JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT díospóireacht -
Thursday, 25 Sep 2008

Draft Work Programme: Discussion with Commission for Victims and Survivors.

Chairman

Ar an ócáid seo, ba mhaith liom fíor fáilte a chur roimh na coimisinéirí speisialta ón thaobh Thuaidh dár tíre. Tá mé ag súil leis an díospóireacht a bheidh againn le chéile agus an teagmháil a bheidh againn ag an gcruinniú seo agus ag an dinnéar ina dhiaidh. I warmly welcome our three Commissioners for Victims and Survivors from Northern Ireland. You are most welcome to our meeting today. I would like to introduce to the joint committee Ms Émer Deane, who joins us as a policy adviser to the committee. Ms Deane is on secondment to the Houses of the Oireachtas from the Department of Foreign Affairs, and we look forward to working with her. I would also like to welcome Mr. Alasdair McDonnell, MP.

Before we begin, I would like to advise witnesses that whereas Members of the House enjoy absolute privilege in respect of utterances made in the committee, witnesses do not enjoy such a privilege. Accordingly, caution should be exercised, particularly with regard to references of a personal nature. It is a great pleasure to welcome three of the four Northern Ireland Commissioners for Victims and Survivors, Ms Bertha McDougall, Mr. Michael Nesbitt and Ms Patricia MacBride. The fourth commissioner, Mr. Brendan McAllister, unfortunately could not be here today due to a prior commitment.

In the Good Friday Agreement, it is recognised that it is essential to address the suffering of the victims of violence. The commissioners are here to discuss their draft work programme and the recent consultative process undertaken by them regarding that work programme, as well as their recently published consultation paper on a strategic approach for victims and survivors.

The commission is developing a comprehensive strategy on how best to address the individual needs of victims and survivors while contributing to broader community needs and reconciliation. One element in taking forward the strategy would be through a victims and survivors forum. The commission is also responsible for, first, promoting awareness of matters relating to the interests of victims and survivors and, second, keeping under review the adequacy and effectiveness of services and of law and practice affecting those interests. The work of the commission will also contribute to broader considerations on ways to deal with the past, including such issues as storytelling and memorials.

It is a great pleasure to invite the commissioners to address the committee on their work to date and on their future work programme. I understand Ms Bertha McDougall will commence.

Ms Bertha McDougall

I thank the committee for the invitation to attend. I will discuss our remit under the legislation, which is very much about promoting awareness of the needs of victims and survivors. We are very conscious that in many instances, in Northern Ireland and beyond, people have a negative attitude towards it. We also have to review the adequacy and effectiveness of law and practice for victims and survivors, and as well as examining current and proposed legislation, this will consider the impact it has had on victims and survivors of the conflict.

We must review the adequacy and effectiveness of services provided, which would include health, including aspects of mental health and well-being. We have to provide advice to the Executive and others who require it, as well as being proactive and at times providing advice where we believe it is necessary and essential. We must throughout all our work consult victims and survivors — this is fundamental for us and permeates everything we undertake. We also have to establish a forum for victims and survivors.

Until now, the main area of our work has been to particularly consider funding for groups. There has been great dependency on that funding and it was a matter of urgency because EU funding was about to cease — there are different sources of funding. I am sure the committee will want to ask further about this issue.

The strategy is the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister's strategy. It is within that strategy that the forum is an aspect of our work. We would envisage the forum being very much a main part of our work in the coming year. Within the draft programme, we have stages of a process of developing the forum. We are determined that the process, and the important work of involving key stakeholders and ensuring the forum is established, happens in a way that stakeholders can buy into, which will be the way for it to succeed. Therefore, we will initially consider how we establish the forum by finding the details on that and considering how the ground rules will be set.

It will not necessarily be the case that the forum will undertake work in the initial stages. However, part of the main area of work within the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister's strategy will consider a comprehensive needs analysis. The strategy indicates this will be undertaken through the forum so we are considering ways in which that can be progressed in the intervening period until the forum is effectively established as a body.

Mr. Mike Nesbitt

I thank the Chairman for his warm welcome. I will briefly reference four areas of specific interest to me. The first is funding, on which Ms McDougall touched. We believe the sector, the support groups in particular, is too heavily grant-dependent. Among the down sides of this, I would reference two in particular. One is that it makes it almost impossible for groups to share best practice because a sister organisation could become a rival organisation at the next funding round. Second, the groups are so dependent on the annual review that it is very hard for them to lift their heads above that and take a strategic view of where they would like to be in five and ten years' time.

To assist them in this, my second area of interest involves efforts to engage the business community. I am currently in discussions with several large membership organisations such as the Institute of Directors in Ireland with a view to forming a pool of pro bono experts who will support individuals who wish start up their own business and become economically active again and groups in terms of governance, financial management and the aforementioned strategic vision.

The third area is education. Many victims and survivors missed out on their formal education, but it is not too late for them to have another chance. They deserve such an opportunity and we are examining the mechanisms that can be put in place to accommodate that. We are also examining the ways in which formal education may function as a tool to tackle intergenerational and transgenerational issues. In addition, education is a tool for the teaching and learning of the conflict.

This leads me to the final area of interest, which I am working on with my colleague, Ms Patricia MacBride. This is a legacy project which we are being encouraged to look on as a potentially world class initiative. It is a scary thought because it is fraught with risk but also full of possibilities. There are many sources of information on what happened during the conflict but, so far as we know, no central source where one can study the human impact of the conflict. Ms MacBride and I are working on a living history website where anybody who wishes can record their memories of the conflict and how it impacted on them.

We have a definitive figure for the numbers who died in the conflict but there is not the same clarity in regard to the numbers physically injured, although we generally refer to a figure of 40,000 plus as a rule of thumb. However, we will never know the number of people who were mentally, emotionally and psychologically impacted by the conflict. These are the people we would particularly like to reach via the living history project. The capacity for people to tell their story and have their experience acknowledged is extremely important in terms of addressing the psychological needs of those concerned. This living history project will represent a legacy that will allow future generations to pause and consider the human impact of what we have done to each other in the past 40 years.

Ms Patricia MacBride

The work we are undertaking is part of an initial work programme that the commission will run until the end of the current financial year. We plan to develop a three-year corporate plan to see through the life of the commission as currently constituted and to continue to address issues arising from our initial investigations and consultation with victims and survivors. That plan will be submitted shortly to the First Minister and Deputy First Minister for their approval.

Our statutory remit arises from the legislation enacted by both Westminster and the assembly. That legislation clearly states that the commission must protect and promote the interests of all victims and survivors of the conflict regardless of where those individuals may reside. This includes people resident in this State, in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, the United States, Spain and so on.

As part of our statutory remit, we have an obligation to keep under review the adequacy and effectiveness of law and judicial practice as they relate to victims and survivors. As part of our initial work programme, this examination encompasses three strands. First is the justice system, which will involve examining processes such as inquiries and inquests. Second is the broader legislative framework, which will look at the benefits and compensation systems. The third strand involves examination of the work of statutory agencies, including the historical inquiries team within the PSNI and the Office of the Police Ombudsman. We intend to consult victims and survivors on their experience of the justice system and statutory agencies. We will do this to discover how the processes impact upon them and what the organisations are capable of delivering and to produce information that will outline clearly what it is possible to achieve through current processes. That will inform our work in the next three-year period on how the processes may be amended or augmented to address needs, specifically those of victims and survivors.

We are expecting the publication this autumn of the recommendations of the consultative group on the past. Chaired by Lord Robin Eames and Mr. Denis Bradley, the group is likely to make a number of recommendations on how we should deal with the legacy of conflict. The commission is mindful of the previous consultation process undertaken by the group. We will scrutinise the recommendations and consult victims and survivors in that respect. We will form our opinion and report back to the Secretary of State, the First Minister and the office of the Deputy First Minister on which recommendations can be advanced and which might require further work with victims and survivors.

In terms of legislation, the Oireachtas has given a commitment to have a victims Bill drafted in spring 2009. It is an opportunity for the Government to ensure not only victims of crime, but also victims and survivors of the conflict will have their needs met. The commission is ready and willing to make an input into that process in consultation with victims and survivors living on this part of the island. It is our responsibility to act as an advocate on their behalf.

Chairman

I thank the commissioner and her colleagues for a clear, focused and measured presentation, given the sensitivities with which the commission must deal and the legacy of the past. Members can now make comments or ask questions.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I welcome three of the four commissioners and wish all four every success in their important work.

As is evident from the contribution of all three commissioners, particularly that of Ms MacBride, it is recognised universally that the theatre of the conflict extended much further than the Six Counties. That the commission has a wider remit and overview in terms of engagement with and advocacy on the part of victims and survivors throughout the island, the neighbouring island and beyond — I welcome this confirmation, in particular — is important.

Ar son mo phairtí, Sinn Féin, cuirim fáilte roimh na coimisinéirííospartaigh chuig an choiste seo. Tá obair tábhachtach ar siúl acu. Tá súil agam go mbeidh an coiste seo in ann cabhrú leo. On behalf of Sinn Féin, I welcome the Commissioners for Victims and Survivors. They have undertaken important work on behalf of the many thousands who have been deeply affected by the conflict in our country. Their work is a key part of the process of healing, reconciliation and building a renewed society. All of my colleagues on the committee share my hope that the dialogue with the committee today and in the future will offer a helpful and useful contribution to the commissioners' work.

I come from County Monaghan and represent two Ulster counties, Cavan and Monaghan, both of which have known the reality of armed conflict. On 17 May 1974 my home town of Monaghan and the city of Dublin were subjected to the terrible events of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings. Like many others, the families in question are seeking truth and justice from the British Government some 34 years later.

Sinn Féin stated it was an important step forward in ensuring all victims could be represented equally. This refers to my short preamble in welcoming the affirmation of the wider view of the victims commissioners. This will have to take into account the needs, backgrounds and experiences the commissioners represent. Many have lost loved ones and suffered during the conflict. They need to be dealt with across the board on the basis of equality. It is positive that there is a commission to put the needs of victims centre stage. Through a collective approach, this can ensure parity of esteem for all victims. In my preparation for this meeting I noted that a colleague, Francie Molloy, MLA, Sinn Féin spokesperson on victims and related issues, had pointed out that the four commissioners had a blend of skills and experience, which we believe will make a real difference. I commend each of the commissioners and the qualities each brings to the role and responsibilities. This is a sincere recognition and an expression of goodwill to each of them in their work.

We are meeting at a difficult time in the political reality north of the Border but it is significant that the commission was put in place after the DUP and Sinn Féin had reached agreement on the way forward, a positive development. This should not be overshadowed by the recent difficulties in the process, serious though they are.

There is no need for any of us to make the point that there cannot be a hierarchy of victims. This is well established and accepted and crucially important. Today, in an article to be published in my party's weekly newspaper An Phoblacht, our party president, Mr. Gerry Adams, has announced that following a process of consultation and discussion, particularly with victims and victims groups, Sinn Féin has concluded that the best way forward in truth recovery is through the establishment of an independent, international truth commission. People here will have noted that republicans have acknowledged the hurt they caused during the conflict. Mr. Adams has expressed his personal and sincere regret and apologised for the hurt caused. The IRA has apologised to the families of all those non-combatants for whose deaths they were responsible.

The British state has refused to acknowledge its role in the conflict, especially with regard to collusion. It is in that difficult but important area that I refer to the series of tragedies visited on communities and individuals on this side of the Border, where collusion was very clearly the central component. That refusal continues, as evidenced by the failure of the British Government to co-operate in the series of investigations conducted by Mr. Justice Hamilton, Mr. Justice Barron and Mr. Patrick MacEntee, SC. That approach must change.

I will conclude by putting forward the principles we believe should underpin any effective truth recovery process. They are announced in the statement issued by our party president today. They are as follows: all processes should be victim-centred and deal with victims on an all-Ireland basis; full co-operation on the part of all relevant parties is essential to the success of any commission; there should be no hierarchy of victims; all processes should be politically neutral; and any future panel should be international and independent.

One of the purposes of any future panel or commission should be to examine the causes, nature and extent of the conflict. An objective of any process should be healing, both for direct victims and society in general. A common aim should be to enable society to build peace. Reconciliation should be the core aim of any truth process. Respect and generosity should inform the parties seeking to reach agreement.

With these words, I believe it is an important development. The proposition must now be seriously addressed by all parties in both Governments. We emphasise that it is our conclusion that an independent international truth commission is the way forward to address comprehensively the issues involved in today's debate.

Dr. Alasdair McDonnell, MLA, MP

I had a party political speech prepared but for the sake of time I will set it aside. I could say many things about victims, hierarchies and all the rest but we should not play politics too much with victims. Victims need to be paid attention and taken care of. I will leave it at that.

I pay tribute to the commissioners. In my dealings with them so far I have found them to be excellent, individually as well as collectively, committed to the task in hand with a sense of justice and fairness that is refreshing and extremely helpful in the difficult task they have to approach. However, I would appreciate it if some of them could emphasise, for the sake of colleagues around us, how they will ensure the quiet and forgotten victims and individuals are not submerged or swamped with more organised groups, that there is not a hierarchy and that those who scream the loudest do not gain an advantage over those who do not scream at all. In my experience, often the people who have been hurt the most end up turning in on themselves and perhaps do not even have the resources to seek the help they need. It would be useful for colleagues around this table to hear how the commissioners will work as a team to ensure the forgotten are not forgotten.

Deputy Margaret Conlon

I welcome the commissioners.

One of the most important items touched on is the human impact of the conflict. I come from the same constituency of Cavan-Monaghan as Deputy Ó Caoláin. We know first-hand the human impact which the conflict had on our county. Many are still hurting and still have a story to tell. However, they may not feel comfortable about telling their story, even after all these years. It is extremely important that there be a time when they feel they are able to do so. They need to feel a sense of trust and mutual respect on both sides. The telling of the story is important because it is part of the healing process and moving on.

We have victims and survivors, including survivors who did not have a body to bury and who do not have a grave to visit. They cannot begin their part of the grieving process until the body of their loved one is put to rest. This is important for them and it is the dying wish of many of them that the body of their loved one is returned to them and that they will be able to get on with laying their loved one to rest and then telling their story. For them a great deal must happen before they will be comfortable about telling their story.

Unfortunately many people involved in the conflict missed their chance for an education, although it is never too late. A high level of encouragement is required and significant incentives are needed to encourage such people to go back into the education system. Such people need to feel that life has not passed them by and they have not missed out on all of the opportunities that life could have presented to them, through no fault of their own.

The commission has done excellent work and the forum will be very important. It is essential to have all the stakeholders on board and the one step forward, two steps back process will be painstaking but worthwhile in the end.

The witnesses referred to funding and the European Union. Where do they see their funding coming from in the future? Reference was also made to the victims' Bill. Regardless of whether one is a victim of crime or of conflict, one has a need that must be addressed. In that context, the aforementioned Bill is to be welcomed and will be examined by members of this committee with interest.

Deputy Joe McHugh

I welcome the commissioners and wish them well in their ongoing efforts. Regarding Deputy Ó Caoláin's point about having a politically neutral forum, while this is a forum, unfortunately it is not politically neutral by virtue of the absence of the Unionist representatives from Northern Ireland. We have already acknowledged this as a committee and I know that the Chairman is doing everything in his power to put pressure on them to participate in our deliberations. We are all conscious of the fact that they should be here if we are to have an effective, politically neutral environment in which to discuss issues.

Dr. McDonnell's point regarding the process is key. The end point of the process is the forum, which will provide a mechanism. We do not know the end point after that because it is new territory and a new area. It is important to listen to all groups and peoples who have been affected to some degree or another by the conflict. Each individual has been affected in a way which is important to him or her. We should use this committee as a forum to invite groups to participate in the design of the process. This would be of benefit to the commission. Perhaps a forum involving us as politicians and the commissioners will not be the endgame nor one which people who have been affected by the Troubles would aspire to in the first instance.

Consultation is very important and must be ongoing prior to the establishment of the forum. We must engage with people and listen to them. The danger lies in people developing negative perceptions of the forum. Some might see it as being patronising. Others might not see it as an effective mechanism to achieve justice or as a mechanism that can meet their needs. In that context, it is important in the overall design of the forum that effective consultation continues.

As Dr. McDonnell pointed out, some groups shout louder than others and it is important to bear in mind that there are quiet, if not silent, groups out there. However, some of the groups that shout the loudest have the confidence to do so and may be reflecting the silent groups that are not in a position to do so. I refer here to the victims of the Omagh bombing. It is important that we engage with groups like that who have had experience in this area and know what they are looking for. It is imperative that this committee engages with such groups and invites them to what will hopefully be a politically neutral environment, once Unionist representatives are on board. If we engage with such groups, that will help in the overall design of the forum to which the commissioners aspire in the long term.

Chairman

I thank Deputy McHugh. I remind Members of Dáil Éireann that a vote is expected at 12.35 p.m.

Deputy Niall Blaney

I join with the other speakers in welcoming the three commissioners. I am glad to have them in front of us for this question and answer session. I agreed with much of what the previous speakers said and disagreed with some, particularly my colleague Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin's views on establishing an independent European group. I am Co-Chairman of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body and we have had a consultation with Archbishop Robin Eames and Mr. Denis Bradley's group. Too much time could be spent examining what has happened in the past, where very few answers are to be obtained. I fear that if we spend so much time looking at the past we will forget where we are going in the future.

In the last number of weeks I attended the British Irish Association conference in Oxford. It was an excellent conference attended by many senior personnel from the conflict in Northern Ireland. The most significant concern coming from there was how we are dealing with the present to move on to the future, particularly regarding education and dealing with our youth. The same tendencies and old habits still exist, such as attacks on school buses, and sectarianism is still alive and well in Northern Ireland. I do not have the answers to dealing with the past. Nobody has all the answers. We should deal with the past sooner rather than later, and not spend forever at it. If we cannot deal with it ourselves there is no point in looking to Europe or an independent grouping. We should put far more emphasis on our future than on our past, particularly on the youth of Northern Ireland. In that way we may all have a future.

Deputy Seymour Crawford

On behalf of Fine Gael I welcome the commission. As Vice Chairman of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body I was fortunate enough to be with Deputy Blaney in our meeting with Archbishop Eames, Mr. Bradley and others. It was very clear from the work they had done that it is a complicated and time-consuming issue to deal with. The issue, as raised by previous speakers, is the fact that those who speak the loudest have not necessarily suffered the most. I was glad to hear Mr. Nesbitt refer to those who have been affected by the trauma, because we often emphasise the 3,500 people who died and those who were injured without dealing with those who can show neither injury nor death. There are an enormous number of such people out there.

I remember going in for a quiet cup of tea one night to a family home after doing business with the husband. We began to talk about the Northern Ireland situation and I said it was time to move on. The woman broke down and said it was all right for me to say it is time to move on because my brother was not murdered in his place of worship. That brought home to me very strongly how delicate the situation is. I stayed there until 2 a.m. and we had a good chat and she understood where I was coming from, that there had been enough murders and we had to move on and find a better way.

I wish the four commissioners all the best in their work. I was fortunate enough to be in this House when the late Gordon Wilson was a Senator. He led the way in a major effort to try to bring reconciliation. In spite of all he suffered he wanted to cross the boundaries and try to make things better and we can learn from people like him. I refer to the point made previously by my colleague Deputy McHugh regarding a more recent issue such as the Omagh bombing. I was there for the ceremonies this year and met different people in different situations. If we can find answers to such matters that have occurred more recently, it is important that we do so.

I do not always support Deputy Niall Blaney, but I support him on this issue. There are significant problems today with sectarianism on both sides, which is something we must deal with as quickly as possible through education, support groups and whatever else is available. Many of the young people involved never witnessed the death, murder and mayhem and they do not realise with what they are getting involved. I was quite frightened by some of what I found in my county recently. Some people are involved at a very serious level from backgrounds that were never before involved in the Troubles, good, bad or indifferent. While we must recognise those that suffered and those that have come through such dreadful times, for the sake of the future we must ensure that we put most of the emphasis into trying to deal with the existing problems. The way to do this is to ensure the assembly works, all people work together, jobs are created and other things are done that will keep people busy, rather than finding time to create mischief — I use the term in the narrowest possible way.

I welcome the commission here. They are great people to get involved in something such as this. They all have their own history and it has not been easy. I live some few miles from the Border and I have many family connections north of the Border. I am one of the few people who has attended funerals on both sides of the religious divide and on both sides of the trauma. There was no difference in the tears and we must remember this. We must remember that those quietly affected by this need to be reached out to as much or more so than those who speak the loudest.

Senator Cecilia Keaveney

Go raibh maith agat. I also welcome the commissioners and I am sorry I missed the start of the meeting. I am interested in the concept of what a victim is and who has suffered post-traumatic stress disorder. Were such people on both sides of the Border or only on one side? Does the commission's remit cross the Border? I could relay long stories and there are people in County Donegal and other Border counties who know about the Troubles. These people know something because when one travelled to other countries one was conditioned to stand and wait to be searched when entering shopping centres and so on. It is a minor matter, but does it come under post-traumatic stress disorder? Does the commission aspire to deal with everyone that has a difficulty as a result of the conflict? It would have to meet everybody if it is to do that successfully as I believe everyone, whether they know it or not, has been affected to varying levels and varying degrees. I am currently undertaking a report on the way to teach history in areas of recent conflict. I am fascinated by a legacy within some political minds that schools are supposed to be the safe haven for the children away from the reality of the awfulness in their community. Their line is that the people that can handle teaching history and the new curriculum that has been introduced are the grammar schools. However, the people who need intervention most are the ones not facilitated or supported to enable that to happen. I refer to the primary and secondary schools on the sectarian boundaries within the different parts of the community.

If we are talking about the wonderful future, we need to embrace the future and maybe not the past so much. We look at school being the answer to all woes, as it is in the Republic for every issue —"the school will sort it all out". I see the unco-ordinated and fragmented nature of service delivery. Who will take the ball and run with it? If school is the future, who will be that liaison person? Is it within the remit of the delegates? Have they access to input their thoughts? The most important thing is to ensure that people who might be second or third generation victims do not become perpetrators or continue the victimhood into another generation. Until we learn what to call the other side and deal with more than one perspective on history we will be sectarian. I do not believe sectarianism and bigotry is confined to six counties; it is much wider than that and therefore would need to be dealt with by an all-island body.

The delegation identified things that are unco-ordinated and fragmented. Individuals contact them but there are many people who still have a problem and will not make contact. What input does the delegation have to ensure simple statements like, "It will be sorted out in school", are followed through with real progress and processes that will support teachers to take on sensitive and difficult issues? The curriculum in the past included Protestant schools teaching Northern Ireland's involvement in the Second World War, while Catholic schools taught the civil rights movements since the 1960s. We must reach the stage where perhaps there is not that choice. Perhaps by dealing with the past from multiple perspectives people can move on to a brighter future.

Who integrates and co-ordinates, and has the delegation ideas? If so, will it be on an all-island basis or will it embrace the Border counties? We do not have to go beyond the Omagh bomb to have real victims. There are victims on a level that do not understand they are victims, because they do know what they are comparing themselves to. Go raibh maith agat.

Senator Ivana Bacik

I join colleagues in welcoming the commissioners and wishing them the best of luck with their important work. Deputy Conlon has already mentioned the victims' rights Bill which has been promised for a long time and has a long genesis and background. I am grateful to Deputy Conlon for raising the point that it is important that the Bill deals not only with so called ordinary victims of crime, but also victims and survivors of the conflict.

As someone who has done some research on the needs of victims of crime in this jurisdiction I would be grateful if the commissioners, perhaps at a future date, could provide Members of the Oireachtas with practical information or suggestions as to how best we can incorporate some of the specific needs of victims and survivors of the conflict. There are many common needs, but it would be useful if this was addressed at some future date, including how we could incorporate the needs of victims of conflict in particular. That is one practical thing we could all move forward together on.

I apologise, but I will have to leave early.

Mr. Pat Doherty, MLA, MP

I welcome the commissioners here today and thank them for their presentation. It is the job of politicians and political parties to deal with the present and look to the future, but there is a big section of society, particularly in the North, that must find some solution to the past. We cannot ignore that reality. I and my party believe it will take an independent international truth commission to establish that. People would believe in such a grouping and come forward to deal with their issues. Sometimes it is not acknowledged — and if it has not been, I will restate it here — that republicans have acknowledged their role in the conflict. I could not say that loudly enough. They have acknowledged their role in the conflict but there is a huge difficulty in the way the British Government is dealing with its role in the conflict. We will have to find some mechanism for it to come forward in a more honest and up-front manner.

We should not criticise organised groups for speaking out. It is their right and entitlement to do so. At some stage we will look to the commissioners to speak out and state clearly what they believe is the way forward. In saying that, however, we must acknowledge that there are many individuals who for their own reasons are not involved in organised groups. We must find a mechanism to relate to them as well. Some of them are very private people and are not good at being involved in wider groups, but that is no reason for us not to try to relate to them.

In my constituency of West Tyrone, I see all these facets in the victims and survivors of the Omagh bombing. The organised faction, the quiet faction and individuals, but all of them are deeply hurt. I reiterate their demand for a cross-Border independent inquiry. Some fuel was added to that in recent revelations on the BBC.

I was very interested in Mr. Mike Nesbitt's submission when he talked about groupings being too heavily grant-dependent. I can see that if their work runs out when the next grant runs out it will be cutting off something that is crucially important at a time when it does not need to be cut off. We might need to find some other guaranteed funding mechanism for those groups. I wish the commissioners well and I look forward to the time when they will speak out.

Mr. Conor Murphy, MLA, MP

I also welcome the opportunity to have an engagement with the commissioners. Quite a few people have expressed a range of views on the issue of victims. It is difficult because there is not one set of needs for any victims, whose emotions range from seeking revenge to seeking truth and an acknowledgement and affirmation of what has occurred. Some people just want to be left alone and have no interest in revisiting the past. That is their way of dealing with it. It is difficult to design a process to cater for all those needs and many others in between.

While many views have been expressed, I have two particular questions. I am conscious of the time constraints. One of them concerns funding to which Mr. Pat Doherty referred. There are two issues in that, one of which concerns the overall level of funding available for work with victims and processing victims' issues; the other one is the approach to dealing with funding. I wonder if the commissioners are examining that. It almost sets rival groups against each other, if not politically then in terms of competing for funding. Do the commissioners think that process is healthy or should a properly resourced funding process be designed to change that approach? I have always felt the EU peace moneys were delivered in a way that almost created competition between groups that needed them; the strongest survived and the weakest did not. Perhaps those groups were strongest in terms of how people were organised or what professionalism they could bring to their approach.

My second question, which was touched upon by Ms Patricia MacBride, concerns the consultative group in the past. There were issues with the way it was set up which go back into some of the issues raised by both Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin and Mr. Pat Doherty, MLA, MP, in terms of the British Government's role in this and its fingerprints on that particular group. What is the obligation on the commissioners in dealing with any of that group's findings? Without getting into any personal opinions on what they might come up with, is there an obligation to look at that? Where do the commissioners see that fitting into their work? Will that contribute to it in a certain way or is the work they envisage in their three-year plan separate from what this consultative group may come up with?

Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP

I also welcome the commission and thank it for the presentation. I will be brief in the interests of time.

One of the questions I wanted to ask was on the education issue. I have heard from families who have been bereaved and families who have suffered through the conflict that circumstances at the time dictated that they had to leave education and take over responsibilities in the home, the family business or whatever. I would like further information on when that strategy is developed and would appreciate the chance to talk to the commission about how we can provide support for the families that have come to us seeking that level of assistance. I would be very grateful to touch base with the commission at a later date, if necessary, to pass on information on how the families can access opportunities that were not available to them at the time.

Chairman

The commissioners have been given much food for thought and many questions as well. We will leave it to them to deal with each item as they see fit and if there is any further information that they want to forward later, that will be okay too.

Ms Bertha McDougall

I will begin by dealing with some of the general aspects, while Mr. Nesbitt will pick up on education and Ms MacBride will deal with the past. Many issues were raised, many of which we are aware of.

Someone asked about the hierarchy of victims. As far as we are concerned, anyone who comes to us is treated equally. That is not in question. For us, we work on a basis that where there is a need, the need must be met. It does not matter where that need comes from. We are not in the business of asking questions about anything else. If there is a need, we must address it.

In terms of the individuals, this is a concern not just for the commission but for everyone. We have talked about the people who are quiet, who do not necessarily belong to groups and who may not shout the loudest. We are looking at ways in which we can reach out to individuals. For example, we met a group of clergymen from the Church of Ireland and indicated that they might act as intermediaries for individuals in their parishes who wished to speak to the commissioner. If people have not come forward at this stage, they will not come forward willingly to a group of four people. We must look at ways in which we can intervene and ensure they feel safe and have trust to be able to express their needs and concerns to us.

An aspect of funding was raised. The funding from the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister over the next three years is £36 million. The committee may not be aware, and forgive me if it is, that until now there has been what has been called core funding from the OFM-DFM. That core funding scheme provides for a worker and covers aspects of rent and lighting — the basics in an office. That scheme opened approximately six years ago and it has not been changed or updated. The funding for the main area of work that was undertaken would have been provided through European PEACE funding and, in fact, many groups would have been in great difficulties without that. There is another scheme called the development fund scheme which groups can access for work they wish to undertake.

Over the next few years the OFM-DFM has indicated the needs are important and the funding will focus on where the need has been identified so that there will be a review of all that funding. The PEACE funding continues but, in effect, it will eventually run out. There is therefore a major issue for groups as to how they will become self-sustaining. Mr. Nesbitt spoke previously about them being dependent on grants and there is therefore much work to be undertaken in that regard. I ask Mr. Nesbitt to deal with the issue of education.

Chairman

If a division is called in the Dáil, I will vacate the Chair and Senator Keaveney will take over in order that the meeting can continue without interruption. I apologise if I have to leave.

Mr. Mike Nesbitt

I am well used to clearing a room with my speeches and I would not be in any way offended. I referenced four areas of specific interest. Funding, business engagement and education are three forward looking areas and the fourth is the living history project, which, to the extent that it is an educational tool, is also forward looking. Education is key to us but it would be glib and it would displace responsibility to say it will be sorted out in schools. It will not unless the schools are given the tools and resources with which to do so. We have had discussions only with the Department of Education in Northern Ireland because we feel we must go forward with baby steps. It is not that we recognise there should be a border in any of the work we do. We are absolutely clear there is no border in victimhood and, therefore, we will reach across when we have something relevant to say.

We are working on an extended new curriculum in the Six Counties. Within this, there are possibilities to deal with specific issues. At primary level, the world around us fits perfectly. At post-primary level, we have learning for life and work and citizenship. We are examining models within the existing framework to roll out what we want to do. At primary level, the extended school is the perfect model to engage people who missed out on their own education and perhaps do not see the value of education for their children. This point was well made by Deputy Conlon when she said we need to incentivise people who do not recognise the value of education for themselves and for their children. Generations, therefore, could miss out. The extended school at primary level is almost a perfect model to tackle that and, with it, the intergenerational and transgenerational issues.

We will work more with the Department for Employment and Learning to get to those who missed their opportunity first time round. I have had discussions with officials at a high level within the Department. If their willingness to engage was replicated in all our work, our task would not be as difficult as I sometimes think. We have had positive feedback. I hope that tackles the education issues reasonably.

Ms Patricia MacBride

A number of justice issues and issues relating to the past were raised in questions, which I hope to digest. Deputy Blaney expressed concern that too much time is spent looking at the past while forgetting about the future. The one thing we have learned in the short time we have had together as a commission is that no one wishes to draw a line under the past. We need to find creative ways to work together as a community to address the legacy of the past. It is for that reason I welcome Sinn Féin's announcement today that they have to come to a decision as a party on a way forward for their constituency. We need to have a discussion internally and with victims and survivors' groups about how this process can best be facilitated in dealing with the past and, it is to be hoped, try to agree a consensus and a way forward that is cross-community, cross-Border and international in order that all the stakeholders in the process come to an agreed methodology for dealing with the legacy of conflict. I urge every party represented at the meeting to take the opportunity to go back to their constituent groups and begin the dialogue with wider society on how we, as a community, deal with the legacy of conflict.

Minister Murphy raised the issue of the consultative group on the past and the commission's obligation in terms of dealing with its findings. The initial idea of the commission came about during direct administration and it was constituted under a devolved administration. The consultative group came into being during that gap. Our approach is to be mindful of the fact that the consultation process has taken place. For us, as a commission, to ask the same questions of the same individuals and groups may expose those individuals and organisations to further trauma. As an initial baseline, we will respect the validity of the consultative group's research. The conclusions they draw from that research, however, will be a matter we will discuss internally with the stakeholder groups and on which we will form an opinion before going back to the Secretary of State and the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, as we are required to do by legislation.

Deputy Cecilia Keaveney took the Chair.

Ms Bertha McDougall

I want to say a little more about the forum. Deputy Conlon said its progress might seem to take one step forward and two steps back. We would emphasise the importance of taking that process forward slowly, involving all the stakeholders and making decisions as to when it is time to move to the next stage. We recognise that this will involve our stakeholders but we must reach out to those individuals and ensure that individuals and the quieter people in the community have the opportunity to participate.

We have three steps targeted for this year. The first is to explore the environment to find out what views are out there. The second is to assess what those issues are for the people and consider how we might address them. The third is to begin to design the forum, looking at standing orders and how it might operate. Those are our targets for this year. We are encouraged and hope people will acknowledge and recognise the importance of the forum and of participation in it. The forum is there to be developed. That opportunity must be taken now. It may not present itself again. We know many people are uncertain about where it is going but there has been an acknowledgment that a forum for victims and survivors is needed.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Cecilia Keaveney)

The concept of taking one step at a time and the concept of process reflects reality. We tend to want everything to happen at the flick of a switch because we have become used to that in this age of technology. However, these issues can only be solved through a process.

I thank the commissioners for being here and sharing their wisdom. Their presentation has been very informative. We wish them well in the work that is ahead of them. No member of this committee underestimates the challenges ahead. I hope we will keep our doors open to receive more information and to give any help we can offer. It is important that anyone who considers himself or herself a victim should be considered as such. While addressing the real needs of victims we must be wary of creating a nation of victimhood. We must move on rather than be happy to remain in a state of victimhood.

I draw this part of the meeting to a conclusion. Is there any other business? No. I suggest 30 October 2008 as the date of the next meeting if it does not clash with other events.

The joint committee adjourned at 12.45 p.m. until Thursday, 30 October 2008.