Dáil debates

Tuesday, 21 March 2006

Ceisteanna — Questions.

Public Inquiries.

2:30 pm

Photo of Joe HigginsJoe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach if he has had communication from the family of murdered solicitor, Mr. Pat Finucane, in relation to the terms of an inquiry. [5506/06]

Tony Gregory (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach if the British Government's proposal to deal with the Pat Finucane inquiry under the new Inquiries Act is in breach of the Weston Park Agreement; if he has brought this matter to the attention of the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6394/06]

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his contacts with the family of the late Mr. Patrick Finucane; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6431/06]

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 4: To ask the Taoiseach the representations he has received from the family of the late Mr. Pat Finucane into British Government proposals for an inquiry into his murder; the response he has made to such representations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6751/06]

Photo of Finian McGrathFinian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 5: To ask the Taoiseach if the issue of a proper inquiry into the murder of solicitor, Mr. Pat Finucane, will be raised again; and the position regarding the case. [7251/06]

Photo of Caoimhghín Ó CaoláinCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 6: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his efforts to press the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, to ensure that the British Government fulfils its commitment to establish a full independent public inquiry into the murder of Mr. Pat Finucane; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7783/06]

Photo of Trevor SargentTrevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 7: To ask the Taoiseach the recent communications he has had with the family of the late Mr. Pat Finucane; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8961/06]

Photo of Trevor SargentTrevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Taoiseach the recent communications he has had with the family of the late Mr. Pat Finucane; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9159/06]

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 8, inclusive, together.

The Government continues to support a full independent public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane. We have made clear that we want to see the standard agreed at Weston Park, and set by Judge Cory, adhered to. We continue to share the concern of the Finucane family, and indeed of Judge Cory, that the new Inquiries Act, under which the British Government intends to have the Finucane case investigated, will not meet these standards. We have raised these concerns directly with the British Government.

The Government welcomes the motion in this case, passed unanimously by the House on 8 March. I have met the Finucane family on many occasions. Most recently, I met Geraldine Finucane and other family members during my visit to the United States. I had a more detailed meeting with the family on 27 February in Dublin, prior to the recent debate in the House. I have on all occasions assured Mrs. Finucane of my firm support for their efforts to achieve the full truth concerning this disturbing case.

I discussed the Pat Finucane case with a number of Senators and Congressmen on Capitol Hill last week. It is clear that the Finucane family also has considerable support there and that the concerns of this House are widely shared in Washington.

I also raised the Finucane case at my meeting last week with President Bush. The US Administration has an ongoing interest in this case and I briefed the President on the current situation. I particularly thanked the President for raising the matter with Prime Minister Blair following our meeting last year.

While in Washington, I also briefly discussed this case with the Northern Ireland Secretary of State. I told him that there continued to be fundamental concerns regarding the proposed inquiry and that we remained fully supportive of the Finucane family.

Photo of Joe HigginsJoe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With all due respect to the Taoiseach, it is not a question of the reassurances he gave anybody and everybody. It is about what Mr. Blair said to the Taoiseach, when they met during the past two weeks, about a full proper public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane. How does the Taoiseach interpret the intention of the British Government to hold the inquiry into that murder on the basis of legislation which can and will see vital evidence withheld? Does he believe the British Government wants to cover up the collusion between the killers of Pat Finucane and the forces of the British State? Did he put that point baldly to Prime Minister Blair when he met him?

The Northern Ireland Office stated the motion demanding a proper inquiry passed by the Dáil was fundamentally flawed and misleading. What did the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Hain, state to the Taoiseach regarding that? Did he contact the Government verbally or in written form following on from that motion? If so, what did he state exactly?

When will the Taoiseach leave diplomatic niceties aside and square up to Prime Minister Blair on this issue? We have been around the garden in the same way seeking information on the horrific bombings in Dublin, in which collusion is also suspected, and we are no further forward. Will we be back in this House again next year with the Taoiseach having failed to get from the British Government any real commitment to bringing out the truth of this horrific murder? Is it not time for him to deliver on this and expose Prime Minister Blair in front of the world as a hypocrite if necessary——

Photo of Rory O'HanlonRory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy must confine himself to a question.

Photo of Joe HigginsJoe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——if he does not comply with what the majority of Irish people wish in this regard?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy speaks as though he is not aware of what has been going on over the past long period. What Prime Minister Blair and the Secretary of State stated was that they do not intend changing the Inquiries Act. Our position at every level, such as through the motion passed in this House, our position at meetings over the past year or year and a half with the British Government and in the United States and through a range of other civil rights groups and other groups, is that we oppose that position.

The Secretary of State has written to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and the Minister has replied to that letter within recent days. It comes down to the basic issue that the inquiry under the UK Inquiries Act 2005 will not be regarded as fully independent. That is the view we, all those who support our view, and the House stated. To make it clear and simple, the reason for that view is that under the new legislation the responsible Minister, not the chair, maintains significant control over the inquiry. For example, no matter how good the judge would be in carrying out the inquiry, he or she might see restricted material but could not use it, publish it or show it to the family or lawyers.

It is our view and that of the family, civil rights groups and Deputy Higgins that this is clearly not covered in what we set out to get, which was a full, independent, public judicial inquiry. That is the position and as of now, I can give the House no comfort. There is no question of diplomatic niceties. This has been raised at endless meetings which have been far from diplomatic niceties. The British Government will not change.

Tony Gregory (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Taoiseach give his views on the reluctance of the British Government to grant a full public inquiry into this case? Does the Taoiseach accept that the inquiry on offer is in effect a British Government controlled inquiry into collusion by British Government security services? It is a nonsense. It is not an inquiry at all. The Inquiries Act restricts the control of the inquiry judges, allows for the deletion of details of findings made by the inquiry and effectively transfers control of the inquiry from the judges to a Minister.

Does the Taoiseach accept that if the Finucane case were to proceed under the terms of that Act the end result would be another cover up, which is not acceptable? Is it not time to end the cap in hand approach on this issue and change tactics to demand a full public independent inquiry? If there is good faith between the two Governments, surely that can be achieved?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with most of what Deputy Gregory said. It is clearly not what was envisaged as a full independent public judicial inquiry in the Weston Park proposals. This is new legislation introduced by the British Government and the restrictive clause in that legislation, which would effectively restrict the judge's handling of the information, renders it useless. It would not restrict the judge in seeing or reading the information but would restrict him or her in using it in public, publishing it or showing it to the family or its lawyers. For that reason it is of no use.

The British Government, under significant pressure from all sides, has shown no inclination to move and in a recent letter the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland said that the Government intends to proceed with the inquiry. I spoke to him again last week in Washington and told him that he would be doing that without the support of the Government, or any parties in the Oireachtas, and the many human rights groups involved in this case. My officials spoke to Geraldine Finucane today. We keep in constant touch with the family and continue to help and support it in any way we can.

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach has a special relationship with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, who has said he does not intend to lead the Labour Party into the next general election. Critics and political correspondents have their own views as to when that might happen. Given the Prime Minister's responses in the House of Commons over the past 12 months about the necessity for the truth to be known, he should understand that the restriction in the amended Act inhibits this information from being made available. There is no point going ahead with a restricted inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane if the full truth cannot be made known.

I do not know whether the Taoiseach has discussed in private with the Prime Minister the revulsion that people feel when they ask why the British Government will not have a full-scale public inquiry under the original Act. I agree with the Taoiseach that it is difficult to move this issue on. If the Prime Minister wishes to leave behind a legacy of progress and reform, the best quality public service and the truth, can the Taoiseach enter his mindset to achieve some closure on this murder? Can he persuade the Prime Minister that if the inquiry proceeds as proposed, and the Finucane family does not become involved, it is a useless entity and restricted findings will not bring closure or truth? Will the Taoiseach give the Prime Minister a copy of the unanimous motion from this House, which I was glad to see people supported, and express to him on behalf of the entire Parliament, the representatives of the people, how important we feel it is that this matter be finalised in an open and fully accountable fashion? In so far as Mr. Blair wants his legacy to be judged, it would be in his own interests to be a prime minister who saw to it that a restriction in the amended Act would be lifted, or that the inquiry should be held under the original Act. That would be a great day's work for politics, for both governments and in terms of finding out the truth for the Finucane family.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not disagree with anything Deputy Kenny said but it is worth going back over some recent history. The Bloody Sunday inquiry took place in part during the life of the government of which Deputy Kenny was part, but the British Government did not want such an inquiry. It took a great deal of persuasion and in the end it was the Prime Minister who ruled, against much opposition, to operate a successful inquiry. Nevertheless there were difficulties involving so-called "soldier A" and "soldier B", people who were not named, and the sessions not held in public session, and so on. I believe most people, though not all, were satisfied with it. It was enormously costly, involving some £100 million, but it was highly important.

In more recent years, the British Government, when involved in some other inquiries with which I am not familiar, looked at the legislation and decided to bring in the Inquiries Act, which was clearly in gestation for some time.

The British Government, including the Prime Minister and the Attorney General, say they intend to bring forward the arrangements for this inquiry. They clearly believe the truth can be established through an inquiry under the new Act, and that this is the only way they can do it. This is the belief right across the system. As well as talking to the Prime Minister I have talked to the Deputy Prime Minister and to others. We do not take that view. I have brought the Attorney General to some of the meetings with the Finucane family and he is assisting them as best he can. We take the view that the proposed British inquiry will not work.

Knowing that we could not take thousands of cases — as time passes there are more and more people who feel very little was done about their cases at the time of the Troubles — as a result of so many terrible deaths on all sides, we decided to take a representative sample, and that was the Weston Park agreement. The issue then became one of how we were to arbitrate, which is when we suggested an international judge and legal team.

That is where Judge Cory came in. He is considered one of the most eminent judges in the world, and though elderly he agreed to take on the job. He put a great amount of effort into it, even when his wife was dying — she subsequently died. Judge Cory deliberated, and I understood that was the end of the matter. We have to honour our commitment in Ireland, such as in the Breen case, which we have begun. All that happened prior to the final position on the Act. On the restricted case, at least there was much progress, with a good deal of debate on the amendments. It was an Act in which we and the Nationalist parties in the North took a great interest. There was a good deal of input and comments on the Act but in regard to the restrictive position, people have their own judgment. I have my view but there is no point in giving personal opinions on why they would have that view because I cannot prove it. During the past year I have tried to work out why they might have such a restrictive view.

Whatever the reasons, and many people have suggested several other reasons, whoever is right or wrong does not matter. The fact is that we are trying to ascertain whether there was collusion by the British forces at whatever level. The inevitable questions are where they went within the system, whether they moved up through the system, went into the political end or whether they were in the Northern Ireland Office. Given the restrictive notice, how can one say it is a full, independent or public judicial inquiry when the judge has a right to see things but cannot publish them, say them in public or show them to the family? How is that a full, independent or public judicial inquiry? It is not any one of those three. That is the position. I wish it was just an issue between Mr. Tony Blair and myself at this stage because the powers of persuasion might persuade him but it is not at that level. This is a strongly held view of the British Government and I believe it is wrong.

To answer the Deputy's last question, I was in London on the day the Dáil debated the motion. I gave Mr. Blair the motion, told him its history, said all the political parties were involved in it and that I believed it would be unanimous. I also told him that the House would be critical of him and his Government on this issue. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Hain, has written to us to say he is still going ahead with the inquiry. I told him last week he could do that if he wanted to. He told me it could cost €50 million to which I replied he could spend that amount of money on it but it would not convince anybody in the collective interest of this case. I have spent hours on the Finucane case because it was picked out as one of the three. I still do not think we have got to the position we want. I would like to tell the House that another meeting, shouting exercise or table banging exercise would change the British Government, but at this stage I must be honest with the House and say I do not see it moving on this position.

The only other new issue is that there is a possibility that the Houses on Capitol Hill will take our motion and also pass similar motions. We briefed the President and the US Administration in the White House last week. Without taking too much licence, I do not think they disagree with our view on this issue, whatever about other issues.

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Where does that leave us? Has the Pat Finucane inquiry run into the sand? Is that what the Taoiseach is saying? He referred to the cases selected at Weston Park. I presume he will recall the remarks of Judge Peter Cory at the time when he said: "Without public scrutiny, doubts based solely on myth and suspicion will linger long, fester and spread their malignant infection throughout [the Republic] and Northern Ireland community". I presume the Taoiseach still agrees with that and agrees with the judge that when the term "public inquiry" was used then, it was in the context as understood in 2001. At the end of this Question Time on this matter, what point have we reached?

This is not the only unresolved murder in Northern Ireland and sadly it is not the only one where there was suspected collusion by the security forces. I note that on a matter I raised in this House by way of the Adjournment and otherwise some time ago, the killing of young Raymond McCord, the Taoiseach has agreed, and I thank him for it, to meet his father and whomsoever he decides to accompany him. Perhaps the Taoiseach will take the opportunity to comment on that as well.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The point to where it has brought us is unsatisfactory. The Secretary of State, Peter Hain, told me on Thursday that he was going ahead with his inquiry and that they are seeking a venue. I am told they have a venue for the autumn. They are also seeking a judge. I understand from international connections that they are having great difficulty getting a judge. The legal world has been quite active in putting out reasons a judge should not take up the position. I have been trying to help in doing that too. That is the position.

Unfortunately, the position on this one is that neither of us can move. I talked to the collective group dealing with the Prime Minister on this issue. I cannot move because I cannot honestly say, and we have been through this with the finest legal people, that it is a full, independent or public judicial inquiry because a judge in this case could have his hands tied as the Minister has the responsibility. That is the unfortunate situation. If they want to go ahead, I cannot stop them but it will be with the opposition of effectively everybody. Judge Cory has recently restated his position; it is not just a case of what he said at the time. At this stage the Government, the Dáil, the human rights groups, the international legal profession, Judge Cory and the Finucane family are calling for this but the British Government is not indicating any movement.

To answer the Deputy's straight question, they are saying they are going ahead. If they do, no matter what they come up with, and I have had to listen to people saying it will take five years to do it and it will cost €50 million, nobody will ever believe it, at least none of the people we must try to represent. Perhaps some people in the United Kingdom will believe it, although I have my doubts about that too, especially where the legal profession is concerned.

I received the Deputy's letter. Earlier in the year I got my officials to meet that brave father. I am meeting him tomorrow with his representatives. As he has pointed out, he used always to believe that collusion was on the Nationalist side, but as I believe he explained to the Deputy, there appears to be considerable collusion in his case. I will meet him tomorrow, as the Deputy requested of me.

3:00 pm

Photo of Finian McGrathFinian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On my Question No. 5 concerning the murder of Pat Finucane and the need for a proper public inquiry, does the Taoiseach agree it is unacceptable for any security forces, particularly those north of the Border, to be involved directly or indirectly in the murder of a human rights lawyer or any other citizen such as Seamus Ludlow? Does the Taoiseach accept that such a murder would cause enormous damage to the rule of law in any democratic society? Does he accept that the British security forces were up to their necks in killings and murders on this island over a 30-year period and has he pointed that out to the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, and his Government?

Also, does the Taoiseach share my major concerns about recent allegations that one of the Greysteel massacre murderers, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for 12 murders at Greysteel and Castlerock, was a paid British agent who received £50,000 through a bogus Special Branch account following his release in 2000? Does the Taoiseach regard that as a disgrace and unacceptable, especially in the current era of co-operation? What will the Taoiseach do about these serious allegations of collusion? Does he accept that the truth must come out if we are serious about the peace process and a healing process?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will not answer on individual cases because I do not have the facts on them. It is clear that there are many cases related to allegations of collusion in Northern Ireland during the Troubles. The hundreds of cases involving thousands of deaths and serious injury that occurred between the late 1960s and the mid-1990s — in many cases later than that but thankfully not in the same number — will obviously not all be subject to full inquiry, and that is why it was decided to take a sample number of these cases. The work of the Northern Ireland Office, Nuala O'Loan and the Chief Constable in setting up a historical data office is a good way to tackle this problem.

We will continue to put our efforts into helping the Finucane family by exerting the maximum political pressure on the British Government. We are determined to meet the needs of the family. There is a view that in the absence of securing an agreement, particularly from the family, on an inquiry, there may be little point in holding an inquiry at all, bearing in mind the expense involved. That is a matter, however, for the British Government. It would be an enormous tragedy if the truth of this case did not come out and I hope a way can be found to meet the needs of the family. The British Government knows that. We have considered all the legal processes and have given the British Government our views on that. We find the current situation unsatisfactory and we will continue to argue the case in the coming months for Geraldine Finucane and her family, as well as for some of the other high profile cases. Otherwise, it will go on for years and will not end. We will particularly focus on this case because in this instance we got an agreement on a process and we will continue to exert our efforts.

Photo of Trevor SargentTrevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach mentioned that a full independent public inquiry was needed into the murder of Pat Finucane and in other cases, and that this was a sample of six cases. Having listened to Michael Finucane speaking to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, it seemed that the six cases were considered to be of such significance that they required an examination by an independent judge. They were not just a sample, but were of particular significance because of the circumstances surrounding them and the evidence to date. Will the Taoiseach clarify that? Did he say that he is not sure if there is collusion, or does he believe that there is a certain amount of collusion and does not know the full extent of it? Is the Taoiseach aware that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Hain, when he met the Finucane family on 7 February 2006, conceded that it was not a question of whether there was collusion, but how much collusion went on? It is important to clarify that point.

Is the Taoiseach aware that the Finucane family believes he is essential to their efforts to bring about the justice they have been denied for so long? It is no wonder it is difficult to find a judge to do the job. Has the Taoiseach taken on board the statement by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Hain, that the amended Inquiries Act was necessary to secure the co-operation of the security services? Does that not indicate that we are effectively dealing with a Government that can no longer claim to be governing, that it is being told what to do by the security services?

Has the Taoiseach put it to the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, that we run the risk of the United Kingdom no longer being able to account for itself as a democracy if the security services dictate the legislation that is required and the level of inquiry permissible? Does the Taoiseach not see reason to put it to the Prime Minister very seriously that it is not acceptable in any civilised, democratic society for the security services to dictate the extent of an inquiry? Has he put that position to the Prime Minister?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When responding to the first question, I did not wish to convey the impression that all the names had been put into a hat and a few main cases pulled out. Deputy Sargent will recall that we took some from the Nationalist side and some from the Unionist or loyalist side. In all we took a balanced selection of six cases, although we could have taken any number. The case about which Deputy Rabbitte spoke could also have been one. I have personally dealt with literally dozens in recent years.

Photo of Trevor SargentTrevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Were they significant?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

All were significant. However, they will not all receive full sworn inquiries as that would be impossible. It is good that there is a historical office to examine cases because some people hold the view very strongly that many of those cases got very little investigation at the time. Whether that is understandable, it is a source of great anxiety and long-term hurt to the families. It is deeply upsetting for them and they want to state their case. Many years ago Deputy Sargent raised the prospect of a peace and reconciliation commission, which I support, because it would at least be of some help to people if they could put their case. I do not claim that it would resolve matters, but even if it achieves no more, being able to record their position and how they feel is an issue for many of the families affected.

The Deputy asked about collusion, which I have always believed took place, including in the case of Mr. Pat Finucane. I have asked many times in this House, the House of Commons and on Capitol Hill whether anyone would be surprised if, after publication of the report on Mr. Finucane's murder, headlines across the world proclaimed that evidence of collusion had been found. Quite frankly, it would be news to no one. We would be interested to find out what level of collusion obtained, how high up the chain of command it extended and how it operated. However, the headline would surprise no one. That is the truth of the system in Britain, America and elsewhere.

Deputy Sargent quoted Mr. Peter Hain. I said I have suspicions on the matter, but I have no evidence or proof. However, I believe that there is some significant reason. That is why I have said that I cannot explain this, never mind stand over it, which I am not prepared to do. If a judge is restricted from publishing something or showing information to the victim's family or their lawyers, how can one call that a full independent judicial inquiry?

Photo of Trevor SargentTrevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What did Prime Minister Blair say to the Taoiseach? Does he agree?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

His answer is that the Act has been passed by the British Parliament and that is the law. It is the only basis on which it will operate.

Photo of Trevor SargentTrevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Dictated by the security services.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Every one else in Britain says the same. We do not accept that. While it seems that political opinion in the UK differs little in this respect, we cannot put this forward as being what was envisaged in Weston Park. I deeply appreciate that we secured a full, independent, public and judicial inquiry into the Bloody Sunday case. However, I am not in a position to justify something which I am advised was not envisaged.

Photo of Martin FerrisMartin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Taoiseach raised with Prime Minister Blair the disgraceful statement from the Northern Ireland Office in response to the all-party motion unanimously agreed in this House? The Northern Ireland statement claimed the motion was both flawed and misleading. Is the Taoiseach aware this statement was issued before the debate took place in this House? If the Taoiseach has not already done so, will he protest, in the strongest possible terms, to the British Prime Minister? Has the Dáil motion been formally conveyed to the British Prime Minister by letter or by the Minister for Foreign Affairs? If so, can Members have a reply to it?

The Taoiseach has always expressed pessimism regarding the prospects of progress on the issue of collusion. There are powerful forces within the British political and military establishment who are blocking this and many other inquiries. Does the Taoiseach agree they must be faced down on the issue of collusion and if they are not confronted by Prime Minister Blair on this issue, they will continue to block the wider peace process?

As my party leader has asked in the past, will the Taoiseach call a special, specific summit with the British Prime Minister solely devoted to the issue of collusion?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The answer to the first question is "Yes". As I stated to Deputy Kenny, I was in 10 Downing Street on the day of the motion. Admittedly it was before the debate, but I conveyed the motion and the reason behind it. Since then, I have conveyed it to the Secretary of State, Mr. Hain, who has written to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, regarding this issue. The Minister will reply to it.

We secured a favourable position from the British Government regarding Bloody Sunday and many other issues. However, the response to this case is not in line with the strategy on which we worked for five years, starting with the Weston Park talks and followed by the great work performed by Judge Cory. Admittedly, there were delays in the process throughout this period. Then, in 2004 the British Government decided to change the law and move away from the 1921 Act, which delayed matters further. The form of the inquiry now proposed has been rejected as being inadequate by Judge Cory, the Finucane family, the Government, the Dáil and human rights groups, on the basic issue I have noted, namely, that the inquiry under the new law will not be regarded as being fully independent as we do not believe that the collusion issue will be properly addressed under this system.

There is no necessity for a separate summit. While Prime Minister Blair is probably fed up with listening to me raising this issue, I have an obligation to make him even more so. That is what I intend to do.