Keir Starmer is facing the prospect of Labour MPs rebelling on his manifesto-promised Hillsborough law after talks broke down with families over how the duty of candour would apply to serving intelligence officers.
Starmer was introduced at last year’s Labour conference by Margaret Aspinall, whose son James, 18, was one of the 97 people killed in the 1989 Hillsborough disaster. She praised him for pushing forward with the bill after months of arguments over its future.
But on Wednesday Aspinall, along with other people whose relatives died at Hillsborough and in the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing, emerged from a meeting with Starmer saying they were disappointed with the government’s position.
The bill will enforce a duty of candour on public officials and contractors to tell the truth in their work and to positively assist inquiries and investigations after disasters. But families have raised concerns since the bill was published about the specific protections it offered to serving intelligence officers.
The families do not want directors of the intelligence services to be able to veto officers giving evidence because of the experience at the inquiry into the Manchester Arena bombing.
Individual officers gave evidence at that inquiry, showing that MI5 had not been truthful about intelligence it had that might have led to the bomber being stopped before the attack in which 22 people were killed at an Ariana Grande concert.
Caroline Curry, whose son, Liam, 19, died in the Manchester Arena bombing, said: “As it’s proposed at the moment, the government’s bill is still giving carte blanche to the security services, MI5, and we just can’t back it with that.
“Good on the government for actually taking the law and running with it and putting it into parliament because the Conservatives didn’t. But do it the right way. Don’t blow it at the last hurdle. We’re just really disappointed. It’s just so infuriating.”
Curry said the “false narrative” MI5 put forward was “torture” for her after her son was killed.
A government source said it was “deeply regrettable” that no agreement had been reached with families but that it had gone as far as it could without compromising national security.
Ian Byrne, a Labour MP who has submitted an amendment for the law to apply to individual intelligence service officers, said as it stood he could not support the bill. He told the Guardian it would be the “saddest moment of my political life” if he could not back the legislation.
One Cabinet Office source said Starmer had said the situation arising from the Manchester Arena inquiry could not happen under the government’s proposals because intelligence services would have a duty of candour not to mislead. But sources admitted that the intelligence services would have discretion over whether to allow individual officers to give evidence at all.
The families say individual officers should provide their evidence to any inquiry with a duty of candour, and if the intelligence service heads argue it should be excluded on national security grounds they should make an application for that to be determined by the inquiry chair.
Pete Weatherby KC, who represented bereaved families at the 2014-16 Hillsborough inquests and at the Manchester Arena inquiry, and is a director of the Hillsborough Law Now campaign, said Starmer had listened in the meeting but the families could not accept the government’s position. He said that the families’ proposals acknowledge national security concerns, which could be legitimate grounds for excluding evidence, but the aim of the law was to prevent cover ups.
“There’s a real roadblock here. The government have not delivered in respect of the application of the bill to the security services: as things stand today, the lies and cover-ups that were features of the Manchester Arena inquiry could happen again. The government is in danger of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory on a landmark piece of legislation, because they are putting protecting the security services ahead of truth and justice.”
More than 20 Labour MPs, including Byrne and Anneliese Midgley, had backed amendments to the bill to place a duty of candour on intelligence officers. The bill was meant to return to the Commons on Wednesday but will now be delayed until next week.
Starmer’s spokesperson said earlier on Wednesday that the government still hoped to find a way to gain the families’ support. “We’re fully committed to working with the families to make the Hillsborough law strong. It is a personal priority for the prime minister and the government wants to get this right.
“That’s why last Friday, we tabled a series of amendments to strengthen provisions in the bill. That’s why we delayed it until next week to see if we can go further. As I say, we will never compromise on national security.”
A government source said they hoped they could continue dialogue with the families but that the bill would progress next week with the government’s concessions so far laid as amendments.
“This bill will make our intelligence services the most scrutinised in the world,” they said. “There will have to be some circumstances where the consent can be withheld, but they can be held to account for use of those conditions. We want to make it as strong as we can.
“There might be a case where officials know only part of the operation they are on, they might not know they are putting parts of the operation at risk by giving evidence. That might prevent them stopping another attack or preventing serious crime. But these amendments will be a huge step forward strengthening the bill from where it is at the moment.”
