Enda Kenny
Question:1 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the procedures in place in his Department in respect of the use of the Government jets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43900/06]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Ministerial Air Transport Service.
Trevor Sargent
Question:2 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the procedures in place in his Department in respect of the use of Government jets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8520/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The procedures I outlined to the House previously in respect of the use of the ministerial air transport service, most recently on 26 January 2005, have not changed. The position is that my approval is required prior to the service being used. Procedurally, requests for the use of the service are made to my office by Ministers' private secretaries and dealt with, in the first instance, by the staff of that office. Requests are examined by my staff with regard to the need for and purpose of travel, the destination and other logistical details. Any necessary clarification or further information is sought at this point. All screened requests are then submitted to me for my consideration and approval, if deemed appropriate. Once approved, all operational matters are settled directly between the office of the Minister in question and the Department of Defence or the Air Corps.
I thank the Taoiseach for outlining the procedures involved. Where are the Government jets normally housed? Are they in a hangar at Baldonnel or Dublin Airport? Will the Taoiseach tell the House the number of occasions in 2006 on which the jets travelled from Baldonnel to Dublin Airport? These are short hop trips which add to their wear and tear. There is a perception that the Taoiseach and the line-up of exalted Ministers do not need to travel on the M50 and put up with the traffic jams, unlike the rest of us.
I use the M50 every morning.
Why is it not normal procedure for Ministers, exalted and absent, to travel to Baldonnel to make use of the facilities of the ministerial air transport service from there, as distinct from having the jets fly from Baldonnel to Dublin Airport in order that Ministers can be whisked away to exotic places to do business for Ireland? That is the perception. I am not saying the Taoiseach would not love to be stuck in traffic in the middle of the M50.
The Deputy was not bad at it himself.
The Minister has other ways of going.
Deputy Kenny to continue without interruption.
The Minister, Deputy O'Dea, has other ways of going. It might be no harm if some of the people concerned had to contend with the reality of everyday travel on the ground, so to speak.
Where are the jets housed? How many times do they have to travel from Baldonnel to Dublin Airport for the purpose of picking up Ministers flying away to change the world? Will the Taoiseach make it part of the procedures that Ministers should be encouraged or instructed by him to be driven to Baldonnel before flying away to do business for Ireland?
The MATS aircraft are housed at Baldonnel. I suggest the Deputy direct a question to the Minister for Defence. Practically all flights arrive at or depart from Baldonnel. A high proportion take off from Baldonnel and a smaller number from Dublin Airport. Those that take off from Dublin Airport do so for a variety of logistical, operational or safety reasons, including the needs of the travelling party but it is rare occurrence. My colleagues use Baldonnel in practically every case. They usually leave so early in the morning when travelling to Brussels that they do not encounter problems with traffic.
The Taoiseach has never been on the M50 at 6 a.m. Regarding the use of the Government jet and the example of the British Government, does the Taoiseach have a protocol in place for engaging in carbon offsetting? Will he provide statistics regarding his use of the Government jet? How often is it flown from Baldonnel and Dublin Airport? I understand one of the operational reasons for flying from Dublin Airport is that the runway at Baldonnel is not long enough to take long-haul aircraft. I invite the Taoiseach to clarify whether this is a reason. Is the Government considering implementing a protocol regarding the use of the Government jet for journeys within the State and other more appropriate forms of transport where they are available?
Most long-haul flights such as those to the United States usually leave from Dublin Airport, while shorter journeys such as those to Britain commence from Baldonnel. I fly from both Baldonnel and Dublin Airport. If I am returning late at night, I prefer to land at Dublin Airport, as it is located five minutes from my home but otherwise I do not really care. Most flights usually leave from Baldonnel. There are not as many flights within the State. We used to use the helicopter service a lot in earlier years but I do not do so, for personal reasons. I do not use the landing pad because I do not like it. I have never used the landing pad in Government Buildings, and I do not use the——
Is the Taoiseach nervous about it?
I am. Three of the helicopters in which I flew crashed in one form or another in one year. That finished me and helicopters, except when I have to use them. I thought I had better take——
Willie should have made sure that did not happen.
I was not on them but, unfortunately, others were.
The Taoiseach should try a hot air balloon.
It is a good job Ireland won against England because they lost against France and Munster lost in Thomond when the Taoiseach was there.
Others were, so I declined my use of helicopters and have not resumed it, except on rare occasions.
With regard to the British example, it is not a fair comparison. When the British go to the European Council on Thursday, they will bring two full jets with 500 staff. We will bring one jet with a dozen staff. With regard to our energy efficiency plans, we are not doing anything other than being helpful to the environment in so far as aviation is concerned.
From those answers, it is apparent the Taoiseach and his Ministers are absolute saints——
They travel a lot, however.
——including when it comes to the environment. Is it the case, as is reported, that the jet takes off from Baldonnel and lands again at Dublin Airport to collect the Taoiseach because that is more convenient? Has the Taoiseach concerns about his carbon footprint? I noticed he was in Galway recently to talk about climate change. Is it the most efficient use of Government transport that, rather than shoot over the West Link bridge and out to Baldonnel, like the rest of us, the jet leaves Baldonnel and calls at Dublin Airport to collect the Taoiseach, and has him back for canvassing in no time at all? Would it not be better to go to Baldonnel in the first instance?
If I did so, the Deputy would probably accuse me of being in his constituency again.
The Taoiseach is always welcome to my constituency.
I do come into Dublin Airport — there is no doubt about that. I am not a great user of the Government jet. As the Deputy knows, some of my colleagues have far more reason to do so. Most of my use is in regard to the European Council meetings.
The wear and tear issue came up a number of years ago. The Air Corps advised me that the wear and tear on the aircraft as a consequence of operating in an out of Dublin is impossible to quantify — it is just wear and tear, and does not make a lot of difference.
I rather arrive back into Dublin Airport for a number of reasons, but sometimes I do not do this. I flew out of Baldonnel last week when I travelled to the UK and I sometimes fly back into Baldonnel. Frankly, I am more interested in where I land at my destination. When I go to the UK, I try to land at the military airport because it is far nearer to London and far more convenient. There is a not a great difference. If it is late at night, I rather come into Dublin Airport.
If I am going to Northern Ireland, as I have over the years, I would nearly drive there in the time it takes to get to and from Baldonnel. I often do drive to Northern Ireland, but I then have to go through the rigmarole of changing, which we all have to do, which creates its own bureaucracy.
The train is the job for Belfast. It is a great service.
Yes. When I was in Galway recently, I drove back, so I did not have any effect on the carbon footprint.
It does not create any great difficulty for the Air Corps to fly across to Dublin Airport.
What was the cost of the ministerial air transport service for 2006?
This question refers specifically to the Department of the Taoiseach.
I do not have the figure but can get it for the Deputy. I think it was given in the House last week.
A recent newspaper article stated that the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism used the Government jet for many domestic flights.
The question refers specifically to the Department of the Taoiseach.
The Taoiseach is in charge of the Government jet and he gave permission for it to be used by the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Deputy O'Donoghue, for a trip to County Kerry on official business. Does the Taoiseach agree it would be far cheaper for the Minister, and the Government in general, to use Aer Arann or take other direct flights rather than using the Government jet?
The Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Deputy O'Donoghue, extensively uses Aer Arann, as do a number of my colleagues.
According to a freedom of information request that is not the case.
I do not know the figures involved. If he was returning from abroad to Kerry in the middle of the night then the Minister might use the jet.
I am talking about domestic flights.
He would not be entitled to use the jet for normal domestic flights. He would not request nor, under the procedures, be allowed the use of the jet, or the Lear jet, for going to Farranfore.
Northern Ireland Issues.
Enda Kenny
Question:3 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the MacEntee commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43902/06]
Pat Rabbitte
Question:4 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if his attention has been drawn to the report of the statement by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland on her investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of a person (details supplied) and related matters, published on 22 January 2007; the action he will take arising from the findings of the ombudsman; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2242/07]
Trevor Sargent
Question:5 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will request a British-Irish summit on collusion between paramilitaries and security forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2343/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:6 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the progress of the inquiry by Mr. Patrick MacEntee SC; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3731/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:7 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the action he proposes to take in response to the O’Loan report on collusion between British state forces and loyalist paramilitaries; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3732/07]
Pat Rabbitte
Question:8 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the position in regard to the work of the MacEntee commission; when he expects to receive the final report from Mr. MacEntee; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3861/07]
Joe Higgins
Question:9 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the MacEntee commission. [4435/07]
Joe Higgins
Question:10 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the action he will take following the publication of the report of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland into collusion between the security forces and paramilitaries. [4436/07]
Trevor Sargent
Question:11 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the MacEntee commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6329/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 11, inclusive, together.
Mr. Patrick MacEntee SC, QC, was appointed as sole member of a commission of investigation to examine specific matters relating to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974, including aspects of the Garda investigation and missing documentation. On 12 February last Mr. MacEntee wrote to my Department to inform me that he required further additional time to complete his work.
As Members will be aware, Mr. MacEntee has now sought eight extensions to his original timeframe. On each occasion, Mr. MacEntee informed me that additional time was required for him to deal properly and thoroughly with the issues under investigation by him. It seems clear from his interim reports that he has uncovered important information relating to his terms of reference. For that reason, it is important that he be allowed sufficient time to complete his work.
On this particular occasion, Mr. MacEntee has informed me that the commission has completed its investigative work and is in the final statutory stages of the investigation. The extension is required by the commission due to the need to take proper account of the statutory position and interests of persons and entities who assisted the commission during the investigation. This is essential work which Mr. MacEntee must carry out in order to comply with the Commissions of Investigation Act. The Act sets out a number of steps to be completed prior to the submission of the final report and the winding up of the commission. These include sending drafts of relevant sections of the report to people who are identified in it, and hearing their observations.
As required under the Commissions of Investigation Act, Mr. MacEntee furnished me with an interim report along with his most recent request for an extension. I brought this eighth interim report to the attention of the Government and, as with previous such reports, I have published it. I have also laid a copy in the Oireachtas Library.
I now expect to receive his final report on 13 March 2007. It is my intention to publish the report as soon as possible after it is received. However, I am required by law to consider certain issues prior to publication. This is likely to involve requesting legal advice from the Attorney General. I will also submit it to the Cabinet prior to publication. The timescale involved between receipt of the report and publication is impossible to estimate in advance but I certainly wish to publish the report as quickly as possible. If at all possible, I will do so while the House is sitting, before the Easter break.
The report of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland is deeply disturbing. Its findings are of the utmost gravity. I raised the serious issues in the report with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, when I met with him in London on 30 January. Over many years, successive Irish Governments, and many others, have raised serious concerns about collusion in Northern Ireland. Mrs. O'Loan's report demonstrates that these concerns were well founded. It presents clear evidence that members of the RUC colluded with loyalist murderers and failed in their duty to prevent many horrific crimes. Behind this report lie many personal stories of lives lost and lives shattered. I wish to express my sympathy to the families of the victims at this distressing time. I met Raymond McCord Snr. in recent months. I applaud his single-minded determination and courage, which helped to ensure that the truth would be told and that these grievous failures were brought to light in a comprehensive and detailed way. It is essential that justice be done, and be seen to be done, in these cases. In the face of such a damning report, follow-up action and reassurance is essential.
The report shows why police reform was so essential in Northern Ireland. All fair-minded people will acknowledge the reforms that have taken place in recent years and that have made a real and visible difference to policing in Northern Ireland. I commend the Northern Ireland Police Ombudsman for her tenacity and determination. Her report shows that the Patten accountability and oversight mechanisms are robust and do work. This must remain a vital part of the reformed policing arrangements in Northern Ireland. Inclusive support by all for reformed policing in Northern Ireland must be the way of the future.
The Taoiseach is aware that the MacEntee inquiry was established to investigate why Garda investigations were wound down in 1974 following the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and why certain leads were not followed up, including information relating to a person who stayed at the Four Courts Hotel between 15 and 17 May of that year and his contacts with the UVF and information relating to a British Army corporal who was allegedly sighted in Dublin at the time of the bombings. Mr. MacEntee is a very eminent person. Will the Taoiseach clarify the nature of the statutory requirements that must be complied with as a result of the request for an eighth extension? Surely Mr. MacEntee, the sole person involved in directing the inquiry, and the Government are aware of the need for compliance with statutory requirements in the context of time. Was the most recent extension requested to facilitate the interviewing of certain other persons who it was not thought necessary to interview when previous requests for extensions were made and would the latter have necessitated compliance with further statutory requirements? Is the Taoiseach satisfied that this will be the final request for an extension and that the final report will be made available to him in or around 13 March? Have the Taoiseach and the Government contacted the families of the victims to prepare them for the publication of the report? How will the report's publication be dealt with and what will be the extent of that publication?
Some of the earlier extensions related to the fact that Mr. MacEntee sought additional information which, in many cases, he obtained. The position relating to the most recent interim report is different because he stated that the commission of investigation has completed its investigative task and that the further period is required to deal with the final mandatory statutory stages of the investigation. Mr. MacEntee also indicated that the commission is bringing its investigation to an end in accordance with the provisions of Part 5 of the Commissions of Investigation Act. The latter sets out a number of steps to be completed prior to the submission of the final report — which will lead to the commission being wound up — and these include sending drafts of the relevant sections of the report to people who are identified in the report and hearing their observations, administrative arguments relating to the winding up of the commission and the transfer of its archive to the specified Minister. I have accepted Mr. MacEntee's view that he needs time to comply with the steps to which I refer.
As the House is aware, Mr. MacEntee sought eight extensions to the original timeframe. On each occasion he informed me that additional time was required for him to deal properly and thoroughly with the issues under investigation by him. It seems clear from his interim report that he has uncovered important information relating to his terms of reference. I do not know how voluminous that information is but it is correct that we should grant him the time required to conclude his work.
We have granted an extension to 13 March. I expect to receive the final report at that time, if not exactly on that day. It is my intention to publish that report as soon as possible but, as I stated in the reply, I must consider certain issues prior to publication which arose in the other reports as well where we would have to get legal advice. I must submit it to the Cabinet as well. On the timescale, I hope it will not take too long but I cannot make a judgment on that until we see what is in his report.
I welcome the news that the MacEntee investigation has been completed. I presume the Taoiseach would acknowledge that the more quickly the report is published, the better. It was this period that led to the recent controversy on the Dean Lyons report, while it was presumably circulating among people who featured in it or on whom it reflected adversely. Does the Taoiseach have a modus operandi in mind? Will he publish it through the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights or how is it likely to be put into the public domain?
In respect of the Nuala O'Loan report into the murder of Raymond McCord junior and exposing the collusion that went on between the RUC special branch and certain loyalist paramilitaries, does the Taoiseach acknowledge that this case is the worst of all the cases we have experienced over 30 years? As he stated, we owe a great debt of gratitude to Raymond McCord senior who selflessly, and sometimes under physical threat, maintained his campaign to have these matters inquired into.
The Taoiseach stated that justice must be done and be seen to be done, and I ask him to state what he means by that. Given he recorded that he met the British Prime Minister and raised these matters with him, what was the character of the response he got from the British Prime Minister? Is the Taoiseach stating that he is satisfied that those responsible for these atrocities, and for collusion in the knowledge and permitting of them, are likely to be prosecuted? Would he agree that in the event that they are not prosecuted, most law abiding citizens on both parts of this island would be shocked? What are the real prospects of prosecutions? Has he any reason to believe, from his interaction with the British authorities, that there will be prosecutions for these atrocities?
On the report of Mr. MacEntee SC, I agree with Deputy Rabbitte. The quicker we can clear the report for publication, the better. However, I must go through those statutory procedures. With the report of a committee of investigation, I need not go through the select committee. On the Barron reports, I had to go through the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. The Government can clear the report of a committee of investigation for publication.
On the O'Loan report on the McCord case, and for that matter a number of the other cases although Deputy Rabbitte's question was mainly on Raymond McCord senior, I agree with Deputy Rabbitte and I applaud Mr. McCord's single-minded determination and courage which helped ensure that the truth would be told about the grievous failures brought to light in a comprehensive and detailed way. As Deputy Rabbitte correctly noted, I stated justice should be done and seen to be done in these cases. It is a damning report and follow-up action is required on the part of the British Government. We have highlighted in our meeting of 30 January the areas in which we believe follow-up action is required.
The difference between the Raymond McCord case, with which the Deputy is very familiar from his involvement in it, and the others is that it is recent. In many of the others we were dealing with past events, although, as I have said to relatives time out of number, I do not say that is an excuse for not following up issues. The historical enquiries team is doing this. The difference is that the McCord case is much more recent and the people concerned are still in the system. The O'Loan report highlights the cases in question and the specific issues and people involved. Some of those concerned have since retired but many remain in the Police Service of Northern Ireland. Like Nuala O'Loan, we have urged that follow up action be taken in respect of these individuals. I know this is happening both within the Northern Ireland Office and the British system. We will have to wait and see whether there will be prosecutions but the report demonstrates there is clear evidence that the RUC colluded with loyalist murderers and failed in its duty to prevent horrific crimes. Obviously, the position of the Government and everybody who has looked at this matter is that the British Government has to follow up the issues involved. It has a clear report which resulted from an investigation of its records and files and the issues raised with Nuala O'Loan. We now have and see what action it will take.
The taking of prosecutions is one part of the matter. The other is that, while there have been huge reforms in the system under the Patten report, as I acknowledged in my earlier reply, Nuala O'Loan has also highlighted many areas where appropriate action on accountability measures remains to be taken in order to prevent any of these events recurring. I have spoken directly to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Peter Hain, about these issues, as has the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and when I met him a few weeks ago, we went through them again.
I have raised with the Prime Minister what many of the families have asked for. The views of the families vary. Some want to legally pursue these issues but many others do not want to embark on a legal process. They want a clear apology from the British Government and are not interested in continuing forever. They know what happened and are not surprised because they always believed there was collusion. We have pursued this issue with the Prime Minister and have gone through a number of ways by which we think the interests and wishes of the families can be met. I hope he will deal with some of the issues raised in the coming weeks. He is mindful of the need to deal with them and has been devoting a degree of effort to them. The difficulty is that an apology of this nature will not satisfy all of the families; some will not accept it, while others want to follow their own route. However, it would satisfy many of them.
The Taoiseach might agree that it would be appropriate for the House to pay tribute to the quality of work done by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland who has demonstrated remarkable integrity, tenacity and assiduousness in pursuing difficult and complex matters. We ought to acknowledge this and express the hope that when our own version, the Ombudsman Commission, is eventually up and running, it will operate with the credibility Ms O'Loan has brought to her role in Northern Ireland, although I do not wish to imply it will have to investigate similar cases.
Is the Taoiseach confident this is the final postponement Mr. MacEntee will seek in making his report? Does he have an indicative date for the publication of the report?
With regard to the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland's report on Raymond McCord and the probable findings of the MacEntee commission, might there be grounds for a British-Irish summit dedicated to the issue of collusion between paramilitaries and the security forces? That might be the best mechanism so that families who have been victims of such collusion can avoid going through a lengthy legal process or commission process and, instead, receive direct statements of regret from the British Government regarding this practice.
We have had many meetings about the reports on collusion, particularly those conducted by Mr. Justice Barron into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, the murder of Seamus Ludlow, the Dundalk bombings and others. Many of the summits have dealt with the issue of collusion and a large part of all our meetings is about the public inquiry we are still seeking into the Finucane case so that Judge Cory's report and the agreement at Weston Park are followed up. The British Government has been reluctant to do this, despite the support of this House, which voted through a resolution a year ago. The issue is ongoing and the British Government has still not granted a public inquiry on the terms supported by this House and many other parliamentary assemblies, including the US Congress, and legal and other forums.
I hope to receive the final MacEntee report next week and its publication will be based on the legal checks that have to be made but we are anxious not to delay it. It is advisable that we try to publish it as quickly as possible.
The Taoiseach will recall that Deputy Ó Caoláin made a proposal for a special summit on collusion, given that almost 50 people were killed by British agents in this State and many more were killed in the Six Counties. That call received widespread support. Will the Taoiseach reconsider his position on such a summit and seek a dedicated meeting on this issue with Prime Minister Blair before he stands down in the next number of months?
When Mr. MacEntee's report is published, will the Taoiseach agree to a debate, or longer if required, in the House, as opposed to a short truncated hour or two hour debate, so that all Members can contribute on an issue that was tantamount to a declaration of war on this State? Nuala O'Loan's report revealed how, in one small area of her investigation, members of the Mount Vernon UVF unit were used as auxiliaries by the RUC special branch to carry out numerous killings with its knowledge and consent. Is the Taoiseach aware of the latest revelation by a former RUC detective who stated the RUC ran a senior UVF member, Colin Craig, as an agent in the Shankill Road UVF unit and that he told him in advance of the planned murder of taxi driver, Tommy Hughes, in July 1991, which was allowed to go ahead?
In his meetings with the British Prime Minister and the DUP, has the Taoiseach asked if all the tonnes of weaponry imported from South Africa through a British agent, Brian Nelson, and others have been put beyond use? These weapons, used to kill numerous people, were supplied to the Ulster Resistance, the paramilitary body that the DUP helped to set up and in which its members were prominent, particularly Ian Paisley and Peter Robinson. What information has Tony Blair or Ian Paisley given the Taoiseach about these arms? Does he accept republicans have taken huge risks in putting arms beyond use while there is no evidence that any of these Ulster Resistance weapons have been put beyond use?
What follow up has there been to the Taoiseach's recent meeting with the family of Councillor Eddie Fullerton who was assassinated in County Donegal by British agents?
On a separate summit and collusion, in the past year or two, a large part of all the summits has been on collusion. Practically all the meeting on 30 January was on collusion. There were a few other items but most of it was on Nuala O'Loan's report, the Finucane case and other cases. We have continued to be very active on these issues as well as setting up the independent commission initially under the late Mr. Justice Hamilton and then under Mr. Justice Barron. We have referred all Mr. Justice Barron's reports to the Oireachtas sub-committee which, in turn, has done a commendable job in hearing the evidence, not least of the bereaved, and it is reporting promptly with very clear recommendations. We have acted on the recommendations of the Oireachtas sub-committee to date.
On matters entirely within the remit of the Government or public bodies within this State, we have established the commission of investigation into the 1974 bombings under Mr. Paddy MacEntee. When that work is complete, there are other issues relating to 1972 and 1973, the Ludlow murder and the bombings at Kay's Tavern, on which we will have to follow up. Where appropriate, action has been taken by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Garda to recognise and address the shortcomings identified in these reports.
In regard to some very important issues the co-operation of the British authorities is essential to the follow through. This is true in the case of a suggestion for a public inquiry. The Oireachtas sub-committee has recognised that as has the Government inquiry. We have been using all the appropriate means and efforts to ensure co-operation. We have raised the matter with the Prime Minister Mr. Blair on a number of occasions — back in early December and at the meeting at the end of January. To a certain extent, our continuing pressure on the British would seem to have borne fruit in terms of the co-operation with Mr. MacEntee's investigation. Clearly, we will have to wait for his final report.
On the Nuala O'Loan report, we have followed all aspects of that through because it is a more recent report. It is not the only one and we have highlighted all the issues and reports. The Deputy mentioned some later information which I do not have. However, I am sure it is being looked at by the Northern Ireland Office if it is in the public domain in Belfast.
I met the family of Eddie Fullerton. My office and officials have been following it through with the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Garda because Councillor Fullerton was shot in this jurisdiction. There is the allegation that people crossed back over the Border. All those matters are being followed through for the family.