-
Question
Does the Minister recognise that although the Hillsborough families have secured important changes, these are insufficient for other bereaved families suffering today? Will he therefore ensure that the Government acts urgently to implement a Hillsborough law?
Minister reply
The Minister acknowledged the importance of ensuring meaningful justice and transparency but emphasised that the government is committed to listening to the Hillsborough families and implementing necessary reforms. He stated that further discussions will be held, including a debate in the new year.
-
Question
Given that 97 people have now died as a result of the Hillsborough disaster and many are still living with life-changing injuries, will the Minister meet me to discuss what further support can be offered?
Minister reply
The Minister expressed willingness to meet the MP to discuss further support for those affected by the Hillsborough disaster.
-
Question
Does my hon. Friend agree that this is an important step but a lot more work needs to be done? Can he assure me and other bereaved families that we will continue to campaign until justice for all victims of public tragedy has been achieved?
Minister reply
The Minister agreed on the need for continued efforts and reassured the MP that the government remains committed to working towards comprehensive justice and support for all affected by major incidents.
-
Question
It is customary to thank the Government for advance sight of the statement, but given the gravity of this matter, the fact that the report being responded to has been with the Government for many years and the length of the Secretary of State’s statement this morning, I am disappointed to have received the copy of his statement much later than is customary. The name “Hillsborough” stands as an indictment of institutions and individuals where transparency was absent. The purpose of the Government’s response must be centred on the experience of the families, just as Bishop James’s report was. We welcome the commitment to consult on expanding legal aid for families bereaved in a public disaster but there is nothing in what we have seen from the Government to date that goes as far as we believe is necessary to require public authorities to act with candour and transparency.
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Lady for her response, acknowledging the manifest lack of equality of arms during adversarial processes. The Government committed to addressing this in two ways: first by ensuring families have the legal arms to take on such cases and secondly, through consultation on further expanding legal aid funding where necessary. Bishop James Jones’ report underlines the need to change the culture, which is why we are consulting on a duty of candour and embedding it as part of the charter for an independent public advocate.
-
Question
I thank the Lord Chancellor for his statement and welcome the Government’s response, although like him, I bemoan the fact that it has taken so long to respond to this report. What underpinned the approach of the organs of the state at Hillsborough was a desire to protect themselves rather than serve the public or search for truth and justice. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that almost the most important point in the charter is that it requires organisations to place the public interest above their own reputation? What specific steps will the Government be taking to ensure that this culture is instilled across the whole public sector?
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend rightly identifies the critical importance of placing the public interest above one’s own reputation as outlined in Bishop James Jones’ report. The Government is implementing a code of practice for ethical policing, which includes provisions to ensure openness and candour within forces and the embedding of the Charter for Families Bereaved through Public Tragedy into training and induction processes.
-
Question
As someone with great affection for the people of Liverpool and Merseyside, I start by saying that our thoughts are once again with the Hillsborough families. I join the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood in her qualified thanks for advance sight of the statement. I was pleased that the Lord Chancellor thanked and congratulated hon. Members, as well as Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram, for their work in this area. I have three questions for the Lord Chancellor. First, the chief executive of the College of Policing has described Hillsborough as a touchstone for change, but in the years since, we have sadly seen a familiar culture of cover-up in relation to tragedies such as Grenfell and the infected blood scandal. The Lord Chancellor appears to accept the principle; does he also accept that at some point, the public will tire of hearing about promised cultural change without visible action accompanying it? Secondly, no police officer has been disciplined or convicted of any offence relating to the Hillsborough disaster. Does he agree that in cases where it is proven that false evidence was given or inaccurate statements were made, retrospective action up to and including prosecution must take place? Finally, part of the reason why the police were able to avoid full scrutiny around Hillsborough for so long was irresponsible reporting of the disaster by sections of the media. Is the Lord Chancellor convinced that reforms in that area have gone far enough, or does he agree with many of us that more reform in that area is sadly needed?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Gentleman for those helpful and pertinent questions. Let me turn first to the issue of the police. Yes, it is one thing to set the culture, which, I think it is reasonable to point out, will now be woven into police training, but accountability matters too. One thing that matters is that schedule 2 to the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020, which, of course, post-date the report, includes the following: police officers must be honest, act with integrity and...not compromise or abuse their position and Police officers have a responsibility to give appropriate cooperation during investigations, inquiries and formal proceedings, participating openly and professionally in line with the expectations of a police officer when identified as a witness. Those standards are in the regulations. Their breach would provide a powerful case for dismissal or other suitable sanction. On the hon. Gentleman’s point about retrospectivity, plainly, if evidence comes to light about behaviour at the time, it can be considered in the normal way. I hope that he will be encouraged by knowing that the offence of misconduct in a public office is being considered by the Law Commission and we will respond in the new year. It is reasonable to observe that it has not operated as we might have liked, and is susceptible to reform. We are giving that very active attention. On the media and irresponsible coverage, my goodness, the hon. Gentleman has a point. I think that there still needs to be a live conversation about whether things have gone far enough.
-
Question
The delay in the report has been unacceptable, but it is absolutely no fault of my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor. I thank him for his statement, for its tone, which was characteristically generous-spirited, and for the work that he has done to expedite it. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it will be important to pick up on some of the learning from two Justice Committee reports on the coronial system and on pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Victims Bill? Does he agree that, to achieve the proper outcome of a legacy for the victims of Hillsborough, we should work to the position where it would be the norm for there to be proper legal representation for victims and bereaved families at inquests? That should be the norm rather than any form of exception. Secondly, does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the duty of candour should extend, in terms of legal representation by Government Departments, to the fullest and earliest possible disclosure of all relevant materials that are in the hands of Departments and their lawyers? Thirdly, does he agree that we should work with the excellent current Chief Coroner, whose predecessor gave powerful evidence to our Committee, to ensure that there is greater consistency in the standards and approach within the coronial system, which has not always been the case in the past? Does he agree that those are important matters, together with the assurance of equality of arms across the piece?
Minister reply
Those are very helpful points. First, I pay tribute to the Justice Committee for its work, particularly the work on coroners’ inquests. Indeed, in preparation for this statement, I went back and re-read some of the evidence given by the then Chief Coroner, Mark Lucraft, in which he talked about this important issue of equality of arms. He made the point—from his position as Chief Coroner, no less—that, yes, there are of course cases in which it is important to have legal representation. We have made enormous strides, as has been indicated. Equally, there will be those in which legal representation sometimes does not help terribly. That is why we have to proceed with care. The key issue is equality of arms, as my hon. Friend rightly points out. The business about candour as regards early disclosure is critical.
-
Question
Bishop James called his report “The patronising disposition of unaccountable power”—the key word is “unaccountable.” Thirty-four years after 97 men, women and children were unlawfully killed at a televised event, for which the public inquiry interim report pinned the blame on the police within four months, no one has been held accountable for what happened at Hillsborough, and now nobody will be. Accountability is key here. Although culture change is good, we need legal change too. The failure to legislate for a full duty of candour for all public officials or to put the charter for families bereaved by public tragedy into statute is inexplicable. As the Lord Chancellor knows, I still think that the independent public advocate’s powers need to be beefed up to include an ability to compel transparency and be a data controller in order to torpedo attempts to cover up—what went wrong at Hillsborough was a cover-up, as much as anything. Will the Lord Chancellor reconsider his apparent unwillingness to legislate to make it clear that this House and our nation require accountability, require candour and require public authorities and those who work for them to act in the best interests of those bereaved in the appalling public tragedies that have occurred and will continue to occur?
Minister reply
I thank the right hon. Lady and say, entirely fairly, I hope, that the merits in this response—and it can reasonably be observed that there are a great number—are due in considerable part to her efforts in engaging with me to make changes and improvements. On the issue of the independent public advocate, for example, there is no doubt—others have fed in as well, not least my right hon. Friend the Member for Maidenhead, the former Prime Minister—that the IPA will be permanent. It will be able to make reports of its own motion come before this House, and not just at the instigation of the state. This IPA is of a different order of muscularity from the one originally envisaged, and the right hon. Lady has played an important part in that.
-
Question
My right hon. and learned Friend’s statement goes some way to tackling the institutional behaviour that puts the reputational damage of organisations and public confidence in them ahead of the interests of the people they are meant to serve, but his comments have been very much in the context of major public incidents. How far does he think the expectations enshrined in the charter can be applied to individual cases? I speak with particular reference to suicide. Quite often, bereaved families attend inquests where the players are keen to avoid any suggestion of liability; that could conflict with what he has described in terms of a duty of candour.
Minister reply
I am so grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that critical point. The issue is not just about major disasters, important though they are. When something dreadful has happened, the victims and families do not want to find themselves in an unnecessarily adversarial situation or one where people are, frankly, trying to save their own skins and showing institutional defensiveness. A lot of the issue comes down to culture, frankly; we are aware of that. There are two things to say. First, on the equality of arms, if exceptional case funding is involved—that is to do with article 2; there are certain thresholds—there will be legal representation. On culture, we have provided a new document, which includes the principles guiding the Government’s approach when they hold interested person status at an inquest.
-
Question
I thank the Lord Chancellor for his statement today and for the empathy and decency shown on Hillsborough. However, I am concerned that what has been decided will not prevent another Hillsborough-style state cover-up. The Criminal Justice Bill mentions a duty of candour only in clause 73 without providing legal definition or compliance mechanism. Will the Secretary of State reflect on comments made across the House to work with us for effective accountability?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Gentleman and will indeed reflect carefully on what has been said, especially about changing the culture. We remain committed to this and I will continue conversations on how best to achieve it.
-
Question
Welcoming the statement's general tone, my hon. Friend asks who will determine what is proportionate regarding legal representation spend by public bodies. He highlights the disproportionate spending seen in past cover-ups to save skins rather than find justice.
Minister reply
The whole point about encouraging Departments to publish material is that the public can assess whether it is proportionate, as they should understand this term.
-
Question
Thanking the Lord Chancellor for the statement and recognising its overdue nature, I highlight my experience attending part of the first Hillsborough inquest where victims were blamed rather than authorities. To ensure certainty, we need to put the public advocate role on the statute book.
Minister reply
I confirm that the Independent Police Complaints Commissioner (IPA) is being put on the statute book.
-
Question
Grateful for today’s statement, I ask if we can look at establishing an office for whistleblowers to provide a place where people could raise issues or get help regarding duty of candour across public services.
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend and would be happy to discuss this further. Already in the civil service code, there ought to be arrangements for people to do precisely that.
-
Question
Exploring Bishop James's recommendation on proper participation of bereaved families at inquests and the impact of inequality of funding between the state and bereaved families, I ask if he agrees with evidence suggesting wider use of exceptional case funding for article 2 cases as a way to achieve equality of arms.
Minister reply
The hon. and learned Lady makes an excellent point; however, we must be judicious in our approach, depending on the specific case.
-
Question
Is he content that sufficient legal and institutional protections are in place to help prevent another event like Hillsborough?
Minister reply
Significant changes have taken place, but we need to ensure resources and support are always there should an event as tragic happen again.
-
Question
Expressing deep disappointment over the long wait for today's statement and that what is proposed is not good enough, I ask if he will meet to discuss moving forward from this point.
Minister reply
My door is always open. We can have a discussion in due course about how we move forward.
-
Question
The MP emphasises the history of deceit by state organisations during the Hillsborough inquest and calls for a statutory duty of candour to prevent future injustices.
Minister reply
The minister acknowledges the importance of changing the culture but notes countervailing issues. He indicates willingness to discuss further steps.
-
Question
The MP asks if a Hillsborough law is necessary for families to feel justice and prevent future incidents.
Minister reply
The minister agrees that cultural changes are crucial, indicating readiness to discuss further measures post-consultation.
-
Question
The MP questions the delay in implementing a Hillsborough law and seeks clarity on legal aid consultations.
Minister reply
The minister responds that significant steps have been taken but highlights the need for caution, especially regarding terrorism cases.
-
Question
The MP inquires about support and justice for victims of Grenfell and Manchester Arena.
Minister reply
The minister confirms a duty of candour is necessary and assures that an independent public advocate will help hold people accountable.
-
Question
The MP questions why the duty of candour applies only to chief officers instead of all individual officers.
Minister reply
The minister explains that while chief officers are responsible for organisational culture, individual officers also have duties under 2020 regulations.
-
Question
The MP criticises the Government's delayed response to the Hillsborough report and calls for a duty of candour across all public organisations.
Minister reply
The minister acknowledges Bishop James Jones’s recommendations but highlights countervailing interests, offering further discussions.
-
Question
The MP urges for a Hillsborough law to ensure real equality of arms and full support for victims.
Minister reply
The minister emphasises significant changes made towards equality of arms, committing to further discussions on this issue.
-
Question
The MP asks why a Hillsborough law is not implemented and seeks clarity.
Minister reply
The minister explains that countervailing interests have been considered across Government Departments, offering further discussion.
-
Question
The MP commends the opposition's efforts and questions whether victims should be prioritised in legislation for public disasters.
Minister reply
The minister agrees that victims' needs are paramount, highlighting the importance of permanent IPAs to assist and hold agencies accountable.
-
Question
The MP asks whether families will be satisfied with the Government's response.
Minister reply
The minister asserts that significant changes have been made in line with Bishop James Jones’s report, while acknowledging further discussions are needed.