Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

There are two other points I would like to make. The motion that was passed in the Dáil at the time essentially gave a green light to Irish facilitation of the US military machine. The arguments put forward in that regard have been absolutely exposed, because the preamble to the motion which concludes the arrangements that facilitate this should continue is all about Iraq's failure to comply properly with allegations it may have had weapons of mass destruction. We have subsequently discovered there were no weapons of mass destruction. Therefore, it could not possibly have complied, or it had complied because it did not have those weapons. Therefore, the entire basis on which the war was conducted has been exposed as having been flawed. Consequently, the justification provided at the time by the Government for facilitating this war has been exposed. There was a quasi-legal justification for what the Government did at the time. It tried to justify it within our idea of neutrality and our commitment to the United Nations and so on. Do the witnesses think this is an area on which we can challenge the Government - in terms of its compliance with international law - given what has happened in retrospect?

In regard to my second question, the witnesses spoke about political interference, the Garda, harassment of protesters and failure to take complaints seriously. As events move on, things that might be said in one context gain much greater force in a new context. The new context for what the witnesses are saying is the shock of the revelations in regard to whistleblowers, Maurice McCabe and John Wilson, and an acknowledgment by the State that there is a problem in regard to how policing was done at the top. It is widely acknowledged there was political interference with how the Garda conducted its business in certain areas, most notably the Mick Wallace affair, where information was passed by the Commissioner to the Minister and used for political purposes. This would seem to add strength to the witnesses contention that there is political interference with how the Garda does its business, its priorities and so on. Does this give the witnesses cause for optimism and confidence?