Mr. Francie Molloy:

I thank the witnesses for the presentation today which is a very important input into the discussions on legacy. I would like to remind people that the Troubles did not just break out. The Troubles resulted from the denial of civil rights and justice. I am old enough to have been involved in the early civil rights marches and campaigns. They related to the very basic demands of a job, a house and a vote. The state would not and did not deliver that. We then finished up in a conflict situation which lasted for another 30 years. It is important to remember that the denial of rights was the big issue that brought all this to a head. We are now again in a situation with the denial of rights for victims to get justice and truth.

While the current system may not be working correctly, it has certainly brought a lot of information and satisfaction to families who went to inquests, etc. The legacy Bill of shame would quash that and wipe it out completely. It is important to look at the options that were proposed. As Senator Ó Donnghaile said, just because someone does not participate, it does not mean that we need to change and take a different route because that is just part of the tactic of delay.

The Stormont House Agreement is not a republican document by any means; it is an agreement reached between Mr. Richard Haass, representing the US, and the Irish and British Governments, and combatants on both sides. That agreement was not implemented, in the same way that the Good Friday Agreement has never been fully implemented. The latter is what this committee is about. That the British Government has walked away from things does not mean things have to be dropped. The Stormont House Agreement still has to be dealt with and will probably finish up being the only way of getting to get the results we need.

Senator Ó Donnghaile posed a question about the document put forward by Relatives for Justice. I would like to pick up on the point on the importance of the relatives agreeing to any proposals about truth, recovery and justice. The Stormont House Agreement needed that thinking within it. I draw attention to a written response by Relatives for Justice to the witnesses proposals. It was sent to this committee. It refers to a comment in an article in The Irish Newsby Ms Sandra Peake, the director of WAVE, in respect of the witnesses' proposals. She said the witnesses are basically following the Northern Ireland Office playbook and that the proposals give perpetrators power over victims and survivors. How would the witnesses respond to the concern expressed by Ms Peake? Can they understand the reactions to the legacy Bill across Ireland and from the EU, US and British Government? It is basically presenting an amnesty. The proposals for truth and recovery again present an amnesty. Many relatives and victims do not agree with that. What effect would the witnesses' proposed amnesty have on relatives who lost loved ones? What would be the response to that?