Last night there was an All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) meeting on Public Accountability. The event was an opportunity for campaigners to express their reaction to the government’s response to the suggestion of a statutory duty of candour and the impact it would have on the Victims and Prisoners Bill and the Criminal Justice Bill.
The version of a duty of candour put forward by the government in the Criminal Justice Bill only applies to police officers and is regarded as undefined and toothless by advocates.
Elkan Abrahamson, a solicitor here at Broudie Jackson Canter and director of Hillsborough Law Now, was one of the speakers who gave his reaction to the government’s response:
“The one relevant clause in the Criminal Justice Bill (clause 73), falls way short of what campaigners have asked for, it is not a “Hillsborough Law”, and it does not have the support of the families. It merely provides for a meaningless code of conduct for the police which does not add to what already exists. It lacks any accountability for other public servants, for national and local public services, and for private companies and their officers responsible for public health and safety.”
Why is a statutory duty of candour needed urgently?
A duty of candour would place legal requirements on organisations to approach public scrutiny, including inquires and inquests into state related deaths, in a candid and transparent manner.
It would allow public servants, including police, healthcare workers, social care workers and others providing state services, to carry out their roles thoroughly and empower them to flag dangerous practices, without fear of penalty from their managers.
How would a statutory duty of candour impact major investigations?
A statutory duty of candour would greatly shorten the process of major investigations, including public inquiries and inquests following disasters, which often take many years to complete. This would not only save huge amounts of public money, but also provide swifter justice to families and survivors and enable life-saving changes to be made much earlier.
Due to the requirement for openness and transparency, a statutory duty of candour would aid in creating a culture change in how state bodies approach investigations such as inquests and inquiries. It would provide individual members of an organisation, who want to fully assist in proceedings but have been discouraged by colleagues, with the confidence to partake without fear of repercussions. A statutory duty of candour would also enable the dismantling of “colleague protection” culture, which is prevalent in the police service.
Why does a statutory duty of candour need to apply to all public authorities?
A key element of the statutory duty of candour was put forward as an amendment to the Victims and Prisoners Bill (NC14), which is a duty of candour which would apply to all public authorities. It is vital that a duty of candour applies to all public authorities to ensure the definite end to evasive and obstructive practices following contentious deaths.
Previous examples show how public bodies, such as the police, have consistently approached inquests and inquires as they would litigation, failing to make admissions and often failing to disclose their full knowledge surrounding incidents. The introduction of a statutory duty of candour would compel co-operation from public authorities and allow inquests and inquiries to fulfil their function of reaching the truth, in order to make appropriate recommendations to address what went wrong and identify areas of learning for the future.
Without ensuring a duty of candour applies across all public agencies, from local authorities to health services, institutional defensiveness and delays will continue when state-related deaths come under investigation. During major incidents where many different public agencies are involved, the persistence of institutional defensiveness and delays only causes unnecessary additional suffering to those bereaved and continues to undermine the fundamental purpose of these investigations, which is to prevent future deaths.
In his government commissioned report on the experiences of the Hillsborough families, the Right Reverend James Jones KBE concluded that South Yorkshire Police’s “repeated failure to fully and unequivocally accept the findings of independent inquiries and reviews has undoubtedly caused pain to the bereaved families”.
Elkan Abrahamson concluded by saying:
“Only the full reintroduction of the Public Authority (Accountability) Bill, which was introduced by Andy Burnham but fell when the 2017 general election was called, will do; namely making a duty of candour enforceable, and ensuring a level playing field between public authorities and those affected by disasters and wrongdoing at inquests and inquiries.
“Keir Starmer has pledged to enact this wide-ranging bill if he leads the Labour Party into power, and tiresome as it is to have to keep reminding the government of this, we will again be asking them to do the same. All public servants must be accountable for their actions. Is their reluctance to do so entirely self-serving?”