The chairman of the Manchester Arena public inquiry has suggested an 'independent source' should be appointed to make sure the security services and counter-terror policing are keeping to a series of recommendations he made.
Sir John Saunders suggested the Investigatory Powers Commissioner, Sir Brian Leveson, who has an oversight role in ensuring the security services comply with regulations in carrying out their covert activities, would be able to monitor the progress being made in implementing changes and proposals he called for.
As a 'final alternative', he said the inquiry's legal team would be prepared to carry out the monitoring free of charge, saying he was 'aware that the cost of inquiries is a matter of concern'.
Try MEN Premium for FREE by clicking here for no ads, fun puzzles and brilliant new features.
Sir John, in a statement on Tuesday, said: "Hearings on whether the attack could have been prevented were mainly held in closed sessions so the bereaved families do not know those matters which were revealed in so far as to do so would affect national security.
"In those circumstances, I think it is especially important for them and the public that they have reassurance from an independent source that the recommendations are being carried out."
The third and final report of the long-running inquiry found there was 'a significant missed opportunity to take action' on the part of MI5 that might have prevented the murders of the 22 people who lost their lives in the bombing on May 22, 2017.
One of two key pieces of intelligence about suicide bomber Salman Abedi - both of which weren't passed to police by MI5 - 'gave rise to the real possibility of obtaining information that might have led to actions which prevented the attack', revealed the report in March. Abedi, who was 22, detonated a device he carried in a backpack at the end of a concert by US pop star Ariana Grande.
But Sir John said he found it wasn't possible to reach a finding 'on the balance of probabilities or to any other evidential standard' as to whether the attack 'would have been prevented' had that action been taken.
He said: "However, there was a realistic possibility that actionable intelligence could have been obtained which might have led to actions preventing the attack."
In October, 2021, three weeks of 'closed' hearings of the inquiry - not open to the press or the families of bombing victims - were held which saw 14 witnesses give evidence, four from MI5, 10 from counter-terror policing and two inquiry-instructed experts.
It led to Sir John producing a 'closed' report and recommendations, the contents of which haven't been revealed for security reasons. He said in his statement on Tuesday the issue of monitoring recommendations he made in the secret report remained 'outstanding', but said it was 'essential'.
"The security services and counter-terrorism policing, having considered my closed report, have accepted that mistakes were made," he added.
"They have each entered into a dialogue with me and my team about suitable recommendations which they accept can be made to work. I have made those recommendations and they have been agreed by the security services and counter-terrorism policing. Both organisations have left me in no doubt of their intention to implement them.
"I believe that they will, but it is important that the families and the public generally receive a public assurance from a monitoring body that the recommendations are being, or have been, implemented.
"We have already seen that it is very easy for new priorities to push the implementation of recommendations from inquiries down the 'to do' list."
Sir John said he had been 'considering alternatives' to the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament carrying out the monitoring.
As well as the Sir Brian Leveson suggestion, he said: "As a final alternative, my inquiry team and I would be prepared to carry out the monitoring by reconvening for a day at an agreed time to hold a meeting with the security service and counter-terrorism policing to check on progress.
"I make it clear that we would not expect or ask for any payment for carrying this out as I am aware that the cost of inquiries is a matter of concern. I hope and see no reason why monitoring should not take place in one of these ways."
The Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, would have to make a direction, said Sir John, adding that he understands 'she has agreed to the principle of monitoring'. "I hope that she would find one of my suggestions acceptable," he added.
"If the Home Secretary did not feel she could direct the monitoring, I would hope that the security service and counter-terrorism policing would agree on a voluntary basis in order to give reassurance to the public."
Sir John said he was 'approaching the time' when he would be notifying the Home Secretary that the terms of reference for the inquiry have been fulfilled, meaning it's work will come to a close and the inquiry will formally end.
There were 13 preliminary hearings before the inquiry began in September, 2020, and 194 days of oral evidence given in total. Over that period the inquiry, which came to a conclusion in February last year, heard from 267 witnesses and 24 expert witnesses. Three reports were produced in total.
