In a setback for Keir Starmer’s signature Hillsborough law, talks between the Labour leader and families of victims have broken down over concerns about the bill’s protections for intelligence officers.
The proposed law aims to enforce a duty of candour on public officials, requiring them to tell the truth in their work and assist investigations after disasters. However, families of those killed in the 1989 Hillsborough tragedy and the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing are worried the current version of the bill still gives the security services too much power to withhold evidence.
Margaret Aspinall, whose son James was killed at Hillsborough, was among those who met with Starmer on Wednesday. Afterwards, she and other bereaved relatives expressed disappointment with the government’s position, fearing a repeat of the “false narrative” and “cover-ups” seen in the Manchester Arena inquiry.
Under the current proposals, directors of the intelligence services would be able to veto officers from giving evidence, something the families vehemently oppose. They want individual officers to be compelled to provide testimony, with the intelligence services having to make a case for excluding evidence on national security grounds.
Labour MP Ian Byrne has submitted an amendment to apply the duty of candour to intelligence officers, saying he cannot support the bill as it stands. Other Labour MPs are also threatening to rebel if the families’ concerns are not addressed.
A government source acknowledged it was “deeply regrettable” no agreement had been reached, but insisted they had gone as far as possible without compromising national security. They claimed the bill would make the UK’s intelligence services the “most scrutinised in the world”, with some limited exceptions where consent to give evidence could be withheld.
However, the families and their legal representatives remain unconvinced, warning the government is in danger of “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory” on this landmark legislation by prioritising protecting the security services over truth and justice.
With the bill’s return to the Commons delayed until next week, Starmer faces a delicate balancing act to satisfy both the government and the Hillsborough and Manchester families if he is to avoid a damaging rebellion within his own party.