← Back to House of Commons Debates
Public Office (Accountability) Bill 2026-01-19
19 January 2026
Lead MP
Alex Davies-Jones
Debate Type
General Debate
Tags
Scotland
Other Contributors: 21
At a Glance
Alex Davies-Jones raised concerns about public office (accountability) bill 2026-01-19 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
The Minister of Justice emphasised the importance of the Public Office Accountability Bill for ensuring transparency, accountability, and support for families affected by state failures. She highlighted the need to balance transparency with national security concerns, especially regarding intelligence services. The Government has proposed amendments but faces criticism over delays and a lack of clear direction.
Nick Timothy
Con
West Suffolk
Timothy criticised the government for delaying progress on the Bill despite repeated promises to families affected by state failures. He questioned the government's ability to find a solution and proposed specific questions about timelines, decision-making processes involving intelligence agencies, and international perspectives.
Ian Byrne
Lab
Liverpool West Derby
Byrne thanked the Minister for pausing the Bill but expressed concern over the delay in adopting amendment 23 which is supported by Hillsborough campaigners. He asked for clarification on why this amendment was not adopted and requested a clear timeline to avoid further delays.
Constituency Not Mentioned
The Minister acknowledged the work of campaigners and committed to working with other parliamentarians, including the Intelligence and Security Committee, to find a way forward on the Bill. She emphasised that while the Bill is not kicking into the long grass, it must be done correctly and at pace without an arbitrary deadline. The Minister also discussed the need for collaboration between government officials and campaigners to ensure the legislation includes clear binding provisions.
Chichester
The Liberal Democrat spokesperson expressed frustration with the current state of limbo regarding the Hillsborough Bill, despite initial commitments by the Government. She criticised the carve-out for security services and requested that when presenting the Bill to the House, it should include a duty of candour applicable to all in intelligence services. The Lib Dem also asked for a commitment to ensure Report and Third Reading will take place promptly.
Paula Barker
Lab
Liverpool Wavertree
Barker paid tribute to the families, campaigners, and MPs involved in the case. She expressed concern about the direction of travel regarding the Bill's compatibility with national security and urged the Minister to continue working closely with victims' families.
Ashley Fox
Con
Bridgwater
Fox sought clarification from the minister on whether heads of intelligence services should determine what information is provided in investigations, questioning if it was possible for individual agents to be subject to duty of candour without creating security risks.
Knowsley
Midgley criticised the response from the shadow Justice Secretary as inappropriate while families were present. She urged the Minister to work closely with the families and introduce an amendment that fully satisfies them on duty of candour.
David Simmonds
Con
Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner
Simmonds raised concerns over ambiguity in the accountability at the heart of the Bill regarding disclosure oversight. He asked for clarity on who should make decisions about information disclosure to ensure effective oversight.
Baroness Williams of Trafford
Stated commitment to solving a complex issue involving national security, intelligence services oversight and accountability. Emphasised working with families, parliamentarians, and government departments to ensure protection, oversight and an amendment that families can support without compromising national security.
Justin Madders
Lab
Ellesmere Port and Bromborough
Acknowledged the Minister's efforts to earn trust of the Hillsborough families. Called for public statements confirming agreement on the Bill, to counteract misleading headlines and political point-scoring.
Welcomed support from colleagues in championing the Hillsborough law. Described the bill as expanding legal aid for those affected by state-involved deaths, introducing new criminal offences of misconduct in public office and misleading the public, aiming to improve British life's culture.
Tessa Munt
LD
Wells and Mendip
Questioned Government's reluctance on accepting amendment 23. Stressed the importance of transparency from security services given their history of misleading truth.
Emma Lewell-Buck
Lab
South Shields
Asked for assurance that families will have full involvement and support in future stages of the Bill, highlighting emotional toll on victims' relatives and campaigners over years.
Ben Obese-Jecty
Con
Huntingdon
Inquired about applicability of the bill to military intelligence services and special forces operations with no exceptions for retroactive application.
Clive Efford
Lab
Eltham
Welcomed delay, emphasising that it is not just about Hillsborough families but also victims of other state-related scandals. Supported the need for a duty of candour from all public authorities including security services.
Aberdeenshire North and Moray East
Paid tribute to Minister's collaborative efforts, endorsed amendment 23. Asked if next draft will include a role for the Intelligence and Security Committee.
Llanelli
Welcomed the importance of changing the culture and ensuring full truth. Mentioned a visit to Liverpool next week to learn from world-leading work on duty of candour for public authorities. Emphasised ongoing work with Northern Ireland Assembly, Scottish Parliament, and Welsh Government.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Thanked the Minister and praised Liverpool MPs for achieving balance between citizens and security agencies in the Bill. Asked for Minister to collaborate with Northern Ireland Assembly on ensuring duty of candour applies UK-wide.
Richard Burgon
Lab
Leeds East
Acknowledged the importance of the campaign for the Hillsborough law led by ordinary people and praised Government's decision to pull back from a previous stance. Asked Minister to confirm that duty of candour applies to security services as well, and that an amendment is still under consideration.
West Dunbartonshire
Asked for updates on discussions with the Scottish Government regarding non-means tested legal aid access for families in fatal accident inquiries and inquests.
Calder Valley
Shared personal experience related to a terrorist attack at Manchester Victoria station and expressed gladness that victims' voices are being heard. Asked Minister to confirm commitment to ensuring the voices of all victims and families of state cover-ups will be central in future legislation.
Government Response
The Minister defended the government's position, emphasising the complexity of balancing transparency with national security concerns. She stated that the delay is necessary to ensure the Bill is fit and proper for implementation. The Government are committed to finding a way forward with the Bill, ensuring it is done correctly and collaboratively, while protecting national security. The Minister emphasised that there has never been a carve-out for intelligence services but clarified procedures around secure information handling. Emphasised commitment to protecting national security, stated no carve-out exists for intelligence services in the Bill. Assured ongoing work with families and public authorities to ensure truth-telling. Emphasised changing culture as aim at heart of Bill. Mentioned visit to Liverpool next week, ongoing work with devolved governments for UK-wide implementation. Confirmed collaboration on legal aid mechanism with Scottish Government.
Shadow Response
Nick Timothy
Shadow Response
Timothy criticised the Government's handling of the Bill, questioning the lack of clarity on timelines and decision-making processes involving intelligence agencies. He asked several specific questions about the Government’s approach to resolving these issues.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.