A crucial piece of legislation, the Hillsborough Law, has hit a roadblock, leaving families and advocates in a state of uncertainty. The law, designed to prevent official cover-ups and hold public officials accountable, is now on hold until an agreement can be reached with the very families it aims to support.
The Guardian has learned that Labour, led by Keir Starmer, has delayed the bill's return to the Commons for debate, prioritizing finding common ground with the affected families. The sticking point? The duty of candour, a key provision in the public authority bill, and its application to serving intelligence officers.
But here's where it gets controversial: while the government agrees that the security services should be covered by the law, they want agency chiefs to have the final say on when individual officers can provide evidence. This power dynamic is a major concern for the families, who fear it could lead to future cover-ups and undermine the law's intent.
On Friday, the government proposed amendments to the bill, placing further obligations on the security services. However, these amendments fell short of satisfying the families' demands, leaving the bill in limbo.
A Labour source emphasized the need for a compromise that respects the families' wishes while safeguarding national security. On Monday, families, along with barrister Peter Wetherby, met with ministers Alex Davies-Jones and Nick Thomas-Symonds, but no agreement was reached.
Starmer, speaking at a press conference, expressed his determination to find a solution, acknowledging the importance of getting it right for the families who have been let down. He highlighted the need to balance the duty of candour with the unique considerations of security and intelligence agencies, emphasizing his primary duty as prime minister to keep the country safe.
MPs expressed relief that the government had temporarily pulled the bill, but the delay could extend for many weeks. About 20 Labour MPs had signed an amendment in support of the families' demands, underscoring the bill's importance.
The bill's journey is far from over; it must return to the Commons for further stages of debate and then navigate the Lords. A government source stated that talks would continue without a deadline, requiring agreement not only with the families but also with various government departments and committees.
And this is the part most people miss: the personal involvement of Starmer in the later stages of these talks. His commitment to finding a solution that respects the families' wishes while maintaining national security is a delicate balancing act.
The campaign group Hillsborough Law Now welcomed the government's decision to withdraw their security services amendment, acknowledging their willingness to listen to the campaign and its supporters. However, the path forward remains uncertain, leaving families and advocates awaiting a resolution.
What are your thoughts on this complex issue? Should the government prioritize national security over the families' demands, or is there a way to find a compromise that satisfies both? We'd love to hear your opinions in the comments!
