The legislation would require public officials and authorities to act with candour and transparency during investigations and public inquiries
The Hillsborough Law is named after the 97 Liverpool fans who were unlawfully killed in the 1989 disaster
The Hillsborough Law is named after the 97 Liverpool fans who were unlawfully killed in the 1989 disaster(Image: Colin Lane/Liverpool Echo)
View 2 Images
A new law creating a legally enforceable duty of candour for public officials has passed its latest stage in the House of Lords. The Public Office (Accountability) Bill, widely known as the Hillsborough Law, has cleared the committee stage in the Upper Chamber, where peers raised concerns over how its provisions would apply to emergency services.
If enacted, the legislation would require public officials and authorities to act with candour and transparency during investigations and public inquiries. The Bill is named after the 1989 Hillsborough disaster in Sheffield, where 97 Liverpool supporters died in a crush during an FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest.
Baroness Levitt, a former justice minister, raised concerns that a new offence of seriously improper conduct did not apply to paramedics, saying this was a chance for Parliament to fix that oversight.
She also argued the Bill needed to apply to emergency workers following a case in which she appeared for the prosecution.
Remove baked on grease in the air fryer using expert's two-ingredient method
The Labour peer said the case involved a paramedic accused of engaging in serious sexual misconduct towards a vulnerable patient.
Former Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer with Charlotte Hennessy (left), Sue Roberts (second left), Margaret Aspinall (second right) and Steve Kelly (right) after the announcement of the Hillsborough Law in 2025
Former Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer with Charlotte Hennessy (left), Sue Roberts (second left), Margaret Aspinall (second right) and Steve Kelly (right) after the announcement of the Hillsborough Law in 2025(Image: PA)
View 2 Images
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you've consented to and improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. More info
She said: "The issue was whether a paramedic responding to an emergency was a public officer for the purposes of the common law offence of misconduct in public office.
"The court concluded that a paramedic did not come within that definition, and as a consequence, the conviction could not be upheld."
Baroness Levitt said when a paramedic responds to an emergency, members of the public are often at their most vulnerable and they must be able to put their trust in whoever has arrived to help.
She continued: “Yet, paramedics are not included. The consequence is not merely theoretical.
POLITICS: Get the latest politics updates from across Merseyside and beyond with political editor Liam Thorp and the team.Click here to activate or add us as a preferred source in your Google search settings.
“If behaviour of the sort I have described were to occur again, a prosecution for seriously improper conduct would still not be possible.”
Baroness Levitt also said the Bill failed in a new offence regarding breaches of duty to prevent death or serious injury.
She said: “If there is one category of professional whose daily work involves preventing death or serious injury, it’s a paramedic responding to an emergency call.
“Let us suppose that a paramedic deliberately withheld appropriate treatment because of prejudice towards a patient on grounds of race.
“As matters presently stand, they could not be prosecuted.”
Justice minister Lord Lemos responded that a Law Commission review concluded that frontline healthcare workers should remain outside of the scope of the Bill unless they are providing services to those in state detention.
He said this reflected existing case law, with paramedics’ responsibilities “primarily owed to the individual they are treating, rather than to the public in general”.
He added: “Frontline healthcare realms were excluded because healthcare services are delivered across both public and private sectors, and therefore cannot be regarded solely as a core function of government.
“Including public sector healthcare workers would create an arbitrary distinction between individuals performing the same role in the private and public sectors.
“This would add complexity, contrary to the policy objective of improving clarity on who the new offences apply to.”
The Bill will now be further considered by the House of Lords at report stage, which will see amendments voted on.
It will then return to the Commons for approval.