Ian Byrne (Liverpool, West Derby) (Lab) (Urgent Question): To ask
the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will make a
statement on the national police response to the Hillsborough
families report. The Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire (Chris
Philp) I am extremely grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his
question. I know this is a subject with profound personal resonance
for him. I pay tribute to him and many others for the work they
have done and continue...Request free
trial
(Liverpool, West Derby)
(Lab)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home
Department if she will make a statement on the national police
response to the Hillsborough families report.
The Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire ()
I am extremely grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. I
know this is a subject with profound personal resonance for him.
I pay tribute to him and many others for the work they have done
and continue to do in memory of the victims of this awful tragedy
and to ensure that the lessons are learnt.
The Hillsborough disaster was an awful, devastating tragedy. Its
impact continues to be felt to this day, especially by the
families and friends of the victims. I am sure the thoughts of
the whole House are with them. It is imperative that lessons are
learned from the experiences the Hillsborough families have gone
through, so I am very grateful to Bishop James Jones for the
report he produced, which highlighted a number of points of
learning for the Government, the police and other agencies.
As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary said during
yesterday’s debate, the Government are fully committed to
engaging with the Hillsborough families prior to the publication
of the Government’s formal response. Since arriving in the Home
Office two or three months ago, I have asked for this work to be
sped up, and we are expecting it to come out in the course of
this spring. The National Police Chiefs’ Council and the College
of Policing published their response earlier this week. I welcome
their commitment to avoid repeating the mistakes that were made,
and I welcome the apology that they gave. They made it clear that
strong ethical values and the need for humanity and humility in
the police response to public tragedies are critical. One of the
commitments they rightly made earlier this week was to
substantially strengthen and update their own code of ethics in
relation to these issues.
Some important steps have been made by the Government in the past
few years, which have addressed a number, but not all, of the
points that Bishop James Jones published. For example, in 2020 a
suite of police integrity reforms was introduced, on a statutory
basis, via the professional standards for policing, which
included, crucially, a duty to co-operate with inquiries. Other
initiatives have already been taken forward to support bereaved
families, including the removal of means-testing for exceptional
case funding to cover legal support for families at an inquest,
which broadens the scope and access for families; and the
refreshing of our “Guide to Coroner Services for Bereaved People”
so that it is more tailored to their needs and provides improved
guidance for others involved in the inquest process. The
Inquiries Act 2005 also provides a statutory process for funding
legal representation requests. Last year, the Home Office also
established an independent pathology review, and additional
consultation with the families is now taking place. A
consultation has also taken place on retaining police documents,
which was the subject of a recommendation made by the bishop, and
the Ministry of Justice has also consulted on establishing an
independent public advocate.
Those steps are important. They go a long way to improving the
situation, but they do not cover everything that the bishop
recommended, which is why we will be responding in full. We
intend to do so in the spring, but after, of course, full and
deep engagement with the families concerned.
The Government are committed to making sure that these lessons
are learned following this awful tragedy and I, as the newly
appointed Police Minister, will do everything that I can to work
with Members across the House, particularly those representing
the affected communities, to make sure that this does now happen
quickly.
Since that awful day on 15 April 1989, 97 people have died
directly from the actions of South Yorkshire police and other
agencies, including the emergency services, the Football
Association and Sheffield Wednesday Football Club, with families
destroyed and survivors traumatised—so traumatised that many have
since taken their own lives.
The lies and smears from the cover-up by the establishment, which
acted with impunity and arrogance because it could, meant that
justice was never delivered for all those who have died and
suffered since. In 2017, Bishop Jones delivered the report “The
patronising disposition of unaccountable power: A report to
ensure the pain and suffering of the Hillsborough families is not
repeated.” Shamefully, we have not yet had a Government response
to his recommendations in the report commissioned by the then
Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs
May).
Yesterday, Bishop Jones said that the delay was intolerable. His
recommendations are, in essence, the Hillsborough law, which so
many in this place and outside have since campaigned for. We must
always remember that these recommendations are to ensure that no
other community goes through the suffering that we have endured
since 1989. They will hopefully futureproof the ability to gain
justice.
Yesterday, we finally had the response to the report from the
College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council. This
was the first apology from the police force for its actions since
the disaster 33 years ago. For so many, including myself, it is
far too little and far too late.
Yesterday’s recommendations from the police did not go anywhere
near far enough to change the culture that we came up against in
our quest for justice. I ask the Minister whether this Government
will do the right thing for future generations in our nation and
implement a Hillsborough law containing Bishop Jones’s
recommendations with immediate effect. The families and survivors
of so many disasters and consequent state cover-ups deserve
nothing less, and these injustices must never again be allowed.
If a Hillsborough law had existed in 1989, we would have had a
chance of justice for the 97; without it we had none.
I fully understand and respect the sentiments that the hon.
Member so powerfully expressed in his remarks. On the timing and
the years that have passed since the bishop’s report, for much of
that time there were ongoing legal proceedings and, of course, no
one wanted to prejudice those for obvious reasons. That accounted
for about four years—from 2017 to about May 2021—but about 21
months have passed since then and I agree that the Government
response does need to come out quickly. Indeed, since my
appointment a couple of months ago I have asked for it to be sped
up, and I want to make sure that that happens this spring,
following, of course, consultation with the families, which is
extremely important. That will include responses to the points
that the hon. Member made.
I reiterate that the statutory changes made to the professional
standards for policing in 2020 include a duty of co-operation on
police officers in relation to inquiries, which, as he has said,
is very important. He is right: we do need to get on and respond
comprehensively to the bishop’s recommendations, which is what I
am working on.
(Maidenhead) (Con)
The apology from the police is, of course, welcome, but it would
have been far better for them to have done their job properly on
that fateful April day, 34 years ago. If they had done so,
families of the 97—and, indeed, the whole Liverpool
community—would not have gone through the suffering and anguish
that they have had to bear over the past 34 years.
Let me say first to my right hon. Friend that I do not think
saying vaguely that the Government’s response will be available
this spring is good enough: five years on, they must now publish
it. Secondly, does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the
elements that can be put in place to help families if, sadly,
such an event—a tragedy of this sort— happens in the future is
the introduction of an independent public advocate, which was
promised in the Conservative party manifesto in 2017? Will he
give a commitment now that the Home Office will not put any
barriers in the way of the work of the Ministry of Justice in
introducing such a body?
As I mentioned, for approximately four years following the
publication of the report there were ongoing criminal legal
proceedings which nobody wanted to prejudice, but, as I have said
in the House and as the Home Secretary said yesterday, we do now
want to get on and respond quickly and comprehensively to the
bishop’s report. As for the introduction of an independent public
advocate—a measure being worked on by the Ministry of Justice, as
the right hon. Lady said—a public consultation has taken place.
The response is being worked on in the usual way, but it is
happening at pace.
Mr Speaker
I call the shadow Home Secretary.
(Normanton, Pontefract and
Castleford) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby
(), and all the other Merseyside
MPs, for pursuing this matter, and I thank my hon. Friend for
securing this urgent question.
Ninety-seven people lost their lives as a result of what happened
at Hillsborough on that terrible day 34 years ago. We remember
the football fans who never came home, and we must also
never forget the shameful cover-up that followed. The
Hillsborough families have fought for decades against obfuscation
and lies to get to the truth. Everyone hoped that the report from
the Right Rev. James Jones would be a turning point, and I
welcome the work that the former Home Secretary did in
commissioning that report, but it is five years on. The police
have rightly said:
“Police failures were the main cause of the tragedy and have
continued to blight the lives of family members ever since.”
Nevertheless, five years is too long, and what makes this even
more shameful is the fact that there is still no Government
response to what has happened. The Home Secretary said yesterday
that it was because of active criminal proceedings, but those
finished 18 months ago, and the work could have taken place even
while those proceedings were ongoing.
In September 2021 the Government announced that the response
would be published by the end of the year, and we are still
waiting. The Home Secretary also said yesterday that the
Government were engaging with families, but what engagement has
taken place? Has the Home Secretary met the families? Has she met
the bishop? And I have to ask, where is she today? Previous Home
Secretaries have shown respect to the families and
acknowledgement of the appalling ways in which they have been
wronged by being here to respond, and it is a devastating failure
of responsibility and respect to them for her not to be here to
respond.
The key measures on which we need a Government response are well
known: the duty of candour, the public advocate and the elements
of the Hillsborough law. The Labour party stands ready to support
that law and get it into statute. Will the Government now commit
themselves to supporting it, and recognise what the bishop has
said about its being “intolerable”, given the pain of those
families, not to have a response? The report is entitled “The
patronising disposition of unaccountable power”. Does the
Minister accept that that is exactly what this continued delay
will feel like to so many families and survivors now?
I entirely agree with the shadow Home Secretary’s opening
comments—and, indeed, with what has been said by other
Members—about the appalling impact that this has had on the
families of those who so tragically lost their lives. When I took
my own son to a Crystal Palace football game a few weeks ago, I
thought about how awful it must have been to be trapped in those
circumstances, which is a terrible thing to contemplate.
As the shadow Home Secretary said, the police have apologised for
the terrible failings that took place on the day and in the years
subsequently. It is right that they have apologised to the
families, and to the country as well. In relation to the timing,
I have already said that there were legal proceedings ongoing. It
has been 18 to 21 months since those concluded, which is why
since I was appointed I have asked for the work to be sped up,
and it will be concluded rapidly and it will respond to all the
points in full.
I repeat the point I made earlier that a number of things have
happened already. The right hon. Lady mentioned the independent
public advocate. As she will know from her own time in
government, where a public consultation has taken place, it
is generally speaking a prelude to action. On the question of
co-operating with inquiries, the 2020 statutory professional
standards for policing did introduce that requirement, but the
response needs to cover all the points, and that will happen
soon.
Sir (South Swindon) (Con)
I listened with great care to my right hon. Friend’s response to
the urgent question, but I have to press him on the independent
public advocate point. As my right hon. Friend the Member for
Maidenhead (Mrs May) said, the Ministry of Justice, which I had
the honour of leading—I worked with her and the hon. Member for
Garston and Halewood ()—is in a position to go ahead
with this policy. The consultation was five years ago. What is
stopping the Government from doing this?
As I have said before to others, including the former Prime
Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Maidenhead (Mrs
May), the consultation has, as my right hon. and learned Friend
the Member for South Swindon (Sir ) said, taken place. The
usual processes in government are going on to respond to that
consultation. As soon as the Ministry of Justice can make an
announcement on this, it will most certainly be doing so.
Mr Speaker
I call the Scottish National party spokesperson.
(Cumbernauld, Kilsyth
and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP)
May I also start by commending the hon. Member for Liverpool,
West Derby () and his colleagues not just on
securing the urgent question, but on all their campaigning work
on behalf of survivors and families affected by Hillsborough? The
persistence, bravery and decency of the people of Liverpool over
these 34 years has been utterly extraordinary in the face of
cover-up and smear, but they need more than warm words—they need
a comprehensive response. The long overdue police report, while a
start, does not provide a complete response. That needs the
Government, and we should have had a Government response before
now.
As Bishop Jones has said, the wait has been “intolerable”, and
the families are speaking about the bishop’s report gathering
dust. I appreciate that questions are being raised that will not
be answered today, in the light of the announcement of a spring
publication, but can the Minister at least assure us that when
that long overdue response from the Government is published, we
can have a full debate on the Floor of the House on its
findings?
Secondly, the Minister referred to engagement with the families.
There has been some good engagement, but there have been some
ropy times as well, so can he say a little more about what form
that engagement will take going forward?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question and for the
sentiments he expressed, which I completely understand. In
relation to a full debate, scheduling business in the House is
not my responsibility, but it would seem to me like a reasonable
request to make, and I will certainly pass it on to my colleagues
who are responsible for scheduling parliamentary business.
Families have been fully engaged. One reason why the independent
pathology review, which had been commenced, has been temporarily
paused is to allow for more engagement to take place, because
families rightly felt that they wanted to be more involved. That
engagement is continuing. Critically, before the Government
response is published, there will be more such engagement, for
the obvious reasons that the hon. Gentleman rightly points
to.
(Rother Valley)
(Con)
The Hillsborough disaster and the following cover-up by South
Yorkshire police was a devastating tragedy that undermined the
faith of my communities in Rother Valley and South Yorkshire in
the police. The police apology yesterday was the bare minimum
that could be done. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that, as
part of this process, the Government will thoroughly engage not
only with the families of the 97, but with the wider communities
in Liverpool, Leeds and Sheffield, to make sure that lessons can
be learned so that such an awful tragedy does not happen again
and that there will be no more police cover-ups of such awful
disasters?
My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. I agree with the points he
has made. I can confirm that the engagement he rightly requests
will happen.
Mr Speaker
I call the Chair of the Select Committee.
(Kingston upon Hull North)
(Lab)
It was a great pleasure to meet Bishop James Jones recently. As
an aside, I pay tribute to his work in securing the infected
blood inquiry, which is another example of the patronising
disposition of unaccountable power, where cover-ups and secrecy
become a further scandal on top of the original events. Given
that the Home Secretary is not here, may I ask the Minister
whether she has met Bishop James Jones to discuss his report on
Hillsborough and the Government response?
I am afraid that I do not have visibility of the Home Secretary’s
diary, so I cannot give a direct answer, but I can certainly ask
the Home Secretary to write to the Chair of the Select Committee
in response to that question. I add my thanks to hers to the
bishop for the work he has done in both of the areas to which she
referred. In the coming months, there will be very full
engagement with all the interested parties, including Members of
Parliament who represent the relevant communities, for the
reasons that she mentioned.
(Aylesbury) (Con)
I was at university in Sheffield at the time of the Hillsborough
disaster. A friend of mine died in that tragedy; another was
seriously injured. I pay tribute to the residents of Sheffield,
who are very rarely mentioned but who showed compassion and gave
real practical support on that day to people they did not know.
They raced to the stadium, they offered free taxi journeys to
help people to get where they needed to go, and they looked after
people in their homes and provided them with hot meals. It was an
incredibly moving thing to witness.
It has taken too long to learn the lessons of Hillsborough. Will
my right hon. Friend confirm, irrespective of the timing of the
publication of a Government response, that he will emphasise to
all police forces around the country that if such an appalling
tragedy ever happens again, their officers must behave openly and
sympathetically, even if it means showing their own
shortcomings?
Yes, I can do that. I thank my hon. Friend for his question,
particularly in the light of how he has been personally affected
by the tragedy. I can give him that assurance. Some steps have
already been taken, partly through the changes made in 2020 to
the statutory professional standards for policing. That will be
further reinforced by the updated code of ethics, which will be
published by the College of Policing, following its announcement
yesterday, with the exact purpose that my hon. Friend has just
set out in mind.
(Garston and Halewood)
(Lab)
It is unconscionable that 18 months after the collapse of the
criminal trials, there has still been no Government response to
the bishop’s report. The fact that we will have to wait until
spring, whenever that is, shows that the work is not finished,
more than five years after that report was written and published.
It is outrageous that the Government have done nothing to sort
this out in that time.
The Minister keeps referring to the consultation on the
independent public advocate. That happened in 2018. The
Government have not yet responded to their own consultation on
the independent public advocate. But I can get the Minister off
the hook. My Public Advocate (No. 2) Bill will be considered
again in the Chamber this Friday. If the Minister were to stop
his Whip objecting to it for the 12th time in this Session, we
could get it into Committee and start this legislation rolling.
It is a key part of the Hillsborough law, along with the duty of
candour and the equality of arms at inquests. With the support of
Labour Front Benchers, the Minister could do himself and his
Government a favour by getting that legislation through.
As I have said, we are working quickly on the comprehensive
response. The hon. Lady says that nothing has happened since
2018, but with great respect I do not think that is entirely
accurate. I have referenced the professional standards for
policing introduced in 2020, which introduced a duty to
co-operate. I have mentioned the pathology review that has
happened. I have mentioned the consultation on the independent
public advocate, and I can tell her that that is being very
actively worked on by the Ministry of Justice as we speak. We
have had changes made to the exceptional case funding at inquest,
so the means testing has been removed. A lot has been done. But I
do accept that a comprehensive Government response is required.
Since arriving at the Home Office, I have asked for that to be
done as quickly as possible, and it will be.
(Torbay) (Con)
Anyone who knows the story of Coventry City’s 1987 cup run will
know that there was a match at Hillsborough where a near crush
took place, making what then happened two years later tragically
predictable. The Hillsborough disaster was a tragedy; the lies,
smears and cover-ups that followed were an absolute disgrace,
worrying echoes of which we saw after the Champions League final
last year, so the extended delay in getting this response out
just makes it even worse. Will the Minister at least commit today
to the principle of the independent public advocate, to ensure
that in future, families would be on a level playing field?
I thank my hon. Friend for his question, and agree with his point
about the policing failures at the time. It is right that the
police comprehensively apologised yesterday for the police’s
behaviour, both at the time and in the years subsequently. As I
say, the consultation on the independent public advocate did
happen, and it is under active consideration at the moment. I do
not want to pre-empt the Ministry of Justice’s work on that,
because it is for the Ministry of Justice to publicly respond,
but I can tell my hon. Friend and others that they are actively
working on it at the moment.
(Halton) (Lab)
It is an absolute disgrace that the Home Secretary was sat on the
Government Benches just before this debate started, but has
left—a debate about a disaster that has no parallel, in terms of
what happened and the injustice that took place. I am quite sure
that the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May) would never
have left the Front Bench in these circumstances.
Mr Deputy Speaker, as you may be aware, I have a number of
constituents who lost loved ones at Hillsborough, and I myself
was present that day at the disaster. As I am sure my hon. Friend
the Member for Garston and Halewood () will agree, my hon. Friend and
I are so proud to have been privy to the work of the Hillsborough
families over the years in fighting for justice. Part of the
injustice that has existed over the years—apart from the general
injustice—was the continued delays, the time it took to try to
get to justice and get to the bottom of what went wrong, even
though we all knew, and to get the report out. It took a long,
long time, and this is adding to the torture of the families and
those people who were affected by Hillsborough, so the Minister
saying that he hopes to have a response by the spring is just not
good enough. I ask him to come back to the House before the
recess in February with an actual date for when that response
will be given to the House.
I thank the hon. Member for his question, particularly given that
he has such direct personal experience of the tragedy that
unfolded—that he was there himself, all those years ago. I agree
that speed of resolution is now important after all this time:
too much time has passed, and I can give the hon. Member my
assurance that I want this done as soon as possible. It is
something I have personally pressed for since arriving, and I
will be doing everything I can to expedite this process and get
the comprehensive response published as quickly as possible.
(Harrow East) (Con)
For football fans everywhere, 15 April 1989 is seared on the
memory, and my sympathy is with the families of the victims who
tragically lost their lives. One of the problems here is that, as
my hon. Friend the Member for Torbay () alluded to, this could have
happened in 1987—it could have happened in 1981. I was present
for the semi-final held at Hillsborough when crushing took place,
but the difference then was that there were no cages. In 1989,
the Liverpool fans who lost their lives were caged in and could
not escape.
The key problem is that, in the same way, following the policing
in 1981, 1987 and 1989, the lessons were not learned. I
personally gave evidence to the inquiry about what happened in
1981, yet nothing seems to have happened about those aspects of
policing. Will my hon. Friend the Minister ensure that there will
be a duty of candour and the other legislative measures that we
need to ensure that the police own up to their mistakes, rather
than cover them up for 34 years? They may apologise now, but it
is far too late for the victims.
My hon. Friend is right to point to the police failings at the
time, and the fact that they essentially created the tragic
situation that unfolded. The apology they gave yesterday was
important: it was comprehensive, I think it was heartfelt, and it
is good that they have done that. It is also important that they
change the way that they respond in those circumstances, as my
hon. Friend has said. That is why the changes to the code of
ethics that the College of Policing will be bringing forward are
important, and it is why the duty of candour I have referred to
previously, enshrined in the statutory professional standards, is
important as well. But I do agree with the points that my hon.
Friend has made.
(Liverpool, Walton) (Lab)
Former James Jones’s
report laid bare the sheer scale of the failure of the
police at Hillsborough and the lies, smears and state cover-up
that followed. It is disappointing, to say the least, that it has
taken this long for an apology to come from the National Police
Chiefs’ Council and the College of Policing, and it does nothing
to undo the horrific abuse of power that has been seen. What is
worse—what is more shameful—is that five years on, we are still
waiting for the Government’s response to the report.
The appalling treatment of the Hillsborough families did not
happen in isolation. As we have heard, from the contaminated
blood scandal to Grenfell, it is part of a problem of failure and
cover-up. When will the Government finally listen to calls for
the Hillsborough law? Will the Minister back the Public Advocate
(No. 2) Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Garston
and Halewood () so that the scales of justice
can be levelled in favour of the bereaved families?
We will be bringing forward the full response as quickly as
possible. That is important, as Members on both sides of the
House have pointed out. In relation to the Hillsborough law, that
will be included in the response. However, via the professional
standards of policing in 2020, which are statutory and were
introduced by regulations, we have already introduced the duty of
co-operation in relation to inquiries, which is one of the most
important elements of that. Our response on the independent
public advocate, which is also important, will happen as quickly
as possible. The Ministry of Justice is working on it actively
right now.
(Christchurch) (Con)
It is not good enough. First of all, the Minister criticises his
immediate predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Corby
(), who, as I understand it, really was trying to get
to grips with this issue. Secondly, he fails to explain why the
Government are blocking this legislative vehicle for establishing
the independent public advocate. What is going to happen is that
the Government will report at the end of the spring, and then
they will say it will take a long time to get through any
legislation. We have a legislative opportunity before us. The
debate began last July! Why will the Government not allow that
Bill to have its Second Reading this Friday?
First of all, to be clear, I am in no way criticising my
immediate predecessor, who was only in post for a matter of two
or three months. For the record, I am most certainly not
criticising him, and I frankly resent the insinuation that I was.
The Government are not blocking progress on the issue of the
independent public advocate, but there is a process to go through
to get cross-Government agreement. The Ministry of Justice is
working on it, and we will respond as quickly as possible.
(Liverpool, Wavertree)
(Lab)
I would like to place on the record my thanks to my hon. Friend
the Member for Liverpool, West Derby () for securing this debate, and
to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Garston and
Halewood () and the right hon. Member for
Maidenhead (Mrs May) for their work. It is a pleasure to follow
the hon. Member for Christchurch ( )—something I never
thought I would say in this Chamber.
After 34 long years, the police finally acknowledged what every
decent Scouser and every decent person in this country knew: a
failure in policing was the main cause of the tragedy that saw
the death of 97 innocent men, women and children. Our city has
never given up the fight for truth, justice and accountability. I
have heard nothing from the Minister at the Dispatch Box today to
say why the Government have not responded to the report for five
long years. This Friday, the Minister has the ideal opportunity
to back the Bill of my hon. Friend the Member for Garston and
Halewood and the duty of candour. We do not want to hear the
reasons why it cannot be done or that something will be brought
forward in the spring. The Government have an ideal opportunity
to back this Bill on Friday. The first question is, will they do
that? If not, why not?
Secondly, the Secretary of State for Education—herself a
Scouser—did the media round today. On BBC Radio 4, she said that
there had been no Government response to Bishop James Jones’s
Hillsborough report because of ongoing criminal trials. The last
trial finished in May 2021, and the police conduct investigation
is ongoing. Does the Minister agree, after all the smears and all
the lies, and after 34 years, that Ministers have a
responsibility to ensure that what they say in the media round is
truthful?
As I said earlier, several things have been done in the last few
years to address the issues that have been raised—not
comprehensively and not everything—but they include the
professional standards for duty of co-operation; the pathology
review; consulting on retaining documents, which is another
recommendation; the consultation on the independent public
advocate, and the removal of means-testing for exceptional case
funding for bereaved families and inquests. All those things have
been done.
The IPA is a Ministry of Justice lead. I cannot speak for that
Department, but I can say that it is working actively on it.
The position on the delay is as I explained earlier. Between 2017
and May 2021, there were ongoing legal proceedings, as the hon.
Lady just said. For the past 18 to 21 months, that has not been
the case, and we need to get on quickly and bring forward the
full Government response. I will make sure that that happens.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. Because of the nature of the urgent question, I am giving
a bit more latitude on the length of questions, but please help
me by trying to focus as quickly as possible on the question in
hand.
(Wirral South) (Lab)
My constituents have waited long enough. That was true last month
when the Secretary of State for Justice gave me the same pathetic
response. I am afraid that I have concluded that the Minister
does not know very much about the issue. It affects not just
Merseyside, but the whole country. As others have said, it is not
just about football or Hillsborough. It affects people who have
suffered because of Grenfell, contaminated blood and a host of
matters where the state has tried to protect itself instead of
putting the interests of the citizen first.
I want a straightforward yes or no answer. When the Bill promoted
by my hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood () comes before the House on
Friday, will the Government block it—yes or no?
I have already explained several things that the Government have
done in the past few years to address the issues that the
bishop’s inquiry raised—[Hon. Members: “Answer the question!”] I
am going to. They include the duty of candour on police in
relation to inquiries. That was done in 2020. I have been asked
about the independent public advocate several times and I have
given the same answer. It is a Ministry of Justice, not a Home
Office lead. I cannot speak for another Minister’s area of
responsibility. It is with the Ministry of Justice, which is
actively considering it and will respond shortly.
(Birkenhead) (Lab)
I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby
() for securing the urgent
question.
More than 30 years after the Hillsborough disaster, and more than
five years after the publication of Bishop Jones’s report, the
National Police Chiefs’ Council and the College of Policing have
finally apologised for what they described as decades of
“deflection and denial”. However, for many of my constituents,
who are still haunted by that terrible day, that is too little,
too late.
Does the Minister agree that while plans to revise the police
code of ethics are welcome, a new duty of candour on public
authorities must have a statutory footing, so that no family ever
again has to struggle for truth and justice, which the
Hillsborough families sought for decades?
A duty of co-operation on police in relation to inquiries was set
out in the professional standards for policing in 2020. We will
respond to the wider duty of candour, to which point of learning
14 in the bishop’s report referred, along with everything else,
shortly.
Dame (Wallasey) (Lab)
The Minister speaks from the Dispatch Box for not only his
Department, but the entire Government. I would have expected him
to know what the approach of the Ministry of Justice to the Bill
promoted by my hon. Friend and sister the Member for Garston and
Halewood () on Friday would be before he
came here. Will he at least say from the Dispatch Box that when
he leaves the Chamber, he will go to the Ministry of Justice and
get permission from them to ensure that on Friday, my hon. Friend
and sister’s Bill, which provides for an independent public
advocate, will be let into Committee and not be blocked, so that
the clauses that the Ministry of Justice is currently drafting
can be incorporated into the Bill in Committee? We have a
legislative vehicle, we could do it now, and he could enhance his
reputation. We have a legislative vehicle, we could do it now,
and he could enhance his reputation.
I would be very happy to convey the hon. Lady’s request to my
Ministry of Justice colleagues.
(Liverpool, Riverside)
(Lab)
I send my support and respect to all the families and friends who
have fought for justice for the victims of Hillsborough. The
Government have said that they will respond in due course, and
today we have heard that might be in the spring but it could be
any time soon. The Labour party has pledged to create a new
Hillsborough law. Can the Minister, without looking at his notes,
commit to supporting the Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the
Member for Garston and Halewood (), and to supporting an
independent public advocate?
I have just responded on the public advocate point. On the
Hillsborough law point, which is different, we will respond to
that and the recommendation in point of learning 14 with the rest
of it. But as I have said quite a few times, we have already, on
a statutory basis, changed and updated the professional standards
for policing to include a duty to co-operate with inquiries
imposed on the police.
(Wirral West) (Lab)
I pay tribute to everybody who has campaigned for justice for the
97. I was a young school teacher in Liverpool when Hillsborough
happened, and I remember how traumatised the children were on the
following Monday and in subsequent weeks and months. I pay
tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby
() for securing the urgent
question.
I hear what the Minister is saying about a Hillsborough law, but
can he tell us whether, in principle, he agrees that we should
have a Hillsborough law that would place a new legal duty of
candour on public authorities and officials—not just the police,
but all public authorities and officials—and would ensure that
victims of disasters or state-related deaths are entitled to
parity of legal representation during inquests and inquiries?
I thank the hon. Lady for her question, particularly given that
she and many other Members have been affected personally by the
tragedy. It has touched an extraordinary number of lives in many
different ways, including hers. We will respond fully when we
reply to the bishop’s report, and I want to make sure that
happens as quickly as possible. It is very important that public
bodies respond quickly, openly and honestly, and with integrity,
and that they do not try to cover things up, as obviously
happened in this terrible case. We all have a shared interest in
making sure that it never happens again.
(Ellesmere Port and Neston)
(Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby
() for securing this urgent
question, but the truth is that he should not have had to do so.
As soon as the police made the apology, there should have been a
Government statement, and it should have been the Home Secretary
giving that statement. I am afraid this gives the impression that
this issue is not a priority, which, given the history, is
completely unforgiveable. Following the question from my hon.
Friend the Member for Halton (), I suggest to the Minister
that he should go back to the Home Secretary this afternoon and
express in the strongest terms that it would be sensible for her
to come back at the next opportunity with a concrete date by
which the Government will respond to the bishop’s report.
The Home Secretary did of course reference this issue during her
speech in yesterday’s debate—I think it was in response to an
intervention. To be fair to the Home Secretary, she addressed the
issue in the House as recently as yesterday, but I can assure the
hon. Gentleman that it is already the subject of urgent
discussions. I want to see action on this as quickly as he and
others do, and I am committed to making sure that happens.
(Sheffield South East)
(Lab)
As someone who was present at Hillsborough on that terrible day
and who was the leader of the council, I echo comments made by
Conservative Members—first, about the incredibly generosity and
warmth of Sheffield residents around the ground, who welcomed
very distraught people into their homes and gave them whatever
help they could.
Secondly, the hon. Member for Harrow East () is right; the South Yorkshire police are
accountable for what they have done. They probably have not been
accountable enough, given their enormous failings. But there was
also a failing to recognise that circumstances had changed, with
cages being put around grounds. As Lord Justice Taylor
recommended in his report, those cages had to be taken down
because they were making so many grounds in this country unsafe.
Essentially, they were put there to treat every football fan as a
hooligan, without any thought for spectator safety, and we ought
to learn some lessons from that as well.
When the Government eventually produce their report, rather than
merely giving us warm words and commitments, will they say how
they will ensure that every single police force in the country
abides by the recommendations in the report and implements them
in full?
First, I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. Like so many
in the Chamber today and across the country, he was personally
affected—indeed, he was actually present. I completely agree with
his point about caging; as a football fan myself—I take my son to
Crystal Palace—the idea of people being caged is completely
wrong. In answer to his direct question: yes, when there is a
response to the report, which will be soon, it is important to
make sure that it has teeth and is not just warm words; that it
has biting and binding effect. I am confident it will, in the way
that he asked.
(Sheffield, Brightside and
Hillsborough) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby
() for securing this urgent
question. Like many others, I have never forgotten that day. I
lived just around the corner from the football ground and
remember seeing young people queueing outside phone
boxes—probably 50 of them—with not one word being spoken, because
they were so traumatised. I have never seen anything like it.
There were young people trembling around the streets in my area.
Yes, lots of us went out to support them, because that is what we
do in Sheffield. None of us has ever forgotten that tragic day,
let alone the travesty of justice that has followed.
The Hillsborough disaster will live long in the memory of my
constituents, but it is completely unacceptable that, more than
30 years on, 97 families are still waiting for justice and
assurances that this can never happen again. It would show those
families the respect they deserve if the Government were to do
exactly what my hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Dame ) has asked for, by supporting
the Bill that will be debated in the Chamber on Friday. Let us
show the families the respect that they deserve and have not
received until now.
A lot has been done already to address many of the issues that
the bishop raised in his report. I have gone through them
previously, but they include, critically: those professional
standards for policing, the removal of the means test on
exceptional case funding, and many other things that I have set
out and will not repeat. We want to honour the families by
responding in full. We want to make sure that this will never
happen again. I have already committed to raising the IPA point
with Ministry of Justice colleagues, which I will do
straightaway. I hope that, through the actions taken already and
the response we will bring forward as quickly as possible, we
will show the families of those who suffered this appalling
tragedy that the Government and the whole House are with them. I
want to make sure that no one has to go through what they went
through.
(Barnsley East) (Lab)
I do not think that the Government’s response is acceptable, and
neither is the Minister’s; he can read out the same thing again
and again, but he is simply not answering the question. Why will
the Government not back the Bill on Friday? I would like to press
him further on the Hillsborough law. The Government have access
to a blank cheque for legal representation, yet victims have to
navigate an often alien and complex system to access limited
legal aid. Does he agree that victims should have access to
public money on the same terms as the state for legal
representation during inquests and inquiries?
That is an important issue. It was one of the points that the
bishop raised in his report, which we will respond to. We have
already taken action in this area already by removing the means
test for exceptional case funding at inquest for the reason the
hon. Lady set out.
(Eltham) (Lab)
The fact that the Home Secretary did not think that it was a
priority to be here to answer this urgent question is a complete
disgrace, and yet another snub to the families of the
Hillsborough 97. We know what will happen on Friday. The Bill
being promoted by my hon. Friend the Member for Garston and
Halewood () is No. 10 on the Order Paper.
The Whips will sit on the Government Benches and anonymously
shout “Object” when the Bill is read out, unless the Government
change their position. We need no further debate on this issue.
We can get the Bill into Committee, debate it line by line and
get the legislation through. There is a vehicle for doing it
right here, right now in this House. It will be forever to the
condemnation of this Government if they do not take that
opportunity.
As I have said, the Home Secretary spoke about the issue when she
was asked about it in this House yesterday. The private Member’s
Bill of the hon. Member for Garston and Halewood () is due for consideration on
Friday; I have already committed to communicating with my
Ministry of Justice colleagues on the topic, and I will do
so.
(Caithness, Sutherland and
Easter Ross) (LD)
Any indication of obfuscation is dangerous for the Government. We
must have a Hillsborough law. We must have a report in full, as
soon as possible. A functioning democracy depends on public trust
in the police forces; without that trust, democracy itself is
undermined. I would like to hear a word of recognition from the
Minister that this is a dangerous situation that we have to put
right. We have to make sure that the general public—our voters,
the people of the United Kingdom—have proper faith in their
police forces. Right now, that faith has been damaged by all that
we have seen.
The hon. Gentleman raises a valid point. Policing takes place by
consent, and it is important that the public have confidence in
the police force. That is why the apology yesterday from the
police and the acknowledgment of the terrible, terrible mistakes
and wrongdoing—not just all those years ago, but in the years
that followed—was right. That is important. The police have
committed to change their own code of ethics to build trust in
policing, which reflects the hon. Gentleman’s point.
Action is also being taken on the vetting issues that we have
debated in this House over the past two or three months. We are
looking to review the way in which dismissals from the police
happen, so we can allow chief constables more readily to remove
officers who are guilty of misconduct or of poor performance more
generally. I agree with the hon. Gentleman’s point; action is
under way.
Let me end my answer by saying that, despite the points that the
hon. Gentleman has raised and other points that we have debated
in this House over the past few months, the vast majority of
police officers are dedicated, hard-working, decent people who
put themselves in danger for our safety. But where there are
terrible failings, as there have been in this case and others
that we have debated recently, it is critical that robust action
is taken, because without public confidence we cannot have an
effective police force.
Dame (Llanelli) (Lab)
We absolutely need a Hillsborough law. We hear that all police
forces in England and Wales have signed the charter for families
bereaved through public tragedy, but the Minister should not be
surprised if that has been met with some cynicism. To prevent the
charter from being just empty words, what steps is the Minister
taking to ensure that all forces are fully trained in and
regularly updated on its requirements, and that they implement it
in full when they deal with any future tragedy?
I thank the hon. Lady for her question, which is a good one.
Charters, codes and so on, in this context or any other, are only
as good as their implementation. The College of
Policing—particularly Chief Constable Andy Marsh, who leads
it—has made it clear that implementation of the charter will be a
topic in training across all 43 police forces. Moreover, I expect
His Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue
services to ensure it looks at that when it conducts its regular
PEEL—police effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy—inspections.
I would be happy to raise the matter next time I see Andy Cooke,
the chief inspector, to make sure that he is keeping an eye on
the issue. The hon. Lady raises a very good point, and I will
take it away.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby (), as always, and others in this
Chamber who have consistently brought this matter to the fore. No
words and no amount of money can bring back a loved one or soothe
the grief of loss, but the Minister will know that full
accountability and openness can help some people to move on. Does
he really believe that is being achieved? Will he consider
implementing and legislating on the proposals in the 2017 Jones
report as a signal that changes will be made to prevent this from
ever happening again?
Closure for victims’ families through openness is critical. The
bishop’s report was an important part of that, as were the
various inquiries that happened in the aftermath; we will respond
in full. There were, I think, 25 points of learning, some of
which address the issues that the hon. Gentleman has quite
rightly spoken about. When we respond in full to the bishop’s
report, those issues will be addressed.
In closing, I repeat that I want to see this happen as quickly as
possible. Hon. Members on both sides of the House have made very
clear the House’s expectation that it will happen as quickly as
possible. I will make sure that it is my duty to ensure that it
does.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
I thank for his urgent question, all
those who have taken part and the Minister for responding for
over 50 minutes.
|
