Joe Higgins
Ceist:6 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when he expects to receive the report of Mr. Justice Barron into the Dublin-Monaghan bombings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24871/03]
Ceisteanna – Questions. - Dublin-Monaghan Bombings.
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:7 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the findings of the Barron commission on the Dublin-Monaghan bombings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25272/03]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:8 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if he has received the report from Mr. Justice Barron into his inquiry into the Dublin-Monaghan bombings; his views on the findings of the report; the steps it is planned to take arising from the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25274/03]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:9 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he has received the report of Mr. Justice Barron; when the report will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25310/03]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:10 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the findings of the Barron inquiry into the 1974 Dublin-Monaghan bombings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26172/03]
Joe Costello
Ceist:11 Mr. Costello asked the Taoiseach when the Barron report into the Dublin-Monaghan bombings, which was presented to the Government on 29 October 2003, will be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28265/03]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 11, inclusive, together.
I received Mr. Justice Barron's report into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974 on Wednesday, 29 October 2003. The bombings, which took place in Dublin and Monaghan on 17 May, 1974, were among the most appalling outrages in the history of this island. Three car bombs which had been placed in Parnell Street, Talbot Street and South Leinster Street exploded without warning within minutes of each other at around 5.30 p.m. As a result, 26 people and an unborn child were killed. Later, at almost 7 p.m., a fourth no-warning bomb exploded in Monaghan town, resulting in a further seven people being killed. More than 240 people required hospital treatment as a result of the bombings. Not only were 34 innocent lives lost on that terrible day but the injured, relatives and friends were left a terrible legacy of pain and suffering.
When I met with Justice for the Forgotten on 26 April, 1999, I gave them my commitment to ensure that the truth was established in relation to the bombings and their aftermath. The former Chief Justice, Mr. Liam Hamilton, began that work in January 2000 and the former Supreme Court judge, Mr. Justice Henry Barron, carried it on from October of that year. I take this opportunity again to thank the judge and his team for all their work in preparing the report and for their commitment and dedication to this difficult task. I also pay tribute to the earlier work of the former Chief Justice, the late Liam Hamilton.
The Government will consider Mr. Justice Barron's report next week. Also next week, I will forward the report to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. It is intended the report will be published by the committee and considered in public session. I understand that Mr. Justice Barron will report, in the coming weeks, on the Dublin bombings of 1972 and 1973 and early in the new year on the other cases referred to him, including the Dundalk bombing and the Seamus Ludlow case. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the group, Justice for the Forgotten, for their work on behalf of the families and their assistance to the inquiry.
The establishment of the inquiry followed on from the recommendations of the report of the Victims Commission, the sole member of which was the former Tánaiste, John Wilson. That report also made recommendations regarding payments to victims of the troubles in Northern Ireland in this jurisdiction. The Remembrance Fund Commission has now been established and will administer the remembrance fund for a three year period. The Government has approved expenditure of €9 million over the lifetime of the commission.
The Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974 were the cause of huge trauma for victims, their families and friends. Does the Taoiseach agree that the investigation into this outrage and particularly the publication of the conclusions of that investigation are being looked to by many of those who were concerned and have suffered as a form of catharsis to an awful tragedy – a resolution, perhaps, in so far as that is possible, to questions which have lingered ever since?
Will the Taoiseach say whether the position of the Government on the publication of the Barron report is as he indicated to Deputy Gregory on 22 October? He indicated then that the full and unexpurgated report would be published. Is that still the case? When precisely will the report be sent to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights and what is the precise date on which it will be published?
I again assure the Deputy of my commitment to see the report through Cabinet next week and then on to the committee as soon as possible thereafter. It is the committee which will deal with the matter of publication.
As to the final form of the report, there is an issue, which Mr. Justice Barron has made clear to me, as to the sensitivity of some of the names in the report and how best to deal with that aspect. As I said to Deputy Gregory, even if I have to suppress the names in the publication – though I should say it is the committee, not I, which will publish the document – it would be my intention to give the details, as they were given to me by Mr. Justice Barron, to the committee.
However, I believe we have to be careful, for obvious reasons, about the security of individuals named in a report. Mr. Justice Barron has emphasised that and, since then, there has been quite a lot of discussion about that matter between the PSNI, the Garda, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and others. We just have to be careful in that regard.
Does the Taoiseach agree that the suppression of any part of the report, including the deletion of names – we are speaking of an event which happened almost 30 years ago – would fuel speculation and suspicion and might even jeopardise the integrity of the report itself in people's minds? For what reason would names be expurgated from the report? Would that not really devalue the worth of the report in getting to the truth of this awful criminal act?
I certainly do not wish to hold back information on any of these issues. The only reason for holding back is the safety of individuals against whom there is no charge. Some of these names were never in the public domain.
Is the Taoiseach referring to intelligence people?
No, I refer to individuals who would, perhaps, never have had any record or have come to the attention of the security forces, but this investigation would have uncovered them. There is also a question of their right to life. That is the concern of Mr. Justice Barron.
If I may pursue that matter, does the Taoiseach understand that the families of victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombing atrocities would wish to see the Barron report before it goes into the public domain? Is he making any arrangements in that regard? Does he accept that the demand of the Justice for the Forgotten group for a public tribunal of inquiry is still part of its campaign? Is the Taoiseach evaluating the merits of that, following the Barron report, or is he saying, as he did in reply to me in October, that he envisages the Oireachtas joint committee's consideration of the report in public session as in some way conceding to the request for a tribunal?
Is there anything further the Taoiseach can say about the merits of such a tribunal? Having regard to the fact that, since Abbeylara, Oireachtas committees cannot compel witnesses, perhaps there is a need to look at the matter again, rather than being satisfied with an Oireachtas committee dealing with it in public session. If, as I believe is expected, there is to be a separate report from Mr. Justice Barron on the Dublin bombings of December 1972 and January 1973, when does the Taoiseach expect such a report to be completed?
As I have stated previously, the 1972-73 reports of the Sackville Place bombings and some other events, the Seamus Ludlow case later and the Dundalk bombings will come in two separate reports from Mr. Justice Barron in the months ahead. I do not have exact dates, but I expect it will be within the next few months. I understand that Mr. Justice Barron does not intend to spend very much longer on this work.
On the Deputy's reference to Justice for the Forgotten, the answer is "Yes". I believe there have been discussions about the report already and further discussions are taking place today with that group. That has been an ongoing process right through. With regard to the redactions, as I have already stated, it is clear that the Garda and the PSNI are not in a position to offer perhaps security information on some of the individuals concerned. We will have to wait and see what happens in that regard.
I gave a commitment in 1999, having always had an interest in this, as has Deputy Gregory – one could say we have spent much of our political lives discussing this matter for almost 30 years – that I would bring the matter to the stage it has now reached. After that, it is a matter for discussion. I do not wish to get into the next phase until people have had an opportunity to reflect on the situation.
Over the years, I have taken the view, when people have been advocating a fully sworn judicial inquiry, that there was no point in incurring huge costs on an inquiry from which one could not be confident of achieving anything. There was no purpose in going in that direction until we had first reached the present stage and reflected on it. Quite frankly, such reflection may not be so much for me as for legal minds to consider as to whether the matter can be brought any further. In many cases, the named individuals are long dead and gone. Many of those who were in authority in various places in those days are also long since dead. It would be difficult to think back and reconstruct where one was during that period, but that is a matter for legal minds to reflect on. I would not be in the best position to do that.
What Mr. Justice Barron and Mr. Justice Hamilton did was go back over almost the past 29 years and reconstruct matters from every available source. It has been an exhaustive exercise because of the pressure they were under, the efforts involved and the contacts that were made. Nobody could have done better. The two judges adopted a no holds barred approach. I read the report not only because I have always had an interest in this issue but also because of the horror it created in my community. People will have to reflect on that. The best people to do so are the members of the committee.
I earlier indicated to Deputy Rabbitte that we would consult Opposition Deputies regarding the detail of the report that will be considered by the committee in light of the Abbeylara judgment. My officials will do that.
I was interested in the point Deputy Sargent raised about the killing of Seamus Ludlow. Do I gather from what the Taoiseach said that Mr. Justice Barron is still seized of this matter or that his inquiry is still sitting and that he will bring in a separate report? There was also a bombing in Dundalk which, if I recall correctly, was in the original remit of Mr. Justice Barron. Will the Taoiseach say what matters will be the subject of subsequent reports? I am not clear from his earlier answers about the extent of the deletions recommended from the report by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and others. As Deputy Joe Higgins suggested, there could be a narrow balance between on the one hand, the report having public confidence and, on the other hand, the extent to which deletions could undermine that confidence.
On that matter, I would be happy if there were none, but I will have to go on the judgment of the Attorney General on where that is necessary. Consultations are taking place on that and some checking is being done on the names involved. I would like to give the full report to the committee. Perhaps the committee would have one with redactions and one with none. Mr. Justice Barron pointed out in a covering letter the dangers in some of this. He has submitted the report as it is but he pointed out the difficulties. The only difficulty is one of security for some of these individuals.
On the Deputy's first question, Mr. Justice Barron will report in the coming weeks on the Dublin bombings of 1972 and 1973. I take it he will do that very shortly, I think before Christmas in a separate report and after Christmas in respect of the other cases referred to him. There were a number of them. By and large, these were cases he came across when he was doing all his other work. He was able to report on them. They include the Dundalk bombing and the case involving Seamus Ludlow. I understand there were some other cases which I cannot recall.
Do I take it from the Taoiseach's last response that the Attorney General has completed his examination of the Barron report and that he has now presented his views to Government? Will the report be referred to the committee by a motion of this House? Will we in this Chamber have an opportunity to debate the report either in advance or subsequent to the committee's deliberations? When will Members of this House receive copies of the report?
Mindful of the situation in the Abbeylara case, how does the Taoiseach envisage the committee's proceedings getting under way and progressing? Does he anticipate that the committee will have the power to summon people to come before it as witnesses? Will it go into its deliberations in that depth? Is there a need for legislation to further empower the committee to carry out its work in an effective and efficient manner? Will the powers of the committee be enhanced and developed? Will further resources be provided to it, given that, certainly from my expectation, this will be an onerous task? In the context of the Abbeylara case, there are lessons to be learned.
Has the Deputy a question?
I have asked a number of questions on this issue.
The Deputy must allow the Taoiseach to answer them because we are coming to the end of this Question Time.
Will additional resources be provided to the committee to carry out its deliberations?
I do not want to be disrespectful and give the Deputy a short answer, but the best way is for me to get the report through the Cabinet, then to pass it to the committee and then work out these issues. The Deputy is correct in that after the judgment in the Abbeylara case and other issues, we will have to look at this. I envisage that the report will be considered in public session and we need to provide for whatever is necessary to achieve that. The Oireachtas Commission will have to examine that, but that is what we should achieve. I want to honour the commitment given in 1999 in this regard. We need to get the report past the Cabinet to the committee, published and discussed in public session in the committee. Whatever is necessary for us to do that—
In this Chamber?
I think it will be done through the committee and then, if necessary, in this House. The committee will have a dedicated job and role to deal with this. The work will be time consuming.
I call Deputy Kenny.
This is a large, substantial and important report. Many issues—
Will the report be made available to Members of this House?
I ask the Deputy to allow Deputy Kenny, who has not had an opportunity to ask a supplementary question, to speak.
Given that the Taoiseach has read the Barron report, he will recall the serious political allegations made surrounding that period. Without disclosing the content or intruding on the sensitivity of the report, has he formed a view at this stage as to what the procedure from here might be, even when the report is referred to committee? How long does he expect the compensation committee to deal with the issue of compensation for the families of the victims?
Before the Taoiseach replies I will call Deputy Gregory to ask a brief question.
Does the Taoiseach accept that those who campaigned for so long for this report will be very disappointed that despite a long-standing commitment, the full unexpurgated report will not now be made available? Does he accept that publishing a report after this length of time and deleting key individual names from it devalues its purpose? Surely it adds strength to the argument of the relatives' committee and the victims' committee that what is required is a full public inquiry into these events. The publication of a report in which key names have been deleted will strengthen that campaign and it will become an absolute demand for a full public inquiry.
The Deputy has made his point.
How could criminal proceedings be taken on foot of a report that does not have names in it or from which names have been deleted?
I call Deputy Jim O'Keeffe to ask a brief question and we will then hear a final reply from the Taoiseach.
How many names are at issue from the point of view of causing concerns about security? The Taoiseach mentioned that many people had died since these horrific events occurred and obviously they would not be a cause for concern.
On the procedures, I have not formed a viewpoint because it is a matter for the committee. I have read the report and there are certain issues that are of major concern. I do not believe we are talking about many names.
Are we talking about two or more names?
Is there evidence for criminal proceedings?
The Taoiseach, without interruption.
It is more, in the order of ten. I do not agree with the Deputy that the people concerned will be disappointed with this. The Deputy is arguing that once we get the report, we should proceed with a public inquiry and, a few hundred million euro later, we will end up with a final report that will not be as good as the first. That is not the line to go down because that is not what Justice for the Forgotten or the people are concerned with. The people will get the names. However, I do not believe that any of the people involved will want to see them. The names will be known to the members of the committee. However, I do not believe that they want to get to a position where in the right to life considerations of individuals that have been pointed out by Mr. Justice Barron someone may be killed over this matter.
I put to Deputy Gregory a scenario that was put to me in the discussions. If you are an innocent person living in Northern Ireland and have never been a source of knowledge to the police, are not on record as being charged or sentenced, and your name appears in this report 30 years later, how willl you feel?
Is that not the argument?
Deputy Gregory, allow the Taoiseach to conclude.
No, it is not. To be frank, that is nonsense. A full public judicial inquiry will not uncover any more information than what Mr. Justice Hamilton and Mr. Justice Barron uncovered. One could reveal the name of a person who is dead – it is not known in all these cases whether the persons concerned are dead. Putting these names into the public domain may create difficulties.
If the committee wants to take responsibility for putting these names in the public domain, with the subsequent consequences of what might happen to a named individual, it can do so, and the members could sign up to take responsibility. That, however, is not something I would wish to do to individuals where no evidence is held against them. I will make the Deputies' concerns known to the committee.
I hope that having gone through this work painstakingly the objective is not just simply to call for an inquiry without an examination of the report. That is the wrong way to approach this issue. This has to be carefully examined and then we must decide if that is the road we wish to go down.