The ‘Hillsborough Bill’ – Voices for victims or just more lip service?

Jonathan Blunden, Alastair Lewis and Conrad Turnock talk through the recently introduced 'Hillsborough' Bill, aimed at giving victims of state injustice a meaningful voice.

Over 36 years since the Hillsborough disaster, which led to the 2017 report of Bishop James Jones on lessons learnt, the Government has introduced its ‘Hillsborough’ Bill.

Promised within the Labour Party’s 2024 manifesto, it has been created to ensure that victims of state injustices have a greater voice. But is it any more than lip service?

If enacted, the Bill will have significant implications across the public sector, particularly for public authorities and officials, who will need to meet new duties of candour and heightened ethical standards.

These obligations will require revised governance arrangements, enhanced record-keeping, and proactive planning to ensure compliance.

To understand its impact let’s take a look at the Bill and its practical implications for public bodies and practitioners.

What does the ‘Hillsborough’ Bill do?

The Public Office (Accountability) Bill was introduced in the House of Commons and given a formal first reading on 16 September 2025, with no date for its second reading as yet confirmed. It is arranged in five parts, with parts two to four containing substantive provisions:

Part 2

Creates the new duty of candour and assistance on public (which includes local) authorities and officials in relation to public inquiries and inquests. This duty will be active at all times and will require public authorities and officials to notify inquiries and inquests if they believe their acts or information they hold might be relevant. It will also require public authorities to provide information or assistance when directed by an inquiry or inquest.

Part 2 of the Bill also imposes on public authorities a duty to promote and maintain high standards of ethical conduct (in effect, putting the Nolan Principles on a statutory footing), and to do this, they must adopt a code of conduct, ensuring that those working for them are aware of it and the consequences of non-compliance. This is, of course, something that local authorities do already.

Part 3

Abolishes the common law offence of misconduct in public office and replaces it with two new statutory offences. The offences of misleading the public and seriously improper acts both carry the potential for custodial sentences.

Part 4

Extends the provision of legal aid to victims of disasters or state-related deaths – it would amend the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 with the effect of enabling bereaved families to obtain non-means-tested legal services at inquests where a public authority is an interested person.

Part 4 also has provisions intended to alter the conduct of public authorities at inquests, by encouraging them not to be legally represented unless necessary and giving powers to the Chief Coroner and Lord Chancellor to monitor and report on the behaviour of public authorities at inquests.

What does the Public Office (Accountability) Bill mean for public authorities?

Public authorities will understandably be concerned about the extent of the measures that the Bill, as drafted, will require them to take.

Processes will need to be put in place for identifying and monitoring relevant ongoing inquests and inquiries so as to enable authorities to comply with the duty of candour and assistance.

Disclosure and record management systems will also need to be robust, which may come at a cost to authorities.

Creating, implementing and maintaining codes of conduct on the surface looks to be a straightforward task, and most local authorities should be able to do so by making minor changes to existing codes.

However, the additional burden of providing training and information to staff, integrating with HR and employment contracts and strengthening and protecting avenues for whistleblowing means that there is much for public authorities to think about.

It would be unfortunate if this duty leads to different codes of conduct being created and implemented by different authorities, leading to varying levels of standards and accountability.

It would, therefore, be desirable to see a joined-up approach to the codes of conduct, perhaps with a model code that may then be adopted by authorities across the board.

As regards the two new statutory offences, we think that the threshold for conduct that falls foul of them is likely to be found by the courts to be a high one.

The offence of misleading the public would require that a public official intentionally misled the public (or was reckless as to whether their act would do so).

In addition, they must know, or ought to have known that their act was “seriously improper”, which in turn means an act that involved significant or repeated dishonesty about matters of public concern, caused or risked serious harm and amounted to a significant departure from proper performance of public functions. Such behaviour would be highly unusual and significant.

It is difficult to see what conduct may be caught by the new offence that would not be caught by the existing common law offence of misconduct in public office.

As such, there is an argument to say that it is perhaps more symbolic than a new avenue for justice for victims.

While local authorities do not fund legal aid, it is their responsibility to maintain coronial services in their area. Increased provision of legal aid, on a non-means-tested basis, is likely to mean more work for coronial services and, therefore, local authorities requiring more funding.

It is not clear where this essential funding will come from. As it is, local authorities are stretched and there is no sign of let up on financial pressures.

If the Government does not provide funding, coronial services could suffer, with the unintended consequence that victims who the Bill was intended to help, end up waiting longer for outcomes.

Preparing for the Public Office (Accountability) Bill

As local authorities try to understand what their services will look like should the Bill pass as drafted, Sharpe Pritchard can offer practical advice and insight into what will be required and expected of them, and the systems and ways of working that will be needed to ensure compliance.