I wish to make a correction to the Order Paper. Questions on the supplementary Order Paper circulated to Members will be taken first by the Taoiseach.
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Centenarian Bounty.
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:1a Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the new terms and conditions of the centenarians’ bounty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13424/06]
Pat Rabbitte
Question:2a Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the new terms and conditions of the centenarians’ bounty; the way in which it is expected that the bounty will be paid to Irish-born people living abroad; if they will have to apply for the bounty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14448/06]
Enda Kenny
Question:3a Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the new terms and conditions relating to the centenarians’ bounty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16015/06]
Trevor Sargent
Question:4a Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the new terms and conditions of the centenarians’ bounty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16184/06]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1a to 4a, inclusive, together.
On 28 March the Government approved in principle the extension of the scheme for the payment of the centenarians' bounty. Subsequently, on 25 April, the Government approved the arrangements for its operation on foot of recommendations by an interdepartmental working group. Up to now, the bounty was payable only to centenarians living in the State, regardless of nationality. This arrangement will also continue.
Under the new arrangements, payment of the bounty, which amounts to €2,500, will be extended in respect of any Irish citizen who was born on the island of Ireland, regardless of where he or she may currently reside. This aspect of the scheme will be managed by the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Over the past decades, hundreds of thousands of our people emigrated out of economic necessity. They made a huge contribution not only to their adopted country but many of them continued to contribute to their family in Ireland by sending home remittances. The centenarians' bounty is not just a practical gesture; it is also a token of regard. Therefore it is appropriate that this regard should be extended equally to Irish people wherever they are in the world. At a time in life for older emigrants when friends and family in Ireland may no longer be as numerous as they once were, it is a fitting gesture that the State should acknowledge their 100th birthday.
Does the Taoiseach recall the words, "The centenarians' bounty is not just a practical gesture, it is also a token of regard. It is appropriate therefore that this regard should be extended equally to Irish people wherever they are in the world"? Does the Taoiseach recall making those remarks regarding new proposals for the centenarians' bounty? In the spirit of what he said, will the centenarians' bounty apply to citizens living in the Six Counties area of our country? I welcome what I understood him to say, namely, that people resident in this State, regardless of whether they were born in it, who reach their 100th birthday will benefit. I am anxious to establish the situation heretofore regarding citizens north of the Border, the situation now regarding the new terms and conditions being introduced, and the method with regard to accessing the bounty. Does it require an application from the individual citizen or, if personally unable, from a family member on his or her behalf?
Since the State has not yet existed for 100 years, and past recipients of the centenarians' bounty — and future ones until 2022 — enjoyed it having simply been born in Ireland, will the Taoiseach ensure that it will be paid to Irish citizens in the Six Counties under the new terms and conditions?
In the first part of the Deputy's question, I believe that he quotes a previous statement, but he also quotes from what I said today. "The centenarians' bounty is not just a practical gesture, it is also a token of regard. It is appropriate therefore that this regard should be extended equally to Irish people wherever they are in the world." I have repeated what I said previously. The answer to the Deputy's second question is "yes". Any centenarian born on the island of Ireland and who is an Irish citizen will be eligible to apply, regardless of where the person now resides. That will apply regardless and not simply to those born before 1920 or 1921.
And into the future.
Yes, and into the future. It applies to every eligible Irish person, no matter when he or she was born. There is provision in the scheme whereby someone born before 1906 who did not apply previously can do so retrospectively. Anyone alive today who was born before that date is entitled to apply.
Did that apply heretofore regarding residents of the North of Ireland, or is that only under the new terms and conditions?
It did not apply previously, since the scheme was far more limited. However, legal advice that I had requested and taking into account the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2001 is that any person born on the island of Ireland before the commencement of that Act is entitled to this as an Irish citizen and that only an Irish citizen is entitled. The view was that the provisions should apply to the island of Ireland. One could ask when the relevant period started, but to do so would be very unfair to people. It should be clear that the provisions apply to anyone alive who is over 100 years of age and was born on the island of Ireland.
The key question is who will get the centenarian vote.
I welcome what the Taoiseach has said and I also agree with the context in which he has put the matter. The Taoiseach will be aware that I have raised the matter on behalf of my party and that Deputy Stagg has pursued it over a period. At the outset of this Dáil we devoted our Private Members' business to the question of emigrants living outside the State, mainly in the British cities. To my surprise it was the first time in the history of Dáil Éireann that we had such a debate. All sides of the House were supportive of the case we sought to make. Does the Taoiseach not agree that this is probably the least important of the proposals we made and the least important of the proposals in the joint document published by Labour and Fine Gael in terms of our emigrants. While this was one of the proposals, it was not the most important. Does the Taoiseach intend to address any of the other issues on that agenda? Will the State locate those people living, for example, in Britain? Will the State proactively seek to establish who is entitled to the bounty?
While doing little things that are meaningful, will the Taoiseach cause the national broadcaster to renew the service to Irish emigrants living in cities in Britain, especially those in London, who have made representations for the restoration of that service? While it is a small step, we seem unable to restore that service. Has RTE made the decision for reasons of finance——
The Deputy is going well outside the scope of these questions.
Few of the people whose interests my party sought to advocate here will survive to 100 years. Many of them are in bad circumstances in British cities, living in very poor conditions and so on and unfortunately will not experience a life of 100 years or more. Is it the Government's intention to make any small reforms that are in the interests of the people who are still with us?
On the general point that Deputy Rabbitte has raised, over the life of this Government, with no urgings from anybody, we have made a large number of decisions that have helped emigrants, including helping local authorities with housing, dealing with many aspects of health, improving the DION grants, establishing the consular service in the United States to fund organisations that we previously did not fund etc. There is a whole range of these issues. I am well aware of the matter Deputy Stagg has pursued. I raised it in London some years ago and made an issue of it with the RTE people. I asked for the technicalities to be investigated. That is an issue with others. There were issues about television schemes and travel schemes. It is not possible to address some of these issues under European Union law, but we have followed them up. Under the broadcasting Bill being prepared, RTE's public service remit will be broadened to include broadcasting to the Irish abroad, subject to EU approval on state aid. That is the point Deputy Stagg asked me to follow up, and Deputy Rabbitte raised it last week.
This concerns the question put down by Deputies Rabbitte, Ó Caoláin, Kenny and Sargent because it had long been said that it was difficult to do it this way. The Federation of Irish Societies and others asked me some years ago to consider how we might deal with this issue. We decided that any Irish citizen born on the island of Ireland would be eligible.
The bounty will be paid retrospectively to any centenarian who previously applied and would have qualified if the new arrangements were in place. There will be administrative discretion as to whether it will be paid to centenarians who did not apply previously but would have been eligible if the new arrangements were in place. I do not see any difficulty in that, unless there is some strange reason not to pay them. In all circumstances, the bounty will be paid only to centenarians who are alive and will not be paid to the estates of any persons deceased. In response to Deputy Rabbitte, we will ask the embassies and consular services, which will operate the scheme, to do so proactively.
Some time ago, when I debated this with the Federation of Irish Societies, I commissioned a statistical exercise to see the figures for people born in 1904. In that year 103,811 people were born in the 32 counties. An actuary calculated that 625 should be alive on their 100th birthday.
There are probably many more than that on the electoral register.
God knows. Only 141 bounties, however, were paid in 2005. Whatever the figure, on that basis we lost close to 450 or 460 of the centenarians. There are Irish people who did not receive the bounty so it is worth making an effort to find them. This corrects a matter that elderly people considered unreasonable.
The old saying that "time and tide wait for no man" is true. When does the Taoiseach expect the scheme to become effective and operational? Do the figures available to the Taoiseach's Department give any idea how many people are approaching 100? If this scheme catches on, some of the 40 million Irish Americans who claim to be Irish on census forms might be interested in lodging an application too. Is it confined strictly to those born in Ireland?
It is.
Does the Taoiseach know the numbers involved?
The embassies and consular service must follow up on the proof of birth in Ireland. It is not just a matter of making an application, the candidates must prove they were born here. We are probably lucky in this country to have some of the best records available, including parish records of all the denominations that were active around the country then. The candidates must verify age, place of birth, citizenship and identity to the consular services and officers abroad, otherwise they will not be paid.
I checked the figure for 2005 before approaching the Department of Finance. Working on 1904 figures and at 141 bounties under the existing arrangements, the gross cost was €352,000. Based on actuarial figures there should be about 480 other centenarians living outside the State. Considering the number living in the State, this figure seems high, but even if it is correct the cost would be €1.2 million. The actuarial figures are based on an internationally recognised formula which is used by the Central Statistics Office. It is interesting that based on 1904 there should be 625 persons but there is only 141. This is an interesting statistic which shows what was happening to our earlier generations.
Eighty people in a two-bedroomed house.
Deputy Sargent has been called.
I welcome the extension of the centenarian bounty scheme to include Irish people born in Ireland but living abroad. While this initiative is welcome, it is hardly revolutionary, considering the schemes in other countries. For instance Irish Italians recently flocked to cast their votes for their new Prime Minister Prodi, his Green Party colleagues and others. In that context, will the Taoiseach clarify a reference both he and the Irish Independent made to Irish citizens being entitled to the bounty when they reach 100? I am sure go mbeidh fáilte roimhe sin ag an Athair Seosamh Ó Maoláin, mac le Michael Mallin, atá ina nóchaidí agus atá anois i Hong Kong. Ach, cad mar gheall ar dhaoine atá ina gcónaí anseo nach saoránaigh iad? The website refers to people who are resident in Ireland on their 100th birthday but does not seem to make reference to those with citizenship. Will the Taoiseach clarify the position of people who might not be Irish citizens but who are resident in Ireland on their 100th birthday?
As I have stated three times, persons must have been born in Ireland but can be resident anywhere on their 100th birthday. They must be Irish citizens who were born in Ireland and be able to prove they were born anywhere on the island of Ireland.
Why should it not apply to all citizens?
The Deputy should allow the Taoiseach reply without interruption.
It will apply to anyone born on the island of Ireland. It is not for somebody who arrives here at age 98 and claims to be 100.
That means even at 100 years of age they are second class citizens in the State. This is ridiculous.
I will allow a brief final question from Deputy Crawford.
I welcome the initiative. On a point of clarification, is a person who left this country at 16 years of age and became a United States citizen entitled to the bounty?
Once the person can prove she was born in Ireland, she is entitled to the bounty.
Her current citizenship does not debar her.
No, once she can prove she was born on the island of Ireland.
Ceann Comhairle, may we have clarification of that issue?
I thought the Deputy had asked his question.
A clarification will only take a second.
Is the Taoiseach saying that an Irish citizen who is over 100 years of age, is not entitled to the bounty if he or she was not born in Ireland? I hope this is not what he is saying. It would mean that one could be a second class citizen even when over 100 years of age. I hope this is not the case.
The scheme is to deal with those living abroad; the current system still applies to anyone living here. Applicants must verify their age, their place of birth, their citizenship and their identity. We have been missing out on those living abroad as the scheme deals with those living in the country. There is not a problem regarding the people living here. The scheme is based on Irish citizens born in Ireland. As I said in my reply, up to now the bounty was payable only to centenarians living in the State, regardless of their nationality. I said that at the outset, and that arrangement will continue. The changes relate to those people living outside the country, but they must have been born in Ireland.
A Cheann Comhairle——
I would prefer to move on to the next group of questions because we have spent a long time on these questions.
I will not detain the House too long.
We must move to the next question.
Briefly, I wish to ask-——
If I call the Deputy, I have no choice but to call the other Deputies offering. That will mean we will not move forward on Question Time or get through many questions.
I do not know if anybody else has any further questions.
Yes, a number of Deputies are offering.
Nobody is offering.
I am offering.
Deputies Ó Caoláin, Sargent and Joe Higgins are offering.
No, I am not offering.
Deputy Sargent has deferred to me.
Deputy Joe Higgins never makes a half offer — he always makes a frontal attack.
If Deputy Rabbitte wishes to speak, I suppose I can also speak.
Briefly, arising from what the Taoiseach said, it seems this is the first time our emigrants will have heard that the Government has decided, for reasons of EU law, that the free travel scheme is not available to Irish people returning here.
That does not arise out of this question.
It arises from what the Taoiseach said.
It does not arise out of this question.
The Minister, Deputy Brennan, seems to have held out the hope for a number of years that this was something he could concede——
The Deputy must be brief.
——or might concede, or was working on conceding. Is it established from what the Taoiseach said that the Government has decided that this scheme cannot be extended to include Irish people returning from British cities?
That matter does not arise from this question.
What does the Chair mean by saying it does not arise?
It does not arise out of this question.
It might not arise for the Ceann Comhairle. Certainly while he is in his current position, it does not arise for him, but it arises for very many of his contemporaries who are coming back from Britain.
This question deals exclusively with the bounty for people who reach the age of 100. I agree with the Deputy and I suggest he tables a question on this matter.
The Taoiseach knows that——
I will allow the Taoiseach to answer the three questions, including the Deputy's question, together. I call Deputy Ó Caoláin.
I ask the Taoiseach to note that in my initial response to what he said——
Has the Deputy a question?
It is a question I am asking.
No, it is not.
I indicated a welcome for these changes because I understood the Taoiseach was indicating the inclusion of people who had reached 100 years of age——
The Deputy is being repetitive. I call Deputy Sargent.
——now residing on our shores.
We must move to Question No. 1 on the Order Paper.
Will the Taoiseach again clarify the position because there is some confusion? It is not only on the basis of——
The Deputy is making a statement. I ask him to resume his seat and let Deputy Sargent speak.
If it is not the intent of the new conditions to include people now resident here, I ask the Taoiseach that we do so.
The Deputy is making a speech. I call Deputy Sargent.
Will the Taoiseach clarify the position? I understand he will do so.
Will the Taoiseach confirm, as I asked him to do previously, that what is on the website and what people are reading from it is the full position? There is no mention of a requirement that a person must be born here. The website states that the centenarians' bounty is a national award made by the Irish President to people living in Ireland who have reached the age of 100 years. It also states that people who are resident in Ireland on their 100th birthday receive €2,540 and a congratulatory letter signed by the President. Can the Taoiseach stand over and deliver on that? In other words, will the scheme be expanded to the extent stated on the website rather than restricted only to people born on the island? If one is a citizen, surely one is equal in the eyes of the law in every respect, including this measure.
I call the Taoiseach to make a final reply.
On Deputy Ó Caoláin's point, up to now the existing position before I made any changes was that the bounty was payable only to centenarians living in the State, regardless of their nationality, and that arrangement will continue. If a person lives in the State and if he or she is 100 years of age, regardless of where he or she resides that person will receive the bounty. Is that clear? That is the current position. The recipient could come from anywhere. We are extending that measure to Irish people who were born in Ireland who might have left this country 80 years ago. There is no change in that aspect of the existing system in terms of the new system. Is that clear?
They are hardly going to flock here just to collect the cheque.
I am simply outlining the existing system and the new system. Let us not try to complicate something that is clear.
It will not apply to all the people that Deputy Ó Caoláin has on the register.
I will respond to Deputy Rabbitte's point. I have to make a distinction between gifts and services. The EU is not involved in the bounty because it is a gift whereas services are totally covered by EU law. Approximately 40,000 Irish pensioners are getting Irish pensions abroad. We have been trying to make those people eligible to get their services. That is the work we are endeavouring to do, but the difficulty with EU law is that we cannot open it beyond that. Under EU law, one cannot discriminate on the basis of nationality. We are trying to facilitate the 40,000 Irish people living abroad who receive the Irish pension.
Not too many Dutch-Irish people will come back here to avail of the free travel scheme.
The Deputy should not bet on it. We are not just talking about Dutch people, we are talking about everybody.
The Dutch cycle everywhere anyway.
Under EU law, we cannot distinguish between people of different nationalities. I do not know what proportion of the 500 million people who live in the member states of the entire European Union are over the age of 66. That is what we have to protect. One cannot normally discriminate under EU law, particularly EU welfare law. If a member state gives something to its own citizens, it has to give it to the citizens of each of the 25 member states. I do not think anybody is arguing for that.
The Government thinks it can extend it to the 40,000 pensioners in question.
That is what it is endeavouring to do, but it has to be certain.
We will now move on to questions from the original Order Paper.
Northern Ireland Issues.
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:1 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the action which will be taken arising from the report of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights on the report of the independent commission of inquiry into the murder of Séamus Ludlow; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13426/06]
Trevor Sargent
Question:2 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the actions the Government will take following the recommendations of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights for the establishment of a commission of investigation and a possible public inquiry into the 1976 Séamus Ludlow killing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13457/06]
Pat Rabbitte
Question:3 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the action he intends to take arising from the report of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights into the death of Mr. Séamus Ludlow; if it is intended to act on the committee’s recommendation that a commission of inquiry be established; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14449/06]
Pat Rabbitte
Question:4 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach when it is intended to publish the outstanding report received from Mr. Justice Barron into certain incidents; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14450/06]
Enda Kenny
Question:5 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the action he intends to take in response to the report of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights on the death of Mr. Séamus Ludlow; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16016/06]
Joe Higgins
Question:6 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the steps he intends to take following the report of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights concerning the establishment of a commission of investigation into the murder of Mr. Séamus Ludlow. [16030/06]
Trevor Sargent
Question:7 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach when Mr. Justice Barron’s outstanding report into certain incidents will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16185/06]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, together.
I welcome the publication of the final report on the murder of Séamus Ludlow, which was published by the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights on 30 March last. The publication of the report represents another significant milestone in the investigation of this brutal murder. I am aware that the joint committee has made a number of recommendations, including that a commission of investigation be established to investigate certain aspects of the case. The Government will examine the joint committee's final report and its recommendations in the coming period. Mr. Justice Barron's final report into the Dundalk bombing of 1975, which also refers to other loyalist attacks around that time, is being considered by the relevant Departments. As with Mr. Justice Barron's other reports, it is envisaged that the report on the Dundalk bombing will be sent to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights for consideration.
I have no doubt the Taoiseach will join me in condemning the brutal sectarian murder in Ballymena of young Michael McIlveen and extending sympathy to his family, condemning all sectarian acts and calling on all political leaders to use whatever influence they have in their respective communities to help to root out this terrible scourge.
Did the Taoiseach raise the joint committee's report on the murder of Séamus Ludlow with the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, when last they met? Did the Taoiseach apprise the British Prime Minister of the joint committee's views, including its strong criticism of the failure of the British authorities to co-operate in this and all other cases of collusion? If so, what was the British Prime Minister's response?
Is the Taoiseach aware that the Pat Finucane Centre and the Justice for the Forgotten group have uncovered files in the Public Record Office in London which indicate clearly that people at the highest level in the British Government had some knowledge of the extent of the collusion between the Ulster Defence Regiment and loyalist paramilitaries? It is recorded in the files that, as long ago as 1973, 15% of the members of the UDR were active members of loyalist paramilitary groups. Is the Taoiseach aware that the files show that even though the British Government knew about the facts I have recounted, it approved the extension of the role of the UDR by giving it a significantly increased intelligence role?
Why have voluntary organisations, such as the Pat Finucane Centre and Justice for the Forgotten, been able to uncover such critical and important material, whereas the various representative agencies of this State and the different inquiries which have embarked on this work appear to have failed to do so? Is the Taoiseach aware the documents show the British Ministry of Defence in 1974, the year of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings — the 32nd anniversary of which will be tomorrow week — agreeing to the extension of that intelligence role? Does the Taoiseach agree that the uncovering of these documents demonstrates clearly the British Government's lie to the effect that it had nothing further to offer to the various inquiries this State has initiated into acts of collusion, not only as regards Dublin-Monaghan, but the many other incidents that we have mentioned here time and again?
On the Séamus Ludlow inquiry, I have at all times kept the British Government totally informed over the years, under the process set up for the review by the late Mr. Justice Hamilton and later by Mr. Justice Barron report, the various Oireachtas reports on it and now the MacEntee investigation into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, which is ongoing. In the case of Mr. Justice Barron's review there were individual meetings with representatives of the British system in uncovering, seeking and examining documents, as I reported to the House, some weeks ago. Mr. PatrickMacEntee, SC, under his commission of investigation, is pursuing relevant matters arising from such documentation with British representatives as well. Everything possible has been done to try to pursue these matters.
As regards the Deputy's question about the recent media reports of possible collusion in certain cases, including the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, as I have said many times, these are serious matters. They have been considered by the late Mr. Justice Hamilton and by Mr. Justice Barron, and now by Mr. MacEntee. The reports into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974, the Dublin bombings of 1972 and 1973, the report into the murder of Séamus Ludlow and the work being done by the commission of investigation into certain aspects of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings all raise questions on the issue of collusion. This issue has repeatedly come up and has been discussed since 1974, as this Deputy and every other Member of the House knows.
As regards these and other important issues, the co-operation of the British authorities is essential. We have used all appropriate means in our efforts to ensure that co-operation, as I have reported to the House on numerous occasions. I have raised the matter with Prime Minister Blair in practically every meeting that I have had with him. I have asked officials to ensure that matters raised in the recent article are also considered. I have read the various issues in the newspapers mentioned by the Deputy and my officials will raise these matters again with the British. Most of the points covered in this article refer to collusion between the UDR and loyalist paramilitaries at the time. As the Deputy knows, these matters have been raised many times before, but we will raise them again.
I offer sympathy to the family of Michael McIlveen. When we hear about such a brutal attack and the killing of such a young person, there is a chilling sense of déjà vu, as we talk about the Ludlow murder in the House. Is the Taoiseach aware of the unhappiness of the Ludlow family about the Garda investigation? Members of the family do not believe that 30 years later it is possible to get a successful murder conviction. However, they are calling for a public inquiry. They want to know why the Garda did not travel to the North to interview suspects in 1979 and why the RUC took 15 months to pass on information to the Garda. Is the Taoiseach open to their views on that matter? Is he aware that it seems that while the Government does not have a problem in calling for a public inquiry outside the State, it seems to be reluctant to call for one inside the State in this type of situation?
From that point of view, will the Taoiseach meet with the Ludlow family to address those concerns and to ensure the circumstances of that dreadful killing are fully investigated so the reasons why evidence was not passed on and the questions that hang over the security forces on both sides of the Border can be clarified and people held to account?
There is time to take a question from Deputies Rabbitte and Kenny and then we will have a final reply from the Taoiseach.
With all due respect to the Ceann Comhairle, I know he is trying to accommodate me but I would prefer if answers to individual questions were given to the Deputy at the time they are asked. It is difficult enough to cope with the wiles and experience of the Taoiseach——
Then I will call the Taoiseach to reply to Deputy Sargent's question.
——without the Ceann Comhairle lumping everything in together.
It is to give Deputies Rabbitte and Kenny a chance because we will conclude at 3.15 p.m.
I know the Ceann Comhairle's motivation is the best but if time permits I would prefer to be allowed ask the question myself.
I have met different members of the Ludlow family a number of times and I know what was stated in the hearings before the committee. During their appearances before the committee the Garda Commissioner, Noel Conroy, his predecessor, Pat Byrne, and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform have all apologised for the failings of the State. I am aware the Oireachtas committee's report asserts that the treatment which the family of Séamus Ludlow received from the Garda was unsatisfactory. That is now part of the report.
I am also aware that a number of recommendations were made in the conclusions of the report, all of which will be examined, including that a commission of investigation be established to investigate certain aspects of the case. The Government will examine the final report and its recommendations.
I am also advised that the Garda acted immediately to instigate a re-examination of the case, which was recommended by the committee. I will not go through all the individual aspects of the report or it will take up all of the time available. They will be followed up and we will come to a final conclusion on this in due course.
I am not ruling out that we will examine the issue of investigations but I am careful not to have a full inquiry on every case relating to Northern Ireland. If we were to do that, I am not sure what purpose it would serve or what closure we would ever bring. Progress has been made on a number of good initiatives. The historic review group that has worked within the Garda, and the police ombudsman, in cases where there was collusion, have examined all of these cases to try to bring some assistance to the families and closure in as many cases as possible.
At Weston Park we agreed we would seek inquiries on certain issues. It was decided to give all the cases to Justice Cory to examine and that we would honour whatever decision he made on them. He has insisted that some cases, such as the Pat Finucane case, should be investigated. He also suggested that we should deal with the murder of the RUC officers. We undertook our responsibilities and we are following up on them.
The easiest thing for me to say with every single case is that we would have a full public inquiry. In truth, we know that in regard to the circumstances of what happened then it was a different world and a different place. While it is easy to be critical of what happened, people were obviously under pressure, and there were many events and issues.
I have stated this to the families on many occasions. It is not an easy thing to explain to families on behalf of the State. I am doing it 30 years later but I accept my responsibility. The fact is that I have met the families affected by the Dublin and Monaghan bombings on numerous occasions to explain the position. I have put this on the record of the House and the committee. I have explained to them that the official Garda report closed in early August of that year on the biggest atrocity apart from the Omagh bombing. It is not an easy one to explain but I stand over it and explain that is how it was. Going back to full inquiries into issues outside our jurisdiction will not resolve them. We have to be honest, and I have always tried to be fair and honest on these issues.