Neale Richmond
Question:8. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his most recent conversations with the First and deputy First Ministers of Northern Ireland. [60572/21]
View answerWednesday, 19 January 2022
Questions (8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13)
Neale Richmond
Question:9. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meetings with leaders of the political parties in Northern Ireland. [61418/21]
View answer
Seán Haughey
Question:10. Deputy Seán Haughey asked the Taoiseach the recent engagement he has had with the First Minister and deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland. [61489/21]
View answer
Alan Kelly
Question:11. Deputy Alan Kelly asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his most recent conversations with the First and deputy First Ministers of Northern Ireland. [61500/21]
View answer
Brendan Smith
Question:12. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach if he has had recent discussions with the First Minister and deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland. [61600/21]
View answer
Peadar Tóibín
Question:13. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meetings with the First and deputy First Ministers of Northern Ireland. [61917/21]
View answerOral answers (7 contributions)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 to 13, inclusive, together.
I briefly spoke by phone on Thursday, 2 December with the First Minister, Paul Givan, to discuss the evolving Covid situation North and South and the additional measures we had announced in light of the emergence of the Omicron variant. We agreed on the importance of ongoing North-South co-operation and communication in this area.
In November, I spoke by phone with the deputy First Minister as part of a series of calls with the Northern Ireland party leaders to discuss the ongoing talks on the Northern Ireland protocol. I also spoke with the First Minister and deputy First Minister in Belfast on 8 October, when we all attended and addressed a conference on climate action, and again at the beginning of November at the COP26 leaders' summit in Glasgow.
During my visit to Belfast, I also separately had meetings with the leaders of the five main political parties, including the deputy First Minister. During these meetings, the main topics for discussion were the Northern Ireland protocol, legacy issues and the stability of the institutions. I also briefly spoke with First Minister Paul Givan at the Ireland-New Zealand rugby test match in October.
Regarding the North-South Ministerial Council, NSMC, plenary, it was decided by the NSMC at its last plenary meeting, which was hosted by the Irish Government in July, that the next plenary will be hosted by the Northern Ireland Executive. We await a proposal from the Executive on the date and arrangements for that meeting. Usually, this would have taken place in December and it is disappointing that it is yet to be scheduled.
I appreciate the update from the Taoiseach. He will appreciate that it is a brief update. That is no fault of his or anyone in the Government. That is the striking issue here. North-south relations are not operating at their optimum due to a political decision by a certain party in Northern Ireland.
I note that the last telephone conversation call was in the area of dealing with Covid-19, where back and forth discussion needs to be increased in the coming weeks as we look to loosen restrictions and possibly moving away from the wave of the current variant. Will the Taoiseach address the efforts being made between the chief medical officers and health Ministers, North and South, to maintain that important level of engagement on vaccination numbers, restrictions and hospital capacity, which has been a huge concern, particularly in Northern Ireland?
I echo the Taoiseach's disappointment that the meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council has not taken place. Now that we are into an electoral cycle in Northern Ireland, from our vantage point it is important to keep pushing the door and not allow certain political actors to derail the important North-South engagements in every area.
This will be a significant year for Northern Ireland, with Assembly elections taking place in May. Meanwhile, Brexit and, in particular, the Northern Ireland protocol remain issues of concern to the First Minister and deputy First Minister, albeit from different perspectives. Business, though, can clearly see the benefits of the protocol. It is interesting to note that recent statistics show cross-Border trade between the Republic and Northern Ireland continues to grow.
Negotiations have resumed on the implementation of the protocol between the UK and the EU. David Frost has resigned and the British foreign secretary, Liz Truss, has taken over the negotiations from the UK side. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Coveney, has since met with Liz Truss but she has stated the UK could still trigger Article 16 if necessary. What is the Taoiseach's sense at this stage of how the negotiations are going in relation to the protocol? Has there been a change of approach by the UK side to the negotiations with the appointment of Liz Truss? It seems the issue concerning the supply of medicines to Northern Ireland has been resolved by the European Commission. Does the Taoiseach believe that all sides, including the parties in Northern Ireland, are ready to cut a deal on the issue and resolve this problem well before the Assembly elections in May?
I presume that, in all meetings with members of the British Government or Northern Ireland Executive, legacy issues are discussed. A message needs to be clearly and repeatedly given to the British Government concerning its proposal to introduce an amnesty for murderers, be they members of the state forces or of paramilitary organisations, some who masqueraded as republicans and others who masqueraded as loyalists.
Under no circumstances should such persons be given an amnesty for committing heinous crimes that, in many instances, included murder. It is very important for that message to be repeated to the British Government.
As the Taoiseach knows, it is approaching half a century since some of those crimes were carried out. Next December will mark the 50th anniversary of the murder of two teenagers in Belturbet, County Cavan, by a bomb that was brought across the Border from County Fermanagh. Nobody has ever been brought to justice for that. In two years my own constituency will mark the desperate atrocities that happened in Dublin and Monaghan in May 1974 and still nobody has been brought to justice. There has been a complete lack of recognition by the British Government over the years of the need to give full co-operation and conduct full and thorough investigations into those desperate atrocities. People have campaigned for decades to get the truth and they want to see the truth established. We all know that every day that goes by means it will be more difficult. Particular emphasis needs to be put on the need to get progress with regard to legacy issues.
I thank the Taoiseach for meeting with the victims and survivors of the Glennane gang. I want to give credit where it is due. When I asked the Taoiseach to do that, he gave his time and effort and he listened respectfully and engaged very well with those victims. I appreciate that greatly.
On the ombudsman's report on the RUC handling of paramilitary attacks by the UDA and UVF, it is important that the Government focuses on that issue. When a state kills a citizen or is involved in collusive behaviour, as is reported in this ombudsman report, in the killing of the citizens of that state, it is unbelievably shocking. The Taoiseach mentioned Teebane. I want the victims and survivors of the Teebane affair to have justice and a proper investigation and for full knowledge and truth to be brought to them. It is also important to realise that when republicans were involved in these actions, they were pursued fully by the state. Republicans spent 100,000 years, cumulatively, imprisoned during the Troubles for the actions they took. On the other side, the British military side, in most cases there were no investigations at all, there were no convictions and people were not held to account. That is why it is important that this Government raises the matter with the British. We must also raise it in an international forum, even with the UN, to make sure that the British state is held to account for the wrongs it has done.
Last night, I was privileged to speak at a meeting marking the 50th anniversary of Bloody Sunday. It was attended by hundreds and hundreds of people from this country, including many young people wanting to learn about the history of Bloody Sunday. The meeting was addressed by Kate Nash of the Bloody Sunday families, people from the Black Lives Matter movement and people from the Hillsborough disaster campaign. The message at that meeting was resounding. After a long struggle at least to deconstruct the disgusting narrative that tried to blame, if you like, the victims of Bloody Sunday for what happened that day, as eventually happened with the Saville inquiry, there still has not been real accountability for the military commanders and political leaders who the families hold responsible for the massacre, the murder, by the British state that took place 50 years ago. The families are still seeking that justice, accountability and truth about the political culpability of the people who ordered that massacre and the senior military figures, not just the foot soldiers, who were responsible for that massacre.
As we approach the anniversary, I ask the Taoiseach whether he agrees that we still need justice and accountability for Bloody Sunday. As we approach the half century anniversary, what is the Government going to do to try finally to get justice and accountability for the Bloody Sunday families?
I thank all the Deputies for raising those issues. Deputy Richmond raised the issue of the North-South Ministerial Council. I agree with him. He also spoke about the need for co-ordination of the vaccination programme and around the whole Covid issue. I wish to make clear that such co-ordination is continuing between our Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Tony Holohan, and his counterpart in the North, Dr. Michael McBride. There is also co-ordination between the health services, which are sharing experiences and trying to keep their processes relatively parallel. That is not always at an optimal level and the North may take measures ahead of us.
Deputy Haughey raised the issue of the latest state of play in respect of the protocol discussions in the context of the retirement of Lord Frost. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Coveney, has met with the Secretary of State, Liz Truss MP, and Commissioner Šefčovič has also had meetings with her. Suffice to say there is good engagement and goodwill on both sides, the European Union and the British Government, to get this resolved. Timelines are challenging in respect of elections in the North and so forth. It is extremely important that we get an agreed resolution. The most recent meeting between the UK foreign secretary and Commissioner Šefčovič was useful. Those discussions will continue with a view to bringing about a resolution. The European Union has been very committed to this and has been open in terms of endeavouring to get it resolved.
The matter of cross-Border trade and the patterns of trade that have developed since Brexit are interesting. It is interesting that aspects of the Northern Ireland economy have done well as a result of the operation of the protocol. That needs to be put on the record. Continued access to the Single Market is critical for businesses and enterprises and for jobs in Northern Ireland. No one is arguing for that access to end anytime soon, from what I can tell from the engagement I have had with all of the Northern parties. It is at a delicate stage. It is important to keep faith in the process.
In response to Deputy Smith's point, which others have also raised, there is no question of the Irish Government supporting an amnesty in any shape or form. We do not agree with the British Government's proposals in respect of legacy. We believe it is wrong because such a step would give everybody who has committed murder, including state forces, paramilitaries and whoever, an amnesty. That would be totally unacceptable. It would be a betrayal of the victims of all violence. I take on board what the Deputy said about the upcoming 50th anniversary of Belturbet and the other attacks in Dublin and Monaghan. I accept his point that for many victims, there is not yet any sense of closure or of answers in terms of who did what.
Deputy Tóibín mentioned that we met the victims of the Glennane gang. I accept the point that there is an extra onus on the state but that does not excuse what happened on Bloody Friday or at Kingsmill. I was watching, the week before last, the episode of "Reeling in the Years" dealing with 1974. It was shocking. The Birmingham bombs and the Guildford Four featured. The caption on the footage made it clear that no one has ever been brought to justice for committing that atrocity. For the victims of that atrocity, that hurts to this day. We need to acknowledge that too in respect of what happened in a whole range of situations during those very dark years. Many people feel that they are being forgotten about or the loss of their loved ones is being completely forgotten about and there is no balance in terms of how we approach that. I believe that the British Government has dragged its feet too long on legacy issues. Agreement was reached ten years ago between the two Governments. We believe that British soldiers should be brought to justice for atrocities such as Bloody Sunday, Ballymurphy and others. As I said earlier, state forces were involved with all paramilitaries. Operation Kenova is revealing a lot too, according to what I have read in various reports in the media and so on, about the operation of intelligence operatives in the North during a prolonged period of time.
It seems to me that the people who do not want closure the most or do not want a light shone on this are all those who were engaged in the killing. I get the sense that it is almost unspoken. I have been dealing with legacy for a long time. I can go back to the Eames-Bradley report. I was sceptical then that those who pulled the triggers and planted the bombs would ever come forward and tell an unvarnished truth about what happened, and that has not happened - they have never come forward. The result is that a lot of families have never got answers as to why their loved ones were killed. That is an issue. In any event, we are all agreed in this House that we are against the legacy proposals of the British Government and the idea of an amnesty. Clarity and transparency need to be brought to what happened.