Dáil Éireann

DÁIL ÉIREANN

AN COMHCHOISTE UM

FEIDHMIÚ CHOMHAONTÚ AOINE AN CHÉASTA

JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT

Déardaoin, 16 Eanáir 2014

Thursday, 16 January 2014

The Joint Committee met at 10.20 a.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Deputy Seán Crowe, Senator Jim D’Arcy, Deputy Frank Feighan, Senator Mary Moran, Deputy Martin Ferris, Senator Mary M. White. Deputy Brendan Smith, Deputy Jack Wall,

In attendance: Deputy Dessie Ellis, Senator Jim Walsh, Mr. Paul Maskey, MP, Mr. Conor Murphy, MP, Dr. Alasdair McDonnell, MP, and Ms Margaret Ritchie, MP.

DEPUTY JOE MCHUGH IN THE CHAIR.

1 Civic Forum for Northern Ireland: SDLP The joint committee met in private session until 11.10 a.m.

Civic Forum for Northern Ireland: SDLP

Chairman: We are running a bit late but we will try to move along as swiftly as possible. As members are aware, representatives from the SDLP are here to discuss the Civic Forum for Northern Ireland. The forum was provided for within the Good Friday Agreement to provide for a broad range of voices in community relations and stimulate informed public debate in respect of key societal challenges. As yet, it remains a non-implemented provision of the agreement. We are discussing the value of a consultative forum and steps required for its implementation with representatives from the SDLP. On behalf of the committee, I am very pleased to welcome John Dallat, MLA, who is a neighbour of mine across the Border and who visits Donegal quite a bit and has reasons to be there. I also welcome Ms Dolores Kelly, MLA, who has also been pushing this agenda for a long period of time and Ms Caroline Mc Neill, who is policy advisor to the party.

Before I invite the witnesses to make their presentations, I must read the following into the record. I advise witnesses that they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of utterances at this committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease making remarks on a particular matter and continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their remarks. Witnesses are directed that only comments and evidence in respect of the subject matter of this meeting are to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against a Member of either House of the Oireachtas, a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I now call on Ms Dolores Kelly, MLA, to proceed with her opening statement.

Ms Dolores Kelly: I thank the Chair for accepting our request to make a presentation. We will deliver our presentation in two parts. Mr. Dallat, MLA, will set the scene and I will take over from there. We are very happy to at least attempt to answer any questions the committee may have. I thank the committee for the invitation to be here this morning, which is very much appreciated.

Chairman: I call on Mr. Dallat to make his presentation.

Mr John Dallat: I am glad the Chairman introduced me as a neighbour. Given that my mother was from Creeslough and my wife is from Carndonagh, I claim that privilege of being a neighbour of the Chairman. Of course, we know each other in other respects as well as in respect of cross-Border transport.

I have been in the Assembly since 1998. It is worth recalling that the civic forum was created under the terms of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement and made up of members of various civil bodies. It has, of course, no legislative or governmental powers and fell into abeyance in 2002 after the suspension of the assembly. Following the flags protests in 2012, my colleague, Ms Dolores Kelly, MLA, wrote to the members and various groups of the forum and we were overwhelmed by the response we received from them. It was clear that there was a need. On a personal basis, as an elected representative who has served in the assembly since its beginning, I know something that the Northern Ireland Assembly needs is missing.

2 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement We are in every respect a fledgling democracy. It is foolish if not arrogant to believe that the political parties can really create a broad spectrum of democracy without the involvement of the wider community. The civic forum did not last for very long but I remember it as something that was absolutely critical and essential. One of the reports in which I was particularly interested was the one on literacy and numeracy because we have that serious problem. That report was superb. Any legislative assembly or government would have been proud to have received it. Sadly, that did not happen.

In recent times, the SDLP has put forward motions on two occasions to bring back the civic forum, both of which were passed. It has not happened. There is a report sitting in the office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister since 2007. There has been no response. I suspect that report is a very positive one that sets out very good reasons why the civic forum should be reconstituted but we have not got it. Recent events in the North indicate that a broader body of opinion is badly needed so that we can create a truly participative democracy and give a strong voice to the wider community. I am sure all political parties in the North are concerned that the level of participation in voting is constantly dropping, which we believe is an indication that the wider community has lost interest. Those of us who are nostalgic remember the difficult work that was done leading up to the Good Friday Agreement and getting over 90% of people in the Republic and over 70% in the North to support it. It is crazy to take that tier away. In my introduction, my impassioned plea is to ask to every support not just because we want a civic forum and it is a wider spectrum of democracy but because it is if we are to shore up, which is possibly the wrong term, and continue the struggle to make sure democracy stays alive.

We do not spend all our time talking about flags, placating paramilitary groups, throwing money at them and all the other things have been going on. We need the civic forum for good reasons and I am sure we will have the opportunity this morning to spell out in greater detail why we believe that without the civic forum, we have a real problem in the North. The assembly - the big house on the hill - on its own is an isolated place. It does not encapsulate or relate to the wider community in the same way as would happen in a normal democracy where there is consensus. At this point, I am pleased to hand over to my colleague, Ms Kelly, MLA.

Ms Dolores Kelly: I want to put on record our party’s thanks and appreciation to the Tánaiste for his recent remarks in support of the party’s call for the implementation of the Haass-O’Sullivan talks and his commitment to opening Government records relating to any mechanism that might be established in dealing comprehensively and ethically with the past. It is important to note that at the outset. The committee may know that in respect of the Haass talks, there was an overwhelming amount of response right across civic society from individuals, trade unions and other community and voluntary organisations. This is an example of where civic society has sought to engage. There will be a call for a compromise rally in Belfast city centre this Sunday. This rally wants to see the parties engaging and dealing with those contentious issues of parading, flags and the past that have not yet been dealt with.

Another aspect of the civic forum is that there would be an all-Ireland consultative forum to partner with a similar body in the South. That remains an unfulfilled promise and commitment of the Good Friday Agreement. As members will know, equality and human rights were at the core and, indeed, a compromise of that agreement which is an international treaty between two sovereign governments and the British and Irish Governments are co-guarantors of that agreement. We believe that more needs to be done and more pressure applied to the Executive and in particular to the Unionist parties in the Northern Ireland Executive.

The victims’ groups in particular have been very powerful over the past number of months. 3 Civic Forum for Northern Ireland: SDLP Despite their differences of opinions and their different experiences of the conflict they have spoken with one voice in their demand for a mechanism to deal with the past in order to address issues of concern with regard to justice and for finding out what happened by means of truth recovery. Their voices have been very powerful and the victims have stayed on the same page, so to speak, in their call and their commitment to the process overseen by Richard Haass and Megan O’Sullivan.

Those are examples of how civic society can put pressure on the political parties. It was an- ticipated that dealing with the past would be the most potentially contentious issue where there would not be agreement at the Haass talks, yet it is the issue on which there is most agreement about the mechanisms. That is a very fine example of how civic society can play a role in setting the agenda for political parties.

The North is still very much in recession with high levels of unemployment. We have a housing crisis and a health crisis. Civic society is at a loss. As John Dallat, MLA, commented, some opt to be increasingly disengaged from the political process. It would appear that our society is being held back by the interests of select interest groups. In our view the civic forum could provide an opportunity to allow the voices to be heard of those who believe themselves to be marginalised.

I did not attend the initial civic forum and we acknowledge that there were flaws in its mechanisms and how it was to be established. The people who responded to our letters asking for their views on whether the civic forum should be reconvened, said as much. However, they agreed with the principle that there was a role and a place for such an institution. The fact that the review of the civic forum has not been published is a very poor decision which suggests to me that the review recommends that the civic forum should be re-established because what has one to fear from publishing the report. This week in the Northern Ireland Assembly the First Minister made light of the civic forum when he said it was not an issue which was raised with him on the street. This attitude does an injustice to those people who want to see a greater participative democracy.

I will give an example of how accountable participative democracy can work, an issue which is also pertinent to the South. I refer to Mapping the Rollback? - Human Rights Provi- sions of the Belfast Good Friday Agreement 15 Years On, recently published by the Committee for the Administration of Justice. I suggest this committee might wish to hear from that committee about its work. It refers to accountable participative shapes of governance as envisaged by the Good Friday Agreement being very possible. Good participation leads to good outcomes. We have seen it in mental health where the participation of service-users and carers in a Belfast mental health rights group led to the implementation of the card-before-you-leave appointment card system across accident and emergency departments in Northern Ireland. As a result of this initiative, 160 people every month who are in mental health distress now get follow-up appointment and support which they would otherwise not have. That is an example of how participative democracy can make a real difference to the lives of people. I will conclude by quoting from Inez McCormack who when speaking to an American audience about the MacBride principles, said:

We can all deliver the rhetoric which offends nobody but the dispossessed. For those who have can always argue that tomorrow is the right time for change. For the have-nots, today is not soon enough and we can only hope for their generosity of spirit in forgetting their yesterdays.

4 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement Deputy Frank Feighan: I welcome Dolores Kelly, MLA, John Dallat, MLA, and Caroline McNeill to this meeting and to Dublin. I thank them for presenting this initiative to reconvene the civic forum. I congratulate them for successfully raising the matter in Stormont. The civic forum is a commitment in the Good Friday Agreement. It crossed political boundaries and ensured that the pressure from political parties was avoided.

Members of this committee visited Belfast before Christmas in 2012. We went to the New- townards Road for the opening of the Skainos centre and we had meetings with various groups. We were quite convinced that everything was okay. Martin McGuinness, MLA, and Peter Robinson, MLA, addressed that huge attendance in what is loyalist east Belfast and in my view this was a cause for celebration. However, less than seven days later, all hell broke loose on the same streets which shows that it is a very difficult situation. I cannot see any reason the civic forum could not be reconvened.

What powers has the civic forum? Are the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister supportive of reconvening it?

Deputy Brendan Smith: I welcome the delegation and I thank John Dallat, MLA, and Dolores Kelly, MLA, for their contributions. I fully support the establishment of the civic forum and hopefully we can have the North-South consultative forum established as well. I have tabled numerous parliamentary questions in the House in order to keep it on the agenda. Before the delegation came into the meeting, Conor Murphy, MP, made the point that demonstrates why there should be a civic forum. We were discussing the importance of the Haass talks, the progress made and the disappointment that the process has not been completed. He outlined the importance of the Haass-O’Sullivan talks and he referred to the fact that up to 600 submissions were made by individuals, groups and organisations. These submissions demonstrate that civic society wants to be involved. It is very remiss and if it is a matter of the competence of the Executive then it is a scandal that the forum has not been re-established. I understand that the re-establishment may be a matter for devolution. I wish the delegation well in its work to have it re-established. We need the involvement of civic society. It can suit the public services well to have fewer fora to answer to. I am not making a political point but the abolition of town councils and other bodies is ideal from the point of view of the public service. I mean no disrespect to members of the public service who work in the Oireachtas but I believe it suits the public service to have fewer fora to service and to answer to. The delegation has made a very good case for the need to re-establish the civic forum.

Ms Margaret Ritchie: I thank my colleagues for attending. It seems that we shared a train together from Newry only a couple of hours ago.

Several serious issues are involved. I come from a position of strongly supporting the re- establishment of the Civic Forum for Northern Ireland and the North-South Consultative Fo- rum. It is important that we view civic democracy as having an important contribution to make. People felt that they were silenced when the civic forum fell and the institutions were dissolved in 2002. The Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, OFMDFM, has steadfastly refused to publish its review of the civic and consultative forums. Could Ms Kelly, who served on the Assembly’s OFMDFM committee, throw some light on these possible refusals?

I wish to make a couple of points about Deputy Smith’s statement on the role of civic society in the Haass talks. Some 600 submissions were made. What role would the civic forum have in supplementing the work of the Assembly, the Executive and other Northern organisations and how would that tie in with the consultative forum? Too often, civic society feels silenced 5 Civic Forum for Northern Ireland: SDLP on many matters to do with the past, parades, contentious issues and wider issues, for example, health and education, in which respect Ms Kelly rightly stated that there was a chaotic situation. Civic society is good in terms of North-South work, as there are many common denominators. The political classes can learn from what civic democracy and civic society are telling us.

Chairman: I thank Ms Ritchie. Next are Mr. Murphy and Deputy Wall.

Mr. Conor Murphy: For many years, we have supported the re-establishment of the civic forum, an outstanding matter under the Good Friday Agreement. This committee has undertak- en to perform an audit of outstanding matters, including the all-Ireland consultative forum and a Bill of rights. As a consequence of the St. Andrews Agreement, Acht na Gaeilge is another outstanding matter.

The reality is that unionism has been hostile to the idea of a civic forum, an all-Ireland consultative forum, a Bill of rights and a review of the North-South implementation bodies and has used its position in the Executive and the OFMDFM to veto any development in or discussion of these matters. This is where the problem lies. There is an appetite in civic society across Ireland-----

(Interruptions).

Chairman: Someone’s mobile telephone is interfering. Just put it on the ground.

Senator Jim D’Arcy: It is not mine.

Mr. Conor Murphy: It is not mine either.

Chairman: Somebody owns it.

Mr. Conor Murphy: There is an appetite, as evidenced in the submissions to the Haass talks, for civic society to make a contribution. There are other vehicles for that, but the Good Friday Agreement envisaged a formal role linked to the working of the Assembly and, through the consultative forum, the all-Ireland arrangements. It is necessary to bring the civic forum back and the consultative forum into existence for the first time.

This is the nub of the problem. Unionism has been hostile to these bodies, including the North-South bodies even though it continues to operate them, for example, the North-South Ministerial Council. Unionists have used their positions in the Executive to stifle any development, discussion or production of a report in respect of these bodies. Pressure needs to be applied by political representatives, the two Governments, which are the guarantors of the international agreement between them, and civic society North and South to the effect that we want a forum, a space to have a formal input rather than just an informal input that is requested by various bodies as situations arise. We want a formal arrangement under which we can develop ideas and make a contribution to politics in the North and the development of its society. This problem needs to be shifted.

Chairman: Senator White will follow Deputy Wall.

Deputy Jack Wall: I welcome Ms Kelly, Mr. Dallat and Ms McNeill and thank them for their presentation. We must determine the position on this matter. They asked whether there was an appetite for reconvening the civic forum. In the last vote held in the Assembly on this matter, a small majority was in favour. In this lies the answer. The SDLP, Sinn Féin and Inde- 6 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement pendent groups want the civic forum, yet the Unionists are failing to grasp this desire, which is overwhelmingly supported by the number of submissions made to the Haass talks. In all of the committee’s visits to Northern Ireland and in my visits through my political party, the one thing that the groups we met all wanted was to be able to explain their positions and to have them un- derstood. If we stymie that, we will stymie the aim of all of this, namely, the joining together of two communities for the betterment of both and with knock-on effects for the political process.

The Good Friday Agreement was heralded worldwide and everyone was on board with it. As such, it is disappointing to see that the civic forum will not be a part of it. We must use every mechanism available to us, be it the consultative forum or the North-South Ministerial Council, to pressurise the Northern Irish system, which steadfastly refuses to address this issue. The civic forum’s initiation cost £500,000 or £750,000. Compared with the costs being incurred by other ongoing problems, for example, the flag dispute, the civic forum’s initiation was value for money. It gave various groups an opportunity, be they communities, political entities or sporting bodies. Each community has many different aspects. We should give them all an opportunity to participate, offer their opinions and work together to get us across the line.

I support the trend at this meeting. I will refer to my party leader, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, the concerns and words that have been expressed and ask that we put the civic forum’s reactivation on the agenda of any talks he has with the Secretary of State or Westminster.

Chairman: Deputy Crowe will follow Senator White.

Senator Mary M. White: I am delighted to see our three guests. When we discussed the Haass-O’Sullivan draft report, I spoke briefly in support of the reconvening of the civic forum. The Assembly voted in April 2013 to recall it.

In 2011, the First Minister in response to a question about the civic forum said:

There was no widespread desire for a return to the structure of the size and expense of the civic forum as previously operated. Accordingly, there has been no meetings of the civic forum during this Assembly mandate, which has also resulted in considerable savings to the public purse.

He then said that a meeting had been convened with people who were claiming expenses, etc. Perhaps Ms Kelly would say if it is the First Minister who is holding this up now?

Ms Dolores Kelly: As the Senator-----

Chairman: As we are under pressure of time, I propose to group questions from members.

Deputy Seán Crowe: As stated by Deputy Wall, we have met already with many groups and propose to meet others, all of whom want an opportunity to express their views and to be listened to and involved. This is the purpose of the forum. One of the weaknesses of the peace process was the lack of civic involvement in the negotiations in that regard. I have no doubt that had the negotiations been widened out to include civic society the peace process we would have a much more inclusive process and we would be much further down the road in that regard.

We all accept that the Assembly is not seriously tackling the issues of poverty, equality, in- clusivity, housing, welfare reform and so on. Everybody thought the peace process would be a

7 Civic Forum for Northern Ireland: SDLP new beginning in that regard. I agree that the greater the involvement of civic society the better. The naysayers will point to the cost factor and say the forum is only a talk shop. However, as elected representatives are elected by their communities they know what issues are important to them. I presume that is the only argument against it. I believe the consensus in this room, and, perhaps, across society, is that the civic forum is a good thing.

Deputy Martin Ferris: I thank the delegation for its presentation. I do not propose to go over the ground already covered by other contributors. I find it disturbing that the Unionist veto has prevented full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. Perhaps the witnesses would comment on whether in their view the Governments are doing enough to ensure full implementation of that Agreement.

Ms Dolores Kelly: I thank members for their comments and support for the reconvening of the civic forum and, more importantly, the principles behind it. I would like to dispel some of the myths articulated, particularly by Unionism, in relation to the cost of the forum and the view that it is a talking shop. That is an absolute nonsense. Millions of pounds is being spent on the dysfunctionality of our society because of a failure to get to grips with a shared future and reconciliation or with the issues around parades, on which issue the Haass-O’Sullivan talks had hoped to make progress. The cost of not doing anything is much greater than the half million budget initially set aside for the civic forum. I believe that the issue of costs can be appropriate- ly addressed by a reconvened civic forum. As stated earlier by Mr. Dallat, MLA, many people in society are, unfortunately, becoming increasingly disconnected from the Assembly. Some see it as a very expensive talking shop, from which there has been a lack of legislation coming forth owing to the dysfunctionality of the Executive, particularly the OFMDFM committee.

On Deputy Feighan’s question in regard to the powers of the civic forum, it does not have any governmental powers or powers of legislation. It was envisaged it would have a role in testing various government policies. For example, the chaos around education and the proposals around welfare reform are two good examples on which there could have been contributions from civic society, including community volunteers, trade unions and business. Business communities in the North favour all-Ireland business proposals. InterTradeIreland is seen as one of the North-South bodies that is making progress. There is widespread support across a wide range of community partners for such proposals.

The will of the Assembly is that the civic forum be re-established. This is borne out by two votes. Deputy Ferris spoke about the Unionist veto. The First Minister and his party - this relates back to the point made by Mr. Murphy, MP, in regard to the bill of rights - and others appear to be frightened by the participative democracy proposals. They constantly run to the courts in relation to decisions by the Executive, such as the finance DUP Minister taking the Agriculture Minister to court last Christmas in relation to the transfer of funds from farming to rural development. As the judge said in that case, this is occurring because of political failure. There is widespread frustration not only among political parties and anoraks but across civic society. This was borne out by the number of people who found their voices during the Haass- O’Sullivan talks and put forward proposals which were of a concrete nature, particularly the victims’ groups which made good submissions in relation to how to deal with the past on an ethical, comprehensive and moral basis.

The civic forum has a North-South dimension. We are seeing a great deal of roll-back within Strand 2 of the Good Friday Agreement. I believe the two Governments as co-guarantors of the Agreement need to hold to account the First and Deputy First Ministers in terms of their particular responsibilities in relation to all-Ireland institutions. For example, we still do not 8 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement have the parliamentary cross-Border councils or assembly associations envisaged in the Good Friday Agreement and there has been a dilution of some of the North-South bodies. At a time of economic recession and challenges these issues should be being grasped on an all-Ireland basis. This is resulting in disengagement by wider society with the Assembly and an increase in street violence during parades. I participated over the Christmas period in the Haass-O’Sullivan talks, during which I learned that a small minority of the population in Northern Ireland, namely, people within the Orange Order and retired police officers, have the most say. This is where we are seeing the hold-back. Political parties are looking to a small constituent group of the Protestant Unionist population in terms of Northern Ireland is being moved forward rather than to a greater number of people for the greater good.

Mr. John Dallat: Members of the Oireachtas in the Republic of Ireland have every right to be interested and concerned. I am old enough to know the price paid by Ireland as a whole following the last collapse of the process in the North. I do not want to be emotive or to suggest that the dark clouds of storm are gathering again. Ms Kelly, MLA, referred to parades. I represent east Derry where the paramilitaries are re-engaging and carrying out punishment beatings in increasing numbers. They are filling the gap that is being created by the failure of the Assembly to engage the wider community. Just as we discovered in 1998, after 30 years, there is no greater weapon against violence and a breakdown in society than engagement with the widest spectrum of people. Those who are engaged, the architects of the Good Friday Agreement, acknowledge that, which is why these structures were provided for. I am the lon- gest serving member of the Public Accounts Committee which, like its Oireachtas equivalent, looks at the historical blunders of Departments. Would it not be great to have an advisory body that was able to identify where Departments need to improve and bring forward initiatives that address the problems in health, education and a spectrum of other services that are not function- ing properly?

Ms Kelly, MLA, has covered the issue of expense. What price does one put on one person losing his or her life? What price does one put on 4,000 who lost their lives, with practically every graveyard in the North containing the remains of somebody who died as a result of failure? Members of the SDLP are not here today to preach doom and gloom. However, we are being responsible by highlighting the awful vacuum that is being created. The former Minister for Finance, Mr. Sammy Wilson, MLA, recently said in the Assembly that he would neuter every cross-Border body. That goes back to the old days of Unionism, which believed it could do it on its own. It cannot do it on its own; two parties cannot do it on their own. The five principal parties cannot do it on their own without involvement because the North is not a normal society but one that needs to be nurtured an awful lot to engage that wider community.

Along with Ms Kelly, MLA, and Ms McNeill, I am making an impassioned plea to all elected representatives, North and South as well as wider afield, to recognise that a serious vacuum is developing in the North and it is being managed by huge sums of money spent on increased policing and so on, which is not the answer. The answer lies in the wider community feeling ownership of what we have.

Chairman: I thank Mr. Dallat, MLA. Does anybody wish to expand on how we can move forward on the suggestions made today? I believe the SDLP representatives have reiterated what has happened in recent months. There has been an appetite in Northern Ireland to get involved in the Haass-O’Sullivan process. Without going into the nuts and bolts of that, it is significant that there were more than 600 submissions and with the vast majority from civic society it has identified an appetite for civic engagement. In private session we agreed that we

9 Civic Forum for Northern Ireland: SDLP would contact the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach to follow up post-Haass outlining the committee’s feelings. We can include today’s SDLP submission as part of that communique. We can also include the full contribution because many people made observations today. I will let the members contribute to add their own input.

I call Senator Jim D’Arcy followed by Mr. McDonnell, MLA.

Senator Jim D’Arcy: Ms Kelly MLA referred to the Haass talks and said that retired police officers and others might be setting the agenda. Is she referring to DUP representatives or others who might not be representing the total community?

Ms Dolores Kelly: I do not believe it is any secret that both the Unionist parties have within their ranks former rank-and-file members of the police service.

Senator Jim D’Arcy: Are they at the Haass talks?

Ms Dolores Kelly: They are not necessarily present at the Haass talks but we know of significant lobbying by representatives who were high-ranking officers. Some of that relates to how we deal with the past regarding improving the powers available to, for example, the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland or any subsequent new investigations unit, of compellabil- ity of former police officers having to appear. I know representatives of victims groups will appear later and the committee will hear more about that. Those kinds of what would seem very sensible provisions were being railed against in any proposals on dealing with the past and improving the powers of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland.

Senator Jim D’Arcy: Does Ms Kelly, MLA, feel a civic forum would open this out?

Ms Dolores Kelly: I am a Member for Upper Bann and represent people who live in some of the deprived loyalist estates and feel that there are certain times of the year that they cannot go to their own political representatives even over issues such as bonfires being placed too close to their homes because they find they have no voice. We would also represent a number of people in the Protestant community at welfare or housing appeals.

Senator Jim D’Arcy: Is it correct that the flags and emblems issue is the toughest issue at present? Would greater participation in a civic forum help that issue?

Ms Dolores Kelly: The Haass-O’Sullivan proposals proposed a commission to deal with the flags. I believe it could provide that mechanism - the civic forum.

Senator Jim D’Arcy: That was what I was considering.

Ms Dolores Kelly: As one of the earlier contributors said, it would give an opportunity for people to hear the other side’s experiences and then to put their own case forward. It is, after all, about compromise, respect and tolerance. I believe compromise is the rallying cry for this weekend.

Chairman: While there may be an appetite to keep the post mortem going, it is important to use the restricted time available to us to make proposals as to how we can follow up here. I call Dr. McDonnell, MP, followed by Mr. Maskey, MLA.

Dr. Alasdair McDonnell: It would be remiss of me to start posing questions to my colleagues. However, I wish to make a background point. While I do not want to bash anybody here today, unionism is reneging on many of the things agreed in the Good Friday Agreement.

10 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement The DUP Members will individually and collectively tell us that they never signed up to the Good Friday Agreement. Many of us are suspicious that they would like to dismantle as much of it as possible. The rest of us believe the Good Friday Agreement is the only compass we have to try to sort out our society in the North. There is a need for openness and we need to allow people in to participate. The civic forum allowed the churches, business community, trade unions and some representation from each of the political parties and various others to have a status and an input. It was not nearly as powerful as the distinguished Seanad, but it was a sort of senate behind the Assembly in a greatly diluted form that allowed issues to be raised.

That is the point I make to colleagues around the table. That wheel - it was not just a cog - was taken out of the system and there is deep frustration among civic unionism that those who wish to be progressive do not have the space or opportunity to create and influence potential progress. There is deep frustration among civic unionism that the Unionist political parties did not support Dr. Haass’s effort because many of the people - both individuals and groups - want to see progress and stability and a degree of prosperity emerging.

That is the nub of this. The Chairman asked for proposals. This committee is the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. The civic forum was a core wheel in the machinery of the Good Friday Agreement. The Good Friday Agreement will not function to completion and to its ultimate potential without a civic forum in some shape or form. While I would like to see it in the shape and form that existed ten or 12 years ago, even a civic forum - dare I tempt fate - in slimmed-down form would allow people to give an input. The disillusion that is setting in because of the dysfunction around some of the politics in the North will ultimately create space, as Mr. Dallat, MLA, has rightly said for the loyalist paramilitaries who are rummaging around Coleraine. It will gradually go to the point where it could blow up again and none of us want to see that.

Chairman: I will take two final speakers because we have gone over time in a big way. Mr. Maskey and Senator Moran have indicated. Everyone else got a good hearing.

Mr. Paul Maskey: The committee has been up on several occasions speaking to members of the loyalist community. To me, the stumbling block is with mainstream Unionism, it is not with loyalism because loyalists will tell me every day of the week, no matter how often I meet them whether in constituency offices or at different fora, that they have no representation. They have cried out in recent years for some sort of representation. I believe a civic forum would be a good way of going about that. The question is who to put the pressure on to ensure a civic forum comes to fruition. That is one of the main challenges faced by all of us in society, including this committee. I agree with the approach and we need to ensure that the Governments put as much pressure on Unionism to do that.

We should possibly write to Office of the First Minister and the Office of the Deputy First Minister as well to ask for their views and thoughts because the decision has been passed by the assembly. We should ask when the decision will be implemented and what the views are. It may come back that there is no agreement or we might not get a letter back. It might be blocked because of the veto from the DUP. I believe we need to put pressure on to see if we can get some sort of feedback and establish what that is. Then, let us take it from there. It is clear to me that when the audit is done on the Good Friday Agreement this area will definitely show up as one of the elements missing. We need to clearly decide how to get the pressure on people. It may be that we should ask the people we have engaged with from the loyalist community for their views on whether they want a civic forum. I believe that some of the people who we have met in the past from the loyalist community may want to accept that as well. 11 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten Senator Mary Moran: I thank Mr. Dallat, MLA, Ms Kelly, MLA, and Ms McNeill for everything today. This has been a very good discussion. Like everyone else, I fully support the establishment of the civic forum. As Deputy Wall noted, it is part of the Good Friday Agree- ment. From visiting places I have found the most beneficial aspect to be engaging with the different community and religious groups of all the different sides.

It is striking how much we are suffering. It is to the detriment of this committee meeting today that there are no Unionists present and that is a major shame. The evidence exists that people want to engage and it has certainly been our experience that people want to engage. People want the opportunity. The matter of the costing, sadly, seems to be an excuse. Rather then go on - I realise we could discuss this all day - the question is how best to move on from here. Many of us on the committee are also on the North-South Inter-Parliamentary Associa- tion. Is there something that we can do through that body to move the position on or through the various other groups? Certainly, we will all be going back to our party leaders today urging for full support, which I know we have. Rather than keep talking, it is a question of what constructive actions we can use now.

Chairman: I will leave the he last word with Mr. Dallat, MLA.

Mr. John Dallat: I usually get the last word, Chairman.

Chairman: Before that, I will have the semi-last word. Thank you for your presentation today. It is important to keep this going. There have been a few suggestions. We always have to go back to the role of this committee. This is an Oireachtas committee. It is our job to hold the Irish Government to account in respect of its responsibilities as co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement. That is where our focus is and where it will continue to be. It is our job to put the pressure on the Irish Government.

We are undertaking an inquiry into the Good Friday Agreement 15 or 16 years on to establish the position. This will be done with the Committee on Sovereign Matters chaired by Depu- ty Frank Feighan at the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly. We will keep you fully informed on that. Thank you for the presentation and I will leave the last word with Mr. Dallat, MLA.

Mr. John Dallat: To sum up, I wish to return the thanks and reiterate what Ms Kelly, MLA, said at the beginning. We must be brutally frank and honest with the Irish Government and explain that we are seriously concerned about a vacuum that is developing in the democratic process which needs to be filled. One excellent way of filling it is through the civic forum, which was a vital part of the Good Friday Agreement. It was put there because there was a recognition then, as there is now, that we need the widest possible spectrum of people involved. We must put that to the British Government because the Unionists simply will not do anything if the pressures are not there.

Chairman: Thank you very much. I am not going to suspend. We will go straight into the next session. I call on the members of the Justice for the Forgotten group to take their seats to make their presentation.

Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten

Chairman: We are now going to hear from representatives of Justice for the Forgotten to discuss their work to support those affected by violence in Northern Ireland. On behalf of the 12 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement committee I am pleased to welcome Ms Margaret Urwin from Justice for the Forgotten, who is accompanied by Ms Anne Cadwallader of the Pat Finucane Centre, the author of the recently- published book Lethal Allies: British Collusion in Ireland. I acknowledge the presence of several people who have joined us in the Visitors Gallery, who are representing some of the families affected by violence in Northern Ireland. We have Kevin and Catherine O’Loughlin, Bernie McNally, Bernadette Joly, Thomas O’Brien, Noel Hegarty, John Byrne, Derek Byrne, Alan White, Monica Duffy-Campbell, Pat Fay and Raymond Walker. You are most welcome to today’s meeting.

Before I invite you to make your presentation I advise that you are protected by absolute privilege. However, if you are directed by the committee to cease making remarks on a particular matter and you continue to so do, you are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of your remarks. You are directed that only comments and evidence in respect of the subject matter of this meeting are to be given and you are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, you do not criticise or make charges against a Mem- ber of either House of the Oireachtas, a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Without further ado I call on Ms Urwin to proceed with her opening statement.

Ms Margaret Urwin: Thank you, Chairman, for inviting us today and good morning. Jus- tice for the Forgotten was formed in 1996 to represent and support the bereaved families and survivors of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. We have gradually extended our remit over the years to include the families of other bomb attacks in the South during the 1970s, including the Dublin bombings of 1972 and 1973 as well as the Belturbet, Dundalk and Castleblayney bombings. We also represent the families of the Miami Showband and several families whose relatives were killed in single incident attacks. Justice for the Forgotten, JFF, is the only dedi- cated organisation working with victims in this jurisdiction and is best placed to deliver services that are supportive and sensitive to the needs of victims. Our services are available to anyone bereaved or injured as a result of the conflict, regardless of political or religious affiliation. Our work in the past included assisting the efforts of the late Judge Henry Barron during his inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan and other bomb attacks. Justice for the Forgotten made 52 submissions to Judge Barron during the course of his investigations; we carried out our own inquiries and we interviewed people with information. Uniquely for an NGO, we were authorised by the judge to suggest lines of inquiry for the inquiry to pursue, signifying our authoritative knowledge and experience of the cases before him.

During the lifetime of the Remembrance Commission, we assisted the State extensively by identifying and locating many victims’ families and survivors. We were responsible for channelling at least €1.5 million of the commission’s fund to victims. The Remembrance Com- mission was established as a result of the recommendations of the late former victims’ commissioner, John Wilson, in his report, A Place and a Name, published in August 1999.

We were centrally involved in the procurement of permanent memorials in the State. We approached and liaised with councils and the Remembrance Commission in this regard. To their credit, the councils contacted responded enthusiastically, providing partial funding for the memorials, the core funding for which came from the funds of the Remembrance Commis- sion. As a result of these efforts, memorials were erected in Belturbet, Castleblayney, Dundalk and in Dublin for the Miami Showband. Memorials had already been secured in Talbot Street and Glasnevin Cemetery, Dublin, and in Monaghan for the 1974 bombings. A memorial for the victims of the 1972 and 1973 bombings was set into the pavement in Sackville Place, with

13 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten financial assistance from Dublin Bus. The unveiling ceremonies of these memorials were very moving occasions, when the relief and joy on the faces of the families that their loved ones were being given official recognition was evident, and whole towns came out to commemorate with the families. This experience brought home to us the importance of physical structures of remembrance, not only to families and survivors, but to the wider communities in which they are placed. We provided counselling and holistic therapies where requested, but we found that the focus of the majority of those we represent was in recovering the truth of what happened to their loved ones.

We were funded for a decade by the Government from 2000 to 2009. When the Govern- ment withdrew our funding, and we failed to procure an alternative despite strenuous efforts on our part, we were forced to close our doors in July 2010. However, the Pat Finucane Centre, based in the North, came to our rescue and managed to secure limited funding for us as part of its organisation under the PEACE III programme. As a result, we were able to re-open in December 2010. The funding covers just one salary, travel and room hire expenses. Funding to run a Dublin office was refused because we were and are outside of Special EU Programmes Body’s remit. This limited funding will end in June 2014. Much work remains to be done.

Although the Barron inquiries provided a considerable amount of new information, giving much solace and comfort to the families concerned, the outstanding thorny issue remaining, ten years after the publication of the Dublin and Monaghan report, is the failure of the British Government to co-operate in any meaningful way with Judge Barron’s investigations. In his report on Dublin and Monaghan, the judge said that the value of information provided by the NIO was reduced because of the reluctance to make original documents available and London’s refusal to supply other information on security grounds had resulted in the scope of his report being limited. The British Government has, so far, failed to comply with two Dáil motions passed unanimously on 10 July 2008 and 17 May 2011, calling on it to make the undisclosed files available to an independent, international judicial figure for assessment. Over the past year we have been in discussions with the British ambassador on how a way forward might be found, but despite some hopeful signs, no positive outcome has yet been achieved. We hope to continue our discussions with him in the coming months.

We had a significant breakthrough recently when the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland accepted that our complaint regarding the RUC’s investigation into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings fell within its remit. Its historical directorate’s investigation is due to begin this year. Another single incident case, whose family we represent, was also accepted by the police ombudsman in November. We have submitted a complaint on behalf of the Dundalk families and are awaiting a decision on that case. We will be submitting further complaints in respect of the other bomb attacks in the coming months. The Miami Showband case was accepted more than a year ago, but those murders occurred within the boundary of Northern Ireland. We view the investigation of deaths that occurred in this jurisdiction by a Northern Ireland statutory body as very significant progress, as the remit of the historical enquiries team was confined to Northern Ireland.

We are liaising with An Garda Síochána about the Belturbet bombing case, for which the chief superintendent for the Cavan and Monaghan division has recently taken direct responsibility. I confirmed this morning that I will be meeting with him next week to discuss the Bel- turbet bombing. The Garda Síochána in Monaghan is also reviewing another single incident murder case, at our request, for any new evidential opportunities.

Justice for the Forgotten, along with the Pat Finucane Centre, has been centrally involved in 14 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement researching archival material over many years in both the National Archives of Ireland and the UK National Archives in Kew. Some of the results of this research have been included in Anne Cadwallader’s best-selling book, Lethal Allies, on which she will brief the committee shortly.

A decade of commemorations has begun during which the centenary of many key historical events in our country will rightly be remembered. This year also marks the fortieth anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings in which 34 people lost their lives, the greatest loss of life in a single day of the entire Troubles. We intend organising special events to commemorate this significant anniversary and would welcome any suggestions or assistance the committee may be able to provide in order to make this a truly memorable one for the families and survivors.

As I mentioned earlier, the cost of funding a Dublin-based office was refused under the PEACE III programme because we are outside of the Special EU Programmes Body’s geo- graphical remit. From the outset, that body’s remit was confined to the social and economic development of the six northern counties and the six counties immediately south of the Border. However, although we recognise that the development of economic and social conditions are very important, the most tragic and continuing legacy of the past is the impact on families and communities of the loss of life of family members and friends and the injuries and trauma suffered by survivors. We face a situation at the end of June 2014 when the PEACE III programme ends, of once again being placed in the position in which we found ourselves in 2010. PEACE IV funding will not come on stream before 2016, which may provide us again with limited funding. A new service, the Victims and Survivors Service, has been established in Northern Ireland, which will provide funding for victims’ organisations within Northern Ireland. How- ever, it has no remit to fund victims organisations outside of Northern Ireland.

We are bound to ask why it is considered that victims of the same conflict, but who were killed outside the territory of Northern Ireland, have a lesser need than those killed within its boundaries. Some 120 people were killed in the Republic during the Troubles - 51 of them in Dublin alone. Additionally, some families who lost loved ones in Northern Ireland subse- quently moved to the Republic. The Victims Commissioner for Northern Ireland, Ms Kathryn Stone, invited us, along with representatives from the Tim Parry and Jonathan Ball Founda- tion in Britain, who are in the same difficult position as ourselves, to meet with her recently to discuss our funding problems. The meeting was also attended by representatives from the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister and the Victims and Survivors Service. The Victims’ Commissioner expressed her concern at the exclusion of organisations outside of Northern Ireland from funding opportunities. At a recent conference in the Stormont Hotel, Mr. Kenny Donaldson of Innocent Victims United appealed for equal funding opportunities to be made available to victims’ organisations in the Republic of Ireland and Britain.

While we acknowledge the funding and support we received from the Government in the past, there now seems to be a general amnesia, in the media, in civil society and even in Gov- ernment, that there are victims of the Troubles in this State. While we readily accept that the great majority of victims are within the North, nevertheless it has to be recognised that victims here have continuing needs too. It is only fair to point out that the Government does fund the Commission for the Location of Victims’ Remains and also provides assistance for a defined number of injured survivors who need medical aids such as prostheses, hearing aids, etc., but the greatest need for the majority of victims is in the area of truth recovery.

Any truth recovery process has to be inclusive of all victims of the Troubles. While it is our view that the proposals of Drs. Haass and O’Sullivan were constructive and worthwhile, the 15 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten amnesia to which I have referred is, unfortunately, evident in the proposed Haass agreement of 31 December 2013 as denoted by its final published draft. The draft tells us that the proposed historical investigations unit would “take forward the remaining caseload of the HET and the conflict-related cases before the PONI”. This fails to take into account the many cases in the Republic which would not be eligible to be brought before police ombudsman and the remit of the HET has, since its inception, been limited to Northern Ireland.

The response by Amnesty International to the failure of the Haass talks reinforces this sense of amnesia. The executive director of Amnesty International Ireland said: ‘We are disappointed the parties failed to reach an agreement on dealing with the past, but determined to press for truth and justice for all victims in Northern Ireland.” He should, of course, have said: “for all victims of the conflict.” We appeal to the committee that, in the event of the Haass proposals being taken forward in the future, to make representations to the relevant parties to ensure that all victims are treated equally. This may necessitate the passage of specific legislation.

On the issue of funding, where there are structures in place including the North-South Min- isterial Council, the British-Irish Council and the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, it cannot pose an insurmountable problem to find a way to provide very modest funding for a small organisation in order that it may continue the work I have outlined to the committee today. Dublin, Westminster and Stormont should be able to reach agreement on this issue. We appeal to the committee to use its influence in this area also.

Failure to treat all victims equally is discriminatory and, in the absence of equality, talk of reconciliation rings very hollow indeed.

Chairman: I thank Ms Margaret Urwin. I will take Ms Anne Cadwallader’s contribution before opening it up to the committee. I note that Ms Cadwallader has quite an extensive dos- sier. I will give her a choice. She probably wants to read it into the record but, if so, it means she will have less time for engagement. It is up to her but if she wishes to summarise it, that would give us more time for engagement.

Ms Anne Cadwallader: If I can, I will skip over it.

Chairman: I will leave it up to Ms Cadwallader.

Ms Anne Cadwallader: I thank the Chairman and committee for having us appear before the committee. Some members may remember me from my previous incarnation as BBC cor- respondent in Dublin for five years in the 1980s and later as Irish Press political reporter in Leinster House at the end of the 1980s. It is great to be here as a participant and not just as a journalist. I am here specifically to speak about the book we have just published, Lethal Al- lies. In case anybody thinks, because it is a best seller, that I am about to retire and move to Bermuda, I am not getting any funding from it. Any money we make in profit will be ploughed back into the PFC because, as Ms Margaret Urwin said, our funding runs out in June. After that, who knows what will happen? However, it will keep us going for about a day and a half.

Some of the reviewers of the book have used the term that the Pat Finucane Centre is a campaign group for republican victims. I want to correct that. There is nothing wrong with being a republican - far from it - but we are really defenders of everybody’s human rights and we are also involved in an outreach to the Unionist community which, for obvious reasons, we cannot go into in too much detail. We help anyone who comes and asks us for help. We are named after Pat Finucane. The Finucane family is well capable of campaigning on its own behalf.

16 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement We believe, as he did before he was murdered, that the best way of upholding human rights is through the law, through the imposition of the law with fairness and equality on everyone.

A third of the people killed, whose deaths I detail in Lethal Allies, were killed south of the Border and most of them in Dublin. Let us eschew any partitionist mentality in our brains. The violence affected everyone in the 32 counties of Ireland, North and South, and everybody should be treated equally.

It is interesting to note that most of those murdered in the North were not republicans - in fact, only one was a republican. He was killed just south of the Border, probably by some undercover British execution squad. Most of those killed were civilians, non-combatants, and included civil servants, shopkeepers, farmers, a pharmacist, a metal fabricator, musicians, the Miami Showband, an ambulance driver and so on, while six were members of the SDLP, which was their only involvement, and some were members of the GAA. Others were probably killed merely because they were successful and were part of that new generation of upwardly mobile Catholic well-educated middle class and it was decided they had to be intimidated and some of them had to be killed. That is what happened.

There is much accusatory talk at the moment about people trying to rewrite history. There is nothing wrong with rewriting history if one is rewriting it accurately. The PFC, unashamedly, says we are involved in trying to rewrite history. What we have discovered from our research is that it simply does not fit in with the history, the dominant narrative, as it is called by academics, of the conflict that has so far been told. It is in everybody’s interest to reject propaganda and speculation and any inaccuracies from wherever they come and focus on facts. As Dr. Haass put it in his proposals, the time to rise to this challenge is now. We do not have the luxury of putting it off any longer. We must ensure the past does not overwhelm the present and the future.

I wish to speak about Lethal Allies. The book has sold more than 12,000 copies so far. We are travelling to Brussels later this month and to the US in March. Most of the real investiga- tive work was done by my colleagues before I joined the PFC. I put it all together which was a difficult task.

What is different about Lethal Allies is very simple. It is based on fact. There is nothing in the book that has been challenged since it was written. Nobody has come back to tell us we got something wrong. That is not to say it will not happen in due course but so far, thank God, it has not happened because everything we wrote was checked and rechecked and is factual. It was so important to get facts out, not opinion, not speculation.

The book came about because there was a story to tell - the story about the wasted lives of 120 people. It is a story about the failure of both the British and Irish states to defend the lives of their citizens. The key lesson to be learned from Lethal Allies is that collusion fuelled the conflict. Did collusion bring the violence to an end a single day earlier than it did? No. Did collusion save a single life? No. As Father Denis Faul put it, collusion taught Nationalists that they could not trust the police, the UDR or the courts. Confidence in the rule of law collapsed.

There may still be people even sitting in this room who believe that collusion is both propaganda and did not happen, that it is made up. It is true the word has been overused like a political sledgehammer. Both sides of the community and those who live in the South have much to gain from understanding its nature. Facing up to the past is going to be like looking at one’s own face in the mirror after a hard night, sometimes not the easiest of experiences.

17 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten It all started off with my colleague who works with me in Armagh, Mr. Alan Brecknell whose father was shot dead and blown up in an indiscriminate attack on a bar in 1975. His family were told not to come to his funeral because they would be attacked by the IRA, which was far from the truth. When he discovered that was a lie, because his father was killed by loyalists, he started investigating, and enlisted the support of the Pat Finucane Centre, PFC. The PFC spent many years working hard on investigating what went on. That was helped immensely when the then Taoiseach, Mr. Bertie Ahern, whatever his other failings, supported by the Oireachtas, ordered the inquiry under Mr. Justice Henry Barron. His work resulted in vital forensic evidence about the so-far hidden links between perpetrators and ballistic and forensic links coming into the public domain. He had the facts. His final report prompted the joint committee to conclude that it had no doubt that collusion between the British security forces and what it called terrorists was behind many if not all the atrocities considered. The joint committee said the British Cabinet was aware of the level to which the security forces had been infiltrated and its failure to respond had allowed the problem to grow.

The Mr. Justice Barron inquiry stepped up the process a gear or two and then the Historical Enquiries Team, HET stepped it up another gear or two when it began work. A critical fact for us was that the HET officers had access to what in our sphere of influence was considered the Holy Grail, the RUC secure depository of files in Carrickfergus. They were security vetted so they could get the files. At the start, many officers were sceptical about collusion as they regarded it as propaganda, but when they saw the files, they began to talk not about alleged collusion but about collusion. I am tempted to describe what they found as a goldmine, but that would be gilding the lily. One senior officer described to me that they had discovered a cesspool, as it was referred to. Individuals were making a significant difference. Meanwhile the PFC and Justice for the Forgotten were also continuing the work of investigating the national archives in London, finding much of interest, including the fact the British knew as early as 1973 that the UDR was hopelessly infiltrated by loyalist paramilitaries but did nothing about it. We also found that weapons were disappearing routinely from UDR armouries right, left and centre, month after month and were being used to kill people. As the HET’s reports began to emerge, families began to understand what had been kept from them for more than three decades.

I will give an example. Members will be aware of Mr. Eugene Reavey and what his family went through. The three brothers of Eugene Reavey were killed almost exactly 38 years ago on 4 January 1976. One gun that was used to kill them was a Sterling sub-machine gun. Five months after the murder of the Reavey brothers, the same gun was used in a gun and bomb attack on the Rock Bar in south Armagh, in which each and every single assailant was a serving RUC officer. It had been stolen from Glenanne UDR base and it was used to murder eight other people, including SDLP branch chairman, Mr. Denis Mullen, an elderly farming couple, Alan Brecknell’s father, Trevor, and two others in the same incident, including a 14 year old boy. A tenth man was shot dead, after which the gun was recovered. The gun had killed 11 people in 11 months, leaving 19 children fatherless, orphaning five children, yet the HET could find no evidence on an investigation into the disappearance of this gun. A second gun, a Luger used to kill the Reavey brothers had also been used to kill Seán Farmer and Colm McCartney, a cousin of Seamus Heaney, as they returned home from an All Ireland semi-final at Croke Park. It was also used in the attack on the Rock Bar. The guns were being shared and swapped and taken from the UDR and were used by both serving RUC officers and loyalist paramilitaries. It did not matter. They got the guns and used them to kill people. This was never investigated.

Another example is when four serving police officers were involved in an attack on the bar called the Step Inn. It was known about in advance and it could have been stopped by the stroke

18 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement of a policeman’s pen. It went ahead and two people were killed, the mother of three young boys and a young plumber who played GAA. The RUC special branch knew all about it and knew about the involvement of four police officers in that attack, yet did nothing to prevent it. When it happened, they did nothing to investigate it. Those families have only recently discovered the facts and are on the brink of taking legal action, which they are very reluctant to take for obvious reasons. However, how else can they make accountable those who failed to uphold their rights?

There are questions about the role of Mr. Robin Jackson, possibly the most prolific killer during the entire period of the Troubles. He probably killed between 50 and 100 people. It has been established beyond any shadow of doubt that he was an RUC agent. He was allowed to continue. He died of natural causes. There are many people in the North who lost their relatives as a result of his work.

The families we speak for, and all other bereaved families, have an inalienable right to the truth. They are the real losers in the conflict. The wider society in Britain and Ireland also needs to discover the truth about collusion. In a normal crime context, the police gather evidence - forensic, admissions, eye-witness evidence. If that crime is collusion, who is there to seek evidence? Those directly involved hardly qualify.

In an article in the current edition of History Ireland, Professor James Hughes of the London School of Economics writes that the British Army’s abuses of human rights in the North were not “merely low-level tactical excesses by undisciplined and racist troops but ... institutional, systematic, and approved or covered-up at the highest levels”. Professor Hughes and others, point to more current disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan. The British Government currently faces a complaint on behalf of 400 Iraqi families at the International Criminal Court alleging they represent thousands of people tortured, shot, hooded, sexually assaulted and subjected to mock executions. In recent days, the British Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron, has ordered an investigation into claims that the SAS was involved in the storming of the Golden Temple at Amritsar in which between 400 and 1,000 people were killed.

We owe it, not just to our children but also to grandchildren, to continue this work, because the work we have done shows we can establish the facts about the violent past, and when the past is honestly faced up to and examined, it has a reconciling quality. We owe it to people living far away in current theatres of war, and those yet to come, that we must learn from the past. Otherwise all we can say is that we do not learn from the past, which would be a tragedy. That is a tragedy we are trying to prevent.

Chairman: I thank Ms Anne Cadwallader and Ms Margaret Urwin for their contributions. Ms Cadwallader’s chilling account brings us vividly to events of that time. Deputy Brendan Smith is offering and Ms Margaret Richie, MP, will follow.

Deputy Brendan Smith: I welcome Ms Margaret Urwin and Ms Anne Cadwallader and compliment them on their presentations. Ms Cadwallader has done the public a service in the publication of the book Lethal Allies. As the Chairman said it is chilling to read the stories. Some months ago, I heard the former Deputy First Minister, Mr. Seamus Mallon, recall in graphic detail some of the atrocities that were carried out in parts of Armagh. Some months ago, we had the opportunity to listen to Ms Denise Mullen and Mr. Eugene Reavey giving their account of the atrocities that were committed against their families. I have been familiar with the work of the group Justice for the Forgotten for some years through Ms Urwin, with particular reference to the atrocities and murders that were carried out in my constituency in Belturbet, 19 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten Monaghan and Castleblayney. It is most disappointing that the British Government has so far failed to comply with two Dáil motions that were passed unanimously in 2008 and 2011. This committee should send a unanimous recommendation to the Taoiseach, Tánaiste and directly to the British ambassador reiterating our concern that the British Government has failed abys- mally to take into account the concerns expressed unanimously by a sovereign parliament.

Ms Urwin mentioned the celebratory occasions, which is probably not the right word, when monuments were unveiled. I was very glad to be able to participate in the unveiling of the memorial in Belturbet. It gives official recognition to the desperate murder of young people on that night in December 1972 in Belturbet. In my dealings with the families, the only message I got from them was that they wanted the truth. None of them ever wanted revenge. I compliment the families, Justice for the Forgotten and the Pat Finucane Centre on the dignified manner in which they have worked and on their commitment to advocating on behalf of the bereaved. I am glad that some of them were able to be present today. I know some of the names that were read out, having attended the commemoration of the Dublin bombing on Talbot Street each year. We should send a firm request to the Taoiseach or the Tánaiste asking him to seek British Government co-operation again. We should also send that request to the British ambassador, given how our guests have been in discussion with him for a considerable period.

When Lethal Allies: British Collusion in Ireland was published, I read it immediately. It does a public service in outlining the campaign of murdering innocent people that was assisted by so-called state forces.

Chairman: Ms Ritchie is next, followed by Deputy Feighan.

Ms Margaret Ritchie: I welcome Ms Urwin and Ms Cadwallader. I had the courtesy of Ms Cadwallader’s presentation in the House of Commons a couple of months ago.

I support the need to find the truth so as to ensure that the elements of the Haass outcomes dealing with the past are implemented by way of legislation. This matter builds on the Eames- Bradley report. Collusion fuelled the conflict. People are looking for truth, some measure of justice and accountability from the British and Irish Governments.

I take Ms Urwin’s point, which was re-emphasised by Deputy Smith, about the two Dáil motions that the British Government has failed to recognise or acknowledge. Those of us who are Members of the House of Commons have a duty and responsibility to pursue the British Government in this regard. We will do so.

Recently, we learned courtesy of The Guardian that the British Government had Ministry of Defence files at Swadlincote in Derbyshire, many of which related to the North and state collusion. As late as June 2013, the Historical Enquiries Team, HET, did not know that these files were available or what they contained. We must force them out into the open. As has been stated, there could be information in them that relates directly to what happened in the Dublin- Monaghan bombings and could be of help to Justice for the Forgotten. The committee could pursue this matter and make overtures to the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the British ambassador. We in the House of Commons will follow it through. A colleague of Ms Cadwallader’s, Mr. Ian Cobain of The Guardian, is also anxious to pursue these matters.

Ms Cadwallader has done us all a significant service with Lethal Allies: British Collusion in Ireland. She has shone a light where others were afraid to do so, namely, on collusion, its impact and how weapons that belonged to state forces were used and misused to kill innocent

20 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement people in many parts of the North. I know some of their families well. Those people eschewed violence. All they wanted was to be a part of the democratic process and bring about a shared and reconciled society in the North and on this island.

As Deputy Smith stated, it is important that the Irish Government put pressure on the Brit- ish Government to bring this necessary truth and justice forward so that we can put to bed once and for all the terrible atrocities of the past. Of equal importance, we must examine the element raised by Ms Urwin, that being, the Haass talks did not consider other victims. A light must be shone on this as well. The other elements of the Haass talks must result in implementation, legislation and resolution, since these are the most important issues. We must never forget the trauma, pain and suffering of all of the victims and survivors.

Chairman: Mr. Murphy will follow Deputy Feighan.

Deputy Frank Feighan: I apologise for needing to leave the meeting during Ms Urwin’s submission, but I had received it in advance. I thank her for the work done by Justice for the Forgotten.

I am encouraged that the Barron inquiry provided a great deal of new information and has supported Justice for the Forgotten. What more could this committee do? I am a member of the North-South Interparliamentary Association. If we could be helpful, please let us know.

The Troubles were difficult times. Our State did not forget, but it occasionally did not want to remember much of what happened. The Dublin-Monaghan bombings are not remembered in the way the State should. My observation includes myself, in that I may have been remiss. Sometimes, we have not been sent invitations. This matter should be further up the list. More than 50 innocent people died on that day, but they have been forgotten.

I thank Ms Cadwallader for her work. It was shocking. We have met Mr. Eugene Reavey and I am familiar with the Glenanne area. When one drives through Markethill or Bessbrook, the nearest village is Camlough. Within a mile of each other across fields are two completely different communities. Given that such murder and bloodshed occurred in small rural communities across the island, it is shocking that this information is only coming out now.

Has the HET been helpful and where should it go? It has been established, but I have heard that some of its investigations have not been helpful.

I come from Boyle, County Roscommon, which has not been at the coalface of the Troubles. One tries to understand them, but it is difficult to do so, as one did not go through them. Forgive where I am coming from. We all want to see solace and truth for the island and its people who suffered. What would be the best way forward? Would it be a truth commission? Politicians are grappling with this issue and want to do what is right.

I thank our guests for their submissions. As Ms Ritchie stated, they have shone a light where we have all sometimes feared to tread, as doing so could be inconvenient.

Chairman: Deputy Wall will follow Mr. Murphy.

Mr. Conor Murphy: I thank Ms Cadwallader and Ms Urwin for their presentations. It is an all-too-familiar story. Deputy Feighan mentioned the village of Camlough, where I was born and reared and still live. It was bombed indiscriminately twice during the period described by Ms Cadwallader. Indeed, a neighbour of mine was picked up at our front gate, driven half a

21 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten mile up the road and murdered. Those responsible reversed over him as well to ensure that he was dead. It was widely believed at the time that the people involved were local RUC person- nel from the neighbouring village of Bessbrook, where their station was. That was a familiar pattern. It was not just the involvement of people in the actual events but it was the fact the areas were cleared. Helicopters disappeared. There was a level of co-ordination beyond just those involved in the actual shootings, which ensured attacks could be carried out in villages and bars in Nationalist areas generally and on individual families. It also ensured those involved were not interrupted in their endeavours. Those above that again ensured there was no proper investigation and, right up to Cabinet level, people were aware all this was happening and took no action in regard to it.

What happened in Ireland was a familiar pattern which developed in many other colonial sites of conflict that Britain managed over the years, including in Kenya, Aden and other places. It simply perfected and professionalised it more as it went through the conflict in Ireland in regard to collusion, shoot to kill, arming and providing intelligence to loyalist paramilitaries. It was a very familiar pattern. None the less, I think Ms Cadwallader’s book has done a great service not just in repeating the facts which we, as a community, knew them to be but in using what limited investigations there were into them to nail down those facts. That has been a great service.

I refer to two issues, including the resource issue for Justice for the Forgotten that seems to have fallen between two stools as the Special EU Programmes Body remit does not stretch that far. The committee should support the mainstreaming of resources for the Justice for the Forgotten group from the Government in this jurisdiction. It provides a very valuable service to victims as well as to the ongoing pursuit of the truth in or around the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

Ms Richie alluded to the fact that in the implementation of the Haass proposals, in particular dealing with the past, if there is a gap or a weakness, even though the origins of these attacks which took place in this State were from the North, which generally speaking is the area in which I live, the victims were from and the attacks took place on the southern side of the Bor- der. If that proves to be a gap in the systems proposed out of Haass, that is something we need to address through legislation to ensure we do not leave people behind. As Ms Richie said, the conflict did not just affect the people in the Six Counties but people across the island. Attacks took place across the island, even beyond the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. Dublin was attacked again in the 1990s when Martin Doherty was killed trying to prevent the bombing of a pub. We must ensure that if we get to the stage of implementing the Haass proposals and looking at legislation, there are no gaps in that legislation so that all incidents are covered and all victims are supported in that regard.

Deputy Jack Wall: I welcome Ms Ritchie, Ms Cadwallader and members of the families. I do not want to go over what was said but I support what Mr. Murphy said in regard to funding for Justice for the Forgotten. If our sincerity means anything, we must allow the group to continue its work without concern about finance. It will continue that work, irrespective of funding. Its determination in regard to this sad piece of history is wonderful. It is great that people care and understand the trauma experienced by and worries faced by the families. We must ensure funding is put in place and that we make the strongest recommendation possible to the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste to allow the group to continue its good work without any concerns. When one is doing research and so on, one must be able to hire people and incur costs. All those things are pragmatic and they must be addressed. I hope this committee agrees to make those

22 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement representations in order that those concerns of the group will be put to bed once and for all.

People spoke about Ms Cadwallader’s wonderful book. It is wonderful in that it underpins the thoughts and ideas which were out there. Further pressure can be applied on the British Government by those in a position to do so, such as ourselves, ministerial committees, etc, to get it to assist in regard to any records or otherwise it has. Ms Cadwallader has underpinned the truth. That is what these meetings and this committee are about. They give people the opportunity to state their case and enable us to move on. There is no use in us just listening. We must take action as well and apply pressure on Departments or Ministers to move this on to the next stage, which is the British Government making these records and so on available. I hope we will move this on to the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste and that we will ensure the concerns about the funding of the group are not in any way undermined and are resolved.

Deputy Martin Ferris: I apologise I had to leave for 15 minutes. I pay special tribute to Ms Urwin on the tremendous work she and her group have done in keeping that terrible injustice alive and in the public eye and on the work they have done trying to highlight and get justice for the families of those who died, and I think it was said 150 people died in this State. Great credit is due to them. What is embarrassing, from a political point of view, is that the Government has failed to give any funding towards the continuation of the good work the group is doing. Like everybody here, we will make a representation that I hope does not fall on deaf ears, although that happens to be the case in many instances.

I read Ms Cadwallader’s book, on which I commend her. She has done a tremendous service to truth and justice by putting pen to paper in this regard. What is striking and very annoy- ing when one reads part of the 2003 Barron report is that the Irish Government showed little interest in the bombings, and when information was given to it suggesting British authorities had intelligence, namely, the bombers, it was not followed up. Again, a huge question mark surrounds the lack of follow through on information given to the Irish Government.

I read Lethal Allies over Christmas. During the 1970s, in particular, Raymond Murray, Denis Faul and Cardinal Conway continually outlined what was happening in that area, which was known as the murder triangle, and brought it to public and political attention, but there was continuous denial about was happening. All of that has come to pass.

Robin Jackson, Ted Sinclair, James Mitchell, Kerr, the Somervilles and all those who were actively involved in killing innocent people, mainly of the Catholic persuasion, all had an association at one time or another with the so-called security forces and were allowed to continue to operate and carry out the killing of a large number of innocent people. They targeted people because they were Catholics. I read where the GOC encouraged people to use the UDA to pro- tect their communities, irrespective of what it had done. What it was allowed to get away with was disgraceful. People highlighted it at the time. I remember vividly that it was continuously brought to the attention of the Government here by Fr. Raymond Murray and the then Cardinal Conway. As documented in Ms Cadwallader’s book, several meetings took place with the cardinal and members of the British Government at the time, yet nothing was done. It was allowed to continue. I will quote a passage from Ms Cadwallader’s book regarding Robin Jackson:

Everything people have whispered about Robin Jackson for years was perfectly true. He was a hired gun; a professional assassin. He was responsible for more deaths in the North than any other person I knew. The Jackal killed people for a living. The state not only knew he was doing it, its servants encouraged him to kill his political opponents and protected him. 23 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten It is a major indictment of the British political system that nothing was done to stop this person. It is not that they did not have evidence. He had been arrested. They had raided Sinclair’s house, one of the farmyards used in the killings in that area. They had found a silencer with his fingerprints on the gun. They had stopped him in a car and found a loaded gun in the car that was taken from a raid on a UDR station, yet they allowed him continue. To this day the British Government, as is the case with the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and other killings in the South, has not come clean about what happened. It has shut the door on it. As it leads right to its doorstep, it was sanctioned at the highest level that these people were allowed continue.

In one of our last meetings just before Christmas representatives of Families of the Disap- peared came before us. One man had lost three brothers, the Reavey brothers who were killed. He met us individually and told us that a very senior RUC officer supplied the weapons that killed his brothers, and he continued to operate for many years after that incident. These were hired killers working for the state, in collusion with the state, to kill either political opponents or to terrorise a Nationalist Catholic community into submission. That is what this was all about.

I have one question for Ms Cadwallader. Regarding her research on which tremendous work was done and on which I understand she got a great deal of support, did she get any help from the Government in the South or from agencies of the Government in the South? It is a personal question but we are coming up against a blank wall. Everybody knows what happened. Everybody knows that the bombers left Mitchell’s farm to come to bomb Dublin. Everybody knows that. Everybody knows that Billy Hanna was the main person involved in that. Robin Jackson was involved in that but nothing has been done about it. That is from the mid-1970s when Weir and McConnell went public on it. Colin Wallace went public on it in 1997 or 1998 and named those involved in it, but nothing has been done about it. Despite the fact it has been asked to co-operate by two motions passed in the House of the Oireachtas, the British Govern- ment has done nothing about this. I would like Ms Cadwallader’s comments on that. I thank both witnesses for the tremendous work they are doing and ask them to keep it up because the truth will surface eventually.

Chairman: I will call Ms Cadwallader at the end. We have three more contributors. We will hear first from Alasdair McDonnell followed by Senator Mary White.

Dr. Alasdair McDonnell: I will be brief and keep it simple. I congratulate Ms Urwin on her presentation, which brought back memories for me. I was a student the evening the bomb went off in Dublin and I know how scary and dangerous it was and how bewildered people were at the time. I would commit to doing anything to ensure they get justice, which I will come to shortly. I congratulate Ms Cadwallader on the success of the book because it has been a tremendous asset to many of us in tying together the threads of collusion that were running through many events. While the Historical Enquiries Team, HET, had done some useful individual work, it took Ms Cadwallader to pull it all together in her book. I have found it immensely useful.

I want to put on the record that from my perspective, surviving victims, and by that I mean the injured, and surviving relatives of the innocent people who were killed, need and deserve the truth. There is an onus on us all, whether we are operating in the North or in the South, and particularly those of us in public life, to ensure the truth is delivered. We have to do all we can in that regard. Funding for Justice for the Forgotten is a small aspect of that and I urge colleagues on the committee to support any effort that can be made to ensure some funding is given to this group to sustain it because it is doing a very useful job, fulfilling a very useful role and it should not be allowed reach a point where it cannot function. 24 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement There is a great deal of information to be absorbed and dealt with and I am grateful to the two people who presented to the committee for informing and educating us across the entire victims and survivors spectrum.

Chairman: I call Senator Mary White who will be followed by Deputy Seán Crowe.

Senator Mary M. White: I will be brief. I am humbled by Ms Margaret Urwin’s continuous drive to get justice for the forgotten. What she has done on her own is awesome. I thank her very much for that. I concur with my colleague, Deputy Frank Feighan, that it would be appropriate, and this is not a criticism of the commemoration of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings, that we would put pressure on the Government in this regard. People have empathy with and understanding for this particular group of people, but we should try to engage with the broader Irish community. That is not a criticism but the Irish people should know about this. Over the years, if one ever suggested there was collusion, people would think one was off the wall; they would not believe it. What I found in Ms Cadwallader’s book is that at long last it dealt with facts. Like Ms Urwin, Ms Cadwallader is a true Irish patriot.

In the summary of her book Ms Cadwallader states that an agreed truth recovery process is needed not only for the families of the people in the North but for both communities to try to learn from the past. What type of truth recovery process would Ms Cadwallader suggest?

I record that my former colleague in the Seanad, Tony Kett, told me many times that Tony Blair, who I believe should be in The Hague, along with George W. Bush, for all the crimes they have committed and the lies the two Governments told about Iraq where people continue to be killed every day, told the former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, that they would not open up any inquiry in this regard or on the Pat Finucane issue. I spoke here to the best friend of the former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, who is a friend of mine also, and he told me Blair has insisted he will not allow any transparency in terms of what has happened. That is a fact. I thank the two witnesses.

Chairman: The final two contributors are Deputy Seán Crowe followed by Senator Mary Moran.

Deputy Seán Crowe: Like the other contributors I have a good deal to say on this subject in which for most of my life on the island of Ireland I have been interested. I have met families whose relatives were killed over the years, and some of my friends have been killed, but one of the most important things we can do here today is come up with recommendations on how we can move the process forward. I would like the witnesses to outline their recommendations on how to deal with this area. They have made the point about the ones they have investigated from the South. What are their recommendations for the South?

Ms Urwin spoke about funding ending in June. Where will Justice for the Forgotten go from here? She also spoke about the Ball and Parry families. Could she suggest a way forward for the different Government bodies?

For those listening at home, how would the witnesses respond to the simplistic narrative of those who say we should forget the past and move on? Some people say that the historical enquiries team is unfair, that it focuses on loyalists not republicans and that it is time to put that to bed, to forget about it. They say that it does not help the process of peace and reconciliation on the island. How do the witnesses respond to that narrative?

We hear the idea that there were a few bad apples in the UDR and the RUC who were gener- 25 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten ally the best of men and women. There is no doubt that there were good people in those organisations, who were there for their own fine reasons. Do the witnesses believe that there were a few bad apples or do they believe that it was part of a British Government strategy? When I was younger I read Frank Kitson’s book, Low Intensity Operations which dealt with the coun- ter-gangs involved in the war in the North and the mobile reaction force, MRF. People talked about communities living side by side, Protestant and Catholic, with no tradition of conflict or tension and the impact that many of these killings had on those communities. It seemed to be a deliberate policy to try to create tension between communities. The recent book about the MRF described taking pot shots and killing people and so on. It also killed people on the loyalist side, Protestants, as well as Catholics, and tried to kill republicans. It was a negative influence.

The narrative we hear today is that when the Brits were there they were honest brokers. The appalling vista is that a Prime Minister would know about a shoot-to-kill policy. There was a pattern in many of the killings to secure the area, those who engaged in the killings were allowed through road blocks and so on. I do not think that the narrative that Ms Cadwallader offers in her book will take off. There is an agreed, accepted narrative about the conflict in the past. That is one reason why many of those opposed to dealing with the past do not want a method for dealing with the past. Maybe that is why the previous contributors spoke about the Haass proposals. There are people fighting the war in the background. They do not want their own past to come out. When the truth does come out, and hopefully it will sooner rather than later, that will move peace and reconciliation forward on the island for all of us. A structure for this has to be established. I would be interested in hearing the witnesses’ views on what that structure should be.

Senator Mary Moran: I thank the Chairman for allowing me contribute. I appreciate the time constraint so I will be brief. I congratulate and commend both witnesses on their contributions today. Ms Cadwallader’s book sounds chilling. The truth and statements contained in it are absolutely overwhelming. It is unbelievable.

I met Ms Urwin in Monaghan and concur with her that we must do whatever we can. When I met her two years ago funding was a big issue. I am sorry that she is back here two years later and that we have made no progress on that. She is to be commended on her work. As I come from Dundalk I know of the plaque erected after the Kays Tavern bombing.

Ms Margaret Urwin: Does the Senator mean the memorial?

Senator Mary Moran: Yes. It is very important to the families and for people in the town. When I bring my children by I point it out to them. I was very young when it happened. I was coming home from school, and did not fully understand what was going on when I heard the bang that evening. One of my neighbours was missing for several hours afterwards and I know the effect that had.

We also need to get on to the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach to get the answers on why these Dáil motions were completely ignored. That is very important and it is something that we can do to move on.

Why was the funding for Justice for the Forgotten withdrawn in 2009?

Ms Margaret Urwin: Does the Chairman want me to answer that question now?

Chairman: No the final contributor is Deputy Ellis. He should not follow the pattern set by the committee members. 26 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement Senator Mary Moran: I am sorry. I stayed close to brevity.

Chairman: I am not referring only to Senator Moran. Brevity is alien to the other members but this is an important issue.

Deputy Dessie Ellis: I thank the Chairman for allowing me to come in. I thank Ms Urwin and Ms Cadwallader for their contributions. I have met Ms Urwin many times. She is a Trojan worker. I do not know how she keeps it up because it is a huge task and a demanding one. I have not read Ms Cadwallader’s book yet but I hope to do so soon.

I have been a republican all my life. I have been involved in the republican struggle. Like many republicans I have always believed that there was a British Government agenda, a huge behind-the-scenes influence on the conflict as it unfolded.L iving in the South I saw that many people did not fully understand that. I believe the Irish Government and the State were happy enough that people did not get the proper information. In my opinion the Irish Government was aware of much that was going on, that there was a lot of collusion. The Governments during that period were in contact with the British Government and its security services, passing information. The Irish Government has questions to answer about those who were in government at the time. That this was going on has passed under many people’s radar.

People in the nationalist and republican areas knew this was happening but it did not seem to come across and there did not seem to be any big outcry. I happened to be in Dublin on the night of the bombings. I was going to a stag party and got off the bus in North Frederick Street when I heard the explosions. Unfortunately, that remains in my memory. The truth has to come out and there has to be a mechanism found for everybody to speak out. It does not matter whether a person is republican or loyalist. Whoever was involved in what happened and unfolded, it is better the truth comes out. We have members of families who need to know what happened to their family members. We need to have closure for the many people who have been affected. I hope, in time, whether it is through a truth commission or otherwise, that we will get a full picture across the board of what happened, how things unfolded and what happened to people’s family members. That is what I hope to see in the future. I look forward to finding a proper mechanism to do that.

Chairman: Thank you, Deputy. Before I ask the witnesses to sum up, I point out that I am obliged by another commitment and have to leave. With the agreement of the committee, I ask that Deputy Frank Feighan take the Chair in my absence. Is that agreed? Agreed. I thank Ms Cadwallader and Ms Urwin for their contributions today. There will be follow-up in regard to what we propose to do, but I will leave that to Deputy Feighan. I thank the witnesses once again and also thank the members.

Deputy Frank Feighan took the Chair.

Ms Anne Cadwallader: Before Ms Urwin has the final word, I will make a few brief comments. I was asked whether I think the historical enquiries team, HET, should continue or not. We were terribly lucky that we got HET officers who worked with us and who were very coura- geous, but it should not just be down to a question of luck. The guys we got were prepared to stand up to the hostility and the discouragement from others not to dig too deep. They had the courage to stand up to them and they did a good job. However, it should not rely on individuals. The HET itself is now hopelessly compromised, no one is co-operating with it, its day is over and we need something new.

27 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten I was also asked what the new process should look like. With some tweaking and some changes, Haass is certainly the basis of what would be an acceptable process. Having said that, there would have to be a few changes, but that is up to the political parties. At the moment, the whole thing seems to be unravelling, unless anybody has heard anything different. That would be a shame because this is going to be an intergenerational thing. There is no doubt that the children and grandchildren of those people who died are affected by this. Conflict will start up again, not exactly as it was, but it will continue, whatever about the need for truth of the bereaved families. There is also a duty on the state to try to prevent pressures building up, and there must be a process.

Deputy Martin Ferris asked what help we had from the Irish Government, and I will defer to Ms Urwin on that. Deputy Seán Crowe referred to Kitson and to the architects. Even though it may sound a bit conspiratorial, and members may all think I am crazy, I actually think there was a policy in the 1970s to intimidate those people who were asking for civil and constitutional rights, and it was not just a question of a few very evil men. I think there was a policy from London, but I will not go into that here because it is very complicated. It is worth reading the book, where I go into that a bit.

I want to talk very briefly about the Smithwick tribunal. When the Smithwick tribunal found that, on the balance of probabilities, there had been collusion in the murders of Harry Breen and Bob Buchanan, there was an immediate and contrite apology from the Irish Government and from the Garda Commissioner. We have shown in Lethal Allies there is a mountain of evidence in the files that there was wholesale collusion in the murders of more than 120 people. Far from an apology, far from contrition from the British authorities, they are trying to ignore it. They refuse to meet us, they have not apologised, they have not shown any concern and they have made absolutely no statement whatsoever. It is frankly outrageous that this is the situation.

I am a Brit. I am not Irish. I was born and brought up in the home counties of England. My father was in the British Army, as was my mother and my sister, and my brother was a policeman. I am not Irish but I am deeply, deeply ashamed of what my country has done here. How- ever, it was not done in the name of the ordinary British people. It was not done in my name, it was not done in the name of anyone I know and it certainly was not done in my father or my mother’s name. There are guilty people there, not the whole British nation. However, as a Brit, I suppose I have a special interest in all of this because I want to make my country own up to what it did here, so we can all move on together in a new spirit of friendship.

I believe the priority of the British Government during this conflict was, above all, to pre- serve its reputation internationally as an honest broker between these two crazy warring Irish tribes. They still, I think, try to promote their reputation as that, which is why they will fight tooth and nail to avoid facing up to the evidence we have provided in Lethal Allies and else- where. It will be a hard, hard battle. The officers we work with in the HET lifted up a corner of the carpet briefly. We saw what was underneath but, believe me, they are going to try to nail that carpet down again as hard as they possibly can to avoid anybody ever again seeing what they have got hidden.

Ms Margaret Urwin: Deputy Frank Feighan asked what we could do in the future. Deputy Brendan Smith suggested what the committee can do in terms of bringing pressure to bear on the British Government to honour the Dáil motions that were passed in 2008 and 2011, which is very important. Those committee members who were on the North-South and east-west bodies, the British-Irish interparliamentary Assembly or the British-Irish Council must emphasise to their colleagues from the British side the importance of honouring and complying with these 28 Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement motions.

We met with the Taoiseach in July. We had sought a meeting for a long time and we got our meeting in July. He promised that he would keep raising this with the British. It probably needs to be done in a more public way to try to somehow bring more pressure. I do not think it will be done in private or in one-to-one meetings, certainly not solely anyway. Pressure has to be brought to bear. If this committee can put forward a proposal to the Government on that, it would be very welcome.

With regard to commemorations, I can assure the committee that every Deputy and Senator will get an invitation to the 40th anniversary commemoration this year. Senator Mary White mentioned the fact the Irish people are not engaging with it. Sometimes the media does not even cover it. I have on occasion rung RTE to say it has not even been mentioned on the day of the anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, even though a press release will have gone into RTE the previous day. We are dependent on the media to let the general public know about the commemorations but, hopefully, this year being the 40th anniversary, that will not present such a problem.

In regard to funding, I was asked why our funding was withdrawn. We do not know why our funding was withdrawn. The Irish Government had funded us for a decade, as I said, and the Barron report had been held and so on. We presume it was because the Government felt it had done enough and had given enough money, and it withdrew it.

Senator Mary Moran: Was no reason given for that?

Ms Margaret Urwin: No reason was given but I would assume that was the reason. As members know from my presentation, an awful lot of work remains to be done, particularly now that cases have begun to be accepted by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. We definitely need help to continue to support the families in that.

On a truth recovery process, we are in favour of the recommendations in the Haass proposals, provided all victims of the conflict and all deaths are included. Mr. Murphy indicated that all deaths that originated in Northern Ireland should be included. That would not be sufficient because many of the killings in the Republic did not originate in Northern Ireland. While we do not represent all of the families concerned, the families of all of those who were killed as a result of the Troubles have the right to know the details and the truth about how their loved ones were killed. The 120 people who lost their lives in this State, regardless of whether they originated in the North, have the same right to the truth. In the great majority of cases where Justice for the Forgotten represents the victim’s family, the killing originated in the North. I am speaking for other victims who we do not represent when I state that they, too, have the same rights.

Deputy Crowe asked for our response to those who argue that we should forget the past. Forgetting is not an option. The families of the victims want and need to know the truth if they are to move on. This has been proved in other areas where conflicts have occurred. For example, people in Spain are demanding the truth about what happened to their loved ones during the Spanish civil war when, for example, many people were disappeared. Forgetting about the past or sweeping it under the carpet does not make it go away. It must be faced and dealt with.

Deputy Crowe also referred to the Military Reaction Force, MRF. A “Panorama” programme on the MRF was broadcast before Christmas. If the Deputy is interested, I can provide him with a copy of a little booklet I published on the issue last year. Copies are also available online.

29 Effects of Violence: Justice for the Forgotten To return to the issue of funding, Justice for the Forgotten’s funding requirements are very modest because we no longer have a city centre office. I work from home, which is fine and has significantly reduced our financial need. If the joint committee would like an expenditure budget for the organisation, I will be very pleased to provide one.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Frank Feighan): I thank the witnesses for their attendance and engagement with the committee on the extensive work being done to support and assist all of those who have been affected by the events of the past. As the Chairman stated, we will follow up this issue with the Taoiseach and Tánaiste and reflect on the contributions we heard today, including the findings of Justice for the Forgotten and the matter of the availability of records from the British Government.

Deputy Seán Crowe: We should discuss possible funding avenues for the Justice for the Forgotten group. Perhaps the joint committee could write to the Taoiseach about the issue.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Frank Feighan): We will write to the Taoiseach to seek funding for Ms Urwin’s organisation. I thank members for their attendance.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.35 p.m. until 10.15 a.m. on Thursday, 6 February 2014.