Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I too welcome Ambassador Cronin to Dublin. She has made a big impact and has been here for only a few days. We look forward to working with her on so many files, from Northern Ireland to Russia-Ukraine to transatlantic relationships and so much more besides.

I am very glad to have this opportunity to discuss this important and very sensitive issue. As I said in our debate earlier this month, the legacy of conflict and the past on this island and how we confront and address this chapter of our often troubled and painful history is vital to the shared future we want to see. Even since that debate, we have seen another important and extensive report published by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. This is the second of two major reports that have examined specific events in the period of the Troubles and serious concerns that were held about the conduct of the RUC at the time. This work by the office of the Police Ombudsman has shone an absolutely necessary light into aspects of the conflict in Northern Ireland and deserves serious consideration in this House. It is a testament to the concern felt across this island that we gather here again to discuss these reports. I wish to make it clear that fully addressing the painful legacy of the past, for every family who has waited far too long and for society as a whole, remains our priority and consistent focus.

On 8 February the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland published her findings following Operation Achilles, which examined the conduct of the RUC in respect of loyalist paramilitary attacks in south Belfast throughout the 1990s that resulted in 11 murders and one attempted murder. That report was published one month after her report into Operation Greenwich, which investigated the RUC's handling of paramilitary attacks by the UDA-UFF between 1989 and 1993. Nineteen lives were taken in those attacks and there were many more attempted murders. The findings of both reports are shocking, while validating many of the concerns voiced by the families involved over very many years. Both reports identified significant investigative and intelligence failures and a range of what are called "collusive behaviours" on the part of the RUC. They identified continued unjustifiable use of informants by Special Branch - informants involved in serious criminality, including murder. They identified the destruction of records, failures on the part of police to exploit all evidential opportunities and failure to warn individuals of threats to their lives. It is important to note that the Police Ombudsman found no evidence to suggest that the police had intelligence that could have prevented any of these attacks or evidence that informants were protected from arrest and conviction. That does not diminish, however, the significance of the failings identified in these reports and the vindication of families' legitimate and justified concerns.

My thoughts, and no doubt those of all of us here today, are with the families, victims and survivors impacted by the attacks examined in these reports. Even after decades of campaigning to know the truth, the publication of such reports can be very difficult and, I am sure, an emotional experience for the families involved, and perhaps for some in this House who may know the families well.

These reports also serve to underline the importance of the work of the Police Ombudsman, set up as part of the transformative process of policing reform in Northern Ireland. That reform process was driven forward by the Patten commission and underpinned by the Good Friday Agreement commitment to a "new beginning to policing" in Northern Ireland. It is only through this kind of rigorous and unflinching examination of the past and through addressing issues that are brought to light that people can have trust in the systems of policing and law into the future.

The survivors of the events examined by these reports and the families of those whose loved ones were lost have had to campaign tirelessly to get to this point and for access to truth and information. Unfortunately, their long and difficult journeys are mirrored in the experiences of so many other families. As I stated here a number of weeks ago, and as I have said many times in this Chamber and beyond, every bereaved family must have access to an effective investigation and to a process of justice and truth, whether their loved one was killed by a paramilitary or a state actor and regardless of the circumstances.

When we come together in this House to debate and discuss the legacy of the conflict on this island and, sometimes, to express our frustration or shock at what happened and how it happened, we must above all remember the people and the families who are still impacted to this day by many of those horrific events. Whether we are discussing the victims of Bloody Sunday, Kingsmill, the Dublin-Monaghan bombings, the Birmingham or Omagh bombings, the Sean Graham bookmakers' attack or other incidents covered in these reports, we owe those families - every family - more than simply our outrage. We owe them our support and our determined efforts to make progress in establishing a genuine process of truth and justice for their loved ones.

Addressing the legacy of the past is complex and sensitive. It is a challenge that requires the two Governments and the parties in Northern Ireland to work together, to build sufficient consensus and to map out a path forward that everybody can support. This is why the Stormont House Agreement, agreed in 2014 after a long and difficult period of negotiation, was a pivotal moment in the peace process on this island.

That agreement addressed, among other issues, the legacy of the past. In doing so, it was guided by a number of fundamental principles. These were that the legacy of the past must be addressed in a way that promotes reconciliation, upholds the rule of law, facilitates the pursuit of justice and information recovery, is human-rights compliant, balanced, proportionate, transparent, fair and equitable, and acknowledges and addresses the suffering of victims and survivors.

The Stormont House Agreement created a series of bodies tasked with addressing the past. These include an historical investigations unit to take forward investigations into outstanding Troubles-related deaths, with prosecutions where possible, and to produce family reports. It proposed an independent commissioner for information retrieval, ICIR, to operate on an all-island basis and enable victims' families to seek and receive information from former paramilitary groups or the Governments about the circumstances of the death of their loved ones. In 2015, the two Governments concluded a treaty on the ICIR. It included an oral history archive to share experiences and narratives related to the troubles of the past. It also included an implementation and reconciliation group to oversee the process and report on themes drawn from the work of those bodies.

The Stormont House Agreement will not bring those who lost their lives back nor can it fully heal the wounds of those injured. No agreement could. However, it can at least offer the hope of justice, truth and, in time, reconciliation. That is why it is so regrettable that the comprehensive and balanced framework we agreed together has yet to be put in place.

Last year the British Government published a policy paper that represented a radical departure from the Stormont House Agreement. This command paper proposed a statute of limitations that would see an end to criminal investigations and prosecutions for Troubles-related offences pre-1998 as well as ending inquests and civil litigation. It is essentially a proposal for an unconditional amnesty for those not yet convicted. The British Government proposals have caused deep upset and concern to victims and survivors, who are understandably shocked by the idea that the avenue to justice open to all other victims of crime would be closed off to them forever by law.

At the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference held in June last year, I agreed with the Secretary of State to begin a period of intensive engagement so the political parties in Northern Ireland and the voices of victims could be centrally heard in finding a way forward. That process ran through the summer and early autumn, engaging with a wide range of victims' organisations, civil society, academics and those working to deliver the current legacy investigations. It was abundantly clear throughout that process that the British proposal for the statute of limitations does not have the support of victims. It does not have the support of parties in Northern Ireland, who have been strong and unanimous in their opposition. It has caused grave concern to international human rights bodies. It is without international precedent.

As I have stated here many times and communicated in clear terms to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, we cannot accept these proposals as a basis for a way forward. We cannot countenance a situation in which families do not have access to a process of basic justice or are left once again to fight through the courts for years to challenge a government-imposed process. We will continue to caution the British Government strongly against unilaterally legislating on these issues and to reinforce our consistent position that it is only through a collective approach that we can hope to deal with legacy issues comprehensively and fairly.

The current system is not working for victims. It is under-resourced and results in piecemeal progress and unconscionable delays and obstacles for families. We see important breakthroughs and significant moments, like the publication of the Police Ombudsman's reports this month or the powerful findings of the Ballymurphy inquest, that bring moments of clarity and truth. However, the important ongoing efforts are uneven and inadequate to the scale of the task. While making clear to the British Government that we cannot and will not support an amnesty, we have remained open and ready to engage seriously with it and others to find a way forward. Unilateral action cannot work. It never works, in truth, when it comes to Northern Ireland. We know from decades of experience what is possible when we try to work in partnership. Our commitment to peace in Northern Ireland has been guided by an intention to ensure the next generation inherits a better, more prosperous and more peaceful society. We must continue to do everything we can to deliver on that commitment and ensure new generations do not carry the burdens and scars of conflict into the future.

In my role as Minister for Foreign Affairs, I have met with many victims and survivors. I am always struck by the tremendous dignity and determination with which they take forward their campaigns for truth and justice. Last month, I met with a cross-community group, the truth and justice movement, and heard about their experiences, including that of Raymond McCord on the killing of his son by the UVF in 1997 and John Teggart on the killing of his father Daniel in Ballymurphy in 1972. Paula Rainey told me about the killing of her father, Sgt. Joseph Campbell, a father of eight children at the time of his murder. Eugene Reavey told me of the gun attack which took the lives of three of his brothers and four members of the O'Dowd family in 1976. I could list many more names, each with a story so powerful it makes it inconceivable that any government could seek to legislate unilaterally to draw a line under that story or their efforts to find what truth and justice may still be possible.

It is important to say I have met families who have challenged us in this State to do more to facilitate justice and truth recovery for cases where it is known or suspected that there was a significant cross-Border dimension to the crimes concerned. It is essential we recognise and respond to that challenge and that we as a Government and a State play our part fully in a collective approach that works for victims in all jurisdictions. It is vital we put in place a framework across both jurisdictions and that both Governments uphold our fundamental human rights commitments. I am committed to doing that.

The European Convention on Human Rights, which is central to the Good Friday Agreement and is incorporated into Northern Ireland law, must be respected fully in the legacy process. Where governments do not live up to those obligations, it is open to families to challenge them. The legacy of the Troubles in Northern Ireland and a group of cases, including that of Pat Finucane, will once again be considered by the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers in early March. The Government will continue to give its support to the families involved. We will again call on the UK Government to fulfil its Article 2 obligations in each of those cases and, more broadly, through the introduction of an agreed and comprehensive legacy framework that puts legitimate needs of victims at its centre.

I know Deputies will have much to add to this debate and many in this House care passionately about the need to fully address the legacy of the past in Northern Ireland. Many wish to speak to the findings of the Police Ombudsman's report and express their serious concerns and solidarity for families involved. Few of us are untouched by the history of the conflict on this island and we share across all parties a commitment to building deeper societal reconciliation based on fundamental principles of justice, fairness and the rule of law. I look forward to hearing these important contributions and to responding at the end of the debate.

See this speech in context