Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 19 February 2008
1 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if officials from his Department have met the family of Seamus Ludlow as outlined in his reply to Parliamentary Question No.139 on 31 October 2007; if he will meet the family; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31949/07]
View answer2 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the action he has taken as a result of the report of the MacEntee commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34026/07]
View answer3 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach when he last met representatives of the Justice for the Forgotten organisation; if he has plans for further meetings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34027/07]
View answer4 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if representatives of his Department have met the family of Mr. Seamus Ludlow; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34142/07]
View answer5 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the MacEntee commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3560/08]
View answer6 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting of 22 January 2008 with members of the family of Mr. Seamus Ludlow. [1907/08]
View answer7 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting of 22 January 2008 with the family of the late Mr. Seamus Ludlow. [1991/08]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, together.
I reported to the House on 10 October on actions taken arising from the final report by the Commission of Investigation into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings 1974 and, as promised, a debate on the report was held in the House.
I last had a formal meeting with the full Justice for the Forgotten group on 25 November 2004. I met representatives of the group a number of times since then at other meetings involving victims. I met members of the group again on Monday, 10 December, when I unveiled a memorial to the victims of the Miami Showband massacre.
My officials are in regular ongoing contact with the group and last met formally with their representatives on 30 October. I have not received any recent request for a meeting.
I met with the family of Seamus Ludlow on Tuesday, 22 January. At that meeting I welcomed and acknowledged the work on this case of Mr. Justice Barron and the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. I added my voice to the apologies already offered to the family by the Garda Commissioner and the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in respect of the Garda investigation. The family is being kept informed of the current active Garda investigation.
Does the Taoiseach agree that the report of Mr. Justice Barron on the murder of Seamus Ludlow is an indictment in particular of senior Garda management who prevented a full investigation being pursued in 1979 even though they were aware of the identity of the four people directly involved in the murder of Seamus Ludlow and that two of those were serving members of the British army's Ulster Defence Regiment? The report concludes that the decision not to pursue the investigation was taken by Deputy Commissioner Laurence Wren. Would the Taoiseach believe, as this Deputy believes, that this was not taken wholly and solely by then Deputy Commissioner Wren, but in consultation with senior officials in the Department of Justice? In the light of this damning conclusion does the Taoiseach agree that this case in particular highlights the huge responsibility of the State not only to come clean regarding what has happened but also to make amends for what was done and what failed to be done in the name of this State? Will the Government agree to the request conveyed to the Taoiseach at his recent meeting with representatives of the Ludlow family for a full independent public inquiry? When will the decision be taken to agree to concede to their request that has been repeatedly made?
Have all the Barron reports and those of the Oireachtas sub-committee been presented to the British prime Minister, Gordon Brown, or his predecessor? If they were presented in the first instance to the former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, has the Taoiseach considered presenting the current occupant of 10 Downing Street with the full complement of these reports including the Oireachtas sub-committee's reports following the reports of Mr. Justice Barron, Mr. Justice Hamilton and Mr. Patrick MacEntee? Have parliamentarians at Westminster, altogether apart from the British Prime Minister, been lobbied for support for the repeated call of this House for a full independent judicial inquiry into all the matters we have recently addressed in this House under the banner of collusion?
Subject to checking I think that all of the reports of the late Mr. Justice Hamilton and Mr. Justice Barron have been provided. I will check whether they have been given to the present incumbent, the Prime Minister, Mr. Brown. If not, I will have a look at doing that.
In the follow up on the third Barron report, which deals with the murder of Seamus Ludlow, there are a number of recommendations made in the report on the murder of Seamus. Specific recommendations from the Ludlow report have already been acted upon. They include that all mechanisms be fully utilised by the Garda to liaise with the PSNI in respect of the investigation into the murder of Seamus Ludlow; and that the Garda Commissioner appoint a dedicated team of gardaí to re-examine the case in a proactive manner to see if there is any possibility of bringing any or all of the four suspects to justice. I have been advised by the Garda authorities that, as recommended by the Oireachtas joint committee, which was the key recommendation, the reinvestigation of the murder of Seamus Ludlow would commence. That is now at an advanced stage and remains ongoing under the direction of a Garda superintendent. Liaison has been established and maintained with the historical inquiries team in Northern Ireland and the family of the deceased have been kept fully informed of the status of the investigation.
At a recent meeting with the family on 22 January, family members made it clear that in their view only a public inquiry would establish the truth about what happened. Their legal representatives suggested they could frame a process that was narrowly focused with tight procedural deadlines and asked for an opportunity to discuss the inquiry process with officials from the Office of the Attorney General. These discussions are taking place — some have already taken place. I understand from the Attorney General and his officials that, following the first round of those discussions, they are not convinced that one can get a tightly-focused process, as opposed to a prolonged inquiry. They are examining the matter, however.
On the general issue, I have always said that the victims must be central to all that we are dealing with concerning the terrible events of the past. I frequently meet officials who are in ongoing contact with the various groups representing victims of atrocities on all sides. We have provided financial support for a number of those groups. In addition, the Government and the British authorities have set up a number of inquires to deal with specific cases. The British Government has established a well resourced historical inquiries team that will provide a thorough examination or re-examination of unsolved deaths during the Troubles. The Police Ombudsman is reviewing cases involving the police, which can bring closure to victims and survivors and hopefully can build confidence within the community. Of course, the Remembrance Commission is still in place and we have made available resources for that.
While I acknowledge the Taoiseach's indication that, if it has not already been done, he will look at compiling all the reports I have cited, including those of the Oireachtas sub-committee, with a view to presenting them to Prime Minister Brown, will he indicate whether we have employed any other level of activity in lobbying parliamentarians at Westminster to give support to the request of the Oireachtas for full British co-operation in an investigation into all cases of collusion? While the Taoiseach is on the record in this regard, will he acknowledge once again his personal concern at the fact that in 1974 we had a very short-lived investigation by the Garda Síochána into the Dublin-Monaghan bombings of 17 May of that year? In addition, the Garda investigation into the murder of Seamus Ludlow was cut short at the direction of the then deputy Garda Commissioner, Laurence Wren. Is it not within our own gift to have the full truth shone upon these particular actions? Surely, it is within the gift of the Taoiseach and the Government to initiate a proper investigation and inquiry into why the gardaí acted as they did and why, despite the fact that they knew the people who were responsible for the murder of Seamus Ludlow, they did not pursue the matter at the time but, indeed, perpetuated the absolute non-truth that the IRA was somehow involved, which of course time has demonstrated was not the case.
On the justified criticism of the recent statements that took place here on the issue of collusion by myself and Deputy Costello of the Labour Party, the Taoiseach indicated in the course of same that he would be open to the idea of a Dáil motion following the conclusion of that particular opportunity. In light of that, will the Taoiseach convene an all-party meeting of representatives of all the parties here in order that a motion can be agreed? I understand that a motion has been drafted and forwarded by Justice for the Forgotten. Will the Taoiseach now call a meeting of either party leaders or whomever within this House so that that motion can be agreed by all parties and we can move this matter forward? Does the Taoiseach not agree there is general acceptance that the statement of views that took place falls far short of the statement of intent in terms of real action and an outworking of this issue? Will the Taoiseach agree that such a motion should formally endorse the reports of the Oireachtas sub-committee, to be directed at the British Government and British Parliament, calling on them to release all relevant documents relating to collusion, especially concerning the killings that took place in this jurisdiction? Will the Taoiseach also agree that it would serve a useful purpose if it included a call for the bringing about of a summit between himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. Gordon Brown, to address this issue as a stand-alone matter of major concern to the citizenry of this country?
On the first question, I will follow up on the reports. I have no problem giving a full set of the reports to the Prime Minister.
We promised in the autumn to give time for a Dáil debate on the issue of collusion. We ran out of time before Christmas, at which point I said the debate would take place immediately after Christmas. As soon as we came back to do that, however, it was stated that we needed a motion. It was not what I had agreed to, but Justice for the Forgotten and some Members asked that I look at that. Deputy Costello has written to me about it and I said I would look at it. I was glad to provide time for the debate, as I had promised, and we did that. We had a long debate, positions were set out and the message from this House was made clear. If we can agree a comprehensive motion, that would be of assistance. I have no difficulty with it. If a motion can be agreed through the Whips, we can agree a time slot to debate it. I never had a problem with that and we will do so if it is helpful.
On the murder of Seamus Ludlow, I have been dealing with this issue for many years. I have been in contact with the Ludlow family and their supporters for many years. There is no doubt that how things happened at the time and what evolved from that led to a very unsatisfactory position. There is no argument about that. There were many arguments at the time, admittedly, and much publicity about what happened, but the fact is that all of that, as far as I am concerned, is now proved not to be so. Seamus Ludlow left the rear of the Ballymascanlon House Hotel on that sad night and was picked up by people who, if they were not well known then, are certainly well known now. There does not seem to be much dispute about who they were.
Whether we will ever prove all of these things is another question. The case remains the same and has remained the same for many years. Was it followed up and investigated by the Garda and was it all dealt with in a way that, all these years later, I can stand over with total confidence and say that I am absolutely happy was correct? No, I cannot do so. I have said this for many years. Can we get to the bottom of it now and get behind every circumstance of what happened? It is very difficult to do so. I am afraid it comes down to legal minds and whether they can formulate a way of dealing with it. I have apologised, as have the Garda Commissioner and others, to the Ludlow family. I met the entire Ludlow family and those who supported them through all these years at the recent meeting. We will be as helpful as we can.
Will we get any more information from the PSNI on this issue? I do not know. Can we get more information from the Garda? I hope so. As I said, the chief superintendent is examining this issue and going back over the files. Deputy Commissioner Laurence Wren was criticised in the report, but he went before the committee to give his account and refute that. It is disputed evidence. An investigation is ongoing into the issue. I must be honest before the House; on the advice I received after the first round, there does not seem to be a way of getting a tight investigation that can meaningfully deal with this issue. As Deputies know, some of the four people who are alleged to have been involved in the murder are no longer about, which makes it difficult to get information. I hope we can get a clear report from the Garda Síochána. I am not sure if we can do so in the case of the Office of the Attorney General. As I have said, I will try to help the family and its legal representative, who is dealing with the Attorney General.
This case is in our own jurisdiction. Several of the other cases are in Northern Ireland. There are many such cases. We do not need to go back through all the cases which were the subjects of the various Barron reports, all of which are finished. We have the issues. I have continued to lobby, and to have an active engagement in the British House of Commons and elsewhere, on the Finucane case. I think I will meet Judge Cory again tomorrow. We have continued to pursue that because it was part of the basis of the Weston Park agreement. We have got on with the Smithwick inquiry into the Breen and Buchanan killings. The same thing was supposed to happen in the Finucane case. We have kept up our pressure. I do not think we can get satisfactory results on all the other cases. We cannot have inquiries into all of them. We will not get behind the MI5 and MI6 information in many of the cases. It is my assessment that no British Government, of any persuasion or with any Prime Minister, will go behind that. I have had endless meetings, put endless pressure and done endless pressing in this regard.
I believe the British Government has an obligation to Geraldine Finucane because it was part of a separate deal. The historical inquiries commission and the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland can do a great deal of work in the other cases and we can continue our investigations. However, I would put Geraldine Finucane's campaign on behalf of her late husband in a different category. We remain in close contact with the Finucane family. Senior officials met Geraldine Finucane on 21 February 2007. I wrote to her personally at that time to assure her that the Government remains fully committed to supporting her and her family in seeking a full independent public judicial inquiry into her husband's murder. We have pressed that at every level within the British system and will continue to do so. At official meetings, there have been discussions on how best to progress the family's position. We are continuing our efforts on that. The Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Foreign Affairs and other bodies have been helpful. We are putting all our efforts into helping the Finucane family by exerting the maximum pressure on the British Government and the British system.
As of now, I do not get any sense from the British authorities that they are willing to meet the Finucane family's needs. However, we will not give up on this one. I know there is a view that there may be little point in holding an inquiry at all in the absence of agreement, particularly from the family, regarding such an inquiry. In my view, it would be an enormous tragedy if the truth of this case did not come out. Therefore, I hope we can still find a way to meet the family's needs. Every bit of evidence, including hearsay evidence and everything else we have been through on this — a lot of it is substantive enough — suggests that there was collusion. It is important that this issue is examined, at least. That would assist what the historical inquiries commission in Northern Ireland and other bodies can do in many of the other cases. We will continue to pursue the Geraldine Finucane case because it was part of an arrangement that was agreed in July 2001.
I welcome the Taoiseach's indication that he will consider positively the proposal made by my colleague, Deputy Costello, that there be an agreed all-party motion on the Barron reports, which were debated in the House some weeks ago. As the Taoiseach will recall, considerable disappointment was expressed by Justice for the Forgotten and the families of many victims that the House did not consider a motion to provide a means by which this issue could be progressed further. I welcome that the Taoiseach is considering the proposal put to him by way of correspondence by Deputy Costello.
It was recently reported that the Chief State Solicitor had changed the Government's pleadings in the case being taken against the State by a number of the families of the victims. I understand he wrote to the families' legal representatives stating: "The defendants are now withdrawing the plea contained in the defence dated 2 March 2005 that the holding of a public inquiry at this time would be futile and/or impractical." Do I understand from that that the Government's position has changed regarding the holding of a public inquiry, which was sought originally by the Justice for the Forgotten group? What significance are we to attach to the change in the Government's pleadings in that case?
With regard to the Seamus Ludlow murder, the Taoiseach had a meeting with the Ludlow family on 22 January last and again it was reported subsequently that the Attorney General would consider the family's request for a public inquiry and would make a final decision on that within three weeks. The three weeks have elapsed and the Taoiseach, in response to an earlier question, indicated the Attorney General is still considering the issues discussed at the meeting. Will he confirm consideration is being given to a public inquiry in this case?
The position on the first case has not changed. Is the Deputy referring to the O'Neill case?
Yes.
There is no change in the State's position on this but a new defence has been lodged based on the undertakings of confidentiality that have been given by third parties. However, for any public inquiry to succeed, it is clear the co-operation of the British authorities is essential and the Oireachtas committee has acknowledged that. We have used all the appropriate means to ensure such co-operation and a public inquiry in this State without the co-operation of the British Government will not resolve the outstanding questions. In the final analysis, as the Oireachtas joint committee said, questions relating to allegations such as this can only be dealt with by the British Government.
Two issues arise in the Ludlow case. We had a useful, lengthy meeting with family representatives where a great deal of information, many assessments, including what emerged at the Barron commission, and other data were exchanged. The first issue is to try to get the chief superintendent to bring the reinvestigation of the case to fruition. That is due to finish this month and I am awaiting the report. The second issue is a public inquiry here. In fairness to the family representatives, they were only seeking a brief, focused and narrow procedural inquiry. The question is whether that can be formulated. The family, myself and the legal representative did not want to open this up. The legal representative asked to meet the Attorney General in his office to see if it is possible to achieve a narrow framework and tight procedural deadlines. That meeting has taken place but there are ongoing issues. I inquired about this yesterday and I understand discussions have taken place. Contacts are continuing but the Attorney General is not convinced at this stage that that kind of narrow focused inquiry with definite guidelines can be achieved. That is our advice for now.
Last year the Garda Commissioner announced that he would set up a cold case unit within the Garda Síochána to investigate approximately 200 unsolved murders in the State. Are the Dublin and Monaghan bombings included in that investigation and does the Taoiseach consider that a useful way of reopening the investigation into those murders? Perhaps the advances that have been made in forensic science in the 30 or more years since the bombings will be brought to bear on a reopening of the investigation by the Garda Síochána.
Subsequent to the Barron report on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the Oireachtas joint committee's report, the Garda re-examined all the recommendations made therein. I am not certain whether that was completed or if the Garda made a report but I will check that with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Garda revisited the matter because, as Deputy Ó Caoláin said earlier, the difficulty with that investigation was that, while the bombings occurred in the middle of May, the official investigation closed in the middle of August of the same year. I will inquire of the Minister whether that investigation came to an end or if anything new came to light from it.
A couple of weeks ago the Taoiseach was in Manchester where, among a number of other high profile activities, he met the UK Prime Minister, Gordon Brown. In the context of the new relationship between Ireland and Britain, the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process, which everybody supports, the allegations of collusion which were debated in this House a couple of weeks ago are central issues. If we are to have an Ireland that lives at peace with itself North and South, east and west, and which allows its various communities to develop, a number of fundamental matters must be addressed.
Did the Taoiseach raise with the Prime Minister the British Government's practice during the time of the former Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, and previously of withholding information that was relevant to the bombings and allegations of collusion between security forces and persons involved in acts of terrorism? If that is not addressed and the information is available in the British archives, it will be a running sore on the relationship between both countries. Did the Taoiseach request the Prime Minister to demand that the latter's Government provide all the necessary documentation in order that the matter might be cleared up once and for all and, if so, what was the response?
Did he raise the British lack of co-operation during the North-South Ministerial Council meeting in Dundalk, which I understand was quite successful? That was an opportunity for the British Government to show its seriousness about cleansing the wound and bringing a conclusion to these matters, thereby allowing a strong relationship to be built for the future.
Does he have a view on the refusal by his Department to provide documents to the tribunal investigating the murder of the RUC officers, Harry Breen and Bob Buchanan, which was also the subject of a report?
On Deputy Kenny's last question, I stated last week in a reply to Deputy Gilmore that the Smithwick tribunal will go to the High Court and the State will not resist that. That is the process which must be undergone. The papers from 1989 will be made available but the tribunal must go to the High Court to obtain them.
The meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council was successful. We did not discuss collusion because of the North-South nature of proceedings. However, I spoke to Paul Murphy who, on behalf of the Prime Minister, now has special responsibility for the east-west relationship. Mr. Murphy has been involved since the beginning of the negotiations on the Good Friday Agreement. He co-chaired proceedings when Senator George Mitchell was involved. Mr. Murphy is a key player and is very familiar with matters. We have raised these issues and he is well aware of our stance in respect of them.
As I see it, several Ministers and Secretaries of State served under former Prime Minister Blair and some of them were more helpful than others. Papers and documents that were readily available were provided by the NIO and the British Government. I do not have any information which indicates that these have not been furnished. A large number of papers were given, on the basis of strict confidentiality, to the MacEntee inquiry.
The Deputy requested my view on this matter. Most of the departmental records, as we know them, and other records have been given. What have not been, and are unlikely to be, given are the files — if any — in the possession of MI5 and MI6, which have a strange system, to say the least. I have dealt with many Ministers and Secretaries of State regarding how that system operates but I came across a number of Chinese walls. I do not believe we will obtain a great deal from these sources.
There were agreements in respect of some cases. Rather than chasing all of these, we have concentrated our efforts on pursuing the Finucane case. What has happened in recent years in this case is that the British do not like to deal with any of our officials in respect of it because we keep pursuing the same issues. The position is that they are totally reluctant and politely unhelpful as regards making available the papers relating to collusion in the Finucane case. I might be wrong but I believe a considerable amount of information relating to the case is available. This is why we should continue to pursue it. In any event it was part of a process agreed at Weston Park, which went to the Cory report. Judge Cory could not have been a more independent person. He was an eminently senior member of the Canadian judiciary, recognised throughout the world, and he did a great deal of work in respect of this matter. Even while members of his family were ill, he continued with his work.
Judge Cory made his report and it was internationally accepted and recognised by various judicial and legal interests. Campaigns were launched and advertisements were placed in newspapers in the United States. This matter was examined in Brussels and is being considered here. A motion was put before the House and one was also put to the joint Houses of Congress in the United States. However, the British will still not act.
I have informed the British on many occasions that I do not believe anyone would be shocked by what might emerge from a report on the murder of Pat Finucane. No one would be shocked because we all know what happened. The stories of those to whom I have spoken about the matter are consistent. As Deputy Kenny stated, it would do a great deal of good if such a report could be forthcoming. I have shown my good faith and proceeded with the Smithwick inquiry into the terrible murders of Buchanan and Breen. We will follow it through and it may have some knock-on effects into our system. We are aware of that but we will follow those investigations truthfully but we are not getting the same response. My tactic is to confine our efforts on this issue to the Finucane case rather than trying to follow several cases, which I do not believe we will get.
I thank the Taoiseach for his answer in respect of the Smithwick inquiry. I support that.
Considering the record of British Governments over the years and centuries, they have always been meticulous at the very least in note-taking and recording, both internally in the affairs of this country over the centuries and internationally. I have no doubt these records exist either in MI5, MI6 or both.
Did either Prime Minister state to the Taoiseach that there were no records? Did they ever say they could not be made available, indicating the records exist but they do not want to make them available? Did they deny point blank that records ever existed? If that is the case, it is a complete reversal of British and imperial policy over centuries, where they were always meticulous in note-taking about issues, tragedies and interference such as this. Was such a comment ever made to the Taoiseach by his peer in the House of Commons or Downing Street?
I am glad to give my verdict on that, although everybody might not agree with it. I believe a file exists on the Finucane murder.
I thank the Taoiseach.
