Mr. Francie Molloy:

By some, but most people have learned since then. I welcome all the presentations here today. It is important that this committee hears about the issues. Mr. Kenny Donaldson comes from the unionist perspective and it is important for us to hear that but, unfortunately, we have not had unionist politicians attend this committee. They are invited to attend this committee, as are other MPs.

I come from what is called the murder triangle. Many victims of the situation lived in that area. The triangle went from Pomeroy to Portadown to Loughgall and there were terrible murders there at the time, right across the board. We should recognise that. As Mr. Austin Stack has said, the issue of evidence being destroyed is not unique to the Garda. There are several cases in the North where forensic evidence has been destroyed, lost or tampered with. It is important that people get answers about how that happened. It shows a lack of concern. Some evidence is lost, destroyed or mislaid and there has always been a question about evidence and how it is come about. With DNA being reviewed and renewed, it is very important that we deal with what is factual and what is not.

Sinn Féin has been leading on truth recovery for many years. We wanted a truth and reconciliation commission to be set up in a similar way to South Africa and other countries. Having said that for a number of years, we fell back from that and, with the Stormont House Agreement, saw the opportunities for the truth and reconciliation legacy issues to be dealt with. I know it has been said that it does not beat all the issues, but the problem is that it has been held up by the people who said they wanted to put it through for so long, namely, the British Government, which does not really want all of the truth but just part of it. If we are to have a truth and reconciliation commission, it is important for all of the truth to be available, particularly from those who have the archives and information. We saw it with the Glenanne gang, for example. Much information was stored and whenever people started to recover it, it all disappeared from the books. It is very important for all that information to be open to us.

Are the victims' groups open to all victims who have suffered in different ways or is it limited to certain sides or groups? We had the Eames-Bradley plan as an earlier structure. Much work went into it to try to deliver for the victims. That was knocked back because of the financial issues it raised. Much good work and many good considerations went into the Eames-Bradley plan. The Stormont House Agreement has not yet been implemented.

The resources have not been provided for the inquests. Many families are waiting 40 years for inquests that are being held up because the British Government is refusing to provide the resources for them. We need to find ways of addressing this issue in the context of dealing with legacy issues.

In regard to the Glencree, many years ago I attended a number of discussions on various issues, some of which were heated but always ended in reconciliation. It was an important mechanism which allowed people to engage in discussion. It is perhaps a failing of the Good Friday Agreement that this mechanism was not built into it. The Stormont House Agreement presents an opportunity to deliver on this. I would welcome members' views on how the Stormont House Agreement can be implemented and on how we can secure the release of the money which the British Government committed to providing to allow this process to continue. There is still a need a Glencree-type mechanism. It is important there is a renewed round of negotiations or discussions around the issues that currently exist. This forum is known as the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. All of these issues are holding back implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. If we are to do our job right, the focus must be on implementation of the agreement. As stated, in terms of implementation we are operating on a shoestring budget. Leaving aside how good or bad the mechanism might be, the danger is that if it is lost we will have nothing and thus a vacuum will be created and further problems will arise. I welcome the opportunity to discuss these issues.

In regard to the survey referenced by Mr. Stack, I believe it would be useful for members of the committee to have a copy of it and to know the outcome. As stated by all here today, there are different needs in different communities. Victims have different needs. Some victims want more from the process than others. Some just want the truth and some want justice. This is the case across all of the communities. There are victims on all sides. I knew a young girl named Sheila Campbell who was studying law at Queen's University and was murdered in the company of a Protestant friend in a hotel. Queen's University never even recognised that she was a student because she was a republican. She was a victim.