extend to local authority investigations intended to capture the likes of the local grooming gang enquiries and the Kerslake gang enquiries and the Kerslake Review into the Manchester Arena attack, and is why we will utilise powers in the Bill to extend the powers in the Bill to extend the duty to a range of Ombudsman investigations, such as those by the Prison and Probation Ombudsman, the Prison and Probation Ombudsman, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, Local Government Social Care Ombudsman and Housing Social Care Ombudsman and Housing Ombudsman.

Can I now turn to the points raised in the debate today? First of all, I want to thank all First of all, I want to thank all honourable and right Honourable members across the House for their support for this Bill. It is support for this Bill. It is welcome. And as many have said, this bill is long overdue. The this bill is long overdue. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson raised a number of issues with the bill or potential issues in the bill. I would just she mentioned legal aid and how the Liberal Democrats would like expanded to those who are survivors as well as the bereaved.

I just want to put on record that this is the biggest

**** Possible New Speaker ****

generation. That point, will the. Minister give way?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister. The bill provides for parity of representation and will expand Non-means-tested legal aid for Non-means-tested legal aid for bereaved family members to secure advocacy at inquests, where a public authority is an interested person. But, as I understand it, only in England and Wales, of only in England and Wales, of course, justice is a devolved issue. But can the Minister confirm that, despite months of engagement with despite months of engagement with the Scottish Government and this UK wide legislation, the SNP Scottish Government has failed to confirm that Non-means tested legal aid will be available in Scotland, resulting in Scots families still

**** Possible New Speaker ****

resulting in Scots families still relying on charity to gain access to justice. Interventions need to be kept short. Alex Davies-Jones I welcome the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Alex Davies-Jones I welcome the intervention from my honourable friend, and it also gives me the opportunity to address some of the opportunity to address some of the issues around devolution that were brought up in the debate this evening. A number of Right Honourable members talked about whether or not this bill will apply UK wide, and I can confirm that the duty of candour provisions within this Bill will apply UK wide. this Bill will apply UK wide. However, as Honourable and Right Honourable members will know, justice is devolved to Scotland and Northern Ireland and the legal system does not apply the same way as it does to England and Wales, which is why some of the criminal offences do not apply.

Now it is for the Ministers in Scotland and Northern Ireland to request whether or not this legislation applies in those instances and applies to those nations. And I do want to say that conversations have been positive and have been engaged. We have been engaging very closely with our counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland on this point, and we do hope that these measures will apply UK wide. That is, of course, our our hope. But we cannot mandate what is not our jurisdiction in other nations.

And on the point of legal aid. Again, my honourable friend makes a very important point. It is for the Scottish Government to determine whether or not they will apply the same provisions that we are providing for England and Wales, where we are providing non-means tested legal aid for anyone bereaved. In an inquest where the state is a represented party. Now it is for Scotland and the Scottish Ministers to determine whether or not they want to apply the same. But what I will say from this dispatch box, because we had a lot of talk this evening about how long this bill has been in the making, and it was the my friend, the Right Honourable member for Llanelli, who mentioned that this has been a very that she was proud that it was a Labour government in just over its first year in office that has brought this bill to the House.

The party opposite had 14 years to do something on this and they failed. The SNP in Scotland have had 20 years to do something on this and they have failed. It is a Labour government that has chosen to bring this forward and to do something about this, to ensure that families get parity on legal aid, and that a duty of candour applies across all of our public services. Now, there was a number there was a number of debates this evening about protection for whistleblowers, and I just wanted to reaffirm the commitment to honourable members that the bill does require all authorities to set out a process to raise concerns and to ensure that procedures are clear and accessible for whistleblowers.

The honourable member, the Chair of the all-party group, requested a meeting with me. I will happily meet with her to discuss this further, because I think it's important that we address that. A number of members again raised the issue of the media. Now they will know that that is out of scope of this bill. This bill is on and provides a duty of candour on public authorities and on public servants. Now, where there is a public service broadcaster, we would of course, ensure that there is that the operation of the public service broadcaster operate with within what they are permitted.

However, I think it is important to note that from when the calls for Leveson and Leveson two were introduced, the media landscape has drastically and dramatically moved on. The public do not consume media in the same way anymore. The vast majority of the British public consume their media via social media, and I'm really, really pleased that the Secretary of State for DCMS was on the front bench when a number of these issues were raised. She has made a commitment. She has already met with a number of victims families to discuss what more we can do to tackle this and misinformation, particularly around disasters and issues that arise in, in, in, in public and then are put on social media.

And I will continue my conversations with her as this bill progresses to ensure that we can address that as well. My friend, the member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough gave a fantastic speech talking about that. We need to be reasonable, proportionate and fair, and I just want to ensure him that when it comes to legal aid and that parity of arms, which is so integral to the core of this bill that the coroners do have the powers to enforce what is in fact reasonable and proportionate in this bill to ensure that the families aren't faced with an army of barristers when they have a publicly funded lawyer advocate for them.

That is not the intention of this bill, and we have put that on the face of the bill. A number of honourable members mentioned the definition of harm, and I just want to reassure members again that this this is actually a very low bar for meeting this test. We have also ensured that it does cover mental distress, and that that is not the only measure for a criminal offence if a criminal offence. I think it was the honourable member mentioned, forging statistics, crime statistics, for example, where crime wouldn't necessarily harm, wouldn't necessarily come into play.

Well, if that was to be the case and an officer did falsify stats or crime statistics to make himself look better, or the or the police force look better, then that would come under the offence of misconduct in public office. So they would be captured in another criminal offence in the bill. So I just wanted to put that out there. The Right Honourable member for Salisbury talked about something that is very close to my heart. He gave an excellent contribution on the need for inquest reform and inquiry reform more broadly, and I wholeheartedly agree with him, as does this government, which is why the Cabinet Office are taking their time to get this right and are looking at quite a substantial piece of work on this.

And I will I endeavour to keep him updated on to this as we are actively developing our proposals here. My friend, the honourable member for Bootle. I hate to tell him and admit to him I am also a red. So I think this is Liverpool three Everton one actually. But I want to reaffirm my commitment to working with him and all Merseyside MPs. In fact, all members in this House and the families as this Bill progresses to ensure that it is the strongest possible bill going forward.

There was an excellent contribution from my friends, the members for St Helens North, Liverpool West Derby Knowsley who have been excellent advocates Liverpool Wavertree for the families of the Hillsborough disaster and their tireless campaigning going forward. I am determined to work with all of them again as the Bill progresses to ensure that there is no carve out, whether that be for the security services. And just to reassure the House there is no carve out. The duty of candour applies to everyone, including the security services, including to individuals.

But what is different for the security services is the way in which they report that breach. They must report it to their senior individual within the service to ensure that national security is protected. And I think we have struck that balance in the bill. But I hear that I hear that there are concerns in this House, and there have been concerns raised outside of this House, and I am keen to engage those conversations to see if there is anything further we can do on this point.

I also wanted to touch upon the members for North Antrim and the members for Lagan Valley, who mentioned the Chinook disaster. A commitment has been made to meet with members and victims of the Chinook disaster, and I. I have made that commitment to be in that meeting as well, to progress on those issues going forward. Fantastic contributions from members of Sheffield who again, as well as Merseyside MPs, have felt the the urgency to bring forward this legislation and have felt the pain of the Hillsborough disaster in their constituencies.

The My friend, the honourable member for Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough talked about how she had just given birth not long after the Hillsborough disaster and how it has always stuck with her that her baby was at home and so many

**** Possible New Speaker ****

parents didn't get to bring their children home. I will give way. I thank the Minister for giving

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way and as a six year old, I remember the death of Joe McCarthy, remember the death of Joe McCarthy, who lived on my road in West London. So it's not just those who lived in Sheffield, but it affected everyone across the country. And so this bill is so important for that reason.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reason. It did. And that's a fantastic point to me. This bill may bear the name Hillsborough, but it is a bill name Hillsborough, but it is a bill for the entire country. And that is one that this government is clear to make as a commitment. A number of honourable members, including the Chair of the Select Committee and my friend, the Right Honourable member for Garston, talked about member for Garston, talked about the independent Public Advocate Cindy Butts, as this House will be aware, has been appointed as the independent public advocate.

She's independent public advocate. She's a fantastic individual who has just been appointed in her first role as an IPA following the horrific attack at Heaton Park Synagogue. I am due to meet with her later this am due to meet with her later this week to discuss how she has found being stood up for the first ever time, following the introduction of the role in the Victims and the role in the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 to discuss her resource requirements, her powers and I will, of course, update the and I will, of course, update the House if we feel like if we both feel her is the independent, adequate advocate and myself as the minister if there is further to go here.

But I am also due to meet with my friends, the Right Honourable Member for Garston and Lord Wills in the other place to discuss how further we can work together to look at the role of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give. Way, sir. I also mention the National oversight mechanism now whether she thinks it needs legislation done by government action to have something government action to have something which is shared, known, publicised. So we're not continually repeating things we know where inquiries have things we know where inquiries have got to. Would she support that? Will she do that in tandem with the bill, if not part of the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes, sir. My friend, the Chair of the Select Committee pre-empts my next point, which was on the National Oversight mechanism, which again, a number of honourable and again, a number of honourable and Right honourable members mentioned as the Prime Minister stated in his opening remarks, there is a need opening remarks, there is a need for accountability here, and we are looking at what way we can do that work being led by the Cabinet Office when it is looking at that inquest reform, inquiry, reform work that the Ministry of Justice have already done on ensuring that prevention of future death reports prevention of future death reports are published.

I would echo the Prime Minister that we do not feel like this bill is the necessary vehicle to put in a national oversight mechanism, but we are looking proactively at what we can do to ensure that there is do to ensure that there is accountability and transparency so that these inquiries are never again left sitting on a shelf and recommendations ignored or put to recommendations ignored or put to one side. My good friend, the member for members for Blyth and Ashington and the honourable member for Cannock Chase mentioned an issue very close to my heart Orgreave.

Now, honourable members may know because I have talked about it with pride before that my dad was there on that day. I am the very proud daughter of a miner, and nothing has given me more pride than this government. Announcing a statutory inquiry into Orgreave, which will be coming forward soon. This bill, when it becomes an act, will apply to inquiries that are going so if the inquiry has started or if it is ongoing, then this bill will come into immediate effect and apply to all of those inquiries that are underway.

And I am really looking forward to the recommendations coming out of that inquiry and what truth we get there, because that, again, is long overdue. Again, there was concerns regarding the security services whistleblowers. Hopefully I have put some of those fears to bed this evening, but I look forward to debating all of this in detail as we go through committee stage. And I again, I just want to extend that offer to meet with any right hon. To ensure that this bill does remain its strongest possible act, as it finally does become an act when it leaves this place.

And I look forward to positive engagement with colleagues across the House. Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill will ensure that no other family will ever, ever have to walk alone, and I am immensely proud to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

commend it to the House. The question is that the Bill be now read a second time. As many as

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now read a second time. As many as are of that opinion, say aye. I of the contrary. No.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. The programme motion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

ayes have it. The programme motion to be moved formally. I beg. To move. The question is, as on the Order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is, as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that opinion, say aye. I of the contrary.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

opinion, say aye. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Money motion to be moved formally. I beg to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move. The question is, as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that Paper, as many as are of that opinion. Say I. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Motion number four on broadcasting Minister to move. I beg to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move. The question is, as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that Paper, as many as are of that opinion, say aye. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Motion number five on broadcasting Minister to move. I beg. To move. The question is as on the Order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that opinion, say aye. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. We now come to motion number six relating to the energy security and net zero committee.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Gen Kitchen I beg to move. The question is as on the Order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that opinion, say aye. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Motion number seven. Relating to the Women and to. Move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Move. I beg to move. The question is as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that Paper, as many as are of that opinion, say aye. I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Petition Emma Lewell-Buck.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lewell-Buck. Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. I rise to present a petition on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to present a petition on behalf of my constituents regarding the uncontrolled growth and the lack of monitoring of houses in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

lack of monitoring of houses in multiple occupation across South Shields HMOs. Are. Having a. Detrimental impact on our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Detrimental impact on our community, increasing anti-social behaviour and contributing to the erosion of family housing. Everyone erosion of family housing. Everyone deserves to have a place to call home and everyone deserves to feel home and everyone deserves to feel safe in that home. HMOs should not be allowed to be used as a substitute for good quality, substitute for good quality, affordable housing. The petitioners, therefore, request that the House of Commons urge the government to introduce new legislation to regulate and lessen the proliferation of houses in multiple occupation, and to ask that each local authority publishes their strategy and policies on HMOs and the petitioners remain Exeter.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition regulation of.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Houses in multiple occupation. I beg.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg. To move that this House do now adjourn. The question is that this House

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this House do now adjourn. Sally Jameson here. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, today marks the first sitting day of National Care Leavers Month. And
21:57
Feed Live - Click to view video
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page