Niall Ó Donnghaile (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

There is a lot to process on the broader issue. There is also much to process on the basis of the conversation so far today. My remarks will centred on the comprehensive papers the witnesses furnished in advance of this meeting. They will appreciate that at least one of us spent a good bit of time reading over them. I thank them for that and thank them for coming in today.

It is a timely and important intervention. It provides the committee with an opportunity to discuss the very important issues of truth and justice for the relatives of all those who died in the conflict, irrespective of who was responsible for the death or injury, and the best way to achieve this long-awaited objective. In approaching this understandable and powerfully emotional issue, I believe it must be relative centred. In other words, we must ask ourselves will relatives, in as broad and inclusive a way as possible, accept what is being proposed today. Will they see the proposals as achieving what many of them have been campaigning for for nearly 50 years, some of them for more than 50 years? If it does not meet that test, no matter how well-intentioned the proposers are - I have no doubt that the authors of today's presentation are well-intentioned - then, like my colleagues, I believe it will be tremendously difficult to achieve.

Sinn Féin fully supports the Stormont House Agreement and the mechanisms it outlines to ensure truth and justice for relatives and survivors. We have repeatedly called on the British Government to abandon its plans to introduce its legacy Bill, a call that has been reasserted today. It has no support in Ireland, the EU or the USA. This committee, the Seanad and the Dáil all oppose the legacy Bill of shame. I believe the Stormont House Agreement provides the best way forward. It has the support of relatives, the Irish and British Governments and most of the political parties across Ireland because it was set within a legally binding framework and was Article 2 compliant. If the Stormont House Agreement is implemented - Senator Currie touched on this in her contribution - then the ICIR is the body to do what the witnesses want to see achieved.

The committee also needs to consider the paper we received in advance of this meeting from Relatives for Justice, which was sent to this committee in response to the witnesses' proposals. I hope we can discuss that with Relatives for Justice in the time ahead. Drawing from the Good Friday Agreement, Relatives for Justice's paper sets out the need for an independent judicial, inquisitorial and investigative process which balances the rights of all victims and perpetrators. This approach is the surest away to achieve an outcome that meets the needs of relatives and society as we continue to deal with the legacy of the conflict.

Mr. Pollak spoke earlier about the current system in the North not working. Rather than just saying that, we sometimes need to name the problem and say why the process is not working at present. That is primarily because one actor in the conflict has reneged from an agreement and is pulling away from the process of truth recovery and justice. Deputy Howlin spoke about the refusal to give access to papers relating to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. Britain's Supreme Court has also ruled that the British Government is in breach of its legal obligation to carry out an investigation into the murder of Pat Finucane. Just this week the Police Ombudsman's report into the murder of Independent councillor Patsy Kelly was published. His family wants a new inquest into that murder. We know the legacy Bill will close that avenue down for them and for many other families from all walks of life.

It is an interesting conversation about the issue of reconciliation in its broadest sense. One of the cornerstone, one of the fundamentals, of true reconciliation is a process of giving people truth and justice. That is a really important way to reconcile it. Obviously, we need to look to international models because we have no indigenous model pertaining to the more recent phase of conflict. When we emerged from the Tan War - we are now in the centenary of the Civil War - there was never a truth recovery process after that. There was never a real process of reconciliation following that. We need to look at this process. It needs to be viewed through the prism of it being national, of it being deep rooted and of it being as comprehensive as possible.

I thank all the witnesses for the presentation today and the information provided. It is an important intervention as the committee considers the broader issues of legacy and truth recovery and now reconciliation also. It is a very worthwhile consideration for us and I am sure it will help shape our discussions and our views on this.