Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent)

The Smithwick tribunal is very important and comprises an important aspect of finding out what happened in our troubled history and in the conflict that took place on this island. It is vital that the families affected see a full and complete report and are satisfied that, if collusion took place, it is recognised and acknowledged by this State. It is also vital in the context of the other inquiries we have sought and the integrity of the entire process.

The motion calls into question the integrity and wishes of this House. A couple of weeks ago we passed a motion calling on the British Parliament to make available the files in London on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. Two short weeks later, however, we turn around and place a motion before the House that will effectively guillotine the work the Smithwick tribunal. When we do not complete inquiries ourselves and provide answers, no matter how unpalatable they might be and no matter what questions arise, it sends out the wrong message to people who are concerned and who attempt to highlight the fact that we want the British authorities to acknowledge any part they played in colluding with the paramilitaries on their side in the conflict. We have an obligation to ensure the inquiry is completed and given all the time it needs to produce a complete report outlining all its views.

Given the visit of the British Queen recently and this attempt to guillotine the work of the Smithwick tribunal I wonder if an attempt is being made to draw a line under the peace process, say it is done and dusted, there is peace in the Six Counties and we need to move on to other work. Judging by the haste with which this motion was brought forward after the visit of the Queen, it appears the Government's intention is to ensure that we do not spend any more time looking into these issues that remain vitally important for many people and many families who have questions that must be answered.

The Minister stated in his contribution that if the tribunal believes it needs more time in the coming months it can come back to the House and request an extension of the time period but why does the motion not include that provision? It should include a section allowing either the Ceann Comhairle or the Clerk of the Dáil to grant the tribunal extra time if it puts that case to them. If that provision were included in the motion it might make it somewhat more acceptable.

The Minister should have consulted with the tribunal before bringing this motion before the House. If it is the Minister's responsibility to bring forward the motion surely he has a responsibility to ask the tribunal for its views on it and what it perceives will be the time required to complete its investigations and present a report to the House. The setting of this deadline sends out the message that we want to curtail this work, it is an artificial deadline. Even if, as the Minister stated, the inquiry can appeal for extra time this motion sets a deadline in the minds of the people who have to give evidence before the tribunal and whose views will have to be taken into account in the final report.

It is wrong to bring this motion before the House, and it should be rejected. The Minister should consult with the inquiry, determine the extra time it needs and put a motion before the House that allows for that extra time, if it is required. That would send out the message that we are giving this inquiry the time it needs to produce a full and frank report on the facts of this case.

See this speech in context