Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. We are approaching the anniversary, which falls on such a poignant day each year, and it cannot be easy for people who lost such young vibrant people. I am taking this issue on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality who sends his apologies but he must be somewhere else. However, I commit to bringing back to him the remarks made by Deputy Broughan who has been a very active campaigner on behalf of this committee.

As the Minister previously emphasised, irrespective of any differences of opinion, no one disputes the magnitude of the tragedy or the impact it had on the families concerned and on the wider community. We are all conscious that this Friday is the anniversary of the fire and all of our thoughts and sympathies are with those affected by this tragedy.

The Deputy is familiar with the background to the concerns relating to the cause of the Stardust fire. As the Minister has responded previously to queries the Deputy has raised on behalf of members of the committee, I will not revisit the full history of the case on the Minister's behalf.

The victims committee's long-running campaign for a new inquiry into the cause of the fire led to the making some years ago of a detailed submission making the case for a new inquiry, criticising the original tribunal and setting out an alternative hypothesis regarding the cause of the fire. The professional advice that was given to the Government at the time was that the argument being presented did not amount to new evidence. The committee rejected this assessment. It was precisely in response to this situation, and with a desire to resolve this question definitively and impartially, that an independent examination was put in place. Mr. Paul Coffey SC was appointed to carry out this exercise by making an entirely objective and professional assessment of the committee's call for a new inquiry. His appointment and terms of reference were agreed with the victims committee and its legal representatives. The committee was given considerable financial assistance to make its case. It had a full legal team to present that case over three days of hearings.

The outcome of the Coffey process was very significant, in so far as it led to resolutions in both Houses clarifying that no one present on the night can be held responsible. This was a key concern for many people and a central component of the committee's criticism of the original tribunal. Mr. Coffey concluded that in the absence of any identified evidence about the cause of the fire, the most another inquiry could achieve would be another set of hypothetical findings, which would not be in the public interest. As the Deputy is aware, these findings were endorsed by motions in both Houses of the Oireachtas and were widely welcomed at the time. Since then, members of the committee have continued to contend that their theory on the cause of the fire accurately reflects what transpired. Nothing the Minister has seen would warrant a departure from Mr. Coffey's findings.

Issues have been raised by members of the committee about the Coffey process on the basis that they justify a further inquiry. There has been an entirely unfounded suggestion that attempts were made to influence his drafting or conclusions. The Minister has made it clear for the avoidance of doubt that no such influence was brought to bear. Unwarranted significance has been attributed to differences between a draft report and the final report. Extracts have been cited out of context and without regard to Mr. Coffey's actual recommendations, which were materially unchanged. The nature of draft reports is that they change. The Government of the day clearly had to rely on the final report, as submitted by Mr. Coffey. As I have said, Mr. Coffey's conclusions and advice were entirely independent and were widely welcomed when his final report was published. The Minister is aware that allegations have been made to the Garda concerning evidence presented to the original tribunal. The Deputy will appreciate that these allegations are matters for the Garda to examine in the normal way. It would not be appropriate for the Minister to comment on that process.

Clearly, members of the victims committee do not accept the outcome of the independent process which was put in place to enable them to present their case for a new inquiry. The people in question have made it clear that they will continue to campaign for a new inquiry. The Minister sympathises greatly with them, but having regard to the outcome of the independent examination and in the absence of new evidence concerning the actual cause of the fire, he does not believe it is open to him to disregard the advice which emerged from that process and which was endorsed in both Houses of the Oireachtas. The Minister has indicated he will arrange for the examination, as appropriate, of a further submission on behalf of the committee. He has cautioned against raising unrealistic expectations about what can be achieved or appearing to suggest the outcome of the Coffey examination can be set aside, simply on the basis that Mr. Coffey's conclusions are not accepted by some.

It is right that concerns about this dreadful and tragic event should be raised in the House. On behalf of the Minister, I thank the Deputy for his continuing support of the victims committee. I can give him a commitment that I will ensure the Minister hears about the statement he has made today.

See this speech in context