Hillsborough Bill: a quiet revolution in public accountability

With Westminster focused on budget brinkmanship and global crises dominating headlines, a major piece of legislation is quietly making its way through the UK Parliament. 

The Public Office (Accountability) Bill, known as the Hillsborough Bill, has implications that extend far beyond its origins in the Hillsborough inquests, reshaping how public authorities operate and interact with business.  

In this article we explore the relevance of the Bill for public bodies, whether central government, regulatory bodies or the wider public sector - examining key obligations, risks and how we can help public bodies to prepare. 

We also examine the Bill’s relevance to businesses that engage with the public sector across a range of settings - whether as suppliers to government, financers or infrastructure funders, or entities otherwise affected by or seeking to influence regulatory or policy changes. This relevance is two-fold. First, the Bill's scope extends beyond public authorities, imposing statutory obligations directly on businesses in certain circumstances. Second, the Bill will provide valuable context and insight when interacting with public authorities, helping to shape more effective engagement strategies.

Where are we now?

The Bill has been introduced by the Government following a manifesto pledge to address historical injustices, including the lack of transparent public authority engagement in the Hillsborough inquests. Some commentators see the Bill as going beyond those manifesto commitments, for example by imposing a statutory duty of ethical conduct. 

There are several remaining Parliamentary stages before the Bill may be enacted, which is not expected until 2026. Organisations that begin preparing early will be better positioned to implement the necessary changes efficiently and avoid the compliance risks that come with last-minute adaptation.

Implications for Business: Public sector transparency as standard

The Bill is a significant development, shifting the approach from reactive disclosure to proactive transparency and requiring systemic changes in how organisations maintain records, manage governance, and engage with the public. The new duties placed on public bodies will also affect business’s day to day interaction with the public sector. For example, awareness that public sector decision-makers will have to justify their choices in light of a statutory Code of Ethical Practice may affect the approach businesses wish to take when proposing a particular course of action.  The statutory duty of candour is also likely to bring a sharper focus to documenting key decisions and the reasons behind them.

These new obligations arrive at a time when public bodies are already operating under significant resource constraints, making early planning and efficient implementation essential.

For business, delivering public services means accepting public duties

The Bill is wide-reaching, and as well as applying to all public authorities, the changes will also bind private contractors delivering outsourced functions. Those businesses which take on certain obligations (such as health and safety responsibility) under contracts with public bodies are also directly affected by the Bill. Were an inquiry or investigation to be held into an incident where those responsibilities were engaged, the contractor would also be subject both to the duties discussed below and the potential criminal sanctions were they to be breached.

Key Changes

We discuss below five key areas of change in the Bill and their importance and implications for both groups. 

1. Creation of a duty of candour – now with real teeth

Public authorities and public officials are already required to act with candour, transparency and frankness in their dealings with inquiries and investigations. The Bill enhances this, placing the duty on a statutory footing for the first time.

Failing to comply is a criminal offence that could be committed by the public body itself, a public official within that body or another person who had a relevant public responsibility in relation to the incident, such as a service provider carrying out activities connected with the incident or someone with a health and safety responsibility.

This duty includes obligations to provide documents and assistance as soon as reasonably practicable after an inquiry or inquest is established, with a proactive obligation to notify the person leading the inquiry or investigation of relevant acts or information. It also creates a positive obligation to correct previous errors or omissions if any are identified, going well beyond a public body's current duties in such circumstances. If enacted, this would be likely to speed up provision of information as there is an obligation for public officials to act "expeditiously".

2. Ethical conduct becomes mandatory

The Bill requires public authorities to promote and take steps to maintain ethical conduct, candour, transparency and frankness within all parts of the authority, and to prepare and publish a Code of Ethical Conduct.

"Ethical Conduct" is specifically defined in the Bill as linked to the seven principles of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty, and leadership; previously known as the Nolan Principles. These principles are currently set out in guidance to which all public office holders were required to adhere, but if enacted, the Bill will place this guidance on a statutory footing.

This duty goes beyond the immediate context of inquiries and inquests and has potentially wide-reaching consequences for public bodies requiring them to take proactive steps to ensure this requirement is met throughout the organisation.

3. Criminal liability for misleading the public

The Bill imposes criminal liability on public authorities and public officials who mislead the public in ways that are "seriously improper".

To be "seriously improper" the conduct must have involved significant or repeated dishonesty, with potential (whether realised or not) to cause harm to others and must have departed significantly from the proper exercise of that person's functions such that any reasonable person would consider the conduct seriously improper in the circumstances. Conviction for this offence could be punishable by up to two years imprisonment or a fine, or both.

4. Redefining misconduct in public office

The Bill also creates two new offences of misconduct in public office, imposing criminal liability for seriously improper acts by individuals holding public office and breaches of duties to prevent death or serious injury. This codification replaces the common law offence, providing greater clarity on the boundaries of criminal conduct.

5. Levelling the playing field at inquiries and investigations

The Bill provides that public authorities may only engage legal representatives to act for them at UK inquiries and investigations where this is necessary and proportionate, seeking to address the "inequality of arms" where members of the public may lack the means to be represented in such proceedings.

In the context of inquests, there is a positive obligation to make legal aid available, without a means test, to bereaved family members where a public authority is an interested person. These changes are intended to facilitate full and effective participation of affected persons.

Preparing for change: how we can help 

Public bodies

For public bodies, preparation for these changes means undertaking governance audits to identify gaps, developing new processes to ensure information relevant to inquiries can be readily identified and supplied, and putting in place robust record-keeping systems. As obligations sit with the public authority (in addition to office holders) this duty will continue after relevant staff have left the organisation, requiring centralised records to be fully up to date and appropriately searchable.

The requirement to put in place a Code of Ethical Conduct will shine a light on any gaps in current practices and governance arrangements. This Code must also contain details of how the public can complain about the authority or those who work for it, creating a new whistleblowing route for such complaints. Authorities would be well advised to develop training programmes to embed the ethical conduct principles across all levels of staff, and consider how to integrate these requirements into existing policies, procedures and performance management frameworks.

The changes related to engagement of legal services providers to advise on inquests and inquiries, requiring individual justification for this approach in future will also potentially lead to a need for upskilling in-house, where resource to take on this additional work may already be limited.

Business

When engaging with the public sector, businesses must fully understand the changes introduced by the Bill and position their engagement accordingly to accommodate and respect the public sector's new obligations. Any business seeking to influence the public sector will need to operate within the boundaries of these duties.

For businesses delivering public service contracts, the priority is to undertake a risk assessment of which contracts may fall within the scope of the Bill and ensure that staff are aware of the change in the law and the implications it has for service delivery.

Get in touch

At Bird & Bird, we have extensive experience advising public authorities, private sector organisations delivering public services, and those navigating complex regulatory investigations and inquiries.

If you want to discuss how the Hillsborough Bill will affect your organisation and what steps you should be taking now to prepare, please speak to Andrew Dean.