Message To Starmer: The Hillsborough Law As It Stands Has No Teeth. If It Does Not Contain A Legally Enforceable Duty Of Candour, Call It Something Else. We Want No Part Of It

The Government was rushing to get the bill before Parliament before the 36th anniversary. Word around Westminster suggests it's not fit for purpose. Anger is growing among campaigners

SOMETIMES IT’S HARD to sleep. Especially at this time of year.

On nights like when insomnia bites, I run along the Thames. The backdrop is familiar to TV and film buffs all over the world: the MI6 building, Big Ben, the London Eye.

There are less well-known locations. The Albert Embankment is a poignant place. The national covid memorial has thousands of red hearts painted on the wall. The names of some of the victims of the pandemic have been written on the hearts by family members and friends. I often stop to stretch by the tributes to two of my mates, Richard and Colin, touching the hearts that bear their names. Both were at Hillsborough. They survived one national disaster but succumbed to a second.

Which leads me to turn and face the Houses of Parliament, the site of so many betrayals of the British people (I’m talking about the Thatcherite selloff of the UK’s national assets in the 1980s and Labour’s sellout of the poor last week, not the guff that comes out of Nigel Farage’s racist imagination). The last time I was in Parliament was a meeting advocating for a Hillsborough Law. There were many diverse groups there, fighting for the same cause, among them Grenfell United, those affected by the tainted blood scandal, the relatives of nuclear test veterans and, of course, the families of covid victims.

There was a flurry of activity over the Hillsborough Law last week. It is worth discussing what happened and what will happen next.

The Government appear to have been keen to get the reading of the first bill before Parliament ahead of the 36^th anniversary of the unlawful killings of 97 people at the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest in 1989.

The men responsible for causing the loss of life – plus numerous injuries – and performing the subsequent cover-up have not been and will never be called to account. Senior policemen changed the statements of junior officers, lied at an inquest and set up a ‘black propaganda unit’ to deflect blame on to Liverpool supporters, who made up the majority of casualties.

A 12-year investigation by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is in the process of responding to 354 complaints against the South Yorkshire Police. Even where the IOPC found justification for the complaints, no action will be taken against officers who left the force before 2017. The bottom line: there will be no justice.

The Hillsborough Law is meant to address these situations by enshrining a ‘duty of candour’ in law, compelling public servants to tell the truth or risk criminal conviction. Its implementation would be a huge step forward for the United Kingdom.

So there was some excitement when the Government arranged a meeting with the families of the Hillsborough dead for last Thursday. Prime Minister Keir Starmer planned to attend.

Meanwhile, word began to seep out about what was contained in the bill. Westminster is often referred to as a ‘village.’ It is hard to keep anything completely under wraps, even in a world where documents are viewed in sealed room and devices and notes are not allowed.

It quickly became apparent that the bill would not meet the standards demanded by Hillsborough campaigners and their allies.

There is no legal duty of candour in the proposed law as it stands and numerous exclusions in favour of the authorities create enormous loopholes in the duty of candour. The criminal sanctions that are a key part of the law simply do not appear to exist.

Equality of arms – granting bereaved families the same level of access to legal support as the state – is not featured. A source familiar with the bill called it “a complete mess,” adding “it’s barely different to what we’ve got now.”

“If what we hear is true,” a survivor said, “we don’t want to be associated with this law. Take Hillsborough out of its name.”

The feedback caused panic in No 10. Starmer is said to have made contact with individuals connected with Hillsborough and has been told in no uncertain terms that the bill is not good enough. The rationale behind getting a first reading out by April 15 appears to have been to generate some positive publicity. The Prime Minister was reminded that, after enduring 35 anniversaries, everyone connected with the disaster would prefer to see another anniversary pass as long as the legislation satisfies the needs of campaigners and the country.

The meeting between Starmer and the families was hastily cancelled – some invitees only found out through the media. Activity was replaced by silence. And suspicion.

There are two viewpoints. The first suggests that the Government have realised they were on the brink of a monumental mistake and stepped back to rethink their approach. The other contends that Starmer and his people are now trying to work out a way of PRing themselves out of the mess.

There is a simple message for the Prime Minister, though. If the new law does not contain a legal duty of candour, if it has no teeth, then take the word ‘Hillsborough’ from it. Call it what it is: ‘The Police and authorities protection bill.’

No one connected with the 36-year battle will accept watered-down legislation.

The legacy of Hillsborough has to mean something. An ineffectual law will only insult the memory of the dead once more and show contempt for the living.

Charters and codes of conduct do not work. The only thing that will ensure that public officials tell the truth is if they are legally compelled to do so.

We need a law that keeps liars awake at night. Those who fight for justice should be able to sleep, if not soundly, at least knowing no one else will suffer anything like they experienced. Starmer and his Government must do better.