Families bereaved by the Hillsborough disaster have urged Sir Keir Starmer to reconsider the reported appointment of a former Sun editor to a senior government role.
David Dinsmore, who edited the tabloid newspaper from 2013 to 2015 and is now the chief operating officer of its parent company News UK, is expected to become permanent secretary for communications.
In a letter to the prime minister, Hillsborough families have claimed he is “manifestly unsuitable” for the role because of his association with The Sun, which is widely reviled on Merseyside because of its reporting of the tragedy.
In 1989, four days after the stadium crush, The Sun’s front page had the headline ‘The Truth’ and included unfounded claims that some Liverpool fans had urinated on police officers resuscitating the dying, and that some had stolen from the dead.
The reporting led to a city-wide boycott that remains in place to this day.
The letter to Sir Keir said: “After the Hillsborough disaster in the midst of unimaginable suffering among the bereaved and the survivors, the Sun newspaper published vicious lies about the conduct of fans.
“Graphic and false allegations cast the deceased and those who survived as barbaric, feckless and inhumane.”
Image: David Dinsmore was editor of The Sun between 2013 and 2015. Pic: Reuters
The signatories, which include survivors and victims of other scandals, called Mr Dinsmore “manifestly unsuitable for public appointment”.
“It risks damaging public confidence in the state among those affected by Hillsborough, everyone connected to Liverpool, and all who feel solidarity with them.”
The Sun apologised for its coverage of Hillsborough in 2012, after an independent panel concluded thatno Liverpool fans were responsible in any way for the disaster, and that the main cause was failings by policewhich were subsequently covered up.
Charlotte Hennessy, who lost her father Jimmy Hennessy in the tragedy when she was six years old, told Sky News the claims in the Sun “is one of the main reasons why we had to fight for so long”, as she urged the prime minister to “backtrack on appointing someone so unsuitable for public office as Dinsmore”.
The decision has also been criticised by Liverpool’s Metro Mayor Steve Rotheram, who called the appointment a “deeply insensitive choice”.
“The paper Dinsmore once led printed falsehoods that caused unimaginable pain. That shouldn’t be brushed off as a footnote in his CV – it should be a red line,” the former Labour MP said on X.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
Liverpool MPs Ian Byrne, Paula Barker, and Kim Johnson have also written to the prime minister to express concerns.
They said that a key requirement of Hillsborough Law, which Sir Keir has promised to put on the statute books in full, is to ensure that senior government officials and civil servants would be legally compelled to tell the truth following a tragedy at the hands of the state.
Their letter said: “What sort of message do you believe your appointment of Dinsmore into a senior Government role sends to Hillsborough families and survivors, who have lived through so much pain and suffering at the hands of the publication he has previously edited?”.
Mr Dinsmore’s appointment was first reported by The Telegraph, which described the role as a new position created after the prime minister voiced concerns about government communications late last year.
The appointment has not been officially confirmed.
Number 10 has declined to comment when contacted by Sky News.
A Cabinet Office spokesperson said no appointment had yet been made, so they would not comment on Dinsmore.
One year on, how’s Keir Starmer’s government going? We’ve put together an end-of-term report with the help of pollster YouGov.
First, here are the government’s approval ratings – drifting downwards.
It didn’t start particularly high. There has never been a honeymoon.
But here is the big change. Last year’s Labour voters now disapprove of their own government. That wasn’t true at the start – but is now.
And remember, it’s easier to keep your existing voter coalition together than to get new ones from elsewhere.
So we have looked at where voters who backed Labour last year have gone now.
YouGov’s last mega poll shows half of Labour voters last year – 51% – say they would vote for them again if an election was held tomorrow.
Around one in five (19%) say they don’t know who they’d vote for – or wouldn’t vote.
But Labour are also leaking votes to the Lib Dems, Greens and Reform.
These are the main reasons why.
A sense that Labour haven’t delivered on their promises is top – just above the cost of living. Some 22% say they’ve been too right-wing, with a similar number saying Labour have “made no difference”. Immigration and public services are also up there.
Now, YouGov asked people whether they think the cabinet is doing a good or a bad job, and combined the two figures together to get a net score.
Here’s one scenario – 2024 Labour voters say they would much prefer a Labour-led government over a Conservative one.
But what about a Reform UK-led government? Well, Labour polls even better against them – just 11% of people who voted Labour in 2024 want to see them enter Number 10.
Signs of hope for Keir Starmer. But as Labour MPs head off for their summer holidays, few of their voters would give this government an A*.