Public Office (Accountability) Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Justice

Public Office (Accountability) Bill

Baroness Levitt Excerpts
Baroness Levitt Portrait Baroness Levitt (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, no one in this country needs reminding of the terrible events which are summed up in that single word: Hillsborough. The pain of the deaths of 97 people remains raw in the communities affected, not least because this was no accident—these people were unlawfully killed. As though that were not bad enough, what followed was a national stain on our public services, which reverberates still and contributes to the suspicion that many of our citizens feel about the state itself—that it is not there to serve the many and, worse yet, that those who work for the state are often contemptuous of many of the ordinary people who just want to go around living their lives in peace and security—because what followed the deaths, terrible enough though those were, was a cover-up. Inquiry after inquiry has shown that the state subjected the families to lies and smears, all so that the people who were in charge would not be held responsible for the deaths.

Members of your Lordships’ House have repeatedly paid tribute to the families because they never gave up. In the end, what was revealed was something which goes far further than just affecting the families. It is about the kind of society we want to be. At the various inquiries and investigations, the police lied, falsified their notes and got away with it, at least in part because they were represented by phalanxes of lawyers paid for by the taxpayer, when the families—the ordinary people—could not get legal aid. It looked unfair because it was unfair. The reason we need a law to deal with this is that, regrettably, what happened after Hillsborough is not an isolated incident, as many others have said. Horizon, Grenfell, Windrush, grooming gangs, infected blood—the list goes on and on. Although successive Governments have wrung their hands, nothing much has happened—but no more, and I am proud that it was a Labour Government who finally did something about it.

I have a particular interest in the criminal law consequences of failures of the state. In my view, the Government are right to abolish the old common-law offence of misconduct in public office, which was too vague and too imprecise, and I welcome the creation of the four new offences. That said, I have some concerns about the drafting, which may make these offences less effective than they ought to be. To give just one example, I am concerned that these offences would not cover paramedics who attend 999 calls and other emergencies. They do not fall within the definition of “those acting for a public authority” as currently drafted. That is one example. I will not go through the others now, but perhaps my noble friend the Minister will meet me so I can tell him of my concerns and see whether we can work together to make this great Bill even better.

This new law will be about the recalibration of the relationship between the state and its citizens—the kind of society we want to be, where it is made explicit through our laws that the state is there to serve ordinary people, including those who are at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale. We believe that everyone counts or nobody counts, and that is why I am proud of the Government for making this happen.