JOINT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN’S RIGHTS (Sub-Committee on the Barron Report) debate

Public Hearings on the Barron Report.

Chairman

I welcome the members of the Justice for the Forgotten group represented by Greg O'Neill, solicitor; Cormac Ó Dualacháin and Micheál O'Connor. I also welcome the group represented by Des Doherty and Company, solicitors, and Miriam Reilly.

The sub-committee established by the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights wishes to express its deepest sympathy with the victims and relatives of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 17 May 1974. In human terms, the true cost of these atrocities is incalculable. The sub-committee wishes to acknowledge the enormous suffering endured by both the victims and their families, which in many cases is ongoing. It is hoped that both the publication of the Barron report and the hearings which will be conducted by this sub-committee in the coming weeks may go some small way towards alleviating the distress these individuals have suffered over the years.

The joint committee established the sub-committee to consider the Barron report in public session and to report back to the joint committee. The Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights is an instrument of Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann and fulfils an important public function in completing the task specifically assigned to it by both Houses. It is pursuant to the terms of reference decided by both Houses that the committee is sitting this morning.

My name is Seán Ardagh and I am chairman of the sub-committee. The other members are Deputy Costello, the Labour Party spokesperson on justice and law reform, Deputy Paul McGrath, vice-chairman of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, Deputy Hoctor, the Government convenor of the committee, Deputy Peter Power and Senator Jim Walsh, the Fianna Fáil spokesperson on justice and law reform in the Seanad. Hugh Mohan, senior counsel, is advising the sub-committee along with Paul Anthony McDermot and Tara Connolly. Deputy Finian McGrath, an Independent Deputy, is also a member of the sub-committee.

At the outset of our work, we recall the words of Mr. Justice Henry Barron in his statement to the joint committee on 10 December last. He said, "The Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 17 May 1974 remain the most devastating attack on the civilian population of this State to have taken place since the Troubles began". A total of 33 people, including one pregnant woman, died as a result of the explosions. Many more were injured and we will hear from some of those people today. Some insight into the nature of the atrocities which were perpetrated on the streets of Dublin and Monaghan can be gleaned from the following report of the Talbot Street bomb, which appeared in the Irish Press the following day. It stated:

Seconds after the blasts, as the pall of smoke rose from the streets, dazed survivors saw the normal home-going rush of people turned into a scene of carnage. There were bodies, some limbless, some blasted beyond recognition, some burned, lying on the pavements. Scores of others badly injured and many knocked out by the blast or shocked by the impact were hurled into windows and side streets. For some time it was impossible to distinguish between the dead and the injured.

Today, 30 years after the events described in that passage, we revisit those terrible scenes for the purpose of fulfilling our terms of reference.

It is appropriate to recall briefly how the Barron report came into being. It also might be appropriate at this juncture to recall the Taoiseach's acknowledgement of the extreme pain and suffering experienced by the victims and their families and of the fact that he has been committed to addressing the concerns of those affected by the terrible deeds perpetrated on that day.

To assist in this, on 19 December 1999, the Taoiseach announced the appointment of Mr. Justice Liam Hamilton. His terms of reference were agreed on 15 February 2000 and were as follows:

To undertake a thorough examination involving fact finding and assessment of all aspects of the Dublin/Monaghan bombings and their sequel, including the facts, circumstances, causes and perpetrators of the bombings; the nature, adequacy and extent of the Garda investigation, including the co-operation with and from the relevant authorities in Northern Ireland and the handling of evidence, including the scientific analyses of forensic evidence; the reasons why no prosecution took place, including whether and, if so, by whom and to what extent the investigations were impeded; and the issues raised by the "Hidden Hand" TV documentary broadcast in 1993.

In this context the phrase "the Dublin/Monaghan bombings" refers to the bomb explosions that took place in Parnell Street, Talbot Street and South Leinster Street, Dublin on 17 May 1974 and the bomb explosion that took place in Church Square, Monaghan on 17 May 1974.

The results of the examination by Mr. Justice Hamilton, who was succeeded by Mr. Justice Henry Barron, were to be presented to the Government and followed by an examination of the report in public session by the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights or a sub-committee of that committee. It was envisaged that the joint committee would advise the Oireachtas on what further action, if any, would be necessary to establish the truth of what happened. The establishment of the Independent Commission of Inquiry was a genuine attempt to respond to the legitimate needs and concerns of those injured or bereaved as a result of the bombings and to move towards closure for people who had suffered for too long.

The Barron report was presented to the Taoiseach on 29 October 2003. The main body of the report was 277 pages long. An idea of the areas covered may be gleaned from the part headings: Part 1: Background information; Part 2: The Garda Investigation; Part 3: Assessment of the Investigation; Part 4: Issues raised by the "Hidden Hand" Programme; Part 5: The Perpetrators and Possible Collusion; and Part 6: Conclusions. The report also contained four appendices dealing with the following subjects: a transcript of the "Hidden Hand" programme; the murder of John Francis Greene; weapons linking members of the security forces and loyalist paramilitaries; and a profile of the victims of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings.

The sub-committee is constrained in all its activities by its terms of reference and, accordingly, all its work must be directed and controlled by the parameters of those terms of reference. It can never be the function of the sub-committee to re-investigate the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974 or to arrive at a different conclusion from that arrived at by Mr. Justice Barron.

By a motion of referral by Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann on 10 December 2003, both Houses of the Oireachtas requested the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, or a sub-committee thereof, to consider in public session the Barron report and to report back to both Houses within three months concerning three items: first, whether the report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings of 1974 addresses all the issues covered in the original terms of reference of the inquiry; second, the lessons to be drawn and any actions to be taken in light of the Barron report, its findings and conclusions; and, third, whether, having regard to the report's findings and following consultations with the inquiry, a further public inquiry into any aspect of the report would be required or fruitful.

In recent weeks we have placed advertisements seeking written submissions from interested parties and have received many such submissions. Even at this stage, if there are any parties who believe they can assist us with our terms of reference we will welcome their written submissions. Many of the submissions received were clearly the result of a great deal of time and effort. They were of great benefit to us and we are extremely grateful to all of the authors. In the coming days and weeks, the sub-committee will request some of the parties whose written submissions were of particular relevance to our terms of reference to make oral submissions. These will consist of a short oral presentation followed by questions from individual members of the sub-committee about matters arising out of those presentations. Where oral presentations are not requested, this should not be taken to imply that the sub-committee is ignoring the other written submissions. They have been circulated to each member of the sub-committee and will form an integral part of the sub-committee's deliberations.

A written programme of the sub-committee's hearings has been circulated and the sub-committee has adopted its proposed programme as the best means of structuring its work, bearing in mind the specific terms of reference. The sub-committee is concerned to optimise the time available to it to fulfil its remit within the timeframe delegated by the Houses of the Oireachtas. The sub-committee proposes to divide its work into five modules. Written submissions, in addition to those already received, will be welcome from interested persons and parties in advance of each module.

Today, in module 1, the sub-committee will hear from individual members of families who have suffered bereavements and from surviving victims of the atrocities. The contributions of these victims are invaluable to the work of the sub-committee and I sincerely thank them for their attendance here today. The sub-committee wanted to commence by hearing from the victims in order to place them at the centre of its work. Module 2 will deal with an examination of whether the report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings of 1974 addresses all of the issues covered in the terms of reference of that inquiry.

Module 3 will involve the attendance here of Mr. Justice Barron to address questions on his report which fall within our terms of reference. We are very grateful to Mr. Justice Barron for agreeing to make himself available for this purpose. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Garda Commissioner and the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces have been invited to appear before the sub-committee in module 4 to address the policies that existed at the time of the bombing and how they may have changed since then. Invitations have also been extended to the current and former holders of the office of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and to other office holders in Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom. In module 5, the final module, we will turn our attention to two items - one, an examination of the lessons to be drawn and any actions to be taken in light of the report, its findings and conclusions and two, whether, having regard to the report's findings and following consultations with the inquiry, a further public inquiry into any aspect of the report would be required or fruitful.

At the beginning of each module, the sub-committee will set out which persons or parties it wishes to hear from and will indicate the proposed order of that part of the hearings. The public hearings will then conclude and the sub-committee will prepare a report on its terms of reference for the purposes of reporting back to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights which in turn will report to both Houses of the Oireachtas. The joint committee, in line with its terms of reference will report back to the Houses of the Oireachtas by 10 March 2004. The report of the joint committee to both Houses will detail the submissions received, the hearings held and such comments, recommendations or conclusions as the sub-committee may decide to make and the said report will be published.

In respect of procedures, it should be noted that the sub-committee is bound by its very precise terms of reference and will not stray beyond them. In particular, the sub-committee is not conducting an investigation of its own into the terrible events of 1974 or seeking to apportion any blame to any person or body. The sub-committee has neither the jurisdiction nor the legal authority to perform any such function. However, if it feels that a further public inquiry which has the power to address those types of issues is necessary, it is open to the sub-committee to so recommend. We would ask everyone appearing before us to respect the fact that we cannot stray beyond our terms of reference.

It should be also noted that in its work the sub-committee is both legally and constitutionally bound to respect and follow the content of the Supreme Court judgment in the Abbeylara case. For anyone who is interested in reading that judgment it may be found in the 2002Irish Reports. In it, Mr. Justice Hardiman stated:

If the Oireachtas were enabled to send for any citizen and to reach findings of fact or conclusions which could be adverse to him and affect his reputation and employment, it would indeed be functioning as a 'High Court of Parliament' and its members would indeed be 'general inquisitors of the realm' to use the archaic language employed by the English courts to describe the former powers of the Westminster parliament. I have not heard anything that convinces me that there is in our Constitution anything which confers such a power on the Oireachtas, either in relation to civil or public servants or in relation to citizens generally.

Mr. Justice Geoghegan stated:

Any kind of inquiry by an Oireachtas committee or sub-committee for a direct and express legislative purpose and which would not be intended to result in findings of blameworthy conduct on the part of identifiable individuals is constitutionally and legally permissible.

As a result of the Supreme Court judgment in the Abbeylara case the sub-committee is legally restrained from entering into any adjudication on the issue of individual or personal culpability. The sub-committee hopes that all interested parties and bodies will understand and respect its position in this regard.

The sub-committee is very concerned that any person who appears before it is fully aware that he or she is not entitled to any form of statutory or parliamentary privilege. Not only can the sub-committee not give any form of guarantee or assurances in this regard, but we would urge invitees to obtain their own independent legal advice as it would appear that each invitee will be responsible for their individual statements.

The sub-committee will apply the Standing Orders of Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann. In particular, it should be noted that Dáil Standing Order 59 provides that in committees, order is to be maintained by the chairperson. Standing Order 94 allows the chairperson to order any person whose conduct is grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately. Similar powers are to be found in Seanad Standing Order 78. I hope those powers will not be needed. That is not anticipated.

It is anticipated that daily transcripts of the proceedings before this sub-committee will be made generally available on the Oireachtas website as promptly as possible during the course of the hearings.

Before we commence, there are a couple of acknowledgements we wish to make. Everyone who appears before us does so on a voluntary basis and we thank them very much in advance for their assistance with our work. This sub-committee would also like to express its gratitude for the work done by the late Mr. Justice Hamilton, Mr. Justice Henry Barron and their staff, who have performed an important public service in producing the report we are here to consider.

I now invite Mr. Cormac Ó Dúlacháin for the Justice for the Forgotten Group to make his opening statement.

Mr. Cormac Ó Dúlacháin

Thank you for the invitation. Today is a day for the relatives and those immediately affected by the bombings in order that they can give the committee their personal stories and testimony regarding the bombings and what has occurred over almost 30 years.

I appear with Micheál O'Connor and solicitor Greg O'Neill of Brophy Solicitors. | will briefly outline how this matter has come back before this committee at this time and what we believe the committee is being asked to address. Next week, we will have the opportunity to make a comprehensive submission which deals with the substance of the Barron report in respect of what it does and does not address and the issues covered by its terms of reference.

I express our appreciation to the committee for the invitation to appear before it and the opportunity today and in the coming weeks to advance the case for a public inquiry. It is worth remembering that it was the joint committee, of which this sub-committee is part, that first offered the victims an official opportunity to publicly state the case for an inquiry. That was in November 1999 when Justice for the Forgotten was invited to appear before the joint committee. Effectively, the committee created the political momentum which led in December 1999 to the establishment of what we call the Barron commission. In that regard it is appropriate that the matter has now returned to the committee which was instrumental in creating this political momentum.

Today, I would like to outline briefly the background of how this process came about from the perspective of Justice for the Forgotten. If this is appreciated by the members of the committee, it may lead to a greater understanding of the expectations of the relatives and injured appearing before it today. In 1993, Yorkshire Television broadcast a programme which highlighted three issues. The first, which was very important, was that it reflected back to 17 May 1974 and the enormity of the bombings. In itself, this was a public service as it made people stop and reflect on what occurred.

Second, it highlighted allegations that the criminal investigation was compromised and the political response was inadequate. Third, it alleged that evidence existed which pointed to security force collusion with the loyalists believed to have been involved in the bombings. These allegations, whether true or false in whole or in part, were extremely serious. If true only in part, the relatives believed they warranted a public investigation.

Following these broadcasts, the relatives held a public meeting and having called for a public inquiry they innocently expected that one would follow soon after. The official response, however, was muted. The then Minister for Justice committed her Department to a review of the television programme and two years later, in May 1995, a subsequent Minister for Justice issued a public statement containing the official response of the State to the programme. This was based on a Garda review of the original investigation, additional interviews conducted by the Garda and views expressed by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Effectively, the Department argued that no further inquiry was warranted because there was no substance in the programme, the Garda investigation was thorough and there was no evidence of collusion. It is important to reflect that the 1995 statement was issued following the Department's own assessment and was based on the stated views of the then Garda Commissioner and the Director of Public Prosecutions. As a stated position, therefore, it carried enormous weight.

We all appreciate that public inquiries are not established on the basis of allegations or idle speculation. There must be material facts which raise a legitimate and grave concern. From 1995 to 1999 Justice for the Forgotten continued to maintain that there was sufficient evidence to give rise to serious and grave concerns such as to warrant a public inquiry. The State position was the opposite of this and was effectively that there was no basis for an inquiry.

In August 1999 John Wilson, as Victims Commissioner, issued his report. I should acknowledge that on two occasions he met Justice for the Forgotten and a large number of the relatives after which he reflected on the matter. In his report he implicitly acknowledged the impasse between the two positions and referred to a vacuum in the relatives' search for the truth. In the context of the Good Friday Agreement, on the basis of which he and his office were appointed, he accepted that the issue was sufficiently grave that it warranted a further independent review. At that stage he indicated that it should be a private form of judicial inquiry or investigation and recommended that a judge be asked to review relevant files. It was clear that the object of this exercise was to establish whether there was substance to the allegations. It was never argued by anybody that, should there be substance to the allegations, a criminal investigation into the murder of 34 people was seriously deficient or, if there was evidence of collusion, that a public inquiry should not follow.

The Government over the years has been well aware of the criteria that apply in considering whether an issue is grave enough to warrant a public inquiry. The Government has been a strong advocate of the concept of public inquiry into serious and grave matters. It did so in advocating the re-opening an inquiry into Bloody Sunday and, in more recent times, in appointing Judge Cory and agreeing that he would review certain killings. It should be noted that the Government was willing to accept the independent view of an eminent judge from another jurisdiction in deciding, following such a review, whether a public inquiry should follow. Our Government and this Parliament have not been shy to establish tribunals when the case warrants such.

In December 1999, Justice for the Forgotten agreed to co-operate with the commission of inquiry chaired by the late Justice Liam Hamilton. That was after considerable debate and deliberation because the position was that Justice for the Forgotten still believed that the only effective means of inquiry was by way of public inquiry. The purpose of that review, as understood by Justice for the Forgotten and the Government, was to break that impasse. Was there sufficient evidence to justify a public inquiry? What was to become the Barron commission was not designed or intended to be a substitute for a public inquiry. As a procedure, it was devoid of the powers and procedures that are the hallmarks of any investigation in public.

In December 1999, Justice for the Forgotten wanted a guarantee that the report of the commission would be considered by a cross-party committee of public representatives. Essentially, Justice for the Forgotten wanted a guarantee of independence in the assessment of that report. It was seen that this committee was sufficiently independent of Government and Departments to be trusted with such a review. In being here today, we re-acknowledge the position that it is proper and appropriate that, in terms of considering the report, the matter come back to this committee.

The language of this process needs some clarification and understanding. Our belief is that the judge was asked to carry out an assessment leading to a report. That report was to be considered by this Oireachtas committee. The fact that a report was to come back to be considered indicates that, in its conception, it was not seen as a process that was final in itself. Normally, a report is issued and people react or act on the basis of the findings, but this report was to come back to be considered. Part of what the committee was asked to consider when the report came back to it was whether there should be a public inquiry or a parliamentary committee inquiry or whether the matter was at an end.

The position, following the Abbeylara judgment, of our Supreme Court is that any meaningful public examination and investigation cannot be conducted by this committee. Therefore, if further inquiry is required, as we assert it is, the only current mechanism is by way of tribunal of inquiry. Therefore, what falls to be decided by this committee in the coming weeks should be guided by the main objective of the entire process - what was this process about? Essentially, it was to establish the truth about what happened, the truth about the bombings, the Garda and RUC investigations, the State response and the allegation of collusion.

I wish to reflect for one moment on the word "truth". There is a wholesomeness and a fulsomeness involved in the word "truth". When we turn to words such as "to address the terms of reference", we should keep in mind that it was the truth that was to be established and, to that extent, the whole truth.

The committee has been mandated to consider whether the Barron report addresses all the issues. When the committee is asked to consider whether the report addresses all the issues, it has to have regard to the object of the entire process. In a superficial way, it can be said the Barron report addresses all the issues in that it certainly contains extensive detail and comment on the various aspects set out in the terms of reference. However, does it address the issues in the sense of establishing the substantive truth about what occurred? We believe this substantive question, establishing the truth, is the first question to be considered by the committee in relation to the report.

In addition, the committee must be conscious of the legal obligations flowing from the European Convention on Human Rights which entered into substantive law in this country on 1 January this year. In that regard, we simply want to bring to the attention of the committee that there are certain special circumstances where human rights can only be adequately vindicated by an examination in public of a matter of concern.

Within this State the only formula or process for a thorough examination in public is a tribunal of inquiry. If the Barron report was the final story, the last word, and if nothing else was to be uncovered, there would still be an obligation, not just to publish the report but also to present the evidence and witnesses and test the matter in public. The gravity of the findings would call in law for public presentation and testing. As a matter of constitutional law, that cannot happen before this committee. We will be submitting to the committee that, on this point alone, a tribunal of inquiry has to be convened. In the past week we have written to the Taoiseach indicating our belief that the Government is under a legal as opposed to a purely political obligation to establish a tribunal of inquiry.

The report is devastating in terms of the extent of failures it reveals but that extensive revelation and exposure should not be confused with finality, nor should the conclusions reached by a judge carrying out an assessment be confused with the conclusions reached at the end of a full sworn public inquiry. Next week we hope to set out before the committee the manner in which the Barron report raises more questions than it answers. We wish to expose issues that require further investigation. By placing on record the facts of what occurred we want to show that it does not establish how and why those omissions and failures occurred and does not apportion responsibility. It further expressly leaves unresolved major issues.

As one reads through the Barron report - it takes some time to read and reread it - the issues, evidence and material become interconnected and interdependent. In considering whether the terms of reference have been met it is impossible for this committee to apply an à la carte approach and say that term of reference A has been addressed and part of B but not C.

Notwithstanding all the negative comments about public inquiries, it is important to reaffirm the fundamental principles underlying an investigation in public. It underlies the concept that justice should be administered in public. To have any confidence, an inquiry into serious and grave matters must be conducted in public and independent; parties must have access to all relevant information on which the inquiry relies and there must be an opportunity to examine and re-examine witnesses in public.

By affording us an opportunity to publicly present the case for a public inquiry the committee is discharging an important function. First, it indicates the concern with which the issue is being considered and enables the public to be better informed of the grounds for an inquiry. From our point of view, it is far, far preferable for us to be here advocating our case in public for an inquiry than to be doing so to Government Ministers behind closed doors. It is preferable that this committee recommend a public inquiry having considered the matter than that we be left to rely on the assertion of legal rights. In that respect, while I have indicated our belief and legal view that the Government has a legal obligation to establish a public inquiry, the reality of achieving inquiries is that someone has to consider the report. Given the history of this atrocity and what has occurred over the past 29 years, from the relatives' perspective in Justice for the Forgotten it is important that this committee carry out that consideration in public. Consideration of the report carried out in discussions with Ministers behind closed doors would not be satisfactory at this stage. The very fact that the consideration is happening in public is in itself very important in underlining the process in play. For Justice for the Forgotten, it has taken ten years to reach this point. The reason for the delay rests not with the relatives or the injured, so should anyone be asking why, 29 or 30 years later, this question is being raised? The responsibility for the passage of time lies elsewhere.

From our perspective, the Barron report is a ringing endorsement of the case for a public inquiry. It is akin to an opening statement for such an inquiry; it is not a closing statement. It validates the relentless campaign of those who will appear before the committee today. This is a campaign driven by these people's deep sense of obligation to ask fundamental questions about what was done to and for their loved ones and themselves. I will conclude by acknowledging that all the people appearing before the committee today have, by their commitment to pursue the truth over the past ten years, done this country an enormous service.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Ó Dúlacháin very much. He said that the members of his group here today are committed to pursuing the truth. We appreciate that and thank them all very much for their attendance. We want to create some informality in order that people feel comfortable in making whatever statements they wish. If they wish to stop and take a drink of water, they should not hesitate. The intention is that, after the members of the first group of three people speak, there will be some questions from members of the sub-committee. They may wish to answer them or not and should feel free to do whatever they please in this respect. I will introduce the first three people: Ms Alice O'Brien, Mr. Thomas O'Brien and Mr. Derek Byrne. They are very welcome. Perhaps Ms O'Brien might commence.

Ms Alice O’Brien

My name is Alice O'Brien. I lost my sister, her husband and her two children in the 1974 bombing in Parnell Street. My sister was only 22 years old and had two children. Jacqueline was a year and five months old and Anne-Marie was five months. My sister, who was the eldest of 14 children, lived just around the corner from Parnell Street in Gardiner Street. She had been in her flat for six months to the day. She could have been going anywhere down town. When my sister died, my mother died with her. My mother was 43 when the bombing happened and died when she was 53, leaving behind 13 children. We all had to fight to get the other children sorted out for school and do everything that their mother should have been doing for them but was unable to do. There were ten children younger than me.

My father joined the campaign with me in 1993. Unfortunately, Paddy Doyle is not here today to see the outcome of this because he died in 1999 having continued to work on the campaign until then. We watched the Yorkshire Television programme, "The Hidden Hand", and have been involved ever since. My other friend, Jackie Wade-McCarthy, who was involved in the campaign lost her sister who was nine months pregnant. Unfortunately, Jackie has died. She will be dead two years on 15 January. She is really missed on the campaign.

After the screening of the Yorkshire Television programme, there was a sense of euphoria as a result of the serious questions raised by the documentary. We felt the Government of the day could do nothing less than grant us a public inquiry. The initial euphoria soon evaporated because, of course, we did not get a public inquiry and an internal Garda investigation came to nothing.

Judge Barron deals with the issue in great detail in his report, raising many further questions. Only for Judge Barron's report, we would not be here today. In 1999 Bertie Ahern came along and, since that day, has opened up for us. From 1993 until 1999 we had come through successive Governments but the door has been shut in our faces many times. I hope today that this door will not be shut in our faces. This is our opening.

Tim Grace and I went to the House of Commons in London and got nowhere. We met Jane Winters of Irish Rights Watch who has been very good. She was the only one over there at the time to give us any leeway and the only one who spoke to us about the 1974 bombings. Anyone else we came across and to whom we mentioned the 1974 bombings did not want to know.

In 1995 Derek Byrne and I had the honour of addressing the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation which was sitting in Dublin Castle. During that address I told the members of the forum that bereaved families and survivors had the right to know the truth about the possible involvement of the British security forces in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and that we also asked for the right to know the truth about the allegations of the failure of our Government and our police force to investigate the outrageous allegations.

We were also marginalised by successive Irish Governments for 25 years. Doors were slammed in our faces and our concerns ignored. More sinister than this was the fact that members of the Garda special detective unit monitored our mass every year at the Pro-Cathederal. We could not even have a mass without the police force intimidating us when we were the victims at the time. Our people died - we did not need gardaí at the mass. They were captured in the act on film by the Yorkshire Television programme.

When our lawyers, Greg O'Neill and Cormac Ó Dúlacháin, came on board in 1996, it was the best day of our lives because we would never have got anywhere without them. The initial claim against the British Government at the European Court of Human Rights was made in order to make evidence available to the European Court to assist in its deliberations. My late father sought access to Garda files but this request was refused by the Garda Commissioner. A case was taken to the High Court which was lost. We appealed to the High Court.

It was 25 years after the bombings before a Taoiseach would agree to meet the families and survivors. We met Deputy Bertie Ahern in 1999 which started the process which resulted in the Barron inquiry. After four years of assessment, we now have Judge Barron's report. We raised questions on every page. I have been attending meetings, lobbying politicians, and travelling to London, Belfast, Derry and other places for more than a decade. When I addressed the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation back in 1995, I called for members to make recommendations for a public inquiry into the bombings. I now call on you to recommend to the Houses of the Oireachtas that a public judicial inquiry be established. I feel that, in light of the Barron report, we cannot fail to do so.

I am here on behalf of my family. I have six sisters and six brothers left. We had a bad life after my mother and father died in the bombings. Some of my sisters were only four and they never knew Anna. I am asking the committee on behalf of all my family for a public inquiry into the 1974 bombing. We deserve it after 30 years and ten years lobbying everybody. I am pleading with committee members for a public inquiry into the 1974 bombings.

Chairman

I thank Ms O'Brien for that sincere and touching contribution.

Mr. Thomas O’Brien

Alice said much of what I was going to say. Johnny O'Brien was my eldest brother. My father died in 1972 and when Johnny, Anna, Jacqueline and Anne-Marie died, my mother was heartbroken and she is still. Johnny was the eldest brother of 11 and I often wonder what the two kids would be now. They would be in their 30s and could be married and so on. We never will get over it, and so I am asking, like Alice, for a public inquiry to get this sorted out once and for all.

My other sisters campaigned as well but I have not been involved as much because I have not been well and I am not too long out of hospital. I do not have a statement and just came on the spur of the moment. At the end of the day, all we want is a public inquiry and the truth so that we can put this under the carpet. I will not say much more because my breathing is at me and I am not too well.

Chairman

I thank Mr. O'Brien because it involved a great effort on his part to attend. This shows his commitment to establishing the truth in this matter.

Mr. T. O’Brien

The truth is all we want. My mother was not in the best of health at the time and she still is not. She had a rough time bringing up 11 of us after the deaths of Johnny and Anna and the kids. We just want the truth.

Mr. Derek Byrne

I am a victim of the Parnell Street explosion. I was a little over 14 years of age and I worked in the Westbrook Motor Company, a garage on Parnell Street. I was injured in the bombing and I was pronounced dead on arrival at Jervis Street Hospital. I was placed in the morgue. I was in the hospital for three months and then spent time in Dr. Steeven's Hospital, Our Lady's, Rochestown Avenue, and the Richmond Hospital. I am still attending hospital. The stigma of the bombings is the scars I carry. When I was a teenager I was refused entrance into night clubs and discotheques and still to the present day you have a stigma attached to you that you are a "bowsie." I did not go back to work until I was 19. My father died the following year, 1975, and my mother died nine years ago. I reckon she died with a broken heart. I am pleading with, rather than asking, the committee for a public inquiry to establish the truth. All we are looking for is truth and justice in this matter.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Byrne. I call Deputy Paul McGrath, vice-chairman of the committee.

Deputy P. McGrath

Like you, Chairman, I welcome the witnesses to our hearing, particularly the victims and the families of people who died in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. It takes tremendous courage to come here and I compliment the three speakers who have spoken so far on their courage in appearing at a committee such as this. It is a daunting task to appear before people like ourselves and to tell one's story. I empathise with them and I compliment them on the way they have told their story. It must be absolutely awful to lose members of one's family in such a way. I have met people who have lost family in tragic circumstances and it is difficult for someone who has not been in that situation to understand it. I can see the trauma the witnesses have gone through in the past 30 years and particularly the difficulty they have had of not knowing exactly what happened.

Ms Alice O'Brien is partly responsible for establishing the Justice for the Forgotten group. Did she find comfort in bringing together the families of the victims and was the group a support to her in the ten years since it was established?

Ms A. O’Brien

It was a great support because everyone was in the same boat. Some of us had lost someone and then there were the injured people. I made great friends with Jacqueline Wade-McCarthy. Her sister died in the bombing and she had a little one as well who was two years old, Wendy Doherty. We got together and everyone was in the same boat, so we all started going to meetings and getting the campaign together. Myself and Jackie and Tim Grace went different places to try to get support to get the campaign off the ground, hoping we would get an inquiry. We did not think we would come up against so many closed doors and people not wanting to know about the 1974 bombing. We could not believe that it was shoved under the carpet and no one wanted to know. It was as if the bombings did not happen here in 1974.

Deputy P. McGrath

Was there no contact prior to establishing that group or had smaller groups come together to have the annual Mass, and so on? Did that begin with the establishment of Justice for the Forgotten or had there been ceremonies or group meetings prior to that?

Ms A. O’Brien

In 1993 I got together with a few of the people who were injured and we met in Wynn's Hotel. From there we went to a Mass in the Pro-Cathedral every year and the crowd got bigger and bigger. Then I met Margaret Irwin. We kept coming up against brick walls and were feeling down but Margaret gave us a boost to keep it going. We had Masses celebrated and the group got bigger and bigger. Margaret put articles in the newspapers asking people to come together. That is how so many people came together so that it is now Justice for the Forgotten.

Deputy P. McGrath

Has the group a counselling service or professional support to help with the trauma they are suffering?

Ms O’Brien

We have plenty of help now. There was no help in 1974. We have a counsellor. Una does trauma therapies, gives massages and so on. We have come a long way since 1999. A counsellor is available to us.

Deputy P. Power

I join my colleagues in thanking the witnesses for attending. It is not long since I came here for the first time as a newly elected Deputy after the last general election. It is not easy to attend one's first committee meeting of the national Parliament and I fully appreciate the position of the witnesses today.

It is important for me and for my colleagues on the sub-committee to hear from the witnesses today because we must make difficult decisions in a few weeks' time as to where we go from here. While we will listen to many lawyers, barristers and legal people, if we are to make these fine decisions, it is important for the committee to know the importance of this issue for the witnesses. That is why our starting point must be to comprehend and understand the impact these awful atrocities have had on their lives.

When watching the "Hidden Hand" programme, which was part of the "First Tuesday" series, for the first time a number of weeks ago, what struck me most forcibly was when Paddy Doyle made his contribution. It was clear that he had not recovered from what had happened, which was 20 years previously at the time the programme was made and 30 years ago now. That concentrated my mind on the enormity of this atrocity. I would have loved had Mr. Doyle been present today but, sadly, he has passed away. To assist my understanding, could the witnesses explain how the tragedy affected him? I would love if that had been elaborated on in the "Hidden Hand" programme. Could they do that for me?

Ms Alice O’Brien

Sitting suspended at 11.10 a.m. and resumed at 11.30 a.m.

Chairman

Before we hear the stories of the victims and the relatives of the bereaved families, I want to say that the purpose is to hear the stories of the suffering and bereavements as a result of the atrocities. It is important to bear in mind that we are not able to apportion blame or individual responsibility as that is outside our terms of reference. I ask the witnesses to help us in that regard when making contributions.

I thank John Byrne, Bridget Fitzpatrick and Pat Fay for attending. You are all very welcome. Would John Byrne like to begin?

Mr. John Byrne

I will talk about the Parnell Street bombing. I was living in Lower Gardiner Street at the time. I was married with a son. What I remember is that the evening was lovely. It was 17 May, the anniversary of the death of my father-in-law. That evening, when I was in my flat having a cup of tea, my wife asked me to get the paper so that she could read her father's anniversary notice. I went to Parnell Street and bought a paper from a woman who was a newsvendor outside Kilmartin's betting office. When I got the paper, I was going to go into the Welcome Inn or the Metro public house. I used to go into the Welcome Inn for an occasional pint but decided this time to go into the Metro. I went there, sat at the top of the counter and ordered a pint. I began reading the paper and the anniversary notice. Within minutes there was a dreadful explosion. I was sitting on a stool and was blasted off it, hurting my back. The front of the pub then came crashing in. There were a couple of customers in the pub and just as they were walking out I urged them to go down to the back, by the toilet. I half-crawled back down to the toilet. I did not want to go out in case there was another explosion. The customers did as I suggested. I was in total shock at the time.

Within a minute we came out of the pub. When I looked around there was complete devastation. Shop fronts had been blown out. The worst atrocity was at the Welcome Inn. Bodies were lying on the ground and cars were wrecked. There was smoke billowing out of buildings. I stayed on the scene for only a minute or so. I feared for my wife and son where we were living, as strange cars used to park outside the flat. Just as I got to the junction of Parnell Street and O'Connell Street, the Talbot Street bomb went off. I went back to the flat. I was devastated and in shock. My wife was after saying to me, "What happened to you?" I told her, "I was caught up in the bomb." My wife was thrown aside with my son in the flat we were living in by the devastation in Talbot Street. I will never forget them; it will never leave me. The sound of the bomb will never leave my head. I was completely devastated. My working life was destroyed. I suffered terrible trauma and shock. I have been attending hospitals for the last 28 years. I am still attending today. I am still on medication even to this present day, 28 years later. That is how I feel about the bombing which will never leave me. That is my summing up of the bombing.

Chairman

John, thank you very much for your story. I appreciate that.

Ms Bridget Fitzpatrick

On 17 May, at 5.25 p.m., I was in the middle of the road on Parnell Street with two of my sons. I was after coming out of a shop on Parnell Street called Hamills with my seven year old son's Communion clothes under my arm. I had my other son, Tommy, who was five and a half, by the other hand and I got a bang of a 250-pound bomb into the side of my face. The only way I could describe it to everybody here is that it was like as if a bus had hit me on the side of the face. I remember my head going over. I was facing the garage that that chap, Derek Byrne, worked in. I can only describe it as that the garage was coming out into my face and a baby's pram was going up over it.

On impact I ran with my two sons. I had been working in the Rotunda Hospital. I had been in there a few months before when I had diabetes and lost a baby boy in a full-term birth. I remember my little five and a half year old, Tommy, who is now deceased, screaming, "Mammy, mammy, stop, the bomb got me in the leg." I do not know what you call it but I was running through a few feet of glass and thick yellow and grey smoke which was like a wall that I could not get through with my two little boys. I just knew I had to run and could not fall because my children needed me - I was their ma.

When I got to the Bank of Ireland on O'Connell Street, I could see to the right of my eyes visions of young girls and people screaming. "Stop, stop that woman, look at her" but nobody could stop me until I got to the Rotunda because that was a safe place for me because I was after having my eighth child there and I worked in it as well. When I got to the door of the Rotunda, this doctor was coming out and I said, "Doctor, doctor, help me and my children." He said, "There are people who are worse off up the road, go in." I did that. When I took my hand away, there were clots everywhere on it. I got inside and held onto the counter. I felt something sticking in my back and pulled out a lump of tin which was in my lung.

I was brought into the emergency department. My little boy, Tommy, had two parts of his legs stitched. My other son, Derek, did not get stitches and I was anointed a few hours later. A doctor came from the Richmond Hospital and asked me if I had ever heard of a perforated eardrum. I said, "I did but, doctor, I don't care if my hearing is gone. Will you, please, let me go home to my other five children?" I could hear my two sons outside saying, "We want our ma, we want our ma." The nurses in the Rotunda brought them over to the shop and bought them Rolos and Crunchies. How could I forget? I just kept saying to them, "I am all right," but for three hours there were sheets being taken from under my lung and clots popping out of me. The doctor came from the Richmond and told me that I had a perforated eardrum and punctured lung. Anyway, it came to pass that the priest came from Marlborough Street Church and anointed me. I said, "Father am I going to die? My kids." He said, "No, you will be okay." I have never been okay to this day.

I went home with a big bandage around my leg holding my two lovely boys. I marched up Sean McDermott Street where I am proud to say I live. There were lovely, decent people living on it - neighbours. About 500 people from all the flats and the houses cheered me and my two sons up the street. When I got home, I did not know where I was, naturally. Three big men - I reckon they were from the Government - came to my home and apologised to me. They said they were very sorry for what had happened to me. My brother brought me to Artane where he lived. I thanked the men and that was the end of it.

I was told in the Rotunda Hospital that it was only a maternity hospital and that it was sorry but that I was to bring my two children to Temple Street the next morning and that I was to go to the Mater Hospital, which I did. I stayed in Artane with my brother Paddy and I brought my seven children with me. My eldest daughter, Lily, who is sitting over there, had to help me get through life and with the kids because my husband left me as I was not a real woman any more. I worried about my children. I overprotected them; thank God I did. I went to the Mater Hospital where I was told I would be deaf before I was 40 years of age. I have suffered from a balance disorder since. I have not been in town for 15 or more years and I have not been on a bus for nearly 20 years. I do not go shopping; I do not go anywhere. I just live on my nerves.

My son, Tommy, died. He went on his first holiday in the sun at 29 years of age and suffered a heart attack in the swimming pool in Santa Ponsa. My other son has been in every hospital one could name. He has tried to commit suicide. I am a broken mother but I love my children so much. We are real people. I am here to tell you all about my sons and my poor daughter who had to leave school to help me because my husband did not want to know. That is my side of the story. I was never treated for my injuries. I never knew what to do. I did not get time to think about it because I had to rear my children. I am not looking for sympathy; I am looking for justice for people like me.

I do not sleep very well, so I listen to Newstalk 106 when I am awake during the night. I have heard people say this is hardly worth bothering about and that it is 30 years since the bombing happened. It happened to me and I lost my family. My marriage failed and I had to live in very bad circumstances, although I do not care about money anyway - I am not talking about that. I had to struggle with my seven children and I did not get any help from anywhere. Nobody knocked on my door to ask us if we were okay, which we were not. I am still not okay. God bless you all and thanks for listening to me.

Chairman

Bridget, thank you very much. That was very touching. We did not really know what was happening when we hear your story.

Mr. Pat Fay

My name is Pat Fay. I was quite touched by Bridget who has been shaking and it has had a slight effect on me. It brought back what happened 30 years ago when my father was murdered beside where Bridget was on Parnell Street. I lived in London at the time and I came back the next morning to identify my father in the morgue, something with which I have had to live all these years. Up to about five or six years ago, I never really discussed it or spoke to anybody about it because it was my suffering and was within me. It haunted me for a long time but now I can speak about it. Nobody knows what it is like to go into a morgue, to literally climb over bodies, arms and people blown to pieces and to go up to a slab and look at what is left of one's father. I was never able to say this before but I am now because I feel the only way we are going to get justice is for people to know what actually happened to us and the suffering we have had to go through to beg for what we, as human beings, are entitled to in a democracy. My mother died the same day; she was never the same woman. She was given so many drugs and so on. She was driven half way around the twist from the amount of medicine she was given to calm her down. It was ridiculous.

I have two children in London. I came back to this country seven years ago. I had a guilt complex because my daughter, in particular, kept asking who killed Grandad and if I did anything about it. I could not give her an honest answer or say that I had done this, that or the other. However, since I have returned the legal people and the rest of our group have done great work in trying to get justice for what was done to my father and the other people.

The Barron report highlighted the injustice that was done. At last I can talk to my daughter, who comes over here regularly - my son is a lot younger and he does not quite realise what happened - and give her an answer which makes her feel proud and think that I am doing something about it. I feel good in a sense because the guilt is eased by my participating in the campaign.

Deputy Hoctor

I also acknowledge the bravery of the people before the committee this morning in terms of the way in which they have related their stories. I do not know whether Derek and John Byrne are related——

Mr. D. Byrne

We are not related.

Deputy Hoctor

——but they were both nearby on the day of the bombings. Mr. John Byrne stated that the trauma is with him today and that it has affected his life. How does it impact on both men in their daily lives in 2004? I understand that they are receiving medication and medical assistance. Perhaps each of them will answer my question in their own ways.

Mr. J. Byrne

My work career was destroyed. I have been attending two hospitals, the Meath and Beaumont. The trauma I suffered is still with me today. When I am lying down at night the sound of the bomb occasionally comes at me. That will never leave me. It is a day I will never forget because my whole life was destroyed. We are only here today as a result of the work of the legal team and Justice for the Forgotten. Were it not for that work, we would be forgotten. We want those who killed the 33 people who died that day to be brought to justice. I think we should be entitled to a public inquiry. As Pat Fay said, it is disgraceful.

I have been devastated by the trauma, etc., that I suffered. What happened that day will never leave my head. Nothing will ever compensate me for what occurred. We just want justice to be done and a public inquiry to be held. The victims, particularly those who were killed, and their relatives are entitled to that. At least I am here to tell my story. The relatives, people who lost loved ones, are not here. Some people who attended meetings held by Justice for the Forgotten have died in the meantime. It is great for me and some of the other victims that we receive counselling and therapy. Without the legal team and Justice for the Forgotten, we would not be here today. We want a public inquiry, and we will fight until we get it.

Mr. D. Byrne

I was asked what is it like in 2004. I just have to look at my body and see the scars that I have been carrying for nearly 30 years. On the same thing, I used to play soccer. When I was 15, I had to give that up. Mentally it is there all the time. I do not think that anything would be able to block it out. However, the public inquiry might help. All we are looking for is truth and justice, and we are entitled to that as citizens of this State.

Deputy Hoctor

Perhaps I might direct a question to Ms Fitzpatrick. I thank her for her testimony here this morning. How is Derek now?

Ms Fitzpatrick

He is very bothered. He is in the clinic in the North Strand now for his medication. I think he is on 14 tablets a day. He does not live with me. He has his own apartment. He is a very sick chap. I can put it to the committee this way: of my two sons, Derek became an extrovert and Tommy became an introvert. Derek went on the wild side of life, although not with drugs. Three times my door was knocked on by someone who told me that he was attempting to kill himself. Derek will never be well again as far as I am concerned, and neither will his mother, but what can you do?

Deputy Costello

I also welcome everyone and thank them for attending voluntarily to give their side of the story. I am sure they have waited a long time to have an opportunity to say all this in public. Considering the trauma, to be able to talk about it takes a great deal of courage.

I lived and worked in the general area at the time. I taught in North Great George's Street, and one of my students was hospitalised as a result of the Parnell Street bombing. I have an idea of the enormous devastation and trauma caused. I have watched over the years how much work has been done, and I compliment all those before us on the campaign, the organisation and the commemoration. I am sure that every year that goes by they wait for a solution to the problem. This is part of the process.

Bernie McNally is another girl involved in the campaign and when October comes around each year and the bangers go off, she nearly jumps out of her skin. I would say they are really affected by things like that. I have been with Derek in Derry and we stayed there overnight. Derek had a nightmare and he was devastated. We were there and he did not know it. That was only around four or five years ago. It still affected him then. It came back to him when he was in Derry and he had a nightmare.

Deputy Costello

It is clearly very live with the survivors and families all the time.

Deputy Hoctor

Has Ms Fitzpatrick clearly established who were the three men who visited her house afterwards? Does she know to this day who they were and who they represented?

Ms Fitzpatrick

No. When I say "big men", I mean tall. They were very sincere and were apologising to me for what happened. I was in a state, as I told the committee. I just said "It is okay, thanks".

People here are saying they are attending hospitals. I never went anywhere. I have lived with my injuries - a perforated eardrum, punctured lung, a brain injury and two holes at the back of my left knee. I have very bad health at the moment because of all these complaints. I wish to God I was well and had my family the way I had it that day. I am sorry if I am rambling. I became afraid of going to doctors. I was 29 when I had my eighth child and I was never afraid to go to a doctor for anything. I have neglected my health for 30 years and I am still neglecting it today because I live in fear. I am sorry but I do not know any other way to put it. I am not going anywhere because I am too afraid.

Why did nobody come to us and ask us how we were? I was just an ordinary mother. I went to a national school but I was in no way stupid; I was brainy. I knew that somebody should have knocked on my door and asked me how were my children. My eldest daughter, Lily, is here and I had to take her out of school because I was not capable of looking after her six brothers and sisters as I was so nervous. I lay awake for three years with a pain in my lung and a pain in my ear. I had a husband who beat me stupid - I do not want this to go out in public - any time he looked at me.

Chairman

You need to be careful.

Ms B. Fitzpatrick

Thank you. I am sorry, I did not mean to say that. I lived between two walls. Please disregard the last comment but I could not do anything right in my life. We are real people and I am here now to take up for everybody. Ms Alice O'Brien's sister lived around the corner from me and I had to go through my life looking at a baby's pram going up in front of my eyes. It only took a split second but it happened to me. Her little niece was found on the roof of the Welcome Inn with a soother in her mouth the next morning. The other baby was found that night.

I witnessed some horrific sights. I was in the Rotunda Hospital and I saw a chap with the top of his head gone. The glasses of an elderly woman were embedded in her eyes. It put so much fear in me and I have neglected my health. I thank God I did not neglect my poor family but they are all broken in different ways. I thank the committee for listening to me.

Chairman

Ms Fitzpatrick is brave as this is difficult and painful for her. I thank all the witnesses for telling us their stories. Six more witnesses will now tell their stories. I welcome Mr. Liam Sullivan, Mr. Kevin O'Loughlin, Mr. Edward Roice, Mr. John Molloy, Ms Marie Power and Mr. Frank Massey. They are victims and relatives of victims of the Parnell Street bombing. I ask Marie Power to begin.

Ms Marie Power

I am here today on behalf of my father, my two brothers and my two sisters. One of my sisters is here with me. My sister, Breda, died in the Parnell Street bombings and that Friday evening changed all our lives. We did not have a telephone at the time and when the news flash came on the television I went down to a public telephone to ring her to see if she was all right. There was no answer. Then I rang her boyfriend who said to leave it with him and he would try to contact her. That was it. Later on that night the Garda came.

I had a stepbrother living in Dublin who was in Parnell Street. He had got out of his car and gone into a bookie's office. He was thrown across the bookie's office and the glass was gone in his car when he came out.

Breda was in a flat in Dublin. The landlord contacted my stepbrother later on in the evening to see if they could identify her in one of the hospitals, which they did. We never saw Breda. If one loses someone and one sees them, at least it is something. Breda was younger than me. She had gone to Dublin to work and she was always bringing home treats for the younger ones. Christmas was a horrible time because back in 1974 Christmas was really Christmas and everything one got was a novelty. My parents and the rest of us got through Christmases but they were lonesome times. I never thought she was really gone until I saw her memorial card. That was when I really knew she was not coming back. She was 21, engaged to be married and had her whole life in front of her. She was to have been my bridesmaid the following March. We had to get through that day and many more without her.

That is all I can think of. I had more to say but it is gone. We would like a public inquiry for my parents' sake and for all our sakes so that we would know what really happened to her.

Mr. John Molloy

On 17 May 1974 I was a pre-leaving certificate student, about to sit my exams in June. I happened to be studying in a library in Capel Street at the time, more or less to get silence and to absorb my work for the exams. I left the library and went into town, going to the GPO and posting one or two letters I had already written. I ventured into Parnell Street some time after 5.30 p.m. and became involved in the Parnell Street bombings.

What I experienced on that day has never left me up to this present day, simply because I am still suffering the trauma and effects of what I witnessed, what I experienced and what I went through. I am attending counselling at present which, thankfully, the Government is providing for the victims. It has done me immense good. I was at the end of the road until the counselling came about.

I was taken to Jervis Street Hospital. Before that, the carnage I saw on the roads in Parnell Street was totally diabolical. I felt I was looking into hell from what I saw. People were lying on the roads moaning, with bits of pieces of bodies here and there. Some people were sitting in upright positions and constantly moaning. I also witnessed the emergency services in action, and our local clergy administering the last rites to those people who were very seriously injured or dead.

I happened to be standing on the road and witnessing all this in severe traumatic shock when a hand was placed on my shoulder to tell me that I had to be brought to a hospital. At that time I did not realise I was injured. All I could remember was repeating the words "I am OK." A man from St. John's Ambulance told me that I had a leg injury and had to have hospital attention, so I was brought to Jervis Street Hospital. When I got there I witnessed the roars and the screams. I also witnessed the great work that the medical staff did at that time, including doctors, nurses and all people connected to the hospital.

I was waiting for a time to be seen to as I was listed as having a minor injury. Sometime later I was taken behind curtains and was stitched up, as one would say, and I was in the observation room for sometime after before being allowed to go home in the early hours of the morning. For some reason I felt that I had to go back to the scene. At that time I lived on North Great George's Street. I went back to the scene at two o'clock or three o'clock in the morning, and since then, I have never felt such an air of solitude and calm.

I saw police officers on top of buildings and with white or black plastic bags to take up debris, and perhaps parts of bodies, I do not know. For three years after I found myself house bound. I feared to go out and did not leave my home because of the shock, although I did pursue the leaving certificate examinations two or three weeks after for the simple purpose of finalising what I had set out to do. I remember going into the examination rooms in the College of Commerce Rathmines. I never mentioned anything to my colleagues, students or teachers about being involved with the bombings. I just remained silent.

I sat down to do my leaving certificate examinations but all I could do was look at empty papers. That was basically it. I then found myself at home. My 21st birthday was in 1974 and I celebrated it at home in isolation, suffering from post-traumatic shock and all that went with it. Times were hard then because I was living with my mother, and things got harder. One day a letter came addressed to me. I opened it, and it was from the criminal injuries tribunal board that had been set up by the Government some time after the bombings. The envelope contained a short letter and an enclosed cheque for £50. The letter, if I can remember clearly, stated: "Sign this and you can never go back on this again as regards injury claims." If I am not mistaken, it was signed by a Desmond O'Driscoll.

However, time passed and I felt I had to get myself going or I would crack up completely. I was with a doctor who asked me how things were and I said I was unemployed and felt I wanted to get some work, and he asked if I would take a job in a hospital. I went to see the personnel officer and I got work in St. Luke's Hospital in Rathgar in February 1977. It was there, when I started working, that I realised there was another body of people that was going through crisis, namely those who are terminally ill. Through working with them over the years I got some strength in so far as, you might say, two fires put each other out. Through the care and attention there, I felt I was getting a little inner strength to continue and forget my own problems.

About seven or eight years ago I read in a newspaper about Justice for the Forgotten looking for anybody who had been involved with the bombings in some way and my first thought was what a noble cause it was and to get in there and find out what had been going on. I was astonished and amazed at what I saw, the determination to work towards getting to the truth of what happened to us.

After a certain time, I found myself on the executive and travelling here and there, particularly to places in Northern Ireland. On 20 January 2000, I found myself in the Stormont offices and debating chambers looking for papers to assist us with our inquiry. I found the people there very pleasant and co-operative and I sensed there was an air of movement, both North and South, in dealing with the political divide.

I also went to the Pat Finucane Centre and we then discovered information on other events and atrocities that occurred which affected the Dublin-Monaghan bombings. With the help and co-operation of people there, we accumulated a sufficient amount of material to realise there had been some form of collusion down the line. Strong footprints of suspicion, as referred to in Mr. Justice Barron's statements, were inevitably all around.

I am a victim of the 1974 Dublin bombings in Parnell Street. I had a small barber shop in Parnell Street at the time. My brother was doing some writing on the outside of the window about 15 or 20 minutes before the bomb went off. He did not seem quite the same since. Incidentally, he committed suicide last year. His name was Eamon.

We were working away that day and a friend of mine, Edward O'Neill, came into the shop. It was his son's First Communion the following day. It was the first time he had ever been in the shop, although I trained with him in martial arts. He just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. He came into the shop and his two sons got their hair cut. Edward and I were talking about the previous week's training that we had done together. When they were finished and walking out of the shop, I gave his two boys a couple of bob and Eddie, in turn, stopped to give me a tip. Just as he was going out, the door was blown off. Eddie's two kids were destroyed and Eddie was killed. He was blown into the garage where young Derek Byrne worked, Westbrook Motors, next door to me.

We had perspex instead of glass, which saved anybody in the shop because it came in, it did not shatter, but a piece of steel did come in. It cut through the top of my head and stuck into the wall. I was injured but I carried on. We went outside and I went to Derek Byrne's assistance. Young Derek was in an awful state. He was a petrol pump attendant. I helped him out as best I could and I saw Pat Fay's father lying there as well. That gentleman was in a bad way too. He hung around for about ten minutes and he eventually got out of the street.

A friend of mine, Eugene Berry, came up to the house and when he saw the state I was in, he brought me over to the then Richmond Hospital. I will never be able to explain what I saw over there. It was like a slaughterhouse. There were bodies everywhere and people being operated on. I was kept there for a day. I was let out but I had to be brought back again.

It has been on my mind all my life that but for the fact that I knew Eddie, he would not have been down in the shop that day with his two kids. I have had to live with that. I have only been receiving counselling in the last two years but I do not feel any great benefit from it. Nevertheless, I am going ahead with it. Like everybody else, I would like to see a public inquiry. I would be most grateful for that. I thank the legal team as well for bringing us this far. Thank you very much.

Chairman

Thank you very much. My deepest sympathy on the death of Eamon. I am terribly sorry to hear about it. I hope the counselling will work for you in the future and that you will achieve peace.

Deputy F. McGrath

Mr. Sullivan

Absolutely.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Molloy. We have heard from the victims and relatives of those affected by the Parnell Street bombing and have been very moved by them. It is a terrible story but it has been well told. I thank the witnesses very much for that. I know it is very difficult for them to come here and I appreciate their attendance. Thank you all very much.

We will now hear of the South Leinster Street bombing. We have with us Frank Massey, father of Anna, Kevin O'Loughlin, whose mother Christina O'Loughlin was a bombing victim, and Philomena Lawlor-Watson, herself a victim of the bombing.

Mr. Ó Dúlacháin

Mr. Massey has presented a very good and detailed submission to the committee. It traverses this module and a number of the other modules. He is very keen to outline today what he has done in his submission, as well as speaking of his personal background. He is very aware of the constraints on the committee.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Massey for his detailed and excellent submission, copies of which we have received and read. As Mr. Ó Dúlacháin stated, it extends into the other modules. We are, however, trying to make our considerations as informal as possible. He understand the situation.

Mr. Frank Massey

Shall I read my script?

Chairman

Yes.

Mr. Massey

My daughter, Anna Massey, aged 21 years, was murdered on 17 May 1974 in South Leinster Street, Dublin. It is with great sadness and disappointment that I make this submission to the committee in the wake of the Barron report. Having been led to place great hope and trust in the powers and efficiency of the Barron inquiry, my family and I were bitterly disappointed in the inability of the report, given its perceived powers, to answer questions most desired by ourselves and other families affected by the atrocities in Dublin and Monaghan in May 1974. Many questions of detail, of which the committee will no doubt be made aware by other submissions, were not answered either in part or at all by the report.

I note that the terms of reference establishing this committee include whether the report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings of 1974 addresses all the issues covered in the terms of reference of the inquiry and whether a further public inquiry into any aspect of the report would be required or fruitful. My submission to the committee recognises that the Barron report may have addressed the issues covered in its terms of reference, but that it failed to answer fundamental questions asked by me, my family, other families of the dead and injured and the public.

A further public inquiry is essential to establish the truth of what happened in the aftermath of my daughter's murder, the murder of 33 others and the injury of hundreds of Irish people on 17 May 1974. I expect a public inquiry to address and answer the following questions: files of the greatest relevance to the bombings compiled by the Department of Justice, the Garda Síochána and, presumably, the intelligence service have been declared missing. Obviously, Mr. Justice Barron did not have access to or view these files, thus rendering his inquiry ignorant of information vital to an assessment of the overall quality of the investigation. These files may contain information as to whether there was any foreknowledge of the impending atrocity; questions relating to the forensic investigation; the quality of the Royal Ulster Constabulary's co-operation with the Garda in the aftermath of the bombings; assessments regarding inter-forces collusion; and the reason suspected persons were not interviewed by the investigators.

I expect that a further public inquiry would be empowered to investigate fully the disappearance of the files. Where and when were they last consulted? Who was responsible for them? Was their guardian asked to explain their disappearance? Were there copies of them and, if so, where?

On the night of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, the then Taoiseach, Liam Cosgrave, appeared on a special television broadcast promising to leave no stone unturned until those responsible were brought to justice, yet the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Garret FitzGerald, recently wrote:

...it would have been better to have launched much sooner an inquiry of the kind Mr Justice Barron has now undertaken. All who subsequently held political office, myself included, must bear some of the blame for the fact that this did not happen.

Despite Mr. Justice Barron's efforts his investigation was thwarted by lack of access to relevant information both at home and abroad. A further public inquiry with investigative powers must be held to determine the whereabouts of the missing files and to charge the current or future Governments to press for greater access to relevant files in the possession of the British Government.

Thirty years have not diminished the sorrow and frustration that my family and the other families have suffered. Despite an untold number of meetings and correspondence, media appeals and appearances, until the recent interest of the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, we, the bereaved, have had very little official contact with or satisfaction from the Government of the day. I hope, at the very least, that a new public inquiry would lead to a public acknowledgement by our Government of our suffering and the neglect of our concerns and that our Government would tirelessly pursue the British Government for the information it holds in regard to this atrocity, that a national day of mourning would be instigated in recognition of all those persons killed and injured since the Troubles began in 1968, and that mention by officials of reparations to the survivors of injury would be addressed to the satisfaction of all concerned.

As an ordinary citizen and the father of a beautiful murdered child, the circumstances of whose death have not been fully or properly investigated leaving my family and I with a great loss and a disappointment in the society in which I brought up my seven children to believe, I demand a public inquiry in her name and in the names of all who died or were injured on 17 May 1974.

My submission is intentionally short and succinct. My plea to the committee is simple. After 30 years, this is probably the last opportunity I and the other relatives will have to press our concerns. This Government and future Governments cannot be allowed to repeat the neglect of our tragedy as past Governments have done. I ask the committee to answer our submissions by an appropriately empowered public inquiry and restore our and the general public's confidence in the Irish political, law enforcement and judicial systems as I have, in spite of everything, tried to instil in my own family. I am now 80 years of age and have fought long and hard to achieve justice for Anna. My family will continue to strive to establish the truth. I hope she will not be disappointed with our efforts.

Ms Philomena Lawlor-Watson

My name is Phil Lawlor-Watson and I was injured in the bomb in South Leinster Street. I can remember little immediately before the explosion of the bomb. When questioned later by the Garda, I could not remember anything of that afternoon.

It was a Friday and I was looking forward to the weekend. I worked with Chubb Alarms on South Leinster Street at that time. There was a bus strike and, as Chubb had a fleet of vans, the staff were promised a lift home. I was sitting in a double-parked Chubb van across from the bomb vehicle at the railing of Trinity College. A colleague, Pat Ryan, sat in the back of the van with me. The driver, Jack Myler, turned the ignition key and simultaneously there was a very loud bang and our vehicle began to rock to and fro. The driver, Jack, who suffered head injuries, ran from the vehicle. Pat Ryan, my companion, dived head first over the front seat and ran screaming down the street dropping her bag outside the vehicle.

I can remember covering my face with my hands and waiting to feel something penetrate my body or to see an arm or a leg disappear. My hair stood straight up and my ears and scalp were full of tiny pieces of glass. One of my fingers was bleeding and there was a slit in the red shirt I was wearing and a wound on my left rib cage. I just sat there and did not move until I was pulled out of the van by Jack, who told me there was going to be another bomb. I was in deep shock.

We both returned to the reception of the Chubb offices where I saw a young lady wounded and lying on the floor. She had no clothes on her lower body and the calf of one of her legs was just a bloody mass, with most of the calf missing. Her thumb was injured and she was calling for her mother and for a drink of water. I knelt beside her giving her water. The first aiders from Trinity then took care of her. The image of that young girl is still very vivid in my mind. I do not know her name and was never able to find out who she was.

We were then taken to Powers Hotel where I was given first aid and interviewed by a journalist from The Irish Times. Some time later I was taken home to my bedsit in Dufferin Avenue but I do not know by whom. I went into my home alone feeling as if in a nightmare. I sat on my bed with my back to the wall and with my knees drawn up to my chin. I was found there by my sister some time later. I have no idea if it was minutes or hours, I can only presume it was at least an hour because my sister lived in Carysfort and had to cycle across the city.

I just sat there feeling cold and numb. Later I began to shiver and could not stop. I was later taken by a friend to the accident and emergency department at a local hospital where I was given medication for shock and trauma. I slept well but the following days were very difficult. I could not forget the explosion, the bang and the fire. In particular, I could not forget the face of the young lady to whom I had given water, wondering if she lived or died. I was fearful of every car which was parked irregularly and on more than one occasion I called the Garda to inspect vehicles, which it did.

Since I joined Justice for the Forgotten, I have come to realise the total devastation felt by so many people who have lost loved ones. The victims who received serious and long-term physical and emotional injuries will carry their pain for the rest of their lives. Nothing could ever be the same again. In realising how lucky I have been, I also feel a sense of guilt that I survived while so many who were much younger than me, even babies, lost their lives.

How am I now? I am still quite jumpy and I suffer nightmares, not every night but many nights. I sometimes wake after loud bangs, obviously recalling the episode. My husband tells me that I jump in my sleep. I still feel shaky in the city centre, large stores and places of entertainment. I am constantly watching for anything suspicious or any person who is acting in a suspicious way. I received counselling a few years ago which helped me a great deal. I am on medication for panic attacks and claustrophobia and may have to remain on it for the rest of my life. It is 30 years since the bombings and it is incredible that so little was done to bring the perpetrators of such heinous crimes to justice.

I welcome Mr. Justice Barron's report, which I have read throughout. It was very well done and I thank him for it. However, it raises many questions not only for the victims, but also for the State. These questions should be grappled with and answered. There seems to be only one way to proceed. The State must get to the bottom of the mass murder of 34 innocent people and the injuries, physical and psychological, of some 150 others. Only a public tribunal of inquiry could assuage, in some small way, the sorrow and pain of the survivors. It is incumbent on the State, at this late date and before more of the injured pass away, to establish a public tribunal of inquiry. By doing so it will give the victims the satisfaction of knowing that the State understands the gravity of the situation and is prepared to act accordingly.

Chairman

I thank Ms Lawlor-Watson for telling her story and I call Mr. Kevin O'Loughlin.

Mr. Kevin O’Loughlin

I am making this submission on behalf of the family of the late Christina O'Loughlin. I am Kevin O'Loughlin, son of Christina O'Loughlin who was killed in the South Leinster Street explosion. I am also representing my father, also Kevin O'Loughlin, her husband, who is 82 years old. Unfortunately, he is in ill-health and is not able to be present today. My father was a committed member of the Justice for the Forgotten campaign from the early days and was very active in the movement. I am also representing my brother, Edward O'Loughlin, and my wife, Catherine O'Loughlin.

My mother Christina was 51 years old at the time of her death. She worked in the Shelbourne Hotel and had a trade that was quite unusual, French polishing. She returned to work in the 1950s when my brother and I were growing up and worked right up until her death. On the day she died, 17 May 1974, she would have been leaving the Shelbourne Hotel and would have passed the gates of Leinster House. She was on her way to our home not far away in Townsend Street. At the bottom of Kildare Street she would have turned down along the college wall towards Westland Row. I think she was probably talking to Frank Massey's daughter, Anna, because I understand they may have known each other. The bomb exploded, and I understand she was killed instantly.

At the time I was in the TSB in Abbey Street. I did hear the explosion. I went home to our house and I waited there with my brother and my father. We had no news, of course; we had no telephone. We waited the whole evening until well past midnight. We had no news whatsoever but we were aware that something was terribly wrong because we knew that she would have passed down that way. She would always come the same way - we dreaded that - but we knew in our hearts that something was terribly wrong.

Later during the night, my father eventually decided to go and search for my mother. He went around to the hospitals in Dublin asking where she was. He got no information at all, so at some stage in the night he would have gone to the morgue. It was there that he identified her body. That would have been at about three or four in the morning, I think. Obviously, I cannot say anything more except the fact that we were totally devastated by this. I remember her funeral and the presence of some Government Ministers at it. After that, we pretty much had to get on with our lives as best we could. As John Molloy mentioned, I remember the time when we received the compensation tribunal award. That was the only time I ever remember hearing anything back from the authorities about my mother's death. We never received any feedback on how the Garda investigation was going.

As time went on, we just carried on with our lives, as I said. We had our own private memorial mass for my mother. We really did not have much confidence in ourselves and in what we could do. In fact, we spoke very little about her death. My father, in particular, found it very difficult to talk about the terrible things he would have seen. Even to this day, he does not really talk about it. He finds it difficult.

When the Justice for the Forgotten campaign started, we joined. Since then we have been able to build more confidence in ourselves to try to find out exactly what happened. I would like to associate our family with the remarks of Mr. Massey, in particular, about the Barron report. Our family is very much in favour of a public inquiry being held. Thank you very much.

Chairman

Thank you very much, Kevin, for telling us that.

Deputy P. Power

I thank Kevin, Frank and Phil for coming in today. Everything you have said in your submissions has been recorded on tape and video, and there will be public transcripts. Everything you have said has now been read into the public record, perhaps for the first time ever. This should never be underestimated. Those transcripts and tapes will be available to you should you ever wish to have a look at them. I know that many of you have come here today - Kevin especially - almost on a mission representing your families. It is important that you know that they are available to bring back to those whom you represent.

Once again - I mentioned this earlier - it is important to say that, when we make our judgments, recommendations and findings in a few weeks time, everything that you have said today will inform us in coming to our opinions. I have one question each for Kevin, Phil and Frank. I would like to ask Phil when she personally became involved in the campaign. You mentioned that in recent years you had been getting counselling. Was it before the "Hidden Hand" programme? Did you have the feeling that this issue was still outstanding in your life, or was it brought home to you that there were big outstanding unanswered questions after 1993?

Ms Lawlor-Watson

No. It was nothing to do with the "Hidden Hand" programme. At first I tried my best to push everything away and get on with my life. At that time, I had not met any of the other people who were involved in the bombing. No one was in touch with me. In around 1997, I joined Justice for the Forgotten. It was the time Mr. Wilson became involved. I gave a statement to Mr. Wilson and got in touch with Margaret Irwin, our secretary. It was only then that the full impact of it all came tumbling back. Particularly when I looked to Frank Massey and saw and heard him speak, I just felt the man's life would never be back with him. He would always be devastated. It was then that the full impact of it all came back to me and I began to ask questions.

I remember the meeting with Mr. Justice Barron. He brought us up to his office, which was in line with the Taoiseach's in Government Buildings. There was a group of us, perhaps ten to a dozen people. He sat us down and listened to us as we gave our own brief stories. With regard to his inquiry, he said he would like us to note that if we came across any evidence that would help him in his report we should bring it forward. He, more or less, left us with that question.

Chairman

On that point we will conclude until 2.15 p.m. this afternoon.

Sitting suspended at 1.20 p.m. and resumed at 2.15 p.m.

Chairman

These hearings are formal but they are also informal inasmuch as we can facilitate people. There are certain time constraints and I appreciate that some people have to travel. In that regard, the committee is delighted to facilitate Mr. Desmond Doherty of Desmond Doherty and Company, solicitors, Ms Miriam Reilly BL and the group of relatives they represent. I know Ms Reilly has an application to make and that Mr. Doherty would like to make a submission. We are delighted to allow that.

Ms Miriam Reilly

I thank the committee for its invitation to attend here today and for the opportunity to address it. I would also like to thank the Chairman especially for facilitating us in allowing us to make our applications and our submissions at this point in the proceedings. I understand that the committee has not quite finished with the Justice for the Forgotten group and that it will be taking up the balance of that process once our submissions have concluded.

The committee has our submissions and will be aware of the people we represent. I have been instructed by Mr. Doherty and I appear on behalf of a number of people, including two families, the O'Brien family and the O'Neill family, and also a lady called Ms Bernie Bergin. The members of the O'Brien family I represent are Mrs. Elizabeth O'Brien and her daughter Linda Sutherland - they are the mother and sister, respectively, of John O'Brien who lost his life on 17 May 1974 - and his two infant daughters, Jacqueline and Anne Marie O'Brien. The committee has heard Ms Alice O'Brien speak of these people. Her sister, Anne O'Brien, the mother of these girls and the wife of John O'Brien, also lost her life on that particular day.

We also appear on behalf of Mrs. Martha O'Neill, the wife of Ed O'Neill senior who died on that day, and their two young sons, Ed O'Neill junior and Billy O'Neill. Both Ed and Billy were injured in the Parnell Street bombing. We also appear for their siblings, Niall O'Neill, Angela O'Neill and Denise O'Neill. On that day the latter three people to whom I referred lost their father and their two young brothers were injured. Ms Bernie Bergin was injured in the Leinster Street bomb.

The committee has our submission and will be aware of the nature of the application we wish to make and also the basis for that application. We are anxious that the committee would retire to consider our application before proceeding any further with these exercises. I understand that the committee will have an opportunity to consider our application over the coming days and we will hear from it in due course in that regard.

First, we ask that the committee considers its remit as set out in the Dáil motion and, specifically, whether it has the power to embark upon the proposed course of hearings in which it is currently engaged. We refer to the Dáil motion that was directed to the joint committee and also the further motion to this committee and we would ask it to look at them. I do not propose to outline the committee's remit, but I would ask it to look to that to see if it has the power to embark upon the proposed course of hearings.

It is our contention, we respectfully submit, that for the committee to conduct the proposed oral hearings within the limitations of the Abbeylara decision renders the process, of necessity, meaningless. On the other hand we suggest that to conduct meaningful oral hearings the committee will be trying to do something which the courts, through the Abbeylara decision, have already said cannot be done.

It is, therefore, our application that these proposed oral hearings on which the committee is currently engaged be truncated and that they be limited solely to what is proposed to be dealt with in module 5, part 2. Obviously, the committee has its own document which outlines the various modules. Module 5, part 2 relates to the consideration of whether, having regard to the report's findings and following consultations with the inquiry, a further public inquiry into any aspect of the report would be required or fruitful. Effectively, that is a consideration of whether a public inquiry is merited. That public inquiry, we submit, should have full powers to compel the attendance of witnesses and full powers of discovery. With respect, we suggest that the committee's deliberations, falling short of being adjudicatory in nature, render the oral hearings on which the committee is currently embarked pointless. We believe, therefore, that if these proposed oral hearings stay within the limitations of the Abbeylara decision, the procedure itself is an academic exercise.

Finally, we believe it is unfair to invite our clients to a series of hearings in which they, and the committee conducting the hearings, are prevented from asking questions which they want to ask and from saying what they wish to say. Any questions or statements which we may wish to utter at these hearings would, of necessity, be ones which would touch upon the reputation and good name of invited parties. We appreciate the limitations imposed on the committee and on participants thereto by the Abbeylara decision.

We ask the committee to consider this application, which is, effectively, to truncate the oral hearings to be held in public to deal only with the aspects that are outlined in module 5, part 2, and that any further deliberations the committee must embark upon, given the remit of the Dáil motions, be considered other than in public session. It is our view that to continue with these sessions in public would amount to an effort which, in itself, would either be meaningless if the committee sticks within the Abbeylara decision or, to be meaningful, become problematic. These proposed hearings should be dispensed with, save and except for module 5.

Chairman

Thank you, Ms Reilly, for the application. The committee will consider it in detail and will come back to you prior to the next module, which is next Tuesday.

Ms Reilly

Thank you, Chairman.

Chairman

I welcome Mr. Desmond Doherty of Desmond Doherty and Company, solicitors. Do you wish to make a submission?

Mr. Desmond Doherty

Yes. I am obliged to the committee for allowing me the time to make a statement on behalf of my clients. They are unable to be here today and they have instructed me to read a statement on their behalf, a copy of which has been supplied to the committee. The statement reads as follows:

We, the O'Neill family, the O'Brien family and Bernie Bergin, wish to state publicly our objection to the current proposed scheme of Oireachtas hearings, as envisaged by the current sub-committee in their letters to our solicitor of 14 January 2004 and 16 January 2004. We have suffered enough. We have carefully considered the remit of the current committee and we have, with respect, viewed the correspondence to our solicitor with much despair, trepidation and incredulity. With the greatest respect to all committee members, we say that, at worst, the correspondence to our solicitor and the proposed scheme of events is insulting and suspicious and, at its best, the attempt to set up these so-called hearings is naive and foolish.

We have, tragically, got used to being ignored, demonised and criticised by all organs of the Irish State for the last 30 years. In effect, we have been marginalised. We direct and lay that criticism, in the first instance, firmly at the doorstep of every successive Government from 1974 to date. We believe we have been bombed and maimed, paralysed and traumatised by the UVF with the aid of sections of the British state, and we have been abandoned and left in the wilderness of suffering by our own Irish State. We repeat, we have suffered enough.

Again, with the greatest respect to the individual members of this committee as individuals and human beings, we reject the invitation from you to hear from us as individual members of families who suffered bereavements and as suffering victims. With respect, if this committee does not know by now who we are, how we have suffered, then you should resign from your position immediately and bring a complete halt to these proceedings. We are sick of telling politicians and all State agencies how we feel and how we have suffered.

With respect, if this committee does not know by now who we are, how we have suffered, then you should resign from your position immediately and bring a complete halt to these proceedings. We are sick of telling politicians and all State agencies how we feel and how we have suffered. It is all a matter of record and undeniable fact. Unfortunately, we have been sucked into a vortex of Civil Service, governmental and political bureaucracy and red tape. We have been duped into a process of subterfuge and our suffering has been replaced by rules, regulations, committees and sub-committees. We have been lost in this process.

It is not the individual fault of you, as committee or sub-committee members, that the Abbeylara case has rendered this process worthless. However, it will be your fault, and we will hold each and every one of you accountable, if you do not do the right thing. The right thing to do - you may view it from a legal, moral, political, constitutional or ethical standpoint; we do not mind - is for these proceedings to be stopped forthwith and for you to recommend to the current Government and to both Houses of the Dáil that a public tribunal of inquiry is set up immediately.

In effect, you are acting as members of the jury with the power to make a judgment and findings in this matter. However, you are public officials with public accountability and the decision that you make in this matter will affect our lives. Please bear this in mind.

There is a legal reality hanging over these proceedings in the form of the Abbeylara case. The Abbeylara case, by your own admission, means that this sub-committee - we quote from your letter to our solicitor of 16 January 2004 - "is obliged to go about its work within the confines of the Abbeylara judgment and, as a result, it is legally restrained from entering into any adjudication on the issue of individual or personal culpability as laid out in the various judgments".

You already know our views on Mr. Justice Barron's private inquiry. We have stated it publicly and our lawyers have told you in writing. We, of course, respect Mr. Justice Barron as a man of the utmost integrity. Nevertheless, it remains on Judge Barron's own admission that this inquiry was private. He had no legal authority or power whatsoever. In effect, it was toothless. These proceedings will suffer the same fate if you do not stop them now. Your letter to our solicitor of 16 January 2004 is viewed by us as a pre-emptive attempt to cover yourselves in the same way that Judge Barron, quite properly we might add, has covered himself by outlining the nature of his private inquiry and the limited scope of same.

Regrettably and, again, with respect to you, as individuals, the process which we have endured for the last 30 years makes us feel like dirty people bombed by a dirty bomb. We are caught in the crossfire of Irish Governments doing nothing for us, Judge Barron's private inquiry, which we never agreed to, and the current proposed process in which you have already effectively admitted defeat in your letter of 16 January 2004 to our solicitor.

As a final thought, we give you an example of the unimaginable. Let us suppose that three car bombs exploded on 17 May 1974 at around tea time, instead of in Dublin but in either Edinburgh, Cardiff or London. Thirty-three people were murdered and hundreds were mutilated and injured. Investigations led the authorities to believe or conclude that the bombings were carried out by an organisation and that some of the culprits or suspects in that organisation were believed to also be serving members of the Irish Army or the Garda. Need we really tell you what would have happened? Just think about it. Just think what the Irish and British Governments of the day would have done. Those families and victims would not have been bombed and abandoned to the extent we have been.

We wish to continually repeat our respect to you, as individuals. If you continue with these hearings on the back of, on its own admission, a private inquiry, you will consign yourselves in history as part of a shameful and illogical process that has achieved a lot to be forgotten and absolutely nothing for justice.

Mr. Brian Fitzsimmons

I am representing my wife, Nora, and my son, Jerome, who were injured in the Monaghan bomb. The reason I am representing my wife is that she does not like to speak about it, because it affected her that much. On the day in question my wife who is actually from Monaghan was going home to visit her mother and stopped in Monaghan town for my son wanted chips. She got him the chips in the café and next there was a big explosion which she thought was a gas cylinder which had gone off. After the smoke had cleared away, she saw a hole which she climbed out through and pulled our son out. They were taken to hospital by some gent in a car. She was in hospital, I think, for three or four days.

I actually did not know anything about this until the Sunday - it was a Saturday night it happened - when my local parish priest came down and told me that he thought it was my wife who was in the bombing but it had come over on the media that she had two sons with her. I said to our local priest that it was not Nora because she just had Jerome with her but there was another young lad with him and they got mixed up, since they were all in the same ward. I passed no more remarks about it but kept listening to the news and eventually I found out it was Nora. I had to get a car and drive to Monaghan Hospital but thankfully they were not too bad and they came through it well.

The after effects were the worst part of it. For a long time afterwards my wife would not go out and would not enter crowds or anything like that. Our social life was affected for a long time because we were very fond of dancing and going out to old-time dancing events and she would not go to anything like that. Eventually, as time went on, we got it together again and got out again. It was terrible for a long time but we have got over it now. Thankfully, we still have her here, along with my son. Other people have lost their loved ones. I just happen to be one of the lucky ones.

Chairman

Thank you very much. Members of the committee might make further comments or ask questions.

Ms Iris Boyd

I thank the committee for giving me the chance to speak on behalf of my father, who was killed by the bomb in Monaghan. My mother passed away a few weeks ago, so it is very difficult for me to come here today, as the committee will probably understand. I feel my parents would want me to do this, which is why I am here.

My father and I were shopping together in Monaghan on 17 May 1974. My father had asked me to call and see his sister in law, my aunt, because she had been sick in hospital. When I called, she was out of hospital. Had she not been out of hospital we had intended to visit her that evening, but because she was out of hospital I stayed in her house and spoke to her for a few minutes. While I was there, a newsflash on television announced that a bomb had gone off in Dublin, and I said I would have to leave. My uncle arrived in from work and said that as he was going to do overtime he would go back to work. He then left the house just ahead of me. As I was saying goodbye to my aunt at the door, the bomb went off. That is how close I was to being killed by that bomb. I feel so lucky that I am here today to be able to give evidence on behalf of my father.

I went down town, where there was devastation. I could not get near the car. I was told that people thought there was going to be a second bomb. I could not get near the car and I collapsed. I was brought round by someone who gave me a drink of brandy. Then my cousin saw me and he brought me to the hospital. The Civil Defence did a great job on that day in Monaghan and I must speak on their behalf. They were excellent. They were on the scene very fast and had taken my father even before the ambulance arrived. When they approached the hospital they could not get near it because of a funeral emerging. There were bodies everywhere. It was terrible.

My cousin could not drive through the gates of the hospital so I said I would walk. I went in and met the nun who was the hospital matron. She took me into her office and told me that my father was in a queue for the operating theatre. I wanted to see him but they would not allow it. To this day I regret that, because he was still conscious. The Reverend Ahearne then came in. He had been boarding a bus for Newry to attend some social event there when he heard about the bomb and came straight to the hospital. He came over to me and I said: "Please tell me the truth about how my daddy is." He checked and told me that he was not among the worst injured, that he could pull through though he had head injuries. I then thought of how I would be able to tell my mother. We owned a pub in our village and my father was very well known. Another publican saw me and he knew my Dad very well and he came in and stayed with me. He said we would somehow have to get round to telling my mother. At that time I was married and had a three year old son. I telephoned a neighbour and asked the neighbour to tell my husband who could maybe break it some way to Mammy that Daddy had an accident. My mother arrived down and she could not understand what was wrong because the traffic was diverted in the town.

Daddy was still upstairs in theatre and nobody was allowed up. It was hours before I could see him. When we did see him, he was unconscious. He had gone into a coma and never spoke - nothing. We asked if we could have him moved to the Richmond in Dublin to get him seen to. They said he could not be moved.

My father lived from Friday until Tuesday but he never spoke. We were with him in the end but life has been very tough. It has never been the same for us as a family. Everything changed. That is all I can say.

Chairman

You told us earlier on, Iris, at lunch time that you had this guilt and that you met a woman recently who helped to lift it.

Ms Boyd

At that time there was no counselling and my mother and I just walked the streets of Monaghan town for those four days because we could not settle ourselves at home and people were continually calling and inquiring. People were very good but we could not face them at home.

Over the years, I questioned why I did not get back earlier to the car. Why did I not leave my aunt and go back earlier to the car? Then maybe we would have been out of town and it would not have happened. Then I looked at it another way; if we had been back quicker, maybe I would have been caught in it too. I was terribly confused about it all. Over the years I carried a lot of guilt about not being able to be back on time.

On the 25th anniversary, which seemed to hit me very hard, my doctor said I would have to seek counselling. I went for open counselling to WAVE in Belfast, which is very good. One lady told me not to be carrying the guilt and that I was not responsible. She said:

My son was killed in a bomb in Belfast. He had never been in this bar before he went in on a Sunday morning and the bomb went off and killed him. He had every right to be in that bar whenever he wanted. Your father had every right to be in town just as you had every right to be in town but the bombers had no right to be there.

I had never thought about it like that before and it just lifted it all off my shoulders. It made me look at life so differently. I thought, "Yes, that's right. Why I am I blaming myself? It's not me who is to blame. They should not have been there. We had every right to be where we wanted to be. They had no right to be there." That changed it all for me. I did not have to go back. I was so thankful to that lady for saying that. Thank you.

Chairman

Thank you very much indeed, Iris. Sonya Askin could not make it today. Deputy Costello, do you have comments or questions?

Deputy Costello

Ms Fitzsimmons

No, they did not avail of any counselling at all. We dealt with it ourselves. As time went on we got over it.

Deputy Hoctor

I have no further questions.

Chairman

That was another heart-rending story. I thank Mr. Fitzsimmons and Ms Boyd for recounting their experiences.

We will now deal with the Talbot Street bombings. A number of people are present who were affected by these and I welcome them to our proceedings. We are grateful to them for attending. With us is Mr. Tim Grace whom I thank very much.

Mr. Tim Grace

Thank you, Chairman.

Chairman

I also welcome Ms Marie Sherry and I thank her very much. I saw Ms Michelle O'Brien there earlier today and she is also very welcome.

Mr. Tim Grace

My name is Tim Grace and my wife, Rita Bernadette, was killed in Talbot Street. She was a beautiful young woman, aged 34 years, in excellent health and in the prime of her life. She was born in County Tipperary and grew up in Tralee, County Kerry. We were in the seventh year of our marriage, living in Portmarnock with one child, a boy aged 13 months at the time. The Chairman and the committee members should consider the story that I am about to tell them very carefully inasmuch as it was total chance that my wife happened to be in the centre of Dublin that evening. It could just as easily have been the Chairman's wife or mother - or any person near or dear to him or to any member of the committee - as my wife.

On the Thursday night before the bombing, I was walking across the road from my home in Portmarnock and stepped on a nail, which went up through my shoe and caused me some difficulty. Our doctor lived next door. He came in and gave me a tetanus injection. He said that I would have to rest it for a couple of days, either by sitting down or taking to bed; it would have to be one or the other. On Friday, 17 May 1974, I would normally have been in the office, as had been usual for many years before. However, I was at home. At that time we had one car in the family. I had been reasonably successful in business. I had progressed from being chief chemist in my company to technical director and I had only recently been appointed managing director. I was at the zenith of my powers, as it were, business wise. As I said, I would normally have been in my office. We had one car in the family, although we could have afforded two, which was not very usual 30 years ago. It was not nearly as prevalent as it is now.

However, my wife would not take a second car from me because she was something of a fitness fanatic and very conscious of her figure. She wanted to walk a great deal, which she did. During the day and in the afternoon, I looked after the baby for my wife. She had been suffering from 'flu during the week. The baby was teething and she was not in the best form, so I said to her that she should take the car, go into town and have a look around. She went into town and parked the car in Gardiner Street, just around the corner from Talbot Street. She was obviously killed on the way back at 5.30 p.m. when the bomb went off. The elements of chance are, as I pointed out, colossal. I could go even more deeply into that, but I do not want to waste too much time.

When my wife did not come home at 6 p.m, I was looking after the little fellow in bed. I had taken him in there to keep him quiet. I came down at 6 p.m. I was feeling a little better and turned on the news. Of course, the news was that bombs had gone off in Talbot Street. There was no sign of my wife. I had expected her home at about 6 p.m. or 6.30 p.m. At 7 p.m. I was standing at the door looking down the road waiting. There was no sign of her. I went next door and borrowed a car from my neighbour and went into town. I went to where I would usually park the car at the end of Gardiner Street. There was one car in the car park - my white Mercedes. It was a very distinctive car and one I did not want to see. You have no idea of the horror of what was going on in town and the reaction of people at that stage. By the way, I could not make any telephone calls from Portmarnock as all the telephones jammed that evening and were jammed for several hours. One could not get through to anyone.

On the way into town, I called at Clontarf Garda station and there was no news. I went to the gardaí on duty on Talbot Street who were all clearly traumatised. I do not know how I was managing to observe all this at the time but I did, thank God, and held my emotions to some degree at least. I told the garda my wife was definitely involved and I had to search for her. I knew she was involved because the car was at the end of Gardiner Street. The garda was very helpful. He cleared a way for me and, where the gardaí had stopped a lot of cars, he let me drive to Jervis Street Hospital, to which he said all the injured had been taken.

I went to Jervis Street Hospital. Talk about horror. People were out of control there. The doctors and nurses could not control the situation. After some time, I managed to get a look at the list of injured. I was not looking for the dead at this stage as I was hoping for a lot better. She was not on the list of injured so I asked what other hospitals were admitting the injured. They told me the Rotunda was. I went to the Rotunda Hospital where there were no dead. There were six bodies in Jervis Street at the time and my wife's body was there, although I did not know it. I had left Jervis Street and gone to the Rotunda. There were no bodies in the Rotunda and she was not on the list of those injured.

I will always remember the sister on duty in the Rotunda who brought me into her office and gave me a cup of tea. It was the best drink I ever had in my life. I like a drink but, by God, that was the best drink I have ever had.

I went from there to the Mater Hospital where there were two dead - one male. I was getting to the stage where I would look at the bodies. When I was in Jervis Street, my instinct was to look at the injured first. The bodies in the Mater were those of an old woman and a man. I rang my brother who came in from Glasnevin and met me at Doyle's Corner and we decided to go to the morgue. There were no bodies in the morgue at the time. They were being moved from Jervis Street to the morgue and I think there was some confusion because they moved the bodies back again. I do not know exactly what went on.

I could not find my wife and I kept hoping that, if she was not on the list of injured, she had been close to the explosion, had a dreadful experience and was suffering from nervous exhaustion somewhere. That was my hope. I went home to Portmarnock with my brother that night. We got up early the next morning at about seven o'clock and went to the morgue. I finally identified my wife's body an hour later in the morgue. They had moved bodies from Jervis Street to the morgue and back again. I do not know what sort of confusion was going on. I can imagine there was considerable confusion because, in terms of trauma, all one had to do was look at them in Dublin that night. I hope committee members never have to see a night like that again in Dublin.

Afterwards, I was totally shattered and traumatised for a considerable time - for several years. However, I launched myself into the task of raising my infant son and developing my business, which proved therapeutic. I am happy that I have been successful in both areas. I am chairman of my company, which is the top company manufacturing construction chemicals in the country, and my son, now aged 30, is a senior business executive making a significant contribution to the development of the country.

Mr. Roice raised a few questions that will have to be foremost in our minds when we come to address the issues. The detail is still so vividly recounted by everybody, and particularly Mr. Grace, that obviously it was a moment in time that changed all their lives. Its effect on Mr. Grace is evident, but what effect did it have on the life of his son, of whom he is very proud, who obviously was very young?

Mr. Grace

Deputy F. McGrath

I welcome Tim, Marie, Michelle and Edward. I sincerely hope they will find that this exercise is not pointless. We were adamant that we should listen carefully to their views. This is a listening exercise and it is part of a process, so people should not get the wrong impression.

Tim raised a number of points about his situation. Did I hear correctly that it was the following morning, after the bombs went off, that he identified his wife, Breda?

Mr. Grace

We are returning to the group from Talbot Street and I welcome Ms Gertie Sheils, Mr. Garret Mussen, Mr. Noel Hegarty, Mr. Anthony Phelan, Mr. Joe O'Neill and Ms Bernie McNally, chairperson of Justice for the Forgotten.

Ms Gertie Sheils

I am coming from a little more distant perspective. My aunt, Concepta Dempsey, my father's sister, was the last remaining relative on my father's side. She worked in Guiney's for a number of years, and travelled in from Drogheda every day on the train. She was a lady in her early sixties who was very quiet and reserved and certainly never did harm, by either word or deed, to anybody in her lifetime.

On the afternoon of 17 May 1974 my brother was driving past Guiney's. He was collecting two young cousins who were also working in town and who were to meet him at the corner of Gardiner Street. The two girls stopped to buy sweets or magazines or something and were only just in the car when somebody said, "I wonder if Cepta has gone home yet." Apparently, someone else said, "Oh, I think she has gone for the train," so he drove on up and was only at the square when he heard a huge explosion. The person from whom they had bought the sweets and newspaper was embroiled in the bombing and was either badly injured or killed.

I was married at the time and living in Balbriggan. A garda came to the door to ask if my daughter, Mary, was home. She was working in the city at the time and had been confused with another girl. I later learned that the other girl, Maureen Shiels, from Coolock, had been caught up in the bombing.

I did not know until that moment that a bomb had gone off in Dublin. It was very traumatic because Mary was not home at the time. However, she arrived shortly afterwards and we were delighted that all was well. Later on that evening, word came from home that my poor aunt had been killed in the bombing. She was on the second floor in Guineys, her place of employment, with her back to the window, when the bomb went off. She suffered horrific injuries because it seems that some of the piping from the outside the building became embedded in her back. She lived for perhaps nine days on life support but never regained consciousness. My mother, brother and sister went to the hospital first to visit and identify her, but she never recognised any of them.

These were people going about their daily lives, doing nothing untoward, and they deserved to be able to do that, to come and go from work. This was the first brush our family had with tragedy and it was all horrific, but I can empathise with people who have lost sons and daughters because nine years later, my young daughter was killed on the road by a drunk driver. There is a different quality involved. Much as I felt so sad about my aunt's death, and regretted it, the feeling of losing a child or a very close member of the family is absolutely horrific.

My aunt was buried very quietly. She had an insurance policy. Nobody ever came to say a word about the death or apologise or say how sad they were. My aunt certainly did not deserve to die like that, nor to be ignored in her death, in that it appeared that she was of no importance to anybody. For that reason, some years later when Paula was killed, I decided such a thing would not happen and that if I could help it, Paula's death would be a watershed that could be remembered, with an attempt perhaps to do something about it or make something of it.

Back in 1974, the attitude was a sign of the times. People did not question things or inquire into them; innocent people were also being killed in Northern Ireland. In a way, I suppose we felt that someone decided to bring the war to us. It has also been one of our concerns all along that this would not become a political football and that it would not be used by either side, because innocent people died on all sides. There was guilt north and south of the Border, particularly in this case.

I met Mr. Justice Barron when he took over from the late Mr. Justice Hamilton. He met us and spoke to us briefly. None of us was asked to give the life history of the person killed. The one thing we did ask - I remember Frank Massey in particular asking about it - was about getting a commitment to finding out the information we needed from all parties and all sides. I said to the judge: "Later on, if you don't get that, will you indict them in the report itself for their silence?"

I did not realise the strict terms of reference so I was expecting far more from the Barron report. I was disappointed but that was because I simply did not understand. So, while I think it is essential that we have a public inquiry, I hope that at the end of it we would not have a void. Will it be possible, and can we be promised, that all the information missing and files that are missing will be presented or that the people who made them disappear will be named and shamed? We at least owe the victims that much and we certainly owe the relatives that much.

Thank you very much. I welcome Mr. Noel Hegarty and thank him for attending.

Mr. Noel Hegarty

My name is Noel Hegarty. On 17 May 1974, I was 13 years of age. I was injured in the Talbot Street bombings and was brought to Jervis Street Hospital. As I did not return that night, my father and brother went out to search for me. It was the following day before they found me in Jervis Street Hospital. The first thing I remembered was waking up in hospital with a priest leaning over and anointing me. I blacked out again and, at that stage, I was transferred to the Richmond Hospital where I spent two to three weeks.

Throughout my life I have tried to commit suicide on several occasions and was hospitalised as a result. At the time, the treatment I received was electric shock treatment. I have been on medication on and off through the years. I still suffer from anxiety, depression and also a fear. This has affected me in that I have not been able to work for long periods and have been afraid to go into town. It took me three years before I went back into town. Even to this day, I still get palpitations and experience fear. As a citizen of this State, I demand a public inquiry.

My sister Marie had been working in Dublin for one year. She was an outgoing and jolly girl who worked in the Civil Service. On 17 May she was invited to a party. She lived in Phibsboro Avenue. She was with some friends and decided to take a shortcut towards Talbot Street to buy a present for the person whose party she was going to attend. She usually never walked home that way. She walked down Talbot Street and outside Guiney's, just past where the car blew up, she was killed. My parents were told that she was unrecognisable. My father was not allowed to see the body. We have relations in Dublin and they informed my father that she could only be recognised by the ring she was wearing.

My mother still suffers from depression as a result of what happened. My father is not well at present because he suffered a stroke. I have an older brother who attends the meetings in Dublin as often as possible. It is tough going. In Waterford, we do not hear as much about what is happening because we live so far from Dublin. However, we attend the meetings as often as possible and Margaret Irwin of Justice for the Forgotten keeps us informed about what is happening.

Growing up, people would ask me how many children were in the family. I would often say that I had a brother and a sister. If they asked what were they names, I would feel strange saying that my sister was murdered in the 1974 car bombing in Dublin. It is difficult to forget and I would always say that I had a sister. I am also often asked whether anyone was ever caught for the bombing and I would say "No" but that we had suspicions. Even in recent years, it has been difficult to keep it out of one's mind. I visit my sister's grave often, particularly around her anniversary. My father and mother, who are from small farming backgrounds in Waterford, and the rest of us visit the grave as often as possible. I drove up this morning from Waterford, caught the DART into the city and visited the monument at the end of Talbot Street.

I hope there is a public inquiry. It would be great if whoever was responsible could be brought to justice. That is more or less all that I have to say.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Phelan and call Mr. Joe O'Neill.

Mr. Joe O’Neill

I am Joe O'Neill of O'Neill Shoes of No. 18 Talbot Street. I moved to Talbot Street in 1974 and opened a shop there. The woman who owned the shop at the time sent me a letter which turned me down as an unsuitable tenant. I cycled out to her house to see her. Her next door neighbour was involved in business with my uncle who ran Dublin Meatpackers. She saw us talking and asked me how I knew the man. I told her that I was involved in business and she told me to go home because I was now a suitable tenant.

Near closing time on the day of the bombings, I heard the first bomb exploding in Parnell Street. I thought that something had happened in the car park out the back. I walked out of the shop up to the corner to Brendan who sold the newspapers and asked him if some car had gone up in the car park, since I had a car in it. He said that it was in Parnell Street. I walked back to the shop, in the door and across the room. At that time I had already bought the second half of the shop. It was divided in two, and I was running two shops separately. I went across the hallway to the main door of the shop to collect the money in the second till, which I never reached.

I put my hand on the door to turn the knob. The door went out of my hand and killed Mrs. McKenna on the other side. I was blown back into the shop. A sheet of glass went past me and cut the fixtures and the heels from the stiletto shoes. I was buried in three feet of shoe boxes. I straightened up and lifted my foot. A piece of timber measuring about nine inches by six inches was on fire. There was no shoe or sock on my foot. I lifted my second foot. I had a shoe on it and stamped it around, since I knew that five staff members were down in the basement at that stage.

I walked out of the shop. I could not see, since my eyesight had gone dark. I could not understand why it was so dark. I thought it was winter. I got out to the footpath. I could see bodies on the street. It appeared to me as if a steamroller had come down the street and run over everybody. I looked down at my side and could see what I thought was yellow stuff pouring out of it. I kept going on, heading for Moran's Hotel. I wanted to go there. I was heading towards it when I collapsed between the double lanes of cars going up and down Gardiner Street. A fellow on the street was going home from work. He pulled open the doors of the car and got a man to help. He threw me onto the back seat of the car. He asked me where I wanted to go, and I told him: "The nearest hospital."

We went down along the quays, which were not one-way in those days. I could not get much further. I told him to go to the nearest hospital. He then headed up O'Connell Street towards Jervis Street. Jervis Street was one-way at that time. He said that it was one-way and that he could not go that way. I told him that I would pay the fines, and on he went. We got to the gate of the hospital, and there was a huge crowd outside. However, they would not let me in. He got out of the car and went up to the man in the box, who told him that he had instructions to let no one in. He told the man to come out and see me, saying that he would surely let me in then. He came out and told us to drive in.

They lifted me out of the car and put me on an iron stretcher. There were two or three nuns and three or four nurses. They asked me what had happened in Parnell Street. I said that I did not know. They asked me if I had come from there, and I told them that I was from Talbot Street. She asked me how that could have happened, since the bomb was in Parnell Street. I told her that I did not know, since I had come from Talbot Street. Then the nun said that I was a northerner, and a man said the same. They asked me where I came from. I told them that I came from a village in County Monaghan, which we discussed. I was put into an iron lift. I was not worth a casualty at all. I was put into an iron lift and taken up into a ward. They cleared the beds from all around me. I then started to pass out. I asked for a drink of water but they would not get it for me. They said they could not give me a drink. They put me onto a bed, rolled me off, came up with a big pair of scissors and cut from the throat down the whole way. Then I conked out and the next thing I could hear was the gas cylinders coming along on a barrel. I did not wake until three o'clock in the morning when Professor Collins came along and said "I will take this man". I did not wake again until Monday morning. When I awoke I thought I had only one leg because I could not find my other leg. I did not realise all my hair had been burned off and my face scorched. They were coming along with big pads to lay on my face. I went back to sleep again for a whole day. They told me they would let me look at the mirror in a couple of days. After a couple of days I looked at the mirror to see what my face was like. I stayed there for two to three weeks.

On a Wednesday night just before the bombing, I had met the tenants who were living upstairs in the shop and I had negotiated a payment of £3,000 for them to move out. Now I had no shop or place to put tenants and I had negotiated a loan with the bank for £3,000. An accountant came in to me and advised that, whatever I did, I should get rid of the tenants or I would be in terrible trouble because it would cost thousands of pounds to fix the place. They went up to the bank. The bank rang the hospital to say it would not give me the money since I was not going to live but I did live and I got my £3,000 otherwise and I made it.

I was out of the hospital in three months. I even walked out because I wanted to get out as quickly as I could. All my footwear had been moved to County Monaghan, far from me in Carrickmacross, since I could not get the stock insured in Dublin because it could not be called "secure stock". It had to be moved to the country in chicken lorries. They did not realise there was a hole in the back of the lorry and that shoes were popping out as it went along the road. After that, I had Bernie and four other girls employed so I had to get back to work.

Thanks to Charlie Brett further down the street, who offered me a premises for buttons, I got back in business. Once I got out of the hospital, I started working right away even though I was told to go home and stay in bed. After two weeks or so, I was driving home when I got violently sick. When I got to Fairview, I found it hard to make the rest of the way home. I made it to home but when I got to the house, I could not get out of the car. I was then lifted out and put up on a bed. I rang a doctor but no doctor would come. I rang an ambulance because I was in dreadful pain - I had a blockage. The ambulance would not collect me because I was in a house. They suggested they would lift me out of the bed and put me on the street and they would come for me. They would not take me. Eventually I got another doctor - our local doctor was on holidays - I was carried away in the ambulance eventually, without being put on the street.

When I got to the hospital, I was taken to casualty this time. They did not know what was wrong with me and they then called Professor Collins. He said "Are ye all mad? The man has only two or three hours to live." I was taken to the operating theatre at 10.00 a.m. or 11.00 a.m. and was in hospital for another two weeks. I got out again and I was told off for returning to work too quickly. I was not out too long when I had to go back to Jervis Street Hospital. I walked in this time and Professor Collins was sent for again. I was only supposed to go in for a test and I asked him how quickly I would return home. He said not to worry about Talbot Street and that I would not be going back at all. That shut me up but I made it out again. I was back a few times to different hospitals. I ended up buying my own house from Mrs. Barr. I owned No. 12 until I sold it last year. I am now in Nos. 11 and 12. There might be no bomb there.

Chairman

I acknowledge Mr. O'Neill's great spirit, in spite of all the difficulties and the terrible injuries he has experienced. I thank him for coming and telling us his story. Ms Bernie McNally was in the cellar.

Ms Bernie McNally

Yes, thank God. I am a survivor of the Talbot Street bomb and I also sustained serious injuries that day. The injuries I received have been well rehearsed in the media of late. I lost the sight in my eye on 17 May. Cosmetically, it looked bad and, eventually, 24 years later, I had to have the same eye removed. I require treatment on a constant basis and expect to do so for the rest of my life. I have been involved in the campaign for the past five years and I was elected chairperson two years ago. Today has been harrowing, listening to the cross section of people, the stories and the ongoing suffering that people must deal with 30 years later. More families and survivors are unable to be present due to work commitments and illness, while many have died while waiting to get justice.

I refer to some of the people I came across that day and how it affected their lives. Mae McKenna occupied a flat over O'Neill's shoe shop. She was a sales assistant in Clery's, O'Connell Street. The staff were on strike so Mae was at home. When she heard the first bomb go off on Parnell Street she went to the lower ground floor. I was in the basement, came up and met her on the landing. Mae asked me if I had heard a bomb going off and I said I thought it was a bomb. I was 16 years and the nearest I came to hearing a bomb going off was a balloon bursting. I do not make light of it but that was how close I had been to bombs. I had gone to the basement for a pair of sandals for a customer who had come into the shop late that evening and, as I stepped away from Mae, the Talbot Street bomb exploded and Mae was killed instantly. The customer for whom I went to get the sandals never got to try them on because she was also killed. I could not find the customer in the shop in the mayhem afterwards and I had no sight myself. I will never forget how weakly she moaned for a while after but I could not find her. She was found dead the next day.

One of the many unsung heroes of the day was a man called Kevin Roe. He came on the Talbot Street bomb scene and when he saw the devastation and human carnage and that there were no emergency services to take any of us from Talbot Street to hospital, he had the presence of mind to go to Busáras and commandeer a bus there. That bus was loaded to capacity with the injured from Talbot Street. People with very serious injuries were on that bus. I was one of the many people on the bus. It took us to Sir Patrick Dun's Hospital where we were tended to at some stage.

Later that evening I was moved to the Eye and Ear Hospital where I met Una Candon for the first time. Una, who has since died, was a strong supporter of our campaign and a victim of the Parnell Street bomb. She spent a week beside me in hospital. When she was going home I envied her because I wanted to get out of the hospital. I did not realise that Una had no home to go to. She had a business premises in Parnell Street and her home was above the business premises. She was out of work, badly traumatised and injured and now she had no home. She had to go and stay in a convent. I mention Una because she has died in the last three years. I also mention Patricia Askin. Her daughter, Sonya, could not make it here today. Patricia Askin's husband, Patrick Askin, was killed in the Monaghan bomb and Patricia only died as recently as October 2003.

So, there is a great urgency in getting to the truth of what happened in Dublin and Monaghan. We now have Mr. Justice Barron's report. This has to be the catalyst for a public judicial inquiry. I felt very angry when I read the report. One single sentence on page 106 is highly symbolic of the attitude of the State to the bombings:

The fragments, or debris, that are still in the possession of gardaí were found in an unmarked cupboard in Garda headquarters following an extensive search of the premises for documentary material relating to the bombings.

In other words, fragments of the debris from the greatest atrocity ever committed on the island of Ireland did not even merit a name. They, like the outrage itself, were to be swept under the carpet and covered up.

The serious questions that have been raised by the judge in relation to the Garda investigation in response to the Irish Government of the day, the likelihood of collusion by the British security forces at some level and the lack of co-operation from the British Government with the Barron inquiry demand the establishment of a public judicial inquiry. The Barron report is the opening chapter of that inquiry.

Over ten years ago the victims expected the Government of the day to hold an inquiry into the bombing. It took the Department of Justice two years to conduct a review that we now know to have been a whitewash and a cover-up and which did not even refer to the disappearance of the Department's own files.

It should not have fallen to us, the victims and survivors, to become campaigners, but it did. The distrust that we, the victims, have in any process that does not involve full public disclosure, public hearings and public testing is found in our collective experience over the past 11 years. We have had a life sentence imposed on all of our lives. There is no getting away from this. I find today, for instance, a very difficult day but it is due to the abandonment that has been imposed on us over the past 30 years and the neglect that has had to be endured by the families and survivors. That is all I have to say. Thank you.

Deputy P. McGrath

As Bernie has said, it has been a long and difficult day for everybody, particularly for the people who came in and had sad stories to tell about what happened to their relations and loved ones. Bernie also rightly said there are many more people who cannot be with us today but who have equally sad stories to tell. We empathise with them also. It is a difficult situation but we hope that coming here today is, as many guests have said, another step along the ladder. I hope we can make progress, and I thank all our guests for attending the committee.

I have a couple of questions, Chairman. My first question is for Ms Shiels. She had a lot of trauma in her own life subsequently when her own daughter died. Again, we cannot possibly understand what that is like. Ms Shiels has a feeling that because it was her aunt who died, her family were not treated properly because her aunt did not have family of her own. I think I detected from Ms Shiels that she felt that because her aunt did not have family of her own, the same care or whatever was not given to Ms Shiels' family. Maybe she would elaborate a little on that.

Ms Shiels

I think the Deputy mistook what I meant. I meant that my attentions were probably diverted a little in Drogheda from the tragedy because I had a family of my own and was probably more concentrated on that. The fact that my aunt was killed was a terrible tragedy but she was an unmarried lady, a single person. She had been part of my childhood and upbringing, and she was a lovely person. As I said, she never harmed anyone in her life and was looking forward to a trip to Lourdes with friends when she was killed.

It was horrific, and I always felt that everybody had been too silent. I did not break the silence but neither did anybody else. Families at that time were suffering, and as I say, there was a sort of war going on among a certain element. Innocent people were being killed and the matter was not being addressed. It was all wrong and never should have happened, particularly to anybody who was not a member of a paramilitary group. That was a disgrace. It is wrong to say that the war was brought to us because we were in some way involved in what was going on up there. I was worried that a conclusion that there was British collusion would bring us into a sort of political football. That would not have been acceptable at all to my aunt, who would not want her death to be used in that way.

All of the deaths should have been addressed. I think, perhaps I was a little remiss. It meant a lot to know that my daughter, Mary, was safe that night. I did not know that Cepta was killed at the time. I suppose I was a lot younger and had a lot to learn.

Deputy P. McGrath

I thank Ms Shiels for that. It is very magnanimous of her to mention the fact that there were so many other people killed. I think 300 people had already been killed in the Troubles at the time the bomb went off.

I reiterate what Deputy McGrath stated - that it has obviously been a difficult day for all concerned and for us too in the sense that the report does not convey the anguish and the trauma and the fact that so many lives and families were shattered beyond recognition. Despite what has been said today, we are much better informed certainly with regard to that aspect.

I have heard a lot of misery today and I have never seen anybody carry so much obvious pain with such good nature as Joe O'Neill. I am sure there are times when you do not carry it with such good nature, but you are to be complimented.

Mr. O’Neill

I still have a lot of trouble with glass coming out through my feet. There was a piece of glass in my knee last Sunday; when I went to kneel for mass I could not move my right knee.

What annoyed me most when I came out of hospital was that I got a hospital bill and the VHI would not pay it because it came under the heading of civil strife. The insurance companies would not pay for the repairs to the shop because I did not have pre-1932 insurance. Again, civil strife was cited.

The Corporation charged me £600 - which was a lot of money then - for removing the chimney stack because it was dangerous to pedestrians on the street. The following week it charged me £800 for removing and replacing the pieces of kerbstone found three storeys up. I had to pay these charges of £600 and £800 and also the hospital fees.

Deputy P. Power

I understand that your injuries are ongoing and serious and I thank your for your contribution.

I want to ask Ms Bernie McNally two questions which I have asked of a number of people. What was the catalyst, to use your own word, for your particular interest? Was it the programme "Hidden Hand - the Forgotten Massacre" or was there a period before 1993 where you had consigned this event to history and said, "This has happened.", albeit traumatic as it was? What was the impetus for you to say: "There is some unresolved issue here and there is an injustice. We have been forgotten about."? When did that become a major issue?

How many people, between injured and bereaved relatives, have said to your group, "I am just not willing to get involved. I have put this behind me and I want to forget about that part of my life."? We certainly got some submissions to that effect. Could you give me a general answer in that regard?

Ms McNally

I cannot answer in that regard. Anybody I came across wanted to be involved. I was 16 years of age in 1974. I was not interested in politics or anything political - that all went over my head. I was six weeks in hospital and when I came out there was never another word about it. In my young mind I used think, "How can this happen and nobody cares?" I was left with severe facial injuries and my family coped as best it could with me coming home. My father never discussed it in the family because I had four brothers. I also had sisters, but I think he was more concerned that the boys would get caught up, perhaps in a paramilitary group or something like that. It was just kept low. He did not speak about it. The only time he spoke about it was with my mother and that would have been about what happened.

I never understood it. For years I regarded it as an accident.

When I joined Justice for the Forgotten many other people referred to it as an accident. I think that was because from the very early stages it was swept under the carpet. It was never exploited and nobody looked into it.

When I came out of hospital six weeks later there was never another word about it; nobody ever spoke to me about it. I went back to work that August for Mr. O'Neill. He was still trying to get the shop back in order. He was still rebuilding the shop and moving back up to Talbot Street. I got married in 1980 and, in 1981, I had my first child. My life was taken up because I went on to have four children.

I thank Mr. Mussen. Did Mr. Joe O'Neill ever pay the fine for going up the wrong way in Jervis Street?

Mr. O’Neill

I did not and I got away with it.

Chairman

That is understandable. I thank all the members of Justice for the Forgotten and all those who contributed here today. It certainly opened our minds more to what happened, the humongous and awesome human emotion, individual grief and bereavement suffered which give us a greater base on which to continue the work we are doing in this sub-committee and the hearings.

All of the contributions which have been made have placed in context all of the reports, the verbiage and words written in newspapers, and have humanised and made it very real. It has been 30 years of great suffering which is quite evident from the contributions made today which were certainly deeply moving. I thank you for coming along and for saying what you have said.

There is also a number of victims and families of victims who were unable to attend today, as Bernie has said, for various reasons, through illness or work. Unfortunately, some are no longer with us. I extend my great gratitude and thanks to those who are for continuing to participate in the broader context in Justice for the Forgotten. If any of them wishes to make a submission to us in any way, we would be delighted to receive it.

Mr. Ó Dúlacháin

I thank the Chairman and committee members for listening today, questioning and participating. In the light of the submission made just after lunch I just want to make one or two very small points. When we asked at the initiation of this process in 1999 that this report go for consideration, we did not want it considered in a two hour session on a single afternoon. We wanted it to be seriously considered. I think what has happened today is the first part of that serious consideration in that the victims, relatives of the victims and the injured have had an opportunity to put a human face on the report, so we are confident that when the committee sits down to consider the report, it will have a human face on it. I think putting that human face on it has been vitally important.

Second, we do see this as a meaningful and significant exercise. We do think what will happen next week will be very important. When we come to discuss the detail of the report next week it is comforting to us to know and nearly a guarantee that those who are considering the report have read it. We will know from the questions coming from the committee members that the report has been considered and read in detail. We and other groups will have the opportunity of highlighting various sections of the report and assisting with the interpretation of the report and the emphasis to be placed on the report. We welcome the opportunity to engage in a very meaningful consideration of the report, conscious that there is a distinction to be made between a consideration and an inquiry.

Chairman

Thank you very much. That brings us to the point of the application made by Ms Reilly on behalf of her clients. It is a matter that we will consider in a private session tomorrow afternoon. We will also take on board Mr. Ó Dúlacháin's comments on that matter. Without pre-empting the decision at which we will arrive but on the assumption that we will be continuing next Tuesday, I ask that we receive a submission from you by the end of this week in order that we will be in a position to consider it, individually and as a committee. We need that length of time and I would appreciate any help you could give us in that regard.

That is the end of today's hearings. Again, I thank you all for attending. All going well, I look forward to seeing some of you next Tuesday. The meeting is now adjourned and we will go into private session for a very short period.

The Joint Committee went into private session at 4:50 p.m.

JOINT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN’S RIGHTS (Sub-Committee on the Barron Report) debate - Tuesday, 20 Jan 2004

Public Hearings on the Barron Report.

Mr. Cormac Ó Dúlacháin

Ms Alice O’Brien

Mr. Thomas O’Brien

Mr. T. O’Brien

Mr. Derek Byrne

Ms A. O’Brien

Ms A. O’Brien

Ms O’Brien

Ms Alice O’Brien

Ms Alice O’Brien

Ms Alice O’Brien

Ms Alice O’Brien

Ms Alice O’Brien

Ms A. O’Brien

Mr. John Byrne

Ms Bridget Fitzpatrick

Mr. Pat Fay

Mr. Fay

Mr. Fay

Mr. D. Byrne

Mr. J. Byrne

Mr. D. Byrne

Ms Fitzpatrick

Ms Fitzpatrick

Ms Fitzpatrick

Ms Fitzpatrick

Ms Fitzpatrick

Ms A. O’Brien

Mr. Fay

Mr. D. Byrne

Mr. D. Byrne

Mr. D. Byrne

Mr. D. Byrne

Ms A. O’Brien

Ms Fitzpatrick

Ms B. Fitzpatrick

Ms Marie Power

Mr. John Molloy

Mr. Molloy

Mr. Molloy

Mr. Liam Sullivan

Mr. Molloy

Mr. Molloy

Ms Power

Mr. Sullivan

Mr. Sullivan

Mr. Sullivan

Mr. Molloy

Ms Power

Mr. Molloy

Mr. Ó Dúlacháin

Mr. Frank Massey

Mr. Massey

Ms Philomena Lawlor-Watson

Mr. Kevin O’Loughlin

Ms Lawlor-Watson

Mr. Massey

Mr. Massey

Mr. O’Loughlin

Mr. O’Loughlin

Mr. O’Loughlin

Mr. O’Loughlin

Mr. Massey

Mr. Massey

Mr. Massey

Mr. Massey

Mr. Massey

Mr. Massey

Mr. Molloy

JOINT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN’S RIGHTS (Sub-Committee on the Barron Report) debate -
Tuesday, 20 Jan 2004