Northern Mayors Warn Hillsborough Law Spy Opt-Out 'Too Broad'
Mayors warn Hillsborough Law spy opt-out is 'too broad'

The mayors of Liverpool and Manchester have issued a joint demand for the Government to withdraw a controversial amendment to the proposed Hillsborough Law, arguing it creates an excessively wide exemption for the security services.

Amendment Sparks Fears of Secrecy

In a statement released on social media platform X, Liverpool City Region Mayor Steve Rotheram and Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham warned that a last-minute government change "risks undermining the spirit of the legislation". The amendment, tabled on Wednesday, brings intelligence agencies within the scope of the new duty of candour, but only subject to approval from their own service heads.

Campaigners argue this provision would effectively allow the leaders of organisations like MI5 to act as the sole arbiters on whether to disclose information related to public inquiries or inquests. They fear it could permit intelligence chiefs to conceal serious failings behind vague claims of national security.

Wide Pickt banner — collaborative shopping lists app for Telegram, phone mockup with grocery list

Call for Withdrawal Ahead of Key Debate

The parliamentary debate on the Hillsborough Law, formally titled the Public Authority (Accountability) Bill, was postponed from this week to Monday 19 January 2026 to accommodate the Government's proposed changes. The mayors have now called for the amendment to be scrapped before that crucial discussion.

In their statement, Mr Rotheram and Mr Burnham stressed their unwavering support for national security, referencing devastating incidents in their own regions. However, they insisted that "establishing the truth at the earliest opportunity when things go wrong" is a fundamental part of strengthening the country's defences. They urged ministers to work further with the Hillsborough Law Now campaign and affected families to find a solution acceptable to all sides.

Legal and Political Backlash

Elkan Abrahamson, a lawyer for the Hillsborough Law Now campaign, criticised the amendment for making the heads of security services "unchallengeable" in their decisions on disclosure. He argued that it should be for an inquiry chair to determine the relevance of information, noting that existing provisions already allow sensitive evidence to be heard in private.

The debate has drawn on past tragedies. Labour MP Annaliese Midgley referenced the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing, alleging MI5 spent "six years misleading the public and concealing information". In response, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer asserted that the duty of candour always applied to intelligence services and denied the amendments watered down the bill.

Meanwhile, Liverpool West Derby MP Ian Byrne has tabled counter-amendments to ensure the duty applies to individuals working within intelligence organisations, not just the agencies themselves.

Government Defends Its Position

A Government spokesperson defended the legislation, stating: "This legislation will right the wrongs of the past, changing the balance of power to ensure the state can never hide from the people it should serve." They added that the bill would make police, intelligence agencies, and the whole of government more scrutinised than ever, but emphasised that national security could never be compromised.

The proposed law is named after the 1989 Hillsborough disaster, a stadium crush at an FA Cup semi-final in Sheffield that led to the deaths of 97 Liverpool fans. The long campaign for justice highlighted systemic failures in transparency and accountability among public bodies.

Pickt after-article banner — collaborative shopping lists app with family illustration