I call on Deputy Broughan, who is sharing time with Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan.
Establishment of Commission of Investigation into the Stardust Tragedy: Motion [Private Members]
I move:
That Dáil Éireann:
notes that, 35 years following the Stardust tragedy in which 48 people died and 214 people were injured, families, relatives and victims of the tragedy have never received full and complete answers as to what occurred on the night of 14th February, 1981;
further notes that:
— the Stardust Relatives’ and Victims Committee have continually attempted to liaise with the Department of Justice and Equality and the Taoiseach regarding misgivings around previous investigations; and
— the Government have repeatedly called for new evidence yet have refused to meet with the Stardust Relatives’ and Victims Committee regarding the new and updated evidence they have uncovered since reviewing Judge Keane’s Report of the Tribunal of Inquiry on the fire at the Stardust, Artane, Dublin in 2006; and
calls on the Government to immediately establish a Commission of Investigation into the Stardust Tragedy of 1981.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for the opportunity to bring forward this motion calling for the establishment of a commission of investigation into the Stardust tragedy of 1981. In two weeks’ time, we will mark the 36th anniversary of the horrific night which saw 48 young people die and a further 214 seriously injured in a fire in the infamous Stardust Ballroom in Artane, Dublin 5, early on St. Valentine’s Day 1981. It was the worst fire disaster in modern Irish history and continues to profoundly affect many families in several parishes of my constituency of Dublin Bay North down to the present day. This is why we are here again tonight asking for a fresh investigation, for justice and for the possibility of closure for the families and friends of the tragic victims.
Up to 846 young people headed off to the local Stardust disco on the night of 13 February 1981. The ballroom, managed and owned by Eamon and Paddy Butterly, was popular with young people of the greater Coolock, Artane, Kilbarrack, Donaghmede, Raheny and surrounding areas. Some time after 1 a.m. a fire broke out, ignited, we believe, due to electrical faults, and spread rapidly, fuelled, we believe, by the large amounts of flammable materials stored in the roof area. Panic ensued when the lighting system failed and patrons, rushing to escape as the inferno overhead dripped and spread down from the ceiling, found emergency exits either locked or draped with chains and locks. The horror of that night and the events that followed cannot be adequately expressed here today. Yet that trauma has haunted hundreds of families and citizens of Dublin's north side over the decades since 1981. Up to 44 families lost brothers, sisters, daughters, sons. Twenty-five boys and 23 girls died tragically. Hundreds of others were seriously injured and profoundly affected. Justice has never been served for these families and the struggle for justice for the victims of this inferno and their families continues to this day.
Before briefly reviewing the powerful case for a new commission, let us remember again in this House the 48 tragic victims and the infant in the womb who died. They are: Michael Barrett, Richard Bennett, Carol Bissett, James Buckley, Paula Byrne, Caroline Carey, John Colgan, Jacqueline Croker, Liam Dunne, Michael Farrell, David Flood, Thelma Frazer, Michael French, Josephine Glen, Michael Griffiths, Robert Hillick, Brian Hobbs, Eugene Hogan, Murtagh Kavanagh, Martina Keegan, Mary Keegan, Robert Kelly, Mary Kennedy, Mary Kenny, Margaret Kiernan, Sandra Lawless, Francis Lawlor, Maureen Lawlor, Paula Lewis, Eamon Loughman, George McDermott, Marcella McDermott, William McDermott, Julie McDonnell, Teresa McDonnell, Gerard McGrath, Caroline McHugh, Donna Mahon, Helena Mangan, James Millar, Susan Morgan, David Morton, Kathleen Muldoon, George O’Connor, Brendan O’Meara, John Stout, Margaret Thornton and Paul Wade.
Amidst the pain, sorrow and national shock that such a tragedy could happen, Mr. Justice Ronan Keane was appointed to lead a tribunal of inquiry into the fire. It held its first public sitting just three weeks after the tragedy. Mr. Justice Keane’s findings in June 1982 made for damning reading of the events of that night and the immediate aftermath, including the failures of the owners, the Butterlys, of Dublin Corporation, of the then Department of the Environment and of the forensic examinations. Most upsetting and shocking though was Mr. Justice Keane’s completely unfair and unfounded contradictory conclusion in paragraph No. 9.14 that arson was the probable cause of the fire, despite paragraph No. 6.193 earlier stating:
The cause of the fire is not known and may never be known. There is no evidence of an accidental origin: and equally no evidence that the fire was started deliberately.
The sullying of the names of these young victims and the slur over their reputations also resulted in no charges being brought against the owners. Instead Eamon Butterly was awarded over £580,000 in compensation compared to awards of just £7,500 to each of the victims’ families.
In the decade before and throughout my political career, I have worked with, and tried to support, the Stardust Relatives and Victims Committee, courageously led by Ms Antoinette Keegan, Ms Chrissie Keegan and her late husband John, Ms Gertrude Barrett, Mrs. McDermott, Mr. Jimmy Dunne, Mr. Willie Mulvey and others, some of whom are here in the Gallery with us tonight. First, from the mid-1980s, began the committee’s campaign to honour and commemorate the young victims. In the early 1990s, following pickets outside the office of then Taoiseach, Charles Haughey, funding was at last made available by Dublin City Council for Stardust Memorial Park. It was completed in 1993 and has pride of place in our local Coolock community.
Second, campaigners strongly queried Keane’s key conclusion and increasingly raised unanswered questions arising from his report and on the need to hold those responsible for the tragedy to account. Since the mid-1990s, the committee has campaigned tirelessly for a full investigation and full accounting for the fire which I believe can only be realised in a new commission of investigation under the 2004 McDowell legislation. I renew the call for the establishment of such a commission tonight.
The Stardust Ballroom was converted from the Scotts Foods factory and was re-designed to a leisure complex less than three years before the fire. Keane clearly showed how important conditions of the Dublin Corporation planning permission, fire regulations and the public resort by-laws were not complied with.
These include a consultation with a chief fire officer, the use of carpet tiles in the walls, the locking and chaining of exit doors and their obstruction, the use of timber partitions and the failure to allocate specific duties to staff in the event of a fire. Keane rightly concluded in paragraph 9.28 that "the owners did not take due precautions for the safety of the public, the performers or the employees". Dublin Corporation is also severely criticised for its failure to properly inspect the building, as is the Department of the Environment for its failure to make building regulations under the planning Acts. Serious shortcomings in the Garda and Department of Justice forensic examination were included in conclusion 9.64 of the Keane report. Keane found samples of material that might have been crucial were not taken and important tests were not carried out. It was also clear that Mr. Eamon Butterly, the owner, and several of his staff seriously obstructed the Garda investigations. It beggars belief on revisiting chapter 9 of the Keane report, the conclusions and recommendations, that no one has ever been brought to account for the Stardust tragedy. The owner, Mr. Eamon Butterly, was severely criticised for his action yet no prosecution was ever pursued. On reading those conclusions again, one would never expect for the final outcome to be suspected arson.
On several occasions in Dáil Éireann, especially in the lead up to the 20th and 25th anniversaries of the disaster, on behalf of the Stardust committee I outlined the many reasons why so many aspects of Mr. Justice Keane's report needed to be disregarded and I called the report’s conclusions "untrustworthy, unfair and unsafe". In a Dáil speech of February 2006, I highlighted the conflict of interest in the appointment of the Fire Research Station of the UK Department of the Environment as the expert adviser to the tribunal because it was working at that time for Dublin Corporation. I spoke about the inclusion of the untrue statement in section 8.92 of the tribunal report that "the practice of locking and chaining the exit doors until midnight at the earliest on 'disco' night was not known to the Corporation". I informed the House a number of times that I had been contacted by a city council official who explained that he had reported to officials in the building control section of Dublin Corporation more than three weeks before the catastrophe that exit doors had been locked late into the night at a function. There were also reports that Dublin Corporation held a staff party in the Stardust the previous Christmas of 1980 and that the then Lord Mayor was present. The tribunal report concluded there was no professional supervision of the electrical system in the reconstruction and fitting out of the Scotts Food factory which became the Stardust. However, the Keane report completely disregarded compelling evidence relating to the electrical system and the new research totally challenged the tribunal’s findings. Testimony of a heat surge from the ceilings of the north and west alcoves given to Mr. Justice Keane by disco-goer Linda Bishop and staff member Leo Doyle clearly pointed to the ignition and spread of the fire from the lamp room-storeroom area in the roof space. The evidence given to Keane in 1981-1982 by external eyewitnesses like Robert O’Callaghan and Alan Buffini also supported that conclusion.
The conclusions of Keane were seriously challenged and we believe demolished by outstanding private investigations carried out in the years preceding the 20th anniversary of the disaster in 2001 and up to 2007. Excellent investigative work by two remarkable young local journalists, Tony McCullagh, now editor of the Northside People, and Neil Fetherstonhaugh, was put into the public domain through their 2001 book, They Never Came Home: The Stardust Story. The title references Christy Moore's famous song about this terrible tragedy. That book first undermined the whole structure of Keane’s conclusions with its highlighting of serious electrical problems in the roof of the Stardust and the failure by the owners in preceding weeks and months to address this incredibly dangerous situation. In 2004, a distinguished local scientist, Ms Geraldine Foy, also carried out further investigations and discovered the existence of a storeroom in the roof space packed with flammable liquids which was beside the lamp room. In new evidence, Ms Foy demonstrated that maps showing a basement in the Stardust were incorrect and also drew attention to the first witnesses of the fire who were outside the building and saw flames coming from the roof. In 2006, Ms Rita O’Reilly and her colleagues in an RTE "Prime Time Investigates" anniversary programme cast further profound question marks over Mr. Justice Keane’s findings.
The Stardust relatives and victims committee finally submitted a dossier entitled "Nothing But the Truth" to the Department of Justice in 2007, which documented discoveries of clear evidence of defective electrical and heating systems in the building, as well as the discovery of the existence of the first floor storeroom full of flammable cleaning liquids and new eyewitness accounts which strongly pointed to the origins of the fire in the roof space and not, as Keane had believed, in the seats of the closed-off west alcove. This dossier also listed the contents of the stored items in the roof space, all of which were highly flammable and included 45 five-gallon drums of cleaning fluids and other liquids. All of these concerted efforts over many years put public pressure on the Government to re-examine the findings of the Keane report. The then Bertie Ahern-led Government eventually appointed Mr. Paul Coffey, SC, now Mr. Justice Coffey, to carry out an independent examination in 2008. Mr. Ahern lived in an estate just across the road from the Stardust. The final Coffey report was presented to the House in January 2009 and led to the correcting of the public record in the Dáil and Seanad that arson was the probable cause of the tragic fire and loss of so many young lives. There was great disappointment in 2009 that Coffey did not call for a new public inquiry in the final version of his report presented to the Houses. Freedom of information requests from the Stardust committee discovered that the original copy of the Coffey report sent to the Government on 10 December 2008 differed on a number of very important elements from the final report brought before the Houses in January 2009. Paragraph 5.13 of the Coffey report of 10 December states:
I accept that this is profoundly unsatisfactory to the survivors and the bereaved. I also accept the Committee’s submission that such was the scale of the disaster that it has become a matter of communal if not national history to an extent that engages a public interest in ensuring that the public record of what happened is factually accurate and established by evidence. I further accept that a new inquiry is necessary if it is the only way of placing on the public record a finding that is based on evidence.
Mr. Coffey’s original finding of 10 December 2008 is certainly now a necessity. The slur of suggested criminality on the young people who attended the Stardust that tragic night was removed in the Government motion of 3 February 2009, which stated that Dáil Éireann acknowledged "that the cause of the fire is unknown, the original finding of arson is a mere hypothetical explanation and is not demonstrated by any evidence and that none of the persons present on the night of the fire can be held responsible for it". It was 28 years after the tragedy and there was still no concrete conclusion as to who was responsible for the deaths of these 48 young people. Mr. Justice Paul Coffey’s report is striking in the manner in which it builds a powerful case supported by witnesses for the Stardust committee such as former fire chief, Mr. Tony Gillick, that the fire began in the roof space.
I note media reports that the wording of the final part of the motion regarding the Government’s engagement with the Stardust relatives and victims committee is rejected by the Tánaiste yet this related specifically to the committee’s attempts to meet directly with the Taoiseach following his promises made to them on former Deputy Terence Flanagan’s campaign trail in 2011. I acknowledge the Tánaiste met the committee personally in 2014. There were great hopes from that meeting. I also acknowledge that she appointed Mr. David Gilbride to be a point of contact for the committee. Mr. Gilbride sent a report in November 2015 querying the committee's evidence. The Stardust committee withdrew from the process with the Department on 8 December 2016 because Mr. Gilbride repeatedly informed its members their new evidence had not reached the standard of reasonable doubt on the Keane conclusions. As fire expert, Mr. Robin Knox, has stated, only a new commission can establish such a standard.
In previous speeches, I referenced the Widgery and Saville tribunals and the Hillsborough inquests and noted there always seems to be a great reluctance in our legal system to create a new precedent by revisiting the work of a tribunal. In the British legal system, which is so close to our own, the Government came forward with the Saville inquiry to re-examine the Widgery whitewash and vindicate the people of Derry. It revisited the Hillsborough disaster in which 96 Liverpool fans were crushed to death. The valiant campaigns by the relatives of the victims of Bloody Sunday in 1972 and Hillsborough in 1989 very much resemble the indefatigable and brave campaign for justice of the Stardust relatives committee. While the courts will admit fresh evidence in civil and criminal appeal cases, the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2004 do not provide an appeal mechanism, yet there are appeal mechanisms in investigative legislation such as the Railway Safety Act 2005 and the Merchant Shipping (Investigation of Marine Casualties) Act 2000. Given the UK precedents, we should be able to come forward with a new commission of investigation. Today’s motion has widespread support in the House. A member of the Government sitting opposite, Deputy Finian McGrath, shared a Topical Issue debate with me in the Thirty-first Dáil demanding a new commission of investigation, not more reports or going back to eminent legal people. We already had that with Mr. Justice Coffey.
During the 2011 general election, the Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny, visited Coolock and committed to a new commission of inquiry. The inclusion of the establishment of the commission of investigation dependent on the production of new evidence - the oft-repeated mantra - featured in A Programme for a Partnership Government.
The motion before us today is in the name of the Independents 4 Change, our technical group, and AAA-PBP. I thank my 12 colleagues in both groups. Deputies McDonald and Mitchell and Sinn Féin are very supportive of such a motion. I am also delighted to have a copy of a letter from the Fianna Fáil leader, Deputy Micheál Martin, to Ms Antoinette Keegan of 27 March 2014 in which Deputy Martin commits Fianna Fáil to support a new inquiry under the 2004 Act. I also thank the Social Democrats for their support and I hope the Green Party will also support the motion. I have always received great support in the past from the Labour Party on this matter. I believe there is an emerging consensus at last in the House to bring closure to the still-grieving families and friends of the young people who never came home that night by approving the motion to establish a new commission of investigation into the Stardust tragedy.
The Government seems to be coming forward with an amendment to the effect that an eminent legal person will be appointed to review the new evidence and arguments.
Mr. Justice Coffey already fulfilled that function in 2008-2009 and recommended the establishment of a commission of investigation in his December 2008 report. The amendment seems to be another instance of this Government kicking the can down the road when it comes to important issues. After 36 long and often grief-stricken years, the Stardust victims and their relatives need final closure and justice. I urge the House to support the motion.
The motion put forward by Deputy Broughan is very simple in nature. I want to acknowledge his work and that of the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, because they have been steady and persistent voices in respect of this matter.
The fact is that, 35 years on, those bereaved by what happened in the Stardust still have questions but they do not have answers. It is ironic the Stardust tragedy happened on St. Valentine's night, which is the night associated with love and romance, not death and tragedy. I remember that weekend very vividly. I recall the stories coming out and the fact that the pain and anguish were intensified as the weekend progressed and more details emerged. I also remember having attended events in the Stardust, so I could very easily visualise what had happened. The grief was compounded by the fact the victims were all from the same area and that there were families who lost more than one member.
I dislike the word "closure" because it seems to suggest there can be an end to the grief at the loss of a loved one and I do not think that can happen. However, there is no doubt that if family and friends have answers to their questions and have a full picture of what happened, it does ease the grieving process. That has not happened in the case of the Stardust. Unfortunately, we have a poor record in this country when it comes to establishing and revealing the truth. How long did families and individuals wait in the context of the Magdalen laundries? The families of the victims and survivors of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings over 40 years ago are still waiting for answers.
The Stardust tragedy was the worst of its kind in the history of the State, with 48 young people losing their lives in appalling circumstances. We can imagine those young people struggling to escape and their consternation at perhaps getting to a fire escape to find chains around the bars. We can imagine the failure of the lighting adding to the panic and confusion inside. The windows were not an option because there were bars and blades around them. The rescue services outside were frustrated because they could hear and see what was going on but they could not reach those inside. It is important to acknowledge all the work of the rescue services.
Afterwards, it was a question of finding out what happened and who was responsible. We know of the Coolock Garda investigation, the tribunal of inquiry and the issue of arson, which allowed the owners to pursue a claim for quite hefty compensation. The "Prime Time" programme in 2006 cast doubts on some of those findings. That was followed by Mr. Justice Paul Coffey's independent examination, which found no evidence of the fire being started deliberately but identified breaches of fire safety regulations. We know there were alterations to the initial Coffey report, which, in itself, necessitates a full and independent inquiry for the relatives.
Listening to the relatives, it is clear their grief is raw - it is as if it only happened last Friday. We think of how long it took to get to the truth of what happened in Derry on Bloody Sunday and at Hillsborough. In both situations, we also know the relief for the relatives when the facts were revealed. In the Derry case, there was the added bonus for the relatives when they received an apology from David Cameron.
The families have never given up, which is a great credit to them, and they have recent research which shows there is new evidence. A researcher has listened to the witnesses who were both inside and outside the Stardust, has looked at inaccuracies in the map of the building that was used at the tribunal and has examined the 999 calls. There are many questions.
The motion notes that the Government was looking for new evidence and I think that has now been brought forward. The relatives handed in a list to the Attorney General's office a couple of months ago and they are still awaiting a response. Given all of the inconsistences and questions regarding the original findings and the changes in the findings, the only way forward is a comprehensive and independent investigation. I am aware of the talks people have been having with the relatives and I know that the Government amendment states that new evidence will be assessed by an independent person who has the trust of the families. I also understand that, if that independent person confirms this new evidence, there will be a commission of investigation. However, that cannot be a further delaying tactic in regard to establishing the truth. Mr. Justice Coffey's report in 2008 indicated the need for an inquiry. For me, it is not a matter of what anybody in this Chamber wants. It is what the families want, what they deserve and what they are owed. It is a matter of national interest and not just for the people of north Dublin.
I move amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after “misgivings around previous investigations” and substitute the following:
“- there has been important work conducted by individual researchers on a voluntary basis over many years into the causes of the tragedy; and
- the Programme for a Partnership Government specifically states that 'full regard will be had to any new evidence which emerges which would be likely to definitely establish the cause of the fire at Stardust';
calls on the Government to meet with the Stardust Relatives’ and Victims Committee regarding the new and updated evidence they have uncovered since reviewing Judge Keane’s Report of the Tribunal of Inquiry on the fire at the Stardust, Artane, Dublin in 2006, to have that new and updated evidence assessed urgently by an independent person who has the trust of the families; and
if the independent assessment confirms the existence of new evidence, calls on the Government to immediately establish a Commission of Investigation into the Stardust Tragedy of 1981.”
I thank Deputy Broughan for raising this important matter. As has been said, the events that occurred at the Stardust in the early hours of St. Valentine's Day 1981 are ones that have lived long in the memories of those of us who were old enough to recognise the tragedy that was unfolding before us as we woke that morning. The scale of the tragedy as it emerged was overwhelming. Across the country, thousands of people, young and not so young, went out on a Friday night to dance, celebrate and enjoy themselves. They said goodbye to their loved ones, told them they would see them later and made plans for the following day. They did and said all the things that we do in such routine circumstances. Every parent worries when their child, of whatever age, is heading out for the night. We tell them to mind themselves and to be careful, but we never think that something like this could happen.
Forty-eight young people lost their lives. Many more were seriously injured and live with those scars, both physical and psychological, to this day. We can only imagine the alarm of the families whose loved ones were out that night as word of the fire emerged, the panic they must have felt and the torment they went through as they sought out news of their loved ones. For some, there was relief; for others, the torture of desperately trying to keep hope while they awaited news; but, for so many, there was only despair.
Tragedies such as this, and thankfully they are few, impact on a wider community than just those present on the night. The impact on the victims and their families and friends, on all those caught up in this terrible event, cannot be forgotten. It has not been forgotten. Members of these Houses have in the past spoken of their memories of these events and of people they knew who were injured and who lost their lives. The Stardust fire is part of our communal history. It is right that it is not forgotten and that we continue, in this House, to discuss and consider any measure that may address the terrible legacy of the fire.
Immediately after the fire, a tribunal of inquiry was established. The tribunal reported in June 1982. Deputies are familiar with the report's findings, which were highly critical of the building's owners, the fire safety measures in place, the means of escape and the response of the emergency services. Deputy Broughan has gone into much of the detail. Over the following years, the findings of the tribunal, particularly as they related to the finding of probable arson, were the source of great dissatisfaction for many victims. Concerns also emerged as to whether the real cause of the fire had been identified and the adequacy of the investigations that were carried out.
Throughout the first half of the last decade, the committee representing victims and their relatives communicated these concerns to Government. The committee's submissions also advanced an alternative hypothesis as to the cause of the fire. Following this, the Government of the day agreed, in 2008, to appoint an independent legal expert, Mr. Justice Paul Coffey, to examine the case made by the committee. His report was published in January 2009 and dealt in some detail with the findings of the original tribunal report. Its key conclusion was that, "the Tribunal's conclusion as to the cause of the fire cannot be demonstrated to be objectively justifiable", and that the tribunal's finding of fact that the fire was probably started deliberately was on its true construction a hypothetical finding only. The report's conclusion that the finding of arson in the original tribunal report was hypothetical only and that no one present could be held responsible addressed a long-standing stigma of suggested criminality that some of the victims and bereaved felt hung over all who had been in attendance that night.
The report also considered the hypothesis put forward by the committee as to the cause of the fire but concluded it had not identified any evidence which could establish its cause. It also found that, "the new and other evidence relied upon by the committee at its highest merely establishes that the fire began in the roof space but does not establish its point of origin or cause".
Following that, the Government of the day in 2009 moved motions in both the Dáil and the Seanad which were supported on an all-party basis in both Houses. The motions acknowledged, "the view of Mr. Coffey that to establish a new Tribunal to investigate the cause of the fire in the absence of any identified evidence would not be in the public interest". That was accepted at that time in an all-party motion in this House.
While the findings of the independent legal examination were widely welcomed at the time, subsequently, some family members raised concerns about the process and its outcome. On my appointment as Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality, I met with Ms Antoinette Keegan, Ms Geraldine Foy, a researcher and adviser to the committee, and the committee's solicitor, Mr. Paul O'Sullivan, to hear at first hand their concerns. Following that meeting, I appointed an official in my Department to liaise with the committee. There has been significant engagement with Ms Antoinette Keegan, Ms Geraldine Foy and Mr. Robin Knox, another researcher associated with the committee, through that mechanism. I am of the view that significant progress was made in 2015 with collaborative efforts between them and the Department, resulting in the drawing up a document outlining the case as they presented it.
Subsequently, they indicated that they wished to provide further material to my Department and the engagement continued. Further material was provided to the Department in January 2016. Engagement on these lines had been continuing up until the end of 2016, at which point the committee decided not to proceed with the process. I respect this decision.
I am mindful, as is the Government, of the understandable depth of feeling of those affected by this tragedy and of the need to avoid adding to their distress. It would be regrettable, against a background where there has previously been broad agreement in the House on motions relating to these events, if this consensus could not be maintained.
Returning to the motions passed in the House following the 2009 report, which accepted the view of Mr. Coffey that to establish a new tribunal to investigate the cause of the fire in the absence of any identified evidence would not be in the public interest, the key issue that now arises is whether any new evidence can be identified as to the cause of the fire. To address this, the Government proposes in its amendment that, in the first instance, an independent person be appointed to assess urgently the question of whether any new evidence can be identified. The Government will act on these findings. As stated in the programme for Government, "Full regard will be had to any new evidence which emerges which would be likely to definitely establish the cause of the fire at Stardust." If the independent assessment confirms the existence of new evidence, a commission of investigation will be established and the Government will proceed on the basis as outlined in the amendment.
I strongly believe this is the appropriate way forward. As I have said - and I think every Member of the House will agree with me - it is right that the tragedy is not forgotten and that we continue in this House to discuss and consider any measure that may address the terrible legacy of the Stardust fire.
I welcome the family members of victims and survivors of the Stardust fire here and I commend my colleague, Deputy Broughan, on bringing forward this motion. As he indicated, it follows on from work carried out by serving and former Members of this House, including my colleague, Deputy Seán Haughey.
There is almost a biblical quality to the pleadings of the families of the Stardust victims. There is equally almost a biblical quality to the delay in the response from Government to them. They find themselves back here once again, after 35 years - just a fortnight, as Deputy Broughan said, before another emotional and raw reminder of the tragedy passes - appealing to the Government to help them right a grave wrong, square a circle and ensure that their voices are heard and their pleas do not fall on deaf ears. The lengths to which they have been forced to go are unjust, unfair and painful, and the resistance to those pleas causes so much unnecessary pain, so much hurt and so much justifiable anger.
There are still questions regarding the causes of the fire, which means there is a chance that justice has been and is being delayed. A Government inquiry carried out by an independent expert produced two reports, one of which was finalised after scores of changes - I accept there is nothing unusual about that - until a freedom of information request indicated that the unpublished report accepted that a further public inquiry was necessary.
As one of the survivors who lost young members of her family 35 years ago said today, "when you get truth, you get justice". The survivors have compelling reasons to believe that previous attempts at uncovering the truth of the events of the night of the Stardust fire have been incomplete and in some cases even contradictory. All the survivors want is that the truth - the whole truth - be put on public record and that all available and new evidence be interrogated and laid bare. This is the least the relatives of those who perished deserve and the least the survivors and their families are entitled to.
The families are weary from grief and exhausted from seeking justice for their relatives and the survivors of the Stardust tragedy. However, they are, if nothing else, resilient. They continue to find the strength and resolve to carry on the fight for justice and truth. The real scandal is that, 35 years on, families are still fighting for truth and justice. I ask the House to imagine the personal and cumulative toll of simply being unable to rest easy in the knowledge that one's story has been told and that the truth of the matter has been revealed in respect of those who lost their innocent young lives on that fateful evening. Until the suspicions that linger about the investigation of this matter and about a lack of forthrightness on the part of State agencies, until the truth is placed - unvarnished - on public record, the families of the Stardust victims and survivors can never rest easy.
As the Government's amendment recognises, there is justification for further investigations into the events surrounding the outbreak of fire at the Stardust. These investigations need to be timely, speedy, efficient and broad, and not truncated in any unnecessary way. The families will not tolerate being thwarted again or having their concerns placed on the long finger by Government. There are a number of areas of concern to the families that are worthy of further investigation, some of which have been alluded to already by Deputy Broughan. Even the Taoiseach this morning stated that the families have never received a full account of what happened and conceded that they feel very strongly about answers that were not given. I understand that the Government's counter-motion involves some movement on this issue and that it appears the Government will agree to meet with the Stardust Victims Committee regarding the new and updated evidence the committee has uncovered. As stated in the motion, it is important that the evidence is assessed as a matter of urgency by an independent person who has the trust of the families. I completely support the request that if this independent assessment confirms the existence of new evidence, as the motion also suggests, the Government immediately and speedily move to establish a commission of investigation into the Stardust tragedy of 1981. The victims who perished and the survivors who want to lead what remains of their lives and to honour and respect their dead deserve no less.
The families have never given up. Unbelievably and very movingly, they have never stopped believing in the ability of Parliament and parliamentarians and of Government and Ministers to deliver the unvarnished truth. They have nowhere else to turn, and we cannot let them down.
The Stardust fire was one of the most significant events in the history of our capital city. It was the worst tragedy to befall our capital city in the 20th century, exceeding even the Dublin bombings which took place in the 1970s. It is an event which has had enduring consequences. On a national level, after the fire took place, it had the consequence of striking fear into the hearts and minds of parents throughout the country who wondered and feared whether their children would be safe going out to socialise in the evenings. Locally, in north Dublin, it traumatised the community from which the bereaved came. Most seriously of all, it devastated the lives of the families involved, having lost their children who went out that evening to go to what they thought would be a Valentine's disco but which ended up in tragedy.
There were also other consequences. These will be of cold comfort to the families, but there were positive consequences in that the fire reformed entirely the fire regulations in this country. The fire regulations we have derive mainly from the tragic and terrible experience this country, the families in particular, went through as a result of the Stardust fire. In many respects, the Stardust fire did for fire regulations what the Church Street tragedy of 1913 did for tenement buildings in this capital city. The tragedy of 1913 effectively brought about a recognition on the part of Dublin Corporation that the time for tenements had to end. Similarly, the Stardust fire meant that fire regulation in this country was significantly and dramatically improved.
It is important to see where we are before going on to consider what is best for the families and what can be achieved for them.
The report of the tribunal of inquiry reached a finding that arson was the cause of the fire, but that finding has been discredited and can no longer stand. There were innumerable campaigns by the families which led to the appointment of Mr. Paul Coffey in 2008/2009. Although there have been criticisms of his report, it is important to note that he found that the finding of arson in the tribunal's report had been based on a hypothesis and was not justified in considering facts produced in evidence before the tribunal. In the aftermath of the report of Mr. Coffey, this House set the record straight on the Keane report by unanimously agreeing a motion on 3 February 2009 that acknowledged that the cause of the fire was unknown and that the original finding of arson in the report of the tribunal of inquiry report was merely a hypothetical explanation not demonstrated by any evidence and that none of the persons present on the night of the fire could be held responsible for it. That was the mechanism the State used to ensure the finding made in the report of the tribunal of inquiry could be changed. The Official Report recorded that there was no evidence which supported a finding that the fire had been caused by arson.
The work of the families and those assisting them has brought them to the objective of trying to identify what caused the fire. The report of the tribunal of inquiry got it wrong; the Coffey report got it right when it stated there was no basis in fact for the finding that the fire had been caused by arson, but it could not identify the cause. The families are entitled to - I can understand why they want to - establish the cause of the fire on that fateful night. If there is new evidence which supports a finding that the fire was caused by a certain activity or that can lead to a conclusion on how it started, a commission of investigation should be established. The proposal made in the Government's amendment is that the evidence should be assessed to see whether it can stand up before a commission of investigation. It is important that the families be aware that commissions of investigation can be cold and impersonal. I do not want and no Member here wants the families to leave here believing that through the establishment of a commission of investigation they will be able to identify the cause of the fire. A commission of investigation would only reach a finding based on evidence properly admissible before a tribunal of inquiry not dissimilar from the rules in a court of law. It is important to assess and identify the evidence that is said to be new and whether it is sufficient to reach a finding by a commission of investigation that the fire was caused in a particular way. The objective of any commission of investigation is to establish the truth. If an inquiry is established I hope it will be able to identify the cause of the fire. However, I do not want the families to leave here believing a commission of investigation would result in the tragedy and unfairness to them being rectified because at the end of the process the commission might not be able to establish the cause of the fire. If there is sufficient strong evidence, it would be able to do so. The families should be aware that a commission is cold and impersonal and will only reach findings based on facts which are properly admitted in evidence before it.
Many Members of this House agree that if we are to establish a commission of investigation, decisions should be made promptly. It is unfair to the families to drag it out for much longer. If there is to be a scoping exercise to appraise the new evidence, that must be done promptly in order to ensure any commission of investigation is established in the very near future. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan is correct to say the Saville and Hillsborough inquiries were able to examine the findings of previous inquiries. We should not underestimate the task facing any individual who is asked to produce a finding of fact on an event which happened 36 years ago. That would be very difficult. Findings of fact can be based only on evidence given by individuals who were there or documents which were produced at the time. It is important to bring this matter to a conclusion quickly and that we do not prolong the families' uncertainty as to whether there will be an investigation. For that reason, we need to quickly and independently assess the new evidence to see whether it would justify the establishment of a commission of investigation.
I thank Deputy Thomas P. Broughan for raising this matter and his comprehensive review of the tragedy. The fire in the Stardust nightclub in 1981 was an horrific tragedy. The loss of life and widespread injuries caused by it stand as one of the greatest tragedies in modern Irish history. Of the 700 young people in attendance that night, 48 never came home and 128 were seriously injured. Devastated survivors and families, together with the local community, all struggled to come to terms with the scale of the disaster. I was 19 years old at the time of the fire and had attended various cabarets at the Stardust nightclub. I think of the tragedy every time I drive along the Kilmore Road and on Valentine's Day and every time I see or hear a reflection of the 1980s. I have no doubt that all those who were caught up in the tragedy think about it every day of their lives.
A tribunal of inquiry set up at the time made several recommendations and their implementation led to a complete transformation of fire safety and protection laws. The view was that everything should be done to ensure such a fire would never happen again. The finding that the cause of the fire was probably arson caused widespread hurt to the families affected. In 2008 Paul Coffey's report concluded that the finding that it had probably been caused by arson was merely hypothetical. Motions were passed in the Dáil and the Seanad to the effect that there was no evidence that the fire had been started deliberately and that the cause of the fire remained unknown. In addition, Mr. Coffey found that none of the victims of the fire, or persons present on the night, could be held responsible for it. He also found that the public interest would not be served by establishing a further inquiry. I have, however, read media reports which suggest previous drafts of his report had been watered down and that he might, in fact, have suggested there was a need for a new inquiry. I have no knowledge of this and think the matter needs to be fully explained by the Department of Justice and Equality.
As a local public representative since 1985, I have worked with the Stardust relatives and victims committee on several issues.
I have worked with the victims' committee on a number of issues, including certain planning applications regarding the Stardust site and the provision of a suitable memorial. The Stardust Memorial Park is now part of the community in Bonnybrook. In addition, a lot of work was done on identifying the remains of five previously unidentified victims.
I am aware of a new demand for a commission of inquiry to establish the cause of the fire. According to a report in The Irish Times on 24 January 2017, the committee believes significant new evidence has emerged in recent years. I understand that this has been uncovered by the researcher for the families, Geraldine Foy. The issue seems to relate to the location of the fire when it first broke out. There is a dispute about whether it broke out in the seating area or the roof space. I have not seen this new evidence, but if there is new evidence it must be investigated.
I have noted the Government amendment to the motion and I am in agreement with it. I support the Government amendment but as other speakers have said, I sincerely hope this process will be a speedy one. I hope it will be finalised as soon as possible and that the families involved finally receive justice and some sort of closure. I note what Deputy O'Sullivan said about the word "closure". Perhaps that is not possible, but as national legislators we should certainly do everything to ensure that the families can move on from this as best they can. I echo the words of my colleague, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan that this cannot be dragged out. We need to get to the bottom of it if we can. We should certainly do everything we can in this regard. I hope this debate will set the process moving speedily, so that we can bring some sort of finality to this long-standing issue.
I want to start by welcoming the families to the Visitors Gallery on this difficult evening. I know how hard it must be for them. Not far from here on the northside of Dublin, 48 young people lost their lives in the Stardust fire. They were young people, with an average age of 19 years, who never came home. We also remember the hundreds of others who were injured in the fire. Words cannot fully describe the enormity of pain involved in the deaths of 48 young people on St. Valentine's night, including the pain their mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters have been feeling since then. Words cannot do justice to the families. Only the truth can do them justice.
Families, survivors and the community need to find the answers to this horrific tragedy. Correcting any possible injustice should be the obvious action by any Government. In this respect it should be pursued to the end.
The journey the families have had to go through began on that awful night in 1981 and it continues to this very day, from the flawed Keane report in 1982 - we all know that report added much more pain for the families - to the Coffey review of 2009, which contained an unpublished recommendation for a new inquiry. The Minister and her Government have the power to take action and help to discover the truth by creating a commission of investigation.
The State claims that it needs new evidence. The families have given the Department of Justice and Equality new evidence which should be used in a commission of investigation. Will the Minister and her Government help the families to find the truth? They should not delay justice any longer with the Government amendment. It is almost 36 years since the tragedy and it has been a long time for families who are seeking the truth. Action needs to be taken for those who died long before their time, as well as for the injured and their families. This Government needs to pursue a commission of investigation to find the truth for them. The Minister should not prolong their pain any longer. She must act now.
We should all declare an interest in this matter. My first recollection was as a young person living in Dublin and hearing the news of this tragedy on the radio. I was a Sinn Féin youth spokesperson at the time. I remember putting out a statement expressing my condolences to the families involved. It is a long time ago. Deputy O'Callaghan said it changed the fire regulations. However, I remember visiting a nightclub in Galway with a group of friends a couple of years later. After about ten minutes we all had this uncomfortable feeling and left. The reason we left was that we noticed there were chains on the fire doors, yet this was a number of years after the Stardust tragedy.
Those young people went out to enjoy themselves, but many of them did not come home. Many others were scarred for life. I remember meeting some of them over the years, including the campaigners who tirelessly tried to get politicians to raise the matter. The Minister says it is regrettable that we do not have a consensus. I cannot speak on behalf of the families and do not know how they feel about the Government's amendment. There was a consensus up to tonight on this matter. There was general agreement that the way forward was a commission of investigation. I am saddened that people blinked and, for whatever reasons, took a decision to go down that path. I hope it works out for the families because they are all getting older and more tired, yet they all want answers.
A constituent, Mark Frazer, said today that the one question that is forever discussed within his family is why no one was ever prosecuted over the chained and blocked fire exit. I do not have the answers to that, but I know who was guilty. It was not the young people who went to the dance that night. I have made my views well known over the years. I know who was behind this tragedy - it was the people who put the locks, bolts and chains on the door. They are responsible for what happened to those young people.
I acknowledge the presence of the families who are here in the Visitors Gallery and commend their work. I also commend our colleague, Deputy Broughan, for bringing this motion forward. It is straightforward in seeking a commission of investigation.
No parent expects to bury a child. It goes against the natural order of things, yet these families faced that reality and have lived with it since that awful event. I am really disappointed that we are re-running a well-run tape. The political system is telling the families that it will support them and will support their quest for truth, yet at the same time the latest barrier is thrown up to stall that quest. Why?
The Tánaiste's logic is perverse in the amendment she has moved. It seems she believes a commission of investigation should be limited to only that evidence that can be brought forward by the families or the committee. Of course, that is not the case, as it is the job of the State to find out what happened. It is not for the families or committee to do it and the State has an obligation to establish that.
The initial finding of probable arson was not just unsubstantiated, it was a lie. It maligned the good names of those 48 young people who were either burnt or died from smoke inhalation. It was a nasty, malign lie. Fortunately, those young people have been given back their good name as that finding was taken from the public record. Now the job is to go one step further and establish the commission of investigation rather than stalling any longer. The evidence should be examined, as the Deputies from Fianna Fáil have suggested, in order to test its quality and veracity. We should seek more information and evidence. If it is then the case that we cannot be conclusive as to the precise cause of the fire, so be it, but it is the job of the State to act immediately to establish those facts.
I have a friend called Debbie who was there on the night. I am sure she would like to give testimony to a commission of investigation. She describes the fire as she ran for her life - she lost two friends that night - as a monster in its ferocity. There are witnesses, evidence and testimony and it is the State's job to seek it out, not the families' job.
Deputy Dessie Ellis has only 30 seconds left in the slot.
Tabhair dom cúpla nóiméad sa breis, le do thoil.
I am not responsible for the time slots.
It is frustrating that we are here tonight supporting this Private Members' motion proposed by Deputy Thomas P. Broughan calling for a commission of investigation into the Stardust tragedy 35 years after that terrible night. It is frustrating in that it has not happened before now. It is 35 years of heartache for the families and survivors that was not necessary. After all these years, the families have still not got the full truth about why their loved ones died and the inadequate way in which the tragedy was investigated and dealt with by the institutions of the State.
One example of this inadequate response can be seen in the report from the Stardust victims compensation tribunal to the Oireachtas in 1985. The compensation tribunal noted that in many cases, the establishment of the tribunal led to victims being examined and treated by doctors for the first time. In many cases the doctors were shocked, not to say indignant, that people who needed medical advice and treatment had been left without it for so many years.
Deputy Brendan Ryan will give the Deputy one minute.
Go raibh maith agat.
In many ways the State carried on abysmally in its treatment of the Stardust families and survivors. Why did this and previous Governments not meet the Stardust relatives and victims committee? The Taoiseach in the House today accepted that the families have never received full and frank answers to what happened on 14 February 1981. They deserve that every effort be made to provide them with answers. The Taoiseach also stated he did not see any difficulty in having members of the Government meet the families and that must happen as soon as possible. A date should be put forward by the Government immediately to start the process.
It is very important that a commission of investigation should take place into this tragedy as a number of questions must be fully examined. For example, there is strong evidence of a fire in the roof space, with health and safety protocols and other evidence pointing to other culpability never being properly examined. The logical course of action is apparent. There should be a new independent investigation established as quickly as possible. I was a frequent patron of the Stardust and I had been there just the week before, with many others from north Dublin. We want answers to what happened to our neighbours and friends on that fateful night. As legislators and a Government, we owe it to the 48 people who died their families, their friends and the hundreds who were injured on that tragic night.
Deputy Brendan Ryan has been generous.
I congratulate Deputy Thomas P. Broughan and the Independents 4 Change group for bringing forward this motion and the Deputy's comprehensive presentation of the case for the motion tonight. Nobody could add to that in any serious way. The Stardust tragedy is a sorrowful part of our nation's history and anybody who lived in Ireland in February 1981 will never forget that time when all those innocent lives were lost. As representatives in this House, many of us have contributed to debates and asked questions seeking truth and justice over many years.
In July 2009 I spoke in the Seanad following the release of the Coffey report earlier that year or at the back end of the previous year. On that night I welcomed the motion and described the Coffey report as a vindication of the valiant efforts of the 28-year campaign by the Stardust families, relatives and victims group. Unfortunately, like many representatives speaking in that debate, I did not have the full facts of the findings at my disposal. We found out subsequently, on foot of a freedom of information request from the committee for the families, that a line in the Coffey report accepting "that a new inquiry is necessary if it is the only way of placing on the public record a finding that is based on evidence" was deleted. This was presented by the Fianna Fáil Government of the day.
If the omitted sentence had been included, it would have led to an entirely different debate back in 2009 and it certainly would have led to parties and individual Deputies seeking different outcomes from those called for in 2009. This omission from the Coffey report stands independent of any other factors as a reason to ensure this motion should be passed. Unfortunately, it seems this Government, again with the support of Fianna Fáil, is resorting to its tried and tested response to any brave or tough decision, which is to kick the can down the road.
The Stardust tragedy will never be forgotten. For everybody who remembers that fateful night in 1981, just the one word brings back the horrific memories and tragic loss of life that was seen. Stardust is a one-word evocation of a national tragedy that we will never forget. Even generations of people born after 1981 know exactly what is being spoken about if the word "Stardust" is mentioned. It is etched in our collective conscience. The 48 young souls lost that night are the reasons we will never forget it. Never before or since have so many of our young people perished in such tragic and avoidable circumstances. What also keeps this tragedy in our thoughts and actions is the quest for truth and justice. It is the reason families have sustained their campaign over so many years. They are not at peace as the full truth is not yet known.
We need to make every effort to find the full truth of what happened that night and there is public support for a commission of investigation. I acknowledge the commitment to this cause from Deputy Broughan. I know from first-hand experience, when we were colleagues in the Labour Party, of his dedication to this cause over many years. In light of that I was slightly disappointed that Sinn Féin chose to raise the matter at Leaders' Questions today ahead of the planned debate this evening on Deputy Broughan's motion. I am also aware of efforts made by the families to meet officials in recent years. I know efforts were made by us in the last Government to facilitate these meetings and move the campaign forward. I am aware of how difficult it has been at times to keep the process on track, and tonight's debate is another important stage of that campaign.
The vote we take in the House tomorrow will have an impact on whether we move closer to examining all the available evidence in a full inquiry or whether further delays and obstacles will be put in place. With this motion there is an opportunity once and for all to deliver a full inquiry that will include all available evidence, most especially the new evidence provided by the committee. The people of north Dublin and the entire country wish to see justice done but it is the families still campaigning for justice that need the inquiry most of all. We support any avenue that will deliver the truth and we will work with all in the House, as well as the families and relatives of victims, to achieve this aim. The Labour Party will support the motion in the vote tomorrow and we will oppose any amendment.
I thank the Deputy for facilitating the previous Deputy.
I commend Deputy Broughan on bringing forward this motion, his brilliant advocacy on behalf of the Stardust families and his review of the case this evening. I commend Antoinette, Robin, Geraldine and all the families who have fought long and hard to get justice and truth for the families and victims.
The suffering, hardship and pain endured by the families is simply indescribable. No one in the House can ever fully know or understand it. That hardship, suffering and loss cannot be undone. However, what we can do is give closure, truth and justice to the families and victims. Again and again, the families have said they want to establish the truth and get justice on the basis of a new commission of investigation that would look at all the evidence, in particular, the new evidence that they have already presented to the Government.
The Minister should correct the record following what the Taoiseach said in the Dáil today. He said he had not seen or the Government had not seen the evidence. At the request of Antoinette Keegan, I personally handed the file with the evidence to the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, on the last day of the last Dáil. The Government has the evidence, which includes, although it is not limited to, facts relating to the five dead young men found some 29 feet away from the west alcove, where, the Keane report claims, the fire started. According to the pathologist, Derek Carson, the men were already dead from carbon monoxide poisoning at the point when Judge Keane said the fire started. These two things cannot both be true.
Second, a 999 telephone call was made by Brenda Kelly at 1.43 a.m., reporting that there was a fire in the roof and that it was well advanced. Judge Keane states a small fire started in the western alcove at 1.43 a.m. Both statements cannot be true. The evidence of Brenda Kelly has not been taken into account. Furthermore, there is evidence that the map used as the basis for the official findings on the fire was not the correct map. This was something that even Butterly said at the Keane hearing. He said the map was wrong and that it did not show the storeroom where, the families believe, the fire actually started earlier than the time given in the official record. They believe it started there because the room was full of combustible material placed there by the owners of the night club and neglected electrics likely ignited that combustible material, which caused the firestorm that killed 48 young people. That is the evidence, and it is sufficient evidence for the families to expect a commission of inquiry after all these years. We do not need another review of it. We need a proper and full investigation of all the evidence. That would be sufficient.
The families also want to get to the bottom of the fact that there are two Coffey reports, the first of which recommends a new inquiry to assess compelling evidence. In the letter accompanying that first report, there is no mention of it being a draft, although the Government insists on using that term. In the letter, Mr. Coffey states that, pursuant to his appointment on 11 July, he has completed his examination of the Stardust Victims Committee's case for a reopened inquiry. This was in Mr. Coffey's letter of 8 December.
We have also discovered something following a freedom of information request. I asked for information under the freedom of information process and got a response from the Minister on 17 January 2017. We asked for the records pursuant to any meetings that took place on foot of the first report. I got a response from the Minister stating there were no records and no meetings, yet the freedom of information request provided to the families shows that documents existed. They were not released under the freedom of information request, but they existed. Therefore, the Dáil was misled. There were two memoranda. One was from the Department of Justice and Equality and the other was a memorandum for the information of the Government along with associated Government papers. They were not released because they were part of Government deliberations on the report. Those memoranda should be released because they are key to understanding what changed between the first report that recommended a new inquiry and the second report.
The Minister insists on calling the first report a draft, but Mr. Coffey disputes that in his letter. The Minister has no evidence to support the claim. The Minister states Mr. Coffey asked for the right to clarify, change and amend the report. Where is the evidence for that? There is nothing in the freedom of information documentation or the correspondence from Mr. Coffey to support the claim; surely Mr. Coffey would have said it. When Mr. Coffey was submitting his report to the Minister, surely he would have explained that it was a draft and that he intended to make further changes. Why did he not say that? Where is the evidence to confirm that he wanted to amend it? There is none. He refers to it as a completed report.
Something happened after that point, whatever considerations and memoranda passed between various Departments. Whatever the nature of the deliberations at the Cabinet, lo and behold, a new report came out with 70 changes, including, critically, the change removing Mr. Coffey's recommendation for a new inquiry. We need the truth on this. What happened? What was in those memoranda? What happened in the Cabinet when this evidence was discussed? Why does the Government insist on stating it does not have new evidence when that new evidence has been presented? There is no need for further delay. There is no need to make another hurdle for the families to jump over. They have fought between 1981 and 2008 to exonerate their kin from the charge of being guilty of their own killings. Now, another hurdle is being put in their way. That hurdle should be removed. The amendment should be withdrawn and the commission of investigation should be set up forthwith.
I have no hesitation in supporting the motion tabled by Deputy Broughan. I thank him for his persistence and, more importantly, I thank the survivors and families for their persistence. In several weeks' time they will have a sad commemoration. It will be 36 years since the disaster in 1981.
There has been a move from some speakers, especially from Fianna Fáil, to talk about a change in legislation. For the record, it is important to point out that what happened at the time was clearly against fire regulations. That was set out clearly in the report by Mr. Justice Ronan Keane. He said that the carpet tiles represented a breach of the requirements of the chief fire officer. There were failures to comply with the fire protection standards. Therefore, what happened at the time was in breach of regulations. It is shocking that there was no prosecution whatsoever.
I am especially disappointed with the attitude of the Government tonight. We should bear in mind the physical barriers in place on the night when the doors were locked and the number of barriers that the families have had to cope with since then over a 36 year period. They had to wait until 1985 for the compensation tribunal. That followed the findings of Mr. Justice Ronan Keane to the effect that someone was responsible for arson. It took 27 years for that verdict to be changed. The tribunal of compensation was set up in 1985. However, it emerged subsequently during the review by the barrister, Mr. Coffey, that the families had received absolutely no treatment or care.
They were treated with utter disrespect by Government after Government. That was in 1985. It was acknowledged in 2009 and yet nothing happened. Here we are again today listening to the weasel words of Government supported by Fianna Fáil. I have absolutely no wish to be political. These families have suffered enough. It is time to say "Sorry". The owner did not say "Sorry". The owner was compensated. It is time for us to say "Sorry". It is time to say "Sorry" for the previous actions of Governments that failed to take the matter seriously. Without a doubt, there is a class element in this. I have absolutely no hesitation in supporting Deputy Broughan's motion.
I too support Deputy Broughan’s motion to establish a commission of inquiry into the 1981 Stardust nightclub fire. I would also like to state my admiration for the Stardust Relatives and Victims Committee and their relentless pursuit of justice, and for Deputy Broughan’s tireless campaign on behalf of the Stardust committee for over 30 years. The families and their solicitor have long been deeply sceptical of the 2009 Coffey report, stating that over 70 highly significant changes made to the report before its publication had the effect of neutering and diluting Mr. Paul Coffey’s original recommendations, including his acceptance that a new inquiry might be necessary. The Stardust Relatives and Victims Committee has presented new evidence to the Department of Justice and Equality. The programme for Government states: "Full regard will be had to any new evidence which emerges which would be likely to definitely establish the cause of the fire at Stardust." Independent researcher, Ms Geraldine Foy, has spent 14 years researching the Stardust fire on behalf of the victims and families. She knows more about the Stardust fire than anyone else. She has spent the equivalent of three to four PhDs worth of research time on this issue. Why does the Government ignore the new evidence already uncovered and already presented by the committee and by Ms Geraldine Foy? Why does the State not trust the testimony of the people from the community?
The only person ever prosecuted in relation to the Stardust fire was the singer, Christy Moore. This was in 1985, when he wrote and released the song, "They Never Came Home", about the Stardust victims. Christy Moore’s song called out the Government and the owners of the Stardust building. It was deemed to be libellous.
In his book The Rocky Road, Eamon Dunphy presented the following assessment of the State’s handling of Stardust: "In the Stardust Story, there lie clearly visible the seeds of the myriad scandals to follow that have rendered Ireland a republic in name only: cronyism; the brutal cynicism of all politicians; the callous indifference of a lazy media class; the endless prevarication of authority when faced with inconvenient truth; and the prosecution of the whistleblower." One has to ask whether anything has changed in the ducking and diving we have seen this week. No words in this House will take away the pain, but justice might help.
In order to achieve justice, one needs the truth. Nearly 36 years on, victims of the Stardust tragedy and their families have yet to find the truth, despite their desperate and commendable search for it. Their search for truth has been obstructed at every turn by nearly everyone who had the power to retrieve it. Apart from Mr. Butterly’s own attempts to obstruct justice, the shortcomings of the Garda investigation itself have been called into question, including the Department of Justice’s handling of evidence. Conclusions of arson made by the Keane tribunal report in 1982 were controversial and helped secure Mr. Butterly handsome compensation as a result. Even this seemed to have benefited everyone else apart from the victims and their families who were left with questions still unanswered.
Mr. Paul Coffey carried out an independent examination in 2008, and he gave a completely different finding that arson was not the cause. However, the Coffey report was manipulated in between the time the Government got hold of it and when it was presented to this House in January 2009. This was discovered through the efforts of the Stardust families, their drive to seek justice as strong as ever. Through a freedom of information inquiry, they discovered that in an earlier draft of the report, Mr. Coffey stated: "I further accept that a new inquiry is necessary if it is the only way of placing on the public record a finding that is based on evidence." However, this was absent from the public report. It is almost certain that this was an attempt by the Government itself to cover up the truth. Those who had the most power to uncover the truth played a role in concealing it. This alone warrants an independent commission of investigation.
We have a problem with truth in this country. Whether it was the Catholic church, industrial schools, Magdalen laundries, our health system that allowed symphysiotomy, residential care homes, the role of the Garda in certain historic investigations, councillors or Deputies, Ministers and the Government of the day, we all have a problem with truth. Today, we have an opportunity to address this problem, not only for the sake of justice for the victims and families of the Stardust tragedy, but for all searches for the truth. We can do this by supporting the establishment of an independent commission of investigation into the Stardust tragedy as the only way forward.
I sincerely thank Deputy Broughan for bringing forward this motion calling for a commission of investigation into the Stardust fire and for his work with the families of victims and survivors of this brutal tragedy, which is what it is. I also congratulate those, some of whom are in the Visitors Gallery, for their perseverance and courage over 36 years in their quest for truth and justice for their loved ones. It is not an impossible quest. This was demonstrated by the campaign for the re-opening of the inquest into the Hillsborough disaster by the Liverpool 96 campaign. The new inquest vindicated the families with its verdict of unlawful killing.
The term "unlawful killing" comes to my mind when I read elements of the original Keane inquiry. I am going to quote a few of them. Conclusion 9.25 stated: "The use of carpet tiles on the walls of the ballroom and the main entrance foyer was a breach of the requirements of the Chief Fire Officer." Conclusion 9.29 found: "The electrical installation was also defective in a number of respects: in particular, trunking lids were not fitted in several areas and conduit fittings were missing." Conclusion 9.31 stated: "There were a number of serious failures to comply with the Fire Protection Standards of the Department of the Environment." Conclusion 9.41 found: "The locking and chaining of one of the emergency exits was the result of a policy initiated by Mr Eamon Butterly of having all the emergency exits locked and chained until midnight at the earliest." Conclusion 9.42 stated: "This policy was pursued by Mr Butterly with a reckless disregard for the safety of the people on the premises." Conclusion 9.47 found that: "Had the appropriate precautions been in existence to ensure an efficient evacuation on the night of the fire, the injuries sustained would have been unquestionably less and the death toll would almost certainly have been reduced." Those are conclusions from the Keane report.
I believe it is reprehensible that 70 alterations were made to the original Coffey report. The one key change, which has been mentioned already, was in paragraph 5.13, which reads as follows:
I accept that this is profoundly unsatisfactory to the survivors and the bereaved. I also accept the Committee’s submission that such was the scale of the disaster that it has become a matter of communal if not national history to an extent that engages a public interest in ensuring that the public record of what happened is factually accurate and established by evidence. I further accept that a new Inquiry is necessary if it is the only way of placing on the public record a finding that is based on evidence.
How did that change to what the Government has recorded here tonight? The Minister said that it would not be in the public interest. I believe we should accept the basis of the new evidence that has come forward from the families and from Ms Geraldine Foy. The Department of Justice and Equality should bring it forward, take responsibility for it and bring it to a commission of investigation. It should not kick it down the road as a Coffey report II type of thing. It should not push it down the road. We cannot be sitting here in six months time asking where that report is and how far it has gone. Hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn. Hell will have no fury like a community's scorn if the Government does not respond positively and quickly to this issue.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for giving me the opportunity to address this very important issue. Next month marks the 36th anniversary of one of the worst tragedies in Irish history that claimed the lives of 48 young people who went out to celebrate St. Valentine's Day but never came home. For as long as I have been involved in politics, both locally and nationally, I have worked with the Stardust survivors and their families to bring about justice and, more importantly, truth, to deal with this tragic chapter. I welcome all of the families in the Visitors Gallery. I give a commitment of my total support. The survivors and their families, as well as many of their friends and supporters, deserve nothing less than answers to how their loved ones died. That is what we are trying to do tonight with our amendment.
It is important we say it. I also strongly agree with many of the speakers and with colleagues that locking, and putting chains on, the doors was absolutely criminal.
Let us look at the facts and deal with them in regard to the amendment before the House tonight. An independent legal expert will examine the new evidence and outstanding questions of the families and survivors before a commission is established. There will be a judge on this with strong criminal law experience. All the new evidence will be looked at and examined very closely. In partnership with the Stardust families we are now on the road to getting the answers many of us have demanded for years. For example, some speakers made reference to the evidence of Ms Brenda Kelly. This will be examined very closely.
Let us also go into the details of what is actually in the amendment. There are some very significant points in it. The amendment notes that in the 35 years since the Stardust tragedy in which 48 people died and 214 people were injured, families and relatives of victims of the tragedy have never received full and complete answers as to what occurred on the night of 14 February 1981. That is accepted. The amendment also notes that the Stardust Relatives and Victims Committee has continually attempted to liaise with the Department of Justice and Equality and the Taoiseach regarding its misgivings about previous investigations. That is accepted. I acknowledge the great work done by individual researchers into the causes of the tragedy, on a voluntary basis, over many years. We intend to deal with that particular issue also. The programme for Government states full regard will be given to hearing any new evidence that emerges which would be likely to definitely establish the cause of the fire at the Stardust. The amendment before the House calls on the Government to meet the Stardust Relatives and Victims Committee regarding the new and updated evidence uncovered since reviewing Judge Keane's Report of the Tribunal of Inquiry on the Fire at the Stardust in 2006 and to have that new evidence assessed urgently by an independent person who has the trust of the families. The families will be directly involved in that process. If the independent assessment confirms the existence of new evidence, the amendment calls on the Government to immediately establish a commission of investigation into the Stardust tragedy of 1981. There is no kicking the can down the road. We are trying to move on this as quickly as possible. One cannot put a price on the lives of 48 people. This Government is committed to a commission of investigation if new evidence is found. The money will be made available.
It is also very important that tonight's debate and the amendment moves this process forward. Earlier in the debate Deputy Seán Crowe asked why there had been no prosecutions. It is absolutely disgraceful, but I suspect that at the time many of the laws and regulations were not strong enough. That is not acceptable but I believe that is the answer to Deputy Crowe's question. Since the Stardust tragedy Ireland has seen very clear improvements in that regard. My own personal concern, and I felt very strongly for many years that it was not highlighted enough, was that the 1981 Garda investigation found no credible cause or location of the ignition. There was no evidence of arson as investigated by An Garda Síochána. It was the fire, the heat and the toxic gases that caused the deaths and injuries. What about the unlawful first floor, the storeroom and the concealed fuel? Were combustible materials illegally concealed behind wooden partitions? Did anybody investigate the illegal first floor? These are all the issues I am raising tonight. Did anybody sift through the debris and ashes of the first floor storeroom concrete floor? Were people dead from toxic fumes, overcome by carbon monoxide, before the burning seat was spotted in the west alcove? These are my concerns and the issues.
I want to give a commitment to the families and to all the people and urge Deputies to look at the details and the wording in the amendment. We are trying to move this process forward in the interests of truth and justice. There is no kicking the can down the road. We are trying to do our best for the families and I urge all Members to support us.
I thank the Members on the opposite side of the House, in particular Deputy Broughan, for raising this matter and for the contributions made to the discussions this evening. The appalling circumstances of the tragedy at the Stardust have been recounted with very strong emotions; even after all these years the emotion still comes through. The magnitude of the event and its legacy continues to shock and haunt us all. While words may be of little consequence I wish to express my deep and continuing sympathy to all those who have felt the impact of these tragic events and to recognise that members of those families are here this evening.
Much has been said tonight and I understand the Government of the day based its actions on the final report of Mr. Coffey and the contents of that final report were his, and his alone. There was a necessity to correct the record and another commission could have happened if no other way of correcting the record was found. The record of the tribunal was corrected by the two Houses agreeing a motion. That was agreed at the time and the record was corrected. There is no secret suggestion of the commission as such, it was about correcting the record. This evening's debate is about how we can proceed - as it is proposed in the programme for Government - by putting in place appropriate arrangements that might help to deal with any new evidence that may have emerged.
I was very taken with Deputy Jim O'Callaghan's contribution to this debate and his strong expertise in the area. He said that commissions of inquiry can be cold places. The Government has recognised the strength of the concerns that have been expressed on this matter. For this reason it is proposed that an independent person who has the trust of those affected and who is really experienced be appointed to assess any new evidence as to the cause of the fire before we go down the road of a bells and whistles investigation or independent commission. As the Minister outlined, if the independent assessment by a trusted and experienced person who has the trust of the families confirms the existence of new evidence, a commission of investigation will be established and the Government will proceed as outlined in the amendment. I believe that is probably the best and most respectful way to proceed at this point in time. Let someone who is trusted, experienced and independent assess the evidence and bring forward a recommendation; either the new evidence justifies a full blown commission of investigation or it does not. We do not want to go in to a cul-de-sac without real prima facie evidence. Deputy O'Callaghan's observations are true; these commissions are cold places. There was much justifiable and understandable emotion tonight which I felt as I listened to everyone and in picturing what happened. It is appalling, awful and tragic. We must, however, proceed properly and it will happen if an independent and trusted person says it is the way to go.
Deputy Clare Daly is sharing her time with Deputy Broughan.
When Deputy Broughan read the list of names of the victims of the tragedy on that appalling night, a real chill descended over the Chamber. That is why we are here. I salute his efforts and his ongoing work to get justice for the victims and their families. It has been a long and often bitter battle by the community and it has shone a light on the failure of the State over 36 years to get answers. It looks like tonight is going to be a continuation of that failure. That is not good enough. This community and the families have still not got the truth and not one person has been held accountable for what happened on that horrific night. That is why we are here. We are here because the other inquiries did not deliver that. Other Deputies explained very clearly that the Keane tribunal not only did not get justice but served to blame the victims and served to be used. His report said that there was no evidence of the fire being started deliberately but then concluded that arson was responsible. How could that be and what did that achieve? I will tell the House what it achieved.
For Mr. Eamon Butterly, it achieved more than €500,000 in compensation and a placing of the blame for this horrific tragedy on the victims. This is the same Eamon Butterly whose mismanagement and reckless policies were pinpointed in the Coffey report in 2008, which noted that had the venue exits been unlocked and unobstructed, people could have exited in a safe and timely manner. In other words, the Coffey report clearly stated the fire should not have happened.
Almost ten years later, however, nobody has been held to account. Twelve years ago, a nightclub fire in Buenos Aires in which close to 200 young people died led to the promoter being sentenced under criminal negligence charges. Seven years ago, in Bangkok, 67 young people died in a similar tragedy. In that case, the owner of the nightclub was charged and imprisoned, with 12 others. Three years ago, in Brazil, 200 people died in a tragic nightclub fire, as a consequence of which the owners were convicted of negligent homicide. Thirty-six years after the Stardust fire, despite all the evidence of criminal negligence, nobody has been held to account. The Government can dress its proposal up however it likes but it serves only to delay matters.
It is an affront to all of us that this proposal is being delivered by a coalition of Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, sadly supported by the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath. These are the same parties that were in power for the past 36 years and have seen all the reports. The only reason this motion is on the business of the House today is that Deputy Broughan pushed for its inclusion. Opposition Deputies' speaking time is very limited; our group gets an opportunity once a Dáil term. It is only because Deputy Broughan chose to prioritise this issue that we have an opportunity to discuss it today.
This House has agreed to the establishment of commissions of investigation in the past. The last Dáil agreed to do so in respect of the "Grace" foster abuse case, but that commission has not even been set up yet. The pre-inquiry the Government is proposing was conducted almost ten years ago and the person who did it, Mr. Coffey, recommended at the time that there be a public inquiry. I urge the Government to revise its stance on this issue. It has until tomorrow to deliver, and further delaying tactics are not good enough. People want the truth and they want accountability, as has been achieved in other jurisdictions. The horror arising from this tragedy runs deep. I have spoken to Leinster House staff who were young people in Dublin at the time of the tragedy. The legacy persists and it will not end until there is a full inquiry. I appeal to the Government to change tack at this late stage and support Deputy Broughan's motion.
I thank my colleagues in Independents 4 Change, the Anti-Austerity Alliance-People Before Profit, Sinn Féin and the Labour Party for supporting the call for an investigation into the Stardust tragedy under the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004. I am disappointed by Fianna Fáil's response to the motion but even more disappointed by the response of the Government, particularly in the case of the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath. It was following a consultation process with the Stardust families that Mr. Coffey was appointed to conduct a new inquiry into the tragedy. Having considered all of the evidence and reviewed the Keane report transcripts, Mr. Justice Coffey definitively concluded, as my colleague, Deputy Boyd Barrett, illustrated in his contribution, that a commission of investigation was necessary.
I said on Leaders' Questions some months ago that the Department of Justice and Equality continued to stonewall on the clear and obvious need for the establishment of a commission of investigation under the 2004 Act. We have more of the same this evening. The private investigations that were carried out since the late 1990s show the Keane tribunal was profoundly mistaken in its conclusion, much crucial eye witness evidence was missed and there were serious shortcomings in the forensic examination by An Garda Síochána and the then Department of Justice. The body of research and new evidence presented by Ms Geraldine Foy, Mr. Robin Knox and others includes details of the use of inaccurate building plans in the Keane inquiry process, the existence of a store room with access to the roof loaded with inflammable cooking oil and aerosols, long-standing electrical and heating system safety issues, including arcing and overloading, earlier external sightings of the fire in the roof space from 1.30 a.m., the wave of heat from the ceiling felt by disco goers and staff, and new evidence pointing very strongly to ignition in the ceiling area. There is enough evidence there to bring a commission of investigation into existence. Deputy O'Callaghan emphasised the powers and modus operandi of such commissions. That is precisely what the people in my constituency want, namely, an investigative body which can ensure, at long last, that they will have justice, peace and closure.
I take the opportunity to pay warm tribute to Ms Antoinette Keegan, Ms Chrissie Keegan and their colleagues who have worked so hard, so diligently and for so long on this project for justice. Besides engaging in the collection of new evidence and their interactions with this House, they attempted, in late 2011, to bring the Stardust case before the European Court of Human Rights under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which concerns the right to life. The 48 victims of the Stardust tragedy were, they rightly claimed, denied the most fundamental right of all. The plaintiffs argued in the two cases against Ireland that the convention had been breached due to deficiencies in the investigation into the deaths. That case did not continue simply on time grounds.
On 23 June 2016, I again, during Leaders' Questions, raised the need for a commission of investigation. Once more, the Tánaiste engaged in a stonewalling exercise and repeated the mantra of a need for new evidence, notwithstanding all the important new facts that have been supplied. As several colleagues noted, those who attended the Stardust nightclub on that fateful night were almost all in the 18 to 25 age cohort, with the average age being 19. Now, 36 years later, they are in their mid-50s to mid-60s, while some other important witnesses are much older. The commission must be established as soon as possible in order that everybody can be heard again and we can finally achieve closure and justice. In response to a series of parliamentary questions tabled by me, the Tánaiste referred to the investigation by An Garda Síochána, which she described as complex, and emphasised that she could do nothing which might undercut it. However, the very existence of that investigation reflects the huge range of unanswered questions, unassessed and missed evidence, and the profound deficiencies of the Keane tribunal investigation. I asked the Tánaiste about the possibility of reopening the coroner's inquest into the deaths of the 48 young people, to which I received a standard reply that inquests were held in early March 1982 under the Coroners Act and pointing out that the coroner exercises quasi-judicial functions and that she, the Tánaiste, has no role in individual cases. In October last year, I wrote again to the Dublin City Coroner asking that the inquest be reopened and what information would be required in order to do so. Dr. Myra Cullinane stated in her reply:
These inquests were held before a jury and presided over by the then Dublin City Coroner, Professor Bofin. I have therefore no jurisdiction to reopen these inquests in the above circumstances.
What are the circumstances in which the inquests could be reopened?
It is incomprehensible to me that we are still seeking justice and closure on this matter. In preparing for today's motion, I revisited my many files on the Stardust tragedy. When one reviews the timeline of events and the litany of instances of grievous treatment of the victims' families and subsequently the victims committee, one cannot help but feel great anger and frustration on their behalf. What we should all be feeling is empathy. If any member of our own families had been directly affected by this tragedy, we would react with great anger and determination. In October last year, the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, presented a submission to the Attorney General, Ms Máire Whelan, entitled "Insults towards the Stardust 48 Fatal Victims". There have been 36 years of insults to the 48 young people who lost their lives.
The Deputy is over time.
If not for the valiant and tenacious work of the grieving families, none of the positive actions of the campaign for justice would have come about, the finding of arson would not have been expunged, the Stardust Memorial Park would not exist, the five unnamed bodies would have remain unidentified, and even the Government's offer of a rerun of a Coffey-type investigation would not be on the table tonight.
The Deputy needs to conclude. His time is up.
It is not quite the two hours provided for by the Business Committee.
I am afraid the clock clearly indicates the Deputy's time is up.
The Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, mentioned that a price cannot be put on the lives of these 48 people. That is certainly the case but any time I interacted and heard back from the media on why we were not proceeding immediately to a commission of investigation, people started raising the cost. The whole issue regarding the cost of a commission is coming from the Fine Gael Party.
Not here.
The point is that the cost to our constituency, to Coolock, has been horrific over the years. The Government has a direct responsibility to address that and to agree to a commission of investigation tomorrow.
That is what we are doing.
That is what we are doing.
Amendment put.
In accordance with Standing Order 70(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time on Thursday, 25 January 2017.