Marcus J Ball (Private Prosecutor and Producer)

Hi again Charlotte, Quoting you: "MPs are NOT excluded from the duty of candour." "MPs are NOT exempt". I'm so sorry and I know this must be painful because it is a betrayal of sorts...but yes they are completely exempt. MPs (and peers, ALL LEGISLATORS) are trying to give themselves a cut out from the Hillsborough Law. You mention chatpt so I would ask you to copy and past THIS PROMPT INTO YOUR AI so you can see for yourself (I ask @grok to give us its own response to the below prompt as well): Read the official Public Office (Accountability) Bill PDF: bills.parliament.uk/publicat… and ExecProsec’s amendments and briefing: execprosec.org/amendments-br…. Establish whether MPs, peers, MSPs, Members of Senedd Cymru and Northern Ireland Assembly members, acting as legislators, fall within the duty of candour and assistance, its criminal enforcement, and the misleading the public offence. Trace clauses 2, 5 and 12 through Schedule 2, paragraphs 2(4) and 3; distinguish ministerial roles and Schedule 4’s separate misconduct offences, and address the briefing’s possible drafting ambiguity concerning peers. Then critically assess whether the Government’s reasons for excluding legislators withstand the proposed amendments. Test each objection against the actual wording: protection for proceedings in every UK legislature; safeguards for opinions, mistakes and ordinary debate; restriction of the new misleading offence liability to five specified purposes; prosecution controls; and fines without imprisonment for serving legislators convicted solely through their legislative status. Explain why protecting parliamentary proceedings would require excluding serious public dishonesty outside them, if it would. Test whether lacking executive powers or ministerial information prevents legislators from causing harm through deliberate fabrication, and whether elections or internal discipline provide equivalent accountability, particularly for unelected peers. Distinguish safeguards already in the Bill from proposed changes. Verify the briefing’s legal claims rather than accepting either side’s assertions. Conclude whether the exclusion remains credibly justified, and whether lawmakers imposing these standards on others while excluding their own legislative roles constitutes a defensible distinction or a hypocritical double standard. If an objection is answered by the safeguards, say so explicitly.