Hillsborough files: Doubts on Cabinet Office case

Liverpool fan pays his respects to those who died in the Hillsborough disaster

The number of signatories on the petition demanding that the government disclose its files on the 1989 Hillsborough tragedy has now passed the 100,000 mark. This means that it has to be considered for debating time in the House of Commons.

But there are new questions about the Cabinet Office case for resisting publication of these records.

The Hillsborough petition calls for the release of all government documents relating to the disaster, "as requested by information commissioner Christopher Graham". Mr Graham was adjudicating on a freedom of information application made in 2009 by the BBC.

It will now have to be discussed by the Commons backbench business committee, along with the petition to deprive rioters of benefits which is the other proposal to have passed the 100,000 target since the coalition government's new e-petition system was introduced.

The Commissioner ruled last month that the government should release files we had requested relating to discussions held by the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher about the incident, which caused the death of 96 Liverpool fans and was later blamed on a failure of police crowd control. He argued that it would add to public knowledge and understanding of how the Thatcher government responded to the event.

Views of ministers

Last week the Cabinet Office announced that it would appeal against Mr Graham's decision, triggering a highly effective publicity drive by Hillsborough campaigners which has led to over 100,000 signatures being added in less than a week.

The Cabinet Office argument is that any release of information should be managed by an independent panel (set up after our FOI request was made) which is to review the documentation about the Hillsborough tragedy and assess what should be made public.

I have now looked more carefully at the terms of reference for this panel, and it is far from clear that it will actually promote the release of all the documents we asked for under FOI. Its planned programme of disclosures will exclude "information indicating the views of ministers, where release would prejudice the convention of Cabinet collective responsibility".

Yet the material we applied for includes records of cabinet and other ministerial meetings, and correspondence between the offices of Mrs Thatcher and her Home Secretary Douglas Hurd. These documents could easily come under the exception in the panel's terms of reference to do with revealing the views of ministers.

This suggests there could be a significant gap between the information the BBC has requested and the records that the panel could end up releasing.

Martin Rosenbaum Article written by Martin Rosenbaum Martin Rosenbaum Freedom of information specialist

10 things we found out because of Freedom of Information

The Freedom of Information Act came in 10 years ago. It's led to the unearthing of a trove of facts.

Read full article

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 146.

    This e-petition is over 100,000 = @ 134,000. Though it's fun to watch the Govt squirm; squirming, passing buck to previous admin, tells me a whole lot more than - say - the simple, straightforward truth. "The Govt has confirmed its commitment to full transparency...all the papers, including Cabinet papers, to be released as soon as Panel so decides...
    Same old, same old...

  • rate this

    Comment number 145.

    If "a lot of people have feared saying something in case it upset those families" then you could have fooled me! Strikes me that quite a lot of people have had far too much to say without any respect for the truth or the feelings of the families or survivors.

  • rate this

    Comment number 144.

    E-petitions site - aimed at "building confidence".
    Hillsborough petition calls for ALL GOVT DOCUMENTS relating to the disaster. Seems simple enough, straight-forward enough.
    Never mind what was ruled before or after.
    No matter the word games, we - the public - are not dumb enough to feel that our confidence in govt is anything but reduced in accordance with these games.

  • rate this

    Comment number 143.

    I think that is the problem, because 96 people died, a lot of people have feared saying something in case it upset those families, but that isn't justice either. The information should become public for all to see, not a small committee. What happened that day, also effected many Sheffield people, who feel unhappy with the outcome and have until now have tried to be dignified about the matter.

  • rate this

    Comment number 142.

    Because the fans were NOT responsible at all, ReggieBlade-they were exonerated many, many years ago. They were responsible for no more than normal football match behaviour, yet too many people want to find a way to blame them too. Why? Did you know that the “man” responsible for some of the initial tabloid reports also invented the “Freddie Star ate my hamster” headline?


Comments 5 of 146



Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.