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

A firm commitment was made by the Taoiseach during the Twenty-ninth Dáil that a full-scale debate on collusion would be held following the publication of the report of Patrick MacEntee, SC, into the Garda and Government investigation of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974. The MacEntee report was published in April 2007. The promised debate was not held soon thereafter as promised, nor was it held during the remainder of the Twenty-ninth Dáil.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I ask the House to give attention, please.

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

The Minister for Education and Science is giving away schools.

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

Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. Only now has the Government finally scheduled this statement opportunity. This has been especially disappointing and frustrating for the families of victims of collusion. The form of the so-called debate is unsatisfactory as there is no motion and no proposal for action.

It is also frustrating in the extreme that this debate has been given a title that does not mention the word "collusion". The investigations by Mr. Justice Barron, the reports of the joint Oireachtas committee and the inquiry of Patrick MacEntee, SC, were not, as the title states vaguely, on "violent incidents arising from the conflict in Northern Ireland". They were on attacks, including mass murders, where British State collusion with Unionist paramilitaries was strongly indicated. Throughout the long search for truth on collusion, there has been an attempt by some to muddy the waters, a process that serves only further to shield those at the highest level in the British State who bore ultimate responsibility. I hope that muddying of the waters is not repeated in the remainder of this two-day opportunity.

Every singe death in the conflict was a tragedy. No family's grief counts less than any other and there should never be a hierarchy of victims. That is the overall context in which we address deaths arising from the conflict. However, it is necessary to be specific and to deal frankly and honestly with the issue of where responsibility lies and how and why many of the tragedies of our past took place.

In Ireland, as in conflicts across the world, the Government in power held all the advantages in terms of controlling the apparatus of the State, the legal system and, to a great extent, the mass media. The British Government tried to convince the world that it was a peacekeeper, a policeman, a neutral force keeping the warring sides apart. It tried to mask its central role in the conflict. It was for this reason that it resorted so extensively to collusion. It was better to have Unionist paramilitaries front the war than to have the international embarrassment of the British army and the RUC carrying out an open campaign of terror in the manner of the Black and Tans.

To the shame of successive Irish Governments they co-operated to a great extent with the British Government in its so-called security strategies. They turned a blind eye to collusion. British agents worked within the Garda. There was open co-operation with the RUC during the worst phase of its repression against the Nationalist community in the Six Counties. Political prisoners were extradited to face the Diplock Court system. Even as the Irish Government politely protested about the fate of the Birmingham Six, the Guildford Four and other victims of British State injustice, it was sending its citizens into that system. This is the reality which many in this House, now as in the past, are unwilling to state.

Let us make clear what this debate is about. It primarily concerns the acts of collusion or direct action by British forces which led to loss of life in this jurisdiction. These acts included the bombing of Belturbet, County Cavan, in December 1972 in which two teenage civilians were killed, Geraldine O'Reilly and Patrick Stanley; the Dublin bombings of December 1972 and January 1973 in which three bus workers were killed, George Bradshaw, Thomas Duffy and Thomas Douglas; the killing of Briege Porter and Oliver Boyce by the UDA near Burnfoot, County Donegal, in 1973; the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of May 1974 in which 33 people died, 26 in Dublin and seven in Monaghan, including people I knew personally, Peggy White, Jack Travers, Archie Harper, Patrick Askin, Thomas Campbell, George Williamson and Thomas Croarkin; the killing of IRA volunteer, John Francis Green in County Monaghan in January 1975, probably by a British army operative; the stabbing to death of civilian Christy Phelan near Sallins, County Kildare, in June 1975; the explosion at Dublin Airport in November 1975 in which John Hayes was killed; the Dundalk bombing of December 1975 in which two civilians were killed, Hugh Watters and Jack Rooney; the Castleblayney bombing of March 1976 in which one person, Patrick Mone, was killed; the killing of Seamus Ludlow in County Louth in May 1976; the killing of Sinn Féin councillor Eddie Fullerton in Donegal in May 1991; and the killing of IRA volunteer Martin Doherty in May 1994, having foiled an attempted bombing and mass murder at the Widow Scallan's pub in this city.

To these tragedies in this jurisdiction should be added the killing of three members of the Miami showband near Newry in July 1975. The web of collusion links their murders to that of the Dublin and Monaghan May 1974 bombings and to the John Francis Green murder. The link with British army Captain Robert Nairac and the Portadown UVF is also well known and is but one facet of the long history of collusion.

Understated as it was, the MacEntee report highlighted a massive failure on the part of this State to properly investigate the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of May 1974. The only logical explanation for what took place is a cover-up of collusion. Gross incompetence is not enough to explain the failure to investigate and the apparent destruction of records. The report again exposed the refusal of the British authorities to co-operate with a commission of inquiry established by the Oireachtas.

The Taoiseach expressed incredulity at the short duration of the so-called Garda investigation that followed. He can initiate an independent investigation of Garda inaction and into the mysterious loss of the relevant files in the hands of the Garda and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Why has he not acted on this element that is solely within his gift?

Prior to the publication of the MacEntee report, Sinn Féin published a Dáil motion on collusion that was drafted in consultation with groups such as the Pat Finucane Centre, the Justice for Eddie Fullerton Campaign, Justice for the Forgotten and Relatives for Justice. Such a motion should have formed the basis for this debate.

The key points we made in that motion must be restated. The findings of a variety of reports justify the demand for full, independent, public judicial inquiries including the Barron report which concluded that a cover-up involving British forces, the Garda and the Irish Government could not be ruled out in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings; the Cory report into the murder of Pat Finucane and the involvement of at least five agents of the British state in that one particular killing; the report of the independent international panel on collusion in sectarian killings, which concluded that in 24 of the 25 cases examined, including the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, there was "significant and credible evidence of involvement of police and military agents of the United Kingdom, both directly and in collusion with loyalist extremists"; the various Oireachtas committee reports on various acts of collusion; and the investigative report of the former Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Nuala O'Loan, into the circumstances surrounding the death of Raymond McCord junior and related matters which exposed the systemic reality and extent of collusion, including collusion in attacks undertaken by loyalist paramilitaries in the 26 Counties.

Both the British and Irish Governments have failed to establish the inquiries repeatedly sought by relatives seeking truth and justice. This is despite statements such as those by the Taoiseach as recently as 10 December 2007 when he said that the suffering of victims had been sharpened "by the clear evidence of collusion by the security forces in many murders". It is now nearly two years since the all-party Dáil motion of 8 March 2006 which called for the immediate establishment of a full, independent, public judicial inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane. The British Government has refused to establish such an inquiry. It persists in proposing a flawed form of inquiry which would be under the effective control of a British Minister. The Irish Government's case in calling for a full inquiry has been undermined not only by its own failure to establish collusion inquiries, but also its own Tribunals of Inquiry Bill.

No one can deny we are in need of new legislation to govern the work of tribunals. The existing legislation dates back as far as 1921. It must be clear to everyone that spiralling legal costs and the refusal of witnesses to co-operate with tribunals needs to be addressed. However, as the Tribunals of Inquiry Bill is currently drafted, Sinn Féin must oppose it. We believe the proposed legislation could be used by future governments to stop public inquiries from delivering the truth to the public and to the families of victims of collusion in particular.

The Bill as drafted is very similar to the British Inquiries Act. That Act is widely viewed as having been constructed to act as a barrier to a full public inquiry taking place into the murder of Pat Finucane. This Bill if passed would not only jeopardise the ability of any future tribunal to uncover the truth surrounding the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the murders of Seamus Ludlow, Councillor Eddie Fullerton and Martin Doherty among others, but it would also undermine the cases of all those in the Six Counties who are seeking inquiries into state collusion because the British Government could point to this legislation in order to justify its own.

This Bill would effectively give the Government power over whether to establish a tribunal of inquiry at all, its members and crucially its terms of reference. It would also effectively give the Government the power to suspend or dissolve a tribunal for unlimited reasons and to prevent the publication of a tribunal's report. These are very serious deficiencies. In our view, this is completely unacceptable and will not instil any confidence among either the general public or more crucially those who have been specifically affected and are seeking the full truth about events. The relatives and those representing victims of collusion have long sought full, independent and public inquiries. We must work together to ensure that no legislation is introduced that would jeopardise and compromise the independence of future inquiries that we have been seeking for so long.

Two months after the Dáil unanimously passed the all-party motion calling for an inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane, Ken Barrett, the only person convicted in connection with the murder, was released after serving three years. He was brought by the British Ministry of Defence to a secret hideout outside Ireland. In the case of Ken Barrett, a deal was done and a guilty plea ensured that there was no trial and no exposure of the central role of British forces in the murder. The same thing happened with the other British agent involved in the Finucane murder, Brian Nelson. Collusion is not only something that happened in the past, but it also continues up to the present day — a situation we must also confront. The British are clearly still protecting their agents. They have refused the demand of the Oireachtas for an inquiry.

I repeat Sinn Féin's demand for the Taoiseach to hold a special summit meeting with the British Prime Minister solely focused on the issue of collusion. It is the Taoiseach's responsibility to create such an opportunity to demand the British Government to provide access to all the original documents relating to the acts of collusion carried out in this jurisdiction that I have cited and indeed to the whole record of collusion in its possession. The demand should be made publicly and the Government's efforts should be open and witnessed not only by all opinion here, but also internationally. By such an approach the British Government's response, whatever it might be, would be equally open to global scrutiny. If it continues to refuse, it should face the censure of all nations. If the British Government continues to refuse, the Irish Government should act unilaterally and establish a full independent public judicial inquiry into all these British state-sponsored atrocities and with key international participation by invitation.

The Taoiseach and the Government must act on behalf of the citizens of Ireland and no further delay is excusable. The search for truth and justice regarding all these atrocities is far from over.

Tom Kitt (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this very important debate. I use the word "debate" deliberately. There has been some discussion on the issue of having statements. I wish to assure especially those in the Visitors Gallery and families of victims that this is an important debate affording people a chance to air their views and bring these issues into the public domain. As the Taoiseach has said, we can then decide collectively where we go from here.

With the extraordinary developments we have seen in Northern Ireland over the past year, no one on this island can doubt that this generation has an opportunity like no other — an opportunity for an inclusive society, a peaceful life and an agreed future, recognising the legitimate rights and aspirations of all. Our present and our future have not looked so bright for a long time as we would all agree. With that opportunity comes a profound responsibility. We must seize this chance and build on it. We must, in the words of the Good Friday Agreement, achieve the "peaceful and just society that would be the true memorial to the victims of violence". It is not an easy or a straightforward task. We must ensure that the future is built on stable foundations. In a democratic society, that means respect for truth, justice, human rights, accountability and transparency.

In a peaceful society, that means a collective commitment to good relations across divisions. It can also challenge people to move forward to some degree from the confrontation of the past to a shared future. In this moment of achievement and optimism, it is entirely appropriate that we look at the legacy of the past and how we might address it anew, in a way that will contribute to continuing and imbedding this process of positive change. To get there, we must look again at the awful legacies of the Troubles. First is the appalling human loss — of life, of loved ones, of wholeness of heart and of body. These cannot be made right. We are left simply with the duty to meet as fully as we can the lasting physical and psychological needs of those who have suffered most. The wider social and economic legacies of distrust and separation, sectarianism and deprivation, are enormous challenges that must be faced. Lingering questions are outstanding from the past as are contested histories and justifications that sow division in the present. Unsolved murders leave families in a cruel limbo, without closure or peace.

It is the allegations of State collusion that are perhaps the most difficult, casting shadows as they do, both on the families of victims as well as on the relationship of trust and the duty of care between citizen and State.

The Oireachtas has played a valuable role in bringing to light such events. Following a recommendation from the victims' commissioner, the late John Wilson, the Government established an independent commission of inquiry in 2000, initially led by the late Mr. Justice Liam Hamilton and subsequently by Mr. Justice Henry Barron. Its purpose was to undertake a thorough examination of certain atrocities committed by loyalist paramilitaries in this jurisdiction, including the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, the murder of Seamus Ludlow and the bombing of Kay's Tavern. The commission produced four reports, each of which was subsequently considered by a sub-committee of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. The sub-committee published each of the Barron reports in the course of its work and held public hearings. A corresponding series of four reports from the committee were published, which contained some stark findings.

The committee also acknowledged that the failure to make definitive conclusions in respect of the role of the security forces exacerbated the pain and suffering of the victims and their relatives. I wish to extend my condolences to those relatives, some of whom are in the Visitors Gallery. It is not our intention that our discussion would re-open wounds but we wish to help shine a light on the way forward. It is therefore important that their anxiety for truth and justice, arising from these reports, is widely understood. This is the reason the Taoiseach has asked the British Government to examine the findings of the Barron, Oireachtas sub-committee and MacEntee inquiries and this debate underlines that concern. This is a matter which the Government will pursue relentlessly.

We also remember just how difficult and deep-seated a conflict it was and how important it has been to change the political and security context in Northern Ireland. Policing and justice reform was an essential part of the Good Friday Agreement and one of its great successes. It was a project to reform the police and create an institution representative of, and working effectively for, all the people of Northern Ireland.

It was an enormous and emotive task to restore confidence across the community and build relationships around what had been a front line of conflict. It required considerable courage and vision by political leaders and by members of the police and security forces.

The construction of effective institutions of accountability and public representation was absolutely crucial. I pay tribute to the role of Nuala O'Loan as Police Ombudsman. I was privileged to meet her when I visited Northern Ireland as Minister for State at the Department of Foreign Affairs. I pay tribute to the independence, integrity and fearlessness she showed and which did so much to build the trust of the public in this new era of policing.

The policing board and district policing partnerships have also played a crucial role. Through the leadership of the SDLP and since last year with the decision of Sinn Féin to nominate members, relationships have been developed which have introduced new levels of responsiveness and transparency to policing. This is also shown by the efforts of the Police Ombudsman and the PSNI historical inquiries team to address outstanding cases from the past. As a result the context in Northern Ireland has been changed utterly. A new consensus on policing and justice adds greatly to the stability of the institutions and the stability and security of everyone. We must ensure that in questioning the events of the past, we do not ignore the achievements. Once more, the first reaction to failures and wrongdoing must be to ensure that measures are put in place to prevent them happening again and extraordinary progress has been made.

I look to the consultative group on the past, chaired by Lord Eames and Denis Bradley, to come forward with proposals on all the issues under discussion. It will be of great importance to look at the question of dealing with the past in a comprehensive way and I commend the group for its wide consultation.

There are examples from across the world of how difficult periods from the past have been addressed by different countries. I refer to South Africa and East Timor. I remind the Acting Chairman that he and I spent some time as parliamentarians in the southern African region dealing with many of these issues of healing the past.

We have examined the structures in place in other countries. I remember being in East Timor when I was Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and working with people such as Tom Hyland and others who were working closely with NGOs on the ground. They were dealing with the transition from a period of violence to one of peace. Irish Aid was known at that time as Irish Development Co-operation and it funded this process. The move from conflict to a peaceful society has been a challenge to deal with in South Africa, East Timor and in many other parts of the world. We have spoken to many people in these countries and studied how they have dealt with such situations. We can learn from each other. These are sensitive, complex issues but they all point to one fact, that we must get to the truth.

The variety of these approaches in different parts of the world confirms that any mechanism we might consider will have to take full account of the unique situation and nature of the conflict and settlement. Any new comprehensive approach will have strengths and weaknesses, difficulties and opportunities and it is only through proper consultation and dialogue that a way forward can be agreed, and it must be agreed. This is not an area where something can be pushed through or imposed from any quarter. We must recognise the great diversity of views on this question.

Everyone who has suffered has the right to be heard, North and South, elsewhere in these islands, victims in cases of collusion and victims of terrorist bombs. In all these cases those who simply wish to know the facts of what happened to their loved one, must be heard. Those who want to see the perpetrator of their own awful loss tried and put in jail, must be heard. Those who just want to tell the story of what happened to them and for it to be acknowledged and remembered, must be heard. Those who want nothing for themselves except to take their own suffering and story and make it part of a wider reconciliation, must be heard. Those who simply want to forget, to stop the debate on the past and be left to their own mourning and their own lives, must be heard. All these voices will be raised and listened to with emotion. Often people will hear only the other side being talked about and they will see selectivity and political motives at work. Sometimes they will be right and if the discussion is approached in a spirit of confrontation or sterile recrimination, then it will achieve nothing. However, I have heard many inspiring voices of those who have suffered most. I have heard many people who have experienced unspeakable suffering say that they wish to move on, that reconciliation not retribution is needed. I have heard straightforward requests for more services to help them cope, more facts to help them understand and more recognition by politicians of what has to be done to ensure their tragedy never happens to another family.

With the progress we have seen since last year it is perhaps a time when the questions of what we do from here can be asked with more generosity and openness than before and with a genuine mutual respect and the objective of a shared and honest understanding of our recent past. This objective has been taken forward by the work of a great number of civil society and community groups across Northern Ireland. This is a vital part of this public debate. It is a dialogue beyond the political level, inclusive of the whole of the society and within local communities most affected by the conflict.

I commend to the House the work of Healing Through Remembering, a cross-community organisation bringing together representatives from North and South and Britain, of victims' groups, churches, academics, community and youth organisations. They have produced reports and recommendations on issues including truth recovery, commemoration, acknowledgement and story telling.

These are thoughtful and well-researched documents that deserve careful consideration. They would serve as a very useful reference for the work of the consultative group on the past. There are no easy or straightforward answers to these issues. However, I am confident that this House, and the people in general have a positive role to play in this debate and in this collective effort to ensure the peace we have found on this island is a just and a lasting one.

Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Crawford.

First I wish to express my sympathy to the relatives of the victims of terrorist atrocities which is the subject of the discussion, many of whom have come to listen to this debate. They have suffered a great deal but they have also been tireless in their efforts to establish the facts surrounding the loss of their loved ones. My colleagues and I have supported their calls for today's debate and I welcome everyone to the Dáil.

Notwithstanding that the party Whips have agreed to set time aside for statements on this important topic, I regret that we did not achieve an all-party motion which was my understanding and which was reported in the media. I am not sure of the circumstances surrounding what happened but I wish to place on record that in spite of what the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt said, no formal contact was made with the Fine Gael Party with a view to agreeing or constructing a motion which would have given far greater effect to the debate taking place yesterday and today.

The victims of crime and terrorism and their families are often ignored, neglected and overlooked by official authorities and organs of State. The weak position of victims in Irish law is an issue that Fine Gael is striving to address, having recently published an extensive Private Members' Bill aimed at enhancing victims' rights and placing the victim at the centre of the justice system. In regard to the atrocities investigated by the Barron reports, the fact that the victims and their families were overlooked is exacerbated by the incompetent handling of the investigations into the various atrocities. Quite simply, the victims and their families were let down by the State. Today's Dáil statements are part of an effort to redress this wrong. We fully recognise the desire of victims and their families to establish the truth and the facts and not only to learn from what happened but to be able to piece together the difficult issues that remain outstanding.

I acknowledge the work of my colleagues on the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights in this area. Four sub-committees examined the four Barron reports and, reading the sub-committees' publications, it is obvious that a huge amount of work went into the committee hearings.

The legacy of the Troubles casts a long shadow over the lives of people on the island of Ireland. Nowhere is this more deeply felt than among the victims of violence and their relatives. I agree with much of what the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, has said in this regard. We have made great strides in moving on from a painful past when politically-motivated violence was a daily occurrence. The fully functioning power-sharing executive in Northern Ireland is a living testament to how far we have come in the past decade since the Good Friday Agreement was signed in April 1998.

A vital component of the peace process included a recognition that the suffering of victims of violence be recognised and addressed and, to this end, a victims commission was established, the work of which I acknowledge. The commission's 1999 report identified the need for further investigation into certain specific crimes, primarily the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974, which was the worst single day of violence during the Troubles, but also including other bombings in Dublin, Dundalk and elsewhere; and the murder of Seamus Ludlow on 1 May 1976. That no prosecutions were made following these crimes has, naturally, been a cause of great distress to the victims' families.

The consequent establishment of what became known as the Barron inquiry constituted a key turning point for those who had sought an inquiry into atrocities perpetrated in the Republic during the Troubles. The detailed consideration of the Barron reports by the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, the establishment of the MacEntee inquiry and today's provision of time for statements in the Dáil underlines the commitment of the Oireachtas to honouring the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement, and, in particular, its recommendations in respect of the victims of violence during the Troubles. The purpose and value of any inquiry is not just to establish facts; it is vital that lessons be learned from the past. Where procedures and practices were shown to be flawed or wrong, it is essential that we learn from these and put mechanisms in place to improve systems.

The Government in power in 1974 at the time of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings has come in for severe criticism for its handling of the aftermath of the atrocities. While I recognise that in many cases criticism is warranted, it is impossible to judge the past by the standards of the present. The fact that it took 25 years for the victims of relatives of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings to secure a meeting with a Taoiseach gives some sense of the vital role played by the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 in creating the circumstances in which we could move forward into a better future while taking important lessons from the difficulties of the past. I understand the deeply felt desire of the families of the victims for truth and justice and I reaffirm the commitment of the Fine Gael Party to do all we can as Members of the Oireachtas to ensure that those responsible for the crimes investigated by the Barron and MacEntee reports are brought to justice.

The range of reports into various atrocities perpetrated during the Troubles, including the Barron, MacEntee and O'Loan reports, suggest that in some cases there was a degree of collusion between the security forces and loyalist paramilitaries. This shocking finding reminds us of the warped political culture that existed in Northern Ireland until very recently. The collusion by those entrusted with the safety of the citizens with terrorists in the murder of innocents is a gross violation of trust, principle and law and a situation that should never be tolerated by any Government. Collusion has exacerbated the suffering of victims of terrorism and their families and must be condemned in absolute terms.

From a personal point of view, as Fine Gael spokesperson on Justice, Equality and Law Reform, I am particularly concerned with the revelation of the MacEntee report into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings that the Garda Síochána failed to maintain the integrity of its files. This finding is extremely disturbing. The destruction or loss of documentation in regard to the bombings is totally unacceptable and can only add to the pain of the victims' relatives, friends and communities. It is vital that lessons are taken from this revelation and that we can ensure this never happens again. In recent years many changes have been introduced to the Garda Síochána as a result of various inquiries and tribunals and the essential import of maintaining files and carefully preserving evidence is underlined for us by the MacEntee report.

Notwithstanding our own bleak record to preserve documentation and evidence, like my colleagues, I am disappointed by the lack of co-operation from the British Government in regard to the attempts by the Irish Government to investigate atrocities carried out here during the Troubles. I acknowledge what the Taoiseach said and I urge him and his colleagues to do all they can to secure the release of the necessary documents from the British Government archives and files. I hope that a mechanism can be found through the various British-Irish bodies, in particular, the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body, of which my colleague, Deputy Crawford, has for many years been a proud and active member. I was a member of the body myself. Perhaps consideration might be given at some level towards moving on matters through the auspices of that body. I hope the Taoiseach will avail of the opportunity presented by his meetings with Prime Minister Gordon Brown to ensure we can advance this issue which, regrettably, has been neglected by the British authorities.

I again express my sympathy to the families of the victims. I understand the need on their behalf and on behalf of all of us for the establishment of the facts in regard to the loss of loved ones in order to achieve closure and honour their memories in an acceptable way. Fine Gael will continue to support the victims in that quest.

Seymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome this opportunity to speak on issues which affected so many people north and south of the Border during the past 40 years. I, too, offer my sympathy to all those who lost loved ones or whose loved ones were maimed. I purposely decided not to name any individuals in this debate. As the Taoiseach stated last night, 3,700 people lost their lives by various means in the Troubles in the past 40 years and 40,000 suffered serious injury. That is the legacy we have to debate today.

I decry the fact that when names were mentioned the only Member of this House who lost his life in those Troubles was ignored. The former Deputy and Senator, Billy Fox, was a close personal friend of mine. He was shot in the back solely because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. That is part of the legacy of the Troubles. My party leader, Deputy Enda Kenny, and our spokesperson on Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Charlie Flanagan, who has already spoken, deal with the legal and structural issues, not just today but over the years, in trying to get as much information as possible for those who have suffered as a result of bombing and murders from whatever source. Those in this House who accused me of not getting involved may have seen in the past 24 hours how the structures work. It is not the ordinary backbenchers but my party leader, Deputy Kenny, who leads the questions on issues like this, as does the parliamentary party leader of Sinn Féin, Deputy Ó Caoláin, and others, but I have been there to support every effort to bring forth information and inquiries where necessary.

Clearly, the issue of the Monaghan bombing has been close to my heart. Some of those murdered by the bomb were among my closest friends. Others maimed for life were similarly close. After my election to Dáil Éireann, I made it my business to contact as many as possible of the families who had suffered from that bomb and all but one made it clear to me that their main interest was in moving on with their lives rather than in getting involved in any public debate.

Since then, much of the debate during Taoiseach's question time has been led by my party leader not just on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, but on the Pat Finucane case and others and it is clear that there are still many questions to be answered. I encourage the Taoiseach — I was a little disappointed by his speech last night — and his Ministers to use their current close relationship with their counterparts in the UK to co-operate fully with the different inquiries.

For me, the main issue is that we move on and that we cement the peace process which, hopefully, will see an end to the times, which I remember as and which some seem to forget were nothing short of open war. In war, things happen of which nobody or no party can be proud. Only this morning I spoke to a young man who was travelling right behind an unmarked van when it blew up in front of him, murdering all those inside. If his mother had driven their vehicle up along the side of the van at the traffic lights, he certainly would not be here today. He was a close friend, in fact, a grandson, of one of those murdered in the Monaghan bomb.

I also clearly remember the Omagh bombing to which there are still no answers, even though it happened much more recently than the others. Many victims of the Omagh bomb have come to my office over the years in desperation to find answers.

The death of Mr. Paul Quinn is another tragic example of recent times and, unfortunately, we have learned only in the past few days that other young men are under threat. It is important to remember that while the work of Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness, as First Minister and Deputy First Minister in Northern Ireland, rightly gets much good publicity, there are still serious intimidation and beatings which go virtually unpublished, together with other types of intimidation within both the hardline republican and loyalist areas. I know this from first-hand advice from friends living in both types of areas. While we must support in every way possible those who have suffered, our main object is to ensure it stops and never happens again.

I was in a house one night and said to the family that we must move on. I did not know at that time that the lady's brother was one of those murdered, shot in the back at his place of worship. There was no inquiry.

I, too, want to be associated with the sympathy expressed to those who died not only in the Monaghan bomb, but in Belturbet, Castleblaney and the other places. I live only a few miles from the Border and I knew many of the small farmers who died north of the Border. I knew many of the people from both sides of the religious and political divide who were murdered just because they were from the wrong religion or in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I urge the Taoiseach, as has been sought in the letter from Justice for the Forgotten, to ensure that access is given to all information relating to the atrocities that are being inquired into. It is vital, if there is to be true reconciliation, that these matters are dealt with in a proper fashion. Above all else, we must deal with the small number of those on both sides who want to continue to create trouble and are in the process of buying guns, bombs, etc. They must be brought to justice and stopped, once and for all.

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy O'Connor.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to contribute briefly to this debate. It is a significant debate at a time when the steady progress with the peace process in the North has come to a stage where we are examining historically, reflecting on and considering both the short and long-term implications of many of the incidents.

A number of speakers have raised as a starting point of this debate the 3,700 people who were killed in the Troubles in Northern Ireland. There were countless more seriously injured, with families bereaved and traumatised as a result. These statistics tell us forcefully why thousands continue to question why loved ones had to die or suffer grievous physical and emotional injury through the period of the Troubles. These sufferings must be addressed if reconciliation is to develop, grow and take hold in the Six Counties. We all accept that it will take time. I am sure both Governments appreciate that and I am sure the Ministers directly involved on both sides realise it as well.

My constituency of Louth was at the coalface of the Troubles in the North from the late 1960s until the peace process took hold in the 1990s. Too many brutal murders were committed during that time. A number of them have been the subject of inquiry, notably the Barron inquiries, and two cases in particular.

The first of these was the brutal murder of an unmarried forestry worker, Mr. Seamus Ludlow, just north of Dundalk in May 1976. To date, nobody has been prosecuted for that crime. The brutal murder of Mr. Ludlow has had a profound effect on his family. Over the years they have worked tirelessly to get to the truth of his murder and it is a great credit to them that their determination to get to the truth is as strong today as it was in May 1976. I sincerely hope that a suitable public inquiry formula can be agreed to allow the circumstances surrounding the case to be fully and satisfactorily examined and reported on.

The bombing of Kay's Tavern in Crowe Street in Dundalk in December 1975 was another incident in Louth. Two people were killed and many were injured. The Barron inquiry reported that the UVF and the British security forces colluded in the attack on Donnelly's Bar in Silverbridge the same evening. The obvious question is whether the British security forces were aware of the bombing in Dundalk on the same day. The Barron report concluded that a UVF gang from Glenanne were behind the shootings in Silverbridge. The Barron report further concluded that the British security forces should have known who were responsible for the Dundalk bombings. However, without proof of identity of those involved in the bombing, it is difficult to prove or disprove collusion in that case.

At this point in time, so many years on from the much desired and appreciated peace process, is it possible to develop a template to bring about reconciliation and forgiveness in the North? One has only to listen to the family members of those who have been bereaved to understand that the need for truth is essential for healing. The feeling that somebody knows something they are not divulging clearly prolongs the agony for families. At a minimum, it seems to me that an evaluation of the truth and reconciliation formula in South Africa is obligatory. Regarding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa and its operation over a long period, I suppose people will argue that the circumstances in South Africa and in the North of Ireland are different in many respects. In other respects, there are many similarities between the two and, at a minimum, we in this House should keep an open mind about the possible benefits of having a truth and reconciliation commission established for people who have been bereaved and who have had unexplained brutal murders visited on their families and on their circle of friends. This offers the opportunity for them and perpetrators to come before the commission and explain the circumstances.

Recently in Monaghan, just across the Border from south Armagh, the brutal murder of Paul Quinn occurred. One need only attend some of the numerous public meetings being held and organised by members of the local community in the area where he lived, Cullyhanna, and the wider area to appreciate the significant impact his murder had on the community as a whole. One can only speculate on the divisiveness this has caused. The perpetrators live in the community and neighbours of Paul live cheek by jowl with them and must meet and pass them on the road each day. I cannot forget either the sadness visited on the Cooley Peninsula when the late Tom Oliver was brutally murdered. I know his family well and I am aware of how they have been affected by his murder.

Dealing with these issues is part of the healing process. I am concerned, however, that our approach is on a piecemeal basis, with no real comprehensive approach. The down-off-the-shelf formula to suit every circumstance may not be readily available, but we need to look further than providing an inquiry here and there. We need to consider the totality of the murders, beatings and terrorism visited on so many people over the period of the Troubles and get a structure in place that will allow bereaved people to come and get answers and find out the circumstances of the murder or bereavement they suffered.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. I regret there was some criticism yesterday on the Order of Business of the terms under which we are taking this item. The Taoiseach made a reasonable statement in that regard. He also set the tone for this debate when he said the debate was on a matter of the greatest national importance. He went on to say it was about a series of atrocities perpetrated on innocent people in our country, including the bombings of May 1994 in Dublin and Monaghan, which saw the greatest loss of life in a single day during the Troubles. The Taoiseach said the debate is about murder, pure and simple, responsibility for those murders, justice for victims and how victims and survivors were and are treated and that while it is certainly about the past, it is also about the future.

The Taoiseach was accurate in what he said and I support him in that. It is vital we have this debate and that while we deal with some issues of the past, we also look forward. This message was borne out for me several times recently. When I was appointed by the Taoiseach as a member of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body, an appointment I was pleased to accept, I was welcomed at my first meeting in Oxford by the joint chairpersons, our own Deputy Niall Blaney and Mr. Paul Murphy, the former Northern Secretary. We spent some of the time at that session reminding ourselves, as Members from all the parliaments on these islands, that we had moved on from the past and from a time when people were killed and maimed and now need to look forward. This very much sums up for me where we are at with regard to this debate.

The effect of the message also came home to me when I drove from Tallaght through the North in the autumn of last year to Armagh to act as a delegate to the SDLP conference. I found my journey a remarkable experience, although some colleagues who travel that road often may not understand the effect it had on me. I had not crossed the Border for some time and hesitated as I entered Keady, expecting to be stopped, but of course I was not. Simple changes like that show how we have moved on. It is important that in debates such as this we are not afraid to point out that things are more normal now. There are still some who do not agree with our peaceful ideals and we must deal with them.

Deputy Crawford mentioned the terrible murder of Paul Quinn. I spoke to a number of people about the murder at the SDLP conference and at the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body meeting. I also raised Dáil questions on the matter. I express my solidarity and sympathy to those affected by that horrendous murder. I offer my sympathy to all the victims of violence over the past 30 odd years. I appreciate the contact I have received from victims' families, including some in my constituency, in recent months. It is only right that we articulate the concerns of these people and I would be happy to be part of that process.

The extent of the historic breakthrough that has been achieved in Northern Ireland is remarkable. Since May 2007, we have shared devolved Government in Northern Ireland, commanding support from both communities and all political parties. I am glad that the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, representatives of two communities which had long held opposing visions for the North's constitutional future, are working together effectively in the interests of all the people of Northern Ireland. I understand disagreements are worked out through negotiation and compromise. It is clear that centuries-old divisions are being left behind, which is very welcome.

I welcome in particular the establishment of the Consultative Group on the Past and the Northern Ireland Victims Commission, which was established by former British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Peter Hain. I am not sure whether I should send him good wishes, but all politicians should be sorry when they see another politician in some bother. While not everyone will agree, he made a contribution. I understand the purpose of the consultative group is to seek views from across the community on the best way to deal with the legacy of the Troubles. The group is co-chaired by Lord Robin Eames and Denis Bradley, people we know well.

The Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, have welcomed the establishment of the group. The Government has consistently stated that dealing with the past is crucial and requires our ongoing attention. It has also stressed the importance of wide consultation, as well as adequately addressing the needs of victims, something I support strongly. The Taoiseach met the consultative group during its visit to Dublin last November. I understand the Minister for Foreign Affairs will meet the group as its work continues.

Many issues will fall under the remit of the group's agenda and I welcome two in particular. There are always issues with regard to commemorations. A constituent of mine, for example, contacts me regularly to suggest the famine should be commemorated, which is something I support. I understand there is a proposal on the table for a day of remembrance or reflection, as suggested by the healing through remembering group. This would be a worthwhile exercise and I hope it will be undertaken as a joint North-South initiative. In my community and public life I have done much networking with Northern politicians and as a result I feel it is important we do this.

There was a little criticism about this debate and how it is being handled. I have listened to much of the debate here and feel it is right we in this Parliament should take the opportunity to voice our concerns about these matters. Deputy Finian McGrath and I were members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights when the Barron report and other reports were furnished. I sat through much of that horrendous evidence. There are issues in the North but there are also issues in the South where there is a need for closure. The Taoiseach was correct yesterday to put it up to the British Government again to do something about this. I recall Paul Murphy, when he was Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, delicately declining an invitation for him and his predecessors to appear before the justice committee. That was a pity. However, contacts in that regard should continue. I am pleased to have had this opportunity to make a brief contribution to the debate.

Joe McHugh (Donegal North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As a public representative for a Border area, representing a vast area close to Derry city, I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important matter. I also welcome the opportunity to put on record how far we have come and the further journey we must make, probably a similar distance, to find truth and closure for the people and families who have lost loved ones. The quest for truth and justice is paramount at this important juncture of the peace process.

In 1996 we were fortunate to have an extensive peace and reconciliation programme, in which all Governments and parties were involved, including Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil. I also acknowledge the efforts of Sinn Féin, the Green Party, the Progressive Democrats and Independents. It was an ADM/CPA funded peace and reconciliation programme. That was a first stage where communities could interface with each other and begin the journey of building trust by seeing they could be in the same room as people they perceived to be different in disposition and attitude. I commend everybody involved in the peace and reconciliation programme through to PEACE II. They were not just ambitious but also courageous people who decided to work on a cross-Border basis. They worked hard and diligently bringing communities from different sides of the divide and different religious backgrounds together. They brought the peace process to where it is today. At community and grassroots level they created an interface that had not happened previously. That built a platform and mechanism whereby the peace process could evolve, as it subsequently did.

The next chapter of the peace process was the political ambition to get the Assembly up and running. Fortunately, that did take place. We believed it would happen but many of us still watch in disbelief the politicians from different poles of the political spectrum sitting and working together. It is most welcome.

The next stage in the process is the most important, the quest for truth and justice. This seeks to bring closure for families and campaigners who have worked vociferously and diligently to have independent investigations carried out to get to the truth about collusion among the security forces and terrorist organisations. We must heed these representative groups and the individuals and families who have lost loved ones. We have a political obligation and are accountable to these people. If we do not get closure on activities that happened over the past 30 years, we will not evolve as a democratic society and the peace process will be derailed. We must open some type of forum which people can enter safely, where the truth can be told and where proper information can be provided.

I commend my party leader, Deputy Enda Kenny, on taking a courageous step yesterday in terms of using the east-west plank of the Good Friday Agreement to secure the release of documentation and information on many examples of collusion over the past 30 years. I represent Donegal North-East and today I received a telephone call, for the first time, from a member of the Fullerton family, Amanda Fullerton, about the murder of her father over 30 years ago. It is an example of the maturity of spirit that exists in politics in Ireland at present that people are reaching out to all political parties in seeking the truth and getting investigations started into the murder of their loved ones. Similarly, Deputy Seymour Crawford, who spoke earlier, lost a very close friend with the death of Billy Fox 30 years ago. People such as Amanda Fullerton and Deputy Seymour Crawford are simply looking for the truth to be told and to overcome the insurmountable obstacles that were placed in their paths during the past turbulent 30 years.

Deputy Brendan Smith from the Border county of Cavan who is present today is a former co-chairman of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body. He was vociferous and proactive in working for a peace settlement. Yesterday, the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body called for proposals and suggestions on how the body should move forward. I do not wish to see the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body dissolve. An element of trust has been built up over the years through the good work it has done. The current co-chairman is Deputy Niall Blaney from my constituency. It is important that we use the body proactively to explore how best to move forward in the quest for an international truth commission.

The body offers that unique opportunity. It includes politicians from Scotland, Wales, England, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. My colleague, Deputy Arthur Morgan, shares a strong relationship with many of the politicians across the water. In fact, only recently he shared a beer with Lord Dubbs in Oxfordshire. It is an example of how this democracy has moved forward. We should build upon that and use the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body. I seek support in this regard from Deputy Morgan and Deputy Brendan Smith who have strong relationships with current members of the body. I notice that Deputy Pat Carey, another former Chairman of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body, has just come into the House. A tremendous amount of trust has been built up with that organisation. We should use it to explore the truth. Perhaps we should consider establishing some form of commission, in line with international best practice. We should look at what was done in places like South Africa before we debate the possibility of developing a similar structure. The British-Irish Interparliamentary Body will not be moving forward if we do not have something to cling to. I am sure the Ministers of State, Deputies Smith and Pat Carey, will agree in the context of a discussion on legacies that it would be wrong to allow good work that was done over the years in building trust within the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body to dissipate.

I commend Robin Eames and Denis Bradley on the pivotal role they played in starting this process, particularly with their work on the Consultative Group on the Past in Northern Ireland. It is important that we keep them involved in this process, which is in its embryonic stages. Their expertise could be used if we are to proceed with the proposal I have made in respect of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body. It is important that Mr. Eames and Mr. Bradley meet the interparliamentary body at the earliest possible stage.

Various groups like Justice for the Forgotten have been campaigning for years. They possibly think they have been campaigning for too long. They do not have a proper platform on which they can air their own suggestions. This is not just a political process in which politicians try to make progress — it is important that representative groups and families are also involved in the debate at this juncture. As I have already said, the peace process is at a watershed at this point. Proper lines of communication should be kept open with each of the many people who have been affected by the Troubles. At the same time, we have a duty to provide for accountability in that area.

I wish to return to the initial point I made about the EU Programme for Peace and Reconciliation. Its successor, PEACE ll, focused on the legacy of the conflict in Northern Ireland. Funding opportunities are available to those who wish to explore the legacy of the conflict. It is not a question of funding, as moneys and people with expertise are available to bring this forward. All that is required is the actual political will. The Taoiseach said yesterday that he is willing to go the extra yard to move this process forward. In fairness, we have not heard any proposals about how that might happen. My party leader, Deputy Kenny, who is also willing to go the extra yard, has placed a great deal of emphasis on the third element of the Good Friday Agreement — the development of east-west bodies. We cannot do this in an insular or self-determined way. We cannot solve these problems on our own because they are shared by everybody in the United Kingdom, Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland. These issues do not affect people in small or parochial areas, such as the Border counties — they affect everybody. It is important that we think thoroughly about the process we will undertake. The only way to make progress is to bring everybody into the debate.

As politicians, we are obliged to get on with our day-to-day business. We spend a great deal of our time reacting to events. We tend to look two or more months down the line — at the next budget, for example. We can facilitate proper procedures if we take the representative groups seriously. The Government has a duty to invite such groups to address the Cabinet as well as forums like the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body. The Taoiseach said he has met these people in his clinics in St. Luke's and elsewhere. A proper mechanism is needed so these people can be heard. I am not sure how that will happen. Politicians should be guided by the experience and expertise of those who have been through the ordeal of campaigning for over 30 years. We sometimes get carried away with ourselves and think we have all the answers. We feel we have to tell those in the gallery and the electorate what they want to hear. We all fall into that trap. We need to tap into what people have learned from their experiences. Those who have been looking for justice for over 30 years should be invited to participate in this debate. We need to communicate with them.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputies Conlon and Finian McGrath.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I recognise the input of the Taoiseach, who established the original investigations which led to the publication of the Hamilton report, the Barron report, the McEntee report and the Cory report. The various investigative commissions, which did great work to bring us to where we are today, have produced excellent reports. The conclusions in the fourth interim report confirmed what many of us living in Border areas knew for some time — that there was collusion in many of the atrocities. A report published by an Oireachtas sub-committee states that there is "no doubt that collusion between the British security forces and terrorists was behind many if not all of the atrocities that are considered in this report". That is obviously a matter of great concern. The sub-committee states in its report that it dealt with 25 cases, involving 76 murders, and found evidence of collusion with the security forces in 24 of those cases, involving 74 murders. As a representative of a Border area which is obviously close to counties like Armagh, Tyrone and Louth, I am concerned by the sub-committee's findings, particularly in relation to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

I recognise the contribution of Justice for the Forgotten and people like Don Mullen over many years. It is encouraging that so much progress has been made at this stage. However, it is a matter of concern to everyone in the House that the different commissions, the Oireachtas sub-committee and the Oireachtas joint committee, which is also entitled to some praise, were unable to conclude their work because they did not get the co-operation of the authorities in Britain. It is not too late for those authorities to hand over their documents. It would help to bring these investigations to a conclusion, satisfy the people and, above all, bring some comfort to the relatives and friends of the victims.

Some 3,700 people were killed and approximately 40,000 people were injured during the Troubles. While we can look at individual atrocities, it is important that we recognise that every one of the atrocities in which those people were killed or injured was a tragedy for the relatives and friends of the deceased. We must be sensitive to that when we select some cases for further examination. It is important that we recognise that it does not matter which side of the community or the Border those who were killed and injured came from. Recently, there was an appalling atrocity in my constituency. A young man, Paul Quinn, was beaten to death with iron bars and it is alleged that the perpetrators came from County Armagh. This murder has rightly been condemned by all Members of the House and all decent people outside the House. It is important that people who have information about this crime, of whom there must be many, go to the Garda or to the PSNI. This is not just so that the Quinn family can have some closure in this tragic situation but also because it is important, particularly for the people of County Armagh and for those of Ireland, that the perpetrators of such crimes are brought to justice.

We gratefully recognise the establishment of the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly and the progress that has been made over the years and we look forward to a much more normal society in which people can live. However, it is important for the victims of the many atrocities that have taken place and for their families, relatives and friends that we bring closure to these cases. This can be achieved, from the point of view of today's discussion on the Barron report, if the British Government comes forward and gives the information it has in its possession.

Margaret Conlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to this debate. Like my constituency colleague, I too come from a Border county, where the Troubles, and this event in particular, have had a major impact. As has been said, the terrible atrocities that took place in Monaghan and Dublin in May 1974 represented the greatest loss of human life in any single day during the Troubles. For me it is a vague memory, but unfortunately for the survivors and the victims' families the memory is all too clear. I am disgusted and horrified that collusion took place. It is evident that the British Government has indeed frustrated attempts to obtain the truth about these and similar incidents for which there is credible evidence of collusion. There cannot be true closure for the families of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings until the full truth about collusion comes to the surface and responsibility is apportioned. This must no longer be swept under the carpet. Somebody must be held accountable.

It is a bit rich for the British Government to take a strong and vociferous stand on international terrorism while remaining mute on the issue of its former State-sponsored terrorism in the form of collusion. As Mr. Justice Barron noted, the value of his report "was reduced by the [British Government's] reluctance to make original documents available and the refusal to supply other information on security grounds." I request that all documentation and information of the British state be made available to allow, once and for all, a truly complete report on collusion. If this does not happen, the issue will follow the British Government for ever until it eventually releases the documents. It should do this for the sake of the survivors and the families and in view of the current era of political accommodation, with co-operation taking place between the DUP and Sinn Féin in Northern Ireland.

I concur with the recommendation of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights sub-committee on the Barron report that a historical inquiries team be established to investigate unresolved crimes connected with the Troubles and that this link up with a similar body in Northern Ireland. I believe and hope this will be recommended by the Eames-Bradley Consultative Group on the Past. I welcome the clear intention of this group to tackle collusion. It is also important that a full and independent inquiry be established into the murder of Pat Finucane.

Although progress is slow, it is taking place. For example, last week's announcement of the establishment of four victims commissioners for Northern Ireland to work on behalf of victims and survivors is to be welcomed. I acknowledge the work of my constituency colleague, the late John Wilson, as a victims commissioner and of Nuala O'Loan, whose tireless work as Police Ombudsman did a lot to instil Nationalist confidence in the North's new police force. In recent times we have witnessed the co-operation of the Garda Síochána in the murder investigation following the death of Paul Quinn in my constituency, which is a welcome advance and which I hope will bring the perpetrators of this heinous crime to justice.

Although these are all progressive steps, the British Government's current intransigence prevents closure for the survivors and the victims' families. As a Government TD, I call on the British Government to provide this closure. It is necessary to realise that those affected by the tragedies are entitled to the truth. We have come a long way since 1974, but the memory of this terrible event lives on in the minds of the survivors and the victims' families. They must no longer be forgotten. They have a right to truth and justice.

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

I thank the Cathaoirleach for the opportunity of speaking on this very important debate on violent incidents arising from the conflict in Northern Ireland. I wish to use this opportunity to express my deepest sympathy to the victims and their families. As part of the healing process they deserve truth, openness and, above all, justice.

I was a member of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights sub-committee on the Barron report. The oral and written submissions had a tremendous impact on all the sub-committee members. I took a minority view and supported the calls of the family members for a full public inquiry. I thank and commend all those who spoke at our hearings. Today I will focus my views on that report and, in particular, on the issue of collusion.

There are some in this State and in other jurisdictions who wish to walk away from this issue, but I have no intention of turning my back or staying silent in the face of strong evidence that the British security forces were involved in collusion. We owe it to the victims, their families, our citizens and future generations. The reality is that the conflict in the North, which continued for more than 30 years, was a dirty war. The only way to ensure that these or similar actions do not happen on this island ever again is to send out a strong, clear message that such actions will not go unchecked.

I wish to highlight the strong findings of the sub-committee on the fourth Barron report, which explicitly acknowledged the reality of British security force collusion in criminal activities in this jurisdiction. Collusion is a separate, discrete facet of the Northern conflict that needs to be specifically addressed by this House, and I share the concerns expressed yesterday about the absence of the word "collusion" in the original statement. I also support the idea of putting a motion to the House for debate on which we can all agree. We owe it to the families and to those who genuinely want truth and justice. I emphasise that these are governmental findings and that the committee requested the guidance of the House on the actions to be taken with regard to these findings. The Taoiseach, in his speech at the unveiling of the memorial to the Miami Showband last month, acknowledged the clear evidence of collusion by the security forces in many of these murders, as has been made clear in several reports over the years, and reiterated the Government's support for the families in their quest for answers. We will take another step when there is a full debate in the Dáil.

These issues demand and deserve the attention of our national Parliament. We must ask ourselves what steps must be taken. Today I propose a step. I call on the British Government, as a sign of its good faith in dealing with the legacy of the Northern conflict, to provide access to all documents relating to atrocities in this jurisdiction which are currently being withheld.

On a more general level, I note that the issue of collusion is more significant now than at any time for many years, with the British Government appointing the independent Eames-Bradley Consultative Group on the Past to make recommendations on the legacy of the past. Members of the group have stated that they saw the Stevens archive on collusion and were deeply shocked by it. I say again that they were deeply shocked by it. What will come out is worse than many people think. The group will make its report to the British Government in June 2008 and has made clear that recommendations regarding British responsibility for collusion and criminal activities will be included.

The report of the Barron sub-committee contained the following important conclusions:

The sub-committee was left in no doubt that collusion between the British security forces and terrorists was behind many if not all of the atrocities that were considered in this report. It was horrified that persons who were employed by the British administration to preserve peace and to protect people were engaged in the creation of violence and the butchering of innocent victims.

The sub-committee believes that unless the full truth about collusion is established and those involved either admit or are fixed with responsibility then there cannot be closure for the families.

The sub-committee further believes that unless the full truth about collusion is established and those involved either admit or are fixed with responsibility then there is always the risk of what occurred in the 1970s occurring again some day. We are of the view that these matters cannot be swept under the carpet.

The sub-committee is of the view that given that we are dealing with acts of international terrorism that were colluded in by the British security forces, the British Government cannot legitimately refuse to co-operate with investigations and attempts to get to the truth.

The sub-committee notes that the British Cabinet was aware of the level to which the security forces had been infiltrated by terrorists and we believe that its inadequate response to this knowledge permitted the problem to continue and to grow.

The sub-committee has the support of all Members of this House. The sub-committee has no doubt that there was collusion between members of the British security forces and loyalist paramilitaries and that this was known at Cabinet level. The British Government has frustrated attempts to get to the truth about these and other incidences where there was credible evidence of collusion. This debate is an opportunity for the Irish Government to put pressure on the British Government to help those bereaved as a result of collusion.

Our Government should at least call on the British Government as an act of good faith to make all original files which may relate to the issues inquired into by Mr. Justice Barron accessible to the appropriate bodies in our jurisdiction. This would show the British Government is genuine in its support of the peace process and, more importantly, of the families of those murdered as a result of collusion. I want to send a strong message to the British Government that these acts should not have been allowed to happen in the past and will not be allowed to happen again. In the words of our sub-committee: "What occurred in respect of these atrocities must, quite simply, never ever be allowed to happen again". The only way to ensure that these or similar actions do not happen in this island again is to send a clear message that these actions will not go unchecked.

I commend Justice for the Forgotten, the Pat Finucane Centre and the Fay, Finucane, O'Neill and other families for their work, courage and dignity in their search for truth. I will always support them to the bitter end.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Kathleen Lynch.

I am glad to have this opportunity to speak on this issue, particularly as I had requested a debate several times from the Government on this issue. I am not happy that the format is a series of statements rather than a debate on a motion.

Many terrible, unforgivable atrocities were committed in the name of Ireland and Ulster over 30 years of violence in Northern Ireland. The violence occasionally spilled over into this jurisdiction. In many cases, nobody was brought to justice for those atrocities and many relatives still grieve for the loss of loved ones and the absence of answers. Various paramilitary organisations, loyalist and nationalist, waged a vile sectarian war and were responsible for the majority of the incidents where 3,500 people lost their lives. We should recognise that the overwhelming majority of the security forces in both jurisdictions were honourable men and women, many of whom lost their lives in efforts to protect the civilian population from the violence of paramilitaries. The atrocities that are the subject of this debate are of particular significance to us because they are among the worst of the Troubles, they occurred in this jurisdiction and there is strong evidence of collusion between those who carried them out and members of the security forces in Northern Ireland.

It is important that we express our gratitude to Mr. Justice Barron for undertaking his four inquiries, making his reports and his co-operation with the justice sub-committee. The work was arduous and demanding and was undertaken in a painstaking, methodical and impartial way. The sub-committee, the public and members of the families affected understand that, notwithstanding the serious limitations that surrounded the process, the results added to our understanding of the events he examined. He particularly highlighted the outstanding issues that still face us. In the words of the final report from the sub-committee: "It should be remembered that all of the Barron reports have been frustrated by the absence of any real co-operation from the British security forces."

We are talking about a period during which there was systematic collusion between state security forces and unlawful paramilitary organisations. In its last report, the sub-committee summarised the position as follows:

The sub-committee is left in no doubt that collusion between the British security forces and terrorists was behind many if not all of the atrocities that are considered in this report. We are horrified that persons who were employed by the British administration to preserve peace and to protect people were engaged in the creation of violence and the butchering of innocent victims.

The sub-committee believes that unless the full truth about collusion is established and those involved either admit or are fixed with responsibility then there cannot be closure for the families.

The sub-committee further believes that unless the full truth about collusion is established and those involved either admit or are fixed with responsibility then there is always the risk of what occurred in the 1970s occurring again some day...

The sub-committee is of the view that given that we are dealing with acts of international terrorism that were colluded in by the British security forces, the British Government cannot legitimately refuse to co-operate with investigations and attempts to get to the truth.

It is against this background that the Labour Party protested so strongly yesterday at the Taoiseach's decision that the Dáil should confine itself to a series of statements on this issue, rather than debating and approving any concrete steps to move the matter forward.

I agree with Deputy Finian McGrath that we should debate a motion. It is a pity that Deputies who today say we should debate a motion did not take the opportunity yesterday of voting with the Labour Party's proposal that we should have a motion. Instead, the Taoiseach said he considers this a debate where we can express our views and that whether it is structured as statements, a debate or a motion is a technical point. There are more than enough people in a position to make statements such as statements of sympathy with families or concern on State actions. More is expected from Dáil Éireann and the Government that is answerable to this House than statements. The people concerned are entitled to expect action. The series of sub-committee reports on which we are making statements contain specific recommendations for action by the Houses of the Oireachtas and the Government, yet we are refused the opportunity to endorse those reports or approve their recommendations.

The first report stated:

3. The sub-committee considers that a public inquiry under the Tribunal of Inquiries Act 1921 in this jurisdiction would have represented the preferred form of inquiry. However, because the perpetrators, information and witnesses are outside of this jurisdiction, there are legal and procedural difficulties arising from an inquiry initiated in this jurisdiction as set out previously.

4. The sub-committee considers that a public tribunal of inquiry in Northern Ireland and-or Great Britain is required and represents the best opportunity to be successful.

5. Before any inquiry would proceed the sub-committee is of the view that what is required in the first instance, is an investigation based upon the Weston Park proposals. The terms of reference should be agreed between the two Governments and should be based upon the terms agreed at Weston Park, in particular paragraph No. 19. The letter of instruction to Mr. Justice Peter Cory and the relevant portion of the Weston Park protocol is at Appendix 11. The sub-committee recommends that such an investigation be conducted on the following basis:

(i) That the judge conducting the investigation be of international stature.

(ii) That the investigation would have the power to direct witnesses for interview, the power to compel the delivery of documentation and to inspect premises.

(iii) That there should be time limits agreed for the commencement, duration and conclusion of the investigation.

(iv) That the judge conducting the investigation could recommend further action including whether a public inquiry in either jurisdiction should be held or not.

(v) The relevant government would be obliged to implement any recommendation within a defined time limit.

It went on to recommend that, if that process failed, the Irish Government should consider instituting proceedings in the European Court of Human Rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. It recommended specifically that a resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas be passed, endorsing the report and its recommendations and inviting the UK Parliament at Westminster to pass a similar resolution. We are not being given that opportunity. Therefore, at the very least, if we are to live up to the expectations of those who wrote and read the reports, the House should pass a resolution receiving, endorsing and approving the reports.

Second, as recommended, our presiding officer, the Ceann Comhairle, should be instructed to inform the Speaker of the House of Commons of these facts and to send copies of the relevant reports, and other documents, with a request that the matter be considered by the Members of that House. Third, we should formally call on the Taoiseach to renew his efforts to secure the agreement of the British Government to the course of action recommended by the sub-committee and to report to the Dáil on a regular, comprehensive and timely basis. Finally, we should resolve that if there is no progress of substance on these issues, the Government should report to this House on the steps it will take to institute proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights.

Anything less than such a basic course of action is just lip-service to the survivors and relatives of what the late Mr. John Wilson described as "some of the bloodiest and most chilling days" of the whole period of the Troubles. Those survivors and relatives have been relentless in their commitment to finding the truth. The Government should help them and this House should have been given the opportunity to instruct it accordingly.

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was a member of the Oireachtas sub-committee which dealt with the final report from Mr. Justice Barron. I listened to the stories of the relatives and some survivors and it was a time that will change every one of us forever.

The reports by the Oireachtas Joint Committee into collusion between the British security forces and loyalist paramilitary organisations relating to a series of murders during the 1970s are extremely shocking and disturbing. Even taking into consideration the context of the era, the extent of collusion is much greater than many would have assumed existed prior to these investigations. I share the views expressed yesterday by my colleague, Deputy Joe Costello, that the British Government must now co-operate fully with all investigations into these atrocities. Its continued refusal to co-operate with these investigations prevents the full truth from emerging. The picture that emerges of the level of collusion between the security forces and loyalist paramilitaries is shocking, with repeated references to information not being shared, information being withheld and a lack of co-operation between security forces in Northern Ireland and the Garda Síochána on this side of the Border who were attempting to investigate these incidents.

The families of those killed have campaigned for years to find out the truth about the circumstances that led to the deaths of their loved ones. Throughout that time, their firm belief and insistence that there was security force involvement in these killings was often disregarded or blatantly ignored. However, that will not happen any longer because all the reports confirm what they believed in the first place.

I was a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee which conducted the hearings and compiled the fourth and final report on Mr. Justice Barron's investigations. Overall, we were left in no doubt that there was collusion between members of the British security forces and loyalist paramilitaries and that this was known at the very highest level in Whitehall. There should be no misapprehension about the role of the Barron commission or the Dáil hearings. They were not public inquiries and were never intended to be regarded as such. As emphasised by the committee chairman, Deputy Seán Ardagh, the purpose of the Dáil hearings was to draw lessons from the Barron exercise and decide whether further action was warranted.

If I, as someone who sat on the committee, am really frustrated and annoyed, I can only imagine what the relatives of the victims and survivors are feeling today. This debate is simply further adding to their list of questions. The main question now being added to that list is where do we go from here? There is no conclusion to what is being done here today. There is no stepping further. None of the recommendations of the committee is being dealt with and there is no action planned for the future. This issue is not closed. Just as for the past 30 years, these people will not go away. They will insist on closure and on knowing all there is to know.

Clearly the level of implementation of the recommendations in the various reports has been totally unsatisfactory to date. Ten years of formal Government and Parliament sponsored investigations, reports and recommendations since the establishment of the initial Victims Commission in 1998 must be acted on. However, there appears to be no way that we can move forward from this debate.

Persistent reports of collusion also demand that Britain opens its files to scrutiny. While its track record in the murky world of espionage makes co-operation unlikely, the Government must use its close relationship with the British Government to ensure evidence of collusion is shown the light of day. While credit can be given to the British Government for introducing reforms, and particularly for the establishment of the historical inquiries team, under the PSNI, it does not meet international standards for investigation. Furthermore, what is most annoying is the fact that its findings will not be published. The committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe is scrutinising British compliance with several judgments of the European Court of Human Rights relating to Northern Ireland. However, despite these developments, the serious concerns and unanswered questions of those affected by past collusion have not been addressed adequately, if at all.

For many years, the relatives of the victims have felt they have been abandoned, misled and marginalised. After 30 years of despair, it is imperative that our Government insists that the British Government puts these atrocities, which claimed so many lives, under the penetrating searchlight of the public gaze.

There is no need for us to sympathise with the people in the Visitors Gallery today. There is no need for us to tell them what happened. They know, they were there, they lived it. They relive it every day. What they want from us is to know how they will get closure. They are not getting closure as a result of this process. We should take seriously the recommendations of the committee and put them in place. We should deal with this as one sovereign Government to another. The days are long gone when we tread on eggshells for fear of bringing everything down around our ears. We must say to the British Government that these people deserve to know and we, as a Government, demand to know.

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

Go raibh maith agat. Ba mhaith liom ar dtús a rá go bhfuil me ag roinnt mo chuid ama leis an Teachta Seán Ardagh.

The Good Friday Agreement acknowledges that "We must never forget those who have died or have been injured, and their families". As someone who has, with my colleagues in the Green Party, consistently campaigned for truth and reconciliation, including calling for investigations into collusion and a debate on collusion in both Houses of the Oireachtas, I welcome the fact that this debate has eventually come about. I hope that the debate adds political impetus to the investigation of collusion and to the identification of measures to bring closure to victims.

I regret that this debate is not specifically on the issue of collusion and that there is no motion before the House. My contribution will focus on collusion, which is a fundamental human rights issue for victims and their relatives.

It is very important that the concerns arising from this and other reports are widely understood. I support the Government's efforts, and urge that such efforts continue, to impress upon the British Government that it must examine the findings of the Barron, Oireachtas sub-committee and MacEntee inquiries. The British Government must address the issues raised by these reports, including by full disclosure of information as highlighted by Mr. Justice Barron.

A significant number of the 3,700 murders remain unsolved and families on both sides of the Border still have no explanation as to why their loved ones were snatched away from them so cruelly. Justice needs to be served. Every effort must be made to uncover the truth for these families to provide them with some closure on the terrible events of the past 40 years. We are reminded today by the presence of representatives of Justice for the Forgotten and others that the turmoil of the past 40 years was not confined to the Six Counties. The greatest loss of life in a single day of the Troubles occurred on Friday, 17 May 1974 when 34 people were killed in four separate explosions in Dublin and Monaghan. Approximately 258 people were injured in the blasts, with many continuing to suffer to this day. I was on Abbey Street, one of the many people in the centre of Dublin on that day and I felt the blast like hundreds of others, but we were spared the injuries suffered by many people.

Bereaved families and survivors of the 1974 bombings joined those affected by the Dublin bombings of 1 December 1972 and 20 January 1973 to ensure that their loved ones were not forgotten. Their campaign led to the establishment by the Government in 2000 of the Barron and MacEntee commission of investigation. Regrettably, important questions remain unanswered. Many survivors and those who lost loved ones are still battling today, demanding to know the truth as to why their loved ones died.

The Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland and the Historical Enquiries Team of the PSNI in reviewing past investigations have important roles to play. Their work is difficult, painstaking and often frustrating. They must rebuild memories, locate papers and challenge accepted wisdoms, and that could perhaps reopen the scars of that troubled time. They can uncover disturbing truths. Both offices have been subject to criticisms, some valid and some unfair. However, the importance of shining a light on events, if just to say how someone died or to return personal belongings kept in evidence, cannot be underestimated.

The Consultative Group on the Past under the chairmanship of Lord Robin Eames and Mr. Denis Bradley has been tasked by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to see whether there is a consensus on how to deal with the legacy of the Troubles. There are myriad opinions on how best this can be achieved, but there is no single answer. The group has cast a wide net in its attempt to listen to and incorporate as many voices as possible. It has held private consultations and public meetings and its members have heard about people's pain. They are talking to victims, their organisations, political parties, the two Governments, the security forces, paramilitaries, lawyers and others in gathering the thoughts, insights and emotions of all stakeholders, whether citizens or office holders, with a view to building a better future for Northern Ireland. Members of the group are in attendance today and they have the Government's support for the difficult work they are undertaking.

Victims' groups, including Justice for the Forgotten, have articulated various approaches to dealing with the past that I am sure are receiving close consideration. One proposal was a recent call by a consortium of groups for the establishment of a truth commission. This approach was advocated by the Green Party and I am pleased to see that it is being considered by the Consultative Group on the Past. When the group makes its report to the British Government in June, I hope that whatever solution it recommends deals adequately with all aspects of the atrocities in question, including collusion. A truth commission would be intended to prioritise the search for truth over the desire for retribution. The group believes that the criminal justice system has frustrated the process of truth recovery. It argues that fear of prosecution means that those who know the real story about the bombings in Dublin and Monaghan and many other atrocities that have scarred this island in the past 40 years will never come forward. It articulates a process of individual and societal healing through an acknowledgment and a deeper understanding of the history of the Troubles.

Consideration of any such approach would need to be balanced against the desires of others to see justice done or to leave this possibility open should the necessary evidence be collected. Progress would need to be contingent on respect for the law, including obligations under international law. On this island, we have the potential for a good future, but to get there we cannot blind ourselves to the past. We must ensure that the wounds of the Troubles are not allowed to fester because we need healing. The announcement on Monday of the new Victims Commission for Northern Ireland was an important step forward and I wish the commissioners well as it begins its work.

The Good Friday Agreement states that building a peaceful and just society would be the true memorial to the victims of violence. Addressing serious issues, including collusion, can contribute to building that society. We owe it to the victims, to those who can no longer speak for themselves, to learn from the mistakes of the past so that we are not doomed to repeat them endlessly. It is only right that we have this debate now.

Seán Ardagh (Dublin South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In reading through the literature related to this debate, I noted that it has been 40 years since the start of the Troubles. It was in October that the first marches occurred and the North's civil rights groups started their actions. The British army then unleashed its power and weapons and the Troubles started. I am delighted that, 40 years later, there is a peaceful, prosperous and shared society in Northern Ireland and a working Northern Executive and that our Government and the Northern Executive work well together. It is a change-about.

The one matter that sticks in my mind more than anything else is the first day of the committee hearings on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. In the committee room downstairs, the victims and relatives of victims gave their first-hand accounts of what occurred on that day and what has occurred in the 35 years since. It has been seven or eight years since those hearings commenced, but I remember distinctly Charlie Bird on the 6 o'clock news on RTE. It was riveting television. The members of the committee, including Deputy Costello, were stunned into silence by the harrowing stories told to us that day. The people in question have remembered those events not just for 35 years, but up to today.

I welcome the Taoiseach's comments yesterday on the Order of Business that he was prepared to accept a motion put to the Dáil and agreed among all party Whips. I hope they will make every effort to agree a wording on the question of collusion between the perpetrators of the violence and the British security forces. It is important that this work be done behind the scenes so that an agreed motion can be developed in the House and put without replaying the entire debate.

Mr. Justice Hamilton began the inquiry, Mr. Justice Barron continued it and four reports have been made on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, the Dublin bombings, the murder of Seamus Ludlow in Dundalk, Kay's Tavern and many other atrocities. As we went from report to report, it became more fixed in my mind. Initially, I was unsure and I accepted the possibility that there was no collusion, but as reports came one after the other, it became fixed in my mind that there was collusion between British security forces and the perpetrators of some of those dastardly crimes. I would not claim that it was in an overt manner, but it certainly occurred through a nod, a wink and turning a blind eye. Sections of the British establishment took the view that whatever their intended end justified the means. Why was full co-operation not given to Mr. Justice Barron by the Northern Ireland Office when he sought it more than once? This co-operation would have included the files of MI6, MI5 or whoever the British security forces in the Northern Ireland Office comprised. These security forces were not prepared to allow the files to be seen by Mr. Justice Barron, which, in itself, indicated that there was something to hide.

We found that members of the security forces in the North were engaged in these terrorist activities in the Republic. It is inconceivable that the colleagues and superiors of these people were not aware that these men were involved. A blind eye was turned to many of their activities.

I thank the members of the sub-committees, all of which I had the privilege and honour of chairing. Deputy Joe Costello was very much an active participant in all those hearings. A number of people, including Deputy Finian McGrath, were also involved in those hearings, but one person I must name is Senator Jim Walsh, who took a very active role in it.

These inquires would not have happened unless the Taoiseach had at the beginning asked John Wilson to act as the Victims Commissioner. He produced a report and recommended that an inquiry be held into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the other bombings I mentioned. Again, the Taoiseach ensured, and the Government agreed, that first Mr. Justice Hamilton and then Mr. Justice Barron would continue with those inquiries.

The sub-committee of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights received full co-operation from all of the gardaí and the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Taoiseach. In addition, the Taoiseach attended a meeting of the sub-committee and answered questions on the matter.

Mr. Paddy MacEntee SC looked at some matters as part of the first commission of investigation set up under the Commissions of Investigation Act. I know that Deputy Costello was the justice spokesperson at the time. The Commissions of Investigation Act, which was very useful legislation, went through our committee. It was the first time this Act was used and it was used effectively. It is a template for further use in the future, probably in place of tribunals, but that is another day's work.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy's time is almost up.

Seán Ardagh (Dublin South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister for Foreign Affairs has carried out significant work in respect of trying to help the victims of violence complete their grieving and bring closure to all those affairs, particularly in respect of the consultative group in Northern Ireland. I know he has worked with Peter Hain in agreeing and bringing this about. He has also been very involved on a regular basis. We see him at the meetings and on television. I also express my thanks to him for the work and effort he has put into it.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

While I welcome any opportunity to raise the issue of collusion, highlight the predicament of the families and recognise their huge effort in campaigning for justice, information and, above all, truth, I agree with my colleague, Deputy Ó Caoláin, and members of the Labour Party that it would have been much more constructive to have an agreed motion before the House and to have a debate around it. This motion should have contained some firm direct action as a follow-on to the statements expressed this afternoon and yesterday.

However, these statements have again seen agreement across the parties in the Oireachtas that the British Government has failed to co-operate with inquiries established by the Oireachtas into attacks in this State, including mass murder, in which there is overwhelming evidence of direct or indirect involvement by British state forces. Two years ago, we unanimously called on the British Government to establish an independent public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane. This was no small matter. This was the democratic Parliament of this State speaking with one voice and demanding that the British Government establish an inquiry into one of the most serious crimes any Government can commit, namely, the murder of a person under its jurisdiction by its forces. The British Government, first under Tony Blair and now under Gordon Brown, has refused the call of this Oireachtas and refused to establish this inquiry.

We now need to know what efforts have been made by the Government led by the Taoiseach to press this issue with the British Government. We also need to know what real action the Taoiseach has taken in an effort to prise information about collusion from the British Government. He has repeatedly claimed that he raises these matters every time he meets the British Prime Minister but is that it? For example, are all British MPs even aware that the Dáil and the Seanad have made this call? Have copies of all relevant reports, including those by Mr. Justice Barron, been sent to the British Parliament and have MPs been informed of their existence? Have there been meetings with party leaders and have key parliamentarians been lobbied?

The Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Tom Kitt, stated earlier that these statements give us the opportunity to consider what further action can be taken. It is a pity the Government did not convene a meeting of all parties before these statements and agree a motion proposing such action. We could then have had a real debate and a productive outcome. The Government can make amends for mishandling this matter by meeting with parties in the coming days and agreeing a motion to be put before the Seanad, which is also due to have a debate on collusion. That motion can then return here and we can proceed with a plan of action. The survivors and relatives of the victims of collusion deserve a serious and concerted approach that goes beyond simply stating our views.

One case where we cannot simply blame the British Government for not enabling us to achieve significant closure is the case of Seamus Ludlow, who was murdered in County Louth. Much of the missing information relating to that case lies in Garda files in this State. The Taoiseach could order a full public inquiry this afternoon. Why does he not do so? Perhaps this is where he should start his quest for assistance for the families of the bereaved.

Reference has been made to the Consultative Group on the Past. I take this opportunity to put on record my position and that of my party on the work of that body and the various proposals which have been flagged. The British Government cannot credibly establish a mechanism for dealing with the past which is capable of commanding sufficient truth or credibility, whatever the virtues or good intentions of those involved in a consultative group which it has appointed. The British Government's handling of this issue has consistently resulted in adding to the pain and suffering of this large constituency of people. This inevitably results from the fact that the British Government is not neutral. This was most clearly evidenced in the Bloomfield report. This report gave "special consideration" to members of the British security agencies who lost their lives during the conflict and devoted a mere two paragraphs to the people killed by these same agencies.

Some families have spent decades in pursuit of the truth, coming up against one closed door after another. In only a few instances have inquiries been conceded. Even in these few cases, new obstacles and delays are still a fact of life. In the vast majority of cases, however, those who have lost loved ones have been pointedly denied the truth. In fact, every effort imaginable has been made to hide and obscure what happened to the many hundreds of people killed directly by British state forces in collusion with their proxies in the Unionist paramilitary organisations.

This cannot be allowed to continue. Political posturing and self-interest cannot be an obstacle to moving the situation forward. All of us have responsibility to create the circumstances in which the needs of all victims are met. Sinn Féin is committed to finding a way forward. We accept that dealing with the legacy issues is an onerous task. However, it is of crucial importance that the past is dealt with and a mechanism found which treats all victims equally and allows families of victims an avenue of acknowledgement, apology and, above all, truth. We are keen to assist in such a process.

A firm motion proposing a series of actions, following a debate in this House, would have been more efficacious in achieving what the families most desire. When we look across the incidents in this State, at Kay's Tavern, Dublin and Monaghan, I have no doubt the families of the victims of these atrocities are as hurt today as they were on the day of the incidents. Each of us must do what we can to bring truth to these people. Reference was made to working with the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body in trying to achieve progress in this matter. There are many agencies that could contribute substantially to achieve truth, not just in the case of collusion but beyond.

First, there is work to be done in this House. We must deal with the incidents that occurred in this State. It is crucial and I hope the Government will change its mind, return after a motion in the Seanad and put the motion to this House for further debate. That is a mechanism to move this forward and to give the families most affected by these atrocities in this State an opportunity to get truth and closure.

Martin Mansergh (Tipperary South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In the context of the peace process, the handling of the legacy of the past is crucial. In Northern Ireland, the appointment of the Eames-Bradley group, as well as some recently appointed victims commissioners, was not free of controversy. I congratulate the members of the sub-committee on the vast volume of work over a long period. When I was in the Seanad I spoke with my colleague Senator Jim Walsh and I know how much work went into it. I am sure that is true of all members, including Deputy Costello. The committee members had to sift through the Barron report and hold hearings. This shows that the State and the Government has gone to considerable lengths to try to clarify issues.

All of us share deep sympathy with the families of the victims who, in the vast majority of cases, were simply blown apart on a certain day without warning. Those wounds do not heal over a lifetime and going through these reports there is a strong desire for the search for truth, knowledge of what happened and why it happened.

All the attacks have in common that they were carried out from Northern Ireland, mostly at a time when co-operation between the two jurisdictions was limited, certainly more so than at present. Relationships between governments could be strained at times and these were periods of high tension. The violence in the North reached its peak in 1971-76. I remember seeing the events of the 1972 and 1974 bombings on the television in Tipperary. I had the feeling that if the perpetrators managed to escape across the Border without being apprehended there would not be much more to do that was in the power of this State. We must remember that there was no extradition at the time and the Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Act, which might have allowed reciprocal prosecution across borders, did not exist until the end of 1976. The State and its organs were chary of demanding too much of counterparts north of the Border because facilities such as hot pursuit, questioning and handing over suspects would be requested in return. In this State, public opinion was at a certain state, far removed from the present position. It is important, particularly in sensitive matters such as security, that there is a broad consensus as far as possible among the vast majority of the population on what the State and the Government is doing.

An unfortunate feature of some of these cases is that many official papers have been lost or removed. Frankly, I do not know which. Those who have not worked in Departments underestimate the vast quantities of paper that were generated, particularly in the pre-electronic age, even in non-sensitive matters. As a young civil servant I had the experience of having great difficulty in retrieving files on non-sensitive issues, even if they were only two or three years old. One lesson I hope has been long since applied is the need to improve the archiving of Government papers, especially those relating to any matter that is particularly important and sensitive. That includes murders, terrorist attacks and so on. One of these reports suggests that perhaps it was because files were put in a special place that they became lost.

Notwithstanding the vast improvement in intergovermental relations, I deeply regret a recurring feature in these matters over the period is the very limited, not to say minimalist co-operation, from the British Government. I interpret this as an attitude of the British Government, its senior officials and security authorities, not to be prepared to lift the lid on the methods used to fight the war. They might have officially called it something different but for those involved, fighting the war was effectively what they saw themselves as doing.

We know there was considerable infiltration of and relationships with paramilitary groups, especially but not exclusively, loyalist ones. The question arises as to what extent they were used as proxies to fight the war. The British Army came to Northern Ireland from various colonial engagements in Aden, Cyprus and Malaysia where it was able to do very much what it liked with minimal scrutiny back home.

Earlier this week I saw an interesting film, "Charlie Wilson's War", set during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. It claims to be based on a true story of how certain American agencies provided the Afghan mujahidin with the equipment with which they were able to claim victory in that conflict. In theory, the mujahidin won the war but the film made it obvious it was because of American aid. An open question in my mind is to what extent loyalist paramilitaries were used to hit targets, communities and intimidate this State through attacks and bombs.

The timing of the 1972 Dublin bombs changed the outcome of a division in this House. The then Government was on the point of falling but after the bombs went off the outcome of the division was different. One can argue this was pure coincidence but I do not believe so. At the time I believed — and still do — that they had a political intent. The question is what was that intent. However, one can only speculate about it.

The Dublin-Monaghan bombings of 1974 must be seen in the context of the struggle to bring down the Sunningdale Executive reaching its climax. There is no doubt they were intended to deter this State in all sorts of ways. From a Unionist and loyalist point of view, an Irish dimension in northern affairs was a no-go area.

When I worked with Fianna Fáil in Opposition in the mid-1990s, a former member of the northern security forces — but from Northern Ireland, not from Britain — gave me details which I noted and subsequently supplied to the secretariat of the Department of the Taoiseach for fitting into the Barron inquiry. The information I was given was not very different from versions given to several other people.

The question arises as to whether British operatives fitted into a larger context. We know the British Labour Government of 1974 to 1979 was deeply unpopular with right-wing elements in Britain, including the intelligence services. It has been suggested this could be seen as the wider context to the bombings.

During the past ten years I have the sense the British Government's control of its security services is limited. There is the famous remark by the Queen, a very well-informed individual, about shadow forces in the country of which we know nothing. Did the British Government know or want to know about these events?

There was the disgraceful episode of collusion, referred to by the last speaker, relating to the murder of Pat Finucane. I am glad the public career of the British Minister of State who made disgraceful comments in the House of Commons at the time did not prosper.

We must keep an open mind on these matters. More evidence will come to light but there must be pressure for this to happen. We must encourage those concerned to tell their stories and not to take secrets to the grave. There were lessons from that period. The Government was not intimidated by threats of loyalist attacks. I recall in the mid-1990s being given a list of targets in Dublin which I promptly passed to the then Department of Justice.

We have an important duty to ensure any misconceptions or myths about what the then Government was about are dispelled as quickly as possible in case they form a basis for attacking people. I commend the reports and after the debate further consideration must be given in how this process can be carried forward.

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Members for their contributions to this important debate which the Taoiseach agreed to hold after the Christmas recess. I wish to note my appreciation for one of the unsung heroes of the transformation that has occurred on this island, Deputy Mansergh, and for the work he has done over several decades in this regard.

Politics in Ireland and Northern Ireland has been transformed with greater optimism for a better and shared future. It has been a very long process. Over the past two days we have been reminded that, despite the great changes under way, the painful and terrible legacy of the Troubles remains the everyday reality for numerous families and individuals.

Yesterday was the 35th anniversary of Bloody Sunday. How many of us in this House remember what we were doing when we heard the awful news from Derry? If our memories of the events of 30 January 1973 remain sharp, I can only imagine how deep emotions run in families that mourn lost loved ones. I speak of the families of the victims of the Dublin, Monaghan and Dundalk bombings, of the Miami Showband, and of the families bereaved on days like Bloody Friday, or in places such as Kingsmill, Loughinisland or Enniskillen, where terrible deeds were done. I speak of all those touched in whatever way by the long catalogue of murders and attacks which marked a low point in the history of this island. So many paid a heavy price in death, injury and loss.

Death and suffering visited my home town of Dundalk. I remember it as a teenager and in my 20s. The bombing of Kay's Tavern just before Christmas 1975 and the murder of Seamus Ludlow barely six months later are still remembered across the community in my area. In particular, their families remember. I have seen their grief, their loss, and heard their demand that wider society listen to and recognise the families' experiences. The State failed them in the 1970s. The previous Government at my request included the Dundalk bombing as part of the Barron remit and I am delighted that it was readily accepted. I hope the work of Mr. Justice Barron and the Oireachtas committee, and the ongoing follow-up by the Government will help give them the comfort they deserve.

We can never bring back what they have lost, but we can show solidarity with all those who suffered loss as a result of the conflict. Those who suffered as a result of collusion have their own grief mirrored by the grief of other families who have suffered not perhaps because of collusion. They include families like the families of Robert McCartney and Frank Kerr, who was murdered in 1994 in Newry. The finest tribute we can pay is to redouble our commitment to the creation of a better future for everyone on this island, regardless of kith or kin. To get there, it is clear that there needs to be engagement with the painful lessons and legacy of the past. I do not underestimate this challenge.

Deputies referred to the late John Wilson, in his capacity as Victims' Commissioner. His 1999 report, A Place and a Name, which was very aptly titled, not only describes the often difficult situation of survivors, but also recommended how some of their needs might be addressed. John took a great personal interest in individual cases, using the experience he gained as a Deputy to help victims secure what they were due. It was he who recommended the establishment of a remembrance commission, whose remit the Government recently extended. He also played his part in the search for the disappeared through his membership of the Commission for the Location of Victims Remains. That commission has of course yet to finish its work, and too many families have yet to have the comfort of burying their missing loved ones. Over the years since becoming Minister and before I have met people who have suffered from the Troubles. Of them all my heart goes out in particular to those who are not yet able to able to bury their loved ones.

The report, A Place and a Name, gave direction and impetus to further inquiry into particular cases arising from the conflict. This was taken forward in the work of the late Mr. Justice Liam Hamilton and Mr. Justice Henry Barron in the Independent Commission of Inquiry, and by Mr. Paddy MacEntee in his investigation into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. Their reports shine a light on many violent incidents whose effects had for too long been compounded by confusion and misinformation.

I pay tribute to Deputy Seán Ardagh, who spoke earlier, and to all the members of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, who meticulously advanced the work of Mr. Justice Barron and Mr. MacEntee. They heard testimony from those whose lives were dramatically impacted by violence. Many of their families, friends and advocates have been with us, in the Visitors Gallery, during this debate. The committee dealt with issues which go to the heart of the democratic process — the failure by the state in its duty of care to its citizens. This is an area where many questions remain unanswered, but face it we must if we are to be true to our responsibilities not only to those touched by the loss of loved ones, but also to the goal of better relations across communities and between these islands.

The findings of the Oireachtas committee that collusion occurred and that it was widespread are of the utmost seriousness. The Taoiseach and I promptly ensured that copies of the reports of the Oireachtas committee were brought to the attention of the British Government. We made clear that the findings regarding collusion were deeply troubling and a matter of serious concern. We have consistently pressed the British Government to co-operate in the investigation of all these incidents. Its response to date has been inadequate and unsatisfactory. We continue to stress to the British Government the absolute importance of co-operation in this area.

I appreciate that there are many issues on all sides arising from the past. I have consistently emphasised, not just as Minister for Foreign Affairs but as someone who saw the damage the Troubles inflicted on my home town of Dundalk, the very deep anxiety and widespread concerns arising from these reports and the need for the British Government to play its part in addressing these concerns, including the need for full disclosure, as highlighted by Mr. Justice Barron. It is in everyone's interests to try now to secure closure with clarity in respect of these dark and troubling cases.

Not only have the institutions in Northern Ireland been restored, but also there is a real prospect of the devolution of police and justice powers to the Executive. This island is being transformed, by progressive steps, brave decisions, creative thinking and often painful exchanges. As this change is embedded, through working institutions and increased trust between communities, the quarrel is becoming history. However, just as we must learn the hard lessons of peace so that conflict on this island never happens again, we have a responsibility to share the insights of the peace process with others. That was why I have established a conflict resolution unit in my Department. Through this initiative, I believe that Ireland can make a distinctive and effective contribution to international peace making, peace building and lesson sharing. The unit is leading the development of an Irish academic centre for conflict resolution, overseeing a stability fund, and will manage a system of roving ambassadors to crisis regions in the world to impart the practical know-how we garnered over decades during our own peace process.

We have achieved much, but the process is not over. The success of the peace process will be measured ultimately by its effect on the lives of people. In this House we often focus on the economic benefits of peace, the normalisation of relations and the landscape, and increased investment. These are without doubt essential building blocks towards a better future. However, people in Border areas frequently speak to me about the return to normal social contact which is the foundation of a healthy community.

Some of those who have impressed me most during my political career are those touched by the awful events we have been discussing today. I have been moved by their embodiment of the power of the human spirit, by their bravery, their patience and their capacity to forgive. They are in some cases taking the difficult, but important, step of engaging with neighbours, breaking a silence which may, for whatever reason, have endured for many years. I acknowledge the tremendous dignity which victims of violence have displayed in the face of horrible adversity. Many struggle to understand why things happened to them or to their loved one. Some seek truth, others justice. Some cannot forget. Others want to break the chains of memory. For some, the traumatic impact of violent attacks on them or their loved ones remains a huge burden, one which precludes an easy normality.

That is why the announcement this week of the four Victims Commissioners for Northern Ireland was a welcome development and I wish them well. If, as individuals or as a society, we are to move on, we need to understand better the dynamics of the particular time through which we have just come, and the manner in which individuals and groups responded or failed to respond, to events during this period. This process of discovery can take place in a number of ways, particularly through public inquiry. At Weston Park in July 2001 the two Governments asked Judge Cory to undertake a thorough investigation of allegations of collusion in a number of cases. He recommended that inquiries be established in this jurisdiction and in Britain. This has led to the establishment in this jurisdiction of the tribunal of inquiry into the heinous murders of Harry Breen and Bob Buchanan and to separate inquiries in Northern Ireland into the murders of Billy Wright, Rosemary Nelson and Robert Hamill.

Judge Cory's recommendation that there be a full public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane remains outstanding. I take this opportunity to repeat this House's call for the immediate establishment of a full, independent, judicial inquiry into this terrible murder and I will continue to do that with our British colleagues. It is time that his family, like so many others, were given greater clarity as to what happened to their loved ones, and who was responsible.

In other cases, different and less formal processes may also play a useful role and this debate is one of them. There are issues that will come before the consultative group on the past, led by Archbishop Robin Eames and Denis Bradley. This group is considering how the legacy of the events of the past decades can best be approached. I welcome the establishment of this group and offer to co-operate with its work. I look forward to the work they will be doing as they continue to investigate these matters. I await with great interest the recommendations which they will present later this year. The group's public consultations earlier this month highlighted the complex and sensitive issues with which they are engaging. I have no doubt they will bear this in mind when considering this report. Building the peace in a way which is respectful of the suffering of the past and which leads to a better future for everyone on these islands is the best way we can honour the dead and serve the living. Today and yesterday this House has heard many of the reasons we need to face up to our difficult past if we are to arrive at a better future for all and we should not shirk this challenge.