To be helpful, as the Minister dealing with the first matter has not arrived, I suggest we take the second matter first.
Topical Issue Debate
If Deputy Dowds will agree. He is normally a very helpful individual.
What can I do but agree?
Very good. We will move to the second Topical Issue with the helpful co-operation, as always, of Deputy Dowds.
Schools Amalgamation
I thank the office of the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this issue and I am delighted my constituency colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Sherlock, is present because we have been working together on this issue for quite some time. I am sure the Minister of State will have some positive information to impart.
Carrigtwohill was a village and is now a town between Cork city and Midleton. Because of the Cork area strategic plan, CASP, and the opening of the rail link to east Cork a number of years ago, a lot of zoning was done in Carrigtwohill, the population of the town increased dramatically in recent years and there are plans to increase it even further. There are three schools in Carrigtwohill, two primary schools - a boys school and a girls school - and a secondary school, St. Aloysius' College, which is also a girls school. They are very successful schools but, at this stage, the two primary schools are chock-a-block with students. I believe there are close to 900 students between the two of them, although the Minister of State might have more up-to-date figures, and there are prefabs stacked on top of prefabs at the boys school. The Minister of State has visited these schools, as I have, and will know they are excellent schools.
A number of years ago, an agreement was made to amalgamate the two primary schools and build one new primary school. For some time, work has been ongoing to locate a site in order to build these new schools. I understand funding is in place and everything is ready to go, except a site is needed. This has been ongoing for a long time and it is now reaching a critical point in that the schools are really and truly at breaking point because there is no space left in which to put any more prefabs and the number of children is set to increase in the next year or two.
I know the Department and the Government have decided that a new school is going to be built. I also know there are plans to build a mixed second level school in Carrigtwohill, which is badly needed. A survey was carried out among parents and I believe it is to be an ETB school, in conjunction with the Bishop of Cloyne, which is fine and is what the majority of people wanted.
What is needed now is some action on the ground. I urge the Minister and the Department to redouble their efforts to acquire a site, get planning and have these schools built. Two schools are needed, a new primary school, which is an amalgamation of the two existing primary schools, and the new secondary school. My understanding is that when this new primary school with 24 classrooms is built, it will just about accommodate current numbers so, even as we speak, we may be looking for another primary school. Perhaps the existing buildings could be used for other educational purposes.
This is now more than urgent. A very welcome extension is under way at the CBS secondary school in Midleton, a project worth over €3 million, and that school is planned to increase to 1,000 students.
It is the same in St. Colman's Community College in Midleton, where another extension is planned, and other schools in east Cork. The big issue here is that east Cork is developing. Since the rail link was established, a lot of land has been zoned, many houses have been built, many young families have moved in and many children are coming on stream who need schools and education. A lot of work is ongoing there in east Cork but Carrigtwohill urgently needs attention and needs new buildings for the amalgamated primary schools and the secondary school. Having said that, we probably need another primary school to be planned for Carrigtwohill because even if a 24-room school is built now, it will be inadequate to cater for what is there as we speak let alone what is coming down the tracks, pardon the pun, in a little while.
I am very interested to hear what the Minister of State is going to say on this. He might give us an idea of what the timescale for construction of the schools is once tendering has been completed and how big this proposed secondary school might be when it goes ahead and the plans for that. Is the Minister of State confident that the timescale laid down with construction to start in 2014-15 will happen?
I thank Deputy Stanton for raising this matter. Both Deputy Stanton and I are playing as a tag team in respect of this issue because it is pertinent to our constituency. The area referred to has been identified by my Department as one of the areas where due to demographic changes it is projected that there will be a requirement for significant additional school provision at both primary and post-primary levels over the coming years. I think Deputy Stanton first identified the precipice that has been reached in respect of those demographic issues in the first instance. Since that time, we have been working together to get these projects over the line. We have had success particularly in respect of Midleton and the Gaelscoil at Mainistir na Corann.
Building projects for five primary schools, one of which involves the amalgamation of two existing schools referred to by Deputy Stanton, are proposed for the Midleton and Carrigtwohill areas to meet demographic growth. Scoil Chlochair Mhuire and Scoil Mhuire Naofa are existing boys' and girls' primary schools currently operating on separate sites in a combination of temporary and permanent accommodation. A project to deliver a new 32-classroom primary school building in Carrigtwohill is planned to facilitate the amalgamation and expansion of these two schools, as Deputy Stanton has outlined. The Department has approved additional temporary accommodation for both of these schools to meet their interim needs for September 2014.
In addition to this particular building project, a further four building projects are proposed that involve three primary schools and one post-primary school in order to meet demographic growth in the area. There will be a new 16-classroom school building to replace an existing temporary school building for Midleton Educate Together national school, Midleton. The site acquisition is ongoing at present. I have already referred to the new 24-classroom school building to replace an existing temporary school building for Gaelscoil Mhainistir na Corann. This is going through the rapid planning process as we speak. The Deputy has also referred to the possible need for another primary school because of the demographic challenges. In that regard, a new 16-classroom primary school with patronage to be decided will be built and a new 1,000-pupil post-primary school is due to be established under the patronage of Cork ETB involving the Catholic Bishop of Cloyne.
The Department, with the assistance of Cork County Council, has identified and is currently engaged in the site acquisition process for the primary and post-primary school projects in Carrigtwohill referred to by the Deputy. Once sites are acquired, the school projects concerned will be progressed immediately through the architectural planning process. I want to assure the people of this area and Deputy Stanton that I as a Minister of State in that Department am personally overseeing those projects. The Deputy and I have discussed the commercial sensitivities around specific sites. Given that we have had some success so far in respect of Gaelscoil Mhainistir na Corann, an issue that went on into its second decade, and the fact that the planning process has now started, I am confident we will continue to give this top priority in respect of Carrigtwohill. I can assure the Deputy and the people of that area that we are working on this on a daily basis and we will continue to work, if I dare say it, as a tag team on the Government side of this House to deliver these necessary projects.
I thank the Minister of State for his response, which was very positive. The people down there will be very pleased to hear that. Again, I acknowledge the work that has gone on with respect to Gaelscoil Mhainistir na Corann where the issue has been ongoing for almost two decades and the Educate Together primary school in Midleton. I notice that the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport is sitting alongside the Minister of State. The Minister will know that the reopening of the rail link to Midleton is one of the reasons we have such significant growth in development, building, rezoning, people moving in and prosperity. It goes to show how a rail link can make a big difference to an area. The council agreed to rezone land in east Cork once the rail link opened and the rail link could not open until the land was rezoned but now we have these children who need school places.
The Minister listed about six school projects that are being planned or are ongoing in the area. Could the Minister of State give us any idea as to when we might see shovels on the ground or diggers on the site in respect of the schools in Carrigtwohill and the Gaelscoil? Perhaps he cannot do so but is there any indication as to when we might see work starting on these projects? Will work start sometime in mid-2015? It would be nice if people could know that and if the Minister of State could announce it this evening to the House and the area. We could both go down to the area together and people would be very pleased.
I understand that the site notice is up for Gaelscoil Mhainistir na Corann. I think that was the project referred to by Deputy Stanton.
No, they were the ones in Carrigtwohill.
The Deputy and I have been through the process of teasing out the site acquisition. I suppose that it is one of the flaws in the system, notwithstanding the fact that there is a memorandum of understanding with the local authority, when one is seeking to acquire privately owned land and there is a market value on the land. There is an inherent challenge there because of the constitutional right to private property and the market value inherent therein. On top of that, if there is a number of sites that have been designated, there are certain commercial sensitivities around that.
I am confident that because we have been through the Gaelscoil Midleton process together, the same energy is being applied to the challenge in Carrigtwohill. I am confident that once the site is acquired, we can move rapidly. If I retain my position or indeed regardless of my position, I will continue to advocate with the Deputy on ensuring that we can move rapidly to getting these schools built. I cannot give the Deputy a definitive timeframe at this point but both he and the people in that area should be assured of our commitment to ensuring that we deliver within the five-year planning programme. That is the aim.
In fairness, we should revert to Deputy Dowds who had the first indicated topical issue.
Road Toll Operators
I have received a number of complaints from constituents regarding difficulties they have had in dealing with eFlow customer services. Given that the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport represents the neighbouring constituency on the north side of the Liffey, he may have received complaints as well. I would be interested in hearing his response. From the answer I received from eFlow arising from a parliamentary question, I understand there is quite a comprehensive customer service mechanism in place but at the same time, problems arise from time to time. In a particularly extreme case, a constituent of mine whose licence plate had been cloned by individuals engaged in criminal activity was charged for journeys the constituent definitely did not make. It was extremely difficult to get eFlow to deal with this issue. Eventually, it did deal with it but we had to involve the gardaí who had to prove that this was correct. Even when it was proved, eFlow was still very reluctant to resolve the issue, although it was resolved in the end.
It was incredibly difficult but I appreciate that is a rare occurrence.
However, the system is too inflexible with automated responses being generated without any reviews by staff who could exercise their common sense. That causes difficulties for motorists. What is the relationship between the NRA and eFlow in the context of oversight? I understand the implementation of individual national roads schemes, which provides for tolling, is a matter for the authority under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2007. Is a service level agreement in place that contractually requires eFlow to deal with customer queries in a timely and efficient manner? Has the NRA power to require the company to do so? What is the position regarding informing customers that they have failed to pay a charge? It is my understanding that within two months, a person may face a fine of more than €150 and a court appearance without realising it. One of the key issues I would like to address is the need for eFlow to remind somebody who may have forgotten to pay a charge to do so.
For a road that is travelled by so many people on an infrequent basis, more could be done to make the public aware of the importance of paying tolls and customers who fail to do so more quickly should be contacted in order that they do not face excessive charges. Could a warning system be provided for those who forget to pay the toll? The penalties mount up quickly. If one crosses the toll in a car and does not pay the €3 charge by 8 p.m. the following day, the charge is immediately doubled and it increases by €41 if it is not paid within 14 days after that. Ideally, no one should end up in a court case like a constituent of mine recently and a warning system would ensure the deadlines are met.
What are the procedures regarding foreign-registered vehicles? I understand special numbers are in use to receive calls in this regard. What powers has eFlow to track down the owners of vehicles registered abroad?
Where do eFlow's profits go? Will charges be reduced in the future?
I thank the Deputy for the opportunity to address this issue. I have responsibility for overall policy and funding relating to the national roads programme. The planning, design and implementation of individual road projects is a matter for the NRA under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2007, in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. Furthermore, the statutory power to levy tolls on national roads such as the M50, to make toll by-laws and to enter into toll agreements with private investors in respect of national roads is vested in the NRA under Part V of the Roads Act 1993, as amended by the Planning and Development Act 2000 and the Roads Act 2007.
The Roads Acts authorise the making of by-laws to deal with the operation and management of a toll road and to deal with various operational matters. By-laws for toll roads generally specify who is to be liable to pay a toll and the different levels of tolls for different types of vehicle, regulate the way in which payment is to be made, specifically require the payment of the appropriate toll before a vehicle may use the toll road and impose that obligation on the driver of the vehicle and provide that failure by a person liable to pay the toll is an offence.
Since 2008, a barrier-free tolling scheme called eFlow operates on the M50. This allows all motorists to pass through the toll at motorway speed, with their journeys and consequent liability to pay a toll being recorded by the barrier free system that has been put in place. The principal types of road users are a tag holder, whether issued by eFlow or some other tag issuer; a video account holder where a camera at the toll booth recognises the pre-registered registration number of the vehicle and charges the account by reference to the registration number of the vehicle; and an unregistered road user where he or she has until the following day at 8 p. m. to pay the toll at any Payzone outlet, online or by telephone. The tolls payable vary depending on the category of user. There is significant signage on the approach to and from the M50 toll point indicating tolls are in place. Every effort is made to ensure motorists have an opportunity to comply fully with the toll system and there are a variety of ways such as telephone, online, pre-pay and shops with Payzone logo to pay the legally due tolls. I understand that a guide for tourists using any of the Republic's 11 toll points is available on the eFlow website.
The NRA has established an enforcement policy to assist in the recovery of unpaid toll charges and fines and the prosecution of all toll evaders of Irish or foreign-registered vehicles. An effective enforcement policy is necessary for barrier free tolling to work. Sanef ITS Operations is the operator of eFlow on behalf of the NRA. It is a customer focused e-commerce business with more than 2 million customers and I understand it handles approximately 45 million transactions per year, making it one of the largest customer operations in Ireland.
Moving from a toll plaza facility to barrier-free tolling was a significant change not just for Ireland but also within Europe. The M50 motorway was the first European barrier-free toll system that catered for all vehicle types. Other European countries had only implemented barrier-free toll systems for HGVs.
Prior to the introduction of barrier-free tolling on the M50, traffic in 2007 had reached 90,000 vehicles per day, almost three times the original forecast level. Major traffic congestion was frequent, with delays of up to an hour at peak times. The free flowing system which was introduced as a result of the M50 upgrade has led to increased efficiency, faster journey times and increased capacity for motorists. The M50 is Ireland's busiest road, with more than 110,000 vehicles passing along it each day. Traffic analysis undertaken as part of the widening scheme of the past few years suggested that, by 2023, many sections would have traffic flows in excess of 200,000 vehicles per day. As such, it is important and vital that the M50 can perform its function for the foreseeable future and barrier-free tolling is a key component of that.
Could a warning system be introduced for motorists who forget to pay the toll in order that they are contacted because that is one of the key issues I raised? I greatly appreciate the fact that it is a barrier free toll because if it was not, we would continue to experience the appalling traffic jams of the past on the M50 bridge. From that point of view, it is a great advance. However, it would be useful if a system could be in place to communicate clearly with people who have not paid, say, within a fortnight to urge them to pay as quickly as possible.
How much has eFlow raised from the tolling of the bridge? Where does the money go? I have an idea that it is going into the Government's coffers but I would appreciate it if the Minister could shed some light on that.
I do not know the answer to all the Deputy's questions. eFlow operates at a certain distance from the NRA, which operates at a certain distance from me and, therefore, I am not fully competent to answer all the questions. However, if the Deputy would like to put them in writing or send them via e-mail, I may be able to give him better answers.
He asked about a service level agreement. I am not sure if such an agreement is in place but there is a contract and I imagine that forms part of it.
The NRA tries to pursue foreign-registered vehicles. It is not easy but it retains a collection company and a company in London to pursue the drivers of these vehicles.
I will take the warning system issue up with the NRA, although it may be argued that people are well aware of the tolls now and they know they must pay them. I am not sure how much warning they need but I can ask the authority to consider this.
A lot of money comes into the NRA from the tolls, particularly from the M50 but also from some of the PPP projects around the country.
Does it go into capital investment?
No. Largely, the tolls from PPP roads go to the private companies. Because the M50 bridge belongs to the State, the tolls come into the NRA's budget, however it goes to pay back the money that was used to buy the bridge. The previous Government bought the bridge back at considerable expense. It is intended that after the money has been paid back, the tolls could go into capital development.
Respite Care Grant Administration
Which Minister will take the third Topical Issue on behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton? It is the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills, Deputy Sherlock. Is Deputy Lawlor happy with this?
Yes, I understand where the Tánaiste is today. I see the Minister of State has his telephone on.
Has Deputy Lawlor not got his on?
No, mine is dead.
The Minister of State bought an extra one.
It is ominous that she sent me here to reply.
As is well known, I am so far up the backbenches that even the pigeons do not fly this high. I have no chance of getting a call, and I do not think the signal works in here. I thank the Ceann Comhairle's office for allowing me to raise the issue. It came to me from a constituent whose son, for whom she was the carer, had passed away. The carers are very important and the work they do is vital to ease the burden on our health services. Deputies on all sides appreciate the work they do. From this perspective, the respite care grant is payable to all those who receive carer's allowance, domiciliary care allowance or prescribed relative's allowance and is a very welcome payment. Approximately 57,000 people receive the respite care grants each year, a total of more than €800 million in 2014.
The payments were made recently, in early June. The cut-off date was 5 June, and there is a six week grace period during which one can receive the respite care grant. However, if a person passes away just before the six-week period, his or her carer receives nothing. It seems slightly unfair that a person who passes away on a Thursday would not receive the grant while a person who passes away on a Friday would. Could we consider a phased payment of the very helpful respite care grant? Why was the first Thursday in June chosen as the payment date when the legislation was enacted in 2006? Could we phase in a payment for those affected by the cut-off date? Notwithstanding the difficult economic times, given that the carers do significant work for society by looking after people in their homes could the grant be increased?
I am taking this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton. As the Deputy said, we acknowledge the crucial role carers play in society. In 2014 the estimated Department expenditure on various supports for carers will be almost €886 million, comprising approximately €557 million on the carer's allowance, €21.5 million on carer's benefit, €122 million on the respite care grant and €105.1 million on domiciliary care allowance. I welcome the opportunity to highlight one of these key supports for carers provided by the Department, namely, the respite care grant.
The grant was introduced in June 1999, at which time the Department of Health also paid a respite care grant to people receiving domiciliary care allowance who were not in receipt of carer's allowance or carer's benefit from the Department of Social Protection. The domiciliary care allowance scheme transferred to the Department of Social Protection in 2009 as did responsibility for the related respite care grant. In 2005 the stand-alone respite care grant was introduced for all full-time carers. All respite care grants are now administered by the Department.
Although the grant is not subject to a means test, applicants are not eligible for the grant if they are working more than 15 hours per week outside the home, if they are getting a jobseeker's payment or if they are signing on for credits. There is no obligation on carers to use the respite care grant to access respite services. The value of the grant stands at €1,375 and this year it is estimated that the grant will be paid to some 87,000 persons at a cost of €122 million. A person caring for more than one person receives a grant for each person for whom they care. The grant is paid on the first Thursday in June of the relevant year to cover 52 weeks from this date. As it is an advance payment, the type of circumstance to which the Deputy referred is already covered.
The grant is not paid on a proportional basis and in order to qualify a person must, in addition to other criteria, be caring for at least six months. The mid-year June payment date allows carers to avail of respite over the summer months, facilitates the administration of the grant and ensures that the grant is targeted at those providing full-time care over a significant period of time. In a review of the grant undertaken by the Department in recent years, carers were asked about their preference regarding payment. The options of splitting the grant into two or three payments through the year were put to people and the vast majority of respondents, 84%, indicated that they would prefer no change to the current arrangements. This view was prevalent irrespective of age group, social welfare status, gender, location, number of care recipients or marital status.
In favouring the current annual payment, people expressed the view that a large lump sum would be more likely to be used for a specific purpose, such as a holiday, whereas smaller sums paid more frequently would be more likely to be absorbed in the day-to-day expenses of the household. In general, respondents stated that they were very pleased to receive the grant and that it was very helpful to them in easing the financial stress they had been experiencing. Those who used the grant for a holiday generally felt that the break would not have been possible without the grant. People who use the grant for other purposes, particularly to pay regular household bills, considered that the grant eased their financial worries generally.
I thank the Minister of State for the comprehensive reply. I had not realised the people in receipt of the payment had been asked how they would like to be paid. Had I received the information in a response to a parliamentary question I would not have needed to ask about it here. It is clear that people prefer to receive it as they do. The cut-off date of 5 June seems to confuse people. A better date might be 31 December and it could remain payable around 5 June. I am happy with the response and I understand where the Minister of State is coming from. The Minister did not say if the Government might be in a position to increase the payment to carers. We all recognise the work they do.
There is a recognition of the work carers do, which is part of the Irish psyche and the intergenerational solidarity that exists here. I do not know if the Government will increase the payment because we are not in a position, regarding the budget arithmetic, to ascertain whether there is scope to do so.
Dublin-Monaghan Bombings
Deputies Seán Crowe, Dara Calleary, Finian McGrath, Thomas Pringle and Brendan Smith have ten minutes in total to make an initial statement but in any event each Deputy has two minutes and will speak in the order in which I have named them.
On 17 May 1974, 34 lives were lost in no-warning bombings in Dublin and Monaghan. There is compelling evidence that the bombing was carried out by British agents in loyalist paramilitary organisations assisted by members of the RUC and the UDR. Following the bombings, a cover up was put in place by the British military and political establishment. Investigations have been frustrated by misdirection and lack of co-operation right up to today. In common with all cases of collusion, there was no indepth investigation, no charges were laid and no one was held to account. Like all victims of conflict, the families of those killed and injured deserve to know who was involved and who facilitated and led the cover up.
All parties in the Oireachtas supported a motion six years ago calling on the British Government to make available all information in its possession on the bombings. To date, the British Government has ignored the motion and, by extension, the wishes of the people of the State. Worse, it has compounded the injury to the families of the victims of these bombings. Does the Minister agree that the relationship between Britain and ourselves must be based on equality and respect? What is the Irish Government's strategy to get Britain to live up to its responsibility and disclose the information requested by the House in the all-party motion six years ago?
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for providing us with the opportunity to raise the issue six years from the date on which the Oireachtas agreed the all-party motion. Deputies Smith, Crowe, Pringle, Finian McGrath and I are all on the cross-party group working with Justice for the Forgotten in this area and we agreed to submit this Topical Issue today to mark that anniversary. It is also 40 years since 34 families had their lives destroyed. A lifetime later, they continue to live with the physical legacy as well as the psychological side of it. It is unprecedented when one considers the huge improvement in relations in the last number of years that the Government of the UK continues to deny access to necessary information. The families and the Justice for the Forgotten group put forward a proposal that a mediator would assist, which was not accepted, and every effort has been made on this side to come to a position where the information can be shared and made available. As an Oireachtas we must unite in both Houses in calling on the British Government to get its act together on this, respect the families and the lives that were lost by providing information that may give answers. At the very least, it would bring people down a path.
A further issue is that the compensation paid to the families covers physical injuries only. I understand the Minister is in correspondence with the families on that. The Minister is restricted in terms of the definition of the compensation, but the families cannot get funding for counselling for psychological conditions arising from the effects of the bombings, including PTSD. It is an area we must examine as the psychological scars, while not visible, are as raw and sore as the physical ones. It is an old way of looking at mental health. We do not want to look at it. This would be a way to assist the families and we should address it as well.
The main issue for today is that once again, six years on, the Oireachtas unites to call on the British Government to do the right thing.
I appreciate the Ceann Comhairle giving us an opportunity to raise this important issue, which is one of concern also to the Acting Chairman, Deputy Joe O'Reilly. It has been raised by our constituency colleague, Senator Diarmuid Wilson, in the Seanad on a number of occasions.
Bombs in Monaghan and Dublin on 17 May 1974 resulted in the deaths of 33 civilians and the wounding of almost 300 people. Those atrocities resulted in the highest number of casualties on any one day during that very difficult era commonly referred to as "the Troubles". The UVF, a loyalist paramilitary group, claimed responsibility for the bombings, but there are credible allegations that elements of the British security forces colluded with the UVF in the bombings. Some years ago, the Oireachtas joint committee with responsibility for justice affairs called the bombings an act of international terrorism. Six years ago, the then Government Chief Whip, Pat Carey, moved a motion on the matter which received the unanimous support of all parties and Members in the House. A similar motion was also passed in May 2011. By way of the motions, the House requested the British Government to allow access by an independent international judicial figure to all original documents held by the British Government relating to the atrocities that occurred in this jurisdiction and which were inquired into by Mr. Justice Barron. Those requests from this House - this sovereign Parliament - have fallen on deaf ears.
More than 40 years on, it is high time for the British Government to respond in a responsible way to our request. Minimum co-operation is not acceptable. We demand and must receive maximum co-operation from the British Government. The release of the files would permit the assessment of the documents to assist in the resolution of these awful crimes which continue to scar our country. The concerns, grief and untold hardship endured by so many families must be our uppermost concern. I note from all of the meetings and conversations I have had with the families of the victims that all they want is the truth. Indeed, it is a very basic request from families who continue to suffer owing to the deaths of loved ones as well as for the many who had injuries inflicted on them on that day of carnage.
Deputy Finian McGrath asked me to convey to the House that he is unable to come and contribute to the debate this evening.
I thank the Deputies for raising this issue. Only a few short weeks ago, we saw the 40th anniversary of the savage bombings in Dublin and Monaghan which resulted in the tragic loss of life and injury referred to by the Deputies. On that day in May 1974, three bombs exploded around Dublin during the busy evening rush hour, including one not far from where we are now. Approximately 90 minutes later, another bomb exploded in Monaghan town. As a result of these brutal bombings, 33 people were killed and over a hundred people suffered injuries. While the passage of 40 years may have eased the pain of the families of those killed and injured to some small degree, we must always remember that they have had to bear the consequences of their injuries and the grief of those tragic events. Their suffering has not gone away and the memory of their loved ones lives on with them and will do so forever.
The late Mr. Justice Henry Barron carried out a detailed and painstaking inquiry into those awful events and, indeed, other atrocities between 1972 and 1976 in which so many innocent people lost their lives. Related matters were also investigated by a commission of investigation led by Patrick McEntee SC. While acknowledging cooperation received from the British authorities, both the Barron and McEntee inquiries concluded that they had been limited somewhat by not having access to certain British Government documents which may be relevant to their terms of reference. This House and the Seanad have unanimously called on the British Government to make this documentation available. It is a matter of regret that, to date, it has not proved possible for access to be made available to such documentation as may exist.
As he has stated to the House, the Taoiseach has raised the matter directly with the British Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron. The matter has also been raised by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Ms Theresa Villiers. The Government remains in discussions with the British Government in support of the families' request for access to documentation.
Dealing with the legacy of conflict and facing up to the past is not an easy task and there is no ready formula of words or set of actions that can put things right. The House will be aware that work is ongoing to try to find ways to address the legacy of conflict in Northern Ireland.
Although there is no easy resolution to the complexity of addressing the past, as is clear from recent events in Northern Ireland, the Government remains strongly committed to working in partnership with the British Government and with the parties in the Northern Ireland Executive to find a way forward. It is a challenge that the two Governments and the Executive are determined and willing to undertake. That said, it is also a challenge that all of those who were party to the conflict must also be willing to take up.
The Good Friday Agreement recognised the special position of victims and, in remembering the victims and their families, we should be strengthened in our resolve to construct a changed society in the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement. As we seek to build a better future for all communities on the island and those who live on the neighbouring island, we cannot forget those who died, those who were injured and those left behind to mourn the loss of their loved ones.
As in the past, this House is unanimous in its message to the British Government to make the relevant documentation available. I hope we can also send a message of solidarity to the families of those who were so tragically killed in Dublin and Monaghan and to the families of all those who lost their lives in the conflict.
In the past, we heard what could not be done and today we want to hear what can be done and what the Minister will do. There needs to be a strategy in respect of moving the British Government on this issue. People ask why they will not release these files. They say there is no silver bullet and no information. Why will they not release the files if that is the case? It is a rational and logical question to ask. The big fear among families is that they have something to hide. There is a view that this is the appalling vista, and that they trained, armed, released intelligence, facilitated travel, supplied transport and supplied bomb-making know-how to loyalists to create the conditions to change the laws in this State, to bring about more oppressive laws, to frighten people and to create a climate of fear. That was the scenario behind these bombs. If that is the appalling vista of which they are afraid, people are already aware of British collusion in other cases. If this is what they are frightened of, we cannot move on as to equal states as long as the information is lacking. There is a responsibility on us to move this forward but also on the British Government to release the files.
The Good Friday Agreement recognises the special position of victims. Recognition is one thing and those who signed up to, and negotiated, an agreement must put actions into the recognition. In this case, the British Government must act and provide that information. I encourage the Minister to work with Justice for the Forgotten in pursuing the notion of an independent mediator who will work to assess the information and provide a report. The British Government cannot hold other signatories to the Good Friday Agreement to account for their responsibilities to the agreement if it does not act on its responsibilities. It cannot be a guardian of the agreement if it is failing the agreement.
I thank the Minister for the reply and I endorse the comments of my colleague, Deputy Dara Calleary. Over the past two years, as Fianna Fáil spokesperson on foreign affairs and trade, in priority questions and oral questions, I have raised this very important issue with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. During that period, I have had the opportunity to meet the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Theresa Villiers, and the Labour Party spokesperson on Northern Ireland, Mr. Ivan Lewis, MP. I have impressed upon them the absolute need to provide a positive response to the request of this House.
At the time when British and Irish working relations are so positive, it is important the files that will establish the truth of what happened on that awful day in 1974 are released. The least the families of the victims deserve is the truth. The British Government has a major responsibility in this regard and it is a responsibility it must not be allowed to evade. In his good work undertaken and completed in 2003, Mr. Justice Barron referred to the clear collusion that occurred with some British State security forces in assisting the UVF in those desperate atrocities and other murders. The Government, particularly the Taoiseach, the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, must bring the utmost pressure to bear on the British Government to finally assist in reaching the truth about these evil deeds. Access to the files is urgently required.
The least the families deserve is a full investigation into these atrocious crimes. Minimal co-operation by the British Government will not be acceptable. I record so many other families that lost loved ones in my constituency and the neighbouring constituency in the south of Ulster. Deputy Joe O'Reilly also knows some of the families. Many of the families have no semblance of justice and no one has been brought to account for carrying out those awful deeds. I can think of two young teenagers, Geraldine O'Reilly from Belturbet, County Cavan, and Mr. Paddy Stanley from Clara, County Offaly, killed on 28 December 1972 as a result of a bomb in Belturbet beside my home area. These were two young teenagers going about their business. So many families are suffering still and all the families have asked me for is the truth. They are not looking for revenge of any sort.
I agree with Deputies opposite who said we can never forget the horrific events of 40 years ago that we are remembering today. We cannot forget the pain of the survivors and the families that Deputy Smith has spoken about. The grief of those families has not eased despite the passage of 40 years. I assure them that the memories of their loved ones will never be forgotten. The debate has provided an important opportunity for the House to express solidarity with the families of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings in 1974 and all of the victims. It is important that it has given us the opportunity to reaffirm the united position the House has adopted, which is essential to maintain. I thank the Deputies opposite for reinforcing the point. It is critical we maintain the united position and I assure the House that the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade continue to raise the matter. The latter stated:
The Taoiseach and I greatly welcome and have worked hard to encourage a sea change in British-Irish relations. In this context, it is particularly disappointing that forty years on, it has not yet proven possible for the British government to respond positively to the Dublin-Monaghan families. I call on the British government to look afresh at this request, which has been the subject of two all-party motions in Dáil Éireann.
A few weeks ago, Theresa Villiers stated "Since May 2010 both my predecessor and I have discussed this issue several times with counterparts in the Irish Government and I continue to do so." I assure Deputies that it will be maintained and that we will continue to raise these issues at the highest level, reflecting the unified position in the motion in the Dáil and in the Seanad. Every effort will be made to progress the situation so that the information about which Deputies have spoken will be made available. I conclude by repeating that this is being dealt with at the highest level and will continue to be dealt with in this manner in the coming months.