Vol. 552 No. 4
3 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach when he expects a report, preliminary or otherwise, from the inquiry being conducted by Mr. Justice Barron into the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and other matters; if the delay in progressing the inquiry is due to non co-operation from the British authorities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11822/02]
4 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he expects to receive the report of the Barron investigation into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings in 1974; if he anticipates an interim report being published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12386/02]
5 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach when he expects the commission of inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings to issue a report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12430/02]
6 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach the costs which have accrued to his Department in respect of the commission of inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12612/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 6, inclusive, together.
I understand that Mr. Justice Barron expects to be in a position to submit his report on the Dublin, Monaghan and Dundalk bombings in the autumn. Among the enormous amount of material which the judge has received in relation to his work, he has had a response from the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Dr. John Reid and the Police Service of Northern Ireland. Mr. Justice Barron has recently initiated further contact with the Secretary of State's office seeking additional information and clarification he requires to complete his inquiry.
It will be a matter for Mr. Justice Barron to assess and comment in his report on the co-operation he has received from all of the various authorities with which he has been in contact. The costs to date relating to the independent commission of inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings amount to €688,863.
Was the Taoiseach aware, as revealed last Sunday, that the British Government's lawyers were preparing a defence of sovereign immunity in the event of a case being taken by bereaved relatives and survivors of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings? Such a defence is invoked by a government to protect itself from culpability for the actions of its agents and was used by the former dictator, General Pinochet, when extradition warrants were served by a number of European states, including Spain, when he was in Britain. What is the Taoiseach's response to these revelations?
Last week the Taoiseach stated, in response to questions I put to him on the same issue, that a large amount of material was supplied to Mr. Justice Barron by the British authorities. Were the documents relating to this line of defence, that of sovereign immunity, included in the documentation provided to Mr. Justice Barron? What is the extent of the material requested by the judge that is still outstanding?
The Deputy has asked three questions. On the matter of the issues raised in last week's Sunday newspapers, I am aware that Justice for the Forgotten was in the process of bringing a case against the British authorities in relation to the bombings, but it did not proceed with that when the independent commission of inquiry was established some years ago.
In relation to the article in The Sunday Tribune, I do not know the status of the correspondence referred to therein and whether it represents a formal or finalised position of the British Government on the question of its bringing a possible case. I hope the British authorities will co-operate fully with Mr. Justice Barron and that he will be in a position to establish the truth and to find out who is responsible for what happened. That is the main focus of his current efforts. It would not be wise for us to try to anticipate or speculate on the judge's possible findings on specific aspects of the issues he is examining, of which I am not aware. The task of the Government at this stage is to support the judge in every possible way in order that he can complete his work as soon as possible.
Deputies will be aware that I have raised the Dublin and Monaghan bombings with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, on many occasions. The British authorities are well aware that there is an independent commission of inquiry examining all aspects of the bombings. Whatever about the question of any legal options the British authorities might have been considering in the event of legal proceedings being taken before the commission of inquiry was established, I would not wish to do anything that might in any way be considered to cut across the work of Mr. Justice Barron and his team.
I firmly believe that Mr. Justice Barron must now be left to pursue all the relevant matters and I will continue to support him in any way I can. I am not aware if any of those papers were in the papers given to Mr. Justice Barron, but I very much doubt that is the case.
The Deputy also asked about the papers that were transferred. In order to be absolutely clear about what I said on this matter last week, I will restate what I said to make sure the position is clear. I answered supplementary questions to Deputy Ó Caoláin and others last week. I said that I was aware that Mr. Justice Barron has acquired an enormous amount of material in respect of the inquiry generally. I hope I did not convey the impression that all that material came from the British files. I was talking about the enormous amount of material he has gathered, which has come from numerous sources, Departments, agencies and elsewhere. I am not saying that all the material came from the British files; in actual fact, that was limited enough.
As I said last week, the judge wants more material. While he got extracts, I know he has gone back to the British authorities to try to ensure that he gets all the information and clarification he requires. He has not yet received that. I do not want to give the impression that he got all that he wished to get. Maybe what he got was all that was available, but that is a different matter. He has not got all that he wished to get. We will continue to support him.
Since Question Time last week, my officials have been in touch with Prime Minister Blair's office again reiterating that we want as much material as is available and that we hope that Mr. Justice Barron receives more assistance than he has received to date. I think I correctly relayed the position that Mr. Justice Barron is not satisfied about this matter. While he is satisfied that he has gathered an enormous amount of material, he has not gathered an enormous amount of material from the British authorities.
In view of the newspaper reports of the British proposing to plead sovereign immunity, will the Taoiseach clarify if he has tried to ascertain either through political or diplomatic channels whether there is any substance to those reports and, if so, will he comment on the gravity of what that means?
Our position is that we totally support Mr. Justice Barron and we are not trying to get behind any other issues in relation to this. I have outlined my position regarding what might have gone on prior to the inquiry but there has been no talk of legal action that I am aware of since the inquiry. To reply to Deputy Mitchell, my officials have several times made clear to the British Prime Minister that we want full co-operation and full disclosure of as much information as they can give us. They are not involved in any legal matters at this stage and any such matters probably arose prior to the inquiry being set up.
Perhaps it would be useful for clarity to put this on the record as this Dáil comes to a conclusion. The intention of the Barron inquiry – previously the Hamilton inquiry – was to establish, prima facie, whether there were sufficient evidence and grounds for a proper tribunal of inquiry into this matter. Following completion of the report, I hope it can proceed to a conclusion in August. Does the Taoiseach agree that, as he agreed to a request from me, the Barron report on publication should be referred to a relevant Oireachtas committee in the first instance? Following evaluation by that committee of the report a decision could be taken by the Oireachtas whether to proceed with a full inquiry. Will the Taoiseach confirm that that is the correct understanding of the procedure we are following? Which committee does he envisage the report will be referred to? Without prejudicing the conclusions of the report, is he confident that we could get to the stage of a full inquiry or, from what he knows already, is it likely that the documentation available to Mr. Justice Barron will not in itself be sufficient to warrant a full public inquiry?
It was envisaged that the report prepared by Mr. Justice Barron and the work by the late Mr. Justice Hamilton would be submitted to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, as originally agreed with Opposition parties and the representatives of Justice for the Forgotten. The Government envisioned that the committee would consider, in public session, a follow-up to the report.
The Government sees three approaches open to the committee at that stage. First, it could advise that the report achieved the objective of finding out the truth about what happened as far as possible. Second, it could advise that the report did not achieve that objective, which could only be done through a public inquiry. Third, it could advise that the committee did not achieve its objective and it or a sub-committee could examine the matter further. That is still the position. In the event of the last option it would be a matter for the committee to take its own legal advice to help it proceed from there. Mr. Justice Barron hopes to have his report completed in the autumn so when the Dáil resumes then we should be in that position.
In response to my initial question the Taoiseach referred to a response last week and stated that he hoped he had not given the wrong impression in relation to the extent of material released by the British authorities. That was the impression I took from the Taoiseach's reply last week and the presentation of my question today was influenced by that opinion. Others would have taken the same view because Justice for the Forgotten commented on that response late last week. Given the Taoiseach is now clarifying that the British authorities did not supply a large amount of material but something considerably less, and not knowing the extent of material requested by the judge which is still outstanding, what further steps can the Taoiseach take to encourage greater co-operation with Mr. Justice Barron, who intends to report during the autumn? The Taoiseach's response today continues to give rise to concerns that we are not getting the co-operation essential to allow Mr. Justice Barron to move forward with his inquiry.
Does the Taoiseach join me, and others, I hope, in voicing concern at reports that the British Government was in the course of preparing a defence based on sovereign immunity, as exposed by The Sunday Tribune last Sunday? It is generally recognised that the adoption of such a course by the British Government is, as others have speculated, tantamount to an acknowledgement of culpability if not direct involvement.
On the last matter, in discussions with me the British Government has not stated that that is its present position. When legal action was pending against it on a previous occasion I presume people would have looked at the legal defence, although I do not have information about this. That is what is in the reports but Mr. Justice Barron's inquiry would have overtaken events – all our discussions over the past two and a half years have been on the basis of his work.
I have clarified the first matter but I restate that I am glad we have the records and data, which include some extracts from files. That said, however, it does not adequately address the questions raised by Mr. Justice Barron. Regarding Deputy Ó Caoláin's question, two issues arise and Mr. Justice Barron has been back in contact with the British authorities to ensure he gets all the clarification and information he requires. We have also been in contact with the British authorities and the Prime Minister's officials formally to state that we want more information given. My difficulty is that I cannot be sure if the information exists or is available. I can only relate to the House that Mr. Justice Barron feels that information is available and he is endeavouring to get it. We are giving official and political support to try to achieve that.
The Taoiseach did not answer my question and I ask it again. In view of the daily and hourly contact that appears to take place at official and political levels between the Irish and British authorities, has a question been put at any level to the British authorities about their pleading sovereign immunity since The Sunday Tribune report? If not, why has that question not been put?
If we were to follow up every article in every newspaper we would be on to them an awful lot more. I know what the British Government's position is now. It has only been a matter of days. We were on to them regarding the point I discussed with Deputy Ó Caoláin. That is the point. I am trying to get co-operation.
As I understand it, the British position, from the whole period since the Barron inquiry started, has been based on that. Prior to that the Justice for the Forgotten group was going to take legal action. In that case, although I do not have facts on it, the British Government would have been working to provide its legal defence on that. We contacted it very recently – in the past few days or late last week – and probably on a daily basis and there is nothing new about legal action from British sources. Normally they would communicate these issues to us.
I will allow a final question from Deputy Quinn.
The Justice for the Forgotten group is concerned about the implementation of the Victims' Commission report which was published in 1999 and which was due to be implemented within six months. Quite a number of the report's 35 recommendations have not been implemented.
I draw the Taoiseach's attention to recommendation No. 16 which deals with acknowledgement payments for bereaved families. These people are awaiting the conclusion of Mr. Justice Barron's report. The recommendation proposes the establishment of a trust fund in respect of these and other victims. Can the Taoiseach give the House an indication as to when these recommendations, particularly recommendation No. 16, will be implemented? Such a development would take away some of the sense of hurt and grievance which people feel in terms of recognition. They may not get the facts, but at least they would receive some recognition for the hurt and injury they endured over many years.
I do not have all the details regarding the recommendations, but the Government and I are mindful of the pain and trauma which the victims of violence in Northern Ireland have suffered over a long period. It is important to ensure an appropriate and sympathetic response by the State to the needs of those who suffered so much. An official in my Department has been assigned to monitor the implementation of the recommendations in the report and he has been dealing with those recommendations involving financial assistance.
As a variation on the recommendations in the report, the Government has agreed in principle to the establishment of a trust fund to address the financial needs of victims and their families in this jurisdiction which is analogous to the memorial fund in Northern Ireland. A working group of officials from relevant Departments is drawing up detailed proposals for the operation of the fund. The group has been established with a view to reporting to Government within a reasonable period – by the end of June. The amount of money to be made available to the trust has not been decided. A number of other recommendations are being dealt with by other Departments and are ongoing.
