Britain’s MI5 faces scrutiny for deceiving the public and the courts about its connections to the Manchester Arena bomber and its protection of a murderous neo-Nazi informant. Now, leaked emails show the intel agency secretly working to gut legislation that would bar British officials and spies from lying when addressing state investigations.
On October 21, Britain’s Public Office (Accountability) Bill, known as the Hillsborough Law, completed its committee stage in the House of Lords. The legislation, which would establish a “duty of candour” making it a criminal offense for government agents to lie to or conceal information from inquiries and investigations, is now due for a vote by the Lords. Members of Parliament’s upper chamber can delay the legislation for a year, potentially killing it altogether, or attempt to force amendments to its terms.
Emails unearthed by The Grayzone show that for years, Britain’s domestic spy agency, MI5, has covertly managed a campaign against Hillborough in parliament. In the House of Lords, former MI5 directors have kept a “list” of “allies” who could be relied on to weaken the bill or kill it altogether. McCallum personally tried to negotiate what he called “a bearable version of the Hillsborough Law” with Prime Minister Andy Burnham before he took office.
The proposed law is named for an April 1989 crowd stampede that killed 97 Liverpool fans at Hillsborough stadium in Sheffield. A public inquiry and separate inquest much later found local police falsified and suppressed evidence to wrongly blame Liverpool football club supporters for the mass carnage, which was actually instigated by police, while peddling repulsive, libelous allegations against innocent fans. The Hillsborough Law would impose criminal penalties of 2 to 14 years in prison for government workers who lie to public investigators.
In the Labour party’s 2024 manifesto, Keir Starmer pledged to implement the bill. But Labour has since dragged its feet after coming under pressure from members of Parliament worried that MI5, MI6 and GCHQ wouldn’t be adequately shielded from scrutiny. The Commons finally passed the legislation in July. With the Lords vote looming, campaigners fear the intelligence services will find a way to insulate themselves from the obligation to tell the truth, as the legislation mandates.
Leaked MI5 emails show these concerns are well-founded. While victims’ families have fought for decades to implement legislation forcing state officials to tell the truth, the leaks reveal that senior agency officials responded to their campaign by conspiring to subvert efforts to demand accountability for police and intelligence agencies. Again and again, the emails showcase the agency’s pathological habit of lying to conceal grave crimes.
One exchange reveals Director General Ken McCallum and his predecessor, now Baroness Eliza Manningham-Buller, lobbied ministers and peers to either create a special “exemption” for MI5 in the Hillsborough Law, or kill the legislation outright. McCallum privately admitted that it was difficult to oppose the proposed law publicly because “it looks like one is against telling the truth.” This did little to deter the agency from seeking to wreck the bill, however.
MI5 has consistently opposed the duty of candor on flimsy “national security” grounds. The emails show the agency believed it had convinced ministers of the need to “carve us out” of the law, until victims’ families forced the government to apply the duty to MI5 in the bill’s final form.
A ‘hard bill to oppose politically’ because it ‘looks like one is against telling the truth’
Since then, senior MI5 officials have overseen clandestine efforts to ensure Britain’s upper Parliament either secures a duty of candor exemption for Britain’s spying agencies, or votes the law down.
For years, McCallum used a private, pseudonymous email address to keep Manningham-Buller informed about his covert lobbying of British Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s “incoming administration” on the legislation. Official guidelines strongly discourage British government officials from using private accounts to conduct state affairs, a fact which raises serious questions about the pair’s commitment to transparency standards.
In the message, McCallum acknowledged having secretly sought “to negotiate a bearable version of the Hillsborough Law” directly with Burnham before the premier had even taken office. The MI5 chief stated that Burnham’s team “hasn’t yet found its feet on our domain,” suggesting he believed the incoming government was composed of relative lightweights into whom he could easily sink his claws.
The oddly tender message was the latest in a months-long exchange which saw the current and former MI5 bosses obsess over how to subvert the Hillsborough Law. In an explosive email two months prior, the current spy chief openly admitted the Hillsborough Law was “a [very] hard bill to oppose politically” because it “looks like one is against telling the truth” and “wants to deny bereaved families some (perceived) meaning from the deaths of their loved ones.” The pair were determined to try, however.
McCallum went on to reveal the exact talking points he and his subordinates were deploying in order to prevent government agents from being compelled to tell the truth: MI5 had been working “consistently to say, carefully but firmly,” that while “we applaud the intent of this bill,” it risks causing “serious damage to [national security].” The justifications listed included claims that the bill would tie up intelligence officers in court and cause MI5’s “international partners” to think twice about cooperating, given that the law “could force, under pain of criminal sanction, the release of their material.”
“Legislation of this sort will keep legal firms happy, but gum up delivery for the average citizen/taxpayer,” he complained. “Is this really what we need?”
McCallum insisted that “the [candour] model the government has proposed gives the campaigners 90% of what they want,” but he complained that victims’ families “keep ratcheting, in ways that now risk wildly disproportionate effect [sic] on national security.” The MI5 Director General was particularly worried about the Hillsborough Law being debated and voted upon by parliament while the agency was embroiled in several ongoing scandals, arising from the longstanding propensity of MI5 officials – including Manningham-Buller – to shamelessly lie.
‘Manchester Arena, STEAK KNIFE, etc.’
McCallum specifically referenced the deadly 2017 Manchester Arena bombing as a potentially problematic line of inquiry for the spy agency.
Demand for the Hillsborough Law intensified significantly after an official investigation found MI5 missed major opportunities to avoid the worst terrorist attack in British history. In May 2017, an Islamic extremist named Salman Abedi blew himself and 22 young people up during an Ariana Grande concert at Manchester Arena. Britain’s intelligence services had enjoyed a covert relationship with Abedi and his family, who fought to topple the government of Libyan President Moammar Ghadafi with London’s assistance.
McCallum publicly professed to be “profoundly sorry” his agency failed to avert the attack, but neglected to mention an anonymous MI5 witness lied to the inquiry about intelligence held on Abedi before the attack.
The MI5 also faced a major public relations crisis from its handling of a serial killer and pedophile it cultivated as a secret agent within the Irish Republican Army (IRA). The intelligence agency launched an internal probe into the agent, known as “Stakeknife,” after it was caught lying to official investigators about him. Having initially claimed it had no ties with the agent at all, MI5 turned over hundreds of documents exposing its intimate relationship with Stakeknife after investigators declined to press charges against agency officials.
In findings published in December 2025, the internal probe, known as Operation Kenova, openly criticized MI5 for concealing the extraordinary extent of its relationship with the agent. On top of withholding crucial information, investigators scolded Manningham-Buller for publicly alleging MI5 had no knowledge of or involvement in London’s “disgraceful” relationship with the notorious predator.
Censored passages in the Kenova report revealed Manningham-Buller consciously concealed important details about MI5’s dark alliance with Stakeknife. As this outlet revealed, references in an April 2025 Daily Telegraph article to Stakeknife being managed by “intelligence service operatives” were secretly removed on MI5’s orders.
“We didn’t get approached in advance on this – very poor form,” an MI5 official complained in an email to Manningham-Buller at the time.
The Telegraph piece was also censored to remove passages stating MI5 had been “found to have lied” about its management of a violence-“obsessed” misogynist who infiltrated Neo-Nazi circles known as “Agent-X.” The BBC revealed that MI5 protected ‘Agent-X’ from prosecution for horrendous crimes against his former partner, then assisted his escape from Britain, which enabled him to assault more women overseas with local intelligence agency protection.
A damning Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office report this July revealed senior MI5 officials provided the real name of ‘Agent X’ to the BBC, then systematically denied having done so to multiple different courts as the agency struggled in vain to prevent transmission of the BBC’s discoveries and protect his identity. MI5 was eventually “found to have lied” to an extraordinary degree in clear violation of British law.
Manningham-Buller warned the MI5 Director General in May 2026 that she intended to “raise concerns re duty of candour,” referring to the Hillsborough Law requiring agents to tell the truth. She was concerned at the time about a forthcoming Lords debate on the King’s speech, the Manchester Arena bomber’s British intelligence ties and MI5’s handling of the serial-killing secret agent known as Stakeknife.
“If helpful to refresh on any of that, let me know,” the MI5 Director General assured her. During the debate, Manningham-Buller did not raise the duty of candor issue, focusing instead on the supposed threat of Russian “influence operations.”
Regarding the Hillsborough Law, McCallum wrote that “At minimum,” it was “worth pausing to reflect properly on the detail,” noting that such bureaucratic hand-wringing was “classic [House of Lords] territory.”
Mired in scandal over past lies, MI5 prepares to infiltrate parliament
For almost two years, Baroness Manningham-Buller had been constructing a clandestine coalition of Lords who could be expected to oppose the Hillsborough Law in part or whole. She was joined by fellow former MI5 Director Generals Andrew Parker and Jonathan Evans, who are both Lords. In January 2022, Manningham-Buller became chair of the British upper chamber’s influential Conduct Committee, which scrutinizes ethical standards, and can sanction them for misbehavior. In the days that followed, Manningham-Buller privately revealed to McCallum she accepted the position after heavy lobbying by Jonathan Evans.
Nearly three years later, she emailed MI5 headquarters asking for clarity on whether “the ‘duty of candour’ problem had been addressed.” An MI5 official named David R. cautioned the issue remained “very tricky,” but sounded an optimistic note.
The agency was “in a good place with ministers on the need to carve us out of it,” he wrote, explaining that MI5 was in the process of establishing a “code of ethics” which would demonstrate that the British security state was already policing itself and needed no outside interference. When completed, the code “can be published as a demonstration of how we are already fully candid in inquiries etc, and therefore we don’t need the duty of candour to apply to us,” David declared. Still, the agency feared “this will be very bumpy in parliament,” with government ministers “concerned by the optics and politics of it.”
Within MI5, these worries were heightened by impending “difficult media [reports] around our alleged lack of candour in relation to various issues.” Chief among those “various issues” was Operation Kenova, the MI5 official explained.
“This will be an unhelpful backdrop,” David lamented. “Ken thinks this will be difficult for us and he’ll be doing a fair bit of parliamentary engagement on it in due course, and we hope you and Jonathan will help too.”
The MI5 apparatchik sought to arrange a meeting with Manningham-Buller at HQ on the Hillsborough Law. He also introduced her to an MI5 official named Kate, the agency’s “lead on all-things-legislation” and “duty of candour” specifically.
Kate wished to regularly update Baroness Manningham-Buller and Jonathan Evans on MI5’s “interests in parliament,” which included forthcoming legislation on employment rights and the military. David mentioned Lord Harold Carter had recently visited MI5 headquarters to make introductions, and had offered “to be another supportive voice in the Lords on our stuff.”
Manningham-Buller responded that she, Evans and Parker would “do what we can.” The former MI5 Director General was eager to know who else was on the agency’s “list” of “allies” in parliament.
MI5 secretly recruits Lords to “oppose the whole bill”
MI5’s ally list was short. David named Lords David Anderson, the former terrorism legislation reviewer, and Alex Carlile, a national security hawk, as occasional contacts, with the Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee and Lord Tim Clement-Jones seen as friendly. MI5 wanted Dido Harding, the COVID-era health security chief, as an advocate because she was strong on data and tech.
Manningham-Buller vetoed her — she had “a very low opinion of Dido” — and proposed targeting former members of parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee and ex-cabinet secretaries instead. Peter Ricketts was reliably supportive; so was Mark Sedwill, when he “bothered to turn up.”
By January, with the bill advancing, MI5’s legislation lead, Kate, was sending Evans, Manningham-Buller and Parker regular updates. HLN campaigners had unexpectedly objected to the bill’s “national security model,” which MI5 had thought workable, and the government was preparing to change the bill without notifying the agency.
“We have significant concerns about the pace at which the [national security] community is being required to advise on the potential risks of amendments and about the long term consequences of some of the options,” Kate cautioned. However, with Lords debates imminent, MI5 was “preparing to engage” with lawmakers to scupper the bill.
Within days, Manningham-Buller had privately spoken to shadow justice minister Lord Richard Keen and shadow cabinet office minister Lady Simone Finn. The pair planned to lead Lords opposition to the legislation, with Keen telling Manningham-Buller they were “inclined to oppose the whole bill.” Meanwhile, “Blairite ministers” Lords George Robertson and David Blunkett were seen as likely allies, too. Evans approvingly chimed in that Finn was “hostile to [the] whole bill.” He pondered, “what is the best way to get her a brief on any [national security] concerns?”
An MI5 operative known only as “Gareth M.” was enthusiastic about Manningham-Buller’s covert outreach to Lady Finn, approvingly quoting the parliamentarian’s recent scathing dismissal of the Hillsborough Law as a major, unwanted threat to state secrecy. Gareth was “confident we will be able to provide Lady Finn (and Lord Keen) with our objective view of national security matters/concerns as policy depts. develop their thinking.” Lord Carlile had recently visited agency headquarters, with McCallum concurrently speaking “to a range of other MPs.”
In late March, Manningham-Buller told Gareth she’d learned a recent meeting with Hillsborough families had featured “lots of strong words” over the delay in the legislation’s implementation. Gareth revealed McCallum had “various further meetings” with ministers and then-premier Keir Starmer. While the duty of candor would apply “at an individual level” to MI5 officers, spy service chiefs enjoyed an “element of control” over how their agencies interacted with official investigations. Coverups may still be state sanctioned, in other words.
Though the MI5’s campaign to defang the transparency bill has largely escaped media scrutiny, but some in the political sphere have taken notice. In the debate on the legislation in the House of Lords in May, civil liberties campaigner Baroness Shami Chakrabarti, apparently wise to the agency’s lobbying campaign, warned that “a blanket exemption for the security agencies would be no kind of Hillsborough Law at all.”
If the leaked emails are any guide, that may be the entire point.