Families devastated by the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing are vehemently accusing MI5 of failing them and are demanding the security service’s full inclusion in proposed new legislation designed to prevent public life cover-ups. This urgent call for accountability comes as the UK government recently paused the progression of the ‘Hillsborough Law’ in Parliament, sparking widespread concern among campaigners and MPs that intelligence agencies might exploit potential loopholes, thereby undermining the very essence of the bill.
The Manchester Arena attack, a horrific suicide bombing at an Ariana Grande concert in May 2017, claimed 22 lives and left hundreds injured. An exhaustive public inquiry into the tragedy previously concluded that the attack could have been prevented had MI5 acted on crucial intelligence. This finding has fueled the families’ distrust and their persistent demands for greater transparency and accountability from the security services.
Renewed Push for the Hillsborough Law
The proposed legislation, formally known as the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, is widely referred to as the ‘Hillsborough Law.’ Introduced by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, it aims to compel public officials and contractors to tell the truth in the aftermath of disasters and to cooperate fully with investigative bodies. For the Manchester families, the law represents a vital mechanism to ensure that the failures identified in their own inquiry, particularly concerning MI5, are never repeated. Their letter to the Prime Minister, seen by the BBC, starkly questioned, “How many times must MI5 show that it cannot be trusted before something is done?”
The bill’s recent withdrawal from the parliamentary agenda, where it was scheduled for its report stage and third reading, has ignited a fierce debate. The pause reportedly stems from government concerns that an amendment could inadvertently create a loophole, allowing intelligence agencies to bypass the proposed duty of candour. This prospect has deeply alarmed those advocating for the bill, who see any exemption for security services as a direct threat to its core purpose of ensuring accountability.
Parliamentary Concerns and Government Reassurances
The parliamentary debate highlighted significant apprehension among MPs regarding the bill’s future. Labour’s Paula Barker, MP for Liverpool Wavertree, welcomed the decision to delay the proceedings but voiced increasing concern about the ‘direction of travel.’ She stressed the importance of national security but firmly stated that the bill is not incompatible with it, arguing that ‘a carve-out for the security and intelligence services would only allow the very behaviour exposed by the Manchester Arena inquiry to happen again, where MI5 were able to withhold information and avoid accountability.” Ms. Barker pleaded with the justice minister to continue engaging with the families and to bring the Hillsborough Law back to Parliament for passage.
Justice Minister Alex Davies-Jones responded by asserting that there is “absolutely no carve-out here,” reassuring the House that the duty of candour would apply to all public authorities, including intelligence services. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer had previously pledged to “get the balance right” and committed that the bill “would not be watered down.” Despite these assurances, Labour MP for Liverpool West Derby Ian Byrne welcomed the pause but pressed for a clear timeline for the bill’s return, expressing a ‘real, real concern now that this could be kicked into the long grass.’ Similarly, Anneliese Midgley, Labour MP for Knowsley, declared that ‘any amendment that fails to satisfy families on the duty of candour of individuals in the security services is a red line for me.’
Ms. Davies-Jones reiterated the government’s commitment to the bill, stating, “We are not kicking this into the long grass. We are committed to doing this as soon as possible, but we have to get it right.” She confirmed that families themselves had requested not to set an arbitrary deadline, prioritizing correctness over speed. The minister pledged to continue working with the families, intelligence services, and the Intelligence and Security Committee to find a way forward that addresses all concerns.
Lasting Impact and Tributes to Victims
The human toll of the Manchester Arena bombing continues to resonate deeply. Beyond the calls for legislative change, efforts to support victims and honor those lost are ongoing. In December, a judge ruled that nearly £20 million is to be paid out to 16 children who were injured in the bombing, all aged under 16 at the time of the attack. These amounts, ranging from £2,770 to £11.4 million, reflect the severe and often life-changing injuries, both physical and psychological, suffered by the young victims.
In a poignant tribute, a yellow Bee Network bus was recently unveiled, bearing the name of Olivia Campbell-Hardy, one of the 22 people killed in the attack. Olivia, described by her family as a ‘funny kid who loved music, dancing and singing,’ was just 15 when she died. Her grandmother, Sharon Goodman, unveiled the bus at Tottington High School in Bury, where Olivia had been a student. The bus will run along Olivia’s former school route, serving as a constant reminder of her vibrant spirit. Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, remarked that Olivia ‘will be forever 15, but forever on the school run with everybody because of the bus,’ ensuring her memory lives on through the community she loved. Olivia’s family also established Liv’s Trust, a charity promoting musical education, dance, drama, and the arts for young people across Greater Manchester, further cementing her legacy.
Broader Context of Accountability and Justice
The legislative challenges surrounding the Hillsborough Law are not isolated, echoing broader discussions within the UK government regarding accountability for historical injustices and terror-related incidents. Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Hilary Benn, recently addressed the House of Commons regarding the previous government’s ‘unworkable’ and ‘legally defective’ legacy legislation for Northern Ireland. This legislation, which sought to remove the right of UK citizens to pursue Troubles-related civil cases and grant immunity to terrorists, was rejected by domestic courts and widely opposed by victims and survivors.
Benn emphasized Labour’s commitment to rectify these provisions, stating that a reformed Legacy Commission would enable families to seek answers, benefiting from information shared by Irish authorities. He underscored that veterans do not ask to be placed above the law but deserve a fair system based on the rule of law, promising new protections for Northern Ireland veterans and former security personnel. These parallel efforts highlight a critical juncture in British governance, where the pursuit of truth, justice, and accountability for victims of state-related failures and terrorist atrocities is at the forefront of legislative reform.
The ongoing debate over the Hillsborough Law, particularly the potential for intelligence service exemptions, underscores a fundamental tension between national security imperatives and the public’s right to transparency and accountability following tragedies. Ensuring that such legislation provides genuine candour without creating new avenues for evasion is crucial for restoring public trust and delivering long-overdue justice to victims and their families.